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

winner69
21-07-2015, 01:04 PM
Did Mr Little lose it on TV this morning?

Plenty of comment about him not really a PM / statesmen in waiting

Daytr
21-07-2015, 01:24 PM
Haven't you been listening Winner?
That's because its Winston, not Little that will be the next PM of NZ. ;-)

Major von Tempsky
21-07-2015, 02:13 PM
But what's wrong with immigration? It's a very strong driver of economic growth, some of the immigrants are skilled and/or bring capital with them. You can't have it both ways DayTr/EZ - you like economic growth but you don't like immigrants and people with Chinese sounding names and you are ostensibly against racism....

Daytr
21-07-2015, 02:36 PM
Bad assumptions MVT & if your economic model relies on increased population then your model is flawed & its not sustainable.
I'm not anti immigration as it has its purpose & I like the diversity it adds to NZ.
However when many Kiwis are staying put & returning from overseas then its time to turn the immigration tap down.
What I am against is a much larger population in general. A small amount of population growth would be ok, but personally I don't want NZ to have another million people or anything like that for that matter. What does annoy me we are happy to take wealthy immigrants etc, but there is a huge international problem with refugees & NZ could do a lot more in this area instead.
But to the point at hand. Does having the largest net migration numbers n record at a time when there is already a housing issue & bubble where most of these immigrants are residing. Let alone the infrastructure issues it creates. All this so called growth model is doing is making NZ unaffordable for a lot of its citizens.


But what's wrong with immigration? It's a very strong driver of economic growth, some of the immigrants are skilled and/or bring capital with them. You can't have it both ways DayTr/EZ - you like economic growth but you don't like immigrants and people with Chinese sounding names and you are ostensibly against racism....

BlackPeter
21-07-2015, 03:19 PM
I would suggest you have discussed Labour's release of some data on the Auckland housing market to ad infinitum.
Are you an advocate of if you say something enough times then it must be true?
11 posts I believe by yours truly, sighting what you see Labour's racist or xenophobic tactics.


Look daytr, interesting that you start to count my posts on Labours appalling racial stunt. Looks like they start to hit - the truth is always painful, even for people with left wing blinkers. You might want to compare the number of my posts on Labour's racial slur with the tsunami of posts you created commenting on the isolated but admittedly somewhat awkward behaviour of our current PM related to the hair of a small number of females.

Interesting as well that I clearly called John's behaviour at the time as what it was - however you are dancing around Labours racist and xenophobic statements and even defending them. Sorry that my comments inconvenience your impaired political vision. Are you left-wing blinkers sitting that firm?

Looking into the issues - I have no problems whatsoever with an debate about restricting foreign (i.e. non resident) ownership of our housing stock. Personally I don't think that restriction of demand is the best solution to a demand / supply issue, but hey - why not having an intelligent discussion around it? If you feel it is worthwhile doing it - why don't you just go to the respective thread and post.

What I find appalling is Labours dirty political tactics to play the race card hoping to gain a handful of additional votes. Great it backfired. Instead of investigating how many house buyers are non resident (which is not that hard to find out - just refer to my previous posts) did Labour decide to gain some votes by poaching in Winston's camp. Not that I am too worried about Winston loosing votes, but it is a difference whether you have like in most countries one smallish racist and backwards looking party around the fringes of the democratic system trying to live of the votes of the always backwards looking rednecks, or whether this is a party which claims to represent (still?) the majority of the Left camp and wants at some stage to take over responsibility. I find this idea frightening.

Still surprised that your normally fine tuned moral judgement seems to lose its sensitivity as soon as its the Labour party doing something wrong. Just wondering - do you see any moral boundaries for Labour or does the potential gain of a handful of votes justify in your view any means?

So this time it was people with Chinese sounding names who seem to be the bad ones (i.e. buying houses otherwise hardworking Caucasian families could buy). Who is next, daytr? People with Arabic sounding names? People with Jewish sounding names? Just tell us whether you see any limits for the once grand party on this slippery slope ...

IAK
21-07-2015, 03:41 PM
Bad assumptions MVT & if your economic model relies on increased population then your model is flawed & its not sustainable.
I'm not anti immigration as it has its purpose & I like the diversity it adds to NZ.
However when many Kiwis are staying put & returning from overseas then its time to turn the immigration tap down.
What I am against is a much larger population in general. A small amount of population growth would be ok, but personally I don't want NZ to have another million people or anything like that for that matter. What does annoy me we are happy to take wealthy immigrants etc, but there is a huge international problem with refugees & NZ could do a lot more in this area instead.
But to the point at hand. Does having the largest net migration numbers n record at a time when there is already a housing issue & bubble where most of these immigrants are residing. Let alone the infrastructure issues it creates. All this so called growth model is doing is making NZ unaffordable for a lot of its citizens.

I'm with Daytr on this one. I also agree NZ needs skilled migrants but not this many....

58,000 migrants on NZ's population of 4.6 mln, is an increase of +1.3%. If the USA was to accept a similar increase on a population of 319 min this would equate to 4.15 min. China with a population of 1.3 6 bin this would be 17.6 min.

Daytr
21-07-2015, 04:02 PM
Ohh BP, no need to apologize, as there is a clear difference between what John Key did & what Labour has been accused of doing.
And I haven't once defended them for doing it even though you keep suggesting otherwise. I have on multiple occasions said it was poor & could have been done with more sensitivity. Hardly defending it. What I have defended is their policy something you continually want to divert from.
Now back to the difference. John Key did actually pull the waitresses ponytail on multiple occasions when asked not to. Correct?
It has also been uncovered that Key has done this on multiple occasions to multiple girls.
And I'll be honest its an embarrassment to Key & National & for anyone other than fervent National supporters & the victims its funny. Tug, tug, wink, wink...

Labour in anyone's rational view hasn't done anything racist. They have presented data. If that data presents certain obvious trends so be it.
It is not racist in itself, however as I will repeat again for the posters who do not care to read before responding, I am not defending it. It was poorly done. So its not actually interesting at all, as I to have called out Labour on what I would say was a dubious practice.

Actually I am on the respective thread, a political thread. Or is the National joy luck club?
Would I tell you where to post? And its not the first time you have tried to control content.
Something to do with climate change I recall. Interesting that is another area of poor performance by National.

So clearly we have a difference of opinion of what racism is. I see it as discrimination against a particular ethnic group or race.
Labour isn't doing that & neither is NZF, they are discriminating against all foreign buyers.
Nope I don't justify the tactics used as said on multiple occasions, however I don't see stating the bleedin obvious as a race attack.
If the biggest influence of foreign property buyers were from the UK, or from the US or anywhere to be frank I wouldn't care if that was stated as its just information.

And I agree the data is probably reasonably readily available, well to the government at least. So why don't they use it instead of forming a register in the future to maybe & most likely not do anything about it?

I hope that corrects some of the myths you posted above.

Daytr
21-07-2015, 04:08 PM
The funny thing is BP, I am guessing you think that the more you raise this & repeat such frivolous accusations over & over that one, people might believe them and two that it may somehow do some political damage to Labour, when the opposite is true. The more you keep stretching the extremes of what was just a poor data release from Labour, the more desperate the right look & highlight an issue that NZers obviously have a clear concern about. The influence of foreign buyers in the Auckland property market. So please keep up the good work.
We of NZF & the Left thank you for your service. ;-)

Daytr
22-07-2015, 08:53 AM
The National led coalition government is again covering itself in glory with two management failures in almost as many days.
Just as National want to lead the country down the path of further corporatization of government services the debacle that is the management of Mt Eden prison is revealed. A prison run by SERCO one of the targeted providers for other government services. Prisoners having a organized fight club, smoking dope, drinking alcohol & as an alleged initiation of dropping prisoners off balconies onto concrete floors with one possible death being attributed to the practice. Either Serco has no idea what is happening in its prisons, or they have been covering it up, or dare I say it had been reported to the minister & nothing had been done & the cover up was political. I suspect it was one of the first two reasons, to be fair to the minister.
SERCO have had some high profile controversy in the UK & have been awarded the management & build of the new prison in Wiri. National knows how to pick em!

The 2nd in a blooper highlight reel of the week, is that it has cost $3M & will take 5 years to move & house three historic documents in the national library. $3M ! This makes a set of doors & a sign in government buildings look cheap. How does it take 5 years to coordinate an exhibition for documents that are stored only 200 meters down the road! I thought the flag referendum / debate was/is a huge waste of money, but proportionally I would suggest this is worse. No wonder government debt is spiraling out of control, they couldn't manage the proverbial booze up in a brewery !

BlackPeter
22-07-2015, 09:32 AM
The funny thing is BP, I am guessing you think that the more you raise this & repeat such frivolous accusations over & over that one, people might believe them and two that it may somehow do some political damage to Labour, when the opposite is true. The more you keep stretching the extremes of what was just a poor data release from Labour, the more desperate the right look & highlight an issue that NZers obviously have a clear concern about. The influence of foreign buyers in the Auckland property market. So please keep up the good work.
We of NZF & the Left thank you for your service. ;-)

Wow "we of NZF" - says it all, really. And another three posts in a row from somebody complaining about me posting too much about Labours shame. There is a nice Greek word for people like that. Hint - it starts with "hypo" and ends with "crite".

Anyway - everybody to their own style ... and hey - there are as well some areas we do agree on. Not sure whether we have already enough data to assess Kevin Davis' latest story around the SERCO run Mount Eden prison, but it clearly does not sound good.

Independently of SERCO's performance problems and MoC's alleged attempts to brush them under the carpet ... I feel quite uncomfortable with the attempt to commercialise the states monopoly of violence (and nothing else is a private company running a prison). All services licenced to exercise violence (like police, army and correction facilities) need to be under direct state supervision. Outsourcing these "services" opens up huge conflicts of interest - of them the desire to make money (by locking people up for along time) vs rehabilitating prisoners (and losing the money stream) being just one of them.

blackcap
22-07-2015, 10:45 AM
A prison run by SERCO one of the targeted providers for other government services. Prisoners having a organized fight club, smoking dope, drinking alcohol

Happens in all prisons in NZ be they Serco run or not. Nothing really shocking at all for mine. Just as bad if not worse at Rimutaka, Christchurch Mens etc.

Daytr
22-07-2015, 11:50 AM
BP its funny different perspectives people have. I wouldn't say I was complaining at all, I was suggesting that your claims lacked validity & posting over & over wasn't going to make them any more valid. Nice cheap personal shot though, speaking of the Greek...

re the prisons, so you are uncomfortable with corporatizing the prison service by the sounds. How do you defend things like corporatizing social housing & mental health? It is equally if not more immoral in my opinion corporatizing those services than prisons, although I think they are of a similar ilk.

Blackcap, I would suggest all prisons have their issues, however I'm not sure to the same scale that we have recently been made aware of at Mt Eden. And if they are, crack down on all of them. I am all for rehabilitation, but rampant use of dope, alcohol & if indeed this violent practice of dropping prisoners does exist as I suspect it does, then that obviously requires investigation, including the death of the prisoner that Kelvin Davis has highlighted. If his allegations are true, this could be a case of negligence causing death. Pretty damn serious stuff in my book.


Wow "we of NZF" - says it all, really. And another three posts in a row from somebody complaining about me posting too much about Labours shame. There is a nice Greek word for people like that. Hint - it starts with "hypo" and ends with "crite".

Anyway - everybody to their own style ... and hey - there are as well some areas we do agree on. Not sure whether we have already enough data to assess Kevin Davis' latest story around the SERCO run Mount Eden prison, but it clearly does not sound good.

Independently of SERCO's performance problems and MoC's alleged attempts to brush them under the carpet ... I feel quite uncomfortable with the attempt to commercialise the states monopoly of violence (and nothing else is a private company running a prison). All services licenced to exercise violence (like police, army and correction facilities) need to be under direct state supervision. Outsourcing these "services" opens up huge conflicts of interest - of them the desire to make money (by locking people up for along time) vs rehabilitating prisoners (and losing the money stream) being just one of them.

Daytr
22-07-2015, 12:09 PM
[QUOTE=BlackPeter;582441]Wow "we of NZF" - says it all, really.

Says what? That I'm a centrist? Then yes that's correct, as I see NZF as the closest thing to a centrist party in NZ.
Coming from an ACT supporter I would say your comment is a bit rich.
I don't think Winston or NZF are perfect, but I think have the average NZers interest at heart & at least NZF easily reached the minimum 5% threshold. What did ACT poll? 0.7% and most of that was given to them by National in Epsom. LOL

If you can't see the future, I'll paint a picture for you. Noticed that Labour & NZFs policies are starting to align?
I heard Little on NZR this morning affirming views today espoused by Winston Peters.
A coalition of Labour & NZF is on the cards in 2017, something that John Key would & should be very worried about.
But he's a smart guy, perhaps he will stand down & let some other mug take the electoral hit in 2017?
I hope he doesn't, I hope he gets voted out

BlackPeter
22-07-2015, 03:04 PM
[QUOTE=BlackPeter;582441]Wow "we of NZF" - says it all, really.

Says what? That I'm a centrist?

It is o.k, daytr ... most people consider themselves as "centre", given that there are always some people to the left and some to the right. Its just human ... same as you preference to dish out, however very sensitive if somebody comes back. Must have been fun to go with somebody like you to school.

craic
22-07-2015, 03:18 PM
Agree entirely. Thirty years of in and out of many prisons leaves me in no doubt that prisons have not changed much in that time, private or otherwise. Greatest cock-up I knew of was a new prison in area with a strong Maori population. A bright gentleman, this time from the left of the political spectrum felt that that there would be a positive result if some weight was given to local Maori prison staff rather than the usual mishmash of officers from all directions. They forgot about the meaning of Whanau. "I want" could be accompanied by the information "your brother #### was on that Burglary/robbery, with us, Didn't you know"? As well as the odd prompt from a Kaumatua on the Marae. It took a bit of sorting out.
This post was a reply to blackcap 8264, this morning. Too much rum still in my system and I forgot to push the post button. But a few hours on the axe and chainsaw have cleared everythingand today and tomorrow are alcohol-free days. Will allow me to concentrate on my horses for Saturday. Winston Peters? Wasn't he the fellow who wanted to be a jockey when he grew up?

BlackPeter
22-07-2015, 03:27 PM
[QUOTE=BlackPeter;582441]
I don't think Winston or NZF are perfect, but I think have the average NZers interest at heart & at least NZF easily reached the minimum 5% threshold. What did ACT poll? 0.7% and most of that was given to them by National in Epsom. LOL

If you can't see the future, I'll paint a picture for you. Noticed that Labour & NZFs policies are starting to align?
I heard Little on NZR this morning affirming views today espoused by Winston Peters.
A coalition of Labour & NZF is on the cards in 2017, something that John Key would & should be very worried about.
But he's a smart guy, perhaps he will stand down & let some other mug take the electoral hit in 2017?
I hope he doesn't, I hope he gets voted out

Little & Peters - sounds like a marriage made in heaven ... two populists in one bed fighting for the same blanket (redneck electorate) - how is this supposed to work? On the other hand, Winston knows his trade ... i.e. I assume Andrew would take the house husband role in this relationship and leave the politics to Winston.

Just out of interest - how do our resident Labour supporters see this relationship working out? Anyway, I am sure it would have lots of entertainment value.

Re your comparison between NZF and ACT ... true - you are certainly supporting the party which got last time more votes - but if that's what is important for you, than you should have voted National.:p

I went for the party with the in my view better policies. Funny you mentioned the future in your post, given that Winston recruits his voters mainly in old people homes - which means his policies need a short horizon.

ACT on the other hand is now a very young team with lots of growth potential. :t_up:

Daytr
22-07-2015, 03:31 PM
Wow you jump to conclusions. Not sensitive at all about what you wrote.
You made a throw away comment & I asked what you meant by it. Pretty simple really.
I have openly said I try & take the best from the left & right so on balance I would suggest that makes me a centrist.
Funny you have quite often called me a lefty on this thread & yet I voted for a right wing party being NZF.
So perhaps think about that & where perhaps I fall in the spectrum... perhaps somewhere near the center.
Just a thought...

I had fun at school & I think most people I knew did, however I certainly don't dwell on it & I'd hate to ruin any imaginings you may have.
I will leave dreaming about school days to John Key, who obviously thinks he's still in the playground surrounded by girls with ponytails.. ;-)

Anyway this is starting to get all a little tedious, so I think I'll just stick to ripping apart National as they are an easy target.
I could have a crack at ACT, but then what's the point? They aren't a political threat to anyone thank goodness & back to playground references, I would just feel like a bully.
Two stuff ups already this week for National & its only Wednesday. Plenty of time for a 3rd or 4th.
Lets just hope no one suffers due to their mismanagement.

elZorro
22-07-2015, 04:54 PM
Wow you jump to conclusions. Not sensitive at all about what you wrote.
You made a throw away comment & I asked what you meant by it. Pretty simple really.
I have openly said I try & take the best from the left & right so on balance I would suggest that makes me a centrist.
Funny you have quite often called me a lefty on this thread & yet I voted for a right wing party being NZF.
So perhaps think about that & where perhaps I fall in the spectrum... perhaps somewhere near the center.
Just a thought...

I had fun at school & I think most people I knew did, however I certainly don't dwell on it & I'd hate to ruin any imaginings you may have.
I will leave dreaming about school days to John Key, who obviously thinks he's still in the playground surrounded by girls with ponytails.. ;-)

Anyway this is starting to get all a little tedious, so I think I'll just stick to ripping apart National as they are an easy target.
I could have a crack at ACT, but then what's the point? They aren't a political threat to anyone thank goodness & back to playground references, I would just feel like a bully.
Two stuff ups already this week for National & its only Wednesday. Plenty of time for a 3rd or 4th.
Lets just hope no one suffers due to their mismanagement.

Daytr, you should get with the program. It's quite OK if prisons are not run how their charter says they should be, they can even ship out the problem inmates once they are at death's door to keep their record and earnings good, that's OK as far as National is concerned. Dirty politics are also OK, it's happening everywhere after all. Judith Collins was the only one who went a bit too far, and she'll be back soon enough. The ponytail stuff is long forgotten, it never happened.

It's very important that National/ACT are left in power because, well, they are just doing such a good job. Because of their policies, we are all doing so much better than..we would have been? We don't need to look back over any data to make sure of that statement.

I think we should have a bit of a look at ACT, Daytr, it'll be interesting.

Bill English over there looking, but the lift is not going to the top floor.

http://www.interest.co.nz/rural-news/76641/finance-minister-who-just-visited-china-says-perfect-storm-has-created-huge-milk?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Wednesday+2 2+July+2015

craic
23-07-2015, 05:59 AM
elZ. you have two more years of pain and suffering under the present Govt. before you can present your collection of Enlightened Ones to the people of New Zealand as "The Way of the Future" But there is still the problem of getting enough people to believe you? So far you have not had much success. Maybe you should hire an agency - they would be sure to do better than the bunch of clowns who front the outfit now. I know how you feel - my horse ran second yesterday and paid a good dividend but, I only had a win bet on it.

elZorro
23-07-2015, 06:26 AM
elZ. you have two more years of pain and suffering under the present Govt. before you can present your collection of Enlightened Ones to the people of New Zealand as "The Way of the Future" But there is still the problem of getting enough people to believe you? So far you have not had much success. Maybe you should hire an agency - they would be sure to do better than the bunch of clowns who front the outfit now. I know how you feel - my horse ran second yesterday and paid a good dividend but, I only had a win bet on it.

Quite correct Craic, but to continue the analogy, National's big horse (CeeTee) is getting bogged down on the straight and has forgotten about the corners coming up. Labour's horse (Kelvin would be his name today) is fleet of foot and is undergoing training. Punter sentiment is moving towards Labour's horse, more every week.

Lyn Webster is sharemilking up north, will be finding the going tough.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/opinion/69981212/riding-low-milk-prices-survival-of-the-fittest?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Thursday+23 +July+2015

Daytr, here is an article from Jamie Whyte about foreign house buyers. I challenge anyone to find an ounce of common sense in here. The numbers are meaningless, he calls it a 'simple example'. It's worse than that. He's just grumpy that National will have to cave in and do the sensible thing. The market didn't win. I hope he gives better advice in his consultancy.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/news/article.cfm?c_id=8&objectid=11485101&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Thursday+23 +July+2015

Daytr
23-07-2015, 06:52 AM
Kelvin is certainly making a name for himself EZ. Seems Northland MPs are leading the charge.
When was the last time you heard from a National Northland MP? Oh yeah Mike Sabin & Dr Reti one under police investigation the other accused of blackmail. Nice ...

BlackPeter
23-07-2015, 08:01 AM
Daytr, here is an article from Jamie Whyte about foreign house buyers. I challenge anyone to find an ounce of common sense in here. The numbers are meaningless, he calls it a 'simple example'. It's worse than that. He's just grumpy that National will have to cave in and do the sensible thing. The market didn't win. I hope he gives better advice in his consultancy.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/news/article.cfm?c_id=8&objectid=11485101&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Thursday+23 +July+2015

Ah well - if you look through the comments to this article - some people seem to have understood his example, but I agree, it is certainly not one of his finest pieces of analysis, it certainly does not address the problem - but I don't think it is core ACT policy either.

However - sad thing is the past leader of ACT does not need to shine to outscore than current leader of Labour. Anybody else watched Little loosing his rag in the recent TV3 interview? Just embarrassing - imagine this guy wants to be PM - really?

http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/video-andrew-little-snaps-over-chinese-buyer-data-questions-2015072112#axzz3gefCDJex

EZ - somehow it is a sad reflection on your party if you think that Labours only chance to get back into government is by continuously tearing everybody else down. Why don't you try instead to lift the bar inside your organisation - hey, this would do our country a service!

Actually - to be fair, Kelvin Davis made recently a quite good figure when highlighting some issues in our prison system. Obviously still early days, but he might be worth his money ... just a pity, that there seem to be more Cunliffe's and Little's than Davis' and Shearer's in the once grand old party.

RGR367
23-07-2015, 08:25 AM
...................

Daytr, here is an article from Jamie Whyte about foreign house buyers. I challenge anyone to find an ounce of common sense in here. The numbers are meaningless, he calls it a 'simple example'. It's worse than that. He's just grumpy that National will have to cave in and do the sensible thing. The market didn't win. I hope he gives better advice in his consultancy.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/news/article.cfm?c_id=8&objectid=11485101&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Thursday+23 +July+2015

You may not, but as a "foreigner" (sic) before becoming a naturalized Kiwi, I found the logic in it. And no matter these much talked data on foreigners buying houses in Auckland is used but as long the proper adjective of "chinese" sounding names are used, it will go down as being racist to most of us coming from Asia. We might not have paid attention to it much if it was coming from Winston P or NZF Party though :)

elZorro
23-07-2015, 05:37 PM
You may not, but as a "foreigner" (sic) before becoming a naturalized Kiwi, I found the logic in it. And no matter these much talked data on foreigners buying houses in Auckland is used but as long the proper adjective of "chinese" sounding names are used, it will go down as being racist to most of us coming from Asia. We might not have paid attention to it much if it was coming from Winston P or NZF Party though :)

RGR367, sorry about my wording earlier. I meant overseas buyers of course. It doesn't matter where the overseas pressure on existing house stocks are coming from, it obviously distorts the prices that Aucklanders have to pay for existing houses that might be in their range of affordability. We need more housing stocks there, that's obvious. Allowing overseas buyers to build houses is much more sensible, but they should all be shut out of the existing housing sales if they don't already live here, or are intending to live here very soon. Lowered interest costs today are going to mean the solution to this problem needs to be found - fast. The market is not perfect, in this case it needs a helping hand from politicians.

elZorro
23-07-2015, 05:50 PM
Ah well - if you look through the comments to this article - some people seem to have understood his example, but I agree, it is certainly not one of his finest pieces of analysis, it certainly does not address the problem - but I don't think it is core ACT policy either.

However - sad thing is the past leader of ACT does not need to shine to outscore than current leader of Labour. Anybody else watched Little loosing his rag in the recent TV3 interview? Just embarrassing - imagine this guy wants to be PM - really?

http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/video-andrew-little-snaps-over-chinese-buyer-data-questions-2015072112#axzz3gefCDJex

EZ - somehow it is a sad reflection on your party if you think that Labours only chance to get back into government is by continuously tearing everybody else down. Why don't you try instead to lift the bar inside your organisation - hey, this would do our country a service!

Actually - to be fair, Kelvin Davis made recently a quite good figure when highlighting some issues in our prison system. Obviously still early days, but he might be worth his money ... just a pity, that there seem to be more Cunliffe's and Little's than Davis' and Shearer's in the once grand old party.

BP, Labour is wary of Patrick Gower, they have been for a while. I am not a statistician, but I have been involved in mini-trials, gathering data for papers, and I know that these people take pride in not overstating the figures. If anything, the figures are always understated, and the significance of them is given a number, a correlation or a standard deviation for example. That tells someone learned in the craft, how good the data is. Patrick Gower knows none of this, and he mentioned the phrase "cooked up the figures". That is certainly a red rag to a bull for someone who has been involved in the work, and I think Andrew Little was justified in his response on behalf of the team. Patrick Gower didn't have the data, he wouldn't know what to do with it anyway, therefore he cannot know if the data was 'cooked up' at all. That is not how a proper unbiased reporter should behave.

Labour would have used external information from their own electorate databases to bolster and check the data, National has similar data gathered from the electoral roll, and are using it to deliver targeted newsletters.

Kelvin Davis is doing a great job, there are many Labour MPs who are doing good work in their portfolios too. Time to shine a light on this National govt.

craic
24-07-2015, 07:16 AM
I happens every time with Labour. They form a committee to work out which is the head and which is the tail of their dog. Then, as soon as they have explained to the public which end is which, the tail starts wagging the dog and they are back in the confused state again. Now it seems that the collar might be a better fit on Davis. Although highlighting the nasty side of NZ prisons is hardly new. It was going on under several Labour regimes as well in the last few decades. Fortunately the voters are likely to prefer a proven winner in the money markets.

winner69
24-07-2015, 07:42 AM
Kelvin Davis. I was thinking he might be the man to turn Labour's fortune around

But he being a real plonker the last few days. No longer on my radar as a Labour leader after his performance on Radio NZ this morning

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/201763663/labour-repeats-call-to-cancel-serco-contract

(Disclosure: don't really know what plonker means but it sounds a neat word)

blackcap
24-07-2015, 08:57 AM
your not wrong there winner... he was terrible. Totally unsubstantiated and insinuations all round. I think its a union driven probe and unfortunately Kelvin Davis is the fall guy..

Daytr
24-07-2015, 12:39 PM
Yeah I agree Winner, KD didn't come across well. A little agricultural is the term I would use to describe his performance. Although that didn't stop Shane Jones.

Craic, yes prisons always have some contra-ban & dodgy behavior, however if you think the level of basic partying, organized fight clubs & this dropping people off balconies onto concrete floors is anywhere near acceptable, I suggest you look at moving to the 3rd world. And no I don't think our prisons have always been this poorly run or necessarily the non Serco prisons are either. It appears the MT Eden Serco run prison is out of control.
Not a bad gig if you can get t. Take tax payer money & just don't do the job you are paid for. Hmm lets see mental health, social housing providers next. I wonder what tax payer money will be ripped off there. And then, hello TPPA, more corporatization at the tax payers expense. We will end up like the US with a government that is insolvent whilst corporations are ripping off government contracts, paying no tax & paying huge salaries & dividends.

westerly
24-07-2015, 01:04 PM
Ah well - if you look through the comments to this article - some people seem to have understood his example, but I agree, it is certainly not one of his finest pieces of analysis, it certainly does not address the problem - but I don't think it is core ACT policy either.

However - sad thing is the past leader of ACT does not need to shine to outscore than current leader of Labour. Anybody else watched Little loosing his rag in the recent TV3 interview? Just embarrassing - imagine this guy wants to be PM - really?

http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/video-andrew-little-snaps-over-chinese-buyer-data-questions-2015072112#axzz3gefCDJex

EZ - somehow it is a sad reflection on your party if you think that Labours only chance to get back into government is by continuously tearing everybody else down. Why don't you try instead to lift the bar inside your organisation - hey, this would do our country a service!

Actually - to be fair, Kelvin Davis made recently a quite good figure when highlighting some issues in our prison system. Obviously still early days, but he might be worth his money ... just a pity, that there seem to be more Cunliffe's and Little's than Davis' and Shearer's in the once grand old party.

Actually I thought Little was fairly restrained given Gower comes across as a fairly obnoxious reporter at his best. TV3 did it's own survey of probably hand picked Asian names to give it the result it wanted.
TV3 news is on a par with the major newspapers and TV1-- pathetically shallow.
The right side of the political spectrum is creating a New Zealand where anyone with a social conscience in public life is continuously under attack.
The Greens, Labour, NZ First are all subject to continuous opposition. As are anti liquor, anti sugar, and other public health advocates. We cannot have anything interfering in the ability of big business to pay less tax and make as much money as possible.
Andrew Little is being subjected to the same continual media and blogging attacks faced by Shearer, Cunliffe, and Norman. Strangely the Maori party seems immune.
As for Jamie Whyte, what he conveniently forgets is that the $800,000 he is quoting as a house price while probably nothing to a wealthy Asian looking for a new life is so far out of reach for the average Kiwi it is laughable.

westerly

BlackPeter
24-07-2015, 02:58 PM
I happens every time with Labour. They form a committee to work out which is the head and which is the tail of their dog. Then, as soon as they have explained to the public which end is which, the tail starts wagging the dog and they are back in the confused state again. Now it seems that the collar might be a better fit on Davis. Although highlighting the nasty side of NZ prisons is hardly new. It was going on under several Labour regimes as well in the last few decades. Fortunately the voters are likely to prefer a proven winner in the money markets.

Hi Craic, great process description ... certainly made my day!

Just one additional observation: the committee they form to work out head or butt ... its not part of Labour itself. They ask some other people (the unions - who may or may not be sympathetic for the goals of Labour) to help them to find their head ... and if these people actually support some other party, than the returned judgement call might not be that constructive. I think this explains how Cunliffe as well as Little managed to become temporary heads of the said dog :p

Daytr
24-07-2015, 03:44 PM
National generally form a committee to investigate stuff ups. Its a nice way of side tracking the issue. They must have a lot of committees...
At least with their latest major stuff up they have acted quickly. Pity it took a labour MP to raise the shocking performance of SERCO running Mt Eden.
The Government is now forced to take back the management of the prison. I like this bit though from the minister. "He denied the move was one of no confidence in Serco, who would continue to run the Wiri prison." Yeah right!
This is a major backflip by National & should send a warning to the electorate of National's plan to further corporatize government services.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/70525388/Government-takes-over-Serco-run-Mt-Eden-prison

I wonder if they will form a committee to investigate why its costing $3M & taking 5 years to rehouse three documents to the National Library!

National = incompetence.

elZorro
24-07-2015, 05:29 PM
Kelvin Davis. I was thinking he might be the man to turn Labour's fortune around

But he being a real plonker the last few days. No longer on my radar as a Labour leader after his performance on Radio NZ this morning

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/201763663/labour-repeats-call-to-cancel-serco-contract

(Disclosure: don't really know what plonker means but it sounds a neat word)

W69, I don't see what you mean, I thought he'd been swearing or something. He's saying there are more revelations than he can deal with in a few spare hours. What's wrong with that? In any case, his work produced a result, National has had to take back control of Mt Eden, at least temporarily. No smoke without fire.

elZorro
24-07-2015, 05:30 PM
your not wrong there winner... he was terrible. Totally unsubstantiated and insinuations all round. I think its a union driven probe and unfortunately Kelvin Davis is the fall guy..

You're making stuff up, BC.

elZorro
24-07-2015, 05:36 PM
Hi Craic, great process description ... certainly made my day!

Just one additional observation: the committee they form to work out head or butt ... its not part of Labour itself. They ask some other people (the unions - who may or may not be sympathetic for the goals of Labour) to help them to find their head ... and if these people actually support some other party, than the returned judgement call might not be that constructive. I think this explains how Cunliffe as well as Little managed to become temporary heads of the said dog :p

You're dreaming if you think the unions are in control of Labour. They don't fund it very well on a per person basis, very low in fact, and they don't offer much campaign foot-soldiering either. It's done by older party faithful, by and large. So this story about the tail wagging the dog, who started that off (C-T?). Give us some good examples to prove your point, if you can find any.

craic
25-07-2015, 07:19 AM
Impossible! Labour have been trying for years to work out which is the head and which is the tail. Last two election they managed to present the tail with a collar on it. As to the unions, you are right. The unions have lost their power and the drivers are the teachers and radical academics. Sooner rather than later, Labour are going to have to look in the same mirror that social credit used a few years back. Maybe a suitable new name would be The Peoples Party, with a picture of Fidel Castro and a picture of the Pope, hung prominently on the wall behind the leaders deskand a small chalk board on the front of the desk with the legend "Todays Leader" on the top and the current name chalked underneath.

Daytr
25-07-2015, 07:23 AM
EZ, National are in the pockets of big business & the wealthy, so they can hardly take the high ground.
When did unions become a bad thing? Its similar to when people say you're a 'greenie' with negative connotation.
Why is it a bad thing to care about the environment? Its not & its a disgrace that it has come to that.
I have never belonged to a union so am certainly not a unionist, however they have their place to keep a balance.
We would still be in the days of serf labour or Victorian work conditions without them.

winner69
25-07-2015, 07:27 AM
W69, I don't see what you mean, I thought he'd been swearing or something. He's saying there are more revelations than he can deal with in a few spare hours. What's wrong with that? In any case, his work produced a result, National has had to take back control of Mt Eden, at least temporarily. No smoke without fire.

He was not in control of that interview when he should have been

If he had all that new stuff he should have been more convincing and explicit instead of mumbling on in vague terms.

Maybe a bad day in the office but didn't do much for me. I am trying to see good in your people but honestly struggling a little.

BlackPeter
25-07-2015, 09:58 AM
When did unions become a bad thing? Its similar to when people say you're a 'greenie' with negative connotation.
Why is it a bad thing to care about the environment? Its not & its a disgrace that it has come to that.
I have never belonged to a union so am certainly not a unionist, however they have their place to keep a balance.
We would still be in the days of serf labour or Victorian work conditions without them.

Hi daytr, I don't think I questioned the value of the union movement - I just indicated that they, while not being part of Labour, seem to dictate whoever is leading Labour at the day (both Little and Cunliffe have been forced on Labour against the will of its caucus). Not a problem for me, I just questioned the wisdom of this selection process ... but if it works for Labour, than this is fine with me . Long may this process continue :p.

Totally agree with you - the unions had their place in history, and their role was essential during the industrialisation. Wouldn't want to know how the world would look like today without a strong union movement at this time. The problem with them is like with every other human based organisation ... they learned to use their muscle, managed to overcome resistance and than started to use their power not for the good of the country, but to satisfy the desire of a few. Just look at the US, who still have a strong union movement - many unions over their are basically legalised criminal organisations living of blackmail and corruption.

Not saying that NZ is that far down the same track, but I don't think this is for the integrity of its union leaders, it is just that they never had the opportunity here to take that much power. Lets keep it that way.

Looking at the Greenies - I used to be one of them and certainly treat the environment with respect. Unfortunately here in New Zealand the Green party has been taken over by a bunch of (very left wing) people who just try to push their socialist agenda under the cloak of the Green party brand. Some of them (e.g. Russel Norman) first tried their luck in marxist political groups (Australian DSP). Many of them came from New Labour and other colourful Alliance-branches. Nothing against socialists and communists (well, I don't question their good will, even if I think that their proposed methods don't work), however there is a problem if they hide under the Green brand because they realised that they get nowhere while working with an open agenda. This is what tarnishes the Green brand, not any desire to protect the environment.

The disgrace you are talking about should target the people who undermined a once honest environmental movement.

elZorro
25-07-2015, 10:21 AM
BP, you're a great stirrer, but again, no substance behind these allegations. Your posts are designed to keep National-Act in power, but what are you really scared of, new tax policies for example? Why not just be honest about that?

In a week where Labour MPs and support staff did their job well, quite a few posters have come on here and tried to undo that. Just making stuff up, as per usual.

This National Govt is being exposed for being poor operators of crown assets, and I hope it keeps happening at the rate it's going. While we may have come through the GFC and the earthquakes (with a lot of help from Labour's previous terms of course), our next challenge is to have a broad-based economy that doesn't rely on rapidly rising house prices for nest eggs for a few, because like the dairy cheque, that could all disappear. It's not real enough, not good enough for NZ, it won't improve our ranking on the OECD scale.

Is deficity a word? (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11486515&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Saturday+25 +July+2015)

winner69
25-07-2015, 03:39 PM
If anybody interested on the troubles Serco are working through this is a good read. Long but it is the weekend

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jul/02/serco-rupert-soames-outsourcing-privatisation?CMP=share_btn_tw

BlackPeter
25-07-2015, 05:13 PM
BP, you're a great stirrer, but again, no substance behind these allegations.

Hi EZ, this is a bit thick coming from you. Which of my allegations do you think is without substance? and hey, you said "again", i.e. there must be more than one allegation without substance ...? You should give me at least an opportunity to deliver the evidence (even if I am sure you won't like it). What allegations exactly are you referring to?

winner69
26-07-2015, 04:45 PM
EZ, is Labour still predistribution on their agenda and using those ideas as the foundation of their policies or did that go out the window with Cunliffe

CT have some leanings that way - maybe the Nats will start thinking that way now

elZorro
26-07-2015, 05:12 PM
EZ, is Labour still predistribution on their agenda and using those ideas as the foundation of their policies or did that go out the window with Cunliffe

CT have some leanings that way - maybe the Nats will start thinking that way now

W69, I'm not sure what you mean, is that pro-distribution of.. something?

However I see John Key has moved to take some Labour policy ideas about immigration into the regions. All carefully worded in the media interview:

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/279717/pm-announces-immigration-rule-change

So while they're bereft of good ideas, they've taken some Labour policies and used them, and simultaneously they are placing some controls on immigration. Then at the end of the interview he's cunning enough to suggest that they still want an open policy on immigration and open markets, and that Labour don't seem to know what their policies are at the moment. Yes, John, we all believe you. Every word.

The only trouble is, this type of policy to move new people into the regions to presumably start up businesses, has come at the very time the locals are cutting back on staff and paring back their costs to weather a big downturn. This bandaid policy would have been better, if it was done a couple of years ago.

An economist formerly from the Reserve Bank was on The Nation this morning, saying that it only takes a 1% population increase in NZ to add 10% to property prices (I assume that's in Auckland, or worse in Auckland). So while the National govt's response to housing prices is to do a snapshot of ownership in October(not a register, which would be updated), it's still going to be very interesting to see the data.

I was speaking to a guy who has two tertiary qualifications today, very briefly he mentioned the leaked house buyer data, and implied the data was rubbish, done solely on surnames. Again, he never saw the data, was only going on what he'd read in the press, and being a National/Act sort of voter, that was good enough for him. You can see where this is going. Labour do need to get the public to be a bit more informed, but that takes money.

winner69
26-07-2015, 05:54 PM
EZ

Wiki definition - Pre-distribution is the idea that the state should try to prevent inequalities occurring in the first place rather than ameliorating inequalities through the tax and benefits system once they have occurred as occurs under redistribution.

Brainchild of a Yale professor

Cunliffe liked the concept and did talk about it.

Conservative introduction of a National Living Wage in the recent UK budget was predistribution in action. Very poignant as Miliband was seen as a dork talking predistribution before the election.

Seems a pattern here - Conservative/National 'stealing' Labour ideas.

elZorro
26-07-2015, 07:21 PM
EZ

Wiki definition - Pre-distribution is the idea that the state should try to prevent inequalities occurring in the first place rather than ameliorating inequalities through the tax and benefits system once they have occurred as occurs under redistribution.

Brainchild of a Yale professor

Cunliffe liked the concept and did talk about it.

Conservative introduction of a National Living Wage in the recent UK budget was predistribution in action. Very poignant as Miliband was seen as a dork talking predistribution before the election.

Seems a pattern here - Conservative/National 'stealing' Labour ideas.

OK, thanks for that W69. I would guess that in some cases you could predict the results from putting effort in at the front end, like a liveable minimum wage, but in other situations you'd need to be there at the end to tidy up. Which is surely what we have now, a series of policies tested over time. While National make a show of being polite to the masses, they also clamp down hard in certain areas too.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/279693/changes-for-social-housing,-sole-parents

winner69
26-07-2015, 07:32 PM
OK, thanks for that W69. I would guess that in some cases you could predict the results from putting effort in at the front end, like a liveable minimum wage, but in other situations you'd need to be there at the end to tidy up. Which is surely what we have now, a series of policies tested over time. While National make a show of being polite to the masses, they also clamp down hard in certain areas too.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/279693/changes-for-social-housing,-sole-parents

That's how it works eh EZ

As long as the insiders keep getting richer and the poor poorer its working.

Daytr
27-07-2015, 07:24 AM
BP, confusion reigns again I see. Common theme on this thread.

I never said YOU questioned the union movement. However I'm glad to see you think they have their place as long as they don't have control. I probably agree with that, although I'm not sure that's how I would term it & I think their needs to be a balance and at the moment the balance has swung too far in favour of business, with the likes of zero hour contracts, threats to smoko breaks and more recently watering down safety standards for small business the biggest employer in NZ.

How can you used to be a Greenie? You are confusing the Green party with being a Greenie. A Greenie is someone who shows concern for the environment or actively supporting and promoting protection of the environment. Obviously Green party members are Greenies, but you can be a Greenie without being a supporter of the Green party. I am one of those. Easy to confuse the two as unfortunately environmental policy is owned by the left, whereas it should be a priority for all parties, as the environment is what we all depend on to survive and surely even the short sighted National party can see of you crap in your own backyard it will cost you in the long run. This is a major area of policy failure for National and one of the first reasons that turned me against them when returning to NZ. Seeing their promotion of mining & fossil fuel exploration & at the same time cutting funding to DOC. Disgraceful.
BP, for someone who doesn't believe emissions which is a, if not the major issue in regards man made climate change, I think you may failed Greenie 101 and perhaps could never call yourself a Greenie in the true sense of the term. However any concern for the environment and its protection is certainly a positive.




Hi daytr, I don't think I questioned the value of the union movement - I just indicated that they, while not being part of Labour, seem to dictate whoever is leading Labour at the day (both Little and Cunliffe have been forced on Labour against the will of its caucus). Not a problem for me, I just questioned the wisdom of this selection process ... but if it works for Labour, than this is fine with me . Long may this process continue :p.

Totally agree with you - the unions had their place in history, and their role was essential during the industrialisation. Wouldn't want to know how the world would look like today without a strong union movement at this time. The problem with them is like with every other human based organisation ... they learned to use their muscle, managed to overcome resistance and than started to use their power not for the good of the country, but to satisfy the desire of a few. Just look at the US, who still have a strong union movement - many unions over their are basically legalised criminal organisations living of blackmail and corruption.

Not saying that NZ is that far down the same track, but I don't think this is for the integrity of its union leaders, it is just that they never had the opportunity here to take that much power. Lets keep it that way.

Looking at the Greenies - I used to be one of them and certainly treat the environment with respect. Unfortunately here in New Zealand the Green party has been taken over by a bunch of (very left wing) people who just try to push their socialist agenda under the cloak of the Green party brand. Some of them (e.g. Russel Norman) first tried their luck in marxist political groups (Australian DSP). Many of them came from New Labour and other colourful Alliance-branches. Nothing against socialists and communists (well, I don't question their good will, even if I think that their proposed methods don't work), however there is a problem if they hide under the Green brand because they realised that they get nowhere while working with an open agenda. This is what tarnishes the Green brand, not any desire to protect the environment.

The disgrace you are talking about should target the people who undermined a once honest environmental movement.

BlackPeter
27-07-2015, 07:39 AM
BP, confusion reigns again I see. Common theme on this thread.

I never said YOU questioned the union movement. However I'm glad to see you think they have their place as long as they don't have control. I probably agree with that, although I'm not sure that's how I would term it & I think their needs to be a balance and at the moment the balance has swung too far in favour of business, with the likes of zero hour contracts, threats to smoko breaks and more recently watering down safety standards for small business the biggest employer in NZ.

How can you used to be a Greenie? You are confusing the Green party with being a Greenie. A Greenie is someone who shows concern for the environment or actively supporting and promoting protection of the environment. Obviously Green party members are Greenies, but you can be a Greenie without being a supporter of the Green party. I am one of those. Easy to confuse the two as unfortunately environmental policy is owned by the left, whereas it should be a priority for all parties, as the environment is what we all depend on to survive and surely even the short sighted National party can see of you crap in your own backyard it will cost you in the long run. This is a major area of policy failure for National and one of the first reasons that turned me against them when returning to NZ. Seeing their promotion of mining & fossil fuel exploration & at the same time cutting funding to DOC. Disgraceful.
BP, for someone who doesn't believe emissions which is a, if not the major issue in regards man made climate change, I think you may failed Greenie 101 and perhaps could never call yourself a Greenie in the true sense of the term. However any concern for the environment and its protection is certainly a positive.

Hmm - given your major concern about confusion ... maybe you should add a bit less :p

elZorro
27-07-2015, 08:55 AM
That's how it works eh EZ

As long as the insiders keep getting richer and the poor poorer its working.

That's certainly what it looks like.

Here is a short version of Labour's immigration policy at the 2014 elections, one of the policies no-one looked at. Seems a bit like National's 'new idea for the regions'.

http://campaign.labour.org.nz/immigration

Daytr
27-07-2015, 09:10 AM
So with National's new immigration policy shifting immigration to the regions, where is the money for the regions to support this change?
Infrastructure particularly sewerage which is already a major funding issue in the regions is already under funded and in a lot of cases requires expansion or replacement. How about regional roads that will have more traffic, dare I say it one way bridges. Is this yet another poorly thought out reactionary policy from our shoot from the hip PM? Spreading infrastructure pain will cost a lot more than centralization.
The obvious answer was just to reign in immigration as well as the plan that has been announced. Combine that with money for the regions, however the difficulty with a throw a dart at the map plan, if that where is the money to be spent? Hawkes Bay? Northland? Dunedin? Everywhere?
The regions do need a lifeline, however investment in the regions rather is required than just pushing more people into areas with already under stress infrastructure is ill thought out.

winner69
27-07-2015, 09:39 AM
That's certainly what it looks like.

Here is a short version of Labour's immigration policy at the 2014 elections, one of the policies no-one looked at. Seems a bit like National's 'new idea for the regions'.

http://campaign.labour.org.nz/immigration

Perception EZ

Key and Nats doing a good job of running the country

Good strategy in listening to all sides and implementing (or saying the right things) the best policies so the populous feel things are under control.

Annette got really grumpy on the radio this morning calling Coleman incompetent. Nice one. She good that Annette

BlackPeter
27-07-2015, 10:26 AM
BP, you're a great stirrer, but again, no substance behind these allegations.


Hi EZ, this is a bit thick coming from you. Which of my allegations do you think is without substance? and hey, you said "again", i.e. there must be more than one allegation without substance ...? You should give me at least an opportunity to deliver the evidence (even if I am sure you won't like it). What allegations exactly are you referring to?

Hi EZ, just notice you are around to praise Labours policies (as you do ....).

Just a wee reminder, you accused me a couple of days ago of making allegations without substance (without specifying which allegation(s) you referred to). I asked you to identify these "alleged" substanceless allegations. Haven't yet heard back from you.

Question - did you check and found out that whichever of my so called allegations displeased you had substance after all, or why is it that hard for you to identify them?

elZorro
27-07-2015, 12:37 PM
Hi EZ, just notice you are around to praise Labours policies (as you do ....).

Just a wee reminder, you accused me a couple of days ago of making allegations without substance (without specifying which allegation(s) you referred to). I asked you to identify these "alleged" substanceless allegations. Haven't yet heard back from you.

Question - did you check and found out that whichever of my so called allegations displeased you had substance after all, or why is it that hard for you to identify them?


From BP: I just indicated that they (Unions), while not being part of Labour, seem to dictate whoever is leading Labour on the day (both Little and Cunliffe have been forced on Labour against the will of its caucus).

Totally agree with you - the unions had their place in history, and their role was essential during the industrialisation. Wouldn't want to know how the world would look like today without a strong union movement at this time. The problem with them is like with every other human based organisation ... they learned to use their muscle, managed to overcome resistance and than started to use their power not for the good of the country, but to satisfy the desire of a few.

Looking at the Greenies - I used to be one of them and certainly treat the environment with respect. Unfortunately here in New Zealand the Green party has been taken over by a bunch of (very left wing) people who just try to push their socialist agenda under the cloak of the Green party brand. Some of them (e.g. Russel Norman) first tried their luck in marxist political groups (Australian DSP).

From the examples of your thought processes, from just one post that I didn't think was that credible. 1. The Labour Party, like the National Party, has a constitution that is thrashed out by all members, and modified from time to time. Labour doesn't allow the caucus to solely choose a new leader, we aren't that kind of party. Everybody has a say from their informed standpoint. We've been through too many leaders recently, sure. But both David Cunliffe and Andrew Little were chosen via the constitutional rules, and the union vote had no veto or overpowering part to play. You could argue that as they represent workers, the unions should have more say in a party like Labour. But Labour are centre left, not hard left, and have been for a long time.

2. Justify your throwaway remark that unions throw their weight around to benefit a few. Not in this day and age, they're more like trying to keep employers honest.

3. Greenies, Green Party, Marxist, hard left socialists, all in the picture according to BP - again, how do you think this lines up with the Green Party of today? They have been good at keeping the National Party on their toes, maybe that's what's wrong with them.

BlackPeter
27-07-2015, 02:47 PM
BP, you're a great stirrer, but again, no substance behind these allegations. Your posts are designed to keep National-Act in power, but what are you really scared of, new tax policies for example? Why not just be honest about that?

In a week where Labour MPs and support staff did their job well, quite a few posters have come on here and tried to undo that. Just making stuff up, as per usual.

This National Govt is being exposed for being poor operators of crown assets, and I hope it keeps happening at the rate it's going. While we may have come through the GFC and the earthquakes (with a lot of help from Labour's previous terms of course), our next challenge is to have a broad-based economy that doesn't rely on rapidly rising house prices for nest eggs for a few, because like the dairy cheque, that could all disappear. It's not real enough, not good enough for NZ, it won't improve our ranking on the OECD scale.

Is deficity a word? (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11486515&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Saturday+25 +July+2015)


Hi EZ, this is a bit thick coming from you. Which of my allegations do you think is without substance? and hey, you said "again", i.e. there must be more than one allegation without substance ...? You should give me at least an opportunity to deliver the evidence (even if I am sure you won't like it). What allegations exactly are you referring to?


From the examples of your thought processes, from just one post that I didn't think was that credible.
1. The Labour Party, like the National Party, has a constitution that is thrashed out by all members, and modified from time to time. Labour doesn't allow the caucus to solely choose a new leader, we aren't that kind of party. Everybody has a say from their informed standpoint. We've been through too many leaders recently, sure. But both David Cunliffe and Andrew Little were chosen via the constitutional rules, and the union vote had no veto or overpowering part to play. You could argue that as they represent workers, the unions should have more say in a party like Labour. But Labour are centre left, not hard left, and have been for a long time.


Hi EZ, thanks for coming back on this. Given its a lot of stuff I shall respond to the three points separately (just to keep the post length under control):
(1) ... actually, I don't see how what I wrote (that the unions, though not being part of Labour have a significant influence over who is elected as Labour leader) is inconsistent with what you wrote (that this is part of a democratically determined constitutional process). Obviously - we do highlight different aspects of this process, and you might not like the aspect I highlighted, but I don't see any contradiction and I fail to see how what I wrote would be an "allegation without substance". O.K - this would be one down, 2 to go ...

BlackPeter
27-07-2015, 03:13 PM
2. Justify your throwaway remark that unions throw their weight around to benefit a few. Not in this day and age, they're more like trying to keep employers honest.


O.K. - so what I said was:
Totally agree with you - the unions had their place in history, and their role was essential during the industrialisation. Wouldn't want to know how the world would look like today without a strong union movement at this time. The problem with them is like with every other human based organisation ... they learned to use their muscle, managed to overcome resistance and than started to use their power not for the good of the country, but to satisfy the desire of a few.

I give you that generalisations are always wrong (though they are often useful). I give you as well that the unisons here in NZ are just too unimportant and (luckily) powerless to really do a lot of damage (and therefore as well less likely to attract the type of machiavellian leaders I might have had in mind) - better examples around in the US and in the UK of Margaret Thatcher.

If you re-read my comments, than you will discover that talked about the union movement ... not specifically about unions in NZ. If you want an introduction to unionism and organised crime (in the US) - here is a good (though somewhat dated) paper to start: http://www.laborers.org/VAIRA_MEMO.html or (much newer): https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/organizedcrime/italian_mafia (read specifically the last part about labour racketeering).

If we look into NZ ... well, lets turn the question around ... which recent strike do you remember, which was beneficial for country, company and workers?

BlackPeter
27-07-2015, 03:44 PM
3. Greenies, Green Party, Marxist, hard left socialists, all in the picture according to BP - again, how do you think this lines up with the Green Party of today?

Ah - you left the best part for the end, this is easy ... just have a look into the program of the NZ Green party and the history of various (not all) of their leaders, co-leaders and PM's:

Actually - here is an interesting comparison between the communist manifest and the NZ Green party manifesto written by David Farrar:
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/05/the_abridged_communist_manifesto-2.html

and if you don't trust David ... here is it from the horses mouth:
http://fightback.org.nz/2013/05/21/green-is-red-the-case-for-eco-marxist-politics/

Now - let's look at some of the more prominent Greenies ...

Russell Norman started his political career in the "Democratic Socialist party" - an Australian Marxist Group

Sue Bradford started her political career in the "Maoist Progressive Youth movement"
http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2009/05/sue-bradford-the-greens-futile-left-option.html

Keith Locke (of course, we shouldn't hold his communist parents against him) started his political career in the Socialist Action League
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Locke

Ah - and if you say, but they are by now retired (actually - Russell is still serving as MP)? Well, this are all people shaping the NZ Green Party (and I didn't listed all) - and their current co-leader Metiria Turei stated just recently (when Shaw came on board), that "there will be no change in direction".

EZ, enough substance for you?

neopoleII
27-07-2015, 07:14 PM
thank you BP for the links you supplied in your last post..... has been interesting reading.
to the point that there should be a public (well known public) site that lists and divulges the history of
all people that wish to be in a position to influence or control NZ politics of all flavours.
unless people know where to look or have the inclination to search... it is difficult to learn who these people
are that wish to rule over us.
in this respect....... this thread alone excluding the left / right banter brings forth some very nice informative jewels.
this info should be available to the masses as per right of course.
funny that in this information generation..... so much is still tucked away from our one vote per citizen democracy.

sad really...... at least we are moving forward....... thanks BP. and to the other posters.

elZorro
27-07-2015, 08:11 PM
BP, I have to agree that there is probably plenty to read here. Some of it doesn't pertain to NZ though. You're also being selective in what you present. This sentence from one of your links lines up with what I thought I saw in a small amount of door-door campaigning, for example.


The Green Party in New Zealand has completely abased itself before the profit motive. It is now the party of “greenwashing”, of middle-class consumer activism, of the relatively well-off under capitalism seeking some kind of moral basis for their consumption habits. The voting numbers for the Greens in South Auckland show how relevant this is to the working class.

Except that's far too strong to be remotely correct. There will be a wide variety of reasons for people to vote Green, some more educated (and therefore wealthier in general) voters might be more concerned with climate change than most. You're reading all the highly opinionated articles, with black and white points of view.

Labour is a party that tries to look like NZ's population. It strives to have 50% of each gender in the top posts, for example. It does this at the local electorate level too. The National Party doesn't look like NZ, and its leader is chosen by their caucus only. When they make policy decisions, they tend to help those who are already in the top (say) 30% of the population, by wealth measure. Not all the time, but enough for it to be a strong trend.

elZorro
28-07-2015, 06:35 AM
Colin James has an interesting article today, looks like he's paying some attention to Winston Peters, Daytr.


Think local? Don't be loopy. Follow the money


Minister of Local Government Paula Bennett often sounds like the minister against local government. Too much of this might play into Winston Peters' hands.


Bennett's favourite phrase for councils has been "loopy rules". A group under MP Jacqui Dean hunting them out has received 2000 submissions.


Bennett also says councils must become "efficient and effective", jointly running services and sharing best practice. If not, Bennett told a National party conference workshop on Saturday, "I am going force that". Last week she told the councils' Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) conference "you can't ... continue as you are."


And, she shouted at the National workshop, she wants "yes" councils, ones that say yes to development.


Grievance at councils was a subtheme at National's conference. It also came up in an economic plenary session and another workshop.


A few voices spoke up for councils. Far more grumped at risk-averseness, slowness, cost, inconsistency, creation of a climate of uncertainty and confusion and lack of "customer" focus, among a welter of accusations. Some said it was Nationalists' own fault: able centre-right people should stand for councils and fix them.


No one, except sotto voce in the margins, noted that councils' "customers" include developers' neighbours -- in fact, all local citizens. There was little recognition that ministers have loaded councils with jobs and complex new legislation without funding, constrained funding for some activities, then attacked them for raising rates -- though Bennett did acknowledge "too many legislative rules" and said she would not make new rules to reduce rules.


Integral to the central-local tension is that councils (health boards too) exist at Parliament's (dis)pleasure, as the Canterbury Regional Council found when the Beehive appointed commissioners.


Through Parliament ministers can tell councils what to do or not do and when and what funds they can raise from what.


This has discouraged local enthusiasm for local control of local affairs. Council elections are in the "why bother" basket: very low voter turnouts. Near-reflex citizens' resistance to amalgamations is more opposition to outside interference than a desire to participate in local affairs -- a sort of negative localism.


On the other side, ministers get frustrated when councils don't do what they would do if they were directly running them.


LGNZ used to grump back. But recently LGNZ has turned constructive: researched, reasoned argument, recognition of failings and governance programmes to address them and a declared wish to work with the central government to clear roadblocks to improvement.


For example, LGNZ has set up a joint borrowing agency, brought in the Institute of Directors to mentor councillors and surveyed public and business opinion to see where councils need to improve. It is encouraging shared services and developing a risk management agency for assets in conjunction with 30-year infrastructure plans required by the central government (though not of itself). Special economic zones are mooted.


At its conference LGNZ issued a 10-point plan for a more rational revenue system than the present hotchpotch of rates, development and user charges, dividends from trading entities and government grants and subsidies.


Rates don't respond to changes in the local economy. Governments can turn miserly on grants and subsidies, especially when trying to prove their own fiscal probity. Nick Smith has limited charges for infrastructure and services for new housing areas, which LGNZ wants rethought.


The government doesn't pay rates on core Crown land. And Parliament has exempted from rates churches and transport, conservation and recreation and some Maori land.


LGNZ wants those exemptions scrapped. Other proposals for a broader revenue base include: proper consultation, cost-benefit analysis and cost-sharing of new duties dumped on councils; simplification of the rates rebate scheme to help more low-income ratepayers; better guidance on the tradeoff of user charges and rates; permission to levy road-user charges, targeted levies and fuel taxes; a share in any "value uplift" from council-assisted economic activity; a share of mineral royalties; and charges on tourists.


LGNZ is also pushing partnership with community and voluntary organisations and private firms to make revenue go further. This has been critical in British councils' response to heavy cuts in funding.


Money is power. Ministers like power. But if LGNZ keeps building up well-researched cases, the case for power-sharing may grow.


Bennett does give glimpses of a kinder side that might respond. If not, her rhetoric risks turning mayors and councillors grumpy, as in 1999 when overbearing ministers cost National votes.


As some councillors already point, Winston Peters is lurking in the provinces, post-Northland by-election, for just such an opening -- as his party's conference this coming weekend will be keenly aware.


Colin James, Synapsis Ltd, 04-384 7030, 021-438 434, P O Box 9494, Marion Square, Wellington 6141,
ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz (wlmailhtml:{859F7BC3-BC06-49EC-89C0-293E8B5037B7}mid://00000046/!x-usc:mailto:ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz), website www.ColinJames.co.nz (wlmailhtml:{859F7BC3-BC06-49EC-89C0-293E8B5037B7}mid://00000046/!x-usc:http://www.colinjames.co.nz/)

BlackPeter
28-07-2015, 07:29 AM
BP, I have to agree that there is probably plenty to read here. Some of it doesn't pertain to NZ though. You're also being selective in what you present. This sentence from one of your links lines up with what I thought I saw in a small amount of door-door campaigning, for example.


Selective? Of course ... You questioned the substance behind my allegation and I provided it. I don't pretend to provide a balanced view on the NZ Green movement in one single post ... and to be honest - neither do you. We are clearly looking from different viewing angles at the same thing. You are looking at the friendly picture of the young smiling and somewhat helpless child saying "Vote for me". You look at the idealistic (and sometimes naive) tree hugger who just wants to do good and protect the environment. I look at the manipulative bunch of political activists who undermined and abused the idealistic basis and who came up with the friendly slogan. Different viewing angles, same party.

BlackPeter
28-07-2015, 07:36 AM
Ah yes - before I forget ... interesting article on stuff:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/70578672/New-Zealand-has-worlds-third-highest-material-standard-of-living-report?cid=edm:stuff:dailyheadlines&bid=859577

NZ takes the 3rd place (from the top) in the world related to material well being ... and actually - even the "inequality" position does not look too bad. Yes, there are a number of countries which seem to fare better than we are (assuming equal is good in your books), but they are not much better.

Not too bad for a centre-right government, isn't it?

Daytr
28-07-2015, 07:41 AM
So no bias there then BP. They are either nave or manipulative. Yeah right.
You are one for extremes...


Selective? Of course ... You questioned the substance behind my allegation and I provided it. I don't pretend to provide a balanced view on the NZ Green movement in one single post ... and to be honest - neither do you. We are clearly looking from different viewing angles at the same thing. You are looking at the friendly picture of the young smiling and somewhat helpless child saying "Vote for me". You look at the idealistic (and sometimes naive) tree hugger who just wants to do good and protect the environment. I look at the manipulative bunch of political activists who undermined and abused the idealistic basis and who came up with the friendly slogan. Different viewing angles, same party.

Daytr
28-07-2015, 07:58 AM
Paula Bennett is a liability for National, I'm surprised Key has woken up to that.
She came across as an angry, ego driven and not particularly bright individual in the bi-election.

Last I looked we were in a democracy, although the TPPA is likely to diminish our sovereignty, so who is Paula Bennett to tell elected councils what they should be doing. No thought for the environment I'm sure.



Colin James has an interesting article today, looks like he's paying some attention to Winston Peters, Daytr.

[B]

BlackPeter
28-07-2015, 08:07 AM
You are one for extremes...

Not quite, daytr ... actually, quite the opposite. I am not for but against the extremes :p

Daytr
28-07-2015, 08:42 AM
Really and you voted for Act. haha
To reference you, everyone thinks they are in the center.
Anyhow again, you misunderstood my post, common theme.
You have extreme views on situations/people.
I am just going by your posts and what you compare people situations to.
And this was just another example of that. There are plenty of others.

BlackPeter
28-07-2015, 09:23 AM
Really and you voted for Act. haha
To reference you, everyone thinks they are in the center.
Anyhow again, you misunderstood my post, common theme.
You have extreme views on situations/people.
I am just going by your posts and what you compare people situations to.
And this was just another example of that. There are plenty of others.

Whats wrong with voting for ACT? They are a party based on liberal ideas ... can't get more centre than that. They advocate the responsibility of the individual vs a nanny role of the state.

I stand for freedom. I stand for tolerance. I stand for minority rights. I stand for fairness, justice and a human society without fear of oppression through the state, majority groups, the doomsday preachers of the day (be they religious or not) or the in any society present bullies. I stand for everybody's right to get a good start in life.

What do you stand for, daytr?

Major von Tempsky
28-07-2015, 10:28 AM
Hear hear BlackPeter.

"Ask not what my country can do for me but what I can do for my country!"

Wasn't it one of the Kennedys in the USA who said that? Democrats too!

winner69
28-07-2015, 12:19 PM
John will be getting many more pats on the back from THEM again.

They will be pleased to see their man championing the cause so well

Alas, my protests have been in vain

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/70605894/john-key-says-nzs-drug-bill-set-to-rise-under-tpp-but-patients-protected

Daytr
28-07-2015, 04:17 PM
ACT have what I would call extreme views on market forces which is basically Randism.
If you really think ACT is somewhere near the center you are dreaming.
They believe that market forces will auto correct & create a balance and should be left pretty much unregulated.
This nave view doesn't account for human behavior & greed, which goes directly against liberal philosophy of fairness.
Greenspan thought on similar lines & look where that ended up.

I would suggest the current National government promotes unfairness in society and look after the all ready well off & is creating a greater divide in regards wealth. Hardly inline with what you declare you stand for.


Whats wrong with voting for ACT? They are a party based on liberal ideas ... can't get more centre than that. They advocate the responsibility of the individual vs a nanny role of the state.

I stand for freedom. I stand for tolerance. I stand for minority rights. I stand for fairness, justice and a human society without fear of oppression through the state, majority groups, the doomsday preachers of the day (be they religious or not) or the in any society present bullies. I stand for everybody's right to get a good start in life.

What do you stand for, daytr?

Daytr
28-07-2015, 04:25 PM
Winner, I am yet to hear one good thing in regards the TPPA.
Is the US going to suddenly stop subsidizing their farmers?
NZ seems to have one of the most open markets and yet the likes of the US & Europe still have large protectionism.
All I see is more corporatization of governments and that is not a good thing.


John will be getting many more pats on the back from THEM again.

They will be pleased to see their man championing the cause so well

Alas, my protests have been in vain

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/70605894/john-key-says-nzs-drug-bill-set-to-rise-under-tpp-but-patients-protected

elZorro
28-07-2015, 06:25 PM
John will be getting many more pats on the back from THEM again.

They will be pleased to see their man championing the cause so well

Alas, my protests have been in vain

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/70605894/john-key-says-nzs-drug-bill-set-to-rise-under-tpp-but-patients-protected

Jane Kelsey was just on Seven Sharp, putting a good case against the TPPA. Mike Hosking of course had the last word, that it'll be all right. But that was after Jane had implied that his questions showed a lack of background research. Those National caucus members think they're so clever, but they are about to get done. And so is NZ, down the track.

westerly
28-07-2015, 06:34 PM
Whats wrong with voting for ACT? They are a party based on liberal ideas ... can't get more centre than that. They advocate the responsibility of the individual vs a nanny role of the state.


"I stand for freedom. I stand for tolerance. I stand for minority rights. I stand for fairness, justice and a human society without fear of oppression through the state, majority groups, the doomsday preachers of the day (be they religious or not) or the in any society present bullies. I stand for everybody's right to get a good start in life.

What do you stand for, daytr?

More suited to John's "change the flag " web site. :) ACT centre? More far right Libertarian.

westerly

winner69
28-07-2015, 06:39 PM
Winner, I am yet to hear one good thing in regards the TPPA.
Is the US going to suddenly stop subsidizing their farmers?
NZ seems to have one of the most open markets and yet the likes of the US & Europe still have large protectionism.
All I see is more corporatization of governments and that is not a good thing.

You are spot on daytr, and we are going to get screwed

Obvious who John is backing eh

Still some protests to come, I'll be there

elZorro
29-07-2015, 06:40 AM
Tourism industry takes $104mill hit from new tax, and now BNZ mentioning a dairy payout with a 2 in front, as possible?

http://www.interest.co.nz/rural-news/76773/finance-minister-agrees-nz240kg-payout-would-be-disastrous-says-rbnz-and-government?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Wednesday+2 9+July+2015

Key's pragmatic policy on regional placement of immigrants, is it really that good? Read the comments.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11487685&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Wednesday+2 9+July+2015

One really good thing about immigration, from National's point of view, is it makes GDP growth look good. How to grow an economy without doing too much at all.

Daytr
29-07-2015, 07:01 AM
Hopefully there is a big turnout. Although I can't see it making any difference to what National signs NZ up for.
The TPPA is probably the most far reaching & encompassing international deal that NZ has ever entered into.
All I see is that this will benefit multi-national corporations to the detriment of our citizens.
We already know its going to cost us more in regards pharmaceuticals. Why on earth would we agree to that?
Last I looked companies/corporations don't vote & governments are there to represent its citizens not protect the dividend payout of corporations.

Can anyone say what benefit NZ will get in exchange for signing away part of its sovereignty?
Isn't this termed as a form of treason in any other guise?

The Green Party gets a hard time on this thread, but they are really the only one stamping their foot loud & hard on the TPPA. Kudos.
Watch-out the privatization of the health system is next with funding being taken away from DHB's just the start.


You are spot on daytr, and we are going to get screwed

Obvious who John is backing eh

Still some protests to come, I'll be there

BlackPeter
29-07-2015, 08:51 AM
ACT have what I would call extreme views on market forces which is basically Randism.
If you really think ACT is somewhere near the center you are dreaming.
They believe that market forces will auto correct & create a balance and should be left pretty much unregulated.
This nave view doesn't account for human behavior & greed, which goes directly against liberal philosophy of fairness.
Greenspan thought on similar lines & look where that ended up.

I would suggest the current National government promotes unfairness in society and look after the all ready well off & is creating a greater divide in regards wealth. Hardly inline with what you declare you stand for.

Ah well, this clarifies it all. Daytr - I asked you what you stand for. The only thing you managed to come up with is another unsubstantiated attack on ACT as well as on myself.

I guess we all know what Winston and NZF stand for: populism, racism and enjoying the baubles of office. Pity that he seems to be rubbing off to his disciples - they are not even able anymore to stand for something positive :p.

elZorro
29-07-2015, 10:58 AM
Ah well, this clarifies it all. Daytr - I asked you what you stand for. The only thing you managed to come up with is another unsubstantiated attack on ACT as well as on myself.

I guess we all know what Winston and NZF stand for: populism, racism and enjoying the baubles of office. Pity that he seems to be rubbing off to his disciples - they are not even able anymore to stand for something positive :p.

We're still wondering what you think of Ayn Rand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand), BP. No doubt you've read her works avidly..

Daytr
29-07-2015, 01:16 PM
Its not unsubstantiated. Doesn't ACT believe in less regulation & let market forces dictate?
It clarifies all does it. haha

No that is your interpretation of what Winston Peters stands for which is completely one eyed.
Need I remind you he is the longest standing politician in New Zealand.
Some would call that service to the country. Others just want to be derogatory.
Peters & NZF has the best interest of all NZers at heart. National just want to look after big business & sell & corporatize everything it can lay its hands on.

You asked me what I stood for, such a simple question that has an array of topics to cover to give an answer to & I didn't want to bore everyone on here with a litany of terms sounding like a super hero, such as truth, justice & the American way... What I will say as many of the things you mentioned I am sure we all stand for, however we obviously have very different thoughts on how they are arrived at or achieved and as I alluded to the current right of politics might say they believe in those things but their policies fail the bar on so many levels and is far more about lining the pockets of big business and development at any cost, be it socially or environmentally.
All National have proved is that they can keep an economy afloat by getting the government in hock up to its eyeballs, build roads, sell anything & everything or corporatize it, botch that in regards MT Eden prison, the sale of social housing, to anyone that has the dosh, securitise mental health, restructure DOC & then reverse it 18 months later, slash the budget to DOC. Now they are looking to sign a trade agreement that nobody wants & wont be in the best interest of New Zealand. Key does not have NZs interests first, its all about money & corporatizing the government. Winston Peters fights for the average citizen.

In one line you say I make an unsubstantiated attack when I am quoting ACT philosophy back at you. if you don't like it I would suggest then that you voted for the wrong party. You then go on to just the same, a very cheap & unsubstantiated attack against a man who just achieved the biggest political swing in NZs history & gave the government a massive black eye they will carry into the 2017 election.

NZF I hope will challenge National in every regional seat. This is National's strong hold and where they will do the most damage. Combine that with Labour's stronghold the urban seats & good bye National in 2017.






Ah well, this clarifies it all. Daytr - I asked you what you stand for. The only thing you managed to come up with is another unsubstantiated attack on ACT as well as on myself.

I guess we all know what Winston and NZF stand for: populism, racism and enjoying the baubles of office. Pity that he seems to be rubbing off to his disciples - they are not even able anymore to stand for something positive :p.

BlackPeter
29-07-2015, 02:54 PM
We're still wondering what you think of Ayn Rand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand), BP. No doubt you've read her works avidly..

Sorry to disappoint you EZ, the name didn't ring a bell. Might be related to being grown up in a non-anglo-saxon culture. We have enough philosophers ourselves.

Just based on the wikipedia summary: I guess there are some ideas in her teachings I would support - and others I wouldn't. I certainly wouldn't support a "laissez-faire capitalism" - and neither would in my view ACT (judging from the current program: http://www.act.org.nz/policies).

Not sure what the article means with "she supported egoism and rejected altruism". If this is meant as observation and something politicians need to take into consideration, than I could understand where it is coming from. If it is however meant as a (desirable) objective - this certainly wouldn't sound like something I'd support.

Ah yes - and I note that she supported a Republican presidential candidate. Admittedly in 1940, and I am not that versed with the US politics of this time. However - I can't remember any recent Republican president (and candidate) I would have supported. I guess many (not all) of the Democrats have been bad enough, why would anybody go for worse than bad?

So, for what it is worth - it might be interesting to learn a bit more about what's behind some of her ideas, but on face value I am not sure, whether I would share more political values with her than I seem to share with daytr ...

Does this help?

Daytr
29-07-2015, 03:07 PM
BP, Greenspan was an avid follower of Randism & convinced the likes of Clinton that with less regulation, market forces would ultimately be self correcting to create a balance. The lack of regulation as well as the non enforcement of regulatory controls were some of the main drivers of the GFC. Even Greenspan now admits he got that wrong. One of ACT's major pieces of policy is a to reduce regulation.
Luckily the ACT party isn't a political force so we don't really need to be concerned what there policies are or how nave they are either.

BlackPeter
29-07-2015, 03:44 PM
BP, Greenspan was an avid follower of Randism & convinced the likes of Clinton that with less regulation, market forces would ultimately be self correcting to create a balance. The lack of regulation as well as the non enforcement of regulatory controls were some of the main drivers of the GFC. Even Greenspan now admits he got that wrong. One of ACT's major pieces of policy is a to reduce regulation.
Luckily the ACT party isn't a political force so we don't really need to be concerned what there policies are or how nave they are either.

Hi Daytr, you sound like a broken record ... but I don't really care whom Greenspan followed. Can't remember that I've been asked to approve his policies - and not sure either, how you want to make ACT responsible for his contribution to the GFC (hey, it was not just him alone ...).

You seem to think quite "linear" ... if there is something wrong with the current system, and if we can stop what's wrong with another regulation, than you just need to add them to the current ballast until it is right. Is this really NZF think?

Look - our economy is already now severely overburdened by unpredictable and tedious bureaucracy and useless red tape. Just some examples: Companies need to pay staff to fill out requests for grants to return to them (maybe) some of the taxes they originally paid. Stupid. Getting consents for anything in this country is a long drawn out, unpredictable and very expensive process. If you want e.g. to put a wee solar system onto your roof (we did), than the required resource consent is nearly as expensive as the solar system. However - we could apply for a grant (feeding more bureaucrats) which returned something like the GST on what the council charged us for permitting a system which had no impact whatsoever on any neighbours. Stupid. Try to build a wee shed and check with your local council what the consenting process would costs.

Sure, adding another bureaucratic straightjacket might help us to break the economies back, meaning it won't do anything undesirable anymore, but it won't do a lot of good either.

Instead of just adding more useless policies, laws, ministries, databases and taxes to all the ballast we already have ... maybe there is a better way: take all the ballast away and control the horse just with a light set of reigns. See - this would be an intelligent solution to the problem ...

Major von Tempsky
29-07-2015, 05:02 PM
"Greenspan was an avid follower of Randism ". What a transparently ignorant quote! It's like saying Keynes was a follower of Michael Joseph Savage! Bizarre!

Greenspan was and is an eminent economist, eminent enough to be appointed as head of the Federal Reserve. Rand is/was (father and son) an ignorant US right winger unqualified in economics. I rather doubt that Greenspan even bothered to read media reports of what Rand was saying.

There is right wing and right wing and that part of it which is well qualified in economics is worth listening to. If you are going to make some startling way out of left field quotes lets have some that compute.

Daytr
29-07-2015, 05:10 PM
I wasn't blaming ACT for the GFC, they are hardly a political force in NZ let alone globally ! haha
Quite a ridiculous assertion.
What I was saying is that their philosophy is similar to that of Randism in regards market forces & this is something that Greenspan bought into & its that sort of philosophy that took almost took the capitalist system to its knees.

Haven't you been saying the economy is just fine under National? Not that I agree with that, however its not the red tape that I am concerned with its the corporatization on anything and everything & the ever growing government debt that has spiraled to elevated levels under National.
I am sure there are some improvements that could be made in regards red tape, however letting people just do things willy-nilly is not a great idea either.
Anyway I was more referring to economic policy.
One light set of reigns would mean those with the might would take the system for all its worth and at the expense of others.
In egalitarian society or the perfect world I could actually agree with some of their philosophy, but unfortunately that is not the world we live in or what has been proven to be human nature & that is where this sort of agenda comes unstuck and is nave, not intelligent as you suggest.

Major von Tempsky
29-07-2015, 05:38 PM
Continuing wrong headed quotes "& this is something that Greenspan bought into" !!?? Au contraire Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, Margaret Yellen && don't buy into any of "Randism"!

Here's one example for you if you can understand it, it is part of economic theory and practice that in certain limited and unusual occasions that quantitative easing is necessary i.e. printing of banknotes to keep it simple. However the Rands totally disagree that quantitative easing should ever be used and in fact talked of legal action to stop it! Because they thought it would automatically cause runaway inflation regardless of the economic circumstances of the time.
Also ACT has enough qualified economists such as Dr Brash that Randism whatever it is would not ever be consulted!

Let me tell you as a qualified and practicing economist of some decades standing that neither Rand has been used in any of the economics courses around the Western world. You give the Rands a vast overstated prominence - they are just not referred to in economic literature or practice.

elZorro
29-07-2015, 07:18 PM
"Greenspan was an avid follower of Randism ". What a transparently ignorant quote! It's like saying Keynes was a follower of Michael Joseph Savage! Bizarre!

Greenspan was and is an eminent economist, eminent enough to be appointed as head of the Federal Reserve. Rand is/was (father and son) an ignorant US right winger unqualified in economics. I rather doubt that Greenspan even bothered to read media reports of what Rand was saying.

There is right wing and right wing and that part of it which is well qualified in economics is worth listening to. If you are going to make some startling way out of left field quotes lets have some that compute.

MVT: you're a bit off-beam here. Ayn Rand was a woman, and she certainly had an influence on Alan Greenspan in his formative years.

http://www.noblesoul.com/orc/bio/greenspan-time.html


In the years following the publication of The Fountainhead, Rand received numerous letters from readers, some of whom it profoundly influenced. In 1951 Rand moved from Los Angeles to New York City, where she gathered a group of these admirers around her. This group (jokingly designated "The Collective") included future Federal Reserve Chairman (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Chairman) Alan Greenspan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Greenspan), a young psychology student named Nathan Blumenthal (later Nathaniel Branden (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathaniel_Branden)) and his wife Barbara (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_Branden), and Barbara's cousin Leonard Peikoff (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Peikoff).


According to Wikipedia anyway. Here endeth the lesson.

Daytr
29-07-2015, 07:55 PM
Did I refer to QE MVT? As Greenspan didn't implement QE its hardly relevant. As an economist I would have thought you may know this. I also think you need to update your research on what Greenspan's influences were, Ayn Rand was certainly a significant one.

elZorro
29-07-2015, 09:15 PM
MVT: Let me tell you as a qualified and practicing economist of some decades standing that neither Rand has been used in any of the economics courses around the Western world. You give the Rands a vast overstated prominence - they are just not referred to in economic literature or practice.


Never heard of Ayn Rand MVT? I hadn't until a year or so ago, but then I'm not an economist of long standing like yourself. Anyone interested in the economy of the USA would surely know of her work.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/15/business/15atlas.html?_r=0

Bluster doesn't always work, does it. But I can see ACT voters liking her ideas. It's apparently quite justifiable to live only for yourself.

Daytr
29-07-2015, 09:47 PM
EZ, perhaps our eminent resident economist MVT was referring to Rand Paul. haha.
Rand never used in economic texts, really!
Someone hasn't studies very widely as an economist.

elZorro
30-07-2015, 06:44 AM
EZ, perhaps our eminent resident economist MVT was referring to Rand Paul. haha.
Rand never used in economic texts, really!
Someone hasn't studied very widely as an economist.

I think history has proven that unfettered capitalism doesn't work long term, and that a mix of progressive policies is better. The trickle-down theory doesn't work near as well as National/ACT people think, that's part of the story. Ayn Rand's ideas are quite extreme liberal right-wing, and she lived her life the same way.

More on the difficulty of renters to get ahead these days. NZHerald editorial on Auckland housing.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/news/article.cfm?c_id=8&objectid=11488863&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Thursday+30 +July+2015

Daytr
30-07-2015, 07:52 AM
Back to things more relevant than the ACT party.

Apparently the TPPA is not as close to being a done deal as communicated only last a few days ago.
It looks like the over zealous Tim Grosser may well come back with egg on his face. Well there is hope!
Key has already told us that the deal would cost NZ more in regards pharmaceuticals something only a few months ago he said wouldn't happen.
According to Key, extending patents by two years will only cost us a little bit. Well if 10s of millions is a little bit then he maybe right.

Keyesk Mike Hosking who has a similar downplaying manner in regards big issues, was made to look rather foolish in this interview with professor Jane Kelsey on Seven Sharp. As she rightly points out this is nothing like a free trade deal we have seen before. In effect it will create less free trade. Prime example, extending patents on pharmaceuticals. How does this make trade freer? It doesn't, quite the opposite.

The TPPA just gives more rights to large multi nationals to reap more money and extend protections such as copyright and patents.

If signed, just wait for the first corporate law suit in regards things like plain packaging on cigarettes or if we want to implement a fat tax, or prevent foreign ownership of land.

Bad, bad bad !

http://tvnz.co.nz/seven-sharp/does-tpp-affect-little-old-me-home-video-6364031

BlackPeter
30-07-2015, 08:08 AM
I think history has proven that unfettered capitalism doesn't work long term, and that a mix of progressive policies is better. The trickle-down theory doesn't work near as well as National/ACT people think, that's part of the story. Ayn Rand's ideas are quite extreme liberal right-wing, and she lived her life the same way.



EZ, you disappoint. Any evidence for the outcome of your thought process?

I agree that unfettered capitalism is for various ethical reasons undesirable, however - it does work ... certainly much better than any socialist / communist experiment did work at any stage in history. Remember the unhappy outcome of the big socialist experiments of last century? No matter whether you look at the downfall of the Soviet union, the Cuban experiment, the Chinese move from communism to a one party capitalist system (they funnily still call communism) or just something like the Israel Kibbutz movement - hardly any socialist / communist country or system survived this system for more than 2 generations, none survived 3 generations. Capitalism is here since man started to trade in the stone ages. Make that at least 200 generations, but likely much longer. How much longer do you need to observe it to prove it works?

However - I assume that we both agree that while socialism is proven to be unworkable (well - unless you create a new type of human being according to Marx) and while uncontrolled capitalism is undesirable, a better system must be somewhere in the middle.

Why not join us there?

Daytr
30-07-2015, 10:34 AM
BP are you suggesting that Labour isn't somewhere in the middle? I would suggest they are closer to the center than National & by quite a long chalk.
As EZ is an avid Labour supporter I think your question is already answered.
What I would like to see is that National mover closer to the center instead of trying to create a corporatized government where dividends will dictate outcomes.
I don't pay taxes so it ends up in the pockets of big business and that is where we are swiftly heading.

elZorro
30-07-2015, 06:09 PM
EZ, you disappoint. Any evidence for the outcome of your thought process?

I agree that unfettered capitalism is for various ethical reasons undesirable, however - it does work ... certainly much better than any socialist / communist experiment did work at any stage in history. Remember the unhappy outcome of the big socialist experiments of last century? No matter whether you look at the downfall of the Soviet union, the Cuban experiment, the Chinese move from communism to a one party capitalist system (they funnily still call communism) or just something like the Israel Kibbutz movement - hardly any socialist / communist country or system survived this system for more than 2 generations, none survived 3 generations. Capitalism is here since man started to trade in the stone ages. Make that at least 200 generations, but likely much longer. How much longer do you need to observe it to prove it works?

However - I assume that we both agree that while socialism is proven to be unworkable (well - unless you create a new type of human being according to Marx) and while uncontrolled capitalism is undesirable, a better system must be somewhere in the middle.

Why not join us there?

BP, all I know for sure, is that I liked the look of NZ when Helen Clark's Labour govt was in power. Going back over other Labour terms, lots of really good policies were put in place, OK, the mid 80's saw huge changes that hurt many people, but that was an aberration and/or we had to go through some of it.

But with National in power since 2008, we are seeing more of the same liberal process being worked on by degrees. I'm not sucked in by the odd Labour-lite action that John Key puts forward, while at the same time selling down state assets and damaging others, with a general top-down funding lid in place over many govt areas, in view of the increasing population. They are smart enough to encourage immigration as a way of making the economy look better than it is. Our manufacturing base has not strengthened, I'm sure it is weaker than it was. That's a damning result. Now they have offered KiwiRail topup funding for two years. What is that telling KiwiRail? That it's not worth giving them a bit of extra cash to reduce the loading on our roads? The Mainfreight CEO (http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/checkpoint/audio/201764549/truck-boss-takes-swipe-at-treasury)had something to say about that, and he should know.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/mainfreight-throws-weight-behind-kiwirail-laments-lack-national-transport-strategy-b-176311

This could be another opening for decent Labour policy. They have quite a few areas where they can point out what poor managers National have been.

As for voting National/Act, no, not for me I'm afraid, not with the data I'm looking at. NZ deserves better.

BlackPeter
31-07-2015, 09:39 AM
BP, all I know for sure, is that I liked the look of NZ when Helen Clark's Labour govt was in power. Going back over other Labour terms, lots of really good policies were put in place, OK, the mid 80's saw huge changes that hurt many people, but that was an aberration and/or we had to go through some of it.

But with National in power since 2008, we are seeing more of the same liberal process being worked on by degrees. I'm not sucked in by the odd Labour-lite action that John Key puts forward, while at the same time selling down state assets and damaging others, with a general top-down funding lid in place over many govt areas, in view of the increasing population. They are smart enough to encourage immigration as a way of making the economy look better than it is. Our manufacturing base has not strengthened, I'm sure it is weaker than it was. That's a damning result. Now they have offered KiwiRail topup funding for two years. What is that telling KiwiRail? That it's not worth giving them a bit of extra cash to reduce the loading on our roads? The Mainfreight CEO (http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/checkpoint/audio/201764549/truck-boss-takes-swipe-at-treasury)had something to say about that, and he should know.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/mainfreight-throws-weight-behind-kiwirail-laments-lack-national-transport-strategy-b-176311

This could be another opening for decent Labour policy. They have quite a few areas where they can point out what poor managers National have been.

As for voting National/Act, no, not for me I'm afraid, not with the data I'm looking at. NZ deserves better.

Hi EZ, that's o.k. ... a functioning democracy needs Right / Left and Centre. Looking at your comment that NZ deserves better - I need to agree, unfortunately however is this comment true no matter whether you describe the current government or the current opposition.

Not sure whether I share your enthusiasm for Helen's government, but I have to admit that I don't have much more enthusiasm for "team Key". The reason I sort of supported them last time (by voting for ACT) was that I thought they will do less damage to the country than the alternatives at hand ... and so far my view's on this hasn't changed.

Anyway .... Kiwirail might be worth a bit more discussion - and personally I haven't really made up my mind what the best course of action would be. I am however not sure whether it is possible to have this discussion in isolation anyway.

What we probably would need is a healthy discussion about NZ 2050 (or there abouts).
How do we want to see our country in 35 years?
1) Two large islands with a sparse population and deserted ghost towns but an overcrowded isthmus with huge traffic and pollution problems sitting on nine volcanoes covered by quarter of an acre sections reaching from Hamilton to Whangarei?

2) Two large islands with the Auckland spread as is, but no further net migration allowed for the country (neither into the country nor within), just to make sure daytr's fishing spot stays his alone. We will continue to live of agriculture with ongoing huge monocultures (dairy, potatoes, onions) producing staples and tourism (selling a green NZ which does not really exists but in ads). Tourists need to be confined to National parks and the Auckland isthmus ... if health and safety regulations wouldn't anyway keep them off any farmland, than the omnipresent agricultural sprays would kill them there. Economical boom and bust cycles continue ad infinitum

3) Increased population (say doubling from where we are at current) and flourishing regional centres all over the country; Agriculture provides still an important source of income but is much more diversified (allowing for many value added industries) reducing as well the need for spraying (no huge monocultures); Tourism focusses not just on the still beautiful natural parks, but even the once environmentally dead Canterbury plains is now again a beautiful landscape, shaped by various farming industries (think Tuscany) and criss crossed by re-naturalised water races surrounded by native riparian belts. We managed as well to grow a new knowledge economy - and companies with low environmental impact buy high value (like XRO, WYN, PEB, ERD, GTK) are spread across the country. Many of their employees work remotely and can live at beautiful places without the need for a daily commute.

I guess you probably can tell, which option I prefer (hint: number 3) ... and if we go for this, than I think it would be stupid to sell off Kiwi rail. We would need them to environmentally friendly transport a growing number of people and goods. However - as long as we haven't made up our minds whether we want to embrace population growth (be it through immigration or breeding) or fight immigration and breed xenophobia as the regressive coalition (Winston, Twyford & Co) does, than it is hard to make a business case for throwing every year another $200m after lots of good money.

What do others think?

Daytr
31-07-2015, 11:00 AM
BP, you forgot to include or none of the simplistic options above.

Why did you emigrate to NZ if you want it to change so much in regards population.
Why didn't you head to many of the heavily populated countries around the world?
Did you perhaps come from one of those? Was one of the attractions to NZ was that it was relatively unpopulated.
How would the massive infrastructure cost to your population growth be funded?
Infrastructure in most towns & cities is already stressed and underfunded.

Do you really think the Canterbury plains is an improved landscape?
They have removed many of the shelterbelts for dairy conversion.
Why do you think those shelterbelts were planted? The nor'wester has not gone anywhere and all that will happen is erosion on a massive scale & the potential for what happened in the US mid-west in the 1930s, massive dust storms.
Competing water interests are creating pressure of water resources in what was traditionally sheep or cropping country.
We are now seeing leeching of nitrates on a massive scale into what were once very clean rivers.
You really haven't thought this through have you.

What I have noticed on this thread, is a lack of comment from those of right wing leanings is comment in regards the TPPA.
This is perhaps happening here & now, although there is also a good chance it falls over.
What are the right wing supporters views on this far reaching agreement?

RGR367
31-07-2015, 11:19 AM
...........
What I have noticed on this thread, is a lack of comment from those of right wing leanings is comment in regards the TPPA.
This is perhaps happening here & now, although there is also a good chance it falls over.
What are the right wing supporters views on this far reaching agreement?

I don't consider myself on the right wing of the political scene but I'll like to just say, that there's nothing there yet about TPPA that warrants any comment from my kind. What we have are just leaks or "hope so" scenarios. What is so sure about it? Would you be betting your dividends on what you've read so far?

BlackPeter
31-07-2015, 11:31 AM
BP, you forgot to include or none of the simplistic options above.

Why did you emigrate to NZ if you want it to change so much in regards population.
Why didn't you head to many of the heavily populated countries around the world?
Did you perhaps come from one of those? Was one of the attractions to NZ was that it was relatively unpopulated.
How would the massive infrastructure cost to your population growth be funded?
Infrastructure in most towns & cities is already stressed and underfunded.

Do you really think the Canterbury plains is an improved landscape?
They have removed many of the shelterbelts for dairy conversion.
Why do you think those shelterbelts were planted? The nor'wester has not gone anywhere and all that will happen is erosion on a massive scale & the potential for what happened in the US mid-west in the 1930s, massive dust storms.
Competing water interests are creating pressure of water resources in what was traditionally sheep or cropping country.
We are now seeing leeching of nitrates on a massive scale into what were once very clean rivers.
You really haven't thought this through have you.

What I have noticed on this thread, is a lack of comment from those of right wing leanings is comment in regards the TPPA.
This is perhaps happening here & now, although there is also a good chance it falls over.
What are the right wing supporters views on this far reaching agreement?

Hi daytr - shoot first, think later? You are so keen to shoot the messenger that you don't bother to read the message first. You even make it up if it just gives you a reason to shoot. Hold on - which politician do I describe here? Right - starts with Winston and ends with Peters. Are you the man himself?

Your post is so wrong that you even had to duplicate it.

I never condoned the recent changes on the Canterbury plains - and certainly don't stand for big scale dairy conversion (or any other stupid monoculture based agriculture). Small and diverse is beautiful:p.

Why did I move to NZ? Well, there are more reasons than I would want to discuss in one post, but one of them was that I did see potential in this country ... and I still do. Standing still is no progress in my books, and given that we are getting older and older as a population would I prefer to allow some more young faces into the country, even if their owners might have almond shaped eyes and a Chinese sounding name ... and a desire to share your fishing spot :p

Don't misunderstand me (just rhetorics, I know you want to) - I do like (and use) the outdoors myself ... if I go these days for a hike in the mountains, than I might meet nobody for hours or for the whole day. If we increase this number by 100%, than I could still live with it. Daytr - learn to share and don't be that selfish ... ah yes ... and learn to listen before you shoot - some day you might kill somebody.

RGR367
31-07-2015, 12:33 PM
Oh boy, Labour accused of plagiarism http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/70715304/labour-accused-of-plagiarism-over-flagship-work-document

winner69
31-07-2015, 12:52 PM
Oh boy, Labour accused of plagiarism http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/70715304/labour-accused-of-plagiarism-over-flagship-work-document

Mummy, what's plagiarism?

Whatever it is it must be pretty good - quote from that article "Which you only wish in some ways that they'd cut and paste more stuff from the Economist, because then their policies would be a bit more coherent," Joyce said.

Daytr
31-07-2015, 12:54 PM
BP what you said is "the once environmentally dead Canterbury plains is now again a beautiful landscape".
Are you referring to what you envisage for the Canterbury plains or what it is "now"? If you meant the former then I misunderstood you, however perhaps you can see by re-reading your post how what you wrote could easily be interpreted as the recent changes to the landscape of the Canterbury plains, i.e. dairy conversion. So there is nothing made up in my post, talk about shooting from the hip.

Perhaps before getting high & mighty you may want to understand where others are coming from & being pro a stablised population is not anti immigration. All it means is you fluctuate the level of immigration according to the flows in & out of NZ. Your racist rhetoric is getting tiresome. There is nothing racist about it. Cheap shots do not score points, they are just that cheap.

If you rely on a bigger population for growth, your model is flawed & unsustainable. Where does its stop? 5 million, 10, 60 million like the UK?
One of NZs greatest advantages is its natural beauty and relatively unspoiled environment and open spaces. This is massive for tourism & as the rest of the world concrete's their landscape it will become even more valuable.

Its all a nice way to distract from the TPPA which really is the most pertinent point for discussion imo right now.

Daytr
31-07-2015, 01:03 PM
Hi RGR367, yes there have been leaks, and I think they warrant heeding. They referred to increased costs relating to pharmaceuticals for instance & the increase on things like patents & copyright. The PM has finally had to concede that drugs will cost the country more even though only months ago he said it wouldn't. How does increasing things like patents & copyright encourage freer trade? It doesn't, quite the opposite.

Also isn't half the issue that it is being negotiated in secret? If it was negotiated and then brought before parliament before signing I would be a lot happier, as at least that's democratic & we the people get a chance to see what it encompasses, before it's signed & if it's as bad as I think it is, people then get the right to tell the government what they think.


I don't consider myself on the right wing of the political scene but I'll like to just say, that there's nothing there yet about TPPA that warrants any comment from my kind. What we have are just leaks or "hope so" scenarios. What is so sure about it? Would you be betting your dividends on what you've read so far?

BlackPeter
31-07-2015, 03:38 PM
BP what you said is "the once environmentally dead Canterbury plains is now again a beautiful landscape".
Are you referring to what you envisage for the Canterbury plains or what it is "now"? If you meant the former then I misunderstood you, however perhaps you can see by re-reading your post how what you wrote could easily be interpreted as the recent changes to the landscape of the Canterbury plains, i.e. dairy conversion. So there is nothing made up in my post, talk about shooting from the hip.

...

Its all a nice way to distract from the TPPA which really is the most pertinent point for discussion imo right now.

Daytr, this statement was clearly part of scenario 3 (i.e. one future possibility, if we go for diversification and all the other mentioned things ...). Maybe I need to colour code it next time for you.

Actually - the discussion was about Kiwi rail. My point was that you can't determine the future (or not) of Kiwi rail in isolation - you first need to have a vision of where the country wants to go ... and population density is one very significant parameter in this context. Sure - keeping the NZ population at 4.6 million is a valid option (even if I might not prefer it) ... however it just means that it makes it very expensive for a small population to afford the maintenance of a hardly used country wide rail system.

Oh - and please accept my apologies that I dared to respond to one of EZ's posts about Kiwi rail while your mind was occupied with the for you so much more important TPPA issue. Maybe you need to clarify internally (within the regressive coalition) which issues you want to discuss on any day. Just let us know afterwards - will you?

Agree however with RGR on TPPA. Lots of hype and rumours yet, no base to have an informed discussion. I am sure that our parliament needs to ratify this contract if & when it is signed. After the signature but prior to the ratification would be a good time to talk about facts ... but maybe this is less fun than hyping people up?

Major von Tempsky
31-07-2015, 04:29 PM
I note a recent prediction that in a years time tourism receipts will have grown to surpass dairy receipts and to become NZ's largest exports.
All on market signals and not socialist diktat :-)

Anyone for diversification?

Daytr
31-07-2015, 04:51 PM
Well BP it wasn't clear and with your posts quite often jumping from one extreme to another who is to know.
Perhaps colour coding in your world might seem racist... ;-)

What do they say about sarcasm.. or was that condescension its hard to tell.
Either way its not a great way to have a discussion.
I do agree that diversification or added value processing is a good thing as I have advocated on here many times.

I am all for a discussion around population, however why not just put out the options rather than a very tainted view on each one as you did?

A regional rail system is more likely to be for freight not transport of people although if you have one I can't see why you couldn't have the other & for the amount we pay on road maintenance each year due to the damage caused by logging trucks etc I think a network of major depots could easily be funded. I just drove down highway 1 from the Bay of Islands to Whangarei and the state of the road is a disgrace, with one bumpy patch after another and pot holes galore. Most of the damage is created by heavy vehicles and it will be an on-going problem with no end in sight in regards the damage & cost to repair.

In regards the TPPA it doesn't need to go through parliament before its signed as its not a law change but an agreement between nations although it could well undermine our laws and the anility of future governments to implement policy.

elZorro
31-07-2015, 06:13 PM
I note a recent prediction that in a years time tourism receipts will have grown to surpass dairy receipts and to become NZ's largest exports.
All on market signals and not socialist diktat :-)

Anyone for diversification?

MVT, tourism is now exceeding the dairy cheque as an overseas exchange earner, but many who work in the tourism area are not paid that much per hour. It's only getting to this point because of the parlous state of other industries, and dairy in particular. So nothing to write home about. How about we diversify into smarter exports? National's plans for that have been either ineffective or non-existent.

BP, if the rail system is hardly used, why do Mainfreight put the equivalent of 110,000 truck movements on it each year? And presumably they're making good money out of that process. More of us should think about that.

Daytr
01-08-2015, 09:44 AM
Murray McCully actually came across quite well on The Nation this morning, something I'm not used to saying.
Although I agree with the ambition of getting rid of the veto power of the senior members of the security council & that opening up Iran could also help liberalise the country, why isn't it the same for Russia? The motion of bringing the culprits to account is miss-timed and of course Russia will veto when the Western world is ganging up on it. Why would Russia ever think it would be treated justly under the current obvious targeting by the US with sanctions etc. ? The latest I read regarding the shooting down of the airliner is from a missile that Russia no longer stocks, however the Ukrainian army does. This came from the Malaysian investigation. I am not suggesting this means Russia is innocent, I just don't know & neither do they. I am however a believer in due process & I think Russia is right to say lets wait for the investigations to be completed. Russia is being castigated for its involvement in the Ukraine, however Crimea voted democratically to be annexed. I am not in favour of a any military action in the Ukraine from either side & I'm sure the Ukrainians just want to live in peace as an independent nation. However where are the calls for the US to be brought to account for their illegal war in Iraq? Not only was it illegal, it has created a new militant force in ISIS and has possibly created one of the biggest refugee crisis since WWII. Then there are the illegal drone strikes in other countries jurisdictions. If you are going to be the world police, you need to be leading by example & not just when it suits your agenda.
The UN is very flawed & frustrating with its lack of action, however I don't see the US calling for action in the likes of Syria, or Nigeria for that matter.
I think NZ needs to very careful where it picks its battles and make sure it is on the side of right, not just might.

elZorro
01-08-2015, 10:32 AM
Latest business survey is the most gloomy for 6 years..Toby Manhire on the Rock-star economy. Fairly good agreement in the comments that follow.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/economy/news/article.cfm?c_id=34&objectid=11489555

BlackPeter
01-08-2015, 10:35 AM
BP, if the rail system is hardly used, why do Mainfreight put the equivalent of 110,000 truck movements on it each year? And presumably they're making good money out of that process. More of us should think about that.

Wow - 110,000 truck movements sounds a lot - doesn't it? But actually, I don't know, what it really means, given that you typically have to move a truck at least twice to transport something by rail (first you need to get your load to the next station, and than you have to pick it up again) vs only one truck movement if you don't use the rail.

EZ, I am no transport specialist, and I suppose you are neither. What I do know is, that railways are less and less competitive compared with other means of transport, even in much denser populated countries than ours.

I guess the reasons are plenty. One is the above mentioned added complexity (the alternative is typically not rail or road, but it is nearly always either rail and road, or just road). Moving loads from truck to rail and back does cost additional time, money and resources. Another reason is speed and reliability. Unless your load needs to go from one station at the mainline to another station on this line, and you can coordinate your urge to ship with the train movements, does it take ages for your stuff to get anywhere. The unionisation of the railways is a problem as well - if you want to see the ugly face of the unions, look no further than transport. Open blackmail everywhere ...

Example - Germany. Population density roughly 20 times of NZ and even in proportion much more traffic given its not just German loads going through the country, but lots of European through traffic. However - using the rail is no matter what you are doing typically much more expensive than the alternatives (like plane, truck or bus), despite the government trying to protect the German rails as much as possible e.g. by giving them monopoly status for many forms of transport and subsidizing them with billions of Euros per year. Again - a union controlled workforce blackmailing the people and the government despite anyway sucking up billions of Euros subsidies every year ... they had just recently again an ongoing strike action stopping commuters and seriously impacting on productivity (by delaying freight deliveries), just to (try to) increase the power of one rather small union (train drivers unions). Luckily they got stopped, but why would any company or country want to increase its dependency on idiots like that?

I don't think there is any European country where railways work without subsidies ... and now explain to me, how they are supposed to be competitive in a sparsely populated country like NZ. Rails used to have their days when the alternative was a cart with a horse pulling. They still might make sense if you have to transport lots of stuff from one point to another point (enough to fill a train).

If you really want public freight transport without using the road in NZ - even shipping would be cheaper and easier, given that basically every major town has a port. I guess the question is - is there really nothing better we can do with $200m subsidy per year for getting nothing in return?

BlackPeter
01-08-2015, 10:58 AM
Latest business survey is the most gloomy for 6 years..Toby Manhire on the Rock-star economy. Fairly good agreement in the comments that follow.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/economy/news/article.cfm?c_id=34&objectid=11489555

This is great news ... last time the business confidence was so low (2009), the economy grew by 2.2%. Not too bad for a depressed mood, isn't it? Thanks EZ for cheering us up :t_up:

elZorro
01-08-2015, 11:10 AM
This is great news ... last time the business confidence was so low (2009), the economy grew by 2.2%. Not too bad for a depressed mood, isn't it? Thanks EZ for cheering us up :t_up:

Yes, it grew by 2%, because it had previously crashed by a bigger percentage with the GFC. The tax take says it all.

No, I'm not an expert on rail, but even Richard Prebble thinks we should keep it running as it is, even expand it.

http://transportblog.co.nz/2015/07/15/prebble-on-rail/

A bit there about one train haul being equivalent to 50 truck movements. You have to think about Fonterra, for example. They built a massive coolstore right beside the tracks, and will be shipping most of it direct to ports.

Daytr
01-08-2015, 11:27 AM
BP I would be interested to know if the rail subsidies are cheaper than the road maintenance required for heavy trucks on the roads?
The rail network in Europe is a brilliant way to get around and is heavily used.
Most developed countries are building high speed rail networks.
The US is even finally starting to wake up. Obviously places like Europe, Japan & now China are going down this path.
NZs population doesn't necessarily support the case for regional rail & another 1-2 million people wouldn't either.
Although if you have a freight network between major centers there probably isn't a reason passenger trains could run as well.
Also the beauty of rail is that it can run right into the center of a city instead of flying in and then catching a very expensive cab.
What would a rail line for running the length of the North Shore to the CBD & an interchange to go south or east or west perhaps on light rail do for Auckland's traffic? With the right infrastructure, i.e. free parking near train stations I think it would do wonders for the likes of Auckland.
There probably is a case for major regional depots to transport to ports and possibly between major cities, particularly the likes of Whangarei, Auckland, Hamilton, Tauranga & the main trunk route south.
There is also the fuel & emissions saving of rail compared to trucks hauling logs etc.
It needs to be in my view a nationally coordinated plan to include the likes of Auckland's transport issues.
I would much rather see that than the billions we are spending on building motorways.
Just a thought. What if you could put your car on the train so you have it at your destination?
Ride in comfort to your destination & drive off the train as again they do in Europe.

BlackPeter
01-08-2015, 11:33 AM
No, I'm not an expert on rail, but even Richard Prebble thinks we should keep it running as it is, even expand it.

http://transportblog.co.nz/2015/07/15/prebble-on-rail/

A bit there about one train haul being equivalent to 50 truck movements. You have to think about Fonterra, for example. They built a massive coolstore right beside the tracks, and will be shipping most of it direct to ports.

Well, Mainfreight invested a lot of money into rail connections - and Richard Prebble is one of their directors. He might have a conflict of interest here. Anyway - I am not against keeping Kiwirail, I am just against keeping it at any price. Show me a business case which adds up and I am with you.

However - I can't remember many examples where continuous subsidization resulted in a lean and efficient industry serving the country which payed the bills ... can you?

macduffy
01-08-2015, 02:04 PM
- I can't remember many examples where continuous subsidization resulted in a lean and efficient industry serving the country which payed the bills ... can you?

Perhaps the medical "industry". Comparing the "lean and efficient" American system with the British/NZ largely taxpayer-subsidised one!

Joshuatree
01-08-2015, 03:09 PM
Its looking like the TPPA deal won't go through atp but its not dead in the water yet. I caught a snippet on AlJazeera

winner69
02-08-2015, 11:18 AM
Tim says he will win the war.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11490776

Of course he will. This corporate takeover of democracy will go ahead. All this current going ones is just a charade to allow some to display their 'displeasure' to the populus and then claim we got
'Concessions"

Sad really but THEY will get their comeuppance one day. Hope not too much damage done in the meantime

elZorro
02-08-2015, 11:23 AM
After reading a bit of the SST this morning, David Slack popped up again on the radar as a very funny and perceptive opinion writer.

The item "The future seems so long ago" isn't available on the web yet. This piece in Metro, which is another publication he's a regular in, is available. He does future obituaries on famous NZers.

http://www.metromag.co.nz/city-life/columnists/david-slack-the-obituary-of-nick-smith-mp/

I don't think he's a National voter. But then, not many of our smarter journalists appear to be, either.

Rod Oram has another perceptive article on the National Govt's fiddling methods, "Fiddling fixes nothing" also.

He commented that if immigrants get 30 points out of 100 on their scores just for living in one of the regions for a year, we'll likely end up with families in the regions who are unskilled in the areas we need, while the husband works in Auckland or a major city. This would not greatly help the regions, and it's probably only a 12 month period anyway. It really is fiddling at the edges, not a well thought-out policy, but it sounds good, doesn't it.

John Key has been "telling us not to worry about the implosion of Greece, or the travails of the Eurozone, or China's slowing growth, or the collapse of China's state-manipulated stock market, or the global dairy slump...In Kiwi terms, that's like selling cow**** to cockies".

BlackPeter
02-08-2015, 02:03 PM
I don't think he's a National voter. But then, not many of our smarter journalists appear to be, either.


EZ, you wouldn't make any baseless derogatory statements, wouldn't you? Just help us to understand how you are measuring the "smartness" of our journalists and how do you correlate latter to their voting behaviour?

BTW - I would call Matthew Hooton, Rob Hosking, Rodney Hide, Shoeshine (to name just a few) good (and some outstanding) journalists and opinion writers. Are they smart? Well, they are smart enough to know that the world is larger than its left-wing. True - not all of them are likely to vote for National, but as you know, there is at least one other good alternative to vote for (ask Rodney, if you want to know more;)).

Let me guess ... I think your real problem is that you believe only Left-wing people can be smart. Risky assumption if we look into history ...

elZorro
02-08-2015, 02:33 PM
EZ, you wouldn't make any baseless derogatory statements, wouldn't you? Just help us to understand how you are measuring the "smartness" of our journalists and how do you correlate latter to their voting behaviour?

BTW - I would call Matthew Hooton, Rob Hosking, Rodney Hide, Shoeshine (to name just a few) good (and some outstanding) journalists and opinion writers. Are they smart? Well, they are smart enough to know that the world is larger than its left-wing. True - not all of them are likely to vote for National, but as you know, there is at least one other good alternative to vote for (ask Rodney, if you want to know more;)).

Let me guess ... I think your real problem is that you believe only Left-wing people can be smart. Risky assumption if we look into history ...

BP, what I'm referring to is that the smarter journalists have read Dirty Politics, have watched John Key and his mates performing, and have come to have a more reserved opinion about the current government. It doesn't mean they're left wing. But I think you'll find that National will have a bit of a head-wind from the press, coming up to 2017.

Anyway, is Mike Hosking one of the most in-depth journalists you know? Or is a me-first kind of a person? David Slack comments, not as funny as others.

http://www.metromag.co.nz/city-life/columnists/the-obituary-of-mike-hosking-died-april-1-2059/

BlackPeter
02-08-2015, 03:56 PM
- I can't remember many examples where continuous subsidization resulted in a lean and efficient industry serving the country which payed the bills ... can you?

Perhaps the medical "industry". Comparing the "lean and efficient" American system with the British/NZ largely taxpayer-subsidised one!

Good point. The problem is not the subsidization in itself, but the protectionist reason for it. The health systems you are listing are not subsidized to protect them against otherwise more economical alternatives, but to make them affordable for the user.

So - you are correct, I should have said: "I can't remember many examples where continuous protectionist subsidization resulted in a lean and efficient industry"

Subsidies for Kiwirail are just paid to keep the rail alive despite there being more economical alternatives (road, ship).

Obviously - this does not exclude either that there might be parts of Kiwirail which could be run efficiently (e.g. Auckland and Wellington public transport, potentially as well some of the freight lines ... if only coal, lumber and dairy prices would be higher ;)) - it is just that I haven't seen yet a business case to keep the whole of Kiwirail running as is.

BlackPeter
02-08-2015, 04:13 PM
BP, what I'm referring to is that the smarter journalists have read Dirty Politics, have watched John Key and his mates performing, and have come to have a more reserved opinion about the current government. It doesn't mean they're left wing. But I think you'll find that National will have a bit of a head-wind from the press, coming up to 2017.

Anyway, is Mike Hosking one of the most in-depth journalists you know? Or is a me-first kind of a person? David Slack comments, not as funny as others.

http://www.metromag.co.nz/city-life/columnists/the-obituary-of-mike-hosking-died-april-1-2059/

EZ, we probably disagree on whether smart people would read a book written by Nicky Hager. Hagers books are consistently left wing propaganda, conveniently released prior to national elections. Best (or only?) way to make money with left wing smear. Let me guess when his next book comes out. Hagers books are of similar quality like Cameron Slater blogs, just differently coloured and you even have to pay for buying them. Do smart people really pay for c**p?

Re Mike Hosking - I guess, if left wing writers write him already obituaries, than he can't be that bad ... at least he is noticed. But agreed, he is not in the same class as the other three I mentioned.

elZorro
02-08-2015, 04:38 PM
EZ, we probably disagree on whether smart people would read a book written by Nicky Hager. Hagers books are consistently left wing propaganda, conveniently released prior to national elections. Best (or only?) way to make money with left wing smear. Let me guess when his next book comes out. Hagers books are of similar quality like Cameron Slater blogs, just differently coloured and you even have to pay for buying them. Do smart people really pay for c**p?

Re Mike Hosking - I guess, if left wing writers write him already obituaries, than he can't be that bad ... at least he is noticed. But agreed, he is not in the same class as the other three I mentioned.

BP, you can't put Nicky Hager and Cameron Slater in the same category, for one Nicky Hager isn't paid to have particular opinions, and he's also a bit more thoughtful in what he writes. You haven't read the Hager book, obviously, and the reason for that is that you don't want your opinion on National/Act sullied. You can just stand back and say the book must be crap, a bit like John Key tried to do. Except they stayed up in the beehive on the night of the release looking all through it to see how bad the fallout was going to be. They sacked Jason Ede from his post within 24 hours, on the quiet, and he never answered any press questions. Based also on the book's details, Judith Collins had to go.

macduffy
02-08-2015, 04:48 PM
Subsidies for Kiwirail are just paid to keep the rail alive despite there being more economical alternatives (road, ship).


Without getting into the politics too deeply, I reckon we ought to take serious notice when the boss of NZ's most efficient road transport company, Mainfreight, comes out in support of Kiwi Rail. Has there been any counter argument put forward by anyone since?

BlackPeter
02-08-2015, 05:57 PM
Without getting into the politics too deeply, I reckon we ought to take serious notice when the boss of NZ's most efficient road transport company, Mainfreight, comes out in support of Kiwi Rail. Has there been any counter argument put forward by anyone since?

Sure, certainly something to consider. On the other hand - Mainfreight invested a lot of money into the Kiwirail interface - and obviously does not want to write off this money. Just highlighting a conflict of interest here. I assume as well (I haven't checked) that the investment made sense for Mainfreight based on the current (taxpayer subsidized) Kiwirail freight charges. Question is - would the business case for Mainfreight still stand up if they would need to contribute their fair share to the annual taxpayer subsidy of $200m for Kiwirail? Probably not. Leaves the question - why is the taxpayer subsidizing Mainfreight (by subsidizing Kiwirail)?

elZorro
02-08-2015, 06:08 PM
Sure, certainly something to consider. On the other hand - Mainfreight invested a lot of money into the Kiwirail interface - and obviously does not want to write off this money. Just highlighting a conflict of interest here. I assume as well (I haven't checked) that the investment made sense for Mainfreight based on the current (taxpayer subsidized) Kiwirail freight charges. Question is - would the business case for Mainfreight still stand up if they would need to contribute their fair share to the annual taxpayer subsidy of $200m for Kiwirail? Probably not. Leaves the question - why is the taxpayer subsidizing Mainfreight (by subsidizing Kiwirail)?

Probably because the govt knows only too well the cost of adding a layer of tarseal to a km of state roading, and they want to reduce the truck loading where they can. The truck lobby has already negotiated an increase in the size of trucks/trailers that can operate on our roads, and the big brands like Kenworth have been selling like hot cakes lately. We are one of the few developed countries in the world who don't use concrete roads very often, they're also often poorer quality chipseal, not even hotmix (https://www.nzta.govt.nz/roads-and-rail/road-composition/road-surfacing/), which lasts longer and is quieter. We're asking for trouble, and the taxpayer will pick up the bill for degraded road infrastructure.

We can subsidise KiwiRail, or we'll pay a lot more to continually fix the roads, and be stuck in traffic more often, too.

The govt, as I say, know all this, but they are trying to get to a budget surplus. Any size, it doesn't matter. They'll cut back on KiwiRail, Health, anything.

elZorro
03-08-2015, 06:52 AM
Bernard Hickey on immigration questions. Interesting comments. National won't want to see falling Auckland house prices this side of 2017, will they?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/economy/news/article.cfm?c_id=34&objectid=11490587&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Monday+3+Au gust+2015

Sgt Pepper
03-08-2015, 08:23 AM
Bernard Hickey on immigration questions. Interesting comments. National won't want to see falling Auckland house prices this side of 2017, will they?

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/economy/news/article.cfm?c_id=34&objectid=11490587&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Monday+3+Au gust+2015

EZ

An unspoken but very real concern for this government is that any chilling in the Auckland property markets could easily mutate into National being abandoned in 2017 when the mortgage suburbs see their paper wealth evaporate and they arrive at that truly awful place called " negative equity".One thing that keeps Bill English wide awake at night, as for John, well I'm not too sure

Major von Tempsky
03-08-2015, 05:24 PM
It's not his "book" (Nicky Hagers) it's a series of hacks indirectly fed to him by Dot Com, his employees and friends. Nor is he an "investigative journalist", he doesn't investigate or research it's just fed to him. He's not a journalist -which magazine/newspapers does he regularly write for? He's independently, embarrassingly (for the left wing) wealthy and a dilettante.

elZorro
03-08-2015, 05:53 PM
It's not his "book" (Nicky Hagers) it's a series of hacks indirectly fed to him by Dot Com, his employees and friends. Nor is he an "investigative journalist", he doesn't investigate or research it's just fed to him. He's not a journalist -which magazine/newspapers does he regularly write for? He's independently, embarrassingly (for the left wing) wealthy and a dilettante.

Prove any of that, MVT, and I'd be amazed. From what I can see of the known details about Nicky Hager, he's not wealthy. A good NZer, yes. Hardworking, and everything he writes will be backed up by the facts. More than I can say for you. No-one seems to know who Rawshark is, so you're out on a limb there. Did you get round to reading the book, by the way?

elZorro
03-08-2015, 09:35 PM
Solid Energy on shaky ground, and the govt not about to help any longer. This is bad news for the regions, Huntly, West Coast included.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1508/S00063/precarious-solid-energy-in-banks-hands-govt-eyes-options.htm

A new quarterly employment report is due out tomorrow, and word is that it'll likely show increasing unemployment rates. Probably just the start I reckon, we're at the beginning of the main dairy season, and some farm owners will be dropping staff and doing more of the work themselves. Provincial retailers and service providers will be watching nervously. Fonterra's revised payout follows at the end of the week.

Today or tomorrow, there is another GDT auction, at which it is expected there will be another 10% drop in the index prices for milk products, before it settles down at a low level. Already, the index is at the lowest it has been in ten years.

This is all desperate stuff for the dairy sector, and for the regions heavily affected. It is natural enough for the regional councils to be a bit wary of Steven Joyce talking up all the work the govt has done for the regions. In fact, a regional mayor has torn up his National Party membership, according to Grant Robertson. There is also disquiet from the conservative regional folk about the idea of changing the flag.

National, who have been so sure-footed in the past according to their own PR, now look to be stumbling, and more of us are seeing it.

Daytr
04-08-2015, 07:20 AM
Hi EZ, the Government is probably doing the right thing by not propping up solid energy any further. Coal is a relic of the fossil fuel era which is winding down and coal is the first to be targeted due to its emissions. Obama just announced significant targets for reductions in emissions from the US power generators & this means coal powered generators will be shut down or changed to other fuels.

With the US president now making aggressive statements in regards cutting carbon emissions and openly saying how much of threat climate change is to humanity, isn't it time National actually started to do something in regards climate change? National have been pathetic when it comes to environmental policy and have openly been encouraging fossil fuel exploration and production in NZ. We need to make the changes we can to do our bit, instead we are doing the exact opposite & our emissions will just continue to grow without any reduction in sight.

I would just to like to add that the right of politics in the US, the Republicans have vowed to fight the changes.
Why is it that climate change and environmental policy is owned by the Left?
Its one of the main reasons that I swung more to the left.

Daytr
04-08-2015, 07:27 AM
MVT, Nicky Hager clearly has an agenda, I'll give you that, however the rest of your assertions are quite outrageous & ironic considering the topic of conversation. Just one thing that Hager exposed widely was the 5 eyes policy and that the government and its partners are spying on the entire populous. Something Key tried to deny. He lied. Apparently if you only collect the data its not spying !


It's not his "book" (Nicky Hagers) it's a series of hacks indirectly fed to him by Dot Com, his employees and friends. Nor is he an "investigative journalist", he doesn't investigate or research it's just fed to him. He's not a journalist -which magazine/newspapers does he regularly write for? He's independently, embarrassingly (for the left wing) wealthy and a dilettante.

BlackPeter
04-08-2015, 08:08 AM
Solid Energy on shaky ground, and the govt not about to help any longer. This is bad news for the regions, Huntly, West Coast included.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1508/S00063/precarious-solid-energy-in-banks-hands-govt-eyes-options.htm

A new quarterly employment report is due out tomorrow, and word is that it'll likely show increasing unemployment rates. Probably just the start I reckon, we're at the beginning of the main dairy season, and some farm owners will be dropping staff and doing more of the work themselves. Provincial retailers and service providers will be watching nervously. Fonterra's revised payout follows at the end of the week.

Today or tomorrow, there is another GDT auction, at which it is expected there will be another 10% drop in the index prices for milk products, before it settles down at a low level. Already, the index is at the lowest it has been in ten years.

This is all desperate stuff for the dairy sector, and for the regions heavily affected. It is natural enough for the regional councils to be a bit wary of Steven Joyce talking up all the work the govt has done for the regions. In fact, a regional mayor has torn up his National Party membership, according to Grant Robertson. There is also disquiet from the conservative regional folk about the idea of changing the flag.

National, who have been so sure-footed in the past according to their own PR, now look to be stumbling, and more of us are seeing it.

Hi EZ, you seem to thoroughly enjoy yourself. While I don't think that the situation is as bad as you try to paint it ... I still fail to see Labours strategy to get more votes. But I guess, given that the electorate followed last time Labours advice, "voting positively" - I am sure they will continue doing that and penalise the people who always try to down ramp the economy.

I guess you are concerned as hell that the milk price might go up prior to the next election ... and given the past frequency of the milk solid cycle I guess you have a good chance it will. It is not easy to get into government if your only tool in the box is to badmouth the government - isn't it? The economy might bottom out too early (and at a respectable level - with the most recent GDP growth prediction of well above 2%) for the Cassandra coalition to be useful.

Voters will remember the eternal badmouths ...

I think we both agree, NZ would certainly deserve a still better government. However - as long as the opposition sets such weak standards ... their seems to be little incentive for the government to raise its performance. At the end of the day - they don't need to be good, they just need to be better that the alternative (as they have been the last 3 times)

craic
04-08-2015, 08:38 AM
Reading todays Herald, I see that, according to Armstrong, NZ first is becoming a joke in the political scene and will disappear into the past where they belong. The fruit export industry is booming and should come close to covering the downturn in dairy. Places like Hawkes Bay are attracting lots of Auckanders, sick of the overpriced ghetto and overall the country is doing well. Did I forget Labour? Ah! Well. I won't be alone in that.

Daytr
04-08-2015, 09:02 AM
Haha Craic, yes I read it. Isn't one of the first phases of grieving denial?
NZF have proven their longevity and they have gained popularity. They are one of the strongest voices in opposition. I do think their policies need to be more comprehensive if they ever want to become a ruling party. National have every right to fear NZF after the massive blow they got dealt in the Northland Bi-election. A party that has just achieved the biggest vote swing in NZs political history is hardly diminishing, quite the opposite. There will be a point where leadership becomes a question and Ron Marks is obviously eying an opportunity at some stage in the future and then there is the possibility of Shane Jones joining the team.

Labour + NZF = Government in 2017

Craic, just to add, its great that NZ produce such as fruit is doing well & the NZD is certainly a big factor, but also record crops from the likes of Kiwifruit. However unfortunately they don't come anywhere near offsetting the losses in the likes of dairy let alone log exports as you suggest with fruit and wine exports up by about $400M whilst dairy & logs were down around $3.5-4Bln !

( Quote craic;584393]Reading todays Herald, I see that, according to Armstrong, NZ first is becoming a joke in the political scene and will disappear into the past where they belong. The fruit export industry is booming and should come close to covering the downturn in dairy. Places like Hawkes Bay are attracting lots of Auckanders, sick of the overpriced ghetto and overall the country is doing well. Did I forget Labour? Ah! Well. I won't be alone in that.[/QUOTE]

elZorro
04-08-2015, 06:46 PM
Hi EZ, you seem to thoroughly enjoy yourself. While I don't think that the situation is as bad as you try to paint it ... I still fail to see Labours strategy to get more votes. But I guess, given that the electorate followed last time Labours advice, "voting positively" - I am sure they will continue doing that and penalise the people who always try to down ramp the economy.

I guess you are concerned as hell that the milk price might go up prior to the next election ... and given the past frequency of the milk solid cycle I guess you have a good chance it will. It is not easy to get into government if your only tool in the box is to badmouth the government - isn't it? The economy might bottom out too early (and at a respectable level - with the most recent GDP growth prediction of well above 2%) for the Cassandra coalition to be useful.

Voters will remember the eternal badmouths ...

I think we both agree, NZ would certainly deserve a still better government. However - as long as the opposition sets such weak standards ... their seems to be little incentive for the government to raise its performance. At the end of the day - they don't need to be good, they just need to be better that the alternative (as they have been the last 3 times)

Look, BP, I'll be feeling the regional pain just like most businesses out here, but what I'm most upset about is that Labour aren't in power and putting their smart policies into play. Part of the reason for the lacklustre economy here is that it has not been given any real direction. The so-called 'smart money' has mostly plumped for property, whether it's a few houses, a block of flats, a commercial building or a farm. A lot of the direction has been purely for tax reasons. In other words, to save on ongoing tax, go for an investment that makes little average net income in each financial year, because it'll work out in the long run. For who? Not the country as a whole. We import more than we export, we don't add value often enough, we're running out of manufacturing jobs, we don't have enough people backing themselves in these areas.

Anyway, don't shoot the messenger, the BNZ had a market report out yesterday "Economic Risks Rising" forecasting 7% unemployment in NZ by sometime in 2017.

https://www.bnz.co.nz/assets/personal-banking-help-support/economic-commentary/markets-outlook.pdf

Sgt Pepper
04-08-2015, 08:57 PM
Reading todays Herald, I see that, according to Armstrong, NZ first is becoming a joke in the political scene and will disappear into the past where they belong. The fruit export industry is booming and should come close to covering the downturn in dairy. Places like Hawkes Bay are attracting lots of Auckanders, sick of the overpriced ghetto and overall the country is doing well. Did I forget Labour? Ah! Well. I won't be alone in that.

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.”
― Sren Kierkegaard (http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/6172.S_ren_Kierkegaard)

winner69
05-08-2015, 03:12 AM
EZ, have Labour given up on bringing down McCully re shonky Saudi sheep dealings?

elZorro
05-08-2015, 05:52 AM
EZ, have Labour given up on bringing down McCully re shonky Saudi sheep dealings?

I heard a bit more in the press yesterday, (http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/280517/labour-rejects-pm's-claims-on-saudi-deal) saying the govt ignored advice that they were on shaky ground there. Unfortunately it's just another screw-up that gets added to the pile of other screw-ups committed by National, and still we have people saying that National are the best of a bad lot. Or, even worse, that everyone's doing it (playing dirty politics).

The GDT auction was poor again overnight, so dairy auction prices are still falling sharply.

https://www.globaldairytrade.info/en/product-results/

Why can't our PM be a little bit more like Obama, here's something that gives me some hope for the future.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/02/politics/obama-climate-change-plan/

Daytr
05-08-2015, 10:25 AM
There are no two ways about it in my opinion that this was clearly a bribe administered by McCully & with knowledge of Key.
All you need to do is turn the scenario around and it highlights exactly what this action was, a bribe.
If the National Government were against a trade deal with Saudi Arabia & McCully was the Trade Minister.
If McCully personally received $11M directly from the Saudi Government we would have him in cuffs.
There are clear laws about receiving bribes. Are we really saying its ok to be paying the bribe as long as we aren't receiving it?
And now this guy represents us on the UN security council !

777
05-08-2015, 10:47 AM
In some countries nothing gets done without bribes. Not right but the reality. The USA call it "tipping"

Daytr
05-08-2015, 11:35 AM
I think you will find even bribery is illegal in the US. Nothing might get done, but that doesn't make it what it is, corruption & bribery.
As I said would you be happy for NZ government officials to take bribes and nothing got done about it?

stanace
05-08-2015, 01:15 PM
In some countries nothing gets done without bribes. Not right but the reality. The USA call it "tipping"

I worked in Asia for a number of years. I gave it my own definition, which helped me in getting things done.
Bribery was paying to get things done quickly, that would perhaps have gotten done correctly, eventually. But perhaps not. Just greasing the wheels.
Corruption was getting things done that were never going to be done, perhaps because they were illegal.
Example; the day I arrived the factory closed down at 5pm because the kampung next door said the noise was keeping the babies awake!!
Solution, the head man of the Kampung was made our official nightwatchman, with pay of course. Problem solved.

craic
05-08-2015, 04:18 PM
Its also common in NZ. We call it cash jobs - and any other names. Look at all the Maori activities that have to be endured, at cost, to get stuff through. Taniwhas appear and have to be appeased. Central European chap gets shot by the police - he was probably some sort of Catholic - and a kaumata and kuia have to go there and "bless" the spot?

elZorro
05-08-2015, 05:32 PM
Its also common in NZ. We call it cash jobs - and any other names. Look at all the Maori activities that have to be endured, at cost, to get stuff through. Taniwhas appear and have to be appeased. Central European chap gets shot by the police - he was probably some sort of Catholic - and a kaumata and kuia have to go there and "bless" the spot?

Possibly all a matter of perspective, Craic. An agnostic might be bemused by any religion or belief system being called in to bless something.

The employment stats were released today for the June quarter, and the detail is that another 24,000 people entered the job market, but only 7,000 extra people were employed. Quite a few people gave up on participating in the job market, and more joined the dole queue. The trend for the employment percentage is heading downwards.

http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/income-and-work/employment_and_unemployment/LabourMarketStatistics_HOTPJun15qtr.aspx

Daytr
05-08-2015, 05:46 PM
Stanace, and you ran the risk of getting caught. Same with someone doing cash jobs, however not that this is in the same league!
Remember this is a government we are talking about paying an individual so they can influence policy.
As I said would you be happy if our MPs accepted personal bribes in the millions and implemented policy on the back of it ?

elZorro
06-08-2015, 06:47 AM
Nick Smith has to agree with the concept that there is a big shortage of housing stock in Auckland.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11492631&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Thursday+6+ August+2015

This has been known for a while, but on the back of record net immigration recently, National's policies appear to be fuelling that problem. Maybe they're hoping that some kind of market magic will transform NZ. Instead, we're seeing a rising unemployment rate, and the shortage of housing there is projected to get worse. That'll help anyone with existing ownership in Auckland, but not those looking to buy their first property.

Surely Labour's KiwiBuild policy is a great idea - use the size and heft of the govt finances to help set up a massive building infrastructure to realise efficiencies in house building, including houses which are built to specific budgets that the main building sector aren't too interested in, onsold to recoup costs. Meanwhile the manufacturing and building trades are boosted enormously, and lots more people get industry training.

Overview from an organised structure like this (linked to local bodies) should work out better than ad-hoc developers working all through the city, mostly building very high-value housing. I acknowledge firms like Fletchers, building whole streets of houses on the periphery of the city, so some of the market is working fine. It's just not enough, obviously.

Daytr
06-08-2015, 07:42 AM
EZ, National know that the economy would be in freefall without mass immigration and the building it creates. We have a building boom in Auckland, although still not enough to keep up with immigration and the influence of foreign buyers. We also have the re-build in CHC, the Government borrowing more & more money and funding massive road building projects & yet growth is limping along. Their primary industry drive is coming unstuck and they have let the regions die with lack of investment in infrastructure and centralization. There are industries crying out for guidance, dairy was obvious & the threat to NZ even more obvious yet they stood by when non dairy areas such as Canterbury converted. The honey industry is another & if we don't get act together in regards bio boarder control could be wiped out or if we don't get our IP together the same could happen. Kauri swamp logs being shipped out under the closed eyes of the MPI. National's investment dollar is so poorly spent and the returns pathetic. Billions & billions on roads! Pathetic.

BlackPeter
06-08-2015, 08:12 AM
Nick Smith has to agree with the concept that there is a big shortage of housing stock in Auckland.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11492631&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Thursday+6+ August+2015

This has been known for a while, but on the back of record net immigration recently, National's policies appear to be fuelling that problem. Maybe they're hoping that some kind of market magic will transform NZ. Instead, we're seeing a rising unemployment rate, and the shortage of housing there is projected to get worse. That'll help anyone with existing ownership in Auckland, but not those looking to buy their first property.

Surely Labour's KiwiBuild policy is a great idea - use the size and heft of the govt finances to help set up a massive building infrastructure to realise efficiencies in house building, including houses which are built to specific budgets that the main building sector aren't too interested in, onsold to recoup costs. Meanwhile the manufacturing and building trades are boosted enormously, and lots more people get industry training.

Overview from an organised structure like this (linked to local bodies) should work out better than ad-hoc developers working all through the city, mostly building very high-value housing. I acknowledge firms like Fletchers, building whole streets of houses on the periphery of the city, so some of the market is working fine. It's just not enough, obviously.

EZ, not sure, why this would be a political issue at all. The rest of the world does just fine in housing people in apartment blocks (http://www.thejournal.ie/best-apartments-architecture-2014-1753671-Oct2014/) - and it is neither difficult nor expensive (well, on a per apartment-basis) to build a small settlement with 25000 units. Or - if you don't want to house them all in one place - make it 3 "settlements" with 8000 units each.

Great for energy efficiency, great for public transport, shorter ways to shops and work. And all Auckland housing problems solved in one stroke. Win-win-win. As indicated - has been done all over the world, its only New Zealand still living in the stone age of human habitation ... one cave (or box) per family.

Maybe this could be something useful for Labour to do ... investigate appartment settlements around the world and find out what it would take a Kiwi household to move into a cheaper, well equipped, energy efficient and warm apartment unit instead of living in a standalone box surrounded by high fences and many other standalone boxes.

Isn't it Labour supposed to push the social idea? Just help us to make Kiwis more social (and I don't mean the Friday evening binge) and this problem disappears ...

craic
06-08-2015, 08:46 AM
Keep reading that the regions are suffering in the economic gloom that the left seek out as a ray of hope for their future. All indicators are that this region, Hawkes Bay, is booming. Dairy farmers are about to go under because they over-committed in a boom and purchased properties for silly amounts.My neighbour is down to buy some bobby calves this year and raise them. He is a plumber, in full time work. Another friend raises pigs - he works for the local council. Both have offered me involvement but I don't need the money. Maybe dairy farmers could raise their own bobby calves and a few pigs on their excess milk? Maybe you and I would not have to buy Australian beef and Canadian pork from the supermarket. Maybe if Labour worked in this area of diversification of our primary assets,people might listen.

Daytr
06-08-2015, 09:06 AM
Yep agree Craic, seems criminal that we import so much Aussie meat.
In our local supermarket we had US citrus in the middle of the citrus season !
Good to see HB is doing well, after quite a few tough years. Unfortunately not all regions are doing the same.
Perhaps as the Auckland money spreads we will see a mini boom, however unfortunately there hasn't been the money spent on the infrastructure to support the growth.

Jamie Whyte doesn't know when to keep quiet. I am really start to think he's a bit of a moron.
This nave & simplistic view of trade & the TPPA case in point.
NZ should get naked first in regards trade barriers and take it on the chin that others will subsidise.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11492506

BlackPeter
06-08-2015, 09:45 AM
Yep agree Craic, seems criminal that we import so much Aussie meat.
In our local supermarket we had US citrus in the middle of the citrus season !
Good to see HB is doing well, after quite a few tough years. Unfortunately not all regions are doing the same.
Perhaps as the Auckland money spreads we will see a mini boom, however unfortunately there hasn't been the money spent on the infrastructure to support the growth.

Jamie Whyte doesn't know when to keep quiet. I am really start to think he's a bit of a moron.
This nave & simplistic view of trade & the TPPA case in point.
NZ should get naked first in regards trade barriers and take it on the chin that others will subsidise.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11492506

Sure - NZ was so much better off in the time with high trade barriers ... I heard that in the 60'ies and 70'ies in trade protected NZ you had to order a fridge several years in advance - and hey, you could pick from all but one model. Not much different if you wanted to buy a new car. But sure - everybody was wearing the same stuff and eating mutton so no need to envy thy neighbour. What a happy people this must have been. I guess this is the past Green, Labour and NZF want to return us to?

Daytr
06-08-2015, 09:58 AM
Short answer, NO.
You always seem to want to jump to extremes.
But you don't enter into a 'trade' agreement where you are offering better protections for others such as patents & copyright and don't get anything back. Its a huge game of poker with big stakes & I don't know where anyone has shown their hand first & gone all in & won.
Jamie Whyte like the ACT party has a simplistic & nave view on how things work.
Lets completely expose ourselves even if others wont as they will be worse off in the long run and it will eventually all come good.
Its so ridiculous its laughable.



Sure - NZ was so much better off in the time with high trade barriers ... I heard that in the 60'ies and 70'ies in trade protected NZ you had to order a fridge several years in advance - and hey, you could pick from all but one model. Not much different if you wanted to buy a new car. But sure - everybody was wearing the same stuff and eating mutton so no need to envy thy neighbour. What a happy people this must have been. I guess this is the past Green, Labour and NZF want to return us to?

RGR367
06-08-2015, 10:07 AM
Yep agree Craic, seems criminal that we import so much Aussie meat.
In our local supermarket we had US citrus in the middle of the citrus season !
Good to see HB is doing well, after quite a few tough years. Unfortunately not all regions are doing the same.
Perhaps as the Auckland money spreads we will see a mini boom, however unfortunately there hasn't been the money spent on the infrastructure to support the growth.

Jamie Whyte doesn't know when to keep quiet. I am really start to think he's a bit of a moron.
This nave & simplistic view of trade & the TPPA case in point.
NZ should get naked first in regards trade barriers and take it on the chin that others will subsidise.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11492506

And why having US citrus in the middle of the citrus season is bad? All other things considered, I think it's good as long as they're cheaper on what's available as citrus.

And why don't you want a simplistic view of trade? Is trade really that complicated for us to benefit?

blackcap
06-08-2015, 10:10 AM
Sure - NZ was so much better off in the time with high trade barriers ... I heard that in the 60'ies and 70'ies in trade protected NZ you had to order a fridge several years in advance - and hey, you could pick from all but one model. Not much different if you wanted to buy a new car. But sure - everybody was wearing the same stuff and eating mutton so no need to envy thy neighbour. What a happy people this must have been. I guess this is the past Green, Labour and NZF want to return us to?

I spoke with my mother recently on this issue. She arrived here in 1980 and was mortified that you could not even purchase coffee in NZ. Well you could but only instant and only one sort. She alluded to many similar items that just were not available in NZ. This all improved drastically and vastly after 1984. Would have been interesting to have been old enough to experience that "system".

Daytr
06-08-2015, 10:18 AM
Do I really need to explain why that is bad RGR367? Do you think the US has made money on that citrus or is it just being dumped on the market?
Why don't we just import everything? One problem, if we don't actually produce anything, we don't have jobs & the money to pay for goods & services.
How about the environmental side of things. Shipping goods half way around the world that are produced here & produced here at a reasonable price.

The problem oh having simplistic view on trade as not everyone is as simple as Jamie Whyte.
You know what it reminds me of? Jack and the bean stalk.
We know others subsidise their agriculture heavily, I'm not saying we should join them, but don't give them concessions in other areas when they are not willing to concede where it counts. Why on earth would we agree to longer patents on drugs for instance? They have protections already, we certainly don't need to extend a monopoly.


And why having US citrus in the middle of the citrus season is bad? All other things considered, I think it's good as long as they're cheaper on what's available as citrus.

And why don't you want a simplistic view of trade? Is trade really that complicated for us to benefit?

craic
06-08-2015, 02:45 PM
I hate disagreeing with peoples mothers but I came here in 1959 and in 1973 started work in the Probation Service (March 12th) under the DPO who wa a Londoner who refused to drink Nescafe and insisted on Greggs or Bushells. Those of us who preferred Nescafe resorted to buying Nescafe and tipping it into a Bushells jar. He never knew the difference
I spoke with my mother recently on this issue. She arrived here in 1980 and was mortified that you could not even purchase coffee in NZ. Well you could but only instant and only one sort. She alluded to many similar items that just were not available in NZ. This all improved drastically and vastly after 1984. Would have been interesting to have been old enough to experience that "system".

blackcap
06-08-2015, 03:13 PM
Fair call Craic, (feel free to disagree with my mother all you like, I do often enough as well) but she was used to drinking "real" coffee not instant, and swears she could not get any in The Wairarapa back then :) But yeah, Nestle, Greggs and Bushells says it all really :P

Daytr
06-08-2015, 03:23 PM
I don't think the restrictions of what was available had much to do with free trade, but that most things still had to come by ship & we didn't have the frequency or banking set up to facilitate international trade. NZ was probably 20 years behind Britain & 30 years behind the States in those days purely because we are so far from anywhere else. Europe had massive subsidies in agriculture of course. So not much has changed then really!

fungus pudding
06-08-2015, 03:31 PM
Sure - NZ was so much better off in the time with high trade barriers ... I heard that in the 60'ies and 70'ies in trade protected NZ you had to order a fridge several years in advance - and hey, you could pick from all but one model. Not much different if you wanted to buy a new car. But sure - everybody was wearing the same stuff and eating mutton so no need to envy thy neighbour. What a happy people this must have been. I guess this is the past Green, Labour and NZF want to return us to?

Those wonderful days - illegal to dance in a bar, margarine could only be bought, from the chemist, with a doctor's prescription. Only carpet permitted was wool. Pubs closed at 6 p.m. Hard to travel overseas without private accommodation as daily allowance barely covered hotel tariff. To buy a new car you needed a trade-in, so they would sell you a dunger and then buy it back at a lower price. No trade-in. Back of the queue please.
If you hung around the wharves you might be able to buy a smuggled in camera or pocket radio. God it was a sad place. Getting a BYO licence - forget it.

Sgt Pepper
06-08-2015, 03:45 PM
Sure - NZ was so much better off in the time with high trade barriers ... I heard that in the 60'ies and 70'ies in trade protected NZ you had to order a fridge several years in advance - and hey, you could pick from all but one model. Not much different if you wanted to buy a new car. But sure - everybody was wearing the same stuff and eating mutton so no need to envy thy neighbour. What a happy people this must have been. I guess this is the past Green, Labour and NZF want to return us to?

Well I am 57 years old and am interested in your description of NZ in the 1970s. Like many things in life some things get better, some get worse and some things stay the same. My first job was with Fisher and Paykel. I am rather mystified about needing to order a fridge???. When you needed to buy whiteware you went, as I did, to a retailer and bought one. As for brands and models there were Fisher/Paykel, Bonnaire, McAlpine, Vallaire freezers etc etc.

Whats got better
travel is much cheaper and affordable
Medical care is better
Range of imports, and selection is far better and affordable
Life style- restaurants, cafes, entertainment much better

what s got worse

Houses are now insanely expensive ( I bought my first house in 1981 for $28000, easy for young person to get on the housing ladder back then
Costs of education: I went to University 1976-79, no fees, easy to get reasonable paying holiday jobs and came out of University with money in the bank
Wage rates: better for most in 1970s

Daytr
06-08-2015, 04:08 PM
National have stuffed DOC.
Their restructure has been a complete disaster.
Way to go National, gut a great organization, where for most of the staff its more a vocation than a job.
This restructure has been an absolute hatchet job.
Add it to the ever growing long list of National botch ups... I'm running out of space there have been so many.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11492900

craic
06-08-2015, 04:21 PM
Well! Now I'm really feeling old. Came here first in '59 as a crewman on QSMV "Dominion Monarch" from Great Britain and thought I had landed in paradise. The Dominion had eight pages of job ads and they offered unlimited overtime, subsidised meals and all sorts of incentives. As to the lack of whatever they had in the UK, that's mostly rubbish. Sure, new cars needed overseas funds for a no remittance licence and a one year old new car would fetch more than its new price but that wasn't a big issue. Most of us spent our Sundays under the bonnet with mates drinking the half dozen Dominion Bitter that we got, yes on Sundays, from the pub down the road simply by knowing the procedure code or whatever. A quarter acre section could be bought on the never-never and if you were a "worker" a State advances loan would cover the$3,000 to build a house. One and a half kids benefits could be cased to pay a lot of the cost. I did this in 1968.In 73-4 I went to Housing Corp and begged them to double my repayments because advances in employment and the oil shocks made my $10 a week embarrassing. They refused and told me to save it and pay a lump sum. The good old days are still here - if you take the trouble to look at the rest of the world. Even a poor ignorant Irishman like me can scrape $1,800 of the markets in the last week.

westerly
06-08-2015, 06:00 PM
EZ, not sure, why this would be a political issue at all. The rest of the world does just fine in housing people in apartment blocks (http://www.thejournal.ie/best-apartments-architecture-2014-1753671-Oct2014/) - and it is neither difficult nor expensive (well, on a per apartment-basis) to build a small settlement with 25000 units. Or - if you don't want to house them all in one place - make it 3 "settlements" with 8000 units each.

Great for energy efficiency, great for public transport, shorter ways to shops and work. And all Auckland housing problems solved in one stroke. Win-win-win. As indicated - has been done all over the world, its only New Zealand still living in the stone age of human habitation ... one cave (or box) per family.

Maybe this could be something useful for Labour to do ... investigate appartment settlements around the world and find out what it would take a Kiwi household to move into a cheaper, well equipped, energy efficient and warm apartment unit instead of living in a standalone box surrounded by high fences and many other standalone boxes.


Isn't it Labour supposed to push the social idea? Just help us to make Kiwis more social (and I don't mean the Friday evening binge) and this problem disappears ...

Build a settlement with 25000 units, or if you do not want to house them in one place why not 3 settlements with 8000 units. Factory farming for
animals is frowned upon but you seem to think it is ok for humans. God help us if anyone follows your ideas.

westerly

craic
06-08-2015, 07:27 PM
Hop on any bus in Singapore and that's exactly what they do. The bus driver should explain how each family has about 100 sq metres and the population of their high rises is randomly selected with NO groups or religions allowed to live in communities mix and match is the rule.
Build a settlement with 25000 units, or if you do not want to house them in one place why not 3 settlements with 8000 units. Factory farming for
animals is frowned upon but you seem to think it is ok for humans. God help us if anyone follows your ideas.

westerly

blackcap
06-08-2015, 07:48 PM
Build a settlement with 25000 units, or if you do not want to house them in one place why not 3 settlements with 8000 units. Factory farming for
animals is frowned upon but you seem to think it is ok for humans. God help us if anyone follows your ideas.

westerly

Pretty common way to live in many European cities as well. If thats what ppl in NZ want I would not be opposing them.

elZorro
07-08-2015, 06:43 AM
Auckland prices are under pressure because the govt has helped that situation along. Time they considered the regions. And no, I'd agree with Mr Yule, Hastings Mayor. We want investment in businesses, not houses.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11493216

"The regions will welcome foreign investment but largely in the productive sector - where an investment can be made, a joint venture, or part of an integrated supply chain."

BlackPeter
07-08-2015, 09:12 AM
Build a settlement with 25000 units, or if you do not want to house them in one place why not 3 settlements with 8000 units. Factory farming for
animals is frowned upon but you seem to think it is ok for humans. God help us if anyone follows your ideas.

westerly

I am flattered westerly, but not sure whether I can claim the idea of housing people in apartment buildings as mine;);

Have a chat with people living in Singapore, Taipei, London, Frankfurt, New York - many of them are quite happy about living in an apartment building. And many of them stay there basically all their life (not because they have to, but because they want to). One quality measure could be how often people move around ... many of the apartment dwellers in first world countries stay for many years at the same place, while many people in NZ just keep moving around and regularly exchanging their often cold, moist and draughty wooden boxes every other year against another cold, moist and draughty wooden box. Only people winning in this game are real estate agents.

Are you a real estate agent - westerly?

Sgt Pepper
07-08-2015, 09:38 AM
Hop on any bus in Singapore and that's exactly what they do. The bus driver should explain how each family has about 100 sq metres and the population of their high rises is randomly selected with NO groups or religions allowed to live in communities mix and match is the rule.

'No Indians No PRCs': Singapore's rental discrimination problem bbc news

They also have advertisements for renting apartments in which the owner can specify which ethnic group is not welcome to apply e.g. " no PRCs" ( no peoples republic of china welcome) Presumably your bus driver didn't mention that.

craic
07-08-2015, 10:12 AM
In agreeing with Mr Yule you may be 'jumping into bed with the devil' Don yule, not only played rugby for Hawkes Bay but he was for many years, the President of the National Party in the province. His son is now hell bent on amalgamating the region into the same sort of mess as Auckland and I am sure he would like to be the local Len brown.
Auckland prices are under pressure because the govt has helped that situation along. Time they considered the regions. And no, I'd agree with Mr Yule, Hastings Mayor. We want investment in businesses, not houses.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11493216

"The regions will welcome foreign investment but largely in the productive sector - where an investment can be made, a joint venture, or part of an integrated supply chain."

craic
07-08-2015, 10:29 AM
80% of the accommodation in Singapore is publically owned and developed by the Housing and Development Board and they control the rules in that percentage of the country. The units contain shops, recreation facilities and a lot more. Private apartments for the other 20% are often shoebox size. My son stayed in one recently with an in-law who lives the temporarily. He - the in-law - is one of the large transient foreign population who represent companies.
'No Indians No PRCs': Singapore's rental discrimination problem bbc news

They also have advertisements for renting apartments in which the owner can specify which ethnic group is not welcome to apply e.g. " no PRCs" ( no peoples republic of china welcome) Presumably your bus driver didn't mention that.

macduffy
07-08-2015, 12:40 PM
Hi craic. I'm surprised to read that 80% of Singapore's accommodation is publically owned. Developed by the state, certainly, but when I worked there in the early 80's the trend was for Singaporeans to buy these, often through their contributions to the fairly hefty compulsory (state-sponsored) super scheme. A long time ago - I've forgotten the details! - but surprised, nevertheless to learn that this is no longer the case.

macduffy
07-08-2015, 12:40 PM
Duplicated post!

craic
07-08-2015, 12:59 PM
You are quite right but. Repayment of mortgage is often intergenerational and I suspect that "ownership" is a looser term than it is here. The complex is more important than its components. Try selling to an Indian who wants to live next to his brother[ and it will be a no. No one is allowed to be homeless now or unemployed. They are given a job and a residence. You never see a uniformed policeman on the street - it is all done with cameras. All the cars appear to be new - ten year registration is required at purchase. QUOTE=macduffy;584964]Hi craic. I'm surprised to read that 80% of Singapore's accommodation is publically owned. Developed by the state, certainly, but when I worked there in the early 80's the trend was for Singaporeans to buy these, often through their contributions to the fairly hefty compulsory (state-sponsored) super scheme. A long time ago - I've forgotten the details! - but surprised, nevertheless to learn that this is no longer the case.[/QUOTE]

macduffy
07-08-2015, 04:14 PM
Someone thinks NZ is doing OK!

http://www.theage.com.au/business/the-economy/rba-australia-needs-more-kiwis-20150807-gitwdw.html

:)

elZorro
07-08-2015, 05:45 PM
In agreeing with Mr Yule you may be 'jumping into bed with the devil' Don yule, not only played rugby for Hawkes Bay but he was for many years, the President of the National Party in the province. His son is now hell bent on amalgamating the region into the same sort of mess as Auckland and I am sure he would like to be the local Len brown.

It was the son of Don Yule I think Craic, here's an article about that.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503459&objectid=11461720

He does seem to talk some common sense, maybe he votes Labour, but the important thing is that the regional economy and employment opportunities seem to be high on his agenda.

craic
07-08-2015, 06:13 PM
No doubt about it, I knew Don well and his son. As to voting Labour, he's an intelligent man.

elZorro
07-08-2015, 06:33 PM
No doubt about it, I knew Don well and his son. As to voting Labour, he's an intelligent man.

I see Stuart Nash had the opposite opinion on amalgamation while electioneering. Mayor of Napier doesn't agree either. Regarding your other slight? I know a few people who vote Labour who are also apparently intelligent, in fact they are fairly high up the academic tree. Perhaps too high to be of much practical use away from a desk, but there you go.:)

westerly
07-08-2015, 06:48 PM
I am flattered westerly, but not sure whether I can claim the idea of housing people in apartment buildings as mine;);

Have a chat with people living in Singapore, Taipei, London, Frankfurt, New York - many of them are quite happy about living in an apartment building. And many of them stay there basically all their life (not because they have to, but because they want to). One quality measure could be how often people move around ... many of the apartment dwellers in first world countries stay for many years at the same place, while many people in NZ just keep moving around and regularly exchanging their often cold, moist and draughty wooden boxes every other year against another cold, moist and draughty wooden box. Only people winning in this game are real estate agents.

Are you a real estate agent - westerly?

All the cities you apart from Frankfurt are densely populated and possibly the only affordable accomodation is an apartment usually rented. The chances of escaping for many is probably nil.
Most of the moving around in NZ is either work related, or trying to move up the property ladder, something encouraged by the policies of the present Govt.
As for wooden boxes I have lived in one for thirty odd years. It is neither cold or draughty and most houses fitting your description can be easily improved with insulation and a bit of effort. However large numbers are rentals and a Govt reluctant to improve it's own housing stock will do little to push landlords into improvements.
Social problems are common in most older apartment blocks all round the world.
I am with Daytr as far as population growth is concerned.
My own opinion is relying on an increasing population for growth is unrealistic and it is basically up to the populations of individual countries to sort out their problems. NZ or any other country has no obligation to house the world or feed the world, only to assist where possible.

Obviously I am not a real estate agent but you may have an interest in pushing apartment living. If you are looking for an apartment I recommend the block in your link that has communal kitchen facilities etc. :)

westerly

Daytr
07-08-2015, 07:09 PM
I would suggest of you want NZ or Auckland to emulate Taipei, Singapore etc then move there.
If you want to change NZ so much & make it like the rest of the world, over crowded, perhaps you are just living in the wrong country.
I think there is room for more urbanization of Auckland i.e. more apartment blocks in the CBD, however we don't need more people, simple as that.
Just stop the urban sprawl. The roads in Auckland are already overloaded & more concentration of people outside the CBD is only going to make it worse.
The way we are going the population of NZ will be over 5 Million in less than 10 years!

craic
08-08-2015, 08:34 AM
What an unthinkable tragedy! A country slightly larger than Great Britain with a population around half the size of most major cities in the world. There are a dozen or more countries in the region who could, with little effort, overrun this place in a couple of days. A few more million people could mean that there might be someone on a headland somewhere to see the coming.QUOTE=Daytr;585058]I would suggest of you want NZ or Auckland to emulate Taipei, Singapore etc then move there.
If you want to change NZ so much & make it like the rest of the world, over crowded, perhaps you are just living in the wrong country.
I think there is room for more urbanization of Auckland i.e. more apartment blocks in the CBD, however we don't need more people, simple as that.
Just stop the urban sprawl. The roads in Auckland are already overloaded & more concentration of people outside the CBD is only going to make it worse.
The way we are going the population of NZ will be over 5 Million in less than 10 years![/QUOTE]

BlackPeter
08-08-2015, 11:44 AM
I would suggest of you want NZ or Auckland to emulate Taipei, Singapore etc then move there.
If you want to change NZ so much & make it like the rest of the world, over crowded, perhaps you are just living in the wrong country.
I think there is room for more urbanization of Auckland i.e. more apartment blocks in the CBD, however we don't need more people, simple as that.
Just stop the urban sprawl. The roads in Auckland are already overloaded & more concentration of people outside the CBD is only going to make it worse.
The way we are going the population of NZ will be over 5 Million in less than 10 years!

Daytr - you are the ultimate bully: "If you don't like it here, than just go". Shame on you - though it helps me to understand why you support Winstons's NZ First.

OK - so lets look what I said. I said that there are people who prefer to live in apartments over houses. I said apartments housing has some benefits over single houses (particularly looking at energy efficiency and public transport), but obviously it has as well drawbacks. I didn't say everybody needs to (or should) live in apartments.

I certainly didn't propose to turn Auckland into Singapore ... hardly possible by building just 25.000 apartment units in Auckland (which would represent less than 5% of all existing Auckland dwellings). 95% of all Auckland houses would be unchanged as is ready to be occupied by whoever wants to live in them - however if there are people in Auckland preferring to live in (quality) apartments, than they could do so - and the Auckland housing crisis would be fixed.

Ah yes - everybody could buy a cheaper place to live (balanced demand and supply) but I guess this would take you another opportunity to complain about the government ... and this would be a pity, wouldn't it?

Ah yes daytr, and if I would prefer to live in Singapore or Auckland than I would live there. I don't. However - in my view is it always a good idea to learn from others .. maybe that's the difference between a progressive Liberal and a regressive NZF supporter?

elZorro
08-08-2015, 07:36 PM
Too much name calling on this thread: even I do some of it I suppose, so apologies for that. Was up in Auckland today and on one intersection there was one rabid group getting started on local body electioneering with the sign:

Len Brown Sux. Toot your support.

They were getting some support, but then it's hard to know how you'd indicate you didn't agree. He hasn't been that good a leftie ambassador I guess.

Lots of articles in the paper and on the news about the dairy payout. It is just as bad as I feared, there are sharemilkers talking about letting staff and part-timers go, losses of $200,000 per business per year, 18 months to recover, if then, rural suppliers very worried too.

This is going to be bad for the govt too. Less GST revenue, less PAYE, higher unemployment costs, less income tax. In fact farmers and some allied businesses will be running tax losses through, and might not be paying prov/ income tax for two or more years. John and Bill, this is going to make balancing your own govt books decidedly difficult.

I think they'll be forgetting all about a budget surplus, this was never promised, it's not happening, and NZ should be reminded, it doesn't matter, does it. National will bring NZ through, they're great at managing the country. Much more trustworthy than Labour.

National have two choices for the immediate future. Start shutting down some govt services by sacking people, or raise some new tax income. I wonder which option they'll pick.

craic
08-08-2015, 10:01 PM
At least they will have the options. Labour will just have to sit back and suck it up for at least two years and possibly a few more. And those of you who find every minor flaw like the hair pulling or the sheep to Arabia or whatever will have to continue to collect trivia and behave like frustrated old maidens sticking pins into a doll in the belief that the person represented will eventually succumb to your darts. If that's political science in NZ, I will continue to trade my dollars on the markets and enjoy all my punts as much as the last one that returned me ninety dollars for a ten bet on the last race.

elZorro
09-08-2015, 10:04 AM
At least they will have the options. Labour will just have to sit back and suck it up for at least two years and possibly a few more. And those of you who find every minor flaw like the hair pulling or the sheep to Arabia or whatever will have to continue to collect trivia and behave like frustrated old maidens sticking pins into a doll in the belief that the person represented will eventually succumb to your darts. If that's political science in NZ, I will continue to trade my dollars on the markets and enjoy all my punts as much as the last one that returned me ninety dollars for a ten bet on the last race.

Craic, surely not all your bets turn out winners? :) I know of one in particular that didn't, but I think you've done fine out of that area overall.

Of course I made an omission in the previous post. National has a third way of making their problems go away for the meantime - do some more borrowing on the taxpayer credit card. After all, we are not yet the world's most indebted nation. We're average, or better than average. This ignores the fact that when Labour left office, old Crown debts were almost completely repaid. The Labour government had led the way by showing that in the good times, it's a sensible idea to pay down old debt. National are acting like NZ Crown assets are something that should be shared out to current taxpayers or bystanders, some being more deserving than others, until there is nothing of net value left.

Winston Peters and Andrew Little were on Q&A this morning, mainly covering the dairy situation. Winston called Federated Farmers out for backing the National Govt no matter what, when they should be backing their members - who as it turns out - are farmers. Winston should get some more rural votes for his plain speaking, and it doesn't sound like he's on National's side of the fence at the moment.

BlackPeter
09-08-2015, 11:01 AM
Craic, surely not all your bets turn out winners? :) I know of one in particular that didn't, but I think you've done fine out of that area overall.

Of course I made an omission in the previous post. National has a third way of making their problems go away for the meantime - do some more borrowing on the taxpayer credit card. After all, we are not yet the world's most indebted nation. We're average, or better than average. This ignores the fact that when Labour left office, old Crown debts were almost completely repaid. The Labour government had led the way by showing that in the good times, it's a sensible idea to pay down old debt. National are acting like NZ Crown assets are something that should be shared out to current taxpayers or bystanders, some being more deserving than others, until there is nothing of net value left.

Winston Peters and Andrew Little were on Q&A this morning, mainly covering the dairy situation. Winston called Federated Farmers out for backing the National Govt no matter what, when they should be backing their members - who as it turns out - are farmers. Winston should get some more rural votes for his plain speaking, and it doesn't sound like he's on National's side of the fence at the moment.

... and while praising Labour for its part in reducing the public debt, you always seem to forget to mention that it was Labour leading us into the NZ part of the GFC. They allowed very shonky finance business to operate throughout the time they have been at the reigns ... no Labour politician called for a reduction of house prices (which went up faster during Labours reign than they do now), nobody in Labour stopped absolutely incompetent finance directors to allow the dirty deeds of Bridgecorp, Hannover Finance and South Canterbury finance (even if latter blew only up under the next government - the mistakes have been made earlier), nobody in the Labour government tried to stop the inflation of the property bubble (not just in Queenstown), and they didn't stop the huge increase in private debts either. Private mortgages as well as credit card debt ballooned during the time of the latest Labour government.

.... just to balance your praise ... :p

EZ, if reducing public debt during a time of plenty is really the only thing Labour can be proud of, than I am not sure, whether they are qualified to lead the opposition (not to think about getting back into government). And this is in my view the problem - I do see a very complacent opposition just waiting for its "next term" - instead of positively fighting for it. Yes, there is the odd mud-throwing exercise and as well attempts to steal votes from each other (e.g. Labour trying to steal from Winston, who used to own the xenophobic and racist vote).

Don't misunderstand me - yes, the current government is getting stale, John Key seems to follow Helen in terms of arrogance and loosing touch.
A good democracy needs a balance of power ... what we currently seem to have is however a balance of mediocrity on all sides. What is missing is an opposition offering a credible alternative. Just look at the numbers - yes, sure - maybe National gets next time less than 50%, but how could the other half form any credible government?

Lets assume Labour and the Greenies could get into bed together, then how would Winston fit into this relationship? Same - if its Little and Winston, how would the Greenies fit into the game? And even these two full and two half (co-)leaders might not be sufficient - you would need as well the support of one or two Maori flavoured organisations.

How do you combine hard left socialism (so called Greenies), lobbying for fringe groups (Greenies as well as Labour), blatant racism (NZF ... and don't forget the "chinese sounding names"), the power hunger of the union movement and the interest of the in itself not so homogeneous Maori movement?

The only common interest of these groups might be to get closer to the baubles of government. Though I am not even sure about that, the Greenies never wanted to run the country ... it is just much more convenient for them to sit back and criticize whoever is in power.

So what would be the common thread / objective / interest which would keep an "anti-National" government together for three long years? Still more relevant - how are you going to convince the voters that such a colourful "group" would be able to run the country?

winner69
09-08-2015, 11:19 AM
NZ was in recession before the GFC struck

elZorro
09-08-2015, 11:54 AM
Technically, W69 is right, but Helen Clark's govt also had eight unbroken years from 2000 to 2008 where the economy grew strongly by an average 3.5%. We truly had a rock-star economy then, even though the dairy payout started off about the same level as it's going to be now.

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/economy/overview/2010/04.htm

During this period, BP, they paid down a lot of govt debt to reduce ongoing interest costs and risk, while the calls from the opposition National Party were all about lowering taxes. Nothing useful, just lowering taxes. As it turned out, that BS changed to increasing tax on the masses with GST by 2010, while the already wealthy did get the tax cuts as promised. Tax cuts that helped cripple govt income for several years, meaning the govt has never been able to post a surplus.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3311679/Key-no-GST-rise-video-emerges

BP, I'm not about to second-guess who is going to have the higher votes in 2017, but I hope it is a leftie coalition. National are running their own coalition already, ACT and the Maori Party, most of us aren't too keen on all their policies. That was foisted on us too. You just don't like anything that's a bit left-leaning.

National could certainly have clamped down on SCF, and nothing to stop them reining in the smaller finance companies steadily, after they were elected. I still think that any controls were far too slow to be organised. In the rush to lower compliance costs generally, lots of things went wrong. Even Labour are not without blame there.

Major von Tempsky
09-08-2015, 12:30 PM
Helen Clark just coasted on what Roger Douglas and Ruth Richardson had achieved already with economy and Cullen ran it down to please Helen until in their last year they were in for a Budget deficit the next year.

As far as the execrable Len Brown goes he will be eased out next year one way or the other and my bet is that the right wing Labourite Phil Goff will become Mayor and apply some common sense to Len's grandiose bankrupting Transport dreams.

Daytr
09-08-2015, 02:19 PM
BP, getting a bit fed up with derogatory terms. You have called me racist on this thread on many occasions & now a bully.
How is suggesting something & it was suggested as in I used the word suggest (if you didn't get it the first time which you obviously didn't) bullying let alone the ultimate bully. Quite ridiculous as have been your racist calls.

Suggesting if someone isn't happy with the way NZ is now & want to change it to be like other densely populated countries/cities to me says you are probably living in the wrong place. As in you might be happier in a place that already exists rather than one you want to change NZ into.
Hardly bullying, but maybe check with your Mum first.

You also seem to think the post was directed at just you, it wasn't, but don't let that get in the way of a good rant.

And by the way when you use quotation marks you are supposed to quote actually what someone said/wrote, not make up your own version of it. You must have learnt that from Dirty Politics of the right.
So the shame is very much on you & not for the first time.


Daytr - you are the ultimate bully: "If you don't like it here, than just go". Shame on you - though it helps me to understand why you support Winstons's NZ First.

OK - so lets look what I said. I said that there are people who prefer to live in apartments over houses. I said apartments housing has some benefits over single houses (particularly looking at energy efficiency and public transport), but obviously it has as well drawbacks. I didn't say everybody needs to (or should) live in apartments.

I certainly didn't propose to turn Auckland into Singapore ... hardly possible by building just 25.000 apartment units in Auckland (which would represent less than 5% of all existing Auckland dwellings). 95% of all Auckland houses would be unchanged as is ready to be occupied by whoever wants to live in them - however if there are people in Auckland preferring to live in (quality) apartments, than they could do so - and the Auckland housing crisis would be fixed.

Ah yes - everybody could buy a cheaper place to live (balanced demand and supply) but I guess this would take you another opportunity to complain about the government ... and this would be a pity, wouldn't it?

Ah yes daytr, and if I would prefer to live in Singapore or Auckland than I would live there. I don't. However - in my view is it always a good idea to learn from others .. maybe that's the difference between a progressive Liberal and a regressive NZF supporter?

elZorro
09-08-2015, 02:24 PM
Helen Clark just coasted on what Roger Douglas and Ruth Richardson had achieved already with (the)economy and Cullen ran it (the debt?) down to please Helen until in their last year they were in for a Budget deficit the next year.

As far as the execrable Len Brown goes he will be eased out next year one way or the other and my bet is that the right wing Labourite Phil Goff will become Mayor and apply some common sense to Len's grandiose bankrupting Transport dreams.

MVT, I hope that Phil Goff gets in as Auckland Mayor too. However, the first part of your post, I don't agree with. It belittles what positive changes there were, in those three terms. Wikipedia has a balanced opinion of this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Labour_Government_of_New_Zealand

Stacked up alongside what National has done in the last 6-7 years, Labour didn't need to sell off assets, they didn't post any deficits while they were in office, and no-one will ever know how much better the economy would have performed if Labour had been able to stay in after 2008. Treasury boffins mocked up forecasts for ongoing deficits in about 2008, and those are what National keeps quoting as verification of their expertise with the economy. They were just guesses, without the knowledge of record dairy receipts (http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/dairy/70912048/Fonterra-revises-down-milk-price-to-3-85) that were going to come through by 2013. Even then, National couldn't post a surplus. Unsurprising, when they are more comfortable with higher unemployment, lower taxes for the wealthy, and encouraging the spread of offshore manufacturing by providing R&D grants to bigger businesses, while ignoring the regions in other areas.

Daytr
09-08-2015, 02:40 PM
Its yet another quite remarkable post from our eminent economist MVT.
I'm just wondering how Helen Clark could ride on the coattails of Douglas & Richardson when there was another 6 years until Clark became PM.
Perhaps Ayn Rand was filling in those intervening years MVT? LOL
NZ was in far better shape under Labour than it is now and we certainly weren't up to our eyeballs in debt and now about to face the very real chance of a recession. I saw a report a couple of days back that the average dairy farmer will be losing $250k pa at the current payout level from Fonterra.

elZorro
10-08-2015, 06:53 AM
Its yet another quite remarkable post from our eminent economist MVT.
I'm just wondering how Helen Clark could ride on the coattails of Douglas & Richardson when there was another 6 years until Clark became PM.
Perhaps Ayn Rand was filling in those intervening years MVT? LOL
NZ was in far better shape under Labour than it is now and we certainly weren't up to our eyeballs in debt and now about to face the very real chance of a recession. I saw a report a couple of days back that the average dairy farmer will be losing $250k pa at the current payout level from Fonterra.

Yes, the average dairy farmer will run at a loss this year. I guess this doesn't apply so much to the established farm owner, who may have a lower residual loan outstanding, and has a sharemilker who provides the herd on the property. The variable order sharemilkers will be hit harder, and they tend to employ workers too.

Bernard Hickey has an interesting article on the glut of savings - people don't want to take risks any more.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/economy/news/article.cfm?c_id=34&objectid=11494181&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Monday+10+A ugust+2015

winner69
10-08-2015, 08:13 AM
EZ, did you write this?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/70958458/yip-its-about-time-to-panic-on-the-economic-meltdown

Lucy has a myopic view of the economy though.

BlackPeter
10-08-2015, 09:06 AM
BP, getting a bit fed up with derogatory terms. You have called me racist on this thread on many occasions & now a bully.


Daytr, you might be here a bit economical with the truth. I never called you a racist. I did call however some of Labours and NZF's actions racist ... and I might have used this attribute as well for some of Winston's campaigns. As far as the other term is concerned - just look into the mirror and you will see :).

elZorro
10-08-2015, 10:22 AM
EZ, did you write this?

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opinion-analysis/70958458/yip-its-about-time-to-panic-on-the-economic-meltdown

Lucy has a myopic view of the economy though.

I'm amused at the choice of words from Jane Bowron (http://karldufresne.blogspot.co.nz/2011/03/no-rulebook-thats-why-jane-bowron.html), but overall it's a bit mean to dairy farmers - as usual, it's not a black-and-white issue. Jane Bowron is pointing the finger at the National Govt mostly. Where is the proper direction from these people, she's saying. They did hope that the dairy cheque would solve a lot of the issues with the economy, it's why the govt booted out the regional group in charge of irrigation in Canterbury, so they could railroad more dairy conversions. Now large areas of the Canterbury plains are without shelter belts, and are even more reliant on regular doses of river-fed water from multimillion dollar centre-pivot irrigators. You can't change these farms back to cropping in a hurry. In lots of other ways, farmers increased their average costs of production over the last few years (because they could afford it on the higher average payouts), and now they're in a tight spot. It's a matter of whether the dairy payouts will move back up again, and for several reasons, that might take a year or three to find out.

craic
10-08-2015, 11:00 AM
If I buy a house in Auckland at an inflated price because I expect to make a profit and the predicted collapse occurs, I can only blame my own action. If I buy a dairy farm at the grossly inflated prices that some Farmers/investors were paying when they thought that they had found the crock of gold at the end of the rainbow and then the crock is empty, then that's life.

elZorro
10-08-2015, 01:07 PM
If I buy a house in Auckland at an inflated price because I expect to make a profit and the predicted collapse occurs, I can only blame my own action. If I buy a dairy farm at the grossly inflated prices that some Farmers/investors were paying when they thought that they had found the crock of gold at the end of the rainbow and then the crock is empty, then that's life.

That's one way of looking at it Craic, but when did the National Govt start saying that maybe it's not a good idea to speed up dairy conversions? Until very recently they've been encouraging the idea, even vocalising it. They haven't been so good at boosting other types of industry in NZ. Sure, they'll turn up for a photo opportunity after the odd entrepeneur or company calls them in, after the hard work has been done. In some of the operations, it has been at the expense of another factory somewhere else, sometimes it's robots replacing staff. They're throwing taxpayer money at large overseas listed companies, just on the off-chance that they'll keep a few R&D people in NZ, but manufacture somewhere else. Not good enough.

Sir Peter Talley also has grim scenarios for the government to ponder.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/70673026/peter-talley-predicts-grim-future-for-jobs-education

craic
10-08-2015, 02:56 PM
I suppose you expect the National party to warn people against investing in housing in Auckland as well? or maybe in the sharemarket because its bound to crash again. We make our own mistakes and if politicians were expert in anything, they probably wouldn't be politicians.









auckland

elZorro
10-08-2015, 05:12 PM
I suppose you expect the National party to warn people against investing in housing in Auckland as well? or maybe in the sharemarket because its bound to crash again. We make our own mistakes and if politicians were expert in anything, they probably wouldn't be politicians.


Those who can, do, those who can't, become politicians? Doesn't have quite the same ring to it. :)

But you have detoured with my argument, Craic. I'm saying that the National govt has visibly backed those they thought would be winners, they have been clear about that. Dairy farmers, big businesses, those with scale, have all been overweighted on their radar. I think that's partly because they then have fewer points of contact to deal with, and the PR looks better. My argument all along, is that this kind of attitude is not inclusive enough for the rest of NZ. We are all taxpayers in effect, all of us.

Coupled with the lobbying from big business and farmers, the National Party has taken a fair bit of the funding that ended up in their party coffers, and spent it with arguably the best neo-liberal political campaigners in the world. They started doing this eleven years ago, and now Crosby-Textor has probably shaped a lot of the policies and dirty politics that the National Party is going along with. They are rotten to the core - we are seeing the results - our economy is well on the way to recession, no budget surplus in sight, the only way they grow the GDP now is with record immigration, there is no hope for any substantial pickup within a year or two.

Where are the fresh new high-tech export manufacturers that will broaden our economy and keep us in first world status? They should have been on the go since 2009, but instead, the number of enterprises nose-dived when National came to power. (http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/businesses/business_characteristics/BusinessDemographyStatistics_HOTPFeb12/Commentary.aspx)

Maybe 'nose-dived' isn't the right word. Perhaps what I should say is that the numbers dropped back, and the obvious growth in enterprise numbers and employees faltered, flatlined, and eventually after 7 years, it got back to where Labour had it in 2008. Crap results from a National govt that is supposedly pro-business. They are not pro-growth, that's for sure. Meanwhile, our population increased quite a bit. Hence, more are on the dole, or out of the workforce.

Daytr
10-08-2015, 05:51 PM
BP, if you really want an example of true bullying, look no further than the Prime Minister and his ponytail pulling obsession with a waitress.
That is the problem when your political leaders set a bad example, others think its ok to follow suit in similar playground tactics i.e. calling people names or poor debate i.e. look in the mirror. LOL
Its ok BP, I'll take it a bit easier on you, as you are obviously struggling with the debate having to resort to dirty politic type tactics.

So now it appears McCully has not only paid bribes to a Saudi businessman, the government accordi9ng to report on National Radio has also fraudulently created invoices to make the payments look kosher. Apparently NZ was paying for Intellectual Property, as that what the invoices were made up for to pay the bribes. What IP did we ever receive? Wasn't it us giving them IP if anything to set up a farm in the middle of the desert ?
This is getting dodgier by the day & this could force a police investigation into what appears to be fraud.
Key will do everything to ensure this doesn't become a criminal case as he has consistently made up a story in regards why these payments were made. IP certainly wasn't part of his fiction. Apparently it was all Labour's fault! LOL.


Daytr, you might be here a bit economical with the truth. I never called you a racist. I did call however some of Labours and NZF's actions racist ... and I might have used this attribute as well for some of Winston's campaigns. As far as the other term is concerned - just look into the mirror and you will see :).

neopoleII
10-08-2015, 06:32 PM
""Where are the fresh new high-tech export manufacturers that will broaden our economy and keep us in first world status? They should have been on the go since 2009,""

To be fair..... it was only a couple of years before 2009 that the labour party gave china most favored nation status and opened the door to the mass produced high-tech products
that we in NZ cant produce for the same cost.... therefore we lost alot of high-tech start ups and enterprise. If you look at what china produces in the high-tech range of products...... there isnt really much that NZ can compete with. We here in NZ are good inventors and that is about it....... we invent ...... then we sell the IP.
NZ is not alone in this dilemma...... most first world countries send their manufacturing to cheap labour countries.
If however we produced high-tech weapons systems or computing capacity or medicine, then it might stay "in country" until our "allies" take it from us.
The simple fact is our high-tech industry is very clever and creative, trouble is with a very small gdp as a nation we dont have the investment money available to
compete with the rest of the world.
And having an open door economy with such a small population base is very noble and world leading........ except it keeps us out of high-tech industrial manufacturing
on a global scale.
Sad really, but not the fault of right wing governments...... not left wing either....... but the "most favored nation" policy hasnt helped our economy to diversity.
So i see it anyway.

elZorro
10-08-2015, 06:55 PM
""Where are the fresh new high-tech export manufacturers that will broaden our economy and keep us in first world status? They should have been on the go since 2009,""

To be fair..... it was only a couple of years before 2009 that the labour party gave china most favored nation status and opened the door to the mass produced high-tech products
that we in NZ cant produce for the same cost.... therefore we lost alot of high-tech start ups and enterprise. If you look at what china produces in the high-tech range of products...... there isnt really much that NZ can compete with. We here in NZ are good inventors and that is about it....... we invent ...... then we sell the IP.
NZ is not alone in this dilemma...... most first world countries send their manufacturing to cheap labour countries.
If however we produced high-tech weapons systems or computing capacity or medicine, then it might stay "in country" until our "allies" take it from us.
The simple fact is our high-tech industry is very clever and creative, trouble is with a very small gdp as a nation we dont have the investment money available to
compete with the rest of the world.
And having an open door economy with such a small population base is very noble and world leading........ except it keeps us out of high-tech industrial manufacturing
on a global scale.
Sad really, but not the fault of right wing governments...... not left wing either....... but the "most favored nation" policy hasnt helped our economy to diversity.
So i see it anyway.

Thoughtful comments NeopoleII. In the business I'm involved with, we do have links to Chinese manufacturing and suppliers, but we keep it to a minimum. We use them for components, not the design or the main manufacturing. We can do this because our products are niche and relatively low volume, but highish value. Then we export most of these value added goods, with very little competition. There is nothing to stop hundreds of small businesses in NZ doing the same thing, trading from small urban premises or houses if they need to. Sure, it's not on a global scale, and no-one has wanted to buy my IP in any major way yet, but it is exciting and challenging, and NZ needs a lot more of this sort of employment opportunity. Out of hundreds of small startups, surely some will end up being like Xero (only profitable?) or F&P (for much of their lifecycle, or Tait (forever), etc.

National have been helping out the bigger businesses far too much, at the expense of a lot more smaller businesses. The big guys are looking to downsize their workforce with systems and robotics, or they're into IT, which I guess is OK. But a lot of this IP is easily moved offshore, as you state. Looking at all of NZ, we need more manufacturing jobs, not less, to soak up some of the school leavers. Now tell me, where are those jobs going to come from?

Labour knew where they'd come from, their policies helped build the economy up, people got employed. That's what we need to have again.

neopoleII
10-08-2015, 07:40 PM
""We use them for components, not the design or the main manufacturing. We can do this because our products are niche and relatively low volume, but highish value. Then we export most of these value added goods, with very little competition""

now this is interesting........ i also import my raw materials from china and / or india. then custom make my high value one off products and sell to the NZ public as specified. we also export about 5% of our product. since thinking about your reply i have thought about my business and besides the brick and mortar.... all the machinery, all of the software, and all of our consumables.... are all imported. it is only the design and custom manufacture that is done here..... that part is what comes from my mind and my hands and the way i use the imported tools and materials to achieve our custom products....... so besides my profit which my "back of the scene no input boss" clips the ticket of...... there is not much of a "NZ" gain.

my own business at home is also using imported materials and imported tools and imported consumables..... its only the workshop and electricity that is NZ made.
the design and manufacture is my value added input and most of my made to order creations are sold to overseas visitors and then shipped to them a few months later.
good for me and my family and the import wholesalers i buy from and the tax man ....... but no one else......... except when i spend my export $.

as you said...... there are many niche markets that we can compete with...... trouble is..... niche is always low volume..... therefore low employment opportunity.
countries get rich by mass production or cornering segments of industry..... or excelling in certain or precise fields.

as a nation, we find this difficult to do.

to be honest..... i dont think any political party can change the situation NZ is in..... it would take a groundswell of public opinion which is not politically motivated
to make meaningful change to NZs direction or culture.

but i do like reading this thread..... even though i dont post that often...... i work 12 hrs a day now and am enjoying my creativity.... doh! work.

cheers

winner69
10-08-2015, 07:55 PM
Mike Hosking says nothing wrong with dairy .....so there

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11494689

elZorro
10-08-2015, 08:21 PM
NeopoleII, good to hear we are kind of like birds of a feather. It is great to be able to turn creative work into exports and eventually, employment for others, to build something even better and stronger.

W69, I'm starting to find Mike Hosking really annoying. With that dairying topic I'm reasonably informed, so I know he's pushing something uphill with a pointed stick. For a kickoff, farmers would need to unwind a whole lot of capital expenses and systems to get back to a lower cost production, similar to where they were in 2001-2003. Most of them won't, they'll be hoping for a rebound in the payout before long. As someone commented down the end there, Hosking should do some research on worldwide dairy production, then he might not be so certain of himself.

After all, NZ is exporting long-life product to these countries, in the form of rotary cowsheds and all the other equipment they'll need. We'll even supply well-bred stock, how's that?

Daytr, yes, I agree about the Saudi deal looking worse by the day. That phrase looks like a classic backhander one, very murky politics National are getting involved in. Millions of dollars of taxpayers money involved, but of course it doesn't stack up against Helen Clark signing someone else's painting so a charity could earn a bit more money from private bidders. We'll never hear the end of that one.

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11491836


In November 2012, Mr Al Khalaf wrote to Mr McCully to agree to "your offer of a capital contribution and a contribution for investment in research and development, as outlined in your letter of 12 November 2012".
The deal was signed off by Cabinet in February 2013.
Mr Al Khalaf's business partner was told, "for your invoice of $4 million please state that it is for services set out under the contract".
Auditor-General Lyn Provost reviewed the deal, at the request of Cabinet.
Her office judged an initial business case to be "weak", and later stressed its involvement had to be limited.

craic
10-08-2015, 09:40 PM
I have resisted publishing this since before the labour party lost the treasury benches but here goes. I was on the street outside an RSA when a QC who is a friend of mine came along with the good Dr Cullen and we had a short conversation. My friend remarked on my involvement with the share market and Cullen replied with the most inane of comments leaving me with the impression that he was a dickhead who knew everything about finances - in his own mind. When my friend suggested a visit to the RSA he got a comment about a few old men sitting behind pints and the pair promptly moved on to a caf just down the road where the lawyers and accountants have their coffee breaks. Maybe all politicians are from the same more I have to do with them the more I like the idea of a benign dictatorship

elZorro
11-08-2015, 06:45 AM
I have resisted publishing this since before the labour party lost the treasury benches but here goes. I was on the street outside an RSA when a QC who is a friend of mine came along with the good Dr Cullen and we had a short conversation. My friend remarked on my involvement with the share market and Cullen replied with the most inane of comments leaving me with the impression that he was a dickhead who knew everything about finances - in his own mind. When my friend suggested a visit to the RSA he got a comment about a few old men sitting behind pints and the pair promptly moved on to a caf just down the road where the lawyers and accountants have their coffee breaks. Maybe all politicians are from the same more I have to do with them the more I like the idea of a benign dictatorship

Craic, not the best experience I guess. From the timing of this encounter, I'd guess the other two chaps had a bit more in common (politically), than you're letting on. Don't forget that Dr Cullen did leave behind some great results. Anyway, you have the last laugh, you're probably raking in a good income from your sharemarket expertise, and he's probably not.

BlackPeter
11-08-2015, 07:26 AM
Actually - here is a great example for what's wrong with the union movement. The bullies at PPTA trying to screw up the career of a junior teacher, just because he dares to work for a charter school:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-advocate/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503450&objectid=11491570

Worthwhile reading. Unions just can't help to raise their ugly face ... even in NZ.

craic
11-08-2015, 08:53 AM
Thank heavens my only Grandson - so far - Has started at St Pauls, London and will not be a victim of some of the teachers we have here. When his father was at intermediate, we were called in and told that he tested in the "bottom 5%" in his ability to learn. We eventually allowed him to leave school from the fourth form to follow a career - he had been offered a job by an employer who recognised his potential. He has an honours degree from London and a senior position that allows him to afford the fees for his son at St Pauls and a daughter at another public school. Quite a few refugees fro that profession escaped to the Probation Service during my career. It looks like that they are heading to the same position as the wharfies of old where you had to be a paid-up member of the Labour party to get into the union and work there.

Sgt Pepper
11-08-2015, 09:06 AM
Thank heavens my only Grandson - so far - Has started at St Pauls, London and will not be a victim of some of the teachers we have here. When his father was at intermediate, we were called in and told that he tested in the "bottom 5%" in his ability to learn. We eventually allowed him to leave school from the fourth form to follow a career - he had been offered a job by an employer who recognised his potential. He has an honours degree from London and a senior position that allows him to afford the fees for his son at St Pauls and a daughter at another public school. Quite a few refugees fro that profession escaped to the Probation Service during my career. It looks like that they are heading to the same position as the wharfies of old where you had to be a paid-up member of the Labour party to get into the union and work there.

Reminds me when I started high school. My best friend and I were among the new entrant 3rd formers sitting the entrance assessment test. The outcome of the assessment would determine which class you were allocated to. Miraculously, and much to my surprise, I was allocated the ' top' class. My best friend was allocated the " bottom" class. An enormous stuff up occurred as I knew my mate had very high academic and practical ability. Eventually he was allocated to our form class and prospered academically. He is now a Geologist for the South Australian government. Looking back I leant more from my weekly " Look and Learn" magazine tan anything at school, which I bought regularly from the bookshop next door to my fathers bicycle. shop As for me my older sister left school at 15. She drives a nice new Volvo. I drive a 13 year old Toyota

westerly
11-08-2015, 04:25 PM
Actually - here is a great example for what's wrong with the union movement. The bullies at PPTA trying to screw up the career of a junior teacher, just because he dares to work for a charter school:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-advocate/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503450&objectid=11491570

Worthwhile reading. Unions just can't help to raise their ugly face ... even in NZ.

Just as well there is a union if this article is correct. Just ACT and National pushing their ideology

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11442055

westerly

elZorro
11-08-2015, 09:15 PM
Just as well there is a union if this article is correct. Just ACT and National pushing their ideology

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11442055

westerly

Westerly, that's shocking. For that sort of money, they could have bought a new Haines Hunter with 150HP outboard, then they'd get somewhere!

I see where the waka came from, its purchase will have paid some builders for their work.

http://www.cclocator.com/en/video/?v=LFC97o7eUIc&lang=en

I guess it doesn't matter much, most of all this cash washing about, will end up back in the govt coffers. I assume they were given a tax invoice with that $100,000 kauri waka. (Oops, I'm sounding like a Nat). But only Nats like charter schools.

Regarding KiwiRail which we were discussing a few days ago, the CEO has written a few words.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/70978250/why-railways-are-valuable-to-new-zealand?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Tuesday+11+ August+2015

Now if each truck trip removed from our roads was worth $75 in less aggro, with cheaper freight, less damage to the road surface, etc, and each urban person off the roads was worth $5 per trip, then the $210mill annual loss of KiwiRail to the govt doesn't look too bad at all. I'm surprised we weren't given some numbers to help with that analysis.

elZorro
12-08-2015, 05:42 AM
Are we trailing behind Australia and about to find some of the same issues?

http://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/596839/Charts-that-show-Australian-economy-is-in-financial-trouble

Late 2014, and already some were picking a recession for Australia in 2015.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11358887

More recently:

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-06-30/a-first-recession-for-australian-millennials

What's interesting is that we aren't in too different a position. In the rush for the big export sales, the smaller businesses, the ones that broaden the export and jobs base, have mostly been left out in the cold. Some of them have died of frostbite before they could get through their first five years, more than usual, and that's why the enterprise numbers dropped back before recovering over the last 2-3 years. I'm picking they'll drop back from the newly-regained 2008 levels that Labour achieved, and so will employee numbers.

National's answer to this situation so far has been that we 'shouldn't get into a negative funk' about it. Perhaps Mr Fixit, Steven Joyce, has a few radio/TV adverts in mind that'll miraculously prop everything up. Like everything else, marketing is surely the answer.

No, Mr. Joyce, sometimes a government just has to do the hard yards, and come up with some decent policy of their own. Something National has failed to do, for seven long years.

Comparison of annual GDP growth charts for Australia and NZ. Aussie have had more stable and higher GDP growth over the last few years, and haven't had a recession for 25 years.

craic
12-08-2015, 07:06 AM
elZ. getting up before six am to stick another pin in the doll, you must be getting really desperate.

macduffy
12-08-2015, 07:47 AM
Don't knock it, craic. There's sometimes a few laughs in those posts. And the occasional grain of truth, too, I suppose.

;)

blackcap
12-08-2015, 07:50 AM
Don't knock it, craic. There's sometimes a few laughs in those posts. And the occasional grain of truth, too, I suppose.

;)

Good call, I get a lot of laughs out of it as well. I think El Zorro is trying the Crosby-Textor methodology if the narrative is said/written often enough we might start believing it :P :)

Daytr
12-08-2015, 08:03 AM
Or Craic, there is just too much to comment on in regards what National is doing very wrong. ;-)
Every day it is just one thing after another.
I wonder what we will see over the next few days. They are a wrecking ball that is out of control & incompetent.

EZ, that's what I have said on many posts, if you weigh up the cost of having these heavy trucks on the road including the amount of time lost by other road users being stuck behind these trucks rail is a great option for certain routes.

Key sounded shonKey on National Radio this morning. Apparently the process of doctoring up dodgy invoices is ok. What I didn't realize is that McCully has form for this sort of thing before, according to James Shaw. Back in the late 1990s McCully was forced to resign as a Minister for a similar scam in regards the Tourism Board. So John Key is ok with all this & fully supports McCully and what he has done. John Key is condoning allegations of bribery and fraud.
That's the sort of PM we need. McCully is making Collins look like a saint. The only real difference is that McCully isn't a threat whereas Collins unfortunately is.

Here is a summary of McCully's previous form when it comes to dodgy payments.

Murray McCully resigned from his Tourism portfolio in April 1999 after questions were raised regarding his handling of the resignation and subsequent payout of members of the Tourism board. These questions culminated in a report of the Controller and Auditor General that deemed these payouts "unlawful," although the report accepted that all involved had proceeded on the basis of advice and "their genuine perception of what was in the best interests of New Zealand’s tourism industry."

Daytr
12-08-2015, 08:38 AM
Its a pretty sad indictment of the Right of politics that in the 'leading light' of democracy the US, Donald Trump is the lead candidate for the Republican nomination by some margin. I suppose it could be worse, we could have another Bush administration.

BlackPeter
12-08-2015, 11:18 AM
Just as well there is a union if this article is correct. Just ACT and National pushing their ideology

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11442055

westerly

Ah westerly, just help us to understand what you are saying.

I pointed out that PPTA is bullying Junior teachers who happen to work for charter schools. They are trying to prevent them from completing their requirements for teachers registration just due to them working on schools the PPTA is opposing for purely ideological reasons. Shows that they are not interested in the quality of teaching nor in the well being of students. Ugly union bosses just concerned about their left wing ideology and about getting more power for themselves.

You posted in response an article claiming that a charter school bought an apparently expensive waka for their students. I say apparently because i don't know the going rate for wakas. Maybe the money was a donation given to the school only for this purpose? Who knows, but even if the story is confirmed, do I fail to see why this justifies the PPTA to try to prevent basically all junior teachers starting at charter schools to gain registration with bullying tactics?

Difficult to understand for any right minded person, so I assume you need to be very "left minded" to see the logic behind it. Can you just help us to understand why it is o.k in your view that PPTA is bullying junior teachers to achieve ideological goals?

Daytr
12-08-2015, 01:52 PM
Question BP. Are all unionists or unions the same? I agree this is an intolerable example of discrimination, I wouldn't call it bullying though.
I'm not sure you know what that term means. There has been plenty of bullying by certain employers over the years though that unions have had to stand up against. Even in NZ...

This is a bad example of one union or union management & I am sure there have been others at times, but it doesn't mean all unions are the same or do this sort of thing which is the inference by saying "unions" in your initial post.

Its like saying all National MPs are up for paying bribes and making up fraudulent invoices or bullying waitresses for that matter. Of course they aren't, only some of them are. Mind you, people do get tarnished by association or supporting certain dodgy actions.

BlackPeter
12-08-2015, 02:30 PM
Question BP. Are all unionists or unions the same? I agree this is an intolerable example of discrimination, I wouldn't call it bullying though.
I'm not sure you know what that term means. There has been plenty of bullying by certain employers over the years though that unions have had to stand up against. Even in NZ...

This is a bad example of one union or union management & I am sure there have been others at times, but it doesn't mean all unions are the same or do this sort of thing which is the inference by saying "unions" in your initial post.

Its like saying all National MPs are up for paying bribes and making up fraudulent invoices or bullying waitresses for that matter. Of course they aren't, only some of them are. Mind you, people do get tarnished by association or supporting certain dodgy actions.

Hi daytr, ....of course are not all unions and unionists the same. You might remember that I recognised as well in previous posts the historic need for the union movement - and I still see today a role for them in improving workplaces and particularly in making them safer. And sure - if people want to form a club (union) to improve their negotiation position for better salaries, than I guess this is legitimate as well - so why not?

It gets however ugly if these unions start to force innocent bystanders (by harming them or their career opportunities) to do what a union thinks is best for the respective union. I call this bullying, but if you have a better word for it, than I am happy to use that as well.

BTW - one definition of "bullying" (lifted off kidspot.co.nz) I would subscribe for is:


Bullying is when a person or a group repeatedly and intentionally uses or abuse their power to intimidate, hurt, oppress or damage someone else.


Actually - I think it fits well to describe the actions of the PPTA. PPTA is doing this repeatedly (actually to any junior teachers working at charter schools), and they abuse their power to intimidate these people and to damage their careers. Whats wrong with using this term to describe the actions of the PPTA?

With power comes responsibility. For some reason I can remember many more examples where (particularly public sector) unions abused their power, than cases where they demonstrated their responsibility for the common good, but I am sure there must be some examples for the latter as well ...

craic
12-08-2015, 03:17 PM
If it is a legal requirement for a teacher to be placed at another school to fulfil the requirements of the profession then I believe that the heavy hand of the minister concerned should be coming down. Where is Suzan Devoy ? She has more than one hat to wear in this arena. Where is the Maori leadership when one of their own is being railroaded for attempting to bring his abilities in this field to his own young people

elZorro
12-08-2015, 07:15 PM
Good call, I get a lot of laughs out of it as well. I think El Zorro is trying the Crosby-Textor methodology if the narrative is said/written often enough we might start believing it :P :)

Well, it works for Crosby-Textor..:)

Glad I'm some entertainment value anyway.

Daytr
12-08-2015, 07:38 PM
Fair enough BP.

Why you probably remember more negatives than good outcomes is that is what makes news. Unions doing their job & getting better outcomes for workers over the last 100 years or so doesn't sell newspapers. I think you just need to look at workers conditions compared to the start of the industrial revolution and how they have gradually improved says what unions have achieved & I don't think the achievements would have been the same without them. Like any organization there are bad eggs and corruption and abuse of power. Politics is full of it. I remember when the contracts bill came in the early 1990s and soon as the bill was signed one of NZs biggest corporations at the time tried to screw its workers. And there was pressure from management not to do any collective bargaining. You could feel your job being threatened by just talking about it. And this company was probably one of the better big corporates at looking after its staff back then.




Hi daytr, ....of course are not all unions and unionists the same. You might remember that I recognised as well in previous posts the historic need for the union movement - and I still see today a role for them in improving workplaces and particularly in making them safer. And sure - if people want to form a club (union) to improve their negotiation position for better salaries, than I guess this is legitimate as well - so why not?

It gets however ugly if these unions start to force innocent bystanders (by harming them or their career opportunities) to do what a union thinks is best for the respective union. I call this bullying, but if you have a better word for it, than I am happy to use that as well.

BTW - one definition of "bullying" (lifted off kidspot.co.nz) I would subscribe for is:



Actually - I think it fits well to describe the actions of the PPTA. PPTA is doing this repeatedly (actually to any junior teachers working at charter schools), and they abuse their power to intimidate these people and to damage their careers. Whats wrong with using this term to describe the actions of the PPTA?

With power comes responsibility. For some reason I can remember many more examples where (particularly public sector) unions abused their power, than cases where they demonstrated their responsibility for the common good, but I am sure there must be some examples for the latter as well ...

Daytr
13-08-2015, 09:25 AM
The link below is just an example of how long John Key has been lying not only to the NZ public but the international community.
He still thinks saying the same BS over & over will eventually mean people will believe him.
I think he is coming unstuck on this ridiculous notion over the Saudi Sheepgate saga, which has made headlines around the world.
Not for the first time in 2015 has National made international headlines for all the wrong reasons.

Apparently NZ is 100% pure as it promotes itself. This National government's record on the environment, climate change and conservation is a disgrace.
This is from 2011.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9480610.stm

BlackPeter
13-08-2015, 10:32 AM
The link below is just an example of how long John Key has been lying not only to the NZ public but the international community.
He still thinks saying the same BS over & over will eventually mean people will believe him.
I think he is coming unstuck on this ridiculous notion over the Saudi Sheepgate saga, which has made headlines around the world.
Not for the first time in 2015 has National made international headlines for all the wrong reasons.

Apparently NZ is 100% pure as it promotes itself. This National government's record on the environment, climate change and conservation is a disgrace.
This is from 2011.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/9480610.stm

You are right ... there certainly is a huge gap between what New Zealand claims to be - and in what it is. "clean and green"? Well, some parts of New Zealand might be green for parts the year (some even for the whole year), but as a country we are certainly not "clean".

We are (per capita) one of the largest rubbish producers in the Western world and still distribute many tons of absolutely unnecessary packaging materials and millions of plastic shopping bags per year. How many other civilised countries do you know where basically all drinks are sold in one-way containers? Our high ways and rest places feature fast food litter spread around.

We are big energy consumers and do feature in the top half of the per capita energy consumption of OECD countries (despite a quite benign climate), our pesticide use tops most developed nations (per sq km of production land) and we are typically much slower in banning dangerous substances than other civilised countries. Example: NZ was the last developed nation to ban leaded petrol (in 1996 - so it was in that case a National government which cared) and one of the last to ban DDT (in 1989 - i.e. something Labour can claim).

So - I agree: lots of opportunities to improve. However - our relative "green and cleanliness" ranking did did not improve during Helen's reign and didn't got worse during John's. As long as our people don't care, our governments won't either. You first would need to change peoples attitudes ... and this is unlikely to happen if the observations are only used in a blame game where the opposition of the day happens to make the government of the day responsible - no matter who is in government and who is in opposition.

Daytr
13-08-2015, 12:53 PM
BP, I think there is quite a difference between the Left & Right or National at least in this regard.
National has had a strong agenda to promote fossil fuel & mining exploration and exploitation. It has 'entertained' & encouraged the likes of Stat Oil and Trans Tasman Resources. It has openly encouraged the rapid intensification of dairy & as recently as in the last month has expressed that there is room for more dairy conversion. Not only are these sorts of policies ever going to be environmentally friendly they also are counter to what macro economics is telling us in regards where investment and the future lies and its not where they have been leading the country. Meanwhile they have ripped apart DOC and slashed its budget. So I would suggest National's record is ugly in comparison on the environment and addressing climate change.

BlackPeter
13-08-2015, 03:33 PM
BP, I think there is quite a difference between the Left & Right or National at least in this regard.
National has had a strong agenda to promote fossil fuel & mining exploration and exploitation. It has 'entertained' & encouraged the likes of Stat Oil and Trans Tasman Resources. It has openly encouraged the rapid intensification of dairy & as recently as in the last month has expressed that there is room for more dairy conversion. Not only are these sorts of policies ever going to be environmentally friendly they also are counter to what macro economics is telling us in regards where investment and the future lies and its not where they have been leading the country. Meanwhile they have ripped apart DOC and slashed its budget. So I would suggest National's record is ugly in comparison on the environment and addressing climate change.

I guess this is the problem - all we have is fuzzy feelings and individual examples - and you find good and bad for both parties. I'd probably give you as well that the Left-Green might have better sounding environmental policies. Problem is that they never had to implement them, because they shy away from any form of responsibility. They just find it easier to sit back and criticize from a fundamental perspective without the need to balance priorities.

What I am after would be some way to measure the overall environmental performance of our governments ... and I guess this will not be easy, particularly that we might not even have in all areas the same view of what's good and what's bad.

Actually - I found something ... there is an Environmental performance index (EPI) developed for the UN ... and according to that does look NZ even quite good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Performance_Index

It was first taken in 2006 with NZ ranking best of all assessed countries ... and dropped by 2010 down to place 15 out of 178. Since than it basically did hold this place (plus/minus 1).

So - obviously you could celebrate place 1 which happened to be during a Labour government (though most of the things they assess are based on long term effects: air quality, water quality, land erosion, adequate sanitation, indoor air pollution, not a lot a government can change in a term or two) - i.e. its probably fair to say that it was still Labours policies (or the GFC?) which brought us down from place 1 in 2006 to the 2010 ranking of 15th. Or you could celebrate that NZ is since 2006 in the top 10% - no matter which government is running it.

Is this good enough? We both seem to feel that it is not ... but our views might be different on whether it is better to support a group of parties promising lots but not able to deliver (Labour / Green) or instead a group of parties more pragmatic but able to deliver. One bird in the hand is better than two in the bush ...

Daytr
13-08-2015, 04:14 PM
NZ should stand out on any international scale as we simply have had less time to %$#& it up!
NZ has one of the worst deforestation records in history. In a very short amount of time we have done a lot of damage as a lot of NZs post European history has been in the age of machines where things are done a lot quicker & with more magnitude.
The Greens on environmental policy are pretty smart, but I do think they need to be more compromising to get some policy through. i.e. some change is better than no change. Labour's record is ok, but could be better in this regard. Nationals' record I would say is appalling & that's the difference.
By cutting budgets to things like DOC whilst at the same time targeting fossil fuel and mineral exploration says they do not value the environment and pretty much they favour development at all or any cost. National want to undermine (pardon the pun) the EPA. This is the agency that protects the environment. How can it be environmentally friendly to weaken their mandate, particularly for things like seabed mining?
I agree both Labour & National need to step up in regards addressing the need to protect both our land, sea & atmosphere & the Greens could do more to work with the major parties as well.
NZs future is with sustainable industries and tourism is probably the best of those.
People don't come to NZ for our cities its for our nature & we need to protect that better than we are now.

Major von Tempsky
13-08-2015, 04:44 PM
I think NZ Labour needs a system like the UK so people like me can pay $6 and vote for the next Labour leader after Andrew Little. So if someone will tell me who is the most left wing NZLP MP I'll vote for him/her :-). It's a fail safe way for Labour to lose the next election :-)

craic
13-08-2015, 04:51 PM
Do a little bit of world travel - you will soon see that is one of the cleanest greenest counties you will find. If you really want to know what pollution is, try crossing a street in Bankok at rush hour. I can think of a hundred examples but just walking outside Auckland international and taking a deep breath quickly reminds e that I am home to a clean green place.

BlackPeter
13-08-2015, 04:51 PM
I think NZ Labour needs a system like the UK so people like me can pay $6 and vote for the next Labour leader after Andrew Little. So if someone will tell me who is the most left wing NZLP MP I'll vote for him/her :-). It's a fail safe way for Labour to lose the next election :-)

just join a union, Major - and you are in ;)

blackcap
13-08-2015, 05:29 PM
I think NZ Labour needs a system like the UK so people like me can pay $6 and vote for the next Labour leader after Andrew Little. So if someone will tell me who is the most left wing NZLP MP I'll vote for him/her :-). It's a fail safe way for Labour to lose the next election :-)

I think from memory you can go to the Labour party website and join up as a member... about $10 per month or something...or $60pa if you are on plenty.... along those lines. Gives you the right to vote after they changed their system a while back.

https://www.labourparty.org.nz/join

elZorro
13-08-2015, 05:53 PM
MVT, we'd be delighted to have you on board as a VFL member, remember Labour is a party that wants to look like most of NZ. So we welcome diversity..

But don't think Andrew Little is going anywhere, he'll need to stay on until well past 2017, no matter what.

I can't help thinking that if National wanted to hang onto Solid Energy, they could. After all, they'll be making taxes out of those employees, and if they go on the dole they'll be costing taxpayers money. A 5% loan for $300mill is just $15mill a year, and who knows what'll happen to the coal price in future. Compare this to the $885mill on offer to about 50 big tech companies for R&D grants. Or the money ($2bill) IRD will spend on their new software. National is spitting the dummy, if they can't sell off part of Solid Energy for some net cash, they'll have a firesale anyway. It is hard though, to think about what could be done with coal, that's clean and green. Fonterra's still using coal in some of their factories.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/agribusiness/68714710/fonterra-a-large-scale-coal-user

Daytr
13-08-2015, 07:15 PM
Yep I have travelled extensively and I agree NZ is a lot greener than most places, as I said we haven't had as long to stuff it up, but the way we are going we will end up just like them. Too many people for the infrastructure & more clearing of land, more species becoming endangered or extinct.
All I'm saying is lets protect what we have, at the moment we are doing a very poor job at that, in fact in many cases we are endangering what we have and our international 100% pure image. It doesn't really go hand in hand with mining & fossil fuel production strangely enough. You would think a guys who ran sales for a major merchant bank might understand that.


Do a little bit of world travel - you will soon see that is one of the cleanest greenest counties you will find. If you really want to know what pollution is, try crossing a street in Bankok at rush hour. I can think of a hundred examples but just walking outside Auckland international and taking a deep breath quickly reminds e that I am home to a clean green place.

westerly
13-08-2015, 07:43 PM
Ah westerly, just help us to understand what you are saying.

I pointed out that PPTA is bullying Junior teachers who happen to work for charter schools. They are trying to prevent them from completing their requirements for teachers registration just due to them working on schools the PPTA is opposing for purely ideological reasons. Shows that they are not interested in the quality of teaching nor in the well being of students. Ugly union bosses just concerned about their left wing ideology and about getting more power for themselves.

You posted in response an article claiming that a charter school bought an apparently expensive waka for their students. I say apparently because i don't know the going rate for wakas. Maybe the money was a donation given to the school only for this purpose? Who knows, but even if the story is confirmed, do I fail to see why this justifies the PPTA to try to prevent basically all junior teachers starting at charter schools to gain registration with bullying tactics?

Difficult to understand for any right minded person, so I assume you need to be very "left minded" to see the logic behind it. Can you just help us to understand why it is o.k in your view that PPTA is bullying junior teachers to achieve ideological goals?

Ah BP, perhaps if you choose to ignore the up to 4 times funding per student at charter schools compared with what state schools get you can be excused for not seeing why teachers are a little upset.
National throwing money at an ACT policy to keep on side with the extreme right.
Are Charter schools are not capable of training teachers ? The PPTA admit the policy is discriminatory
but bullying? Perhaps the charter school should have advised their new recruit of the policy?
And a waka for teaching navigation If it goes off shore I hope they are wearing life jackets.:)
And if you have to qualify an argument with any right minded person you have lost before you start.
westerly

Daytr
13-08-2015, 07:50 PM
Apparently even the business community has had enough of John Key however it doesn't get any better they want Paula Bennett to replace him! LOL
Paula Bennett! I couldn't believe it! If anyone besides Mike Sabin lost them Northland she was pretty close to being a catalyst. Every time she opened her mouth she got someone offside. I must admit I thought they may go for Crusher. Either way if Key's time is up, so I would suggest is Nationals. I can't stand Key, but he is a leader, but just leading NZ in the wrong direction.

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/politics/survey-urges-national-to-groom-key-replacement/

elZorro
13-08-2015, 08:50 PM
Apparently even the business community has had enough of John Key however it doesn't get any better they want Paula Bennett to replace him! LOL
Paula Bennett! I couldn't believe it! If anyone besides Mike Sabin lost them Northland she was pretty close to being a catalyst. Every time she opened her mouth she got someone offside. I must admit I thought they may go for Crusher. Either way if Key's time is up, so I would suggest is Nationals. I can't stand Key, but he is a leader, but just leading NZ in the wrong direction.

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/politics/survey-urges-national-to-groom-key-replacement/

Daytr, we should talk up Paula Bennett, see how they like it. I find it very hard to see John Key as a leader. He's smart, very quick on the uptake, but how has he used those skills? Mainly to keep Labour in the doldrums, with dirty politics and facile behaviour in the house. I can't think of any useful policy he's behind, I don't really know where he stands on anything, he's the invisible or Clayton's leader.

That's why I quite like Winston's new momentum - if I could be sure he has a bottom line on most things, and I knew he wasn't going to side with Act or National (which would be in complete contrast with his attitudes at the moment), then I reckon a Labour coalition will take the next election. National will be out cooling their heels, and John Key will be looking for a new hobby. Bill will be looking after the farm. NZ will carry on without them, and more than likely, the economy will improve. This will be a real improvement, not one bolstered by immigration.

Daytr
14-08-2015, 08:17 AM
Funny I thought slavery was illegal in NZ, well National with their zero hours contracts were pretty close to re-instigating it. This is a very good reason why you need strong unions. How could anyone imagine that having workers on call at the whim of employers without any guarantee of hours of work wouldn't be abused (well its not abuse I suppose if its allowed) or is some how fair. National are fixing, well partially at least, another one of their ill thought out policies that have come back to smack the in the nose. Its a pity that some workers will have already suffered due to this Victorian style industrial relations policy.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11496840

craic
14-08-2015, 08:39 AM
One on the left - Daytr - says he's a leader but he hates him. Another on the left says he's not a leader "but he keeps Labour in the doldrums" They even claim that the "business community" want Paula Bennet to be leader in place of John Key. Now I know that there are wild flights of fantasy or desperation on that side of the fence but no one has to keep labour in the doldrums it is their natural home recently. They come out sometimes to cut their leaders throat or to speculate on Winston Peters as a possible saviour. "if I could be sure he has a bottom line on most things and knew he wasn't going to side with Act or National" is about as clear a statement as a one-eyed Labour supporter could possibly produce. Would they offer him the leadership - the Prime Ministership? Would they give him all their marbles and other baubles just to get rid of John Key, a leader who has been screwing them at every turn?

Daytr
14-08-2015, 09:11 AM
Ha ha Craic, I don't make the claim, it was a business survey.
Also I'm not a leftie, although I do advocate for what I think is the best from both the left & the right.
I voted for NZF, hardly a left leaning party.
Although compared to the extreme right wing policies of the National party I can see how you could get confused.

BlackPeter
14-08-2015, 09:14 AM
Do a little bit of world travel - you will soon see that is one of the cleanest greenest counties you will find. If you really want to know what pollution is, try crossing a street in Bankok at rush hour. I can think of a hundred examples but just walking outside Auckland international and taking a deep breath quickly reminds e that I am home to a clean green place.

Hi craic,

sure, there are lots of places on this globe which are worse. I have not seen them all, but a good number of them. Agree as well with daytr (not often the case) that our short history and our quite limited population helps. However - if you look at pollution at a per capita level, than NZ does not look that flash in the international statistics - and even in absolute numbers: winter air pollution in some of our cities is getting better, but was still 10 years ago absolutely shocking for a first world country (and still is - ever visited Reefton in winter?). Rubbish production is ridiculously high - I mentioned plastic shopping bags and one way drinking containers before. Pesticide spraying seems to be ingrained into the genes of some locals - me shudders every time if I see some of our neighbours spraying away every weed and insect (using containers with a skull and crossed bones on them) without regard for human and animal life. They often don't even carry masks - so maybe at some stage nature will resolve this problem, but as innocent bystanders we have to inhale as well some of the poison they spread.

Farmers are worse - sometimes it smells on the Canterbury plains like in a chemical factory (and it is difficult to keep breathing when passing the treated fields) - but its just one of the local farmers "treating" their harvest. Just wondering who wants to eat this stuff afterwards, but lucky us, they export ...

I agree - having a stroll outside Auckland International Airport is nice (and much preferable to having a stroll say outside say Bangkok, LA, Chicago, Houston or Beijing International airport), but if this is the only way how you measure our "Green and Cleanliness", than you might be a bit one eyed.

Major von Tempsky
14-08-2015, 09:36 AM
I recall getting back from a 2 week trip to Karachi and stepping onto the Auckland Airport tarmac and breathing in deeply, marveling at the clean, cool, Auckland air. And then ditto at Howick. And now in Christchurch at the clean cool Chch air vs Auckland.

But you still haven't solved my problem of who is the most left wing NZ Lab Party MP so I can vote for them to sabotage Labour.

Oh well, I can default to voting Cunliffe again as leader.

Surprises me that nobody knows who the most left wing Labour MP in NZ is - I would have thought there would be a lemming like rush to emulate Corbyn of the UK by now. Neat little article in The Press today on the totally destabilizing effect all this is having on the UK Labour Party :-)

BlackPeter
14-08-2015, 09:58 AM
I recall getting back from a 2 week trip to Karachi and stepping onto the Auckland Airport tarmac and breathing in deeply, marveling at the clean, cool, Auckland air. And then ditto at Howick. And now in Christchurch at the clean cool Chch air vs Auckland.

But you still haven't solved my problem of who is the most left wing NZ Lab Party MP so I can vote for them to sabotage Labour.

Oh well, I can default to voting Cunliffe again as leader.

Surprises me that nobody knows who the most left wing Labour MP in NZ is - I would have thought there would be a lemming like rush to emulate Corbyn of the UK by now. Neat little article in The Press today on the totally destabilizing effect all this is having on the UK Labour Party :-)

Cunliffe certainly would be a good choice. Not sure, whether he is most left-wing, but he has proven experience in losing votes and elections. However - Labour typically only replaces their leaders during the term if the incumbent might have a real chance to win (remember - they replaced Shearer while his polling results have been in the mid 30'ies with Cunliffe, who ended up in the mid 20'ies. Not sure, whether Little will ever poll as high as Shearer - i.e. there might be no need for Labour to replace Little - he might be highly successful in defending his opposition placement;)

Daytr
14-08-2015, 11:40 AM
MVT, how about the most right wing for National? Or just perhaps Paula Bennett?
What do you think National's chances would be with her as leader?

elZorro
14-08-2015, 05:56 PM
Mood of the Boardroom yesterday, some various opinions, none more positive than the likes of Westpac and Phil O'Reilly. But apparently Grant Robertson did well in the debate with Bill English.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/economy/news/article.cfm?c_id=34&objectid=11496545&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Friday+14+A ugust+2015

I think there is just one phrase with this market-led economy of ours at the moment: Old money will continue to do well. Older farming ventures, farming partnerships, those already in the property sector, established businesses in the right sectors, they'll continue to do well, might even do better than normal. It's the new entrants, the try-hards, they'll be in trouble. As they exit, shedding jobs and capital, the older businesses will hoover up the leftovers and the market share.

Maybe Solid Energy was a try-hard SOE. Bill English finally admits that the National Govt has to take some of the blame for its demise.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/71131637/Finally-the-Government-accepts-Solid-Energy-was-more-than-a-perfect-storm

winner69
15-08-2015, 08:48 AM
EZ, how we going to stop this happening to NZ one day.

Inevitable if we keep borrowing as we do. What's government gone up to when national in power?

Another reason to get out and protest against TPPA today. Corporatracy is evil.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/greece-is-about-to-be-completely-dismantled-and-fed-to-profithungry-corporations-10452068.html

BlackPeter
15-08-2015, 09:07 AM
Outstanding opinion piece in NBR - written by Michael Hooton:

http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/key-goes-all-mccully

I think its currently unbarred, have a try.

The story in a nutshell: Michael Hooton points to the corruption and problems within the National government (not just the sheep saga), but highlights that the ineffective opposition we currently have basically allows National to drop the standards without fear of losing the control.

Meanwhile Labours leadership wannabes are just waiting for the next leadership challenge within their own party instead of focussing on doing a good opposition job. They see no point in supporting Mr. Little (well, I can somehow understand the latter), allowing National to drop the government standards as they please ...

Actually - a frightening article pointing to a broken system, but difficult to wrong.

elZorro
15-08-2015, 11:42 AM
EZ, how we going to stop this happening to NZ one day.

Inevitable if we keep borrowing as we do. What's government gone up to when national in power?

Another reason to get out and protest against TPPA today. Corporatracy is evil.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/greece-is-about-to-be-completely-dismantled-and-fed-to-profithungry-corporations-10452068.html

Yes, I agree, the Greeks must be feeling fairly rough about all this going on. The TPPA protest march in Hamilton is on soon, from 1.00. Trouble is I need to head in the opposite direction to do some maintenance work.. and fishing. The march is only at the north end of town (past the Base), not into the centre. It's a bit barren in the centre of town during the day, anyway.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/waikato-times/news/71080400/hundreds-signed-on-for-tppa-protest-march-in-hamilton

There are more and more headlines about the dairy issue now, including this realistic one:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11497435&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Saturday+15 +August+2015

Note the cash shortfall for an average dairy operation, although I'm unsure why most of them would be paying rent. If it's interest of $232,000 then that's a $3.8mill loan at 6%. Drawings are still in the costs figure too.

Farmers with a basic operation who bought in several years ago or more, will be just fine for quite a while, as they have plenty of equity in the business now, and much lower interest costs.