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

elZorro
10-03-2016, 05:57 PM
You are slighting the name of someone as influencing the government without offering a shred of evidence.

How many National MP and party political hack backgrounds would you need for me to prove my point, FP? National buys votes, that's the truth. They need the cash in their coffers to stay in power. Anyone supplying enough of that cash will probably get what they're after. Candidate nominations, positions on the executive, you name it.

fungus pudding
10-03-2016, 06:02 PM
How many National MP and party political hack backgrounds would you need for me to prove my point, FP? National buys votes, that's the truth. They need the cash in their coffers to stay in power. Anyone supplying enough of that cash will probably get what they're after. Candidate nominations, positions on the executive, you name it.


Conspiracy stuff. An indication of paranoia.

elZorro
10-03-2016, 06:15 PM
Conspiracy stuff. An indication of paranoia.

How many examples? That was the question.

fungus pudding
10-03-2016, 06:53 PM
How many examples? That was the question.


I don't know and I don't care. It was your inference that some family with business interests and one of their lot being involved with the national party has influenced govt. policy. If you are going to make such claims you need to come up with evidence. It's pathetic to say you 'see the hand of the Goodfellow family in this'. It's no more than a dopey conspiracy theory. The paranoid are always looking for these connections, and see them where none exist.

Sgt Pepper
10-03-2016, 07:01 PM
How many examples? That was the question.

EZ
Remember the notorious Cabinet Club revelations in 2014? John Key scuttling for cover. Anyway storm clouds ahead that they will have to encounter

1. Auditor General report into Murray McCully sheepgate scandal
2. The " problems" in the Clutha Electorate. do you sense a by election coming there?
3. Tax cuts?? (boy I bet they regret that promise)
4. Judith Collins .
5. Fresh water negotiations
6 Flag referendum debacle

elZorro
10-03-2016, 07:08 PM
I don't know and I don't care. It was your inference that some family with business interests and one of their lot being involved with the national party has influenced govt. policy. If you are going to make such claims you need to come up with evidence. It's pathetic to say you 'see the hand of the Goodfellow family in this'. It's no more than a dopey conspiracy theory. The paranoid are always looking for these connections, and see them where none exist.

FP, do you mean you don't want me to post anything awkward about National in public? I think National is on the ropes enough already, but maybe it's about time.

You'll note that I repeatedly mentioned that National buys votes. They are the strongest right-wing party, this makes sense when the left-wing parties like Labour and the Greens share the vote on that side. Winston and NZ First of course have the protest vote too. Crosby-Textor have in the past fractured the 'non-National' vote to a greater extent, making it hard for Labour to gain traction again. They'll get there.

But look at this graph of the National % vote nationwide against their spend in the three months leading up to the last few elections. The lowest blue point is when Bill English tried to become PM, and was too conservative for the National Party funders. They left in droves, their vote collapsed that year. This is too tight a correlation to be a coincidence. National has been buying votes, and it was Crosby-Textor who told them how to do it properly.

fungus pudding
10-03-2016, 07:31 PM
FP, do you mean you don't want me to post anything awkward about National in public? I think National is on the ropes enough already, but maybe it's about time.

You'll note that I repeatedly mentioned that National buys votes. They are the strongest right-wing party, this makes sense when the left-wing parties like Labour and the Greens share the vote on that side. Winston and NZ First of course have the protest vote too. Crosby-Textor have in the past fractured the 'non-National' vote to a greater extent, making it hard for Labour to gain traction again.

I don't care what you post about National or anyone else. I just don't think it's on to bad-mouth people as you did with your inferences. Your paranoia is ruling you - be careful. Your constant reference to this advertising agency, Crosby Dexter, that probably no-one but you has ever heard of is an indication.

elZorro
10-03-2016, 08:06 PM
I don't care what you post about National or anyone else. I just don't think it's on to bad-mouth people as you did with your inferences. Your paranoia is ruling you - be careful. Your constant reference to this advertising agency, Crosby Dexter, that probably no-one but you has ever heard of is an indication.

Nothing to do with cattle. Anyway, Crosby-Textor are getting mentioned in the media quite a bit now. Maybe you have your blinkers on.

craic
10-03-2016, 09:39 PM
el Zorro haven't you heard? When you find yourself in a deep hole, the first thing you must do is stop digging! You have been digging for so long you must be almost in China Labour could win an election sometime in the future but not with the crap you keep digging out of your hole. And not with the group of middle aged women dressed as condoms singing for a few curious people.

elZorro
10-03-2016, 09:49 PM
el Zorro haven't you heard? When you find yourself in a deep hole, the first thing you must do is stop digging! You have been digging for so long you must be almost in China Labour could win an election sometime in the future but not with the crap you keep digging out of your hole. And not with the group of middle aged women dressed as condoms singing for a few curious people.

What about the graph, Craic? Interesting, no?

iceman
11-03-2016, 01:35 AM
EZ I really do not see what problem you have with reporting of recreational catch. NZ has one of the better fisheries management systems in the World and it is of paramount importance to its integrity that the scientists and Government have a fair idea on how much fish is taken from the ocean, to ensure sustainable management. Recreational catch is increasing in NZ and needs to be monitored. Contrary to your claims of a big bureaucracy being needed for this, there are apps for smartphones available to do this reporting at the touch of a button.

Your slandering yet again on this thread of the Goodfellow family is preposterous and you should be ashamed of it. Your hatred of the National Party obviously relieves you of your sanities on occasions.

elZorro
11-03-2016, 06:07 AM
EZ I really do not see what problem you have with reporting of recreational catch. NZ has one of the better fisheries management systems in the World and it is of paramount importance to its integrity that the scientists and Government have a fair idea on how much fish is taken from the ocean, to ensure sustainable management. Recreational catch is increasing in NZ and needs to be monitored. Contrary to your claims of a big bureaucracy being needed for this, there are apps for smartphones available to do this reporting at the touch of a button.

Your slandering yet again on this thread of the Goodfellow family is preposterous and you should be ashamed of it. Your hatred of the National Party obviously relieves you of your sanities on occasions.

Maybe I'm just a careful observer, Iceman. It's one thing to be a wealthy and philanthropic entity, but so often there seems to be an underlying message of political power. Why do the Goodfellow family deem it expedient to have one of their number as the President of the National Party? In Hamilton, Bill Gallagher hosted the National electorate of Hamilton West's celebration party on the eve of the 2014 elections, in his new corporate building. Why do these powerful people take every opportunity to let everyone know which way they vote? In business, there's almost always a quid pro quo involved. If they were truly philanthropic, they'd run a mile from choosing political allegiances in public.

craic
11-03-2016, 07:12 AM
Your graph, el Zorro? I have a graph that shows me buying block of shares on Tuesday morning that are now worth $2,000 or more than I paid for them. but it's only a squiggle on paper - it doesn't make me a rampant capitalist -I'm not taking bread from the mouths of the poor - I'm using my wits to look after my own. Graphs mean little they can be stretched in all directions, coloured like rainbows to stress whatever you want them to stress. They're a bit like Labour propaganda. the graph shows the funding increase threefold in about twelve years? Most of that is inflation but it also reflects the satisfied voter who is happy to pay more for better quality. Might be a lesson for Labour here?

elZorro
11-03-2016, 07:29 AM
Your graph, el Zorro? I have a graph that shows me buying block of shares on Tuesday morning that are now worth $2,000 or more than I paid for them. but it's only a squiggle on paper - it doesn't make me a rampant capitalist -I'm not taking bread from the mouths of the poor - I'm using my wits to look after my own. Graphs mean little they can be stretched in all directions, coloured like rainbows to stress whatever you want them to stress. They're a bit like Labour propaganda. the graph shows the funding increase threefold in about twelve years? Most of that is inflation but it also reflects the satisfied voter who is happy to pay more for better quality. Might be a lesson for Labour here?

No, Craic, it simply says that votes can be bought with marketing, advertising, and resulting media exposure. Part of that timeline goes backwards. If National's funding drops, so does their vote in that year. It implies that Labour will need at least as much funding to counteract National in 2017, as both parties have strong branding. The Conservatives and the Internet Party spent heaps in 2014 but didn't do too well, because they don't have widespread brand exposure.

fungus pudding
11-03-2016, 09:11 AM
Maybe I'm just a careful observer, Iceman. It's one thing to be a wealthy and philanthropic entity, but so often there seems to be an underlying message of political power. Why do the Goodfellow family deem it expedient to have one of their number as the President of the National Party? In Hamilton, Bill Gallagher hosted the National electorate of Hamilton West's celebration party on the eve of the 2014 elections, in his new corporate building. Why do these powerful people take every opportunity to let everyone know which way they vote? In business, there's almost always a quid pro quo involved. If they were truly philanthropic, they'd run a mile from choosing political allegiances in public.

It's nothing to get wound up and bitter about. All sorts of people take an interest in politics, and that's a good thing. Naturally any party wants successful people. So take a dose of valium or something and chill out eZ. It's not worth blowing a gasket over who or who doesn't belong to the Greens, NZ first or National. Unless of course you can balance it up with a few sleepless nights over the union blowhards and various failures currently within labour.

craic
11-03-2016, 05:00 PM
A notable feature of fridays is that most posters seem to have a twinge of conscience and spend the day working and seldom post. Or maybe it's looking forward to a visit to a pub?

artemis
11-03-2016, 06:30 PM
EZ
Remember the notorious Cabinet Club revelations in 2014? John Key scuttling for cover. Anyway storm clouds ahead that they will have to encounter

1. Auditor General report into Murray McCully sheepgate scandal
2. The " problems" in the Clutha Electorate. do you sense a by election coming there?
3. Tax cuts?? (boy I bet they regret that promise)
4. Judith Collins .
5. Fresh water negotiations
6 Flag referendum debacle

Most of that is beltway stuff. Maybe it shouldn't be but it is. I get that a good part of the Opposition's job is to oppose but it would be better IMO off choosing issues with more widespread relevance. The TTPA might have been one such, but it needed a clear stand, not a vague flip flop.

Even the Judith Collins issues would not have been understood well by the general voter, but there's a pretty good chance plenty of them prefer her announcements on police, burglary and criminals to those of Kelvin Davis. Opposition politicians would be well advised not to be critical of the police, even if obliquely (eg by supporting criminals, visiting Oz detention centres) as there are rather more law abiding folk here than the other.

fungus pudding
12-03-2016, 01:40 PM
Labour's biggest fright trying to resurrect himself. Parker wants another crack as finance spokesman. Allah forbid. The only upside in that, is that he's another barrier to Labour's return, so I suppose it might be a good thing. Even eZ must be worried about the suggestion of letting a lunatic get his hands on the cheque book.

Sgt Pepper
12-03-2016, 03:17 PM
Labour's biggest fright trying to resurrect himself. Parker wants another crack as finance spokesman. Allah forbid. The only upside in that, is that he's another barrier to Labour's return, so I suppose it might be a good thing. Even eZ must be worried about the suggestion of letting a lunatic get his hands on the cheque book.

FP
You really dislike David Parker. Did he bully you at school?

Sgt Pepper
12-03-2016, 03:26 PM
Most of that is beltway stuff. Maybe it shouldn't be but it is. I get that a good part of the Opposition's job is to oppose but it would be better IMO off choosing issues with more widespread relevance. The TTPA might have been one such, but it needed a clear stand, not a vague flip flop.

Even the Judith Collins issues would not have been understood well by the general voter, but there's a pretty good chance plenty of them prefer her announcements on police, burglary and criminals to those of Kelvin Davis. Opposition politicians would be well advised not to be critical of the police, even if obliquely (eg by supporting criminals, visiting Oz detention centres) as there are rather more law abiding folk here than the other.

Artemis
You make some good points but my response to the issues would be that the compounding toxic effect these could have on National. It is true that sheepgate and the Auditor General investigation are not the topic of conversation of people I associate with. However if , for instance the Auditor General refers her report to the Serious Fraud Office/or Police that would be a serious distraction for any government.
The Flag Referendum
John Key foolishly attached his colours to the mast of this sinking ship. A lack of judgement here
Tax Cuts
Unnecessarily promised ( against the advice of Bill English) last election. Provides ammunition to the Opposition, ( remember Nationals taunting of chewing gum to Labour several years ago

Fresh Water negotiations ( secret) with Iwi. This has the real potential to destroy Nationals chances in 2017. As usual John Key has left the heavy lifting to poor old Bill English again

fungus pudding
12-03-2016, 03:36 PM
FP
You really dislike David Parker. Did he bully you at school?

No. But he came up with some wacky ideas, and have a look at his disastrous track record in the business world. He's got some talent, but it sure as hell isn't in the finance role.

westerly
13-03-2016, 10:59 AM
No. But he came up with some wacky ideas, and have a look at his disastrous track record in the business world. He's got some talent, but it sure as hell isn't in the finance role.

FP some excerpts from recent posts

“That's no more than an absurd conspiracy theory. Unless you can cite evidence it's a fairly low character attack. Doesn't do you or your cause any favours. “

“. Unless of course you can balance it up with a few sleepless nights over the union blowhards and various failures currently within labour. “

“Labour's biggest fright trying to resurrect himself. Parker wants another crack as finance spokesman. Allah forbid. The only upside in that, is that he's another barrier to Labour's return, so I suppose it might be a good thing. Even eZ must be worried about the suggestion of letting a lunatic get his hands on the cheque book. “

You seem to get upset when it is suggested a National Party office holder may have some influence on policy but are quite happy to bad mouth Labour Party politicians at every opportunity.

Intrigued by your obvious dislike of David Parker, I stumbled upon this:
http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/debates/debates/48HansD_20060321_00000712/urgent-debates-%E2%80%94-david-parker%E2%80%94resignation-from-executive
Given the media disposition to rake up any dirt on politicians especially those of the left., it would seem the acceptance by Parliament and the subsequent lack of media interest means Parker spoke the truth.

westerly

elZorro
13-03-2016, 12:01 PM
FP some excerpts from recent posts

“That's no more than an absurd conspiracy theory. Unless you can cite evidence it's a fairly low character attack. Doesn't do you or your cause any favours. “

“. Unless of course you can balance it up with a few sleepless nights over the union blowhards and various failures currently within labour. “

“Labour's biggest fright trying to resurrect himself. Parker wants another crack as finance spokesman. Allah forbid. The only upside in that, is that he's another barrier to Labour's return, so I suppose it might be a good thing. Even eZ must be worried about the suggestion of letting a lunatic get his hands on the cheque book. “

You seem to get upset when it is suggested a National Party office holder may have some influence on policy but are quite happy to bad mouth Labour Party politicians at every opportunity.

Intrigued by your obvious dislike of David Parker, I stumbled upon this:
http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/debates/debates/48HansD_20060321_00000712/urgent-debates-%E2%80%94-david-parker%E2%80%94resignation-from-executive
Given the media disposition to rake up any dirt on politicians especially those of the left., it would seem the acceptance by Parliament and the subsequent lack of media interest means Parker spoke the truth.

westerly

Thanks for digging that up Westerly. After observing FP's posts, I find that generally he responds when there is more than an element of truth about some good aspect on Labour's side, or a poor aspect on National's side. Then he'll just make stuff up to rebalance it, or make difficult-to-prove statements. He's not into posting any data, generally. Why? It always looks bad for National.

fungus pudding
13-03-2016, 01:22 PM
FP some excerpts from recent posts

“That's no more than an absurd conspiracy theory. Unless you can cite evidence it's a fairly low character attack. Doesn't do you or your cause any favours. “

“. Unless of course you can balance it up with a few sleepless nights over the union blowhards and various failures currently within labour. “

“Labour's biggest fright trying to resurrect himself. Parker wants another crack as finance spokesman. Allah forbid. The only upside in that, is that he's another barrier to Labour's return, so I suppose it might be a good thing. Even eZ must be worried about the suggestion of letting a lunatic get his hands on the cheque book. “

You seem to get upset when it is suggested a National Party office holder may have some influence on policy but are quite happy to bad mouth Labour Party politicians at every opportunity.

Intrigued by your obvious dislike of David Parker, I stumbled upon this:
http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/pb/debates/debates/48HansD_20060321_00000712/urgent-debates-%E2%80%94-david-parker%E2%80%94resignation-from-executive
Given the media disposition to rake up any dirt on politicians especially those of the left., it would seem the acceptance by Parliament and the subsequent lack of media interest means Parker spoke the truth.

westerly

I'm not talking about that incident. I was referring to his disastrous record in private industry. Not a man to be in charge of a cheque book.
My comments don't mean I'm upset at all, nor do I have any desire to defend National party office holders. It simply means I dislike inferences based on the thinnest excuse - IOW I dislike conspiracy based character attacks, no matter who they are aimed at.

craic
13-03-2016, 02:38 PM
[QUOTE=elZorro;611388s. He's not into posting any data, generally. Why? It always looks bad for National.[/QUOTE]

What a lot of rubbish. The only meaningful data that exists is that National is in power. That all the evidence points to National remaining in power, that is to say tat they are still the most popular alternative for the next election at a point in the cycle where Labour should be miles ahead in accordance with the reality that the electorate gets tired of the incumbent and changes the government at regular intervals, regardless. John Key would have to throw in the towel, literally, for Labour to win from here, but that won't happen.

Sgt Pepper
13-03-2016, 02:58 PM
I'm not talking about that incident. I was referring to his disastrous record in private industry. Not a man to be in charge of a cheque book.
My comments don't mean I'm upset at all, nor do I have any desire to defend National party office holders. It simply means I dislike inferences based on the thinnest excuse - IOW I dislike conspiracy based character attacks, no matter who they are aimed at.

FP
I assume you may be referring to Russell Hyslop. Of that I am fully aware, as my mother and two aunts were at the sharp end of his bankruptcy

fungus pudding
13-03-2016, 03:49 PM
FP
I assume you may be referring to Russell Hyslop. Of that I am fully aware, as my mother and two aunts were at the sharp end of his bankruptcy

You will hardly be members of the Parker fan club then.

fungus pudding
13-03-2016, 04:15 PM
Thanks for digging that up Westerly. After observing FP's posts, I find that generally he responds when there is more than an element of truth about some good aspect on Labour's side, or a poor aspect on National's side. Then he'll just make stuff up to rebalance it, or make difficult-to-prove statements. He's not into posting any data, generally. Why? It always looks bad for National.

How wrong you are. As I have frequently pointed out I have voted Labour in the past and it may happen again. I am not pro-national, but always use my vote against the party who I think will do most harm. Currently that is Labour and not likely to change in the near future from what I can see. e.g. if in the highly unlikely even t Judith Collins became the leader I would somehow use my vote against National and for the very same reason you should use your vote against Labour while they have a walking wet dream standing as their leader. You won't though - your blinkers are the size usually worn by horses.

elZorro
14-03-2016, 06:45 AM
How wrong you are. As I have frequently pointed out I have voted Labour in the past and it may happen again. I am not pro-national, but always use my vote against the party who I think will do most harm. Currently that is Labour and not likely to change in the near future from what I can see. e.g. if in the highly unlikely even t Judith Collins became the leader I would somehow use my vote against National and for the very same reason you should use your vote against Labour while they have a walking wet dream standing as their leader. You won't though - your blinkers are the size usually worn by horses.

It was at least heartening to see NZ First, Greens and Labour leaders around one table on TV yesterday, talking about the dairying situation and other things regarding the economy. They all think there should be some govt relief to farmers, the opposite view to Bill English and National. I would guess that Bill doesn't have much in the coffers to give.

At least dairy farmers are not entirely alone, the manufacturing sector has shed workers and is back to levels last seen two and a half years ago in terms of confidence.

National has pumped up the dairy sector, ignored SME manufacturing basically, so what do we have left? Sell stuff to each other?

fungus pudding
14-03-2016, 08:18 AM
It was at least heartening to see NZ First, Greens and Labour leaders around one table on TV yesterday, talking about the dairying situation and other things regarding the economy. They all think there should be some govt relief to farmers, the opposite view to Bill English and National.

Don't be so naïve. If English announced some sort of bail-out package they'd all be sitting around the same table decrying every detail of it. So would you.

elZorro
14-03-2016, 04:09 PM
Don't be so naïve. If English announced some sort of bail-out package they'd all be sitting around the same table decrying every detail of it. So would you.

I must admit I thought the positions were a bit backwards. Of course National wasn't going to let the lefties rail about how the Nats only really back the big business end of town. They headed off the argument by stating no giveaways, at least for now.

There's always tourism I suppose, I hear they pay massive wages in that sector because they're all so wealthy.

elZorro
15-03-2016, 05:55 AM
Colin James on the Dairy Situation.

Colin James's Otago Daily Times column for 15 March 2016
Jihadists and cows: two security risks

Is dairy John Key's "Think Big"? Is it "too big to fail"? Is it a security risk?

Take the last first. The New Zealand Herald's Claire Trevett quoted Sir Michael Cullen saying (at the media briefing on his spying report) that he had told Canberra spies, Australians were New Zealand's biggest security risk.

Fruit flies, he explained. Sir Michael's acute, edgy wit usually carries a part-cargo of truth. Fruit flies would seriously damage fruit exports, as foot-and-mouth disease would beef exports. That would shake our economic security.

Put that alongside the threat from Islamic jihadists.

Since 9/11 rich-world politicians have progressively subordinated personal liberties to security from jihadists. Fear flummoxes freedoms. Democracy quavers. Jihadists strut. Al Qaeda notches a point each time you pass through airport security.

Watch Key and Andrew Little adjust that "balance". They might agree there. They don't on cows.

Dairy's plunge chips at economic security. The panic reached the top shelf last week: Fonterra told contractors they must wait 90 days to be paid. Fonterra can do that in effect immoral act with impunity because it is the big guy and contractors are small guys. The power is asymmetrical, similar to that between an employer and employees. (Hence unions, minimum wages, safety laws and bottom-up drives for a living wage and, successfully, to outlaw zero-hours contracts.)

Labour is promising contractors protection from slow payment. Beleaguered dairy farmers are small. Banks are big. Some banks will expropriate some dairy farmers. That number will climb as the crisis lengthens.

Bill English blandly said farmers made business decisions to take out their now crippling loans They and the banks will work it out (and it is in banks' interests to do so). On Sunday English flatly ruled out a bailout.

But would so many farmers have taken such big risks if English and Co had not targeted a doubling of primary exports from 2012 to 2025 and subsidised irrigation to boost cows' contribution?

Even last week, when even optimists were pushing out the date of a break-even payout price, Primary Industries Minister Nathan Guy announced "three new investments totalling $1.6 million into irrigation projects coming from the Ministry for Primary Industries' Acceleration Fund", including the controversial Hawkes Bay Ruataniwha project.

"As a government we are strong supporters of irrigation and water storage and have signalled up to $400 million in total towards irrigation over time." Horticulturalists applauded.

In short, Guy was still saying to farmers: borrow more, long-term prospects are good, here is a subsidy.

More subsidies: ministers have so far refused to price water to farmers or their added pollution of waterways from dense stocking and fertiliser use. If householders also pay higher mortgage rates to offset banks' dairy losses, that is an indirect subsidy.

In the early 1980s Sir Robert Muldoon drove a crash "Think Big" programme of heavy industrialisation centred on energy and metals to cut the economy's dependence on price-strapped primary exports. The crash programme crashed. In the late 1980s Sir Roger Douglas spent $9 billion of taxpayers' money fixing its failures.

There are two risks to the public in grand ventures, whether private or public. If they go bad the whole economy suffers. Tax revenue may be needed to sort the mess, just as for a big natural disaster. That is, some parts of the economy are too big to let die because the cost then is even greater. Americans and Europeans found when their banks crashed in 2008 that they were "too big to fail". (Our version was the Bank of New Zealand's two failures in 1989-90.) Is dairy in that category?

Grant Robertson came close to saying so (though did not quite) last Wednesday: potential dairy farm defaults from "toxic debt" required that “the Government must be an active partner in supporting farmers and the communities around them to get through the tough times and build a sustainable regional economy". Robertson said the dairy plunge had dug an "$8.2 billion hole in the economy". English said on Sunday dairy exports were down $3 billion in the past 12 months.

Tourism, education and high-tech exports and construction have kept the show going. English said "a few billion of losses for the banks is not a threat to financial stability". In effect he was saying dairy is not an issue of economic security.

But in 2015 GDP growth per capita was close to zero. The positive nominal figure was due to record immigration.
And the Reserve Bank last week struck a crisis-low official cash rate and added two possible scenarios which would each warrant another 0.5% of cuts. English would deny dairy is "too big to fail". But another year of flat or falling per capita growth -- plus, maybe, foreign buy-ups of farms -- would fuel feelings of insecurity beside which the spies' jihadist excitements might seem less pressing.

Sir Michael would have a quip for it.

Colin James, mobile 64-21-438 434, landline 64-4-384 7030, PO Box 9494, Marion Square, Wellington 6141, New Zealand ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz (wlmailhtml:{859F7BC3-BC06-49EC-89C0-293E8B5037B7}mid://00000014/!x-usc:mailto:ColinJames@synapsis.co.nz), www.ColinJames.co.nz (wlmailhtml:{859F7BC3-BC06-49EC-89C0-293E8B5037B7}mid://00000014/!x-usc:http://www.colinjames.co.nz/)

craic
15-03-2016, 08:06 AM
A complete transcription of a long article by a writer with whom el Zorro agrees The right will see "elZorro" and ignore it, the Left will be delighted with it but the end result is a complete waste of space.

Major von Tempsky
15-03-2016, 08:25 AM
Hmmm, EZ is back to posting 2 articles in a row. When he gets up to 3 4 or 5 articles in a row as he used to in an attempt to drown out anyone with the temerity to disagree with him, the Moderator needs to step in again.

The reality is (as shown in a poll of Sharetrader before the last election) that the silent majority here is heavily centre/right.

We have a number of very unrepresentative left wingers led by EZ and DayTr who are very vocal and try to drown out everyone else by the number and shrillness of their postings.

elZorro
15-03-2016, 11:15 AM
Hmmm, EZ is back to posting 2 articles in a row. When he gets up to 3 4 or 5 articles in a row as he used to in an attempt to drown out anyone with the temerity to disagree with him, the Moderator needs to step in again.

The reality is (as shown in a poll of Sharetrader before the last election) that the silent majority here is heavily centre/right.

We have a number of very unrepresentative left wingers led by EZ and DayTr who are very vocal and try to drown out everyone else by the number and shrillness of their postings.

How do you know for sure that I'm not one of the new moderators? :)

You guys might be centre/right, but I presume that doesn't preclude reading and comprehension abilities. Concentrate...

fungus pudding
15-03-2016, 11:49 AM
How do you know for sure that I'm not one of the new moderators? :)

You guys might be centre/right, but I presume that doesn't preclude reading and comprehension abilities. Concentrate...

I must admit my comprehension ability is severely tested trying to follow your 'reasoning'.

Sgt Pepper
15-03-2016, 01:48 PM
Hmmm, EZ is back to posting 2 articles in a row. When he gets up to 3 4 or 5 articles in a row as he used to in an attempt to drown out anyone with the temerity to disagree with him, the Moderator needs to step in again.

The reality is (as shown in a poll of Sharetrader before the last election) that the silent majority here is heavily centre/right.

We have a number of very unrepresentative left wingers led by EZ and DayTr who are very vocal and try to drown out everyone else by the number and shrillness of their postings.

I am gutted. I don't get an honourable mention. Sgt Pepper will have to try harder.

Daytr
15-03-2016, 05:27 PM
Not for the first, 2nd or 3rd time you post a quite ridiculous chain of imaginings.
1) If they are the silent majority, how do you know they exist? Its such an over used term when there is no evidence.
However as its a sharetrader thread I am willing to accept that there are probably far more right wingers, not centrists and rightwing as you suggest.
2) I'm not a lefty.
3) Two people try and drown out the majority. Now that is ridiculous. Even if it were true, would you rather it was just a bunch of people who thought alike? A rightwing Glee club if you like. Shudder the thought
4) I'm not a lefty, seems no matter how often I have stated this you assume otherwise. Perhaps anyone tat doesn't agree with you is a lefty.


Hmmm, EZ is back to posting 2 articles in a row. When he gets up to 3 4 or 5 articles in a row as he used to in an attempt to drown out anyone with the temerity to disagree with him, the Moderator needs to step in again.

The reality is (as shown in a poll of Sharetrader before the last election) that the silent majority here is heavily centre/right.

We have a number of very unrepresentative left wingers led by EZ and DayTr who are very vocal and try to drown out everyone else by the number and shrillness of their postings.

westerly
15-03-2016, 05:28 PM
Hmmm, EZ is back to posting 2 articles in a row. When he gets up to 3 4 or 5 articles in a row as he used to in an attempt to drown out anyone with the temerity to disagree with him, the Moderator needs to step in again.

The reality is (as shown in a poll of Sharetrader before the last election) that the silent majority here is heavily centre/right.

We have a number of very unrepresentative left wingers led by EZ and DayTr who are very vocal and try to drown out everyone else by the number and shrillness of their postings.

EZ and Daytr, do you not know your place?
MVT thinks you are letting the left side of politics down by not keeping a low profile He feels let down that you have the temerity to oppose his entirely legitimate view that anyone not agreeing with his political ( and possibly other his views on other subjects) is wrong and should at the very least be horse whipped. He is being very reasonable in asking the Moderator to close you down.

Mind you I tend to agree that James's article only required a link.

westerly

Sgt Pepper
15-03-2016, 06:40 PM
John Keys observation on General Clapper, US Director of National Intelligence, who visited NZ.

"He's obviously got great insights into intelligence "

Yes John, if you are the head of a national intelligence organisation, whether it be the Mossad, MI5, MI6, CIA., I guess a core skill would be great insights into intelligence.

Daytr
15-03-2016, 07:12 PM
Shouldn't it be 'gathering' intelligence rather than just intelligence. Typically the two aren't found in the same place. ;-)

elZorro
16-03-2016, 07:22 AM
Just the one post today I promise, MVT. And I'll link to it.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1603/S00497/dairy-prices-affecting-over-one-fifth-of-nz-smes.htm?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Wednesday+1 6+March+2016

macduffy
16-03-2016, 10:50 AM
Just the one post today I promise, MVT. And I'll link to it.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1603/S00497/dairy-prices-affecting-over-one-fifth-of-nz-smes.htm?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Wednesday+1 6+March+2016

Yes, that's what you get when you elect a National govt! Those pesky Europeans subsidise their farmers to produce more milk! At least, I assume that's the connection to the subject of this thread?

;)

BlackPeter
16-03-2016, 11:13 AM
Just the one post today I promise, MVT. And I'll link to it.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU1603/S00497/dairy-prices-affecting-over-one-fifth-of-nz-smes.htm?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Wednesday+1 6+March+2016

OK, EZ - I understand ... whatever might be bad for NZ - you are indulging in it! Must be a miserable pleasure, but each to their own.

What I don't see is - what alternative would a left wing government (including some Labour component) offer?

Magically increase the milk price? Force the banks to reduce interest rates (as stiff-elbowed Andrew proposed)? Remove any foreign governments which subsidize the milk price? Force the Russians to comply with Western requirements so that we can sell them our milk again? Shift our agricultural production from dairy to love and sell the latter? Print money and distribute that via benefits to everybody?

Just pointing out problems without offering a credible alternative might not be enough ...

craic
16-03-2016, 02:00 PM
Milk is a saleable product like any other and the world demand went through the roof. That was followed by boatloads of investors who borrowed the sun moon and stars to rake in the profit - many had never been near a farm in their lives but there were many more within farming who saw the glitter of gold and converted to the new religion. Now the price has dropped and for some hard line traditional dairy farmers its business as usual and they will continue as they did before, taking the good with the bad. But then we have the droves of investors of various types and levels who were stupid enough to over-extend and now face bankruptcy or some other form of poverty and they expect the Govt./nation/banks to bale them out. Just because milk, farmers,dairy are words that are filled with emotion in NZ does not make them any different than the many businesses that go to the wall every year.

fungus pudding
16-03-2016, 02:28 PM
OK, EZ - I understand ... whatever might be bad for NZ - you are indulging in it! Must be a miserable pleasure, but each to their own.

What I don't see is - what alternative would a left wing government (including some Labour component) offer?


Good lord - don't start him up!

RGR367
16-03-2016, 06:11 PM
Don't worry EZ, Andrew Little heard you http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/andrew-little-takes-dig-at-foreign-chefs-2016031615#axzz42p5BfrPL
Better for Labour Party to merge with NZ First really :ohmy:

elZorro
17-03-2016, 08:30 AM
OK, EZ - I understand ... whatever might be bad for NZ - you are indulging in it! Must be a miserable pleasure, but each to their own.

What I don't see is - what alternative would a left wing government (including some Labour component) offer?

Magically increase the milk price? Force the banks to reduce interest rates (as stiff-elbowed Andrew proposed)? Remove any foreign governments which subsidize the milk price? Force the Russians to comply with Western requirements so that we can sell them our milk again? Shift our agricultural production from dairy to love and sell the latter? Print money and distribute that via benefits to everybody?

Just pointing out problems without offering a credible alternative might not be enough ...

I quite agree, there should be more work done on alternatives. The bank stress tests look OK, except banks also fund most SMEs in the region, backed with property generally. Read the last line in this link.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/77948349/reserve-bank-stress-tests-show-low-future-dairy-payouts-will-cost-banks-billions?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Thursday+17 +March+2016

If I don't go over my imposed word count, my points are that the National Govt lit a fire under dairy growth, they basked in the highs but didn't get a massive amount of tax in to show for it. Now the payout has plunged, they say dairying isn't that important to the economy, but out in the dairy provinces, it certainly is.

There are other uses for land on the scale used for dairying. Goat farming/milking for one. Horticulture, cropping. But my most scathing retort on this government is reserved for the other new businesses they have not helped as well as they should for seven years - the small manufacturers, the niche market people, the growing exporters.

The big guys have been looked after with grants. They've automated, reduced staff counts, then built themselves massive mansions with the profits and leftovers. This occurred because they have lobbyists, and/or they are funders of the National Party machine.

SMEs would take grants and use them carefully, and they'd immediately employ more people, because they are at the growing part of their cycle.

craic
17-03-2016, 09:17 AM
The greatest number of small businesses in this country and most of the western world were retailers. Most retailers are the leftovers of an old economy - the Butcher, The Baker and the Candle Stick maker. I would go to the shoe shop and spend two or three weeks wages on a pair of shoes and next door to the tailor and spend two months wages on a suit of clothes. Now I go to the N01 Shoe Warehouse and spend less than an hours wages on the shoes and the suit? Well, I bought one for my sons wedding fifteen years ago and I think I still have it. The message is simple - if you happen to be a small businessman, like el Zorro, and you are being swept down the gutter by progress - find another way of making a living - don't expect the taxpayer, through the government, to bail you out.

BlackPeter
17-03-2016, 11:32 AM
Don't worry EZ, Andrew Little heard you http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/andrew-little-takes-dig-at-foreign-chefs-2016031615#axzz42p5BfrPL
Better for Labour Party to merge with NZ First really :ohmy:

Merger? ... not so sure. Maybe Little is just looking for a new challenge? I hear Winston won't be around for ever, maybe Little just wants to demonstrate his interest and qualifications in running the populist party, given the doubts about him staying around as Labour leader? Just remember: Shearer got fired for bad poll ratings ... and this was when Labour polled in the mid 30'ies :scared:.

BlackPeter
17-03-2016, 11:44 AM
...

There are other uses for land on the scale used for dairying. Goat farming/milking for one. Horticulture, cropping. But my most scathing retort on this government is reserved for the other new businesses they have not helped as well as they should for seven years - the small manufacturers, the niche market people, the growing exporters.

The big guys have been looked after with grants. They've automated, reduced staff counts, then built themselves massive mansions with the profits and leftovers. This occurred because they have lobbyists, and/or they are funders of the National Party machine.

SMEs would take grants and use them carefully, and they'd immediately employ more people, because they are at the growing part of their cycle.

Agree that diversification would be a good thing - for the environment as well as to mitigate the economical risk.

Agree as well that the grant system (old boyz picking "winners") does not work. However - not sure, whether I have seen so far any evidence that SME's would do better when pampered with tax payer money as you seem to imply. Plenty examples for small enterprises nurtured by taxpayer grants and than just sold out overseas.

What we need is a level playing field for everybody in a low tax environment. No grants but lower taxes. We don't need inefficient bureaucrats wasting tax payer money to run lolly scrambles (no matter who is targeted). If everybody pays low taxes, there is no need for an expensive and inefficient wealth redistribution system (aka lolly lottery ...).

elZorro
17-03-2016, 12:59 PM
Just to be clear, I'm talking about 50% grants for some R&D, or a lot less as a tax break, but distributed primarily to SMEs, and not just big business. This is not a bailout as Craic implies, it's an incentive for smart business practices. These incentives are there right now, but the hurdle for them at MBIE is set ridiculously high, a National Party tactic.

fungus pudding
17-03-2016, 01:35 PM
Merger? ... not so sure. Maybe Little is just looking for a new challenge? I hear Winston won't be around for ever, maybe Little just wants to demonstrate his interest and qualifications in running the populist party, given the doubts about him staying around as Labour leader? Just remember: Shearer got fired for bad poll ratings ... and this was when Labour polled in the mid 30'ies :scared:.

To replace Little right now would be disastrous, but so is leaving him there. It must have the party dizzy from running around in circles over what to do. Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little -a 5th would look bad, but they have not really got aa choice. To leave Little there means certain defeat, so they might as well take a deep breath and at least have a go with a new leader. Unless they're planning to lose the 2017 election and then put Stuart Nash in the hot seat. He's probably the next to have a turn.

Sgt Pepper
17-03-2016, 02:47 PM
To replace Little right now would be disastrous, but so is leaving him there. It must have the party dizzy from running around in circles over what to do. Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little -a 5th would look bad, but they have not really got aa choice. To leave Little there means certain defeat, so they might as well take a deep breath and at least have a go with a new leader. Unless they're planning to lose the 2017 election and then put Stuart Nash in the hot seat. He's probably the next to have a turn.

I would suggest that this National government has some very rough weather that the good ship John Key is about to sail into. Having 20% of dairy farmers walking away is one thing, 8% interest rates hammering the married and over mortgaged in Auckland is quite another. John Key? I give him two years ..tops

fungus pudding
17-03-2016, 03:08 PM
I would suggest that this National government has some very rough weather that the good ship John Key is about to sail into. Having 20% of dairy farmers walking away is one thing, 8% interest rates hammering the married and over mortgaged in Auckland is quite another. John Key? I give him two years ..tops

True that it's almost an unwritten law that 3 terms is the maximum for a government. Holyoake was the exception. This time could break the mould though given MMP and the popularity of Key and National well into their third term. Labour has failed to appoint an electable leader so far, and so is unlikely to pull in enough votes to form a 2 party coalition. The Greens are their only real potential partner but their relative strength would play havoc with any pre-election policies Labour announce. Winston first would be most unlikely to join a coalition with the Greens in it unless of course he was appointed Prime Minister. Things don't look bright for Labour at all. Whatever you give Key - he will certainly survive longer than Little.

Daytr
17-03-2016, 05:22 PM
Nationals key seats are in the provinces. Labour / Greens are in mostly Auckland & Wellington.
With farmers walking off farms, there could be a massive swing away from National.
National openly encouraged intensification and as late as last year Key & others were saying there was room for more dairy!
Landcorp has seen many dairy conversions.
It's now not only going to cause an economic crisis in NZs largest export sector it's causing all sorts or environmental issues as well in regards river health and irrigation. Another thing National want more of!
This government has no respect for the environment they just want to see how best they can exploit it.

Daytr
17-03-2016, 05:24 PM
They need to replace him now, short & simple.
His attempt to engage people on immigration was weak at best.
Its an easy target and he blew it & was straight away on the defensive.
So I disagree it would be a disaster to ditch him, as the ratings can hardly get much worse for a leader of a major party as preferred PM etc.


To replace Little right now would be disastrous, but so is leaving him there. It must have the party dizzy from running around in circles over what to do. Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, Little -a 5th would look bad, but they have not really got aa choice. To leave Little there means certain defeat, so they might as well take a deep breath and at least have a go with a new leader. Unless they're planning to lose the 2017 election and then put Stuart Nash in the hot seat. He's probably the next to have a turn.

elZorro
17-03-2016, 07:17 PM
They need to replace him now, short & simple.
His attempt to engage people on immigration was weak at best.
Its an easy target and he blew it & was straight away on the defensive.
So I disagree it would be a disaster to ditch him, as the ratings can hardly get much worse for a leader of a major party as preferred PM etc.

Daytr, mate, you need to filter out the RW press a bit. They obviously made up most of that Chinese chef story, by clipping words out here and there. Here's the good oil.

http://www.labour.org.nz/andrew_little_responds

fungus pudding
17-03-2016, 07:30 PM
Daytr, mate, you need to filter out the RW press a bit. They obviously made up most of that Chinese chef story, by clipping words out here and there. Here's the good oil.

http://www.labour.org.nz/andrew_little_responds

Tell me, who was the voice on zb newstalk zb making various comments and then denying he made them? Brilliant imposter - even allowed himself to be introduced as Andrew Little. Had Hosking fooled and even Barry Soper and Larry Williams when they replayed it.
Even fooled me - I could have sworn it was Little - putting his foot right in it.

elZorro
17-03-2016, 08:05 PM
Tell me, who was the voice on zb newstalk zb making various comments and then denying he made them? Brilliant imposter - even allowed himself to be introduced as Andrew Little. Had Hosking fooled and even Barry Soper and Larry Williams when they replayed it.
Even fooled me - I could have sworn it was Little - putting his foot right in it.

I pinched these words. Good ones.


The thought that the Key Government is going to collapse under the weight of its own bull**** is driving Key and his acolytes to personal attacks on a man on whom they can find no dirt. It’s driving them nuts that he is succeeding where Goff, Shearer and Cunliffe could not.

fungus pudding
17-03-2016, 08:14 PM
I pinched these words. Good ones.

So tell us. Break the suspense - who will replace Little, and will the replacement have enough time to make a bit of noise before the 2017 election?
I'm picking it will be Nash - should I bet on that? Any tips?

elZorro
17-03-2016, 08:26 PM
So tell us. Break the suspense - who will replace Little, and will the replacement have enough time to make a bit of noise before the 2017 election?
I'm picking it will be Nash - should I bet on that? Any tips?

FP, I think you're part of the first sentence of that quote. Andrew Little's quite a bit bigger than John Key, he probably knows how to hammer a nail into a hoarding, he hasn't been caught out lying hundreds of times, for lots of reasons he'll be staying around.

fungus pudding
17-03-2016, 08:34 PM
FP, I think you're part of the first sentence of that quote. Andrew Little's quite a bit bigger than John Key, he probably knows how to hammer a nail into a hoarding, he hasn't been caught out lying hundreds of times, for lots of reasons he'll be staying around.

Good. I just wondered if he was lined up for the chop yet. But if you say he isn't - who am I to think he is! I accept that he may have a talent for banging in nails, as for the rest of these 'lots of reasons', I suspect the main one is they are trying to find a way to slot in a replacement without the normal humiliating public bun-fight. Should I bet on that?

Major von Tempsky
17-03-2016, 08:51 PM
This amazing devotion to Andrew Little....did I not see it before for Cunliffe, and Shearer, and Goff and....and.

And these tedious Soviet style comparisons to John Key...that Key always has to be inferior to the current left wing leader....despite polls repeatedly showing most of the electorate thinks it's the other way round by a very large margin.....is EZ really in touch with reality.....

Daytr
17-03-2016, 08:55 PM
Why did he even use chefs as an example? Its a terrible one.
The obvious point to make that National's economic policy is a one trick pony. Immigration.
Without it where would the growth rate be?
They are poor money managers and have no broad economic plan for NZ other than exploitation of resources & building more roads.
Its 1970s or Muldoon type economics & its not sustainable.
Either way Ez, Little ended up being on defence rather than attack.
Sorry mate he's a lame duck as a leader no matter how honest or nice he might be.


Daytr, mate, you need to filter out the RW press a bit. They obviously made up most of that Chinese chef story, by clipping words out here and there. Here's the good oil.

http://www.labour.org.nz/andrew_little_responds

iceman
17-03-2016, 08:58 PM
FP one has to feel sorry for Little flapping about expediating his downward spiral to an obvious early termination of the Labour Leadership. They just can not get any hits against this Government and popular PM.
Meanwhile the economy just keeps on humming along despite the opposition (and EZ) claims to the contrary and the obvious difficulty for dairy. Lates numbers out show:
Service industries up 2.4% over a year ago
retail trade and accomodation up 5.5%
professional,scientific, technical up 4.3%
construction up 2.4%

And all Little and Labour can come up with is to attack the Chinese yet again, this time they single out Chefs. Very smart politics !!! They are doomed for yet another failure with their current Leader

Sgt Pepper
17-03-2016, 10:19 PM
FP one has to feel sorry for Little flapping about expediating his downward spiral to an obvious early termination of the Labour Leadership. They just can not get any hits against this Government and popular PM.
Meanwhile the economy just keeps on humming along despite the opposition (and EZ) claims to the contrary and the obvious difficulty for dairy. Lates numbers out show:
Service industries up 2.4% over a year ago
retail trade and accomodation up 5.5%
professional,scientific, technical up 4.3%
construction up 2.4%

And all Little and Labour can come up with is to attack the Chinese yet again, this time they single out Chefs. Very smart politics !!! They are doomed for yet another failure with their current Leader

I am intrigued that so many of John Keys admirers seem to have forgotten the promise of tax cuts made prior to 2014 election. Whenever I raise the issue its conveniently ignored. So

Are they affordable?
When will they be offered?
Do you believe they regret making the promise?

iceman
17-03-2016, 11:34 PM
Hi Sgt Pepper.
Did they actually "promise" a tax cut ? Was it not always "subject to conditions" ?
I think the Government could possibly afford a small tax cut if they so chose, but it is all about priorities. I for example don't think we can afford the current WFF system or keeping Super at 65, but we do. Neither do I think a tax cut should be a high priority at this point in time, although I do note we've had a small "tax cut" in the form of ACC levies recently.


I am intrigued that so many of John Keys admirers seem to have forgotten the promise of tax cuts made prior to 2014 election. Whenever I raise the issue its conveniently ignored. So

Are they affordable?
When will they be offered?
Do you believe they regret making the promise?

Daytr
18-03-2016, 06:21 AM
Hey Iceman, what's the agricultural sector up by in the last year?
How about oil and gas?

Both are sectors that the government has injected a huge resources into.
The others besides roading not so much and immigration at full tilt, not so much.

I saw on the telly the other day that they are trying to plan for another 1M people Auckland by 2040.
That should translate to an additional 2M people at least nationwide.
Great! We can't cater for the number of people coming in now.
And who decided that we need a much bigger population ?
Where was that in National's policy.
One of the great things about NZ is that it isn't over populated.
Our record of planning to date is diabolical, is it suddenly going to get better?
This government already shows scant regard for the environment, what will it like when there is more stress on resources?


FP one has to feel sorry for Little flapping about expediating his downward spiral to an obvious early termination of the Labour Leadership. They just can not get any hits against this Government and popular PM.
Meanwhile the economy just keeps on humming along despite the opposition (and EZ) claims to the contrary and the obvious difficulty for dairy. Lates numbers out show:
Service industries up 2.4% over a year ago
retail trade and accomodation up 5.5%
professional,scientific, technical up 4.3%
construction up 2.4%

And all Little and Labour can come up with is to attack the Chinese yet again, this time they single out Chefs. Very smart politics !!! They are doomed for yet another failure with their current Leader

westerly
18-03-2016, 09:37 AM
I am intrigued that so many of John Keys admirers seem to have forgotten the promise of tax cuts made prior to 2014 election. Whenever I raise the issue its conveniently ignored. So

Are they affordable?
When will they be offered?
Do you believe they regret making the promise?



Something is wrong. A political party whose economic policy is the promotion of cows immigration, and tourism, lead by a man who swaps kiwis and steak knives for pandas, and is a flagging in the flag change and is despite all logic, still popular. Well with 40% but I suppose the good side of that is 60% don't want him. Household debt is higher now than before the GFC, Govt debt is high and the inevitable downturn is not that far away. Flags and pandas to distract while a right wing media use every opportunity to attack the opposition.
Looks as though Labour will have to comeback and sort out the economic mess left by National and it's predecessors as they did in 1935,1957,1987, and 20?

westerly

craic
18-03-2016, 11:14 AM
The polluted rivers bit is about to be sorted by the introduction of Egyptian Dung Beetles who will roll up all the cow dung into little balls and bury it in holes in the ground. Maybe the Labour Party could do the same with some of their droppings?

Daytr
18-03-2016, 02:14 PM
Sounds as well thought out as introducing rabbits, possums or planting gorse.


The polluted rivers bit is about to be sorted by the introduction of Egyptian Dung Beetles who will roll up all the cow dung into little balls and bury it in holes in the ground. Maybe the Labour Party could do the same with some of their droppings?

elZorro
18-03-2016, 05:06 PM
The polluted rivers bit is about to be sorted by the introduction of Egyptian Dung Beetles who will roll up all the cow dung into little balls and bury it in holes in the ground. Maybe the Labour Party could do the same with some of their droppings?

Will the dung beetles sort out the multiple point source pollution from cattle urinating? I wonder. The dung beetles are a good idea though, especially in paddocks with low worm populations.

iceman
19-03-2016, 01:26 AM
Hi Daytr. No I don't have the numbers for agriculture nor oil & gas, despite searching for them. But I think we all know that dairy is going through a very tough time due to fall in international milk prices, ditto oil & gas. I believe dairy exports dropped $3B last year, but despite that overall exports increased by $2.9B. That shows how resilient our economy is. Agriculture/forestry/horticulture are overall doing OK though. Areas like BOP, Hawkes Bay, Nelson/Tasman which rely heavily on primary industries such as horticulture, wine exports, forestry and fishing are doing well. I find it extraordinary how you, EZ and those opposed to John Key go to great lengths to point out anything that is negative or difficult in our economy and country, without ever acknowledging that NZ is humming along quite nicely compared to most other countries in the World. Do you blame Key for fall in oil and milk prices ????? What do you mean by Government having injected huge resources into agriculture and O&G ? Haven't they simply just facilitated good private investment into those and other industries, like good Governments should ?
It is for this very negative attitude that the opposition can not gain any ground for over 7 years now, with one loser after another leading the Labour Party. With this attitude you have no hope of unseating Key at the next election. Pls keep it going


Hey Iceman, what's the agricultural sector up by in the last year?
How about oil and gas?

Both are sectors that the government has injected a huge resources into.
The others besides roading not so much and immigration at full tilt, not so much.

I saw on the telly the other day that they are trying to plan for another 1M people Auckland by 2040.
That should translate to an additional 2M people at least nationwide.
Great! We can't cater for the number of people coming in now.
And who decided that we need a much bigger population ?
Where was that in National's policy.
One of the great things about NZ is that it isn't over populated.
Our record of planning to date is diabolical, is it suddenly going to get better?
This government already shows scant regard for the environment, what will it like when there is more stress on resources?

craic
19-03-2016, 09:12 AM
Will the dung beetles sort out the multiple point source pollution from cattle urinating? I wonder. The dung beetles are a good idea though, especially in pa ddocks with low worm populations.

Robert the Bruce was inspired by a spider, Try, try, try gain. Maybe the labour party couldbe inspired by a dung beetle. If at first you don't succeed, try rolling it into a ball and burying it and try again

iceman
20-03-2016, 03:09 AM
Got this from Brian Gaynor for you Daytr. He also points out that a big contributor to current NZ population growth is the fact that under John Key the exodus of Kiwis going to Australia, net loss of 64k in 2007/2008 for example, has stopped:

"The main movements by industry in the December 2015 quarter were:

• Construction activity increased by 2.5 per cent compared with the September quarter.

• Retail trade and accommodation was up 1.7 per cent. This was due to increased activity in accommodation, furniture, electrical and hardware retailing, and food and beverage services.

• Business services expanded by 1.5 per cent due to growth in advertising, market research and management services.

• Agriculture was down 1.7 per cent because of the decrease in sheep and beef production.

The December 2015 quarter GDP figures show that the New Zealand economy ended the year on a strong note but the dairy sector downturn is expected to have some impact in the quarters ahead.

Nevertheless, the Reserve Bank is forecasting positive economic growth for every quarter in 2016, 2017 and 2018 with the March 2016 quarter projected to grow by 0.7 per cent, the next two quarters by 0.8 per cent each and the December 2016 quarter by 0.7 per cent.

The other important economic statistic this week was the country's balance of payments or current account, which measures all of New Zealand's international receipts and payments.

New Zealand has traditionally had a current account deficit but the good news is that the annual deficit has fallen from nearly $15 billion in 2008 to under $7 billion in the latest calendar year. Any current account deficit in excess of 5 per cent of GDP is considered to be a problem and the country's current account to GDP radio was nearly 8 per cent in 2008."

winner69
20-03-2016, 07:52 AM
From UK - Labour ahead in polls. Tories in disarray

Some guy said ' EVERY Labour MP should now UNITE to fight this vile Tory govt'

Latest polls in NZ shows Nats down - and greens/labour closing the gap

The world is gradually turning against the (choose your own description) gifts that have had there day.

Sad but can't see Labour uniting behind Little - maybe the disenchanted could unite behind Shaw.

Sgt Pepper
20-03-2016, 12:33 PM
I have just read that the announcement of the appointment of the next Governor General will be made by the government at the end of next month. There is speculation that Jenny Shipley is in contention
GOOD GRIEF!!!!! If John Key is seriously thinking of appointing her than common sense has deserted him

She was a lousy Prime Minister, pompous and arrogant. I dare say many who had shares in Mainzeal wont be enthusiastic either

777
20-03-2016, 12:36 PM
I have just read that the announcement of the appointment of the next Governor General will be made by the government at the end of next month. There is speculation that Jenny Shipley is in contention
GOOD GRIEF!!!!! If John Key is seriously thinking of appointing her than common sense has deserted him

She was a lousy Prime Minister, pompous and arrogant.

As was the next female Prime Minister.

fungus pudding
20-03-2016, 12:49 PM
She was a lousy Prime Minister, pompous and arrogant.

Sounds perfect for a Governor General.

craic
21-03-2016, 02:04 PM
Any truth in the rumour that all the left-wing posters have been sent to North Korea for a training course? Or maybe they are all out buying the new flag?

fungus pudding
21-03-2016, 02:14 PM
Any truth in the rumour that all the left-wing posters have been sent to North Korea for a training course? Or maybe they are all out buying the new flag?

They're all in a state of shock cos it's dawned on them that Labour, Greens and NZ First together outnumber National in the latest poll - but to get Winston first in coalition would mean they'd have to let him be the Prime Minister. :scared: How would you feel!
And one of his tosspots as Minister of Finance.

craic
21-03-2016, 02:35 PM
Be interesting to see how he jumps on the case the Maoris are taking against the crown over fisheries. If he takes the Crown side on his principal that we are all equal ( One NZ) then he will be drummed out of the North by the Maoris and if he jumps the other way, all the bridges in hell won't save him.

westerly
21-03-2016, 03:36 PM
Any truth in the rumour that all the left-wing posters have been sent to North Korea for a training course? Or maybe they are all out buying the new flag?

Possibly as much truth as is in the rumour that because they had to fly through New York to reach anywhere near Pyongyang, they were captured by Trump supporters at JFK airport. Then forced to attend a Right wing brainwashing seminar on how to lobby for lower taxes, anti union actions and no social welfare. They were pleasantly surprised to meet several National Party activists who were attending the same seminar.

westerly

neopoleII
21-03-2016, 07:19 PM
if labour can pull this off
Labour considers 'universal basic income' policy
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11609094
i will defiantly vote for them
a free $11k each for the missus and me
that is surely a big vote changer.
the things we can buy with this money on top of our salaries is mind boggling.
first thing is more property.

Daytr
21-03-2016, 07:29 PM
Iceman, you only pointed out positives when there were some obvious massive negatives, I raised dairy & oil & gas to give some balance.
Exports did rise, however mostly as a result of a weakening dollar which was off around 15 to 20%, where as exports were up around 6%.
Investment in oil and gas exploration in recent years has hardly proven to be good investment.
Neither has the intensification of the dairy sector. NZ has gone from one of the cheaper to one of the more expensive producers of dairy exporters in the world. Hardly a sound business case.
Construction is being fuelled by two things. Record immigration and roads funded by yours truly.
Yes Kiwis are coming home and less are leaving, all the more reason to turn down the level of foreign immigration.
However the government can't afford to as it is the main thing under pinning their one trick pony economic plan.

Daytr
21-03-2016, 07:31 PM
Really! You are comparing a 3 term prime minister with one who got there by knifing her leader in the back when he was overseas and she was never elected.


As was the next female Prime Minister.

Daytr
21-03-2016, 07:32 PM
Not that I'm a lefty, but I was actually thinking of joining Obama in Cuba instead.
Sounds like much more fun.


Any truth in the rumour that all the left-wing posters have been sent to North Korea for a training course? Or maybe they are all out buying the new flag?

BlackPeter
22-03-2016, 08:15 AM
if labour can pull this off
Labour considers 'universal basic income' policy
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11609094
i will defiantly vote for them
a free $11k each for the missus and me
that is surely a big vote changer.
the things we can buy with this money on top of our salaries is mind boggling.
first thing is more property.

Where do you think the additional money would come from? Sure - they might print some of it (devaluing our dollar that way), but don't forget that they might need to "slightly" adjust your income tax before you get these "free" 11 k (or whatever).

The only who might win are the non performers and the bureaucrats - everybody else will need to pay for this policy.

Remember the days of the super surcharge? This one, if implemented will be worse.

Remember - there is no such thing as a free lunch.

777
22-03-2016, 08:30 AM
Really! You are comparing a 3 term prime minister with one who got there by knifing her leader in the back when he was overseas and she was never elected.

How each attained office was not relevant. It was whether she was a lousy Prime Minister, pompous and arrogant.

fungus pudding
22-03-2016, 08:32 AM
if labour can pull this off
Labour considers 'universal basic income' policy
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11609094
i will defiantly vote for them
a free $11k each for the missus and me
that is surely a big vote changer.
the things we can buy with this money on top of our salaries is mind boggling.
first thing is more property.

It's not designed to give you more money if you are on a reasonable income. There's various versions of this idea that have been around for decades, although I don't think it's ever been implemented. (Finland are running a trial in the near future) But income tax will rise - a common suggestion is to a flat rate of around 30% The tax free money offsets the higher tax to many tax payers. It is just a redistribution - but replaces sickness benefits, unemployment benefits, superannuation payments, wwf etc. Whether you think it's a good idea or a bad one is irrelevant, because it won't happen. At least Labour, bless their socks, have introduced something that can be debated. No harm in that (except to Labour).

craic
22-03-2016, 08:59 AM
A radio reporter yesterday quoted a cost of Xbillions, which is exactly double the present welfare bill. It applies to those over the age of eighteen if implemented and is as likelyto be implemented as any of the other forms of communism.

fungus pudding
22-03-2016, 09:08 AM
A radio reporter yesterday quoted a cost of Xbillions, which is exactly double the present welfare bill. It applies to those over the age of eighteen if implemented and is as likelyto be implemented as any of the other forms of communism.

It won't be double the cost. Remember it replaces a hell of a lot of current welfare and superannuation payments. However it will cost a fair amount more and it will come from tax increases from every single person earning any amount above the tax free universal benefit. Actually on 2cnd thoughts it won't cost more because it's a dead duck before it can even quack.

blackcap
22-03-2016, 09:09 AM
A radio reporter yesterday quoted a cost of Xbillions, which is exactly double the present welfare bill. It applies to those over the age of eighteen if implemented and is as likelyto be implemented as any of the other forms of communism.

I think under a universal income system every man and woman over 18 gets this $200 per week, regardless of income or whether you work or not. So you can work on top of this benefit without being penalised. In theory it may be a good idea... disincentives to get back to work are gone, it simplifies all other welfare but ultimately the top earners will be subsidising this via tax and the whole tax structure will have to be re-written.

Sgt Pepper
22-03-2016, 01:14 PM
It won't be double the cost. Remember it replaces a hell of a lot of current welfare and superannuation payments. However it will cost a fair amount more and it will come from tax increases from every single person earning any amount above the tax free universal benefit. Actually on 2cnd thoughts it won't cost more because it's a dead duck before it can even quack.

Why would any government change? The basic system is

Middle and upper income wage and salary earners = pay the bills

Earn under 50k with kids = no tax

High net worth + income producing assets = no tax

craic
22-03-2016, 02:45 PM
It won't be double the cost. Remember it replaces a hell of a lot of current welfare and superannuation payments. However it will cost a fair amount more and it will come from tax increases from every single person earning any amount above the tax free universal benefit. Actually on 2cnd thoughts it won't cost more because it's a dead duck before it can even quack.
The figures given were for the actual cost of paying everyone over the age of eighteen, $200 per week and the current cost of the entire welfare budget. The figure for the new system is approx. double the old. And savings on superannuation? My wife and I would receive $300+ less than we are getting now, per fortnight. We could survive but the majority of pensioners could not and the no politician could survive the blast.

fungus pudding
22-03-2016, 03:01 PM
The figures given were for the actual cost of paying everyone over the age of eighteen, $200 per week and the current cost of the entire welfare budget. The figure for the new system is approx. double the old. And savings on superannuation? My wife and I would receive $300+ less than we are getting now, per fortnight. We could survive but the majority of pensioners could not and the no politician could survive the blast.

They're obviously working on a figure more like 18k. The majority of people will repay the xxk in tax plus what they are paying now plus a bit more - but Robinson has since announced it won't be accompanied with a flat tax package, so it's hard to know how he sees it working. Doesn't matter. It won't fly. No country has got it off the ground yet even though it's fashionable chat throughout Europe. I suspect they'll all be watching the Finnish experiment.

Daytr
22-03-2016, 06:41 PM
Well the fact that Shipley was never elected says something.
Clarke lowered the national debt, had a series of surpluses.
Was a three term prime minister and the first woman pm elected In NZ.
Very well respected internationally and still is.
Razor sharp intellect.
I could go on.
But you think she was a lousy PM & I suppose that's all that counts. Lol


How each attained office was not relevant. It was whether she was a lousy Prime Minister, pompous and arrogant.

777
22-03-2016, 07:11 PM
if you are such a believer in her ,how come you can't even spell her name correctly.

neopoleII
22-03-2016, 07:15 PM
so anyway.......
my last post was tongue in check, but i'm glad it sparked a conversation.
i do realize that the net winners will be those that do not, want to, or cant work.
and the net losers will be those that work smarter,harder, or have risked or invested more into themselves.
this "new" scheme is just another way of making wealth distribution more palatable to the sheepole masses.
for everyone to get 11k free...... someone has to pay......... and the question is who pays and how much and at what level?
what with gst in play now.... how high will the tax rate go on someone like a doctor, dentist, builder, lawyer, etc... 40% 50%?
the left always said the "trickle down" system doest work.
what will the "trickle up" tax take do to the economy to pay for 11k for every one?
the sad fact is..... like through the last 2000 years...... you have to work to pay your way.
there is nothing free.
in modern times we have a political system to make sure that those who fall through the cracks get looked after....... that is fair.
what is unfair is those "in increasing numbers" who create gaps and sit in them and collect tax payer money.
and the political parties who exploit those who seek the gaps.
and even more sad...... the left and right wing are doing this.

macduffy
22-03-2016, 07:28 PM
i will defiantly vote for them

"Defiantly" or "Definitely", neopole?

Or, perhaps, both?

;)

Daytr
22-03-2016, 07:29 PM
As far as I'm aware a UBI was a concept in relation to the acceleration of automation and that many jobs that exist now won't in the medium term.
There are many functions or jobs that could be performed now that we don't value, particularly in the area of the environment.
We have massive issues around pest control be it flora or fauna, beach erosion, thousands of tons of rubbish along our roads.
There are also a number of health care related roles particularly helping with the elderly and disabled and special needs.
Fund those jobs before giving out money for nothing.

elZorro
23-03-2016, 06:10 AM
As far as I'm aware a UBI was a concept in relation to the acceleration of automation and that many jobs that exist now won't in the medium term.
There are many functions or jobs that could be performed now that we don't value, particularly in the area of the environment.
We have massive issues around pest control be it flora or fauna, beach erosion, thousands of tons of rubbish along our roads.
There are also a number of health care related roles particularly helping with the elderly and disabled and special needs.
Fund those jobs before giving out money for nothing.

I agree, Daytr. Those job schemes in the 80s were an interesting way of tackling unemployment.

An aside: Meridian capitulates to NZAS on the terms of the contract, and may yet be able to pass on reduced transmission costs to the smelter. One seventh of our power use to one customer, if they drop out Huntly's older units go, along with our backup power. Then a combination of electricity suppliers would need to spend billions on new power stations somewhere, if we ever get the economy going again. http://www.nzresources.com/attachments/8388/MeridianNZAS.pdf

Daytr
23-03-2016, 06:21 AM
I see Key has back flipped in regards the taxpayer paying his legal bills & settlement in the defamation case he lost.
Its not the first time he's done a back flip by any means, but its probably one of his quickest.
What was he thinking! Absolute PR disaster.
He really seems to be losing the plot.

fungus pudding
23-03-2016, 07:12 AM
I see Key has back flipped in regards the taxpayer paying his legal bills & settlement in the defamation case he lost.
Its not the first time he's done a back flip by any means, but its probably one of his quickest.
What was he thinking! Absolute PR disaster.
He really seems to be losing the plot.

I don't think so. It's because that's the parliamentary ruling.

elZorro
23-03-2016, 07:35 AM
I see Key has back flipped in regards the taxpayer paying his legal bills & settlement in the defamation case he lost.
Its not the first time he's done a back flip by any means, but its probably one of his quickest.
What was he thinking! Absolute PR disaster.
He really seems to be losing the plot.

I think JK needs to get some more media training, listen to some more focus groups, pay for some more C-T advice.

winner69
23-03-2016, 07:42 AM
National could govern alone after next election if they made interest on term deposits tax free income for those over 60 (if not everybody)

The oldies would love it

fungus pudding
23-03-2016, 07:49 AM
National could govern alone after next election if they made interest on term deposits tax free income for those over 60 (if not everybody)

The oldies would love it

No responsible government would do that. Income is income, and as long as we have income tax it would be ridiculous to exclude one form of it.

BlackPeter
23-03-2016, 08:01 AM
I think JK needs to get some more media training, listen to some more focus groups, pay for some more C-T advice.

you are probably right EZ ... and fully agree that John Key didn't made a particular good figure in this saga. He just should have paid up (with his own cash) and shut up, given his undignified comments in the first place. He now comes across as thoughtless and arrogant. However - you give at the same time an amazing illustration of the famous citation from the "good book" (Matthew 7:3):


Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?


Shouldn't you worry first about Andrew Little's lack of media training, PR skills and his hapless attempts to befriend the populists no matter the moral cost (people with Chinese sounding names, foreign chefs ...)?

westerly
23-03-2016, 10:30 AM
National could govern alone after next election if they made interest on term deposits tax free income for those over 60 (if not everybody)

The oldies would love it

Given the pathetically low interest rates the Gvt. return from this source is minimal. Savers are being shafted by the Central banks policies of quantitative easing. The elderly are more likely pursuing SKI policies. :)

elZorro
23-03-2016, 10:35 AM
you are probably right EZ ... and fully agree that John Key didn't made a particular good figure in this saga. He just should have paid up (with his own cash) and shut up, given his undignified comments in the first place. He now comes across as thoughtless and arrogant. However - you give at the same time an amazing illustration of the famous citation from the "good book" (Matthew 7:3):



Shouldn't you worry first about Andrew Little's lack of media training, PR skills and his hapless attempts to befriend the populists no matter the moral cost (people with Chinese sounding names, foreign chefs ...)?

I quite agree BP, but of course the well-heeled National Party spin machine doesn't make too many mistakes, so the lefties have to make the most of every muck-up on the other side.

fungus pudding
23-03-2016, 10:36 AM
Given the pathetically low interest rates the Gvt. return from this source is minimal. Savers are being shafted by the Central banks policies of quantitative easing. The elderly are more likely pursuing SKI policies. :)

What on earth are you on about? The Central bank do not have a policy of quantitative easing. The govt. does not provide the return from term deposits.

winner69
23-03-2016, 12:56 PM
In Muldoon's era NZers returned home (more NZers came back then left on a permanent basis)

Every year since we have an outflow of NZers - in total the net outflow is nearly 700.000.

Must mean something - maybe a real visionary leader could change that

craic
23-03-2016, 02:23 PM
)

Every year since we have an outflow of NZers - in total the net outflow is nearly 700.000.

Must mean something - maybe a real visionary leader could change that
Who did you have in mind. Jesus Christ? Donald Trump? or Mr Little? Go - give us a laugh.

westerly
23-03-2016, 03:21 PM
What on earth are you on about? The Central bank do not have a policy of quantitative easing. The govt. does not provide the return from term deposits.

No, they tax the return, which was what W69’s post was referring to. it is called RWT which if rates are low reduces the take. As for quantative easing, broaden your outlook,. Central bank policies does not refer to the Reserve Bank of NZ.
The world is awash with cash hence the very low interest rates.

westerly

fungus pudding
23-03-2016, 04:38 PM
No, they tax the return, which was what W69’s post was referring to. it is called RWT which if rates are low reduces the take. As for quantative easing, broaden your outlook,. Central bank policies does not refer to the Reserve Bank of NZ.
The world is awash with cash hence the very low interest rates.

westerly

Of course they tax the return - it's income.

Daytr
23-03-2016, 05:35 PM
Agreed, so if he could, he would have let the taxpayer foot the bill.
Outrageous! And it just shows out of touch he has become.


I don't think so. It's because that's the parliamentary ruling.

fungus pudding
23-03-2016, 05:45 PM
Agreed, so if he could, he would have let the taxpayer foot the bill.
Outrageous! And it just shows out of touch he has become.

Of course. So would every politician rather than use their party's funds. For further advice - refer Mr. W. Peters.

Daytr
23-03-2016, 06:39 PM
I don't care who has done similar in the past. It was Key that as done for defamation, its he who should pay the penalty & costs.
Amazing how you think others should pay for his mistake.

Key's lucky not to be facing court on assault charges after the serial ponytail pulling saga.

elZorro
25-03-2016, 07:19 AM
Fonterra's trying another approach and asking bigger suppliers for a restating of their business case. It'll be open book costing next.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/78225580/fonterra-letter-tells-businesses-to-get-set-to-fight-for-the-coops-business?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Friday+25+M arch+2016

Meanwhile ANZ has increased its bad debt provisions, and they lend heavily into the rural sector.

It'll be interesting to see the inevitable effect on the govt's tax take, and I think plenty of provincial businesses will be doing it tough for the next year or two.

craic
25-03-2016, 07:43 AM
I don't care who has done similar in the past. It was Key that as done for defamation, its he who should pay the penalty & costs.
Amazing how you think others should pay for his mistake.

Key's lucky not to be facing court on assault charges after the serial ponytail pulling saga.

Your blind hatred of John Key, evident in almost every post, is a measure of you, not him. The facts -He is the elected Prime Minister of the country - He is the most popular political leader in NZ. He is likely to remain the Prime Minister after the next election unless you and the rest o fthe disgruntled minority can put together an alliance of all the perpetual losers and hold it together long enough to take a breath.

Daytr
25-03-2016, 08:08 AM
Certainly not blind, or have hatred for Key. Dislike, sure.
If you care for the environment, then it is very difficult to appreciate Key's leadership.
Seeing the national debt more than treble is difficult to swallow.
He has lined many people's pockets through a housing bubble in Auckland mainly due to having the immigration tap on full noise.
He has changed NZ in a very short time from having affordable housing, to very unaffordable, particularly in Auckland .
Its similar to dairy. We were one of the lowest cost producers in the world.
National openly encouraged intensification .

NZ is benefitting largely from a lot of the rest of the world being in turmoil, either economically or politically.
And Key is riding on the coat tails of much of that.

craic
25-03-2016, 09:39 AM
Now there's a green agenda if ever I've seen one.
"seeing the national debt nearly treble" shows a complete ignorance of finance. Key has enough experience in that field, and success, personally, to know what he is doing.
Unaffordable housing is common to every major city - London, Sydney etc. and Key has nothing to do with those places.
He hasn't lined anyone's pocket - they did it themselves, by not living the Green myth, that we should all be in grass skirts and live in caves.
Dairy was rocketing before JK came t power and he does what any good leader should do, Let nature take it's course. And ther will be Dairy farmers after the dust settles and they will be the traditional ones who did not borrow and invest beyond their means.
NZz is not in turmoil because of the quality of our leadership under a National government.

Sgt Pepper
25-03-2016, 12:48 PM
Ref TPP Protestors /Chester Burrows

TPP protestors:If a car is exiting a drive don't stand in front of it.

Daytr
25-03-2016, 09:10 PM
How much fiction can you fit into one post.
Its your Green myth, no one else.
As an ex banker with 20 years servicing multinational corporations I think you might be just a little off the mark.
Nothing unusual there though.
Has the government debt trebled under National? Yes.
I wonder if you would be so lenient if I was Labour that trebled the level of government debt?
Well NZ didn't have unaffordable housing until National took over and record immigration is fueling it.


Now there's a green agenda if ever I've seen one.
"seeing the national debt nearly treble" shows a complete ignorance of finance. Key has enough experience in that field, and success, personally, to know what he is doing.
Unaffordable housing is common to every major city - London, Sydney etc. and Key has nothing to do with those places.
He hasn't lined anyone's pocket - they did it themselves, by not living the Green myth, that we should all be in grass skirts and live in caves.
Dairy was rocketing before JK came t power and he does what any good leader should do, Let nature take it's course. And ther will be Dairy farmers after the dust settles and they will be the traditional ones who did not borrow and invest beyond their means.
NZz is not in turmoil because of the quality of our leadership under a National government.

craic
25-03-2016, 09:58 PM
One of my in-laws is a banker he had to sell his house to cover draw-downs on his mortgage. And he tries to give e financial advice. I manage my sons share portfolio and he is a vice-president of one of the worlds major banks, London office. Being an ex-banker and claiming financial expertise is like an ex-priest claiming special knowledge of god and how to get to heaven. I have made a significant profit on each of the last six race meetings and I know stuff all about race horses and tomorrow I will throw about another $300 at the TAB - horses don't count, numbers do and I know about numbers.

Daytr
26-03-2016, 06:58 AM
Last time you mentioned your son, Craic, you wouldn't even admit he worked for a bank!
Refusing to admit the institution was a bank, on multiple occasions I might add.
Well at least you have learnt something I suppose.
Or does it just suit your purpose his time around.
Seeing you don't know me, probably best you stop claiming who I am & what I know.
It just looks a little silly, me ol' mucker.

You know numbers, that's very good.
So you will know that trebling a government debt and not showing any signs of reducing it anytime soon, is not a good thing.
No doubt like other national governments they will leave it to Labour to clean up the mess.

craic
26-03-2016, 07:11 AM
The biggest joke is to suggest that Labour could ever clean up a mess, any mess particularly their own. I have more than one son. Try this. Put a dollar for a win on all the horses in the first two races at Tauranga today - you will have two winners guaranteed - and the entire outlay will be $12. This has nothing to do with my betting strategy for the day,more to do with a better way of wasting your money than buying lotto tickets.

Daytr
26-03-2016, 09:34 AM
Not that I'm a Labour voter, but I could perhaps if they get a leader that resonates.
But I'm not blind to what they achieved.
Under Clark, Labour reduced the government debt considerably, continually posted surpluses.
In the 1980s Labour transformed/modernised the NZ economy from Muldoon's 1950s approach.
This National government beat a previous National government's record of the most consecutive years of running the country in deficit.
National line the pockets of the already wealthy, at the expense of the tax payer and lower income.
They exploit natural resources with little of no thought for the environment or the long term benefit of the country.
And benefit is not just in dollars and cents, although if we actually valued the environment & the potential impact on tourism in the future then it could be measured that way as well.
I am a centrist or even slightly right wing, but I cannot support a government that has no respect for the environment & sound environmental policy should not be just the domain of the left.
ACT seem to have picked up on this, although I don't really trust a leopard to change its spots or the fact that they are only in government courtesy of National.

By the way, its nice to see you have 2 sons working for banks! ;-)

fungus pudding
26-03-2016, 10:39 AM
[QUOTE=Daytr;613388]Not that I'm a Labour voter, but I could perhaps if they get a leader that resonates.
But I'm not blind to what they achieved.
Under Clark, Labour reduced the government debt considerably, continually posted surpluses.
In the 1980s Labour transformed/modernised the NZ economy from Muldoon's 1950s approach.
This National government beat a previous National government's record of the most consecutive years of running the country in deficit.
National line the pockets of the already wealthy, at the expense of the tax payer and lower income.
QUOTE]

fungus pudding
26-03-2016, 10:40 AM
[QUOTE=Daytr;613388]Not that I'm a Labour voter, but I could perhaps if they get a leader that resonates.
But I'm not blind to what they achieved.
Under Clark, Labour reduced the government debt considerably, continually posted surpluses.
In the 1980s Labour transformed/modernised the NZ economy from Muldoon's 1950s approach.
This National government beat a previous National government's record of the most consecutive years of running the country in deficit.
National line the pockets of the already wealthy, at the expense of the tax payer and lower income.
QUOTE]

Couldn't agree less. Tax on annual income of 50,000 is approx. 16% Tax on annual income of 200,000 is around25%
Annuak income of 300,000 pay tax of approx 30%.
The higher paid certainly subsidise the lower paid.

Daytr
26-03-2016, 02:48 PM
And yet the wealth divide continues to grow...
Your numbers are based off what is actually claimed as income.
If it was based off gross income the percentage for higher income earners would be a lot lower, due to all the deductions and tax minimisation.
Where as Joe & Jane wage earner pay at source and typically have little way to avoid paying tax on their income.

fungus pudding
26-03-2016, 03:37 PM
And yet the wealth divide continues to grow...
Your numbers are based off what is actually claimed as income.
If it was based off gross income the percentage for higher income earners would be a lot lower, due to all the deductions and tax minimisation.
Where as Joe & Jane wage earner pay at source and typically have little way to avoid paying tax on their income.

What do you mean by gross income? No matter who - income is either a wage or a profit. In other words no-one pays tax on the amount of money they turnover - it's assessed on profit. Nothing else would make sense. Certainly some people do not declare all income, but that is illegal.

craic
26-03-2016, 03:48 PM
So Daytr, anyone who works for a bank is a banker? even the tea lady, the doorman? the electrician and the cleaner? Go to Goldman-Sachs in London and speak to the fellows in suits who hang around the doorway. They call themselves security guards. Which kind of banker were you? Clearly not one of the highly paid money handlers who know about money.

blackcap
26-03-2016, 04:26 PM
And yet the wealth divide continues to grow...
Your numbers are based off what is actually claimed as income.
If it was based off gross income the percentage for higher income earners would be a lot lower, due to all the deductions and tax minimisation.
Where as Joe & Jane wage earner pay at source and typically have little way to avoid paying tax on their income.

Don't really know what you are on about here Daytr. We in NZ have a progressive tax system so those that earn higher income pay a lot higher tax. Care to give a few examples of tax minimisation? If you are in business and pay Joe and Jane a wage (with accompanying PAYE) but you yourself make the same amount of profit as Jane and Joe, you will still be paying the same amount of tax. ALl the deductions are legitimate business expenses that actually do not benefit you privately (otherwise you would be paying fringe benefit tax) so I fail to grasp your reasoning. Income splitting between husband and wife etc (say for a professional sole trader) has become a lot more onerous too and it now has to be shown that the "wife" is actually being paid for what she is doing. If she is doing nothing, then she cannot claim a wage or salary.

Daytr
26-03-2016, 09:03 PM
I don't think you are that naïve.
What I am saying is the wealthy have more opportunity to minimize their tax or taxable income than the paye wage earner.

Daytr
26-03-2016, 09:10 PM
Perhaps you should read posts before responding.
I said they work for banks.
I was a commodity trader in metals & energy markets and worked on deal teams for bank loan syndications etc.
Traded futures and derivatives, physical, FX, interest rates, commodities, money market, credit derivatives on occasion.
I'll let you decide if I was paid the big bucks. ;-)
Perhaps you might want to stop guessing about others, as I said you are looking a little silly.


So Daytr, anyone who works for a bank is a banker? even the tea lady, the doorman? the electrician and the cleaner? Go to Goldman-Sachs in London and speak to the fellows in suits who hang around the doorway. They call themselves security guards. Which kind of banker were you? Clearly not one of the highly paid money handlers who know about money.

Daytr
26-03-2016, 09:18 PM
Hi BlackCap, I would have thought its pretty obvious. The fact the we don't have a fully fledged capital gains tax, means there are plenty of avenues for income to be made that is not taxable.
I also refer to the offshoring of income that never sees the light of day.
Trusts in the past have also been a very lucrative tax light vehicle in the past, although from what I gather the tax advantages have largely disappeared, but I could be wrong on that.
They maybe legal but continual deferment with things like depreciation, companies that make losses year on year & yet the owners get wealthier & wealthier.
You make it sound like everyone's tax return is legitimate.
I would suggest tax avoidance is akin to a sport in the Western world.
Mind you I would rather we & other countries clamp down on these multinational companies that have avoided paying tax all round the world including NZ. I wonder what the SP of the likes of Google and others would be if they were forced to pay tax each country where the earnings came from.
Ireland has got away with 'stealing' 10s if not hundreds of billions of tax revenue from other countries in the last 20 years or so.



Don't really know what you are on about here Daytr. We in NZ have a progressive tax system so those that earn higher income pay a lot higher tax. Care to give a few examples of tax minimisation? If you are in business and pay Joe and Jane a wage (with accompanying PAYE) but you yourself make the same amount of profit as Jane and Joe, you will still be paying the same amount of tax. ALl the deductions are legitimate business expenses that actually do not benefit you privately (otherwise you would be paying fringe benefit tax) so I fail to grasp your reasoning. Income splitting between husband and wife etc (say for a professional sole trader) has become a lot more onerous too and it now has to be shown that the "wife" is actually being paid for what she is doing. If she is doing nothing, then she cannot claim a wage or salary.

craic
27-03-2016, 08:51 AM
[QUOTE=Daytr;613461.
I was a commodity trader in metals & energy markets and worked on deal teams for bank loan syndications etc.
Traded futures and derivatives, physical, FX, interest rates, commodities, money market, credit derivatives on occasion.

And how did you manage to turn that exalted position into your present position as a disgruntled poster, obsessed with another from a simiilar position who, with a consderably more positive outlook than yours, has risen to the position of the most popular Prime Minister the nation has seen in a long time.

elZorro
27-03-2016, 08:57 PM
And how did you manage to turn that exalted position into your present position as a disgruntled poster, obsessed with another from a simiilar position who, with a consderably more positive outlook than yours, has risen to the position of the most popular Prime Minister the nation has seen in a long time.

He's popular, but is he any good for anything, Craic?

fungus pudding
27-03-2016, 10:43 PM
[QUOTE=craic;613475]

He's popular, but is he any good for anything, Craic?


Not for you. Not good at all; you will look for and find a negative side to his every utterance or action, whether real or imagined: but for those with a positive outlook a generally sunny disposition, he's an inspiration.

Daytr
28-03-2016, 07:11 AM
Keep making personal remarks / attacks Craic. It says more about you than me.
If you had two eyes open, you would have seen posts from me congratulating Key or National when they have done things that are worthy.
Like raising the minimum wage or creating a marine sanctuary as examples. There are others.
However in my view there is little to cheer about in regards Key's led National short termism approach to policy.
Can you quote any post where you have given Labour or the Greens any credit for anything Craic?
Keep rants about me coming though Craic and we can all see who is really obsessed.



[QUOTE=Daytr;613461.
I was a commodity trader in metals & energy markets and worked on deal teams for bank loan syndications etc.
Traded futures and derivatives, physical, FX, interest rates, commodities, money market, credit derivatives on occasion.

And how did you manage to turn that exalted position into your present position as a disgruntled poster, obsessed with another from a simiilar position who, with a consderably more positive outlook than yours, has risen to the position of the most popular Prime Minister the nation has seen in a long time.

Daytr
28-03-2016, 07:27 AM
One thing I will add for those who keep crowing about Key's popularity.
He is popular, there is no denying that, despite ponytail pulling and bullying antics.
However popularity is no reference to quality.
Adolf Hitler was very popular in Germany.
Justin Bieber and Kim Kardashian are both extremely popular now...

elZorro
28-03-2016, 09:29 AM
One thing I will add for those who keep crowing about Key's popularity.
He is popular, there is no denying that, despite ponytail pulling and bullying antics.
However popularity is no reference to quality.
Adolf Hitler was very popular in Germany.
Justin Bieber and Kim Kardashian are both extremely popular now...

The last fortnight wasn't a good one for JK. Here's a post about that from The Standard.

http://thestandard.org.nz/tough-couple-of-weeks-for-key/

And one from reporter Duncan Garner. Ouch.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/the-flag-debate/78253159/duncan-garner-the-flagging-fortunes-of-a-leader-chasing-a-legacy.html

I wonder how big an operation I could build - what I could do - if I was allowed to borrow on the tab of five million people, $164million a week for over seven years. I guess I would be a big shot.

craic
28-03-2016, 09:49 AM
And you still didn't answer the question Daytr.

elZorro
28-03-2016, 11:36 AM
And you still didn't answer the question Daytr.

Craic, you didn't really answer my question. What is John Key good for? Your answer that he has a sunny disposition and is an inspiration to all, is not that great, considering he's the current Prime Minister of NZ and he is following on from Helen Clark's nine year term heading a Labour government. Most of the social policy reparation work that Labour performed on the economy during that time has not been removed, because it's too popular and sensible.

What National did manage to do (that has often slipped under the radar) is to hand more power to big business. How has that worked out? The tax base remains perilously low, the National government is still borrowing money to meet their budget shortfall, and that will ramp up as the provincial economy implodes on itself at the end of the previous dairy boom.

I'm not sure what could be on the horizon to save this National Govt from ignominy, when the political history books are written.

craic
28-03-2016, 11:46 AM
Craic, you didn't really answer my question. What is John Key good for? Your answer that he has a sunny disposition and is an inspiration to all, is not that great, considering he's the current Prime Minister of NZ and he is following on from Helen Clark's nine year term heading a Labour government. Most of the social policy reparation work that Labour performed on the economy during that time has not been removed, because it's too popular and sensible.

What National did manage to do (that has often slipped under the radar) is to hand more power to big business. How has that worked out? The tax base remains perilously low, the National government is still borrowing money to meet their budget shortfall, and that will ramp up as the provincial economy implodes on itself at the end of the previous dairy boom.

I'm not sure what could be on the horizon to save this National Govt from ignominy, when the political history books are written.

Aren't you confusing history with left wing propoganda?

Sgt Pepper
28-03-2016, 11:50 AM
Craic, you didn't really answer my question. What is John Key good for? Your answer that he has a sunny disposition and is an inspiration to all, is not that great, considering he's the current Prime Minister of NZ and he is following on from Helen Clark's nine year term heading a Labour government. Most of the social policy reparation work that Labour performed on the economy during that time has not been removed, because it's too popular and sensible.

What National did manage to do (that has often slipped under the radar) is to hand more power to big business. How has that worked out? The tax base remains perilously low, the National government is still borrowing money to meet their budget shortfall, and that will ramp up as the provincial economy implodes on itself at the end of the previous dairy boom.

I'm not sure what could be on the horizon to save this National Govt from ignominy, when the political history books are written.

EZ
I agree with your observations.
Of significance, which I believe has been underrated, was Judith Collins being the only cabinet minister to declare her support for retaining the current NZ flag. This has ominous implications for John Keys tenure. As I have said in previous posts, and dismissed by National supporters, she will not hesitate to strike when the time is right. She has nothing to lose and everything to gain.

fungus pudding
28-03-2016, 12:27 PM
Craic, you didn't really answer my question. What is John Key good for? Your answer that he has a sunny disposition and is an inspiration to all, is not that great, considering he's the current Prime Minister of NZ........

That was not Craic's answer. It's just one observation of mine. Among Key's numerous achievements he has kept your lot away from the cheque book. So far he's seen off Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, with Little soon to join the list. Well worth celebrating.

elZorro
28-03-2016, 12:40 PM
EZ
I agree with your observations.
Of significance, which I believe has been underrated, was Judith Collins being the only cabinet minister to declare her support for retaining the current NZ flag. This has ominous implications for John Keys tenure. As I have said in previous posts, and dismissed by National supporters, she will not hesitate to strike when the time is right. She has nothing to lose and everything to gain.

There might be something in that, Sgt Pepper. I see from Wikipedia that Judith Collins is from a farming family in Walton (near Hamilton) and at an earlier point supported Labour. Hard to believe now. She's still at No.6 on the National List, completely exonerated, except if one takes the trouble to read "Dirty Politics". She certainly likes to take aim at a target.

elZorro
28-03-2016, 12:42 PM
That was not Craic's answer. It's just one observation of mine. Among Key's numerous achievements he has kept your lot away from the cheque book. So far he's seen off Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe, with Little soon to join the list. Well worth celebrating.

Sorry about the incorrect attribution, FP. Should have looked more carefully, it isn't Craic's style to spout vacuous comments. If he doesn't have a good rejoinder and I'm on the money, he just doesn't say anything.

Daytr
28-03-2016, 12:51 PM
Did you really expect an answer? LOL.
Not sure what planet you are living on to expect any sort of reasonable response from what you wrote.
This is becoming rather childish to say the least.
Right up with Key's playground antics.
Pulling ponytails, blaming everyone else for stuff ups and there has been a litany of them during his time as PM.
Happy to list them if you like...


And you still didn't answer the question Daytr.

craic
28-03-2016, 02:25 PM
Here we go again Daytr! Did John Key steal your teddy bear or maybe your girlfriend? Or maybe hes just better looking or richer than you? See if you can go more than two posts without mentioning him The problem is that only you care - the electorate don't really give a stuff about those things. A good stable leader running one of the most successful economies in the west - even the Australians envy us.

fungus pudding
28-03-2016, 02:37 PM
Sorry about the incorrect attribution, FP. Should have looked more carefully, it isn't Craic's style to spout vacuous comments. If he doesn't have a good rejoinder and I'm on the money, he just doesn't say anything.


Why don't you and your fellow malcontents start a new thread 'I hate National and John Key' or something similar where you can moan, groan and whinge among yourselves all you like and then your negative posts won't distract others when they visit this site?

Daytr
28-03-2016, 04:05 PM
Can't handle the heat FP.
Still telling people what to do & whinging about people whinging.
Our posts aren't negative. They are actually very positive.
We just want better from our government.


Why don't you and your fellow malcontents start a new thread 'I hate National and John Key' or something similar where you can moan, groan and whinge among yourselves all you like and then your negative posts won't distract others when they visit this site?

Daytr
28-03-2016, 04:11 PM
And you keep biting. LOL.
I didn't go fishing this weekend but I 'virtually' did. ha ha.
Pathetic.


Here we go again Daytr! Did John Key steal your teddy bear or maybe your girlfriend? Or maybe hes just better looking or richer than you? See if you can go more than two posts without mentioning him The problem is that only you care - the electorate don't really give a stuff about those things. A good stable leader running one of the most successful economies in the west - even the Australians envy us.

elZorro
29-03-2016, 05:51 PM
Has Fran O'Sullivan got this right? Is John Key setting NZ up to be a bolthole for the top 1%? It explains a helluva lot.

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11611816

A TED video that informs this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=CKCvf8E7V1g

Daytr
29-03-2016, 08:13 PM
A couple of good current affairs segments over the weekend.
1) An expo on Northland 1 year after NZF took the seat. National representatives interviewed displayed National's lack of a plan for the region & how they want to dismantle existing infrastructure, instead of providing more! The region has started to boom in the last year & this government's policy is holding us back. The 10 bridges promised is now 4 and are still only at the planning stage!
2) A democrat that is close friends of the Clintons and worked in the Clinton administration I believe, visiting NZ was interviewed about the TPPA. His view that basically it was a corporate take over, that would make it much harder for governments to right policy that protects its people in regards health, welfare and the environment.

blackcap
30-03-2016, 08:53 AM
Has Fran O'Sullivan got this right? Is John Key setting NZ up to be a bolthole for the top 1%? It explains a helluva lot.

[/URL]

You mean like Sue Moron with a $800,000 bach amoungst others.... :)

elZorro
30-03-2016, 06:29 PM
You mean like Sue Moron with a $800,000 bach amoungst others.... :)

I can't believe that little story has been beaten up so much. Thousands of dollars of media exposure per word for National I guess. That said, it was a poorly thought out tweet by Sue, gifting them a win. I think I know where the defamed bach is, it's a nice one beside a walkway.

Just goes to show how careful MPs need to be. John Key makes plenty of mistakes, but wouldn't have put that thought into writing, at least where it could be viewed by public and the media.

Major von Tempsky
30-03-2016, 06:58 PM
A couple of good current affairs segments over the weekend.
1) An expo on Northland 1 year after NZF took the seat. National representatives interviewed displayed National's lack of a plan for the region & how they want to dismantle existing infrastructure, instead of providing more! The region has started to boom in the last year & this government's policy is holding us back. The 10 bridges promised is now 4 and are still only at the planning stage!
2) A democrat that is close friends of the Clintons and worked in the Clinton administration I believe, visiting NZ was interviewed about the TPPA. His view that basically it was a corporate take over, that would make it much harder for governments to right policy that protects its people in regards health, welfare and the environment.

It's very easy to find an overseas "expert" to say anything you like on TPPA, and face it, the grovelling media regards anyone from overseas as an "expert"! However I'd like to refer to you to your very own left left leaning Listener, in the second to last issue it ran an interview with the very highly regarded retired Governor of the Bank of England, Dr Mervyn King, who opined that TPPA was a good thing for NZ. Somewhat more expert than any Clinton groupie. Mervyn King is regarded as having played a major part in navigating the UK through the Global Financial Crisis and the European ones since then.

Daytr
30-03-2016, 08:23 PM
How many things can you get wrong in one post MVT?
Where did I say he was an expert?
I am not left leaning, well to be fair, I am on some things, but not on others, however I do think the Listener is a good quality publication.
Typically anyone who uses the word opines automatically triggers a fast forward switch in my brain, as it says a lot about the user in my view & its not good.
From what I have read about King, is that many lay blame for him not identifying the bubbles and reacting to what was gong on in the UK that helped caused the GFC. He may well have assisted in its recovery by cutting rates to almost zero , however his record is chequered at best.

elZorro
31-03-2016, 06:48 AM
I'm not sure you can trust 'economists'.

As expected, the economic future sentiment in regions like Waikato, Taranaki and Southland is strongly negative at the moment. Urban areas are still positive, along with house prices of course. House sales are included in GDP figures, and this govt then uses them to tout a 2% GDP increase for NZ over the last year. Meanwhile the value of our dairy exports plummets down from a high, forestry is going badly too. As John Gascoigne notes, it's time we had better indicators than total GDP, on which to base our progress.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/economy/news/article.cfm?c_id=34&objectid=11613468&utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Thursday+31 +March+2016

I know he's right. Sometimes I've gone looking for a suitable chart to show the trend in an econometric indicator that I know will probably look bad for the National Govt. I'll look on govt websites and find that these graphs or charts don't exist. I can make my own graph/chart by using the spreadsheet data that they have to compile, but "they've" studiously avoided making it easy to see what's going on.

craic
31-03-2016, 07:31 AM
. Sometimes I've gone looking for a suitable chart to show the trend in an econometric indicator that I know will probably look bad for the National Govt. I'll look on govt websites and find that these graphs or charts don't exist. I can make my own graph/chart by using the spreadsheet data that they have to compile, but "they've" studiously avoided making it easy to see what's going on.[/QUOTE]

Thats easily the biggest admission you've ever made that you hunt around in the system, desperately searching for anything that you can possibly find to attack the government and when you can't find anything, you claim that the government must have hidden it. What do you do when you find anything that the government did right? At least the majority of voters over recent elections find enough good to elect National and keep them there. The negative attitude thatfreely admit to is a disease of the left and always has been.

fungus pudding
31-03-2016, 08:04 AM
Sometimes I've gone looking for a suitable chart to show the trend in an econometric indicator that I know will probably look bad for the National Govt. I'll look on govt websites and find that these graphs or charts don't exist. I can make my own graph/chart by using the spreadsheet data that they have to compile, but "they've" studiously avoided making it easy to see what's going on.

Oh dear eZ. Just because you may not find the negative side of an argument does not mean 'they' have hidden it. That's paranoia. If you spent as much time looking for good news, about anything at all, rather than looking for anti-National govt. to post here, life would be a whole lot better for you. You will find anything you look for about any political party - any economic report - any subject you care to name in fact. Give yourself a rest.

elZorro
31-03-2016, 08:04 AM
Thats easily the biggest admission you've ever made that you hunt around in the system, desperately searching for anything that you can possibly find to attack the government and when you can't find anything, you claim that the government must have hidden it. What do you do when you find anything that the government did right? At least the majority of voters over recent elections find enough good to elect National and keep them there. The negative attitude that (you) freely admit to is a disease of the left and always has been.

That's an absolute cop-out, Craic. You should be denying that this govt massages stats like no other previous govt in NZ, rather than having a go at me for trying to find out the truth.

If I have to chart a series of numbers to clearly show this govt isn't doing very well at some metric or another, why doesn't Treasury or a govt department always do the same? In the case of annual GDP, the solution to hide a whole lot of poor economic stats under that label is to keep net immigration figures high, to keep the pressure on housing, so new houses get built and other houses change hands. This increases the GDP figure, without having to show that export income is dropping like a stone in some manufacturing areas like dairy and heavy equipment.

craic
31-03-2016, 08:20 AM
That's an absolute cop-out, Craic. You should be denying that this govt massages stats like no other previous govt in NZ, rather than having a go at me for trying to find out the truth.

If I have to chart a series of numbers to clearly show this govt isn't doing very well at some metric or another, why doesn't Treasury or a govt department always do the same? In the case of annual GDP, the solution to hide a whole lot of poor economic stats under that label is to keep net immigration figures high, to keep the pressure on housing, so new houses get built and other houses change hands. This increases the GDP figure, without having to show that export income is dropping like a stone in some manufacturing areas like dairy and heavy equipment.

But you're not looking for the "truth" elZ - You're looking for anything that suits your opinion - once again a leftie trend. Now I must go and find out why my big chainsaw will not start - a rightie trend.

westerly
31-03-2016, 09:17 AM
National and it’s war on govt. expenditure. Student allowances paid, down from $78m to $58.7m since 2010. Rob Stock reports on the sneaky reductions in social expenditure in a Press article on the non indexing of government programmes.
Interesting that Govt. super. is not subject to this insidious erosion. John Key’s promise?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/78333951/some-government-benefits-are-quietly-being-eroded-at-the-expense-of-families

westerly

fungus pudding
31-03-2016, 10:44 AM
National and it’s war on govt. expenditure. Student allowances paid, down from $78m to $58.7m since 2010. Rob Stock reports on the sneaky reductions in social expenditure in a Press article on the non indexing of government programmes.
Interesting that Govt. super. is not subject to this insidious erosion. John Key’s promise?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/78333951/some-government-benefits-are-quietly-being-eroded-at-the-expense-of-families

westerly

Interesting that govt. superannuation is adjusted annually because the legislation requires it. Where does Key's promise come into it?

craic
31-03-2016, 12:21 PM
Wow! Daytr and Winnie will be delighted with the upturn in the Northland economy. 69,000 cannabis plants grown by locals and harvested by the police. 41 firearms taken into police keeping. 124 locals arrested in the biggest operation in decades.

elZorro
31-03-2016, 01:58 PM
But you're not looking for the "truth" elZ - You're looking for anything that suits your opinion - once again a leftie trend. Now I must go and find out why my big chainsaw will not start - a rightie trend.

I'd suggest changing the spark plug, Craic. It's a lot quicker way of getting something going. Sometimes you need to change.

fungus pudding
31-03-2016, 02:05 PM
I'd suggest changing the spark plug, Craic. It's a lot quicker way of getting something going. Sometimes you need to change.

Sounds like a labour party solution alright - just change something without applying the logical remedy of finding out if there is a problem, and if so, how to fix it. Next step is to blame John Key.

elZorro
31-03-2016, 03:14 PM
Sounds like a labour party solution alright - just change something without applying the logical remedy of finding out if there is a problem, and if so, how to fix it. Next step is to blame John Key.

The National Party solution would be to place the chainsaw out on the front verge to see if the 'market' would fix it. Or pay a consultant to look at it, and failing that, clean it up and try to sell it as is, for some pocket money.

Anyway, nine times out of ten, a spark plug change will be the quickest solution Craic.

craic
31-03-2016, 05:04 PM
The National Party solution would be to place the chainsaw out on the front verge to see if the 'market' would fix it. Or pay a consultant to look at it, and failing that, clean it up and try to sell it as is, for some pocket money.

Anyway, nine times out of ten, a spark plug change will be the quickest solution Craic.

I have five chainsaws between 50 and 100cc and I can't remember the last time I had to replace a plug. Dirty fuel is the usual cause so the rule is never empty a can of fuel into a saw. I sometimes do.

fungus pudding
31-03-2016, 05:10 PM
I have five chainsaws between 50 and 100cc and I can't remember the last time I had to replace a plug. Dirty fuel is the usual cause so the rule is never empty a can of fuel into a saw. I sometimes do.
And put fresh fuel in after storage- it can go off if stale. Also never take advice from strangers, and there's nothing stranger than eZ. :t_up:

westerly
31-03-2016, 05:25 PM
Interesting that govt. superannuation is adjusted annually because the legislation requires it. Where does Key's promise come into it?

Mathew Hooton 2/6/12

The English doctrine is that it is better to engineer a political environment where voters are urging the government to do more.* Ministers, as good democrats, can then be seen to respond.* This, he says, is the key to achieving sustainable policy change.

On superannuation, the doctrine appears in play.

Mr Key’s 2008 promise was remarkable for its extremity: “National will retain all the superannuation entitlements and eligibility rules that our senior citizens currently enjoy. We will keep this pledge and I will resign as prime minister, and as a member of our parliament, rather than break it.”

“What’s more,” Mr Key said, “as we cut taxes and grow average after-tax wages, we will progressively increase the amount of super paid to senior citizens.”

westerly

fungus pudding
31-03-2016, 05:50 PM
“What’s more,” Mr Key said, “as we cut taxes and grow average after-tax wages, we will progressively increase the amount of super paid to senior citizens.”

westerly
Thanks. Sounds great.

elZorro
31-03-2016, 06:18 PM
I have five chainsaws between 50 and 100cc and I can't remember the last time I had to replace a plug. Dirty fuel is the usual cause so the rule is never empty a can of fuel into a saw. I sometimes do.

I might be right though, you're not changing plugs often enough, Craic. Anyway, a good spark plug would probably fire up that stale fuel, and everything will start working properly again.

Not to stray too far from this thread, it appears that the normal service life of a spark plug in a chainsaw is about 100 hours. Based on the number of your posts mentioning chainsaws, and even factoring in that you have enough of them to open a small chainsaw museum, you should at least have a look at the spark plug, Craic.

http://homeguides.sfgate.com/need-change-spark-plug-stihl-chainsaw-100576.html

Similarly, governments sometimes run past their use-by date, and three terms is about their limit.

westerly
31-03-2016, 07:35 PM
Thanks. Sounds great.

Dreams are free. :)

westerly

Daytr
31-03-2016, 08:25 PM
Here are a couple of charts for you EZ.
Government debt to GDP levels under Clark v Key.

http://thestandard.org.nz/who-was-the-better-economic-manager-helen-clark-or-john-key/

Or just the level of government debt in a simple chart since 1993.
Key and Co sure know how to get the country in hock.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/58/NZ_Govt_debt_1990-2011.svg/578px-NZ_Govt_debt_1990-2011.svg.png

Daytr
31-03-2016, 08:52 PM
Craic, with the Northland economy neglected for decades the 'green trade' has been a big part of the black economy for almost as long.
And yes hopefully with the uptick in the local economy less people will resort to things like growing or selling drugs.
However we need investment in infrastructure both rail, road and also in services such as health.



Wow! Daytr and Winnie will be delighted with the upturn in the Northland economy. 69,000 cannabis plants grown by locals and harvested by the police. 41 firearms taken into police keeping. 124 locals arrested in the biggest operation in decades.

elZorro
31-03-2016, 09:03 PM
Here are a couple of charts for you EZ.
Government debt to FDP levels under Clark v Key.

http://thestandard.org.nz/who-was-the-better-economic-manager-helen-clark-or-john-key/

Or just the level of government debt in a simple chart since 1993.
Key and Co sure know how to get the country in hock.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/58/NZ_Govt_debt_1990-2011.svg/578px-NZ_Govt_debt_1990-2011.svg.png

Thanks Daytr, of interest is that to help fund the tax cuts to the wealthier voters, and keep things going, this National Govt has had to borrow $164mill on average, every week since they took office in late 2008. Now they're still borrowing to pay the interest, and the tax take is about to go for a big dive, unless they can keep immigration and house prices up. There's not much else working for this 'rock-star' economy. As someone noted in a comment on your post link, if everyone figures out what they've done, National will lose the next election and they'll never return to office again.

I spoke with Andrew Little this evening, he gave our group a short spiel, with no stumbling at all. Everything seems to be on track.

jonu
31-03-2016, 09:11 PM
I spoke with Andrew Little this evening, he gave our group a short spiel, with no stumbling at all. Everything seems to be on track.

Pray tell El Z, pray tell. Andrew gets through a speech to a receptive audience and all is well!

craic
31-03-2016, 09:19 PM
There is no stale fuel. A 20 litre can seldom lasts two weeks. Spark plugs are regularly cleaned. Dirty fuel is usually water that will not fire.

elZorro
01-04-2016, 06:47 AM
There is no stale fuel. A 20 litre can seldom lasts two weeks. Spark plugs are regularly cleaned. Dirty fuel is usually water that will not fire.

Craic, this analogy between your chainsaw and the National Govt gets better and better :). So you're saying you have fuel that looks and smells like fuel, but it's not firing. You should buy a can of spray Labour Engine Start and see if the chainsaw roars into life for a few seconds. That'll tell you it's fuel related for sure, before having to pull the whole carburettor/bureaucracy apart at the risk of losing some good parts.

As an aside, I once did a rough apprenticeship in small motor repairs, and on one motor, after ignoring the advice of a proper mechanic who suggested I replace the spark plug first, I spent a great deal of time cleaning everything in sight, even the spark plug, sand blasting and testing the plug under pressure in a Champion spark plug machine. It passed the test. Still that engine would not fire. Finally the mechanic produced a new plug, it started first time.

craic
01-04-2016, 08:06 AM
One of my closest friends is a small motors mechanic and an avid Labour supporter. Until recently his shop and husqvarna dealership was just down the road. I gave him a tree every year and he looked after my saws. Now he is a very ill man and I must look after my own saws. The only thing my friend ever did wrong was that he introduced me to Michael Cullen once.

fungus pudding
01-04-2016, 08:11 AM
I spoke with Andrew Little this evening, he gave our group a short spiel, with no stumbling at all. Everything seems to be on track.

Are you being serious? He gives a short speech to 'our group' which I presume is a sympathetic friendly audience of supporters without spluttering - and everything is just fine and dandy all of a sudden. Well goodie goodie. He'll just sail into power in the dead easy, no opposition, gentle and soft world of politics then.
Or perhaps this is your idea of an April fool joke.

westerly
01-04-2016, 08:55 AM
Just for Craic

https://videos.files.wordpress.com/Xblfe4qf/retired-vacum-cleaner_dvd.mp4

westerly

Daytr
02-04-2016, 07:58 AM
National, looking very much like a possum caught in the headlights in regards their response to the Franz Josef flooding.
Plenty of warning and yet very little done. Even difficult to get comment from the minister .
Apparently they may send someone to write another report.
Speaking of planning.
What's their plan to cater for the additional 60-70k people per annum?
Billions spent on roads! Give me a break .
Where are the new hospitals? An aging population & a drift north and no major investment in health or new facilities, particularly in the regions.
How about conservation? With more people there will be more pressure on the environment.
We are already seeing it and yet National's feet are stuck in the mud.

craic
02-04-2016, 05:10 PM
Daytr, I will cut down another sixty-year-old pine next week and cut enough firewood to provide you with enough of the black stuff (carbon) to paint the Right black and you can have all the fun digging up the unimportant rubbish right through to the next election where the populace will demonstrate to you that they are interested in the metal not the dross and will probably elect a right wing government for record term. A gentleman by the name of Mr Mudhoo rode his horse to victory in the last race at Riccarton today and caused my to arise and refill my Glass with Kentucky Bourbon to celebrate but that was the last so it's out to the shed to make another gallon or so.

Daytr
02-04-2016, 09:16 PM
Looks like you might have consumed a bit too much of your own potion.
Here's a hint, don't drink and post. '-)


Daytr, I will cut down another sixty-year-old pine next week and cut enough firewood to provide you with enough of the black stuff (carbon) to paint the Right black and you can have all the fun digging up the unimportant rubbish right through to the next election where the populace will demonstrate to you that they are interested in the metal not the dross and will probably elect a right wing government for record term. A gentleman by the name of Mr Mudhoo rode his horse to victory in the last race at Riccarton today and caused my to arise and refill my Glass with Kentucky Bourbon to celebrate but that was the last so it's out to the shed to make another gallon or so.

fungus pudding
03-04-2016, 08:29 AM
Thanks Daytr, of interest is that to help fund the tax cuts to the wealthier voters, and keep things going, this National Govt has had to borrow $164mill on average, every week since they took office in late 2008. Now they're still borrowing to pay the interest, and the tax take is about to go for a big dive, unless they can keep immigration and house prices up. There's not much else working for this 'rock-star' economy. As someone noted in a comment on your post link, if everyone figures out what they've done, National will lose the next election and they'll never return to office again.

I spoke with Andrew Little this evening, he gave our group a short spiel, with no stumbling at all. Everything seems to be on track.

Oh dear. That new-found anti-spluttering seems to have been temporary and returned full steam for q and a this morning.
And James Shaw who claims to understand business would chuck money at kiwibank to help Aucklanders buy houses. The effect of that nonsense is of course to make houses dearer still. National assured of at least one more term even if Winston First has to be given some fancy sounding portfolio with associated baubles to coalesce.

Daytr
03-04-2016, 08:43 AM
FP, I notice that you have referenced Winston Peters on a number of occasions recently in regards National being able to secure a fourth term.
You obviously see Peters as a real threat to National's re-election chances.
In my view the biggest possible threat is if Labour switch to a leader who inspires.

fungus pudding
03-04-2016, 09:14 AM
FP, I notice that you have referenced Winston Peters on a number of occasions recently in regards National being able to secure a fourth term.
You obviously see Peters as a real threat to National's re-election chances.
In my view the biggest possible threat is if Labour switch to a leader who inspires.

That would certainly improve their chances. Obviously Little is not P.M material - but what's your point?

craic
03-04-2016, 09:25 AM
FP, I notice that you have referenced Winston Peters on a number of occasions recently in regards National being able to secure a fourth term.
You obviously see Peters as a real threat to National's re-election chances.
In my view the biggest possible threat is if Labour switch to a leader who inspires.

A reminder. You CANNOT make a silk purse out of a sows ear. Not even the sackful that Labour have.

Daytr
03-04-2016, 06:35 PM
My point is, if I was a National supporter, I wouldn't be protesting too much re Little.
In fact I would be keeping very quiet, hoping he does stay leader to the election. (I realise that's very difficult for the zealots on here)
As I say the biggest threat is that they dump him for someone much better.


That would certainly improve their chances. Obviously Little is not P.M material - but what's your point?

fungus pudding
03-04-2016, 07:20 PM
My point is, if I was a National supporter, I wouldn't be protesting too much re Little.
In fact I would be keeping very quiet, hoping he does stay leader to the election. (I realise that's very difficult for the zealots on here)
As I say the biggest threat is that they dump him for someone much better.

My vote is always cast against the party I think will do the most harm. With every new Labour leader we seem to get a new bunch of policies, so who knows - maybe I'll vote Labour again one day. I'm quite sure Labour will not be in a position to form the next government, but that doesn't mean I want to see National sleep-walk to victory. Yes, they probably will need Peters, a complete toss-pot but a few baubles in his direction will do the trick. To sum that up - I don't really care which party wins, but I very much care what the policies are. In my life time Muldoon's National were probably the worst govt. and 1984 to 1990 Labour were the best.

elZorro
03-04-2016, 09:30 PM
My vote is always cast against the party I think will do the most harm. With every new Labour leader we seem to get a new bunch of policies, so who knows - maybe I'll vote Labour again one day. I'm quite sure Labour will not be in a position to form the next government, but that doesn't mean I want to see National sleep-walk to victory. Yes, they probably will need Peters, a complete toss-pot but a few baubles in his direction will do the trick. To sum that up - I don't really care which party wins, but I very much care what the policies are. In my life time Muldoon's National were probably the worst govt. and 1984 to 1990 Labour were the best.

Andrew Little can get some more media training, at least he doesn't have a hidden agenda like John Key. I think it's amusing that you have to admit that Labour had to tidy up after a disastrous National term in office, FP. They'll have to do that again soon, only this time it won't be with the help of a handbook compiled by Treasury boffins after they researched neo-liberal think-tank ideas in Chicago.

I was on one of the "National Roads of Significance" today, the disguised think-big project that rewards the large construction firms around NZ. A cop pulled over a driver in front of us who had been passing dangerously at the end of a multi-lane area. These big wide roads all end up back at thin sections sooner or later, and as the Easter traffic showed, they haven't solved much yet.

How stupid will these highways look, if we all have to trim back on fossil fuels and find more efficient transport, or not make so many trips because the fuel is too expensive or too dangerous with ongoing climate change? National will look like dinosaurs then.

NZ is not alone, we'll all need governments that have some ability to look ahead and deliver policies that will help people cope with future events and technologies. Labour and the Greens, along with NZ First, could form a very useful coalition, and their policies have a lot in common already.

What's National's policy? Get in power, borrow $164mill a week using taxpayer credit (http://www.nzdmo.govt.nz/publications/mediastatements/debtprogramme/2015-12-15/), and bluff your way through using the media. It worked for over seven years. It shouldn't last for over nine years though.

Snapper
03-04-2016, 10:34 PM
"What's National's policy? Get in power, borrow $164mill a week using taxpayer credit, and bluff your way through using the media. It worked for over seven years. It shouldn't last for over nine years though."

A more useful way of looking at the government debt is as a percentage to GDP. Makes for a more rational discussion, don't you think?

Useful to put in the a graph from the UK as well, puts the last eight years into perspective. i think I remember something about an earthquake as well...

79607959

Daytr
04-04-2016, 06:11 AM
Agree snapper, however comparing it to a bad performance in the UK to make National look good doesn't put it in perspective.
Perhaps comparing Labour's performance to National's is a better comparison. The difference is stark in comparison .
Apologies to those who saw this the first time around.

http://thestandard.org.nz/who-was-the-better-economic-manager-helen-clark-or-john-key/




"What's National's policy? Get in power, borrow $164mill a week using taxpayer credit, and bluff your way through using the media. It worked for over seven years. It shouldn't last for over nine years though."

A more useful way of looking at the government debt is as a percentage to GDP. Makes for a more rational discussion, don't you think?

Useful to put in the a graph from the UK as well, puts the last eight years into perspective. i think I remember something about an earthquake as well...

79607959

elZorro
04-04-2016, 06:30 AM
Appreciate the work Snapper, at least you're making a good argument.

But it looks to me like National's policy is to borrow when they are in office, until the debt is around 30% of GDP, no matter which cycle they're in. If things are going well, they can reduce taxes to the higher paid, and even if the economy is not going well, they'll take any benefit that Labour has left behind. Look at the longer-term graph from 1986, and you'll note who is in office when the effort goes into reducing the debt below 30%. Labour, 1999 to 2008 . As GDP has climbed lately (higher new house valuations, finance fees, high immigration) the debt percentage graph has started curving back a bit. Don't be fooled, National is still borrowing quite a lot and will soon have to repay some maturing bonds, which will push it back up. They'll leave a big mess by 2017.

Major von Tempsky
04-04-2016, 07:12 AM
Yawn! I've pointed out once before....they teach it in Economics I from Samuelson (ok, there's probably a newer guy with a different name these days saying much the same thing with a few additions) but the National Debt doesn't get repaid, it gets rolled over (good stuff at such low rates of interest). Occasionally it is repaid to some extent as an instrument of monetary and fiscal policy to reduce liquidity in the economy. If a country is extremely improvident and borrows mainly or solely overseas without any thought to maturities and cashflow planning then they end up the creek without a paddle(think Greece and Argentina) but that's not NZ and our borrowing in mostly or solely domestic. Overseas direct investment in NZ is not borrowing, its a private sector decision and if they get it wrong through stupidity they go bankrupt.
Besides which have a look at the table of lenders and you'll see a whole lot of investors looking for a safe investment, superannuation and insurance companies etc.

For every left wing nitwit hiding under the bed at the thought of the Government borrowing (they don't when a Labour gov't does which is just a measure of their hypocrisy) there's half a dozen economically literate people laughing at you.

Daytr
04-04-2016, 07:16 AM
FP, we vote on similar lines i.e. policy rather than be dogmatic in regards right & left.
Although in some respects the Lange/Douglas era in were more right wing than National at the time.
Labour are struggling with a forming an identity in regards what they stand for, at least publicly anyway .
National however remind very much of Muldoon's era, with their big capital projects, particularly roads .
Their environmental policy is seeing NZ go backwards. They are now pushing for things like seabed mining!
They lack direction on combating the NZ diabetic epidemic . Of course they should introduce a sugar tax.
Even if the evidence is yet to be convincing that it reduces consumption over time, at least it would help fund the health costs.
Obviously a sugar tax alone isn't going to resolve the issue. Have warnings, like cigarettes etc.
Regulate the products.
Doing nothing is not an option .
Again National, left floundering .



My vote is always cast against the party I think will do the most harm. With every new Labour leader we seem to get a new bunch of policies, so who knows - maybe I'll vote Labour again one day. I'm quite sure Labour will not be in a position to form the next government, but that doesn't mean I want to see National sleep-walk to victory. Yes, they probably will need Peters, a complete toss-pot but a few baubles in his direction will do the trick. To sum that up - I don't really care which party wins, but I very much care what the policies are. In my life time Muldoon's National were probably the worst govt. and 1984 to 1990 Labour were the best.

fungus pudding
04-04-2016, 07:30 AM
FP, we vote on similar lines i.e. policy rather than be dogmatic in regards right & left.
Although in some respects the Lange/Douglas era in were more right wing than National at the time.
.

Douglas modernised the economy and that was long overdue, particularly after almost 9 years of Muldoon - the most interventionist PM ever. Life in NZ had become as financially controlled as the Soviet Union. What amazes me is how rigidly Labour voters stuck with Labour while they introduced sensible policies that they had always opposed. And it took the NZ party to oppose National and bring about the change of govt.

elZorro
04-04-2016, 12:26 PM
I like the way you right-wingers rewrite history, you're all so full of it.

Douglas didn't have the smarts to write those neo-liberal polices, that was the work of Treasury boffins. The period from 1984 was brutal, and many lost their jobs. Some of you guys sailed through, but you're in the lucky minority, so have a bit of respect.

All through the Clark era when Labour were redressing these unequal imbalances caused by neo-liberal policies, the National cry was to refund taxes. In other words, the repayment of external debt was secondary. When the GFC fully hit, along with the earthquakes, NZ was in a very safe state to lend to. If National hadn't had that headroom, it would have been a lot harder. Even now Bill English is careful to point out that we are in a good spot compared to other nations with our external borrowing. So what you are saying, MVT, is that the level of borrowing doesn't matter, it'll get rolled over? Bill doesn't think so, he's keeping it locked down to 30% of GDP.

However if Labour hadn't ignored National cries from the cross-benches and prudently paid back almost all of NZ's historic debt, we'd now be paying the interest on 60% of GDP, not 30%.

Labour grew our economy with real expansion, National is trying to do it by sleight of hand with immigration and house prices. National's big export hope, dairying, is on the ropes. Large companies throughout NZ are feeling the pinch and are trying to bluff their way into 60-90 day terms with all their smaller suppliers. This grinding down of the economy has a way to go yet. The market is solving the issue of less external income, they'll wring some profits out of smaller enterprises and workers instead.

fungus pudding
04-04-2016, 12:32 PM
I like the way you right-wingers rewrite history, you're all so full of it.

Douglas didn't have the smarts to write those neo-liberal polices, that was the work of Treasury boffins. The period from 1984 was brutal, and many lost their jobs. Some of you guys sailed through, but you're in the lucky minority, so have a bit of respect.



Did treasury write 'There's got to be a better way' as well or did Douglas manage it by himself? Wallace Rowling certainly thought so.
As far as losing jobs - did you ever stop to think how many jobs would have been lost if Douglas hadn't restructured the economy? No? Didn't think so!

elZorro
04-04-2016, 01:14 PM
Did treasury write 'There's got to be a better way' as well or did Douglas manage it by himself? Wallace Rowling certainly thought so.
As far as losing jobs - did you ever stop to think how many jobs would have been lost if Douglas hadn't restructured the economy? No? Didn't think so!

I'll look up the historical details if you think I need to, FP. Just so much bluster. And the rest of what I wrote, would that be accurate then, I take it? Feel free to debate those points too.

westerly
04-04-2016, 02:24 PM
Yawn! I've pointed out once before....they teach it in Economics I from Samuelson (ok, there's probably a newer guy with a different name these days saying much the same thing with a few additions) but the National Debt doesn't get repaid, it gets rolled over (good stuff at such low rates of interest). Occasionally it is repaid to some extent as an instrument of monetary and fiscal policy to reduce liquidity in the economy. If a country is extremely improvident and borrows mainly or solely overseas without any thought to maturities and cashflow planning then they end up the creek without a paddle(think Greece and Argentina) but that's not NZ and our borrowing in mostly or solely domestic. Overseas direct investment in NZ is not borrowing, its a private sector decision and if they get it wrong through stupidity they go bankrupt.
Besides which have a look at the table of lenders and you'll see a whole lot of investors looking for a safe investment, superannuation and insurance companies etc.

For every left wing nitwit hiding under the bed at the thought of the Government borrowing (they don't when a Labour gov't does which is just a measure of their hypocrisy) there's half a dozen economically literate people laughing at you.

I would rather the words of Brian Gaynor ( http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11468289) than the bored ramblings of a right wing economist.
Interesting how the right are so worried about the left they have to resort to name calling and derogatory remarks to boost their criticism of posts they disagree with.

Daytr
04-04-2016, 08:37 PM
Well MVT claims to be an economist, but has been caught out on many occasions on some pretty basic economic history and theorists that any economist should know. I must admit if was to dream up a avatar I think it would be more exciting than an economist.

There has been some discussion on here re tax avoidance. Seems NZ is right up there in regards tax havens and right under the nose of the government.
Thank god for leaks otherwise we would never uncover these things .

Again National caught napping & we are on the UN security council for gawds sake!

http://i.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/78547467/Why-NZs-reputation-could-be-sullied-by-oil-bribery-and-accounting-scandals

elZorro
04-04-2016, 09:51 PM
Did treasury write 'There's got to be a better way' as well or did Douglas manage it by himself? Wallace Rowling certainly thought so.
As far as losing jobs - did you ever stop to think how many jobs would have been lost if Douglas hadn't restructured the economy? No? Didn't think so!

Wikipedia says that Roger Douglas changed his tune in the leadup to the 1984 elections quite a lot, and attributed the new thinking to a Treasury paper and Treasury advisors.


A new direction, 1983–1984[edit (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rogernomics&action=edit&section=3)]At the end of 1983 there was a marked change in Douglas’s thinking. He prepared a caucus paper called the “Economic Policy Package” which called for a market-led restructuring of the economy. The key proposal was a 20 per cent devaluation of the dollar, to be followed by the removal of subsidies to industry, border protection and export incentives. The paper doubted the value of “picking winners” and saw only a limited place for government funding of economic development.[21] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogernomics#cite_note-21) His colleague Stan Rodger (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stan_Rodger) described the paper as a “quite unacceptable leap to the right”. It immediately polarised opinion in the Labour Party.[22] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogernomics#cite_note-22)
Douglas characterised the policy package as restrained and responsible, and an appropriate response to the country’s economic difficulties.[23] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogernomics#cite_note-23) He acknowledged the contribution to the package of Doug Andrew, a Treasury officer on secondment to the parliamentary opposition, among others.[24] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogernomics#cite_note-24) W H Oliver noted the close alignment of the package and Economic Management,[25] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogernomics#cite_note-25) Treasury’s 1984 briefing to the incoming government.[26] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogernomics#cite_note-26) His assessment was that Douglas was predisposed towards the Treasury view because its implementation required decisive action and because greater reliance on the market solved what Douglas saw as the problem of interest-group participation in policy-making.[27] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogernomics#cite_note-27)
Division in Labour over economic policy crystallised when a competing proposal was submitted to the Labour Party's Policy Council. Its proponents included Rowling and others who had resisted his replacement as leader. It argued for a Keynesian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keynesian_economics) use of monetary and fiscal policy. It was sceptical about the ability of the private sector to promote economic development. Economic restructuring was to be led by the government, which would act within a consultative framework. In this way, the social costs of restructuring would be avoided.[28] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogernomics#cite_note-28)
There was stalemate in the Policy Council. As the 1984 election (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_general_election,_1984) drew closer, Labour’s deputy leader Geoffrey Palmer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_Palmer_(politician)) drafted a compromise that contained elements of both proposals. The Palmer paper was broadly worded, and it made no mention of devaluation. It anticipated some form of understanding between government and unions about wage restraint (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incomes_policy). It allowed for extensive consultation about economic policy and stated that necessary structural change would be gradual and agreed.[29] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogernomics#cite_note-29) When Muldoon unexpectedly called an early general election, the Labour Party adopted Palmer’s paper as its economic policy. Lange said that Labour went into the election with an unfinished argument doing duty as its economic policy.[30] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogernomics#cite_note-30)

fungus pudding
05-04-2016, 06:36 AM
Wikipedia says that Roger Douglas changed his tune in the leadup to the 1984 elections quite a lot, and attributed the new thinking to a Treasury paper and Treasury advisors.
Douglas outlined his ideas in his book well before Lange became leader.

Major von Tempsky
05-04-2016, 07:39 AM
Lange was a lawyer and didn't have a clue about economics, as also as you can see above neither did Palmer, another lawyer. Hey Presto, Roger Douglas had some economic ideas and policies so Lange grabbed it with both hands. Lange didn't get re-elected, the electorate said, hey we need to give Roger Douglas a chance to complete his program and Lange was carried back in on Roger Douglas' coattails.
The state of Palmer's ignorance was such that he opposed devaluation!
If NZ hadn't had a floating dollar over the last year or so, and a flexible economy, we wouldn't have been able to cope with the dairy crisis, it would have been off with cap in hand and begging bowl to the IMF.

elZorro
05-04-2016, 07:48 AM
FP and MVT have destroyed my argument, or have they? Treasury put those ideas together, not Douglas, and the ideas in turn came from neoliberal think-tanks and suchlike based in Chicago, USA. Treasury officials spent time there, their economists at the time were firmly in this camp.

https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/2321

fungus pudding
05-04-2016, 08:01 AM
FP and MVT have destroyed my argument, or have they? Treasury put those ideas together, not Douglas, and the ideas in turn came from neoliberal think-tanks and suchlike based in Chicago, USA. Treasury officials spent time there, their economists at the time were firmly in this camp.

https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/2321

Douglas published his book in 1980; four years before his appointment as Finance minister. Although not in policy form it did signal his thoughts. His contribution to NZ is probably the major achievement of any politician of the last 70 odd years; but don't read it. Keep thinking Treasury dragged him down the path he followed.

Sgt Pepper
05-04-2016, 08:25 AM
Lange was a lawyer and didn't have a clue about economics, as also as you can see above neither did Palmer, another lawyer. Hey Presto, Roger Douglas had some economic ideas and policies so Lange grabbed it with both hands. Lange didn't get re-elected, the electorate said, hey we need to give Roger Douglas a chance to complete his program and Lange was carried back in on Roger Douglas' coattails.
The state of Palmer's ignorance was such that he opposed devaluation!
If NZ hadn't had a floating dollar over the last year or so, and a flexible economy, we wouldn't have been able to cope with the dairy crisis, it would have been off with cap in hand and begging bowl to the IMF.

I always find it intriguing that you are dismissive of any Labour politician regarding their academic credentials. He " was a lawyer" etc. I note you conveniently ignore that Bill English has an English Literature degree and Steven Joyce has a degree in Zoology.

Snapper
05-04-2016, 09:15 AM
Well MVT claims to be an economist, but has been caught out on many occasions on some pretty basic economic history and theorists that any economist should know. I must admit if was to dream up a avatar I think it would be more exciting than an economist.

There has been some discussion on here re tax avoidance. Seems NZ is right up there in regards tax havens and right under the nose of the government.
Thank god for leaks otherwise we would never uncover these things .

Again National caught napping & we are on the UN security council for gawds sake!

http://i.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/78547467/Why-NZs-reputation-could-be-sullied-by-oil-bribery-and-accounting-scandals

Have to agree on this one. NZ trusts with overseas settlors have been a nice little earner for some members of the legal profession for a couple of decades now and it is time that the non-transparency of these trusts was done away with. Peter Dunne as Minister of Revenue resisted calls to change this state of affairs a few years ago and just said it wasn't a problem and there was no need to change anything. It's not a good look and makes us look flaky.

Major von Tempsky
05-04-2016, 10:21 AM
I always find it intriguing that you are dismissive of any Labour politician regarding their academic credentials. He " was a lawyer" etc. I note you conveniently ignore that Bill English has an English Literature degree and Steven Joyce has a degree in Zoology.


Totally up the buhoi.

Nowhere did I challenge Lange's and Palmer's academic qualifications, that's a figment of Pepper's imagination, just because he WISHES I said it, or even thought it, does not mean I did, in fact I didn't. What I was challenging was his expertise in a field totally different from his own.

Some people can master a different field through sufficient reading and experience, Lange and Palmer obviously couldn't. Another one who couldn't was Robert Muldoon, he got a conceded wartime troops pass in the Economics 1 part of an accounting qualification, thought he was a brilliant economist, said it was his hobby, and then proceeded to demonstrate he was a dunce and had an anti Midas touch. He was the most left wing Minister of Finance in practice since the Labour Government of the 1930's and 1940s. He also kept overruling Treasury because he thought he knew better than Treasury. Another notable on the list is Noam Chomsky who is qualified in linguistics and a total duffer in economics. Similarly Rand Paul and his father in the US.

I expect the other answer to your comment is that Bill English and Steven Joyce are sufficiently modest and realistic to take advice from Treasury and MBIE and colleagues who do have the relevant qualifications and experience.

Roger Douglas had part of an accounting degree, but he did have an open mind so he could see what wasn't working and he read widely and did his homework.

Sgt Pepper
05-04-2016, 10:45 AM
Totally up the buhoi.

Nowhere did I challenge Lange's and Palmer's academic qualifications, that's a figment of Pepper's imagination, just because he WISHES I said it, or even thought it, does not mean I did, in fact I didn't. What I was challenging was his expertise in a field totally different from his own.

Some people can master a different field through sufficient reading and experience, Lange and Palmer obviously couldn't. Another one who couldn't was Robert Muldoon, he got a conceded wartime troops pass in the Economics 1 part of an accounting qualification, thought he was a brilliant economist, said it was his hobby, and then proceeded to demonstrate he was a dunce and had an anti Midas touch. He was the most left wing Minister of Finance in practice since the Labour Government of the 1930's and 1940s. He also kept overruling Treasury because he thought he knew better than Treasury. Another notable on the list is Noam Chomsky who is qualified in linguistics and a total duffer in economics. Similarly Rand Paul and his father in the US.

I expect the other answer to your comment is that Bill English and Steven Joyce are sufficiently modest and realistic to take advice from Treasury and MBIE and colleagues who do have the relevant qualifications and experience.

Roger Douglas had part of an accounting degree, but he did have an open mind so he could see what wasn't working and he read widely and did his homework.

Unconvincing

Oh I see, Bill and Steven are just modest wee souls who do everything that MBIE and Treasury say. Just admit it, " I don't like Labour politicians, I don't care how competent they are, I just don't like them.

from 1984 George Orwell

Quote 11: "She had not a thought in her head that was not a slogan, and there was no imbecility, absolutely none, that she was not capable of swallowing if the Party handed it out to her." Part 1, Chapter 6, pg. 67

elZorro
05-04-2016, 05:30 PM
What a day. Contrast Helen Clark confirming her bid for the post of Secretary General of the UN, and John Key's need to support the bid in public, while being roasted for NZ's tax haven policies in the house. TV1 was gentle on him tonight, Radio NZ had a more balanced view.

I'm not sure why a wealthy person or corporation would go to Panama to find a tax haven, and have the firm recommend NZ trusts to them, if it wasn't untraceable. If the owner of the money doesn't have to be registered on the file, surely that's a tax haven. I've traced at least one NZ-based individual prominent in the minerals sector, to tax haven companies. They're doing it, no doubt about it.

westerly
05-04-2016, 05:36 PM
Seems to sum up the results of "rogernomics",

"Over 15 years, New Zealand's economy and social capital faced serious problems: the youth suicide rate grew sharply into one of the highest in the developed world;[42][43] the proliferation of food banks increased dramatically;[44] marked increases in violent and other crime were observed;[45] the number of New Zealanders estimated to be living in poverty grew by at least 35% between 1989 and 1992;[46] and health care was especially hard-hit, leading to a significant deterioration in health standards among working and middle-class people.[47] In addition, many of the promised economic benefits of the experiment never materialised.[48] Between 1985 and 1992, New Zealand's economy grew by 4.7% during the same period in which the average OECD nation grew by 28.2%.[49] From 1984 to 1993 inflation averaged 9% per year, New Zealand's credit rating dropped twice, and foreign debt quadrupled.[50] Between 1986 and 1993, the unemployment rate rose from 3.6% to 11%.[51]"

westerly

Daytr
05-04-2016, 05:57 PM
Although I loathe to keep this historical debate going.
Lange was the leader & a charismatic one at that, he had a great intellect and was one of NZs best orators.
Being the leader he must get quite a bit of credit for the changes that were made to modernize NZs economy.
Some of the change was probably done too rapidly, however it set up NZ for the next 40-50 years.
MJ Savage another great Labour leader must stand out FP, only 50 years earlier than Lange/Douglas.

fungus pudding
05-04-2016, 06:10 PM
Although I loathe to keep this historical debate going.
Lange was the leader & a charismatic one at that, he had a great intellect and was one of NZs best orators.
Being the leader he must get quite a bit of credit for the changes that were made to modernize NZs economy.
Some of the change was probably done too rapidly, however it set up NZ for the next 40-50 years.
MJ Savage another great Labour leader must stand out FP, only 50 years earlier than Lange/Douglas.

I certainly give credit to Savage, a man for the time; I should have said 50 years, not 70. Couldn't agree less about Lange. Clever, but a strange character. He killed his own party when they were on a roll.

Daytr
05-04-2016, 06:32 PM
Back to NZ being a soft target for hiding money.
How would we know what this activity is hiding. Terrorist funding, drug money, money laundering from criminal activity or just straight tax evasion.
Not gathering sufficient information has opened us up to all sorts of dodgy activity.
The government was warned on several occasions in recent years to act.
They sat on their hands.
Key in his usual way, is trying to play it down.
Nothing to see here.
What will be the distraction to take away further scrutiny ?
We have already had a referendum , what else can he conjure up?

elZorro
06-04-2016, 06:10 AM
Back to NZ being a soft target for hiding money.
How would we know what this activity is hiding. Terrorist funding, drug money, money laundering from criminal activity or just straight tax evasion.
Not gathering sufficient information has opened us up to all sorts of dodgy activity.
The government was warned on several occasions in recent years to act.
They sat on their hands.
Key in his usual way, is trying to play it down.
Nothing to see here.
What will be the distraction to take away further scrutiny ?
We have already had a referendum , what else can he conjure up?

Here's a good article about our trust system from The Standard.

http://thestandard.org.nz/deborah-russell-whats-going-on-with-foreign-trusts/

There's more good detail in comment '2', from what looks like an insider in the legal area.

The solution is simple, we collect more information from foreign trusts, and we force the few NZ lawyers who are only earning a total of $20mill a year from this despicable work, into the AML system, which must be an overseas standard.

We're already bringing up the rear. Currently NZ's rules for foreign trusts are the loosest in the OECD.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/78585843/foreign-trusts-hiding-darker-secrets-than-tax-avoidance-says-expert?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Wednesday+6 +April+2016

fungus pudding
06-04-2016, 06:58 AM
I always find it intriguing that you are dismissive of any Labour politician regarding their academic credentials. He " was a lawyer" etc. I note you conveniently ignore that Bill English has an English Literature degree and Steven Joyce has a degree in Zoology.


What on earth is dismissive about saying someone is a lawyer? Lange was a lawyer and made no secret of his lack of understanding of economics.

Daytr
06-04-2016, 07:09 AM
Agree, so why hasn't National done this already.
The risk has been raised at leapt twice in the last few years.

In your previous post you said Lange destroyed his party.
Strong words. I am a little young to remember fully, but I would suggest he was a very good leader in his first term '
Ego & the rift got in the way in his 2nd.


Here's a good article about our trust system from The Standard.

http://thestandard.org.nz/deborah-russell-whats-going-on-with-foreign-trusts/

There's more good detail in comment '2', from what looks like an insider in the legal area.

The solution is simple, we collect more information from foreign trusts, and we force the few NZ lawyers who are only earning a total of $20mill a year from this despicable work, into the AML system, which must be an overseas standard.

We're already bringing up the rear. Currently NZ's rules for foreign trusts are the loosest in the OECD.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/78585843/foreign-trusts-hiding-darker-secrets-than-tax-avoidance-says-expert?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Wednesday+6 +April+2016

craic
06-04-2016, 08:42 AM
And of course this "tax haven" situation was never allowed to exist under Labour ?

macduffy
06-04-2016, 12:02 PM
I wouldn't get too excited about NZ's "ranking" in the tax haven league tables. After all, Britain has been described as the world's most efficient tax haven because of its extensive variety of exemptions and deductions - why else would so many ultra wealthy foreign nationals choose to be domiciled there?

It's a sad fact that unless some form of comprehensive international agreement puts an end to it, countries will continue to compete with each other to attract capital through various types of "incentives".

elZorro
06-04-2016, 04:09 PM
I wouldn't get too excited about NZ's "ranking" in the tax haven league tables. After all, Britain has been described as the world's most efficient tax haven because of its extensive variety of exemptions and deductions - why else would so many ultra wealthy foreign nationals choose to be domiciled there?

It's a sad fact that unless some form of comprehensive international agreement puts an end to it, countries will continue to compete with each other to attract capital through various types of "incentives".

That's no excuse. We don't make anything significant out of it, it's only helping the corrupt system along worldwide, so we should do our best to stamp out the practice on our own shores, where we can immediately make an impact. Maybe as Labour pointed out, some major sources of cash from these trusts are being spent on housing assets in NZ, for a double whammy. No external income tax to pay, plus a near certain capital gain with no capital gains tax in NZ. It would all boost our GDP figures quite well in that case, just what National needs to hide their truly abysmal economic performance. Bonus, NZ is not widely known to be a tax haven. Not yet, anyway.

Craic, I have no doubt that given the new revelations, a Labour Govt would act on trusts. They, at least, do have principles.

Daytr
06-04-2016, 07:51 PM
From what I have read is that NZ asks for less information than most of our Western peers.
And that's precisely why NZ has become a soft target for these offshore trusts.


I wouldn't get too excited about NZ's "ranking" in the tax haven league tables. After all, Britain has been described as the world's most efficient tax haven because of its extensive variety of exemptions and deductions - why else would so many ultra wealthy foreign nationals choose to be domiciled there?

It's a sad fact that unless some form of comprehensive international agreement puts an end to it, countries will continue to compete with each other to attract capital through various types of "incentives".

Daytr
07-04-2016, 06:02 AM
I just signed a petition to clamp down on these trusts. The headline read NZ arrests student over non repayment of loan but lets this stuff go un challenged. I see the same when I hear Paula Bennett going after people on social welfare and yet they turn a blind eye to much of the white collar crime. I'm not saying they shouldn't make examples of people who cheat the system, but after all of them & particularly those who aren't desperate, are already wealthy and just want more at the expense of others.

fungus pudding
07-04-2016, 06:12 AM
I just signed a petition to clamp down on these trusts. The headline read NZ arrests student over non repayment of loan but lets this stuff go un challenged. I see the same when I hear Paula Bennett going after people on social welfare and yet they turn a blind eye to much of the white collar crime..

What crime?

elZorro
07-04-2016, 06:58 AM
I just signed a petition to clamp down on these trusts. The headline read NZ arrests student over non repayment of loan but lets this stuff go un challenged. I see the same when I hear Paula Bennett going after people on social welfare and yet they turn a blind eye to much of the white collar crime. I'm not saying they shouldn't make examples of people who cheat the system, but after all of them & particularly those who aren't desperate, are already wealthy and just want more at the expense of others.

I agree Daytr, think I signed that too. If you looked at the costs to the state of estimated social welfare fraud and compared it to tax evasion through trusts by NZers, untaxed capital gains, I think one lot of figures would be a lot smaller than the other.

In a year where we are seeing the future demise of over 1,000 manufacturing jobs across various firms, another 50 this week from the Justice Dept and 500 from NZPost, surely if the govt wanted to reduce welfare dependency, then they would be trying to encourage the SME sector to innovate and create new niche manufacturing jobs. National makes polite noises about that, but it's not enough.

Not enough to discourage those with free cash to invest, away from their tax havens and easy capital gains with unproductive property, back into real enterprises that employ people. That's what makes this a very sad picture.

Daytr
07-04-2016, 06:58 AM
Tax evasion. Lawyer trusts etc.
Some activity may be legal due to loopholes. So close the loopholes. Clamp down on hiding assets and offshoring to avoid paying tax.

craic
07-04-2016, 07:35 AM
Why should we worry about foreigners storing thir rescources here? If the chinese or the Mongolians or whoever are storing money in Australian banks in NZ in trusts, where's the problem? The banks have a bigger lending base and the problem is for the Chinese or Mongolian taxtakers who are missing out. Flags of convenience have been around for years.

elZorro
07-04-2016, 07:46 AM
Why should we worry about foreigners storing thir rescources here? If the chinese or the Mongolians or whoever are storing money in Australian banks in NZ in trusts, where's the problem? The banks have a bigger lending base and the problem is for the Chinese or Mongolian taxtakers who are missing out. Flags of convenience have been around for years.

Craic, you're now drifting to the extreme right-wing side, away from public opinion on tax havens, just like John Key earlier this week. Vernon Small suggests you start rowing back.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/78612250/panama-papers-new-zealands-trusted-reputation-demands-changes-to-foreign-trust-rules?utm_source=ST&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ShareTrader+AM+Update+for+Thursday+7+ April+2016

fungus pudding
07-04-2016, 08:31 AM
Why should we worry about foreigners storing thir rescources here? If the chinese or the Mongolians or whoever are storing money in Australian banks in NZ in trusts, where's the problem? The banks have a bigger lending base and the problem is for the Chinese or Mongolian taxtakers who are missing out. Flags of convenience have been around for years.

Why should we worry about foreigners storing their resources here? Easy - we shouldn't. It's not our problem, although eZ and co. will lose a few night's sleep.

elZorro
07-04-2016, 12:24 PM
Why should we worry about foreigners storing their resources here? Easy - we shouldn't. It's not our problem, although eZ and co. will lose a few night's sleep.

Put aside the political point-scoring for a moment. It has been easy pickings for Labour and the Greens for a few days. It'll get better.

But anybody who knows they pay their fair share of income tax as it's due, be it with PAYE, prov tax, terminal tax, company tax, and in addition doesn't use trusts to hide their wealth as old age creeps up, is playing fair. Many of these people don't have spare property for capital gains either, so they miss out on the other big loophole for tax in NZ. It annoys the hell out of me to know that some people think it's their God-given right to heavily arrange their affairs in such a way as to dodge income tax. They are generally asset wealthy, otherwise why bother? The assets they need to use for this subterfuge are unproductive things like bullion, cash in a trust or tax haven, property, rural farm land etc.

Take the same amount of wealth and start up a new business enterprise like manufacturing, and NZ would be overloaded with job opportunities. But no, many wealthy people can't handle the idea of paying a fair bit of tax with that business model. They don't care if their wealth is tied up in unproductive assets, as long as it's safe and they don't have to pay too much tax. When applied collectively, this attitude holds NZ back hugely. National/Act voters therefore, can't possibly be interested in a brighter future for NZ. They're in it for themselves.

Daytr
07-04-2016, 09:20 PM
Really! And what if that is laundered money for terrorism, drug cartels or tax evasion.
We wouldn't have a clue because we don't ask enough questions.
Of course its our problem and National should have remedied it when it has been raised on several occasions in the last few years.


Why should we worry about foreigners storing their resources here? Easy - we shouldn't. It's not our problem, although eZ and co. will lose a few night's sleep.

elZorro
08-04-2016, 06:30 AM
Really! And what if that is laundered money for terrorism, drug cartels or tax evasion.
We wouldn't have a clue because we don't ask enough questions.
Of course its our problem and National should have remedied it when it has been raised on several occasions in the last few years.

Even Larry Williams on NewstalkZB agrees with you, Daytr.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11617271

From wiki:

Larry Williams Drive features live crosses to reporters, political commentary and quickfire news talkback. The first hour includes interviews with newsmakers, political editor Barry Soper, financial analysts, overseas correspondents and sports journalists. The second hour includes interviews with newsmakers and experts, and a topical panel discussion with commentators like David Farrar (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Farrar_(blogger)), Tim Watkin and Cameron Slater (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameron_Slater).[52] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newstalk_ZB#cite_note-52)[53] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newstalk_ZB#cite_note-53)[54] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newstalk_ZB#cite_note-54)[55] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newstalk_ZB#cite_note-55) Business and finance experts like Cameron Fisher, Fran O'Sullivan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Herald) and Rob Hosking (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Business_Review) appear in the final hour of the programme.[56] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newstalk_ZB#cite_note-56) Susan Wood (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Wood_(television_presenter)), Greg Boyed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_Boyed) and Tim Dower serve as the programme's substitute hosts.[57] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newstalk_ZB#cite_note-57) Williams has been described as "short on humour, long on suspicion" - as someone who "seethes and snarls" and feels "personally affronted" by the news stories he covers.[58] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newstalk_ZB#cite_note-grumpy-58) He has remained in the drive-time position consistently since 1987, appealing directly to peak-hour commuters. The show includes 15-minute news updates, hourly news and sports bulletins, and regular editorials. It has also featured many on-air arguments - during the Blackheart campaign for Team New Zealand (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_New_Zealand), for example, he often argued with fellow host Murray Deaker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Deaker).[58] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newstalk_ZB#cite_note-grumpy-58)

RGR367
08-04-2016, 10:13 AM
For reputational sake, we really need to PLUG any LOOPHOLE about any overseas aliens setting up any kind of "Trust" here, be it a company or a personal trust sort of. It's all about respect first and foremost.

BlackPeter
08-04-2016, 11:12 AM
For reputational sake, we really need to PLUG any LOOPHOLE about any overseas aliens setting up any kind of "Trust" here, be it a company or a personal trust sort of. It's all about respect first and foremost.

Hmm - I guess I agree based on ethical considerations that it would be preferable to avoid to profit from the proceeds of crime and tax avoidance.

However - there is fine line to hypocrisy. As a country (and initiated by Labour) are we happy to be in business with mass murderers (the Chinese regime kills more people per year than all other crooks in government together), we are happy to make deals with regimes ignoring the most basic human rights (Saudi Arabia and China, of course). We are happy and proud to be in business with basically any corrupt and murderous regime (no matter whether this is Belarus, some Banana republic or some African despot).

I suppose - this must be o.k., given that governments of all colours proudly supported all of above. Given all that - is doing business with some people who might try to reduce their tax bills or hide some money from whoever really the worst thing which could damage our reputation?

As well - look at Switzerland, they basically live from hiding other peoples money (some of it probably legit, some of it certainly not) ... did this ever hurt their reputation?

And regarding saving taxes .... I guess the Irish have (rightly or wrongly) a reputation for eating potatoes and drinking whiskey ... but do they have a bad reputation for helping companies to save taxes?

I really think that there are more pressing matters to safeguard our reputation ...

Daytr
08-04-2016, 02:22 PM
It very different BP. These trusts could be hiding or laundering the very proceeds from this type of activity.
Also you could almost add every country in the world to that list.
US has probably killed more innocent people since WW11 than any other country.
The illegal Iraq war, detainment without charging people.
Illegal drone strikes that we hardly ever hear about.
Even Australia has started this very dubious practice with some Kiwis having been caught up in it.

macduffy
08-04-2016, 03:12 PM
It very different BP. These trusts could be hiding or laundering the very proceeds from this type of activity.
Also you could almost add every country in the world to that list.
US has probably killed more innocent people since WW11 than any other country.
The illegal Iraq war, detainment without charging people.
Illegal drone strikes that we hardly ever hear about.
Even Australia has started this very dubious practice with some Kiwis having been caught up in it.

Can anyone remember when the world wasn't regarded as being in some kind of mess or peril?

In my own time there's been the 2nd WW, the Korean war, the cold war, numerous economic and/or financial crises, an untold number of undeclared wars, atrocities, minor and major massacres. I'm just thankful to have been born and lived most of my life in Godzone!

:mellow:

fungus pudding
08-04-2016, 03:21 PM
Can anyone remember when the world wasn't regarded as being in some kind of mess or peril?

In my own time there's been the 2nd WW, the Korean war, the cold war, numerous economic and/or financial crises, an untold number of undeclared wars, atrocities, minor and major massacres. I'm just thankful to have been born and lived most of my life in Godzone!

:mellow:

I think the Vietnam war deserves mention in there.

elZorro
08-04-2016, 07:49 PM
A quick youtube tune from the UK. Does this look familiar?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vbLGG5UGEKw

macduffy
09-04-2016, 09:06 AM
I think the Vietnam war deserves mention in there.

Yes, it certainly does! Just goes to show how chronic - in the literal meaning of the word - this dire condition is, when a major conflict such as that gets "lost" with the spotlight on the present mess.

elZorro
09-04-2016, 09:25 AM
Yes, it certainly does! Just goes to show how chronic - in the literal meaning of the word - this dire condition is, when a major conflict such as that gets "lost" with the spotlight on the present mess.

That's an interesting take, MacDuffy. However, I don't suppose the Vietnam War could have been stopped with a simple law change in NZ, but our tax haven status could be (should the government have a mind to do that).

fungus pudding
09-04-2016, 10:00 AM
That's an interesting take, MacDuffy. However, I don't suppose the Vietnam War could have been stopped with a simple law change in NZ, but our tax haven status could be (should the government have a mind to do that).

NZ is not a tax haven, but guess what eZ! If the govt. need to change the law - they will.

elZorro
09-04-2016, 11:53 AM
NZ is not a tax haven, but guess what eZ! If the govt. need to change the law - they will.

FP, what definition did you apply to "Tax Haven" to come up with that response? A fairly loose one, I think. That's a lie, basically.

Just because we don't pop up on the list like BVI or Cayman Islands, doesn't mean we aren't doing our bit for foreign tax dodgers and money launderers.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11618057

And this site - they say that NZ isn't a tax haven, and then go on to describe how it all works very effectively as a tax haven, 'without the stigma'.

http://www.trust-nz.com/en-nz-as-offshore.html