If National wins ...

[POSSUM THE CAT]

craic the boy actually completed the seventh form but played during his seventh form year. Both the boy & girl earned extra pocket money cleaning the tools & cleaning up after my mechanical jobs. The boy could service his own car by the time he finished school. Also he worked after school & holidays doing irrigation repairs, maintenace & installation cycling as much as 12km out to the farms untill he bought his own car. Then he got a cadetship with a computer printer firm in Auckland & went from there. At the moment I think he is employing 5 staff. The girl became Dux of her school got several degrees & in never realy happy she is into computer programing & web development. The boys first computer was a ZX81 & then i think it was an Amstrad.

[fungus pudding]

All the indications are that National's controversial policy of partial sell downs will end up being wildly popular with a large section of the population, including many that have been and probably still are opposed to sell downs of SOEs and have not been directly involved with the sharemarket before. I will go out on a limb and predict this may indeed assist National in securing a 3rd term, helped by the Opposition continuing to harp on about this long after everyone else happily moves on and just looking like bitter old men/women.

My thoughts exactly. I'll second every word of that.

[iceman]

National's opposition will be loosing my vote as I'll be leaving the broken down country that is a sold-off NZ.

So yes, you may be right.

I am sure you will be making sure you get your shares in the SOE's first though Belg

[elZorro]

All the indications are that National's controversial policy of partial sell downs will end up being wildly popular with a large section of the population, including many that have been and probably still are opposed to sell downs of SOEs and have not been directly involved with the sharemarket before. I will go out on a limb and predict this may indeed assist National in securing a 3rd term, helped by the Opposition continuing to harp on about this long after everyone else happily moves on and just looking like bitter old men/women.

The recent history of NZ is littered with lessons learned when state-owned assets or enterprises have been sold off. It so often ends badly Iceman. I thought John Key looked decidedly down as he annouced the sale process on TV yesterday. What is it that he knows, that you don't?

I was talking to someone the other day who reckoned the reason the NZ dollar was so high was that NZ had huge investments overseas that Treasury or the Reserve Bank have been making on the quiet over the years (sorry for the inaccuracy of the source). However on scouring the web, I can see no evidence of this, although my impeccable? source had been in Wellington for some years.

It's more likely our dollar is so high because the interest rate is still very high compared to other countries. In Japan for example, funds can be borrowed for 1-2%. Just think what you could do with funds at that rate here.

Which all begs the question, did we ever need to sell these assets down, and will the populace really respond across the board to buy them up, as Iceman hopes?

I suspect No, on both counts.

[iceman]

The recent history of NZ is littered with lessons learned when state-owned assets or enterprises have been sold off. It so often ends badly Iceman. I thought John Key looked decidedly down as he annouced the sale process on TV yesterday. What is it that he knows, that you don't?

I was talking to someone the other day who reckoned the reason the NZ dollar was so high was that NZ had huge investments overseas that Treasury or the Reserve Bank have been making on the quiet over the years (sorry for the inaccuracy of the source). However on scouring the web, I can see no evidence of this, although my impeccable? source had been in Wellington for some years.

It's more likely our dollar is so high because the interest rate is still very high compared to other countries. In Japan for example, funds can be borrowed for 1-2%. Just think what you could do with funds at that rate here.

Which all begs the question, did we ever need to sell these assets down, and will the populace really respond across the board to buy them up, as Iceman hopes?

I suspect No, on both counts.

I am well aware of the "recent history" EZ and agree with you that many of them have been handled badly. We have also had quite a few Government owned Companies that have turned into disasters, latest example being Solid Energy. We also have PPPs such as Port of Tauranga (and recently Air NZ) that have been outstanding successes. So for the record, I am very much in favour of PPPs for at least some of the companies the Government is looking at selling, rather than selling 100% of these companies.

Why I hear you ask ! Firstly I think they will be more transparent being partly publicly listed and they will be subjected to much more public scrutiny than they are now. I wish more scrutiny had bee placed on Solid Energy.

Secondly I think the Government should not be putting more debt on their balance sheet at present. It is simply too risky in today's World. On the other hand, we have some very real urgency for serious investment having experienced the biggest natural disaster in history, bringing an almost complete destruction to our 3rd biggest and very important city. It now needs a lot of money to be rebuilt and I believe the Government should and will bear a lot of that cost. In my view, that is more important than any other issue currently facing NZ

At the same time, we are dealing with the biggest World wide economic melt down in 70 years which needs to be also managed through. It requires a pragmatic approach to cut backs in unnecessary Government expenditure without jeopardizing the most vulnerable in our society, I think John Key's Government has done a blimmin good job of finding the middle ground.

That's why they consistently poll with around half the population supporting them. National at present is the only real Center party in NZ that connects with the general population.
Having said that, there are many things I don't agree with that they do but I agree with more than I disagree with.

Yes our dollar is far too high for our exporters liking (I'm one of them) but it is also a vote of confidence in the way our economy and banks are on fairly solid financial ground. We are lucky that both Labour and National Governments over the last almost 30 years have been generally responsible in managing the Government's finances. We can and should debate the finer points like we do, but like Norway for example (they have been much more clever in extracting their natural resources and being green at the same time, making their country one of the richest in the World, while we with our stupid overtly extreme green policies missed out on the boom !), we are a fairly centrist country that does not swing wildly from Left to Right each election. It gives investors confidence in our country and unfortunately supports a strong currency. C'est la vie

So to your 2 final questions EZ, I say "yes"on both counts. Time will tell

[craic]

Does anyone really think that national will lose the next election? JK has been portrayed as a bumbling idiot who twists the truth to suit and the Govt. as a crowd of idiots on the verge of destroying the country but what are the facts? We are better off than most European countries, hence the strong currency - international finance does not back losers. If you opened the immigration gates to Europeans or just British, the airports would be jammed with planeloads of folk wanting to live here. We travel overseas most years and have decided against any more UK visits - always glad to get home. I wait in vain for the leader of the Labour Party to produce any single policy to improve the Nation as a whole. Every single statement is an attack for attack sake on anything the Govt. does. Doesn't Mr Shearer know anything about the principles of leadership. That there are times to shut up and that there are times to praise your enemy?

[elZorro]

Does anyone really think that national will lose the next election? JK has been portrayed as a bumbling idiot who twists the truth to suit and the Govt. as a crowd of idiots on the verge of destroying the country but what are the facts? We are better off than most European countries, hence the strong currency - international finance does not back losers. If you opened the immigration gates to Europeans or just British, the airports would be jammed with planeloads of folk wanting to live here. We travel overseas most years and have decided against any more UK visits - always glad to get home. I wait in vain for the leader of the Labour Party to produce any single policy to improve the Nation as a whole. Every single statement is an attack for attack sake on anything the Govt. does. Doesn't Mr Shearer know anything about the principles of leadership. That there are times to shut up and that there are times to praise your enemy?

I seem to remember National and John Key picking away at Labour continuously up until 2008. It worked, in combination with the fact that Labour had already served three terms. As it turned out, Labour had been doing most things well.

Iceman thinks that scrutiny of an SOE by the market will help it. That process didn't work for Pike River, and it might very well have been a big factor in its demise. The relentless pursuit of targets and profitability in each quarterly report.

I think we can see that JK will bend the truth when he has to, no doubt about that. Shearer still needs to look more like a statesman, I agree there. Someone on the left side of things just needs to put the real story out clearly and succinctly, more often.

Can Labour win this next election? I hope they do, they have the policies we all need to move forward as a proud country. As soon as they start believing that too, they can convince the rest of us. Enough of us anyway, to take the reins in 2014.

[Major von Tempsky]

"to our 3rd biggest and very important city" - Grrrrrr!!! u r treading on very thin ice Iceman!

Christchurch is definitively our second largest city. According to the last Census it had passed Wellington in all 3 population measures for the first time, as a province/stat area/region, as a City, and as the total of all neaby urban areas. Don't let me have to correct you again!
It's also currently the fastest growing area.,,,,

[iceman]

"to our 3rd biggest and very important city" - Grrrrrr!!! u r treading on very thin ice Iceman!

Christchurch is definitively our second largest city. According to the last Census it had passed Wellington in all 3 population measures for the first time, as a province/stat area/region, as a City, and as the total of all neaby urban areas. Don't let me have to correct you again!
It's also currently the fastest growing area.,,,,

Shame on me ! May be proven right though based on the Census compiled as I was typing my post yesterday, but time will tell. Hope you don't disagree with the "very important city" bit

[Fred114]

Viral video on unequal wealth distribution in US. Pretty much the trajectory that NZ is taking in my observation

http://mashable.com/2013/03/02/wealth-inequality/