If National wins ...

[777]

Who cares.

There are plenty of places for gamblers to spend their money. The number of pokies available won't change that.People have a choice in life. Some make bad choices. We can't hold their hands all the time.

As a SKC owner I am happy for them to build the centre and as both an Auckland rate payer and NZ taxpayer I am particularly pleased.

[Halebop]

Hang on CJ, NZ could afford all of these policies 20-30 years ago - good social welfare, jobs for anyone who wanted to work, free tertiary education, think big schemes. Retailers put a markup on of 1/3 in general, it all seemed to be OK. In the meantime globalisation happened, energy started to be priced higher, and we didn't keep up with the play.

I'm pretty certain you are quoting the wrong decade elZorro. 20 to 30 years ago was 1982 to 1992. This was the period where things had finally got so wrong, so dire, that Labour became the champions of libertarian free market econonics. Inflation averaged 8.7%, Floating Mortgage Rates 15.9%, government debt ballooned because recession and restructuring was expensive. The only policies that NZ could afford during this period was smaller government - rather than free education this was the period that student loans were introduced and real unemployment benefits were cut.

[elZorro]

I'm pretty certain you are quoting the wrong decade elZorro. 20 to 30 years ago was 1982 to 1992. This was the period where things had finally got so wrong, so dire, that Labour became the champions of libertarian free market econonics. Inflation averaged 8.7%, Floating Mortgage Rates 15.9%, government debt ballooned because recession and restructuring was expensive. The only policies that NZ could afford during this period was smaller government - rather than free education this was the period that student loans were introduced and real unemployment benefits were cut.

You're right Halebop, I was thinking of the period 1970-1980, I'm older than I thought..and yes I paid over 20% interest on my first house in the mid 80s. Tell that to house buyers today and they wouldn't believe you..

[elZorro]

More than $6 million is believed to have been allocated since the fund was set up in 2010.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...nau-gatherings

WTF !!! At first I thought this was an April fool's joke! But no!

F$$k me!!! ... $6 million so that the special people can get drunk and party?

Shonkey better explain this tuite suit! I want a public enquiry as to how this vote buying gig got set up!

Hi Belg, that's only $250 per person (example), many could spend that on a good night out with fine wines. But as well as provide the food, this funding did support maraes, consultants and the infrastructure out there in the regions. Te Puni Kokiri in Hamilton were formerly well known for putting on great huis, maybe this funding has simply been moved outside the city walls.

Is this funding really any different from the CRIs, who are taxpayer funded for research to the tune of hundreds of millions, most of which goes nowhere, but it employs the scientists "so they don't leave, and so that if the private sector ever need them, they'll be there". And I'm not joking, that is the rationale.

The govt takes in over 60,000 million in taxes. What's a few million here or there?

[Major von Tempsky]

Wellington is being emptied out as far as jobs go, house prices too. Is the public sector really that inefficient, or are they just convenient cost savers? The National Govt can't sack workers in the private sector, well not directly. They are making it hard for Wellington retailers, landlords, and anyone needing a prompt response from the public sector.

http://www.sharechat.co.nz/article/6...on-s-mojo.html

Ha! ha! ha! I'm rolling about laughing! I worked 35 years in the Public Sector and a good bit of it in Wellington. It's gotta be an April Fools...

When did someone last get a prompt response from the public sector???????????????????

Helen Clark mopped up unemployment by hiring all anthropology, political science, sociology graduates as "policy analysts" in different government departments. Now they are being forced to get an honest job. Instead of specifying how many rungs there should be in a ladder.

[elZorro]

You can always tell a National/Act voter, everything's black&white isn't it MVT?

My cousin's a bureaucrat, works in one of the Wellington offices, used to work for the railways. Last I heard he was bringing up an extended family in the suburbs, he has no university education. So while now he pays taxes and spends on GST items, in your perfect world he'd be out of a job and on the dole. The government is well aware that of every dollar they might spend on the public sector, most of it will come back in taxes, and that if the size of the sector is reduced, there'll be more on the dole and causing grief in other ways perhaps. The outfit my cousin works for, puts out incredibly useful reports that are used in policy decisions, and the private sector should be using these more often, to get an edge. But we're too lazy.

[Major von Tempsky]

Wellington will continue to decline because its main industry does not have productive, useful output, it doesn't have a hinterland.
Christchurch will continue to boom because nothing is done in Chch/Canty unless there's a paying market for it and a good profit (except the CCC Peoples Republic of Chch of course). Canterbury has a huge hinterland dairying & & (with more farms switching to dairying everyday), a huge airport expanding exponentially, a booming port, recovering tourism, a labour market on steroids.

Auckland is an import port and has guaranteed growth from the brown rabbits in South Auckland who are soaking up all the benefits NZ can produce.
Tauranga is a growing export port, well organised with sensible labour market arrangements.

Hint: Move out of Wellington to somewhere with a future.

[jmsnz]

You can always tell a National/Act voter, everything's black&white isn't it MVT?

My cousin's a bureaucrat, works in one of the Wellington offices, used to work for the railways. Last I heard he was bringing up an extended family in the suburbs, he has no university education. So while now he pays taxes and spends on GST items, in your perfect world he'd be out of a job and on the dole. The government is well aware that of every dollar they might spend on the public sector, most of it will come back in taxes, and that if the size of the sector is reduced, there'll be more on the dole and causing grief in other ways perhaps. The outfit my cousin works for, puts out incredibly useful reports that are used in policy decisions, and the private sector should be using these more often, to get an edge. But we're too lazy.

I'm in private enterprise and too lazy to comment on most conversations on this forum, but this astounds me.

In my perfect world your cousin wouldn't be a bureaucrat, and wouldn't be on the dole either. He would be working hard and productively in the private sector to support his family. I am sure that the government is well aware that cutting the bureaucrats shifts costs and doesn't remove them (actually seeing some things they do we might debate that a bit). Long term though, you would hope that a society that was encouraged as individuals to arrange their lives so that they could support themselves would be a good thing. This attitude that the government will support you one way or another is actually quite debilitating.

I would also note that whether he has a degree or not is irrelevant. I know plenty of people who have been able to support themselves and their families without one.

[elZorro]

I'm in private enterprise and too lazy to comment on most conversations on this forum, but this astounds me.

In my perfect world your cousin wouldn't be a bureaucrat, and wouldn't be on the dole either. He would be working hard and productively in the private sector to support his family. I am sure that the government is well aware that cutting the bureaucrats shifts costs and doesn't remove them (actually seeing some things they do we might debate that a bit). Long term though, you would hope that a society that was encouraged as individuals to arrange their lives so that they could support themselves would be a good thing. This attitude that the government will support you one way or another is actually quite debilitating.

I would also note that whether he has a degree or not is irrelevant. I know plenty of people who have been able to support themselves and their families without one.

Thanks for your astounded post jmsnz, I challenge you to post more often than once every two months. I was simply correcting MVT, in that not all public sector workers will be fresh out of university with social science degrees. There will be a wide range of staff backgrounds, some quite practical.

I'm a left-leaning, grey area, private sector person, and I understand that there has been a public sector in NZ for a very long time, it won't disappear anytime soon. When the private sector strikes issues with the public sector, they should aim to make the most of it, jump through those hoops and get the information or part grants that are offered. The CRIs, I'm not so sure about them, they are being forced to compete with, and flog ideas from, the private sector in some instances.

I have every faith in the private sector too. But we all have much to learn, to compete with mass economies. A welder in India is paid $12 a week. Anything we build here to export, has to fit around those kind of facts.

[jmsnz]

Not sure why how often someone posts is of relevance really, but anyway.

We will never compete with 'mass economies' and shouldn't try. We need to find niches that we excel at and the government's role in that should be setting the framework and ensure that infrastructure is in place and then empowering the citizen's to achieve. It isn't necessarily their role to do the work. CRI's are an interesting debate in that context.

I agree that the public sector has a wide range of people staffing it and that it isn't going to disappear anytime soon. My issue is that you imply that its size is irrelvent because it was employing people who would otherwise be on the dole, that isn't the reason for having a public service. That service has to achieve more for society that the costs to society.