If National wins ...

[elZorro]

CRI, IRL, ATI : three letters that mean large public sector group with a low accountability for R&D results per dollar invested.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10808890

I'm not even sure the universities are much better, but they are more fleet-footed, that's for sure. Again, neither have channels to markets. Do all the R&D you like, don't you have to sell it to someone? That is the domain of the private sector, that's where the R&D spend and directive should come from.

[Major von Tempsky]

Funny thing, heh heh heh, food for thought for those who bitterly contested my thesis that most of those that emigrate to Australia vote Labour in NZ.

A nice cartoon in The Press today.

A banner going through the top of two boxes saying " People Leaving in Record Numbers".

In the left hand box Shearer looking glum thinking "We're losing all our constituency" and underneath the cartoonist has added "And your credibility".

In the right hand box Key looking delighted thinking "We're losing all our unemployed!".

So, Roll On the Great Migration :-)

[Pumice]

MVT I had a look at the figures on Statistics NZ website and there is no correlation between migration and governing party. It actually showed slightly more left under labour. (Although not corrected for population growth)
Also assuming they are all (majority) labour supporters, they can still vote for them from over here.
I’m a bit confused on why you are happy with willing workers having to leave NZ to get a job?
My main reason for moving is I refuse to pay for all the unfunded liabilities that make up the bulk of the welfare costs, Aged health care costs and superannuation.
Here’s and excerpt of what I sent to Rodney Hide: “A lot of people complain about the unemployment, DPB and even interest free student loans as big budget costs, however these costs are miniscule compared to health and superannuation costs, but if I were part of the baby boomer generation (who make up a significant portion of the voting public) I wouldn't vote in a government whose policy is to make budget cuts to these areas. I doubt the youth are prepared to pay for these unfunded liabilities and will likely move overseas and leave the mess for someone else to clean up and fair enough too.”

Rodney’s response: “you’ve hit the nail on the head”
Seems I’m somehow sympathising with ACT!! I’m ashamed of myself…..

[Pumice]

Funny thing, heh heh heh, food for thought for those who bitterly contested my thesis that most of those that emigrate to Australia vote Labour in NZ.

A nice cartoon in The Press today.

A banner going through the top of two boxes saying " People Leaving in Record Numbers".

In the left hand box Shearer looking glum thinking "We're losing all our constituency" and underneath the cartoonist has added "And your credibility".

In the right hand box Key looking delighted thinking "We're losing all our unemployed!".

So, Roll On the Great Migration :-)

Hey Major, thought I would use something a little more calculated than a cartoon for my argument. Based on the 2008 election results, more overseas voters (by a majority) voted National, fact. Maybe the next election will be very Red & Green for NZ with all thses national supports heading offshore?
chart Overseas votes 2008.png chart overall 2008.png

[Major von Tempsky]

Good try Pumice :-)

I suspect a pretty low proportion of AUSTRALIAN domiciled NZers actually vote in NZ elections. National/conservative voters are far more conscientious than Labourites in terms of registering and actually voting even though its raining (unlike the wharfies who won't work when its raining :-0 ).
So, yes, thank you to our Australian domiciled National voters for actually registering and voting and equally, thank you to our Australian domiciled formerly Labour voters for not bothering and going to the League, placing their bets, having a fag and/or getting drunk instead :-)

However the UK domiciled Kiwi voters tend to be more professionals and very patriotic and register and get out and vote National.

[elZorro]

Wild unsubstantiated claims supporting National there MVT.

We need higher profits all round here, more innovation. Building things up, not tearing them down.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/7032...rms-innovators

[Aaron]

Balancing the books and living within your means is something I agree with so support National in that regard. I even think John Key was unfairly treated re Skycity and the conference centre. Trying to encourage a conference centre that might bring in some overseas conferences and dollars seems like a good idea to me. Good to see an MP doing something practical.
My problem with national is that it is the young (the future of NZ) that have to take make the sacrifices. They are increasing class sizes reducing support to people studying at University at a post graduate level (if it is tech classes at school that are getting cut then that may mean less engineers and scientists.)
No mention of raising the retirment age or reintroducing means testing for National Superannuation( i.e. if you don't need social welfare from the rest of NZ you don't receive it) I know National's needs to pander to greedy boomers who want/expect a continuation of their cradle to grave welfare but at the expense of the young it is getting a bit much. John's a polictician not a statesman. Even Fungus Pudding must be starting to feel a bit guilty about the oldies screwing over the young in NZ. A lot of those young people are already leaving. Some are protesting. Next elections I hope they can get off their arses and vote.

[Aaron]

but NZers are mainly socialists, and the promise of robbing Peter to pay Paul always brings the Pauls out of the cupboard.

Whose doing the robbing Fungus the people who got free education, free healthcare and now expect welfare in retirement even if they don't need it. Welfare should only be there for people who need it in my opinion. NZ Super made up 43% of the welfare spending to June 2011 and will be expected to grow in future years. I bet there could be some significant savings made there without anyone starving that could go to education and health (I wonder what age group uses up most of the health spend)

[winner69]

The clash of the generations .... bring it on

Only problem is that will take 10 years or more to sort it out .... but I have faith in the Millenials to come up with a resolution

[Aaron]

While I am ranting, removing the child tax rebate and the under $9,880 rebate seem like asking those who can least afford it to make sacrifices for the good of the country.
Imagine earning $9,000 for the year and being expected to pay $945.00 in tax. That might be quite tough going to be fair even if it is only 10.5% of your income well less than half the 33% people earning over $70,000 have to pay. After tax weekly $9,000($154.91($173.08-$18.17)) $90,000($1,334.23($1730.77-$396.54) at least we don't have a flat income tax rate yet.
Increasing the tax take is another way to balance the budget. (That would not include increasing GST as we all know this is a regressive tax) Capital gains tax could be a consideration if it wasn't so complicated.