Damn! I was going to link to that tomorrow!
You still should. I saw that quote on one of the blogs this morning too.
This has been a thread of near-poetic cynicism ...
In the end years of the Labour Government, I felt that no matter what argument I presented to the Government, ones they could be sympathetic to in other times, they'd carry on their pre-ordained agenda. It didn't make a difference to them.
I already feel that way about the present one.
It's Santa Cthulhu, you vile blasphemer.
I thought you were the Grinch who stole Christmas.
All hail Cthulhu.
Even when Damian Christie mentioned later that he had a gig with "the new Paul Holmes show" I didn't twig.
No sane person would have heard that comment and thought he was referring to the replacement for Agenda.
I should say that I was stung by the .49 dollar this morning to the tune of a few hundred dollars, so I'm more than a little personally interested in the matter.
George, how do you suggest we set the rate for the NZ currency? By government fiat, with the rate determined by whether farmers or Mac buyers currently have the ear of government?
I'm suggesting no such thing. It was before my time, but I have a strong impression of the postwar and Muldoon era, and how that caused a great deal of frustration and hardship.
I do think however that the Government could impose limits on very large transactions. A large company converting (say) over $1million would simply have to register the transaction with the Government, and this could be done in a non-intrusive way. Those who do this commercially for companies would have no problems, but those who simply gamble money (as they do quite openly and obviously now) would find themselves shut out. No system is perfect, and there might be some issues to be resolved in my proposal, but I stand by my statement that the current system harms the NZ economy, perhaps significantly.
Given that NZ is run by a currency trader at the moment, I don't think that we're likely to see this given any serious consideration before 2011, but opposition parties should consider it.
Can we ban the currency speculators already? I'm actually quite serious about this.
The dollar bounces unpredictably in a USD .40 - .85 range and it hurts the economy in serious ways. Exporters and importers can't plan ahead properly (unless they're able to hedge currency - another expense, and one that's difficult for small businesses). It means that people are more cautious about investing, because what they're about to spend on might suddenly become dramatically cheaper or more expensive, and they would have wasted large amounts of money.
The NZD is one of the 12 most traded currencies in the world - far in excess of the size of NZ economically. Basically, rich men are using our dollar to make money. And we pay the price.
There's been talk above about how Sky City and casinos are just harmless fun. You pays your money, you haves your fun, and you walk out at the end of the night.
I don't think that the pokies, and the rest of Sky City would be much of a moral hazard if there weren't real consequences however. That is real money that people are handing over, and for too many it is the loss of money that means suffering in other areas of their lives. And that, essentially is the problem. Hundreds of dollars. You'd have to drink a lot of alcohol, or start taking regular hits of P to get that far into your finances - and society would recognise that as a problem.
The problem for Sky City and the places that rely on pokies is that their entire business model revolves around people spending lots of money - if they ran things so people felt good after only spending $20-30 they'd go bankrupt. Compare that to a bar, where most people are having a good time after spending the same amount, and there is no comparison.
This isn't about wowserism. This is about the fact that there's comparatively so little pleasure derived for such a lot of social harm.
I don't think the Prime Minister has gone far enough. These are radical times, and we are a nation of DOers.
I want him to suggest a 2 day working week, with the other 3 days paid for by the Government. That way, we could reduce productive capacity and no-one would be worse off.
It takes a bold man to say these things. And that man is John Key. Can you imagine Helen Clark introducing the 2 day working week, for example? There is no comparison.
Here's an idea. The Government nationalises all housing. That way, people will be able to take cuts of 2-3 days per week, not having to pay rent or mortgages.
Problem solved, right?