Posts by Kumara Republic
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Remember TranzRail!
-
OnPoint: Election 2011: GO!, in reply to andin,
When its all about winning at any costs. Even being a decent human being.
Revenge of the Jocks, methinks?
A focus on increasing New Zealander's investment in NZ to fund more of our growth from our domestic savings/markets would be better than reminicsing on who you would most like to phuck..
Bread and circuses, much?
KiwiSaver is an obvious candidate for boosting local savings. Oh wait, the powers that be think it's run by dancing Cossacks.
-
OnPoint: Election 2011: GO!, in reply to Sacha,
Yep, Devlin's latest spoutfest confirms he's a member of the Good Ole Boys club.
-
Gingercrush's little rant on Te Standard would have been farcical if it wasn't so deadly serious. Vaguely reminiscent of Lindsay Perigo's rant on the Battle in Seattle.
Shouldn't Ginge be more concerned about nouveau riche ladder-kickers? The differences between "latte liberals" and said ladder-kickers are obvious. To name just one of them, a sense of good taste.
-
But the deficit is, largely, a private sector problem. Reducing government debt-related outflows doesn't deal to the 80-something percent of our foreign debt that is related to private borrowing for homes, cars, and big-screen TVs. Flogging off state assets to reduce state borrowing doesn't change that calculation, which is at least some of Keith's point.
With apologies to Piggy Muldoon, the usual suspects wouldn't recognise a current account deficit if it kicked them in the balls. And regrettably, the only effective solution would probably come from Iceland. Or American sub-prime lenders, if my inner Machiavellian is to be believed.
And OT, but not quite OT: what chance of the Pike River Royal Commission doing a Justice Mahon, given the increasing disillusionment of the next of kin?
-
-
We do effectively have an upper house. It's called the Business Roundtable.
-
-
OnPoint: Election 2011: GO!, in reply to BenWilson,
Also, there's plenty of unnatural monopolies that are harming our economy. Our supermarket chains, for instance. There's a case for government taking a controlling stake, just so that the profits from our skyrocketing food costs are returned to us. I'm not actually suggesting this, just pointing out that it's not potential for monopolization that is the sole factor in whether we should be owning something as a nation.
Or taking a leaf out of America's Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Mass media is another area where unnatural monopolies have emerged.
So far absolutely everything they have come up with has actually been a consequence of the energy crisis and the global financial meltdown.
Sticking heads in the tar sand, methinks?
-
Hard News: Only what we would expect a…, in reply to Sacha,
Nailed him on the whole 'mums and dads' being taxpayers thing, though. This is just another transfer of wealth from all of the public who already own those assets to those who can afford to buy shares. That's 'mums and dads' who look more like the Hotchins and the Fays - or foreign investment funds, more like.
Or even Bernard & Ruth.