Posts by Rich of Observationz
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Anyway, why doesn't the Government just bite the bullet and nationalise the airports, ports and rail network and tell us what social services are going to be cut to pay for it all? :)
The airports and ports *make* money. The rail network is in public ownership apart from the oepration of freight and tourist trains - and it's quite likely that Toll will collapse and those will need to be bailed out, as well.
Perhaps if they were nationalised, the revenue from the (air)ports could subsidise the rail network. That's pretty much how the New York subway is financed, incidentally.
-
There obviously needs to be some backstop that stops the airport owner (Kiwi or foreign) from simply shuttering the place and building houses. I suspect if they tried, they'd rapidly find emergency legislation passing through to keep the airport in place.
More likely would be that an exploitative owner let the airport deteriorate to the standards of LAX, for instance. Oh wait, who owns LAX? - yes, it's the City of Los Angeles.
It's a monopoly, it needs a regulator. Like Telecom and the New Zealand Herald.
-
its not it's. And it should be "our"
-
A NZ-based investor at the least is more likely to keep some of the dividend stream here.
If said NZ investor (say Auckland City Council, or the Cullen fund) instead put their money into an overseas investment, they'd get a stream of dividends from overseas.
It makes sense for any large investor to have a globally diversified spread of investments, ensuring that risk is spread. That's why the Cullen fund invests overseas and why the Canadians do the same.
If the Cullen fund put all it's money in NZ, then a downturn in the agricultural sector (just for instance) would impact it's ability to pay out super - right at a time when the Governments current revenues were being impacted by the same situation.
-
Mike Skinner
You've moved to Remuera? Are you going to rename The Streets to The Avenues?
-
Rich: You're extracting the urine, aren't you?
Not entirely. The Herald (and Dom Post, Press, etc) are monopolies. They don't have a "dominant market position" or a "complex monopoly" - they are the only choice if you want a paper that covers the city you live in.
I think there's been a tacit acceptance that they're allowed to get away with this in return for some degree of political impartiality (even if this has always been mythical).
If we are now going to have a monopoly paper that acts as a propaganda sheet for the National Party, shouldn't something be done about it?
-
BTW, the "us whiteys" wasn't to say that everyone here is white, or that white/Chinese/Native American people aren't entitled to an opinion on the Maori seat issue.
-
The situation with the Maori seats would be exactly the same if there was a successful "South Island party" or "Wellington party" that scooped the general seats in a particular locality.
Maori seats are simply an alternate way of grouping people into an electorate. The Epsom electorate is "people who live in Epsom", the Tamaki Makaurau electorate is "people who identify as Maori and live in Auckland".
The Maori seats are, in any case, a taonga and not for us whiteys to take away. If Maori want to get rid of them, they will.
(It would be possible to implement a system where any organised group of people, like students or farmers, could choose to have their own electorate. I doubt any would, but it would remove the (groundless) accusation of racial preference).
-
I don't see any reason at all why an Eric Watson or whoever would be any more or less likely to invest appropriately than a Canadian pension fund.
It's a monopoly. It needs regulation, whoever owns it. Suggesting that a Kiwi investor would be more inclined to run it in the public interest than a foreigner is wishful thinking at best and racism at worst.
-
20 mins is still five times longer than it would take to read the same information off a screen or a sheet of paper.
I don't fully buy that US network news is that much better. Sure, seeing somebody out in one of Americans failing colonies has more of an emotional impact than reading a dry set of facts, but at the end of the day, you're looking at propaganda. It's easier to filter that off paper than off telly, in my view.