I should probably look this up, but is that a nominal figure? Because inflation is going to go mental, as a result of GST plus the wallop of Christchurch spending.
No no no. It is nominal - but inflation stays really low. For some reason. Also unemployment plunges for some reason. And productivity grows steadily, somehow. It's all gravy.
For many, the increase in employer contribution to 3% and the sneaky imposition of tax on that will all end up coming out of worker's pockets in the form of smaller pay rises.
Don't worry! Treasury confidently predict 4.0% annual wage growth for six years! Which, as far as I can tell, has not happened in New Zealand in at least the last hundred years!
can someone deconstruct the reasons why people think Key is a good bloke, a nice man etc.
I know it does no good trying to convince people who think that way otherwise, but….
….I WANT TO KNOW WHY THEY THINK THAT WAY, ANYHOW!!!!!!!!
I hate things I don’t understand, and this is one of them. Please help!
Here you go:
Basically, NACT own the media. They are never going to portray any party to the left of John Key as other than crazy or incompetent. It's time to realize this and work around them.
Yeah, that's what Labour thinks. It's bullshit. Total bullshit. The media runs every anti-Key smear story Labour gives them, it's just that the public doesn't respond to them.
As Rob Salmond pointed out a few days ago - when Labour talks about policy the media COVERS IT and they go up in the polls. When they smear Key the media ALSO COVERS IT but they go down in the polls, because the public likes Key and Labour's 'scandals' are almost always trivial bullshit. Premier House is getting repainted? Give me a break.
What have we done to deserve such all round awfulness?
My thesis is that Clark and Cullen were brilliant and driven enough to run their party, and then their government by themselves, aided by very high calibre staff (Heather Simpson, Mike Munro, Grant Robertson). To secure their own position they stacked their cabinet with people who were personally loyal to them, and incapable of challenging them.
Which worked really well, until all the people who ran the party left at once. That's why we currently have a vacuum instead of an opposition.
Mallard seems to spend most of his days posting bizarre conspiracy theories on his blog and exchanging insults with Cameron Slater over Twitter.
He who fights with monsters . . .
Call me a skeptic but how do we know Bin Laden is dead . . .
If it was a fake attack it would be pretty easy to prove, and then Obama would be impeached, sacked and and disgraced. Political leaders tend to operate with pretty low risk thresholds when it comes to things like that.
Could you elucidate? I'm prepared to believe they had DNA (familial?) for comparison, but obviously I have no idea what they might have been able to show.
Although our DNA is roughly 99.9% identical, there is such a huge variation in the other 0.1% (which are mostly non-coding regions) that you can usually nail down a statistic like: 'there is a 1 in a hundred million chance this is not bin Laden or one of his brothers, all of whom are accounted for'.
Personally I’m feeling extremely uncomfortable about the fact that he was killed (together with a bunch of people with him) rather than being captured.
I get the sentiment, but I'm not sure what that would achieve. There's no doubt about his crimes or culpability. And he was living in an armed, fortified compound a block away from the Pakistani military academy. It seems reasonable for the US to decide that capturing and holding him was simply too problematic.
They’re going to go after the low-hanging fruit, the people with enough understanding to successfully torrent things but not enough to be smart about it.
I don’t know how it’ll work, but I suspect they will go after people seeding new or unreleased albums/blockbuster movies.