Posts by Tinakori

  • Speaker: What has Neoliberalism Done for…, in reply to Sacha,

    Well the job losses in the private sector, especially in agriculture were driven by changing terms of trade which meant we got far less for what we exported. Governments tried to prop up agricultural producers and encourage other industries but that was never a long term solution. Freezing works closing down was a symptom of the long term lack of demand for what sheep and beef farmers produced and not a temporary blip in market conditions. When your largest export industry is on the ropes everyone suffers - farmers, processing workers, and all the service industries supporting agriculture. It also makes it much harder to sustain high taxation and highly inefficient government owned entities like the railways and the post office. It's no mystery why things changed and very little of it had to do with ideology.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2013 • 66 posts Report Reply

  • Speaker: What has Neoliberalism Done for…, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    Well as a young journalist on an evening paper working lots of hours outside of the standard working hours it took a very high proportion of all that extra money. The change in take-home income was very,very noticeable when the tax reforms of the mid 80s kicked in. In previous jobs like the freezing works the effect was just as noticeable. I suspect this was why the appeal of the Douglas tax changes reached deep down into the working population.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2013 • 66 posts Report Reply

  • Speaker: What has Neoliberalism Done for…, in reply to Rob Stowell,

    Well the definition of plenty was not exactly something Warren Buffet would recognise. Anyone working long hours at a pretty standard labouring or semiskilled job soon found themselves paying tax at the 60% rate. Then, as now, the only way a high tax economy will raise the required revenue, is for the high taxes to cut in at relatively low levels of income.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2013 • 66 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to Dylan Reeve,

    A very good summation of the situation. Journalism is also a house with many rooms only one of which - and by no means the largest - is about holding power or governments to account. Sport, horse racing (decreasingly) farming (the Dom's Posts farming pages are almost the best thing in the paper), lifestyle, Hey Martha stories (hey Martha, wtf is this?), family tragedies, crime, lost/cute pets , the weather , book and movie reviews, the ads etc, etc all make up the daily diet of what interests consumers of journalism. If holding Government's to account was of overwhelming interest to the wider world there would be an awful lot more of it on all media outlets and it would make money, as old style magazine TV current affairs shows like the US 60 minutes did for CBS for many years. While I watch Campbell Live I can also see why I am among an increasingly small number of people who do so. It has pretty much one emotional tone and leaves you in no doubt of where it stands, which are also the main reasons why it appeals to a niche audience. That exclusionary and hectoring approach also renders the format wholly unsuitable for a public television channel. Fine for commercial TV not for publicly funded TV.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2013 • 66 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Haphazardly to war, in reply to Rich of Observationz,

    The US fracking revolution is undermining the role of Saudi Arabia as an oil producer, that's the key reason the Saudis are pumping as much as they can - to depress the oil price and reduce future investment in fracked wells. There's a significant debate as to whether this is an effective strategy because some argue the cost of fracking is going down all the time and many wells are now much cheaper to move into production than in even the recent past.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2013 • 66 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Haphazardly to war,

    Wasn't the decision to contribute troops in Afghanistan the reason Labour's coalition partner, the Alliance, blew up? Most of the members couldn't cope with being on the same side as the Great Satan, as the Ayatollah Khomeini called the US.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2013 • 66 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Garbage in, garbage out, in reply to BenWilson,

    There's quite a big market for stories about Bad things being done to Good people, which is fine, but not much market for highly technical stories about policy and how it is made and how it works. Many, many years ago - when Colin James was the editor - the NBR did a lot of it. It basically gave you the story behind the story. The Listener too did quite a bit of it and most print and TV stations had specialist reporters who had some sense of how the world worked behind the press release or the Minister's speech. But with their elimination and fewer eyeballs on the job we are left to the tender mercies of what political journalists say and what politicians say. That's important but it's only a sliver of what actually happens when policy is made and implemented.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2013 • 66 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Garbage in, garbage out,

    Broad strokes of the brush based on lots of time in newsrooms and lots of time with people good at numbers, an empirically based observation in other words.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2013 • 66 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Garbage in, garbage out,

    Journalists are notoriously innumerate and people who are good at numbers are not often good writers. The development of electronic and social media has improved the testing of numbers used by politicians significantly because it allows people other than journalists or writers of letters to the editor to share their views on the quality of that data and for the rest of us - including journalists - to have access to those views and conversations. It's not quite the best of times but it is significantly better than it once was. Also, lots and lots of government data is poorly collected and then poorly used with little consistency from agency to agency as to what is being counted or recorded. Sometimes it is not about an intent to deceive but people who are using data without understanding the assumptions and practises built into its collection.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2013 • 66 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: The uncooling of the inner West, in reply to BenWilson,

    Yes, mid century housing and lending policies had the unintentional impact of making lots of the inner city housing cheaper than it otherwise might have been if people were able to express their own preferences. Lots of people still wanted new houses because they were a hell of a lot more convenient to live in than all but the most palatial 19 and early 20th century housing but lots would have had a go at gentrification a lot sooner and prices would have stabilised at a higher level earlier and then probably moved up from that higher base at a more steady pace than has been the case. Would they have reached the level they are now? Current prices are probably more a function of various planning policies and transport issues than gentrification with many older houses in their 2nd, 3rd and 4th generations of renovations. Could the inner city become cheap again? As you say, unlikely. To me one of the key issues is the crappy design of new housing. One way of improving it would be to have monthly executions in Victoria Park of builder-developers-draughtsmen judged to have put up the worst housing without benefit of architectural advice. That would change the incentives in a hurry.

    Wellington • Since Jul 2013 • 66 posts Report Reply

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 7 Older→ First