Posts by Rob Stowell
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Felt rockier, but shorter, eh?
Geonet seems frozen on the 5.8 so no confirmation. Lots of little aftershocks.
I can see some people out fishing in the harbour, half a k or so away. They've been there for a few hours- bet they haven't felt a thing :) -
Cellphones not working that well. Town will be crowded, and probably gridlocked as people head home, and shops close....
Getting txts from out of town, but not from family shopping in Chch.
Bloody hell. -
Yeah, BUGGER!
5.8 8kms depp, 20kms NE of Lyttelton.
This is going to put a damper on Xmas. I still have shopping to do! -
These things are thinkable, but not sayable in the political conversation. Yet.
Norman appears to be saying them... but the Labour leadership won't/can't/don't?
Bottom line: if they don't have the guts to take on the media, why should we believe they have the conviction to do anything? The conversation isn't going to change all by itself.
Shearer needs to stand up and say this stuff. Or he really is the 'lite-blue' option.
And: bloody earthquakes. Just stop it! I am now on holiday! -
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to HenryB,
Yeah, I’m in the same camp. For all the farandango of the public process, Shearer’s selection seemed like back-room business. Against all the evidence we could see, the weaker candidate was chosen.
I think that’s why this thread has been, at times, rather fraught. Keith’s post was full of innuendo and snark towards David Cunliffe. But unless (as has been hinted again and again) there was a hidden back-story of the ABC movement, it was hard to see why.
<rant> TLDNR :)
Paul: the notion that Labour will go out and talk to people (focus groups, anyone) and then cut their policy cloth accordingly just fuels the narrative: they don’t know what they believe in.
Russel Norman didn’t have that problem. Hone Harawira doesn’t seem to. Goff, during the election, managed to draw a clear line (with help from Cunliffe- the CGT initiative is a great move, which even has people across the political spectrum nodding assent) and reiterate some old Labour values.
People in NZ like Labour’s policy. But some of us aren’t so sure Labour themselves believe in it. Or will fight for it. Or are competent to put it in place.
That’s the job for Labour: show us you’ll fight, show us you can do a competent job in opposition, show us YOU believe.we forecast a declining tax base relative to government costs so unless we’re going to provide fewer services to our ageing population, we have to earn more offshore
Look, that would be lovely, but it’s not so easy. And here’s the rub: great new innovative global businesses are nice to talk about. But they are not within government’s power. If it were, geeze wayne, every govt in the world would be doing it. Of course govt can and should do more for science, education, and innovation. It’s worth doing, in my opinion, whatever the financial return, because education is a social good, and knowledge expands the very horizons of humanity :)
We can also hope it leads to greater wealth and national well-being. But it might not. (I’ll bet if it’s embarked upon with project management ‘benchmarks’ and timelines for ‘ROI’ it’ll be a mighty waste of human capital, goodwill, and money, too.)
So what do we do about the growing inequality in NZ? We might look back at the years of relative equality, and ponder: hmm.
Top personal tax rates were 65%. Benefits were relatively high. The ratio of worker to CEO pay was considerably lower.
Labour did raise the top tax rate in 1999 to 39% (and the country hardly fell off a cliff- we entered a silly boom, in fact.) A CGT is a great first step. Labour’s plan was relatively timid, though, limiting it to 15% (I think this is what Bush, hardly a socialist, lowered the US CGT to) and excluding many things other countries manage to include.)
And we might also hear Labour talk about raising benefits to a pre Nancy Richardson level that allows people a decent life.
But somehow neo-lib orthodoxy rules, and these things are hardly thinkable, not able to enter the political conversation. Certainly not things Labour is going to fight for.
I’ve voted Labour almost exclusively, all my life (Greens in 1999; Mana this time). I’ve been a party member, didn’t bother in 2010 because they seemed so weak and waffly an opposition, and a communications embarrasment. I may join again. Like most here, I certainly want them to give the govt heck and win in 2014. I want Labour to show and shout and demand there is another way to run the country, with values that are not all expressed in $$$$ and policies focused on equality of outcomes for all NZers (as Russel declared) not some phantom level playing field.
Yeah, it’s frustrating. </rant>
sorry for ranting, it's been a trying year :) -
Merry Christmas folks. I don't know many of you, but yay! for this forum, and its Saintly, Gouty, Gracious Host :)
Hope everyone gets everything they are wishing for, and a few surprises, too. -
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Heather Gaye,
is for their jobs this term to be an utter fucking nightmare.
+1.
But one we get to wake up from, please :) -
Norman did sound good. A very clear contrast to National.
an urgent need to reduce poverty, retain assets and create meaningful work
Maybe- but how? Shearer's answer isn't so impressive. Something borrowed: 'smart, green' and something blue: 'growing the pie' with innovative new businesses.
I agree with a point Ben Wilson keeps making (and Russel Norman, in a different way)- we are foolish to base all our economic and social plans on the NZ economy 'growing' most years, and ever on, til the end of time.
Globalisation will keep on tending to push NZ wages down- and hopefully, third-world wages up. NZ is plenty 'smart'- but it's nuts (and a little offensive) to assume there aren't also plenty of smart folks in India, China, Ghana and Bolivia.
And just about our whole economy and way of life is based on cheap (dirty) energy and free (endless) water. Resources are finite.
The world has the ability to sustain 7 billion people, and more. But not the way we're doing it now. -
Shane Jones.... What was that 'fresh' front bench again? :)
-
OnPoint: Dear Labour Caucus, in reply to Cecelia,
Yeah, I kind’ve liked it too. I want to like Shearer. When he’s getting raggy on the Nats, I like him.
But I find his ‘new’ vision of smart green jobs and industries a little borrowed, and a little blue :)
Can we pull lots of people out of poverty with ‘smart’ market jobs and education? We’re no good at ‘commercialising’ our genius? Couldn't you almost hear Joyce saying some of these things?
Since Gio ain't here to ask the question- How is Shearer’s vision for NZ ‘left’?
We have growing and shameful inequality in NZ. I don’t think there’s any way to halt it that doesn’t involve turning away from ‘the markets’ for some straightforward old-fashioned wealth redistribution.
Sharing it round- there’s an idea!