Posts by Rob Stowell
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
OnPoint: It's real, in reply to giovanni tiso,
'Middle class' in the US doesn't translate at all cleanly to 'bourgeoisie' or exclude the 'Working class'.
But yeah. There is a huge 'underclass' in the US that Reich doesn't mention.
I don't think that's deliberate callousness. He's an economist, and his particular schtick at the moment is that great and growing wealth inequality and weak govt intervention is bad for the (capitalist) economy- and any hope for a recovery of same. He makes a good case for that.
Whatever his position on social justice. -
Roger said to me they do not want to get involved in the Market. My ‘yelling from roof top’ is trying to get people to see there will be no other way for people to get land.
Yes. Leaving the resolution of people’s dire housing needs to ‘the market’ is absolute ballocks in such a situation. The people in the red zone are not average buyers in any sort of ordinary supply and demand scenario. They’ve been forced out by multiple quakes and a government decision.
I’m not especially shocked to see this Govt outsource empathy to land sharks. But angry, yes. Various aspects of the ‘private enterprise’ response to the quake give looters a bad name.
Brownlee and CERA have been given extraordinary powers. Handing over responsibility for the recovery to ‘market forces’ is gutless on the one hand, and a terrible ’solution’on the other. Time for the govt to step up- or get out.
If govt, CERA and the council continue to show no inclination to lead, those affected need to start organising their own solutions- helped by whatever local leadership and wider support can be mustered. It will suit the land-sharks perfectly to have thousands of individual families all looking for land at the same time- and competing with each other. On the other hand- collectives of even 10 or 20 families, with a nominated buyer or agent, would have significant money behind them. A collective land-buying agency, with 100s of families involved, might have the ability to change the game completely.
There’s already some organised lobbying. Surely worth a try? -
Emma- +2
-
I am ready to repeat the call I made here a couple of years ago to create a charitable trust to fund public interest journalism. Gimme a day or two, I have a draft already that I need to tidy up.
Genuinely interested in this notion- though of course it’s up to you, Stephen, to push it or not.
Anyway- you have til tomorrow or the kitten gets it. :) -
I’m in no doubt that the public strongly supported harsh action on looters after the quakes
Yeah? Personally, I think this is a lousy assumption, albeit one Phil Goff and Crusher Collins seem likely to have shared.
Emotions were running high. But strong support for illegal, immoral and indefensible Police bashings? I hope we are not so far gone. -
I am ready to repeat the call I made here a couple of years ago to create a charitable trust to fund public interest journalism. Gimme a day or two, I have a draft already that I need to tidy up.
Terrific idea.
In the early days of TPM, Josh would occasionally call for donations, for specific projects/hires. Big audience. It seemed to work pretty well (and no need these days- it's a mini-empire :))
Probably not what you have in mind, but maybe you should talk to Gordon Campbell/Werewolf.
Creating content is one side: it needs a dynamic method of sharing/disseminating it as well. www.publicinterest.tv is gone, but you could snaffle publicinterest.net.nz ... -
Looking at the roll-call of rabid right-wing commentators who’re weighing in to support a CGT
... what's the bet JK, after campaigning against it (and winning) becomes a firm supporter by 2013, and promises to bring it in if re-elected? :)
-
Yep, mostly the idea is to tax the unimproved value of land, so that if it becomes in high demand the old folk living on it are encouraged to sell up and move on (and they all hate the shit out of that idea).
Kinda sucks for anyone hanging onto a bit of native wetland, forest, or rare animal habitat, all that has to end up on a list of recognised reserves for exemption. Discourages long-term investments like forestry for things that provide a constant (if lower overall) return.
+1
Thanks mate. People talk of this as a better idea that CGT, but I emphatically don't think so. CGT you pay at a point where you actually have $ money. This sort of tax insists all ownership must be 'productive' - for some short-term value of productive that's only measured in $.
<disclaimer> we own a property that already costs us a lot. we've planted thousands of trees. but it's unlikely we'll ever make much money from it- unless we sell. an asset tax- on top of fairly heavy rates- would probably force us to sell.
we'd make money on that- but we don;t want to. it's more than a property- it's home; turangawaewae. -
Hard News: Radio NZ: Sailing on in…, in reply to Hilary Stace,
Very good it was too.
-
Are we not allowed to read it because people think she’s guilty? Or because it might warp our minds? Bit of both?
You are allowed. If you can hold your nose long enough to buy it from the skunk direct. And when you have read it, you're allowed to report back :)
That is the point people keep making, and other people keep missing: it's a boycott, not a ban.