Posts by Gareth Ward
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The HoS has become so predictable that when I saw that header plastered over the front I instantly thought "bet he's just got a new pair of shoes and is paroled to a middle-class uncle's house". Against my better judgement I read the main story and it wasn't even THAT lavish.
I'd given up on it a while ago, that was my first attempt at re-reading it and was tossed aside as soon as I got halfway through that article.
Appalling, appalling creation of story- and yet these guys won Best Something-or-Other at the Qantas awards didn't they?
-
Cheers for the I'm on Fire link Russell - that is the perfect song for a late Friday afternoon tidy up of loose ends at work before the beer in the sun. Eerily accurate matching to mood.
-
On the AC power to seat things - Air NZ Premium Economy is listed as providing that feature but in reality it seems to be to only every third seat or so.
So was rather disappointed on a flight back from London when I had planned to charge (and keep powered) my freshly purchased PSP throughout the flight. When I found there wasn't the promised power outlet I asked an attendant if they had power outlets somewhere they could plug it in for me for at least one charge - "well no", she says, "but there is a spare seat in Business Class and they all have power outlets".
Brilliant I thought, upgrade to Business!
But no - my PSP got to sit in the middle of a Business Class seat (lie-flat somewhat wasted on it I believe) where I could go pick it up when it had finished charging and return to my seat. =| -
I'm going to state the obvious, in thinking that he faces the murder charge because he stabbed someone with a knife and they died, rather than, he got frustrated.
Knives don't kill people. Frustration-over-the possibility-of-minor-vandalism kills people.
And I'm with Jolisa over the Austrian cellar dweller gibe - I've seen the odd mild joke about that awful affair that was (just) on the fair side of the decency/comedy line, but directly impugning the education of a girl imprisoned and raped for decades to make your (already offensive) point is so far beyond the pale of any culture I can identify. -
I love the way they're demanding apologies for this "vicious smear" while continuing to flip the bird to all the scientists whose names they've misused. They're quite an outfit.
I ADORE the "real scientists don't complain" call...
-
It might come down to a city called Gary
LOL, That is brilliant.
-
And darn those fancy economists with their high-falutin' theories and all.
Jon Stewart was hilariously cutting on that point last night...
-
Excellent - I'm off to that show on Thursday night, courtesy of a rather excited mother who seemed to catch the Star Wars buzz in the 80s even more than the sons she was allegedly buying the toys for...
-
What is comes down to is that if we wanted rail at all, there were two options:
1. Give Toll its sweetheart deal and be prepared for it to continue to game the New Zealand taxpayer indefinitely.
2. Take the hit and get Toll out of the way.
Which I'm happy enough with - if the Govt said:
- We need rail for these reasons (public benefits, costs to having an underinvested rail network etc)
- The state of the current industry in NZ is such that no alternative companies are willing to put up the cash the incumbent wants for the purchase, and that incumbent is unwilling to invest to deliver the benefits above.
- We therefore believe a purchase of this network at XXX dollars delivers appropriate benefit to the NZ taxpayer.
I'm not against the move, but do agree with Craig that the case should be clearly laid out - I think it's there. -
We have to somewhat put aside the "efficient means of travel", "plenty of demand for services", and "carbon-efficient means of transport" stuff though, because if they all held true the investment would have been a popular one for many commercial businesses and the Govt wouldn't have needed to step in.
If Dr Cullen or Treasury or whomever would put up a paper showing that all those things held but NZ simply didn't have the investment base to deliver on them, then I'd be happy that the Govt stepped in as that player to fulfill all this demand.
Alternatively, if they put a paper that said commercially it doesn't stack up but there are these significant public benefits (being beyond the users of the rail itself) that makes public subsidy valid, and we therefore would rather operate it as an SOE than subsidise a private organisation, then I would also be happy with the investment.But if they have pulled the trigger WITHOUT that clear picture of benefit to the country that lets them say "this is why we've spent $665 million as a starting point" then it's a little disappointing. I still like to think that those benefits are there, but if they're so obvious, why haven't they been put up?