Posts by Andre
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I imagine we'll find out who is at fault sometime after the election. I imagine they'll blame council employees rather than government ministers when the dust settles though. What a botch-up. Our biggest ever, most important event apparently. Will we face the same scrimping attitudes and lack of accountability when it comes our water, sewerage and rubbish distribution from the CCO-controlled councils (for that seems to be the Super-City reality so far)? If they can get it this wrong, then what's next? Great post!
-
Hard News: Auckland City Nights, in reply to Sacha,
The RWC generates less tourist traffic than the really busy times through summer so the free Wi-fi idea should really fly full-time. 100% FREE even. It’s a better idea than paying for the UFB infrastructure to offer really fast broadband to farmers then gifting everything to Telecom (who are mainly foreign owned), for example.
In 1986 there used to be no supermarkets at all and only one dairy that closed at 5pm in the inner city so the two new supermarkets going in will make it a megapolis in comparison (with 4 in the CBD next year). It was a ghost town with wind swept streets after 6pm other than small hubs around pubs like Vulcan Lane, High Street etc and less than 1000 residents. Now the CBD has 50,000 residents. Maybe when the Wyndham Quarter gets more residents it’ll attract more cigarette vendors? -
Birmingham and Liverpool are also experiencing riots today according to MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44055812/ns/world_news-europe/
Presciently, Mark Faber told CNBC on Friday that he predicts catastrophic global financial collapse and war. Since quantative easing in 2001 made 2008's crash worse, the following one will be much larger. He advises the wealthy to invest in precious metals and oil. He has no advice for those who aren't rich other than to prepare for war followed by a worldwide depression. http://m.cnbc.com/us_news/44031717?refresh=true
Meanwhile John Key tells us that he's relaxed and confident about the future. Well I suppose with $50 million in assets he would be. It makes me think back to the Irish potato famine. A couple of years ago they proved that the larger your land-holding, the less likely you were to die and that those who leased less than an acre all perished (or in my family's case, emigrated). Something to look forward to perhaps? -
My favourite comment (currently attracting 3500 likes) on the riots so far is from the Facebook page for TV show Ashes to Ashes: "Right Raymondo. Fire up the Quattro. London's calling."
You can just imagine Gene Hunt pushing rudely past some woman, downing a quick pint then shooting off to the scene shouting obscenities. That'll sort it.
The Aotea Square riot was sparked initially by some friends from Warkworth who were urinating off the canopy over the walkway next to the Post Office at 24 Wellesley St. When the police tried to get them down the crowd noticed and turned around. I was sitting on the statue in the middle of the square and had already seen gang members fighting in front of the stage earlier. There were initially a tiny number of police - about 20 and only about 60 maximum at the height of the riot. Afterwards every inch of the square was covered in broken bottles. I took a bus from Britomart to Onehunga at 9pm and was almost the only one on the bus not clutching looted cameras, clothing, stereos etc. It was my first concert - DD Smash were amazing! -
Almost all older kiwis own their own homes. Means testing would cover other assets and investments and therefore would only affect a small percentage and wouldn't "drive people from their homes". Bad investment decisions would be more likely to cause the loss of the family home rather than a lack of super payouts for those targeted. A year targeting the top 20,000 pensioners would still only cover a week's worth of borrowing under the current government though.
-
I just think that opposition to means testing comes from a very small portion of society if the reality of the situation is pointed out - that it will only be the very wealthy who don't get paid superannuation if pensioners are means tested. The amount of negative press given to anyone who raises the issue is amazing considering the reality of the situation. NZ First have a field day. We have had a pension available to those who need it since the late 1800's. During the boom years when we topped the OECD the government brought in universal superannuation. We spend most of our welfare money on super yet many receiving it don't need it at all. It's not a right but a privilege to receive superannuation when you haven't actually saved for it in the first place and the initial reasoning behind the current system seems wrong in retrospect. There are only 200,000 wealthy investors in New Zealand (most of them over 60) so it's a very small group I'm referring to that will be affected if means testing was introduced.
-
The fact is that the currently retiring generation voted to end paying for superannuation beyond paying tax by installing Muldoon as PM. They were of course voting against Reds Under the Beds, for Think Big and for the inalienable right of South Africa to play rugby here as long as we picked a pakeha-only team by voting for Muldoon as well. How could they resist? The timetable to raise the age of entitlement put forward by the Retirement Commissioner is a joke and she hasn't mentioned means testing once. Neither have Labour or National. If we can handle CGT then why not means testing super. The social contract between the individual and the state is to help out those most in need. 50% of retirees are definitely in need of help. The other 50% sometimes do and sometimes don't need our help as their circumstances change. Many of them will be "in retirement" for over 30 years. About 25% of them will never need state help in reality though. At that point, without means-testing, superannuation is a bit like giving a gift to someone who doesn't actually need it. It doesn't even qualify as a benefit and seems to destroy the fabric of any social contract between generations.
-
I wonder what the British response to Nicky Hagar's Brash emails would have been? The suspicious deaths of whistle-blowing journalists springs to mind.
Our media is biased as well and I applaud this blogger for pointing it out: http://fearfactsexposed.wordpress.com/2011/07/14/doms-credibility-destroyed-by-double-standards/
-
OnPoint: It's real, in reply to Dave Howell,
Thanks for pointing out that the whole lending ratio between business and property is currently developed on purely commercial lending terms associated with risk.
Imagine if banks were made to follow the US doctrine whereby mortagees unable to continue servicing their debt are able to walk away leaving the banks holding the whole can rather than being able to bankrupt the debtor to chase them for any loss made? Aussie-owned banks make $4 billion a year in NZ. With no current downside. Let's legislate to allow kiwis to walk out of a mortgage with no debt while we're at it. That would encourage a higher deposit rate (5% deposits would become an urban legend) and make business lending more interesting. -
I reckon that Labour had to launch a CGT to stem the flow of their supporters to the Greens. "Russel Norman and Bernard Hickey save Labour" should be the headline if they beat National.
We need more investment in small businesses and the share market can't help the problem. How about if the trading banks were forced by legislation to offer a higher ratio of business lending? Or if we brought in compulsory super and part of it was invested or lended to SME's through Kiwibank? This would encourage kiwis to start more companies and therefore eventually increase our standard of living.