Posts by bmk
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
OnPoint: Budget 2011: Radioactive Space Donut, in reply to Steve Barnes,
I have given it a go and it's very fast (even faster than Chrome) but I can't find an ad-blocker for it. Do you know of one that exists? Because if I can't block ads then I will be sticking with Chrome.
-
OnPoint: Budget 2011: A Credible Path to…, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
Probably not. But the freed up cash that people have from using Trade Me will have been spent elsewhere creating jobs somewhere else in the economy. To say that broadband caused job losses I think is (or very similar to) a broken window fallacy.
-
OnPoint: Budget 2011: Now with 70% less wordiness!, in reply to Sacha,
I don't. Probably because I think most people aren't properly informed and aren't that interested in becoming properly informed.
When I talk to the average person about politics they can kind of agree that National haven't enacted good policies but then they usually finish it with '... but John Key seems like a good bloke so I'm going to vote for them again.' -
OnPoint: Budget 2011: A Credible Path to…, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
You are right in that big companies definitely won't do that. But I think many small, medium sized ones will (which make up the majority of NZ businesses) and having found out that this is, in fact, legal the practice will I imagine be quite widespread.
If I were an employer I would. It's only fair if one employee is getting a 3% contribution then I would give the employees not in kiwisaver a 3% pay rise to contribute.
-
Hard News: Friday Fever, in reply to nzlemming,
As did I. But I instead made a counter-offer whereby people knowing they will be taken in their rapture pay me $100 upfront and I will take care of their pets for the rest of their lives. They can't leave their pets behind alone uncared for on what will be a living hell. Still haven't had anyone take me up on it yet though:(
-
OnPoint: Budget 2011: A Credible Path to…, in reply to SteveH,
Basically what nzlemming just said. The places with fibre have far more high-value tech. jobs than we do. Before we can even hope to have a comparable industry we will require comparable infrastructure.
-
OnPoint: Budget 2011: A Credible Path to…, in reply to SteveH,
So you are completely confident that some new technology won't emerge that will require fibre? In the same way that fax machines and the internet couldn't even be conceived when laying the copper network. By laying fibre out we will be ready to take advantage of future technologies which are bound to be developed at some point in the future.
Plus what Sacha said.
-
OnPoint: Budget 2011: A Credible Path to…, in reply to Matthew Poole,
This is a common problem with future technology. Standard cost-benefit analyses don't work as for example when the copper phone network was put in New Zealand fax machines, dial-up internet, broadband didn't even exist. And so these huge benefits wouldn't have shown up in a cost-benefit analysis.
-
OnPoint: Budget 2011: A Credible Path to…, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
All those people who sign up for kiwisaver are having the employer kick in. Those that aren’t get no kiwisaver benefit from their employer, but are going to get less pay rise as those employers spread the kiwisaver costs over their whole workforce.
The lesson: sign up to kiwisaver if you’re not already.
Except I know of two workplaces where staff not in Kiwisaver were given pay rises while those who were weren't because their employer told them they had got their pay rise through Kiwi Saver. This may not be legal but I think will become increasingly common. So my advice would be that if you don't sign up to Kiwisaver your employer is likely to look more favourably on giving you a pay rise.
-
Hard News: People Take Drugs, in reply to BenWilson,
Exactly. It works similar with heroin I have never heard of any one O’ding from smoking heroin where it is sadly all too common when injected. That’s why it would good if drugs could become so cheap that people no longer felt the need to inject and would smoke instead.
This is where I think the harm minimisation model can be really effective. Teaching people to take drugs in better ways. IE if you can snort it – do that rather than smoke it – if you can smoke it do that rather than inject it.
I have known a lot of drug users and the ones who have gone down the IV route I quickly dropped from my acquaintance as from there I have seen no good come. Where I have known plenty of high-functioning addicts who consume in other methods.
I think that is where methadone is so helpful too in that it gets the addict used to swallowing rather than injecting their drugs.
But it could well be simply that I am biased against IV use from the personal experiences I have had with people who have used that way.