Posts by Keir Leslie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Aaron Keown is a known wanker, and campaigned for the DHB primarily on `free parking at the hospital'. Quite what this particular policy meant is beyond me. He's also a hard line Act law and order type with a diversion in his past. It would not surprise me if he said that kind of thing.
-
What makes you say that?
This is based primarily on the facts that (a) all premises in the CBD are shut, for the next 3-6 months, (b) a third/quarter of Christchurch residencies are functional unliveable at the moment, and (c) visual observation of how shit's fucked up.
Now, when I say there's no economy, I don't mean there's no economic activity, or that everybody's out a job or anything. But the economy, as a functional mechanism for ordering the resources available in Christchurch, doesn't exist the way it did on Feb 20th. It still exists in parts, and it will recover over time, but it will need a lot of assistance.
-
At this point in time Sacha, there is no local "Economy".
Yes. This is true. What we need to do is get that going again as soon as possible. Food, power, water are vital. But after that, people need jobs, they need jobs where they live, and they need jobs soon. Christchurch won't be rebuilt for twenty years. We can't wait that long to start getting that economy back on track.
-
And he’s an MP from Christchurch!
From Fendalton. You know all that guff about social stratification in Christchurch? Well...
-
But you can solve it very quickly by building generic concrete and steel blocks quickly or you can try and do something different and better.
Personally I like steel and concrete blocks and would quite like Christchurch to have a lot more of them. Many of the ones we already have are really rather nice.
The main thing the CBD needs is people and activity. That's paramount. Everything after that is a nice to have.
-
Moving residents away from Christchurch also shifts their economic contributions elsewhere, so rebuilding enough work, transport and retail/service capacity is important. Making clear that temporary means just that should prevent bad future outcomes from getting things moving fast now in the right places.
Remember, there's a fucking wicked social discount rate on getting things going now. Future residents of Christchurch won't be living in a disaster area; it makes sense to make decisions for people here and now, and let the future sort itself out to a large extent.
-
Nah, the focus has to be on putting things in place in Christchurch. That's where the people are now, and that's where they'll stay. It doesn't matter hugely how things are done right now, as long as they are done. Cheap and quick is better than nothing. I mean, Riccarton Mall is almost entirely open, and Riccarton's been pretty untouched. There has to an opportunity to chuck up some quick prefab structures there and get something going in the way of office space and of expanded retail on Riccarton Road. The industrial areas out south of Blenheim Road are relatively unscathed as well, I think. These structures won't go down as the greatest things ever built in NZ, but on the other hand, they don't have to. There's got to be similar chances on the eastern side of the city. Even if we end up with glorified tents sitting on parks, that's got to be better than nothing.
Sure, we need to get power and water and essential services back to the east of Christchurch, but if there aren't jobs to get back to afterwards, then it's going to be really painful.
-
People can't afford to be out of jobs for six months. That has to be the realistic goal: to restore some kind of a functioning economy to Christchurch within the next three-six months. It might not be in the CBD, it might not be permanent, but it has to be something that can keep putting food on the table. (It might involve large amounts of gov't cash floating around to facilitate -- loans to business, grants to help pay wages, assistance with alternate premises.)
-
I prefer a can-do attitude. Maybe you are right but I reject the general proposition that there is no way supply can be arranged at short notice by the enterprising. An argument for decentralised decisionmaking is that new ideas can unexpectedly emerge. The example works for 1000 litre loads. Or 100 litre loads as well.
In other words, this is an article of faith. There's no empirical basis for this belief, just a nebulous preference.
-
Why not? An arbitrageur need know only two things: a) the going rate for petrol in Christchurch, and b) the rate in a nearby town. These are discoverable even in a crisis. The arbitrageur would also need the means to get petrol from A to B. Why can’t supply start arriving within an hour, or a day, of the quake from someone who happens to have the necessary equipment? Surely you’re not arguing supply isn’t relevant to solving a shortage?
Right. Let's say we buy 30,000 (that's a tanker about) litres of petrol in Timaru for $2, right. Oh, wait. It's not that easy, is it? You probably can't just buy 30,000 litres of petrol in Timaru if there's a shortage in Christchurch and the fuel companies are trying to get petrol there as fast as possible. I also doubt that BP sells to trade. So that's the first problem. The second problem is transport. You have to comply with the various regulations on petrol transportation, and I bet you that if you fuck up a hazardous goods shipment on SH1 at the moment you will get your head to play with. Then you've got to sell it safely and effectively, again complying with the various safety regulations, which, yeah, won't be too easy.
Honestly, wtf?