Congratulations 48%

[Headbanger]

arrh a case of discretion being the better part of valour you seem to be claiming. No prizes for guessing that shrub will not agree :laugh:

More a case of get in, raise some stink, and get out before they counter attack with superiour weapons and skill.

[Headbanger]

If you're not interested, the why are you debating the subject in the first place?

Because I quit my job, its raining, My son is hogging the xbox, The wife is busy running her company, and after 70 hours of Skyrim I need a break.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

[avgas]

Looks like rogonomics achieved more then I thought, It not only rescued a failed economy and enabled the country to function again
Who/What now? While I might not agree with all of Mr D'mages statement. How did an economic tax policy magically fix everything. Do you understand what happened under Rogernomics? (not all was bad, but effectively it did fuck a lot up).


Hell yes I'm biased against our former labour Government, for their failures, which is good grounds to judge any political party on.
National and any other pack of wankers will be held to the same standard, I personally have no issue voting against National or for Labour in the future dependent on performance.
Who you going to vote for next? If you hate national, hate labour, all the minor parties will side with one of the 2.

Don't you think its funny you have to "vote against". Its kinda like someone saying to you.
"You can eat shit, or you can drink piss"..........but you must do one.
"Hang on, how does eating shit or drinking piss help me"
"It doesn't, but if you drink piss you won't have to eat shit"

[Headbanger]

Who/What now? While I might not agree with all of Mr D'mages statement. How did an economic tax policy magically fix everything. Do you understand what happened under Rogernomics? (not all was bad, but effectively it did fuck a lot up).




Do you understand why Rogernomics was required?

The economy had stalled, The country was bankrupt, Company tax rates of 66% had killed all growth and tax evasion was rampant, No banks would lend us money and we were on the brink of collapse.

We were what Greece are now, But instead of rioting in the streets we took the pain and swallowed the fix, The fallout from rogernomics and entering the real world was the more desirable of two paths.

[avgas]

Do you understand why Rogernomics was required?

The economy had stalled, The country was bankrupt, Company tax rates of 66% had killed all growth and tax evasion was rampant, No banks would lend us money and we were on the brink of collapse.

We were what Greece are now, But instead of rioting in the streets we took the pain and swallowed the fix, The fallout from rogernomics and entering the real world was the more desirable of two paths.
That pill is still dissolving.
The exact opposite of what he wanted to happen, happened anyway (just slower).
Telecom, CHH, Energy companies.....used NZ as a cash cow. Draining every dollar by slow increases because they had no competition. Keynesian economic problems occurred without market forces as natural dominant (government unfavored) companies suddenly grabbed more control that their market regulated counterparts.
We became a dumping/laundering ground for cash as it was not invested due to government having control over firms. So rather than international investment going into firms in NZ, the went into debt bonds - which means that while we did grow, we grew slower than everyone else because firms now had debt overhanging them.
This all went balls up in 87 when, everyone had debt and suddenly the interest rates changed.

So we avoided the euro crisis to adopt the american one.
The credit rating dropped twice.

So we avoided a greece style riot, because people worked their arses off to make sure the banks didn't kick them out of their homes while they tried to pay 20% interest rates.

The only people who did good were the people doing FOREX and using NZ as a cash dump.

Then the next government minister went and reversed it (also not so good).

Nope its better when governments don't adopt god like images of themselves and then attempt to change market economics. They only cause Chaos. Likewise "special taxing" simply fucks around with peoples lives.

[BoristheBiter]

Because I quit my job, its raining, My son is hogging the xbox, The wife is busy running her company, and after 70 hours of Skyrim I need a break.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

But is it better than oblivion?

[shrub]

Because I quit my job, its raining, My son is hogging the xbox, The wife is busy running her company, and after 70 hours of Skyrim I need a break.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

After 70 hours playing a computer game you need a life. You also need to learn that if you believe something (in this case that the govt should have let the rail fail before buying it) you need to be able to respond when someone challenges your belief. Saying "I don't want to talk about it anymore" hardly makes you the ultimate keyboard warrior. Now assume the position please :spanking:

[Headbanger]

After 70 hours playing a computer game you need a life. You also need to learn that if you believe something (in this case that the govt should have let the rail fail before buying it) you need to be able to respond when someone challenges your belief. Saying "I don't want to talk about it anymore" hardly makes you the ultimate keyboard warrior. Now assume the position please :spanking:

Meh, Ive played thousands of hours of video games, Enjoyed every second of it, My life is awesome. who are you say what I need to get?

That aside, Its a fact that buying the railway system for as much as they did was a bad move, Not my belief, and I'm not going to argue facts against your "beliefs".

[Headbanger]

But is it better than oblivion?

I didn't enjoy oblivion, but I didn't really give it much of a chance.

Skyrim is one of the better games I have played, Its scope is epic.

[Headbanger]

That pill is still dissolving.
The exact opposite of what he wanted to happen, happened anyway (just slower).
.

yeah, I came across as far to positive about it in my post, the entire process has been a total fuck up, but I agree with the reasoning for what was done initially.

[BoristheBiter]

I didn't enjoy oblivion, but I didn't really give it much of a chance.

Skyrim is one of the better games I have played, Its scope is epic.

I've gone back to oblivion after not playing for a year or so as is it would freeze every time i left this house i had saved in so had to start again.

O well only 134 days and i should be back to where i was up to.

[shrub]

Meh, Ive played thousands of hours of video games, Enjoyed every second of it, My life is awesome. who are you say what I need to get?

That aside, Its a fact that buying the railway system for as much as they did was a bad move, Not my belief, and I'm not going to argue facts against your "beliefs".

And i've spent thousands of hours getting an advanced education. I guess that's the difference between us - I have learned shit about how the real world works whereas you have vanquished dragons.

And it's your belief that buying the railway system was a bad idea, a belief you are unable to support even in a KB debate. If it was factual you would be able to counter my arguments.

[Headbanger]

And i've spent thousands of hours getting an advanced education. I guess that's the difference between us - I have learned shit about how the real world works whereas you have vanquished dragons.



exactly, more fool you.:bleh:


The difference between us is I'm glad you followed a road that suited you.

None of which makes buying back the railroads at an inflated price a good deal.

[shrub]

That pill is still dissolving.
The exact opposite of what he wanted to happen, happened anyway (just slower).
Telecom, CHH, Energy companies.....used NZ as a cash cow. Draining every dollar by slow increases because they had no competition. Keynesian economic problems occurred without market forces as natural dominant (government unfavored) companies suddenly grabbed more control that their market regulated counterparts.
We became a dumping/laundering ground for cash as it was not invested due to government having control over firms. So rather than international investment going into firms in NZ, the went into debt bonds - which means that while we did grow, we grew slower than everyone else because firms now had debt overhanging them.
This all went balls up in 87 when, everyone had debt and suddenly the interest rates changed.

So we avoided the euro crisis to adopt the american one.
The credit rating dropped twice.

So we avoided a greece style riot, because people worked their arses off to make sure the banks didn't kick them out of their homes while they tried to pay 20% interest rates.

The only people who did good were the people doing FOREX and using NZ as a cash dump.

Then the next government minister went and reversed it (also not so good).

Nope its better when governments don't adopt god like images of themselves and then attempt to change market economics. They only cause Chaos. Likewise "special taxing" simply fucks around with peoples lives.

Pretty much on the money. When Mother England paid us whatever we asked for our shit in exchange for the lives of a few thousand lads with rifles we were fine, but when that all changed we shut our eyes and pretended it wasn't happening. Most of the initial reforms were needed and worked well, but what happened next was the bad part. Using the pill analogy we kept on taking the same pill when the sickness was healed and when we stopped improving (because we were healed) we played around with the dose.

[shrub]

exactly, more fool you.:bleh:

I guess we have a different definition of a fool.


None of which makes buying back the railroads at an inflated price a good deal.

What would have made it a good deal? What would the costs of not purchasing it in 2008 have been? What would have been the advantages of purchasing it later? Would the price have dropped? Would it even have been available later? Would we have had the money to buy it later? Can you answer these challenges, or is your opinion based on what Wayne down at the pub reckons? After all, not only does he have a grouse ute and a smokin hot missus, but he's a level 3 Elf Lord Warrior, so ya gotta listen to him.:niceone:

[MisterD]

What would have made it a good deal? What would the costs of not purchasing it in 2008 have been? What would have been the advantages of purchasing it later? Would the price have dropped? Would it even have been available later? Would we have had the money to buy it later?

One might venture to suggest that someone negotiating on behalf of the government, who even had an attitude that they would like to buy, but only at the right price, would have been an improvement. Cullen going in with "I'm desperate to do this for political reasons, and I want to spend all the money before I'm booted out of office." written all over his dumb face was a recipe for the shafting the taxpayer got.

Talk to someone in the road transport industry about the effect that Toll, with piles of our money and free rent on Kiwirail properties, has had on smaller businesses.

[Headbanger]

I guess we have a different definition of a fool.

The point being that I have also invested untold thousands of effort into my career, and received the payoff for it, The fact that you would try and make a point out of what I do for entertainment shows one of your short comings.

That aside, I don't consider you a fool, quite the opposite, I read everything you say with interest. The other guy, the one who ran away to Japan, he's a fool.




What would have made it a good deal? What would the costs of not purchasing it in 2008 have been? What would have been the advantages of purchasing it later? Would the price have dropped? Would it even have been available later? Would we have had the money to buy it later? Can you answer these challenges, or is your opinion based on what Wayne down at the pub reckons? After all, not only does he have a grouse ute and a smokin hot missus, but he's a level 3 Elf Lord Warrior, so ya gotta listen to him.:niceone:


The pub is only slightly more credible then Kiwibiker, which for some reason you have chosen as your platform to speak to the world at large.

My opinion is based on a huge expenditure for scrap, requiring almost limitless financial support.

[shrub]

One might venture to suggest that someone negotiating on behalf of the government, who even had an attitude that they would like to buy, but only at the right price, would have been an improvement. Cullen going in with "I'm desperate to do this for political reasons, and I want to spend all the money before I'm booted out of office." written all over his dumb face was a recipe for the shafting the taxpayer got.

And what evidence do you have to support that argument? Or is that just what you feel might have happened?

[MisterD]

And what evidence do you have to support that argument? Or is that just what you feel might have happened?

Exhibit A) Michael Cullen pays ridiculously over the odds for a heap of C18th technology.

Exhibit B) Michael Cullen gloats "We've spent the lot!"

Not too many dots to join really.

[shrub]

Exhibit A) Michael Cullen pays ridiculously over the odds for a heap of C18th technology.

Ah, that explains it, you believe the rail network including ferries was 18th century technology. In the 18th century they still used sail and horses and carts, and if that's what had been purchased anything more than a couple of grand would have been a waste of money.


Exhibit B) Michael Cullen gloats "We've spent the lot!"

Did he really say that? Can you provide proof, or is that just what you think he might have said? What if he had said "Do you get wafers with it?"? Or "Hah, bet that pisses MisterD off".

[BoristheBiter]

Ah, that explains it, you believe the rail network including ferries was 18th century technology. In the 18th century they still used sail and horses and carts, and if that's what had been purchased anything more than a couple of grand would have been a waste of money.



Did he really say that? Can you provide proof, or is that just what you think he might have said? What if he had said "Do you get wafers with it?"? Or "Hah, bet that pisses MisterD off".

http://nominister.blogspot.com/2008/10/rainy-day-has-now-arrived-and-we-dont.html

[shrub]

http://nominister.blogspot.com/2008/10/rainy-day-has-now-arrived-and-we-dont.html

God, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. You supported MisterD's argument with a link to a right wing blog that is filled with incorrect data and this lovely statement: ""We've spent the lot!" or words to that effect, said Michael Cullen after the last budget."

He never said it. Ever. It's what a few idiots think he might have said. I think he might have said "I need to mow the lawns this weekend", so that is now what he said and not "We've spent the lot!".

[BoristheBiter]

God, it's like shooting fish in a barrel. You supported MisterD's argument with a link to a right wing blog that is filled with incorrect data and this lovely statement: ""We've spent the lot!" or words to that effect, said Michael Cullen after the last budget."

He never said it. Ever. It's what a few idiots think he might have said. I think he might have said "I need to mow the lawns this weekend", so that is now what he said and not "We've spent the lot!".

http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/9/7/3/48HansD_20080528_00000911-Budget-Debate.htm

Try that one.

[Headbanger]

I think he might have said "I need to mow the lawns this weekend", so that is now what he said and not "We've spent the lot!".

Really?

He mows his own lawns?

He is still a cunt.

[shrub]

http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/9/7/3/48HansD_20080528_00000911-Budget-Debate.htm

Try that one.

I see. If you look closely you will see that it was actually Wayne Mapp speaking, and not Michael Cullen. Someone saying that someone else said something doesn't make it true. If I reckon that BoristheBiter said "I'm going to buy Shrub a million bottles of Steinlager" does that mean you said it? If so, where's my beer? I'm powerful thirsty.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Really?

He mows his own lawns?

He is still a cunt.

There's no way that poof would know how to operate a lawn mower.

[Brian d marge]

exactly, more fool you.:bleh:


The difference between us is I'm glad you followed a road that suited you.

None of which makes buying back the railroads at an inflated price a good deal.

I also have a different view , a view that seems to be gaining traction I feel.

Just Out of the discussion for a moment here , why would I be a fool , is it because I saw the writing on the wall , or wanted to better myself and my family , or most likely you couldn’t express yourself adequately.

Yes I failed , and am obviously STILL Failing, IF after 20 odd years , of saying the SAME thing OVER and over again , the intelligentsia , are believing the nice smiling man on TV.

You know in your heart what the truth is , but are to scared , or its to difficult to express, but don’t ruin yours and your childrens future , because of your fallibilities ...that’s selfish.

anyway I would go back to the Xbox,
now we are Down to fk off tosser , and you want me to even look up. from me coffee, ( in a manner of speaking) ........before going to the Xbox where the bright lights might keep you amused for awhile, flick on to the internet and look at why rogernomics came to nz..... no don't say I know why, have a wee look...
You might realize why tossers like me are not so keen on it (its not all bad, nothing rarely is)
trickle down? market forces? privatization?.... How are those power cuts , Violence, Acc , Revenue gatherers, ..Mining ? Mines? those lazy bums on the dole? ( were they really the result of the loony left? or more right wing policies?) )

Rogernomics, I suspect you. don't even know why it came into being
in fact I will go as far as saying you Dont know...surprise me.?

now you just regurgitate half truths ....at least I do some research on the subject...

condescending? arrogant, no not really, get annoyed with stupid people, yes totally...

good luck

Stephen
tossing since puberty and loving every minute

[Headbanger]

I also have a different view , a view that seems to be gaining traction I feel.

Stephen


You're nobody, You live in japan, and you have never written anything I have seen that would indicate you're anyone worth listening to.....so who cares?

Should we consult the French next?

[Brian d marge]

You're nobody, You live in japan, and you have never written anything I have seen that would indicate you're anyone worth listening to.....so who cares?

Should we consult the French next?

Sorry , I have no Idea about Xbox , you have got me on that one!..busted !

Who cares ..I did/do and will continue to do..... if it will keep the illiterati from making things worse

Stephen

[mashman]

Sorry , I have no Idea about Xbox , you have got me on that one!..busted !

It's a gaming console... better than the playstation 3 (another gaming console). They offer an alternative use of the telly.

[avgas]

Pretty much on the money. When Mother England paid us whatever we asked for our shit in exchange for the lives of a few thousand lads with rifles we were fine, but when that all changed we shut our eyes and pretended it wasn't happening. Most of the initial reforms were needed and worked well, but what happened next was the bad part. Using the pill analogy we kept on taking the same pill when the sickness was healed and when we stopped improving (because we were healed) we played around with the dose.

Depends. Do you think the Maori vote counts for anything?
If no, does any vote count for anything?

Mother England also gave us "the government". If you vote - you partake and believe in it position.
I used to wonder why people cut down flag poles. Now it makes sense to me.

[Winston001]

I'm not sure how we got onto Labour's buy-back of NZ Rail but I thought it was a bad commercial decision made for political reasons. Toll was/is a successful Australian company but they were haemorrhaging money on their rail investment here. They wanted out, they needed out, to pacify their bankers and their shareholders.

I actually respect Dr Cullen which is why I'm still surprised he negotiated the purchase at $665 million. He could have quietly prodded Toll with $1.00 for months until they finally gave in. Seriously - NZ Rail barely had scrap value. If the government had been patient instead of mesmerised by the coming election, they could have taken back rail for nix.

A real world example: Feltex was a very large NZ carpet manufacturer but over-borrowed and in serious strife by 2006. Their main competitor, Australian Godfrey Hirst looked like a saviour to do a takeover....but they didn't. Far too canny for that. They waited until Feltex collapsed completely and then bought up the mills and pieces they wanted for pennies. Far far cheaper than buying a sick company.

Back to Toll - canny Aussies once again. They got paid for something they didn't want and on top of that, kept their profitable freight business. Situated on Kiwirail sites. Its the sort of deal they study on MBA courses just to show how clever some businesses are.

Shame about the Kiwi taxpayer...:weird:

[avgas]

I guess we have a different definition of a fool.
Useless bit of history.
A fool was someone who reported researched events to the king in such a manner that was entertaining. The fools, musicians were often the only people who were aware of what happened outside the kings borders. They usually came from Journeymen who were what we would now call wise (especially in comparison to the religious wise, or the medical wise at the time).
The term "Fool", came about so the king could sound condescending to someone who was wittier than them and could "jest".

I always thought it was an amusing fact.

[avgas]

Back to Toll - canny Aussies once again. They got paid for something they didn't want and on top of that, kept their profitable freight business. Situated on Kiwirail sites. Its the sort of deal they study on MBA courses just to show how clever some businesses are.
Remember Ansett ;)

We are just as nasty as they are.
You only have to look at the books of a few of the Aus/NZ banks to see why they are most generous to customers in NZ......there are probably a few other situations out there as well.

As for buying back the rail at the wrong time. Double edge sword.
- Should not have been sold in the first place. While there are state assets that I believe can be sold selling the complete Rail over NZ? Cost of replacement? Possible substitution?
- While we should not have paid $$$$$$$$ for it, they needed to make a statement and do some marketing. I would rather they did it with something the country can benefit rather than some ETS BS.
- Waiting for the rail to get cheap enough could be a bit like waiting for fine scotch and finding muddy water in the barrels.

[Indiana_Jones]

Cullen should of brought this,

<img src="http://www.hellopro.co.uk/images/produit-2/6/5/1/hornby-virgin-trains-125-train-set-79156.jpg">

Would of been a damn sight cheaper for the same thing.

-Indy

[Ocean1]

Back to Toll - canny Aussies once again. They got paid for something they didn't want and on top of that, kept their profitable freight business. Situated on Kiwirail sites. Its the sort of deal they study on MBA courses just to show how clever some businesses are.

Shame about the Kiwi taxpayer...:weird:

Uncanny, your two examples... nevermind. Toll not only accepted 'prox 300% more than market value for their interests in NZ rail they managed to secure on-going maintenance contracts arguably worth as much again, allowing them to drain the last few drops of blood from a corpse long cold.


God save us from politicians playing businessman, in the face of sharks like Toll they're complete amateurs.

[Headbanger]

I'm not sure how we got onto Labour's buy-back of NZ Rail but I thought it was a bad commercial decision made for political reasons. Toll was/is a successful Australian company but they were haemorrhaging money on their rail investment here. They wanted out, they needed out, to pacify their bankers and their shareholders.

I actually respect Dr Cullen which is why I'm still surprised he negotiated the purchase at $665 million. He could have quietly prodded Toll with $1.00 for months until they finally gave in. Seriously - NZ Rail barely had scrap value. If the government had been patient instead of mesmerised by the coming election, they could have taken back rail for nix.

A real world example: Feltex was a very large NZ carpet manufacturer but over-borrowed and in serious strife by 2006. Their main competitor, Australian Godfrey Hirst looked like a saviour to do a takeover....but they didn't. Far too canny for that. They waited until Feltex collapsed completely and then bought up the mills and pieces they wanted for pennies. Far far cheaper than buying a sick company.

Back to Toll - canny Aussies once again. They got paid for something they didn't want and on top of that, kept their profitable freight business. Situated on Kiwirail sites. Its the sort of deal they study on MBA courses just to show how clever some businesses are.

Shame about the Kiwi taxpayer...:weird:


Uncanny, your two examples... nevermind. Toll not only accepted 'prox 300% more than market value for their interests in NZ rail they managed to secure on-going maintenance contracts arguably worth as much again, allowing them to drain the last few drops of blood from a corpse long cold.


God save us from politicians playing businessman, in the face of sharks like Toll they're complete amateurs.


About fucking time some Calvary arrived, My position of ignorance is a difficult angle to fight from....

[Ocean1]

Remember Ansett ;).

Yes.


We are just as nasty as they are.

You obviously don't.

Air NZ bought into the basket case Ansett because it was the only way they could operate on what they thought was a level field with Quantas. This after the Australian government arbitrarilly canceled an open skies agreement with NZ.

Ansett predictably fell over later when it turned out to have been well gutted of any value.

Australian governments support their big business, to a fault. Ours fucks them over and then gives them to someone else to play with.

[Brian d marge]

from my notes.....

The New Zealand Rail sale in 1993 was organised by Faye Richwhite who then proceeded to benefit
from it hugely by taking a substantial shareholding – a conflict of interest fit for a post-Soviet state.
The main shareholders of the purchaser, TranzRail, were Faye Richwhite, Berkshire Fund and
Wisconsin Central of the US, and Alex van Heeren. They bought a company which had been freed of
debt by a $1.6 billion injection by the government. The price was $328 million, of which they paid only
$107 million and borrowed the rest.According to Brian Gaynor they "were responsible for stripping out
$220.9million of equity in 1993 and $100 million in 1995" .By the time they had sold out, they had
made total profits of $370 million,mainly tax free because of the lack of capital gains tax, and darkened
by accusations of insider trading
. Under Wisconsin's management the safety record was appalling
(by 2000, fatal accidents for employees were eight times the national average) and reinvestment and
maintenance were abysmal, leaving the operation in a crippled state. They sold out to Toll of Australia
who similarly failed to maintain the system, and who then sold it back to the government in two
tranches for a total of over $700million plus ongoing costs to the government of several hundred
million dollars to repair the rail network and replace the antiquated rolling stock. It is difficult to
estimate the total costs to the country, but the total cost to the government will be almost $4 billion
greatly magnified by the neglect of the private owners.

Stephen

[Ocean1]

from my notes.....Stephen


Substantially correct.

Ethics aside private owners have no incentive to spend money on maintenance or new capital projects. It's just more profitable to run it into the ground and then bung it on the market, pointing at the last couple of years revenue as a measure of market value. NZR went through several iterations of asset stripping through various "infrastructure management specialists" before it was handed back to the taxpayer requiring a decade of maintenance and a couple of billion in re-investment.

Ownership of hard infrastructure assets stretgically critical to the national economy should remain controled by the state. I don't think the same nescesarily applies to service industries, though.

[Oscar]

Substantially correct.

Ethics aside private owners have no incentive to spend money on maintenance or new capital projects. It's just more profitable to run it into the ground and then bung it on the market, pointing at the last couple of years revenue as a measure of market value. NZR went through several iterations of asset stripping through various "infrastructure management specialists" before it was handed back to the taxpayer requiring a decade of maintenance and a couple of billion in re-investment.

Ownership of hard infrastructure assets stretgically critical to the national economy should remain controled by the state. I don't think the same nescesarily applies to service industries, though.

How soon we forget.
NZR was fucked when it was sold and was probably never viable in its history.
It had been nurtured through the years with copious amounts of taxpayers money, overmanning which was effectively a way of disguising unemployment figures and most of all by draconian rules on freight transport (IIRC a 100km limit on road freight). This enabled NZR to operate a monopoly which choked local businesses whilst holding them to ransom and made sure that economic development anywhere more than 100km from a railway line was impossible. The final indignities were the endemic theft and graft by staff, constant industrial action and "service" which was provided by Stalinist officialdom.

[Ocean1]

How soon we forget.
NZR was fucked when it was sold and was probably never viable in its history.
It had been nurtured through the years with copious amounts of taxpayers money, overmanning which was effectively a way of disguising unemployment figures and most of all by draconian rules on freight transport (IIRC a 100km limit on road freight). This enabled NZR to operate a monopoly which choked local businesses whilst holding them to ransom and made sure that economic development anywhere more than 100km from a railway line was impossible. The final indignities were the endemic theft and graft by staff, constant industrial action and "service" which was provided by Stalinist officialdom.

I hadn't forgotten, I wasn't suggesting a return to the bad ol' days. I can't see why we can't have our cake by retaining infrastructure assets in state ownership and eat it by out-sourcing private enterprise to run it. Tender the service elements of the business every couple of years in county-sized lumps to encourage competition.

It should be about retaining and excercising prudent control of the market on behalf of the owners, exactly the opposite to the anti-competition tactics employed by Telecom et al. And that's another story...

[Brian d marge]

Telecom

Tthe Ameritech/Bell Atlantic/Fay,Richwhite, Gibbs,Farmer syndicate bought Telecom for $4.25 billion in July 1990, when the company
had shareholder funds of $2.5 billion.

Shareholder funds declined over the next several years despite
cost-cutting because of large capital payments to its shareholders who walked out of the company from
1997 with a realised capital profit of $7.2billion, in addition to a share of over $4.2 billion in
dividends– adding approximately $10 billion to New Zealand's international liabilities.

Between1990 and 1998 the company's shareholder funds halved to $1.1 billion by when it was heavily in debt. In the
decade from 1995 to 2004, Telecom paid out dividends of $6.7 billion from net earnings declared in
New Zealand of $5.4billion, of which approximately $5.0 billion went overseas.

Not sure its the mom and pop mortgages , or me with me credit card that increased the international liabilities ........

Mr Key doesn’t tell you about these things

Stephen

[Winston001]

Telecom

Tthe Ameritech/Bell Atlantic/Fay,Richwhite, Gibbs,Farmer syndicate bought Telecom for $4.25 billion in July 1990, when the company
had shareholder funds of $2.5 billion.

Shareholder funds declined over the next several years despite
cost-cutting because of large capital payments to its shareholders who walked out of the company from
1997 with a realised capital profit of $7.2billion, in addition to a share of over $4.2 billion in
dividends– adding approximately $10 billion to New Zealand's international liabilities.

Between1990 and 1998 the company's shareholder funds halved to $1.1 billion by when it was heavily in debt. In the
decade from 1995 to 2004, Telecom paid out dividends of $6.7 billion from net earnings declared in
New Zealand of $5.4billion, of which approximately $5.0 billion went overseas.




Source please.

[Brian d marge]

Source please.

bloke down pub told me.
Stephen
I'll post the list , later tonight when I've some more time

[pzkpfw]

Are we dead yet?

[mashman]

Are we dead yet?

I would be hoping for something a little more hellish if that's the case.

[Winston001]

Remember Ansett ;)

We are just as nasty as they are.


Sorry man but as Ocean said - WRONG. In fact exactly the opposite: Ansett was yet another example of NZ business being conned by Aussies.

Background: Ansett was allowed into NZ to compete with Air NZ and Mount Cook on domestic routes - but Air NZ was not allowed into Oz to compete on their domestic routes. Ansett were great for a while...until they went broke.

Bob Ansett was a good airline operator but he had one flaw - he liked planes. All sorts of planes. So he bought them. It would be like me setting up a motorcycle rental business and buying a Aerial Square Four, a Suzuki RE5 (rotary), a Z1, a Norton Commando, a Ducati Darmah, some Jawas, and a Zundap. Lots of fun for enthusiasts...but I've only got one mechanic to service the lot. And he trained with Honda...

Anyway, here's Air NZ and our government banging on the Australians doors with the Closer Economic Relations (CER) treaty demanding access for Air NZ. The aussies kept saying NO until one day - "oohhh looky over here, mate have I got a deal for you!! We've got this spare airline not doing much - yeah Ansett thats the one, how'd ya like to buy it? That way you get access to Australian routes and everybody's happy." :facepalm:

Not very long after Air NZ is in crisis on the verge of bankruptcy and our government has to inject hundreds of millions to keep it afloat. And Ansett was dead.

[Winston001]

bloke down pub told me.
Stephen
I'll post the list , later tonight when I've some more time

Ok while we are waiting for your source, can you or anyone else tell me exactly - with specific details - why the 1984 Fourth Labour Government and 1991 National Government sale of state assets was completely wrong/bad/stupid etc??

For simplicity, you can pick one or two sales at a time for comment.

[pete376403]

Source please.

Don''t know the OP source but theres a lot of good info here, roll down to about the mid '80s
http://www.wordworx.co.nz/KiwitelcoTimeline.htm

[Brian d marge]

Source please.

I have three main sources

Hp , Heinz and A1 brown sauce

Stephen

though the list of the guilty is as follows (there are some humorous ones in there so do dismiss to easily , as the info is also available from other sources) ;

"Testing years ahead for Telecom", by Brian Gaynor, New Zealand Herald, 26 May 2001.

"Telecom: What a winner!", financial report on winner of the 2004Roger Award, Sue Newberry,

http://canterbury.cyberplace.org.nz/community/CAFCA/publications/Roger/Roger2004.pdf.

Investment: Track record costly to public", by Brian Gaynor, New Zealand Herald, 21 October
2000
"A tough case ... and a long one", by Brian Gaynor, New Zealand Herald, 16 October 2004.

"Government Toll buy a sad indictment", by Brian Gaynor, New Zealand Herald, 10 May 2008.


"Privatization and Public-Private Partnerships", Chatham House,NewYork, NY, p.3.

"Privatisation: 'more a political than an economic act'", by SueNewberry, presentation to
"Privatisation by Stealth" conference, 16 March 2008


"NZ's first PPP prison to be built at Wiri", Bill English, JudithCollins, 14 April 2010,

"Private prison to cost $300m to build, $60m a year to operate", byMartin Kay, Dominion Post, 13
July2010, p.A9.

"School PPPs in New Zealand: Will PPPs Provide Value for Money as a Method of Procuring
Schools in New Zealand? Stage One Business Case", CastaliaStrategic Advisors, May 2010, p.24,
produced for the New Zealand Government,

[Winston001]

Thanks Stephen, good on you. I respect Brian Easton.

Sue Newberry is a leftist academic (like Jane Kelsey) and her views are coloured by her political compass. There's nothing wrong with having such views but the problem is her writing starts off with a biased perspective which undermines its value. The same is said of Marxist economists.

I also note that much of what you have referred to and/or quoted comes from The Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa http://canterbury.cyberplace.org.nz/community/CAFCA/ of whom Sue Newberry is a member. Not exactly an open mind.

[Winston001]

For anyone interested in a balanced view on the NZ privatisation experience, there is a very readable paper written for Treasury in December 2010:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:UoNmCyXlXsgJ:www.comu.govt.nz/resources/pdfs/mixed-ownership-model/mom-shppnz-wilson-dec10.pdf+privatisation+of+government+assets&hl=en&gl=nz&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESh1yCComHO6zRrk94w-_TGX2de6WuAoh8h9BYfXh8AnW7qGpBzIel3tQsmh0w4cbfx_CH okbxCyUsIQF-4FfptaRYuBgkD3bIj_6D6GaPxk5WSWYdfSdB60J9I9P8-lxUUc9P4-&sig=AHIEtbSW3w_WOPCRUyxmEDlU_q7DZ_p2_Q

A clip:


"Sale price: Contrary to what might well be the public view, it does not appear from
looking at these assets now that the Crown received consistently poor prices for its
sales. There are some where shareholders who have held their shares have done
very well (Auckland Airport, those who bought into Contact at float), and some where
at least those who held onto their shares did badly (Forestry Corporation, Air New
Zealand)....."

[Brian d marge]

Thanks Stephen, good on you. I respect Brian Easton.

Sue Newberry is a leftist academic (like Jane Kelsey) and her views are coloured by her political compass. There's nothing wrong with having such views but the problem is her writing starts off with a biased perspective which undermines its value. The same is said of Marxist economists.

I also note that much of what you have referred to and/or quoted comes from The Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa http://canterbury.cyberplace.org.nz/community/CAFCA/ of whom Sue Newberry is a member. Not exactly an open mind.

Actually I dont Know Sue Newberry , but Jane I have had correspondence with ( She HAS to be a lesbo ! ..not sure that has anything to do with the current argument , but it cant hurt )

I had a quick read of the link you posted and would be a balanCING view , still inst gushing with praise about privatization
even Paula Bennett on prisons, concedes that it would not be cheaper, to privatise

But on the other hand neither were the old institutions. The thing about those old work schemes such as benmore , the railways, it was WORK , abet subsidized work, but work , and work gives the man worth . ( meaning full work that is )

Unfortuantly once those shares go into private hand , then control is lost so, even in SOE form they still have responsibilities to perform

State owned assets have multiple functions, the balance of which will differ in each case. They include ( imho)

• Preventing excess profits in important services which are a monopoly or are otherwise less than
fully competitive;
• Ensuring essential services are provided equitably and affordably
• Providing security of services;
• Social solidarity mechanisms such as ACC (or equivalently perhaps, providing services which
are considerably more efficient to provide universally than individually)
• Providing services in the public interest which the private sector is unlikely to provide;
• Providing additional income to the government.

which is reduced or lost in the search for shareholder profit. IMHO

Stephen

Ta for link that gets printed and into the notes folder..........

[Brian d marge]

I also note that much of what you have referred to and/or quoted comes from The Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa http://canterbury.cyberplace.org.nz/community/CAFCA/ of whom Sue Newberry is a member. Not exactly an open mind.

You might note; that I might support that view , Sorry but , While I do indeed , live and work in Japan , (Brave Sir Robin did indeed bugger off ) , I do a lot of my business with NZ companies , save with Kiwibank and Supoort the view of New Zealand for New Zealand and NOT to be exploited by americans or Auzziecans . I would also support Moari , if they didnt spend so much on Underpants.

New Zealand was very good to me when I was growing up , and the very least I can do is fight to keeep it what it was , a damn fine country to live in.

I think some confuse PPP or Privitisation with the small business they operate, when IMHO , its actually a cash vehicle for international money , who are interested in ONE THING , maximising ( shareholder profit ) at ( all) costs, and bears little relationship with small business, who may have a more ethical side to their activities

Just my thoughts

Stephen

[oldrider]

Actually I dont Know Sue Newberry , but Jane I have had correspondence with ( She HAS to be a lesbo ! ..not sure that has anything to do with the current argument , but it cant hurt )

I had a quick read of the link you posted and would be a balanCING view , still inst gushing with praise about privatization
even Paula Bennett on prisons, concedes that it would not be cheaper, to privatise

But on the other hand neither were the old institutions. The thing about those old work schemes such as benmore , the railways, it was WORK , abet subsidized work, but work , and work gives the man worth . ( meaning full work that is )

Unfortuantly once those shares go into private hand , then control is lost so, even in SOE form they still have responsibilities to perform

State owned assets have multiple functions, the balance of which will differ in each case. They include ( imho)

• Preventing excess profits in important services which are a monopoly or are otherwise less than
fully competitive;
• Ensuring essential services are provided equitably and affordably
• Providing security of services;
• Social solidarity mechanisms such as ACC (or equivalently perhaps, providing services which
are considerably more efficient to provide universally than individually)
• Providing services in the public interest which the private sector is unlikely to provide;
• Providing additional income to the government.

which is reduced or lost in the search for shareholder profit. IMHO

Stephen

Ta for link that gets printed and into the notes folder..........

Finding the balance between the two (private and public) should be the goal ... like utilizing the power band on a two stroke motor!

The problem lies with the difference of a private utility running on on public service employment principals would fail eventually simply for that reason!

Too much government interference and political tweeking would add to the utilities demise as well ACC for instance!

Other than the methods of operation ... ownership is not such a big deal ... it is the service that the utility provides that is important, IMHO!

[Ocean1]

The problem lies with the difference of a private utility running on on public service employment principals would fail eventually simply for that reason!


And private utility running the usual private business principals will allways provide the least amount for the greatest income. Fact is neither public nor private has worked very well beyond the first few years of a systems foundation. I suspect that's because the original brief and funding are aligned for just so long as politicians don't fuck with the details.

It's not a problem you'll solve unless you write a charter for the service that politicians can't fuck with. Seems pretty basic don't it? write a description of what's to be delivered and a budget to match... and we can't do it.

[Winston001]

The thing about those old work schemes such as benmore , the railways, it was WORK , abet subsidized work, but work , and work gives the man worth . ( meaning full work that is )



I know I know and at first glance that appears to have been good for our society. Big government departments like Railways, Mines, and Ministry of Works employing hundreds of thousands of Kiwis funded by the rest of the population. Supporting each other.

The problem was that a guy earning the average wage at the time ($25,000) was paying tax so his brother-in-law could earn $40,000 wandering around the railway yards. It simply was not fair to the majority of the population. It is easy to talk about subsidised work but when you boil it down and discover the average person earned less than those in some government jobs, that was wrong.

I do respect your belief that NZ should hang on to ownership of as much of our economy as possible. In fact most of us would agree with that.

[Oscar]

I know I know and at first glance that appears to have been good for our society. Big government departments like Railways, Mines, and Ministry of Works employing hundreds of thousands of Kiwis funded by the rest of the population. Supporting each other.

The problem was that a guy earning the average wage at the time ($25,000) was paying tax so his brother-in-law could earn $40,000 wandering around the railway yards. It simply was not fair to the majority of the population. It is easy to talk about subsidised work but when you boil it down and discover the average person earned less than those in some government jobs, that was wrong.

I do respect your belief that NZ should hang on to ownership of as much of our economy as possible. In fact most of us would agree with that.

So true.
Raglan had four wharfies, paid God knows what, to load and unload a maximum of two ships a month...they probably considered it a hardship because they didn't get enough opportunity for pilfering.

[Ocean1]

So true.
Raglan had four wharfies, paid God knows what, to load and unload a maximum of two ships a month...they probably considered it a hardship because they didn't get enough opportunity for pilfering.

Gretta point slipway had just one item of traffic for several years after it was officially closed: the van carrying the wages for the slipway greaser. Nobody had told him or the WIC his services were no longer req'd. True.

WIC. There's a blast from the past that'll send a shudder up many an old spine.

[Brian d marge]

Have you seen the pay rates in chch at the moment for ECQ

Stephen

[Grumph]

Gretta point slipway had just one item of traffic for several years after it was officially closed: the van carrying the wages for the slipway greaser. Nobody had told him or the WIC his services were no longer req'd. True.

WIC. There's a blast from the past that'll send a shudder up many an old spine.

Well, maybe....are you saying that the privatisation of port labour has worked ?? There's a lot of people around the shipping industry who tell me it hasn't. Wouldn't surprise me if eventually something similar comes back. Auckland at present could be a case in point.
I left the industry when the WIC closed despite being head hunted by the Lyttelton Port co - I could see what it would go like and the stress levels I see in old friends prove I was right to get out.

[Ocean1]

Well, maybe....are you saying that the privatisation of port labour has worked ?? There's a lot of people around the shipping industry who tell me it hasn't.

Worked? For some ports the demise of the WIC allowed good management to make both employees and the board happy. Wellington was a case in point a decade ago, less so now I understand.


I left the industry when the WIC closed despite being head hunted by the Lyttelton Port co - I could see what it would go like and the stress levels I see in old friends prove I was right to get out.

Yeah. Jobs in the public service, particularly institutions protected by rigid labour laws and unionism were largely stress free, some remain so. That's invariably because there's no link between effort and reward, you could fuck around all day with impunity. Easy it might have been, but it don't amount to pulling your own weight.

Not suggesting everything worth doing has to be stressful, but nobody has the right to be completely free from the consequences of their professional performance.

[Grumph]

Okay it worked for some ports - Tauranga seems to be the shining example.

The WIC wasn't public service - it was a Quango as it was industry funded - no state services overview ie no protection...

Responsibility...Pay office supervisor at Lyttelton - try having a payroll of over 1000 potentially baying for your blood if you let a cockup through the system....and as for the shipping companies if something was charged wrong....pure poison.

The last 3 years of waiting for parliament to set a shut date were hell trying to keep staff...no security at all.

Labour relations certainly at Lytt are worse now than when the WIC shut....looks like Akl is much the same.

[Ocean1]

Okay it worked for some ports - Tauranga seems to be the shining example.

The WIC wasn't public service - it was a Quango as it was industry funded - no state services overview ie no protection...

Yes. There's a problem with any such arangement. DHB boards are a classic example, a high percentage of local professional bureaucrats individually utterly clueless about the industry and collectively squabling over resource assignments not perfectly aligned with their constituents. Chaos. I'm not absolutely sure that you can't run a business or a public service by committee, but I'm fucking certain that you can't run one by a committee with as many objectives as there are members.



Labour relations certainly at Lytt are worse now than when the WIC shut....looks like Akl is much the same.

Meh. Unhappy employees are sometimes caused by poor management, but sometimes they're caused by unhappy employees. Don't know which is the case in Lytt or Orks, don't much care, it's not my problem nowadays.

[Grumph]

[QUOTE=Ocean1;
Meh. Unhappy employees are sometimes caused by poor management, but sometimes they're caused by unhappy employees. Don't know which is the case in Lytt or Orks, don't much care, it's not my problem nowadays.[/QUOTE]

I'll drink to that.....

[Swoop]

How soon we forget.
NZR was fucked when it was sold and was probably never viable in its history.
It had been nurtured through the years with copious amounts of taxpayers money, overmanning which was effectively a way of disguising unemployment figures and most of all by draconian rules on freight transport (IIRC a 100km limit on road freight). This enabled NZR to operate a monopoly which choked local businesses whilst holding them to ransom and made sure that economic development anywhere more than 100km from a railway line was impossible. The final indignities were the endemic theft and graft by staff, constant industrial action and "service" which was provided by Stalinist officialdom.
Ahh yes, the old NZ Snailways monopoly.

As the saying went (with good reason) "If you want something crushed beyond recognition, send it via rail".