Inside New Zealand

[mashman]

Interesting watch. (http://www.tv3.co.nz/INSIDE-NEW-ZEALAND-Mind-The-Gap/tabid/3692/articleID/94816/MCat/3061/Default.aspx)

[MisterD]

I lasted about five minutes of it, can't stand party political broadcasts.

[mashman]

I lasted about five minutes of it, can't stand party political broadcasts.

Party political broadcast? Go'arn, watch the rest.

[MisterD]

Party political broadcast? Go'arn, watch the rest.

No thanks.

I don't where Mr Bruce puts all the logical analytical skills he displays on those crime docos he did, when he does this stuff.

[mashman]

No thanks.

I don't where Mr Bruce puts all the logical analytical skills he displays on those crime docos he did, when he does this stuff.

Fair enough.

Does the presenter matter that much? Isn't the subject matter more important?

[MisterD]

Does the presenter matter that much? Isn't the subject matter more important?

The subject matter is important, but when the presenter starts out with preconceived notions of the the problem and then sets out to make the fact fit his narrative...yeah, nah.

[F5 Dave]

I got a bit suspect when the Zombies started appearing, I mean c'mon. His diagrams of social classes over a Beehive drawing & then "I suspect it is now more like this". . .then animated arrows of all the money going from the unemployed up to the super rich box at the top - CUT to commercial with no explanation.

It got to 8 & Futurama seemed like the less fictional viewing.

Plus it has Bender.

And Amie wearing a backless Nurses uniform (how do they make cartoons sexy?)

[Paul in NZ]

I'm obviously doing something wrong because all I get is stupid adverts and no program...

[Paul in NZ]

I got a bit suspect when the Zombies started appearing, I mean c'mon. His diagrams of social classes over a Beehive drawing & then "I suspect it is now more like this". . .then animated arrows of all the money going from the unemployed up to the super rich box at the top - CUT to commercial with no explanation.

It got to 8 & Futurama seemed like the less fictional viewing.

Plus it has Bender.

And Amie wearing a backless Nurses uniform (how do they make cartoons sexy?)

I love Futurama...... and I have no idea how they make them sexy other than I'm glad that they do...

[mashman]

The subject matter is important, but when the presenter starts out with preconceived notions of the the problem and then sets out to make the fact fit his narrative...yeah, nah.

I didn't see many preconceived notions, perhaps I was making my own mind up by watching it without any preconceived notions :D


I got a bit suspect when the Zombies started appearing, I mean c'mon. His diagrams of social classes over a Beehive drawing & then "I suspect it is now more like this". . .then animated arrows of all the money going from the unemployed up to the super rich box at the top - CUT to commercial with no explanation.

It got to 8 & Futurama seemed like the less fictional viewing.


You want an explanation? WTF are you people smoking? Try thinking for yourself instead of having someone spoon feed you the answers you want to hear :shifty:


I'm obviously doing something wrong because all I get is stupid adverts and no program...

All good things come to those who wait... aye, the ads are a feckin pain, but hey, they end.

[MisterD]

I didn't see many preconceived notions, perhaps I was making my own mind up by watching it without any preconceived notions :D

Probably because his preconceptions and yours line up so well...capitalism's bad, mmkay?

[Scuba_Steve]

What it's taught me is Tax evasion is a good way to make the cash moneys... if on the off chance you actually get caught you then only face a 20% chance of jail time, sounds like good odds to me :devil2:

[mashman]

Probably because his preconceptions and yours line up so well...capitalism's bad, mmkay?

Oh FFS :facepalm:

[F5 Dave]

. . .
You want an explanation? WTF are you people smoking? Try thinking for yourself instead of having someone spoon feed you the answers you want to hear :shifty:. . .
ok... I'll give it a shot, bear with me, I'm a little slow. . . let me see,. . . so the Fat cats on the top of the pyramid are getting rich by taking money off the unemployed. Oh right I see. The barstards!


but I'm uneasy about the equation somewhere:(. Never mind I'll let out some outrage and try not to think about it :2guns: Leave the maths for the pointy heads.


Then best we go kill some of these Zombies hanging around on Parliament steps. grab the shovels.

[Hoon]

Interesting watch. (http://www.tv3.co.nz/INSIDE-NEW-ZEALAND-Mind-The-Gap/tabid/3692/articleID/94816/MCat/3061/Default.aspx)

Maybe if you gave a better description, more people would actually click on the link.

[mashman]

ok... I'll give it a shot, bear with me, I'm a little slow. . . let me see,. . . so the Fat cats on the top of the pyramid are getting rich by taking money off the unemployed. Oh right I see. The barstards!

but I'm uneasy about the equation somewhere:(. Never mind I'll let out some outrage and try not to think about it :2guns: Leave the maths for the pointy heads.

Then best we go kill some of these Zombies hanging around on Parliament steps. grab the shovels.

Cooperation will see us all prosper. It will make many things in this life less of a struggle for a huge number of people.

Tax cuts = less money to go into "social living". Yes, the fat cats are getting rich by taking money off the unemployed. Are there enough jobs. No. Are there enough well paying jobs. No. Then you're going to have to have a portion of your population that are unemployed. They need looked after. The cost of living is rising (not just food, but services too) which requires more tax income in order to help cover the costs of the unemployed blah blah blah.

:rofl:... why does it always come down to let's kill the rich guys?

[mashman]

Maybe if you gave a better description, more people would actually click on the link.

Quite true... but I wouldn't want my preconceptions to taint what is actually a fair whiff of reality.

[T.W.R]

:rofl:... why does it always come down to let's kill the rich guys?

Because the "have more" always want more & are never happy with what they've got......Greed ;) .How much does someone need? to some there's never enough but how much do they really require...less than they've actually got.

[Oscar]

The subject matter is important, but when the presenter starts out with preconceived notions of the the problem and then sets out to make the fact fit his narrative...yeah, nah.

+1

I lasted five minutes.
He makes about as much sense as Mashman.

[mashman]

Because the "have more" always want more & are never happy with what they've got......Greed ;) .How much does someone need? to some there's never enough but how much do they really require...less than they've actually got.

They only get more because we keep on printing more. Print none and they get OMG, none :blip:

I liken "greed" to a CEO of a company using the best PC on the market for emails, internet, spreadsheets and word processing, just because it's the best PC on the market. Whilst there are other people in the company that could make better use of the PC, he has it, because he deserves the best.

[Maha]

Even the promo couldn't hold my attention, chose to chew some tin foil instead.

[T.W.R]

They only get more because we keep on printing more. Print none and they get OMG, none :blip:

:laugh: most of them don't see the material version of their wealth, it's just wee numbers ticking over in their bank accounts



I liken "greed" to a CEO of a company using the best PC on the market for emails, internet, spreadsheets and word processing, just because it's the best PC on the market. Whilst there are other people in the company that could make better use of the PC, he has it, because he deserves the best.

Greed
Greed is the inordinate desire to possess wealth, goods, or objects of abstract value with the intention to keep it for one's self, far beyond the dictates of basic survival and comfort.

[mashman]

:laugh: most of them don't see the material version of their wealth, it's just wee numbers ticking over in their bank accounts

Greed
Greed is the inordinate desire to possess wealth, goods, or objects of abstract value with the intention to keep it for one's self, far beyond the dictates of basic survival and comfort.

True... as long as it doesn't come down to the last 10mill, 10thou, 10hundy, 10dlr all is well with the world

So Greed is a mental health issue then :lol:

[Brian d marge]

If there is more money available the value of an asset will rise. banks love houses as they are reasonably safe investments. If the value of an asset rises then so does the purchase price. Also , such as in Christchurch, supply and demand have influence pushing the cost of a house up

The accepted ratio for hose to income is around 30% of income. Or something called mortgage stress may occur.

If the income is not matching , you end up with Tokarora (sp) or Hornby !

not rocket science

Stephen

[Paul in NZ]

Greed
Greed is the inordinate desire to possess wealth, goods, or objects of abstract value with the intention to keep it for one's self, far beyond the dictates of basic survival and comfort.

Wot? Like motorcycles then? Got to be one of the greediest forms of transport... Hmm... I think I see where you are going wrong...

[T.W.R]

So Greed is a mental health issue then :lol:

:lol: Megalomania :laugh:

[T.W.R]

Wot? Like motorcycles then? Got to be one of the greediest forms of transport... Hmm... I think I see where you are going wrong...

:scratch: Self indulgence maybe but not greed :laugh: the only comparison of greed in motorcycling would be the ones who think having the latest & greatest bike available makes them better than the person who has something that is 20yrs old...reality of fact is that that train of thinking makes them less of a motorcyclist and pretty shallow :msn-wink:

[mashman]

Even the promo couldn't hold my attention, chose to chew some tin foil instead.

Eeeeeeee that annoying yet pleasurable tingle on the fillings.


:lol: Megalomania :laugh:

Goooood word. Had to look it up. Bit close to home :shifty:

[Road kill]

Probably because his preconceptions and yours line up so well...capitalism's bad, mmkay?

He didn't say capitalism was bad,,,,but rather that it was broken in NZ due to the total lack of responsibility shown by big business in NZ that the middle class has now become used to the gov'ts bailing them out with "our" money when they fuck up.

Which if you'd watched with both eyes open and your mouth shut you might of noticed.

Not that that's ever going to happen huh.:crazy:

You might of also noticed that in NZ you can rip off the country for millions in tax fraud and get away with it,,but if you commit benefit fraud for a few thou' your likely to go to jail.

Two laws,,,one for the super rich and another for the peasants.

Mind you I will admit that Tax expert looked like a screaming meth head if I ever saw one,,,fuck me.

Anybody else also notice all the losers shown where honkies,,,I loved that bit.

Maybe they'll feature smoky next week.....

[Wingnut]

Its all about "Dead Money".

Money is required to remain in circulation for Capitalism to work effectively. That's where it fails... When there is a small portion of population with a significant portion of $$...

As long as I can protect,feed, clothe and house my children.. I'm not going to complain. It is what it is and without a total revolution, it will remain the same.

Head returns to sandpit

[Ocean1]

He makes about as much sense as Mashman.

Harsh. Very very harsh.

[mashman]

+1

I lasted five minutes.
He makes about as much sense as Mashman.

-1

I hope you didn't make a mess.
Unfair, I thought he did a great job.

[98tls]

:scratch: Self indulgence maybe but not greed :laugh: the only comparison of greed in motorcycling would be the ones who think having the latest & greatest bike available makes them better than the person who has something that is 20yrs old...reality of fact is that that train of thinking makes them less of a motorcyclist and pretty shallow :msn-wink:

:facepalm:Motorcycles?Fuck off to a motorcycle forum would ya....ridiculous.

[T.W.R]

:facepalm:Motorcycles?Fuck off to a motorcycle forum would ya....ridiculous.


hear this :violin: :bleh::bleh:
:angry2: I thought this was the political analysis/financial advisory forum :crybaby: someone mentioned bikes and I thought I was in the Tremendous Lemon Zone :bleh: you still suffering hypothermic nut sack or you been sniffing exhaust pipes again :bash:

[Robert Taylor]

Fair enough.

Does the presenter matter that much? Isn't the subject matter more important?

It is clear where the presenters political sympathies lie, but politics aside it is very clear that without even seeing this documentary we do have a lot of disadvantaged people in this country and that is WRONG. But I don't believe you necessarily have to think like a socialist to make such a statement. Or to inherently have a sense of fair play. One of the biggest crimes in recent history is making houses unaffordable to so many people ( and also market pressures forcing rents up ) because of an unneeded and totally false property boom. Wealth accumulation should only happen by actually doing something useful and carrying people along with you.

[Oscar]

-1

I hope you didn't make a mess.
Unfair, I thought he did a great job.

You have to be kidding.
The first thing I saw was a homeless family in Christchurch.
Imagine that, housing problems in a city that's just had two large Earthquakes.

[mashman]

It is clear where the presenters political sympathies lie, but politics aside it is very clear that without even seeing this documentary we do have a lot of disadvantaged people in this country and that is WRONG. But I don't believe you necessarily have to think like a socialist to make such a statement. Or to inherently have a sense of fair play. One of the biggest crimes in recent history is making houses unaffordable to so many people ( and also market pressures forcing rents up ) because of an unneeded and totally false property boom. Wealth accumulation should only happen by actually doing something useful and carrying people along with you.

I dunno. He seemed pretty genuine when he was asking the questions. There are no easy answers eh. I'll take him a subject at a time please. If people responding to the needs of people is socialist, them I'm all for it if "this" is the alternative. Some may think the presenter is more important, tbh, I kinda felt for the woman and her 3 kids living in tents... coz they ain't got any money to go anywhere else. Then you move on to one of many reasons why everything should be free and why we need a simple shift in how we manage the economy :D. The evil begets the evil. The good begets the good. Your services, quality and dedication, will always be wanted and needed, most definitely required in NZ ;). There's a group in the UK called the Renegade Economist, they've done a wee movie and written a wee book. They call the wealth accumulation practice, Renting... and are proposing a Land Value Tax. I have the book if you'd like it.

[mashman]

You have to be kidding.
The first thing I saw was a homeless family in Christchurch.
Imagine that, housing problems in a city that's just had two large Earthquakes.

How long ago was it that you saw a homeless person in Chch?

[Brian d marge]

You have to be kidding.
The first thing I saw was a homeless family in Christchurch.
Imagine that, housing problems in a city that's just had two large Earthquakes.

what do you think happened over here , 20 odd thousand , 20 THOUSAND people

and they are all rehoused and life is as usual

Even with the Nuclear problems ( AS WELL!!)

When we first arrived in Chch we lived in the Army camp for 6 months until we could find a house

SOMETHING aint right down south !

Stephen

[Brian d marge]

It is clear where the presenters political sympathies lie, but politics aside it is very clear that without even seeing this documentary we do have a lot of disadvantaged people in this country and that is WRONG. But I don't believe you necessarily have to think like a socialist to make such a statement. Or to inherently have a sense of fair play. One of the biggest crimes in recent history is making houses unaffordable to so many people ( and also market pressures forcing rents up ) because of an unneeded and totally false property boom. Wealth accumulation should only happen by actually doing something useful and carrying people along with you.

tis a fall out of fractional reserve banking and banks just doing what they do , lend and make profit ( which is what a business should do , make a profit )

Here in japan , the house prices ( from memory) Fell by 0.7 % and houses are affordable due to the construction methods and a ( not quite ) non speculative market ( people don’t really buy and sell houses ,)

The average person CAN afford to buy a house on ONE wage ( the loans are over 40 years and bonuses are used to pay of the principle )

Stephen

[Oscar]

How long ago was it that you saw a homeless person in Chch?

How is that relevant?
Christchurch is a special case and is not representative of all of NZ in respect of housing.

[Oscar]

what do you think happened over here , 20 odd thousand , 20 THOUSAND people

and they are all rehoused and life is as usual

Even with the Nuclear problems ( AS WELL!!)

When we first arrived in Chch we lived in the Army camp for 6 months until we could find a house

SOMETHING aint right down south !

Stephen

What is 20,000 as a percentage of the Japanese population?
Christchurch had 10-12,000 severely damaged houses.

The root cause of the housing shortage in Chch is seismic, not economic.

[mashman]

How is that relevant?
Christchurch is a special case and is not representative of all of NZ in respect of housing.

See Stephen's example above of 20,000 rehoused and getting on with things after the ocean shit a fit and leveled a wee chunk of Japan. And we still have people that need decent housing, not just "housing"? Somefink really ain't right... and I'm tempted to add that it's you :blip:

[Oscar]

See Stephen's example above of 20,000 rehoused and getting on with things after the ocean shit a fit and leveled a wee chunk of Japan. And we still have people that need decent housing, not just "housing"? Somefink really ain't right... and I'm tempted to add that it's you :blip:

I thought it was Ocean that was to blame?
Ah well, I have big shoulders, blame away.

See my answer regarding the relative numbers rehoused in Japan v. the number of houses damaged in Christchurch - I figured it was obvious, but I forgot the type of nupty's that I'm dealing with.
Whatever housing problems that we may have had in NZ were made 10 times worse by the earthquake, and no amount of moaning is gonna fix it.
We simply do not have the resources to rebuild overnight.

[mashman]

I thought it was Ocean that was to blame?
Ah well, I have big shoulders, blame away.

See my answer regarding the relative numbers rehoused in Japan v. the number of houses damaged in Christchurch - I figured it was obvious, but I forgot the type of nupty's that I'm dealing with.
Whatever housing problems that we may have had in NZ were made 10 times worse by the earthquake, and no amount of moaning is gonna fix it.
We simply do not have the resources to rebuild overnight.

Him too.
No blame, just pointing some things out that should be sorted by NOW (heh).

Of course the resources are there, but we need to wait for the money and planning to be sorted before they can start. Meanwhile houses need to be built and utilities need to be sorted... but wait, there's people who don't want to leave so they're being threatened with being ex-communicated etc... Stupid Games. The manpower is here. The resources are here, albeit we'd need to stop selling too much overseas etc... limiting factor in all of that in one word please sir? other than logistics that is.

[Robert Taylor]

I dunno. He seemed pretty genuine when he was asking the questions. There are no easy answers eh. I'll take him a subject at a time please. If people responding to the needs of people is socialist, them I'm all for it if "this" is the alternative. Some may think the presenter is more important, tbh, I kinda felt for the woman and her 3 kids living in tents... coz they ain't got any money to go anywhere else. Then you move on to one of many reasons why everything should be free and why we need a simple shift in how we manage the economy :D. The evil begets the evil. The good begets the good. Your services, quality and dedication, will always be wanted and needed, most definitely required in NZ ;). There's a group in the UK called the Renegade Economist, they've done a wee movie and written a wee book. They call the wealth accumulation practice, Renting... and are proposing a Land Value Tax. I have the book if you'd like it.

Suffice to say ''remove the labels''. Im always up for reading things from a different viewpoint, even if instinctively Im a tory. Whats the exact title of the book?

[mashman]

Suffice to say ''remove the labels''. Im always up for reading things from a different viewpoint, even if instinctively Im a tory. Whats the exact title of the book?

I have issues with it (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Four-Horsemen-Survival-Mark-Braund/dp/0956398510) ;). There is at least 1 group in NZ (http://neweconomics.net.nz/) who also consider an LVT a viable option, but I haven't kept up.

[Brian d marge]

What is 20,000 as a percentage of the Japanese population?
Christchurch had 10-12,000 severely damaged houses.

The root cause of the housing shortage in Chch is seismic, not economic.
Using the phone so difficult to add things
Approx, as a percentage , 1.5 of the population were killed,
Slightly more or less if you take into account miyagi which was the worst hit

As for the root , boot of both , why cannot Burnham military camp be used or temp shelters put up

0.05 ℅ is what I get for chch, either way they should have temp accommodation

Stephen

[BMWST?]

Probably because his preconceptions and yours line up so well...capitalism's bad, mmkay?

one of the points made in the program (not by Bruce) was that we are not operating under a true capitalism otherwise a lot of the companies that "went bust" during the meltdown of 2008 would actually have gone bust not bailed out by governments(taxpayers) so that the C.E.Os still got their bonuses.

[Ocean1]

one of the points made in the program (not by Bruce) was that we are not operating under a true capitalism otherwise a lot of the companies that "went bust" during the meltdown of 2008 would actually have gone bust not bailed out by governments(taxpayers) so that the C.E.Os still got their bonuses.

That's true, both National or Labour have been guilty of both introducing constraints to free trade and protecting those that took opportunistic or imprudent risks.

It's usually just the left that decries the obvious ethical advantages of free trade, though, and routinely actively subvert it.

[Oscar]

Him too.
No blame, just pointing some things out that should be sorted by NOW (heh).

Of course the resources are there, but we need to wait for the money and planning to be sorted before they can start. Meanwhile houses need to be built and utilities need to be sorted... but wait, there's people who don't want to leave so they're being threatened with being ex-communicated etc... Stupid Games. The manpower is here. The resources are here, albeit we'd need to stop selling too much overseas etc... limiting factor in all of that in one word please sir? other than logistics that is.

An interesting issue, but not relevant to the documentary.

[Oscar]

Using the phone so difficult to add things
Approx, as a percentage , 1.5 of the population were killed,
Slightly more or less if you take into account miyagi which was the worst hit

As for the root , boot of both , why cannot Burnham military camp be used or temp shelters put up

0.05 ℅ is what I get for chch, either way they should have temp accommodation

Stephen

As I have stated, an interesting discussion, but in terms of the thread subject, a cheap shot by the documentary maker.

[BMWST?]

See Stephen's example above of 20,000 rehoused and getting on with things after the ocean shit a fit and leveled a wee chunk of Japan. And we still have people that need decent housing, not just "housing"? Somefink really ain't right... and I'm tempted to add that it's you :blip:
.you dont live in the land of reality.It will take years to fix things in CHCH.Any one who thinks any different dont have a grip of the reality of the situation.It takes 3 months to build one house for a typical builder.How may builders in NZ,How may houses do we ussually build in NZ in one year.Do the sums.

[mashman]

.you dont live in the land of reality.It will take years to fix things in CHCH.Any one who thinks any different dont have a grip of the reality of the situation.It takes 3 months to build one house for a typical builder.How may builders in NZ,How may houses do we ussually build in NZ in one year.Do the sums.

:rofl:... nah, a better one beckons ;). ok, 10000 houses. More people working from home and the homeless or dodgy home owners can move into partioned offices. They will have all amenities, coz offices do. They used prefab housing in Kosovo, 1 a day (sometimes 2, depending on how far away you had to travel to get there and how long it took the lorry to navigate seriously narrow and part ice part mud goat tracks in order to deliver it), but they were installed with a heater that they could also cook on. Even novices like myself could help batter one together. I often wonder how some of those guys who had prefabs built are getting on these days... and whether they have a house again or not. Anyhoo, 10,000 houses, 50 building teams, 200 days.

[Brian d marge]

The god botherers can do a house from bare land to watching TV in one day

Possibly a cheap shot but that's the result

The people living in miyagi are re-housed in
Prefabs
Small uninsulated but have everything
Take a few hours , from start to turn key

Just checked

Stephen

[F5 Dave]

Only problem I see with socialisim is that the end result seems to be the need to machine gun an awful lot of common people for being enemies of the state.


come the glorious day

[Brian d marge]

That's true, both National or Labour have been guilty of both introducing constraints to free trade and protecting those that took opportunistic or imprudent risks.

It's usually just the left that decries the obvious ethical advantages of free trade, though, and routinely actively subvert it.
And why is that,,,,,, oh gifted one ?

Stephen

[mashman]

An interesting issue, but not relevant to the documentary.

Dude, you said


We simply do not have the resources to rebuild overnight.

The resources are there. The logistics aren't. The woman in the vid should be housed by now, she isn't. Why not? It is relevant.

[Brian d marge]

Dude, you said



The resources are there. The logistics aren't. The woman in the vid should be housed by now, she isn't. Why not? It is relevant.

dont go holding him to his word , they melt and get all sticky

hopefully he will ignore and go off on a different tangent

Stephen

[Oscar]

Dude, you said



The resources are there. The logistics aren't. The woman in the vid should be housed by now, she isn't. Why not? It is relevant.


The resources are not there.
There are simply not enough tradesmen in this country.
Did the documentary maker answer the question?
What were her circumstances?
Why was she not in emergency housing?
Like you, he was big on propaganda and short on facts.

[mashman]

The resources are not there.
There are simply not enough tradesmen in this country.
Did the documentary maker answer the question?
What were her circumstances?
Why was she not in emergency housing?
Like you, he was big on propaganda and short on facts.

Yes they are.
Yes there are. Tradesmen can be quite proficient in any number of simple tasks such as joining pipes, connecting electrical connectors, banging nails into wood. I'm not diminishing their skill by any means, but I have done these jobs myself in the past without the need of a skilled trades person.
Which question?
That doesn't matter, she, and her 3 kids, are not housed.
She, and her 3 kids, are living in tents.
Bollocks. He asked questions and gave very few answers, the questions he asked all seated in fact. A woman and her kids in tents are facts. As are any others living in garages, without jobs, feeling the pinch etc...

[Oscar]

No, that's left up to the watcher... and economists and politicians etc... Still though, I did ask you for an answer.

You asked me for an answer?
How would I possibly know that?
There was no explanation given, just the use of her and her family for propaganda purposes..

[mashman]

You asked me for an answer?
How would I possibly know that?
There was no explanation given, just the use of her and her family for propaganda purposes..

Yes. You told me that my point was irrelevant. I pointed out that it was and asked why the woman, an her kids, are not housed. Her circumstances are irrelevant. Propaganda? You fuckin muppet... hand up yer arse so far there's got to be an ulterior motive for showing someone who's homeless :facepalm:

[avgas]

I have been inside new zealand. It's just dirt.

[avgas]

Tracy lives with family but they won't give them the lounge - so they have to live in a tent. Family love there.

[Oscar]

Yes. You told me that my point was irrelevant. I pointed out that it was and asked why the woman, an her kids, are not housed. Her circumstances are irrelevant. Propaganda? You fuckin muppet... hand up yer arse so far there's got to be an ulterior motive for showing someone who's homeless :facepalm:

You have a real comprehension problem, don't you?
I said the documentry makers point was irrelevant.
The fact that your points are irrelevant is pretty obvious to all concerned.

[avgas]

Family and student allowance.

More family love there - if you don't love your'e job you must love your'e family and keep working for them. Study part time (night school) like the rest of us.

[BMWST?]

Yes. You told me that my point was irrelevant. I pointed out that it was and asked why the woman, an her kids, are not housed. Her circumstances are irrelevant. Propaganda? You fuckin muppet... hand up yer arse so far there's got to be an ulterior motive for showing someone who's homeless :facepalm:

Whatever her circumstances in arriving at thst place its not something I like to see in our country and regardless of the politics of the program illustrates that something is broken.there is no way a mother and 3 kids should spend a winter in a tent

sent from the tag

[avgas]

asset sales.

Government are terrible management, nz are too poor to buy. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

We need a middle ground, when the government gives the the assets (in equal shares) to the people - say 50%. Then sells the rest.
Take the whole thing off the government hands, but put it in those whom need AND want it.

[avgas]

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/LA0X4SliFJI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[BoristheBiter]

You might of also noticed that in NZ you can rip off the country for millions in tax fraud and get away with it,,but if you commit benefit fraud for a few thou' your likely to go to jail.

Two laws,,,one for the super rich and another for the peasants.



That's because tax fraud is not giving all of what you earned.
Benefit fraud is just plain stealing as you haven't earned it in the first place.

You go and start a company, build it with your money, time and effort and then give it all away to those that do not get out of bed until they feel like it and you will see the difference until then you are just another monkey on the "something for nothing" " all company's are evil" band wagon.

[BMWST?]

That's because tax fraud is not giving all of what you earned.
Benefit fraud is just plain stealing as you haven't earned it in the first place.

You go and start a company, build it with your money, time and effort and then give it all away to those that do not get out of bed until they feel like it and you will see the difference until then you are just another monkey on the "something for nothing" " all company's are evil" band wagon.

Bullshit theft is theft.

sent from the tag

[BoristheBiter]

Bullshit theft is theft.

sent from the tag

So all this left bollocks of they only commit crime because they are poor is it's self bollocks?
Who would have thunk?

[avgas]

Helen Kelly.

A teacher who is no longer a teacher. A lawyer who never was a lawyer. Now a union boss.
Gotta give her credit - she saw a way to upgrade her career and do less work.

[Ocean1]

And why is that,,,,,, oh gifted one ?

Stephen

Because they're focused on buying votes, not rewarding enterprise or hard work.

[avgas]

Budget cuts statistic fails to show the massive immigration wave that happened in early 90's also influx of fast food and convenient lifestyles. In 1980's I would get fish and chips once a week and McDonalds / Pizza Hut.
Also the cut in apprentiships - which means less houses......which is why I live in a house from the 1950's not 1990's. Also why I have had to insulate the fucker.

[Ocean1]

Bullshit theft is theft.

sent from the tag

I agree. And even the thieves agree that tax is theft.

So one is preventing the theft of one's money.

And the other is thieving it from the thieves.

[avgas]

Like the idea of robin hodd tax and max wage.

Lets see the govern't try first wage wise then feed all the way down the soe line. FYI many big bosses of govnt stuff make over $500K/year. I hear $700K isn't difficult.

[Ocean1]

In 1980's I would get fish and chips once a week and McDonalds / Pizza Hut.

You greedy bastard.


Also the cut in apprentiships - which means less houses......which is why I live in a house from the 1950's not 1990's. Also why I have had to insulate the fucker.

Fewer houses.

And which apprenticeships? The govt stopped producing engineering and electrical tradesmen way back in the 70s, they never made too many builders in the first place. So the "cuts" in apprenticeships don't have much to do with any shortage of housing, I'd place that squarely at the feet of local authorities and building supply monopolies.

[BMWST?]

So all this left bollocks of they only commit crime because they are poor is it's self bollocks?
Who would have thunk?


I agree. And even the thieves agree that tax is theft.

So one is preventing the theft of one's money.

And the other is thieving it from the thieves.

Until we come up with some other system income tax is it.One of the points made in the program was people have become self centred and less community minded.Like it or not we need to pay taxes to make the place work

sent from the tag

[Ocean1]

Also why I have had to insulate the fucker.

For free. If you have a community services card.

If not you can still get a subsidy. Before the subsidy you could insulate your average home's roof space for about $1500. The govt introduces a $1000 subsidy for the job, available through approved installers.

The job now costs the home owner $1500, and the govt $1000.

Nice one.

[mashman]

You have a real comprehension problem, don't you?
I said the documentry makers point was irrelevant.
The fact that your points are irrelevant is pretty obvious to all concerned.

:yawn:
Not in response to anything I had posted.
:yawn:

[mashman]

Whatever her circumstances in arriving at thst place its not something I like to see in our country and regardless of the politics of the program illustrates that something is broken.there is no way a mother and 3 kids should spend a winter in a tent

sent from the tag

Agreed whole heartedly.

[Ocean1]

Until we come up with some other system income tax is it.One of the points made in the program was people have become self centred and less community minded.Like it or not we need to pay taxes to make the place work

sent from the tag

I agree. But the system is massively convoluted and as I've just shown above open top legal and illegal abuse, which accounts for a fairly large slice of the tax take.

So reduce taxes on your average income earner, so he doesn't need subsidies to take his kid to the doctor or insulate his house, and use the taxes saved from not having to subsidise even high income earners to help those that actually need it.

It's not rocket science.


It's also not how you get enough votes to make those changes...

[avgas]

For free. If you have a community services card.
If not you can still get a subsidy. Before the subsidy you could insulate your average home's roof space for about $1500. The govt introduces a $1000 subsidy for the job, available through approved installers.
The job now costs the home owner $1500, and the govt $1000.
Nice one.
Nope once again I got nothing. Y'see I wanted to do it as cheap as I could cos I can't afford someone to install it. So I did what I could by myself for $300. Because no installer - no subsidy.


You greedy bastard.
And which apprenticeships? The govt stopped producing engineering and electrical tradesmen way back in the 70s, they never made too many builders in the first place. So the "cuts" in apprenticeships don't have much to do with any shortage of housing, I'd place that squarely at the feet of local authorities and building supply monopolies.
a) Sorry didn't finish that sentence due to multitasking (which I fail at) - but basically was saying that Maccas was a once a year thing if I was lucky. The fish and chips once a week were so us kids would shut up in the car while parents did their second job in the weekend (lawn mowing business). But we had to help them to get it.

b) Yeah your probably right - but hasn't CHH and Fletchers been around since 70's. MAF help em too otherwise we would have more imported timbre here.

[avgas]

Until we come up with some other system income tax is it.One of the points made in the program was people have become self centred and less community minded.Like it or not we need to pay taxes to make the place work
Or create more jobs........
For every $1 spend on supporting others I would expect 0.9 to helping them support themselves. Why? because that is what others expecting of me. If we continue this chain of thought we can get to the end where everyone supports themselves.

The alternative is a handout and and expectation that the good times never end.

[mashman]

For free. If you have a community services card.

If not you can still get a subsidy. Before the subsidy you could insulate your average home's roof space for about $1500. The govt introduces a $1000 subsidy for the job, available through approved installers.

The job now costs the home owner $1500, and the govt $1000.

Nice one.

Judging by the many calls I receive at my new home from company's offering me the lagging subsidy, it's up to $1300 now.

[Ocean1]

Nope once again I got nothing. Y'see I wanted to do it as cheap as I could cos I can't afford someone to install it. So I did what I could by myself for $300. Because no installer - no subsidy.

Aye, that was the point I was making, like most subsidies it never makes it to the target. In this case the installers are raking it from both directions, huge discounts from suppliers because they've just been handed huge quantities of buying power and a guaranteed $1k extra profit per job they do.

Taxpayer: 0, Cold homeowner: 0


a) Sorry didn't finish that sentence due to multitasking (which I fail at) - but basically was saying that Maccas was a once a year thing if I was lucky. The fish and chips once a week were so us kids would shut up in the car while parents did their second job in the weekend (lawn mowing business). But we had to help them to get it.

I was being facetious. But I like your Mum and Dad.


b) Yeah your probably right - but hasn't CHH and Fletchers been around since 70's. MAF help em too otherwise we would have more imported timbre here.

They were, but it takes time to eliminate the competition and more time to slowly ratchet the prices so's nobody notices they're twice what they should be.

[Ocean1]

Judging by the many calls I receive at my new home from company's offering me the lagging subsidy, it's up to $1300 now.

I don't want to know that, that's my taxes being frittered away, there.

[mashman]

I don't want to know that, that's my taxes being frittered away, there.

Mine too... but hey, healthier homes n all that, less visits to doctors and hospitals etc... shame the aluminium widows let the whole idea down. Maybe they'll subsidise windows next time :laugh:

[BMWST?]

Mine too... but hey, healthier homes n all that, less visits to doctors and hospitals etc... shame the aluminium widows let the whole idea down. Maybe they'll subsidise windows next time :laugh:
Still a gain in insulation so not wasted

sent from the tag

[Brian d marge]

The resources are not there.
There are simply not enough tradesmen in this country.

snip

Why was she not in emergency housing?

.

Yes there, are if the houses are quickbuild , even the JWs can do it

second part ., is the question we have been trying to get u to answer

Stephen

[mashman]

Still a gain in insulation so not wasted

sent from the tag

Absolutely...

[Oscar]

Yes there, are if the houses are quickbuild , even the JWs can do it

second part ., is the question we have been trying to get u to answer

Stephen

Why are you asking me?
It wasn't my program.


So we have 10,000 quickbuild houses lying around, just in case?
You are such a child.

[Brian d marge]

Why are you asking me?
It wasn't my program.


So we have 10,000 quickbuild houses lying around, just in case?
You are such a child.

What ?

do you even know what a quickbuild is or even what kind of shelters they are using here

you have that stuff sitting at around waiting to be exported , The houses are designed for a max of two to three years and are rough as a bears bum ( quick builds are prefabs )

basically its a plywood hut , with amenities.

While it may not be stacked in one corner of the country , Im quite sure you ( if you scrounged a round ) could find enough for a few hundred or at the very least one family with kids

fk me even I lived in the military camp in Riccarton for a few months back in the 70s till we found a flat , wooden hut split down the middle .. 2 families one room each ...

but then as a child the romance still shines

Stephen

[avgas]

No need - last check I did a year ago. There are 250 relocatable homes up for sale in NZ. Most up on blocks in a train yard somewhere.

[Oscar]

No need - last check I did a year ago. There are 250 relocatable homes up for sale in NZ. Most up on blocks in a train yard somewhere.

Thank you.
250
Not 10,000, just in case we have an earthquake.

[mashman]

Thank you.
250
Not 10,000, just in case we have an earthquake.

You did notice the bit where he said FOR SALE? Perhaps you noticed the bit where he said RELOCATABLE HOMES? Perhaps prefab and relocatable homes aren't the same thing. Amazing that they used container for offices and shops down there yet can't be arsed using them for temporary housing?

So with all of these prisoners in jail and unemployed etc... you would think that there would have been a course on building prefabs eh? Prefabs that you could store for times when they are needed. Yet we have 0 prefabs and 250 relocatable homes. :tugger: It highlights yet another issue of how prepared NZ is for things that go bump.

That's the sign of a set of proactive governments over the years <_<

[Oscar]

You did notice the bit where he said FOR SALE? Perhaps you noticed the bit where he said RELOCATABLE HOMES? Perhaps prefab and relocatable homes aren't the same thing. Amazing that they used container for offices and shops down there yet can't be arsed using them for temporary housing?

So with all of these prisoners in jail and unemployed etc... you would think that there would have been a course on building prefabs eh? Prefabs that you could store for times when they are needed. Yet we have 0 prefabs and 250 relocatable homes. :tugger: It highlights yet another issue of how prepared NZ is for things that go bump.

That's the sign of a set of proactive governments over the years <_<

No really on topic though is it?
No suprise there - you have the concentration span of a gnat.

I'll assume that since you haven't addressed the original point (that using the housing shortage in Chch to illustrate a national economic debate is silly), that you having nothing to add (as usual).

Notwithstanding that, if the Govt. had prisoners building prefab housing, it would surely breach some UN agreement on human rights, and would have the left wing nutters (such as your good self) up in arms.

[BoristheBiter]

You did notice the bit where he said FOR SALE? Perhaps you noticed the bit where he said RELOCATABLE HOMES? Perhaps prefab and relocatable homes aren't the same thing. Amazing that they used container for offices and shops down there yet can't be arsed using them for temporary housing?

So with all of these prisoners in jail and unemployed etc... you would think that there would have been a course on building prefabs eh? Prefabs that you could store for times when they are needed. Yet we have 0 prefabs and 250 relocatable homes. :tugger: It highlights yet another issue of how prepared NZ is for things that go bump.

That's the sign of a set of proactive governments over the years <_<

The big thing i noticed was how a lot of people sat around waiting for help, some still are.

[mashman]

No really on topic though is it?
No suprise there - you have the concentration span of a gnat.

I'll assume that since you haven't addressed the original point (that using the housing shortage in Chch to illustrate a national economic debate is silly), that you having nothing to add (as usual).

Notwithstanding that, if the Govt. had prisoners building prefab housing, it would surely breach some UN agreement on human rights, and would have the left wing nutters (such as your good self) up in arms.

It's a large part of the reason the lady with 3 kids are living in tents, so it's on topic.
:tugger:

Of course it isn't silly. You claim that the earthquake is the problem, I highlighted that it would take 50 builders 200 days to put up 10,000 prefabs therefore covering everyone that had issues. Yet we're down to at least 1 person and nothing has been done.

:killingme Earth to Oscar, Earth to Oscar, how do prisoners currently earn $ whilst locked up?

Just more of your short-sighted out of sight out of mind nonsense shining through there. I'm not sure why you even bother anymore.


The big thing i noticed was how a lot of people sat around waiting for help, some still are.

Do ya reckon they've asked and been told that they're on a list? S'ok though, while they wait they can go and shelter in the cardboard church mebee, or perhaps the stadium is finished by now?

[Oscar]

It's a large part of the reason the lady with 3 kids are living in tents, so it's on topic.
:tugger:

Of course it isn't silly. You claim that the earthquake is the problem, I highlighted that it would take 50 builders 200 days to put up 10,000 prefabs therefore covering everyone that had issues. Yet we're down to at least 1 person and nothing has been done.

:killingme Earth to Oscar, Earth to Oscar, how do prisoners currently earn $ whilst locked up?

Just more of your short-sighted out of sight out of mind nonsense shining through there. I'm not sure why you even bother anymore.



Do ya reckon they've asked and been told that they're on a list? S'ok though, while they wait they can go and shelter in the cardboard church mebee, or perhaps the stadium is finished by now?

Having proved that you were an idiot some time ago, you don't need to constantly reiterate your stupidity - I get it.
So bearing in mind your slow-wittedness, I'll type this slowly - Go back and study the thread: What is the topic? I know that staying on topic challenges you, but work with me. Now tell me why using the un-housed in a recently earthquake hit city to prove that there's a housing shortage throughout the country is dishonest reporting.

See? Easy wasn't it?

As for your other stupidity, as an unhinged lefty you should be aware of the problem of getting prisoners to actual work (i.e. build meaningfull stuff).
It takes jobs from other workers whilst paying very low wages.
This causes the unions to get very upset.

Feel free to go off on another meaningless tangent, now....

[T.W.R]

Having proved that you I'm an idiot some time ago, you don't need to constantly reiterate my stupidity - I get it.
So bearing in mind your slow-wittedness, I'll type this slowly - Go back and study the thread: What is the topic? I know that staying on topic challenges you, but work with me. Now tell me why using the un-housed in a recently earthquake hit city to prove that there's a housing shortage throughout the country is dishonest reporting.

You took it off to ChCh in post #36



As for your other stupidity, as an unhinged lefty you should be aware of the problem of getting prisoners to actual work (i.e. build meaningfull stuff).
It takes jobs from other workers whilst paying very low wages.
This causes the unions to get very upset.

No different to P.D work, maybe it'd pay for the $30K+ it costs to keep them in the holiday camps anyhow instead of the tax payer having to front the bill all the time.
Bit like the CPIT doing big advertising push for peeps to learn trade skills to help with the ChCh rebuild, thats just a push for legitimised cheap labour, what are they going to do flood the market with builders then once the rebuild settles down to normal levels again the majority of those people will be without work and back as stats on the unemployment


Feel free to go off on another meaningless tangent, now....

way you go

[BoristheBiter]

Do ya reckon they've asked and been told that they're on a list? S'ok though, while they wait they can go and shelter in the cardboard church mebee, or perhaps the stadium is finished by now?

Who knows but If that had been me I would have either moved, built something temp or moved.
The other question was were they {the ones in the tent} insured? (i never watched the program) as ;
1) my insurance will pay for temp accommodation, why didn't theirs?,
2) if not then they are entitled to nothing as they have not contributed to EQC so should be happy for anything they get.:corn:

[mashman]

Having proved that you were an idiot some time ago, you don't need to constantly reiterate your stupidity - I get it.
So bearing in mind your slow-wittedness, I'll type this slowly - Go back and study the thread: What is the topic? I know that staying on topic challenges you, but work with me. Now tell me why using the un-housed in a recently earthquake hit city to prove that there's a housing shortage throughout the country is dishonest reporting.

See? Easy wasn't it?

As for your other stupidity, as an unhinged lefty you should be aware of the problem of getting prisoners to actual work (i.e. build meaningfull stuff).
It takes jobs from other workers whilst paying very low wages.
This causes the unions to get very upset.

Feel free to go off on another meaningless tangent, now....

Of course I do, because you obviously don't.
The topic is the programme and the contents of. An un-housed woman was on the programme, who is STILL homeless after the Chch quakes. No one is talking about dishonest reporting other than yourself and those who prefer the propaganda style of analysis after watching 5 minutes (you did say you only made it to 5 minutes right?) v's those who watched it and formed opinions/thoughts based on the content.

:blink: it would have been if any of your "logic" actually made any form of contextual sense.

I am aware of the issue, however as no prefabs exist etc... there is a gap in the "market" as no one else is doing this, so why would anyone kick up such a fuss other than right whinge monacle visioned sheeple like yourself? If you had the ability to apply lateral and critical thinking, you wouldn't be so ignorant to post the likes of the above. Fortunately you don't, which, if nothing else, helps with my education, ta.

S'ok, you're doing that enough all on yer lonesome old chap.

[mashman]

Who knows but If that had been me I would have either moved, built something temp or moved.
The other question was were they {the ones in the tent} insured? (i never watched the program) as ;
1) my insurance will pay for temp accommodation, why didn't theirs?,
2) if not then they are entitled to nothing as they have not contributed to EQC so should be happy for anything they get.:corn:

Well it wasn't you. Not everyone is as capable of looking after themselves as you. Some people need assistance.
Why should it matter if they were insured or not. Homeless people get housed too don't they?
1) That's Peace Prize material right there.
2) bwaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa... you're a fuckin savage.

[BoristheBiter]

Well it wasn't you. Not everyone is as capable of looking after themselves as you. Some people need assistance.
Why should it matter if they were insured or not. Homeless people get housed too don't they?
1) That's Peace Prize material right there.
2) bwaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaa... you're a fuckin savage.

So if people need assistance (for free) then they shouldn't cry about how long it takes.

[mashman]

So if people need assistance (for free) then they shouldn't cry about how long it takes.

Yes they should... coz that is the mark of how well your society functions, or in this case doesn't. Your money'd world really isn't a nice place and looks to bring out the worst in many of whom I would have considered to have a brain. Live and learn eh.

[BoristheBiter]

Yes they should... coz that is the mark of how well your society functions, or in this case doesn't. Your money'd world really isn't a nice place and looks to bring out the worst in many of whom I would have considered to have a brain. Live and learn eh.

Actually it only brings out a feeling of self entitlement from those that can't seem to work in it.
Never had these problems in the 70's I guess that came from living withing one's means and taking responsibility for one's actions.

Free money aye, and the greens want to print more of it, go figure.

[mashman]

Actually it only brings out a feeling of self entitlement from those that can't seem to work in it.
Never had these problems in the 70's I guess that came from living withing one's means and taking responsibility for one's actions.

Free money aye, and the greens want to print more of it, go figure.

Or those who aren't allowed to work in it. There are not jobs for everyone. Unemployment is a requirement of a healthy economy blah blah blah... not everyone knows the system inside and out and as we often here, some people just fall through the cracks.
Probably never happened in the 70's coz we looked after people way back when... but then again, there were still communities, unlocked doors, lots of jobs, and a brave new world just around the corner to fuck it up as they went. Meh.

I know... how dare they try to follow the Japanese govt example to stimulate the economy, or the US govt example of economic stimulus, or the UK example etc... You do realise that that is what these country's have been doing? Printing more money that is? Whereas NZ has been borrowing large sums of money instead. I wonder where they could be borrowing large sums of money from, hmmmmmmm. Are the US/UK/Japanese govts bad govts if they're following a Green policy? Or are the Greens ahead of the game with a better economic understanding?

[MisterD]

how dare they try to follow the Japanese govt example to stimulate the economy, or the US govt example of economic stimulus, or the UK example etc... You do realise that that is what these country's have been doing? Printing more money that is?

Point 1) what those economies are doing in respect of "quantitative easing" are pretty much desperation measures since their official interest rates are all but 0 and they have nowhere else to go, our OCR is 2.5 so the reserve bank has plenty of scope for movement yet. Point 2) have you seen how ineffective those policies have been? All the US has acheived is a stock market bubble.

Money printing discourages savings which is precisely the opposite of what any economy needs.

[jasonu]

Interesting watch. (http://www.tv3.co.nz/INSIDE-NEW-ZEALAND-Mind-The-Gap/tabid/3692/articleID/94816/MCat/3061/Default.aspx)

It would have been far more interesting if I could have gotten it to fucking play...
Pity as I am quite keen to give it a watch.

[mashman]

Point 1) what those economies are doing in respect of "quantitative easing" are pretty much desperation measures since their official interest rates are all but 0 and they have nowhere else to go, our OCR is 2.5 so the reserve bank has plenty of scope for movement yet. Point 2) have you seen how ineffective those policies have been? All the US has acheived is a stock market bubble.

Money printing discourages savings which is precisely the opposite of what any economy needs.

You mean that even though those country's have AA- (Japanese being the lowest) credit ratings, their economy's are in the shit? Other than that, QE is nothing more than printing money irrespective of how you dress it. What are they printing against? govt Bonds? Yet another thing that is generated out of thin air. 1) You're right, so why are the govt borrowing if there is still room to lower the base rate and to stimulate the economy by using the money saved when the tax breaks were given? 2) I have laughed at how ineffective those policies have been, primarily because as you say, they threw the money at the wrong people (even though they did mull over the idea of a citizens dividend to shoe horn it in where it's needed).

Money printing discourage savings? No. The cost of living in the economy discourages savings. Ya know, that lower wages = less available to save paradigm. The whole reason the citizens dividend was mentioned is because you need the consumers to consume, and not save, in order to spur on economic growth. Having said that I would agree that money printing discourages wider investment.


It would have been far more interesting if I could have gotten it to fucking play...

You haven't been cleared? They must be watchin you bro.

[Brian d marge]

Having proved that you were an idiot some time ago, you don't need to constantly reiterate your stupidity - I get it.
So bearing in mind your slow-wittedness, I'll type this slowly - Go back and study the thread: What is the topic? I know that staying on topic challenges you, but work with me. Now tell me why using the un-housed in a recently earthquake hit city to prove that there's a housing shortage throughout the country is dishonest reporting.

See? Easy wasn't it?

As for your other stupidity, as an unhinged lefty you should be aware of the problem of getting prisoners to actual work (i.e. build meaningfull stuff).
It takes jobs from other workers whilst paying very low wages.
This causes the unions to get very upset.

Feel free to go off on another meaningless tangent, now....
It maybe a. But sensationalist or there maybe a hidden story behind it
But it still doesn't distract from the idea that A: they should be in at least temporary housing or at least offered housing and/ or B: we have become or are becoming a nation of "me" first
I believe ,as do others and the programme itself highlighted, is due to economic theory/conditions
Stephen

[MisterD]

1) You're right, so why are the govt borrowing if there is still room to lower the base rate and to stimulate the economy by using the money saved when the tax breaks were given?

Because the government isn't borrowing to "stimulate" the economy. It's borrowing to pay, more or less, the welfare bill, on the reasoning that the other way to pay the bills is to increase taxes and they don't want to do that because what really drives an economy is private investment.



Money printing discourage savings? No. The cost of living in the economy discourages savings. Ya know, that lower wages = less available to save paradigm.

Of course it does! Create more of anything, and it's worth less create more money and you get inflation which means it's better to spend a dollar than save it if it's going to lose value.



The whole reason the citizens dividend was mentioned is because you need the consumers to consume, and not save, in order to spur on economic growth. Having said that I would agree that money printing discourages wider investment.

Wrong, just flat wrong. Like I said up there, an economy is really driven by private investment...and where do the funds for investment come from? That's right, savings.

Don't feel bad about not understanding that, neither do Ben Bernanke or Paul Krugman.

http://mises.org/daily/5641/Its-Not-about-Consumption
http://mises.org/daily/4193/

[mashman]

Because the government isn't borrowing to "stimulate" the economy. It's borrowing to pay, more or less, the welfare bill, on the reasoning that the other way to pay the bills is to increase taxes and they don't want to do that because what really drives an economy is private investment.

Of course it does! Create more of anything, and it's worth less create more money and you get inflation which means it's better to spend a dollar than save it if it's going to lose value.

Wrong, just flat wrong. Like I said up there, an economy is really driven by private investment...and where do the funds for investment come from? That's right, savings.

Don't feel bad about not understanding that, neither do Ben Bernanke or Paul Krugman.

http://mises.org/daily/5641/Its-Not-about-Consumption
http://mises.org/daily/4193/

No doubt that's a reason for borrowing also, but the idea behind tax cuts is to put more money into the pockets of those who spend i.e. investment. In which case, why hasn't that worked if it's your be all end all answer? Having said that, more likely 100% of the beneficiary (I hate that term) will go back into the wider economy i.e. food, utility bills, rates, rent etc... still though, would it not have been cheaper for investors in NZ to invest in NZ than it would have been to borrow?

Tis only worth less when demand outstrips supply... and given that money is in short supply and demand is outstripping it, then what's the problem? They've been throwing in $85 billion per month in the US which gets sucked up instantly and does nothing. Thing is though, inflation hasn't risen either. Can you explain that?

Bullshit. An economy is driven by their being willing buyers for products that are being sold i.e. consumerism. You need the consumer or the investment goes flat on its face. Funds for investment do NOT just come from savings at all, that's just being silly. Plenty of people borrow to invest i.e. borrow funds to consume according to our wonderful economics experts.

:rofl:... I thought Krugman had been having a change of heart of late?

[Brian d marge]

Point 1) what those economies are doing in respect of "quantitative easing" are pretty much desperation measures since their official interest rates are all but 0 and they have nowhere else to go, our OCR is 2.5 so the reserve bank has plenty of scope for movement yet. Point 2) have you seen how ineffective those policies have been? All the US has acheived is a stock market bubble.

Money printing discourages savings which is precisely the opposite of what any economy needs.

Saving money in a fiat money system stop or slows growth, See Japan and the measures Abe is using to speed up the money cycle

the bank need to lend it out asap ...you need to spend it asap.

Stephen

[Brian d marge]

Because the government isn't borrowing to "stimulate" the economy. It's borrowing to pay, more or less, the welfare bill, on the reasoning that the other way to pay the bills is to increase taxes and they don't want to do that because what really drives an economy is private investment.



Of course it does! Create more of anything, and it's worth less create more money and you get inflation which means it's better to spend a dollar than save it if it's going to lose value.



Wrong, just flat wrong. Like I said up there, an economy is really driven by private investment...and where do the funds for investment come from? That's right, savings.

Don't feel bad about not understanding that, neither do Ben Bernanke or Paul Krugman.

http://mises.org/daily/5641/Its-Not-about-Consumption
http://mises.org/daily/4193/

Re read that article , it says "wealth creation " which could be "savings"

yes , As I pointed out , "abe Economics " is about getting the money to flow "quickly" If you "save " that’s good the bank can lend , ( bank or financial institution ) but the money must create "capital wealth" which then drives production ( but production needs consumption)

( least that’s how I read it )

So the "more the bank lends and the more the money is used to create Capital wealth ( plant and machinery etc) the more production rises. The more production the more consumption rises and the money flows ie drives the economy

but what happens if no one is buying ? ie not spending what happens to the value of the "wealth " ??and production?? and if money is the conduit for capital transfer the more "Money " you can move the greater your accumulation of capital wealth , possibly creating a divide between those that can , and those that cant .

least that’s how I read it

As for wages , I invest money in a new plant , to make cars , I invest in robots ,,the cost of cars drop due to efficiencies but what about the worker ? retrains ?


the link needs to be thunk about more and possibly a re-reading of Hayak ( I which he could have discovered the paragraph )



Stephen

[Brian d marge]

It would have been far more interesting if I could have gotten it to fucking play...
Pity as I am quite keen to give it a watch.
shame , cos the ending with the oil and the lesbian was epic

Stephen

[mashman]

shame , cos the ending with the oil and the lesbian was epic

Stephen

I just watched that whole thing again and never saw the oil.

[mashman]

Re read that article , it says "wealth creation " which could be "savings"

yes , As I pointed out , "abe Economics " is about getting the money to flow "quickly" If you "save " that’s good the bank can lend , ( bank or financial institution ) but the money must create "capital wealth" which then drives production ( but production needs consumption)

( least that’s how I read it )

So the "more the bank lends and the more the money is used to create Capital wealth ( plant and machinery etc) the more production rises. The more production the more consumption rises and the money flows ie drives the economy

but what happens if no one is buying ? ie not spending what happens to the value of the "wealth " ??and production?? and if money is the conduit for capital transfer the more "Money " you can move the greater your accumulation of capital wealth , possibly creating a divide between those that can , and those that cant .

least that’s how I read it

As for wages , I invest money in a new plant , to make cars , I invest in robots ,,the cost of cars drop due to efficiencies but what about the worker ? retrains ?

the link needs to be thunk about more and possibly a re-reading of Hayak ( I which he could have discovered the paragraph )

Stephen

Confidence is a bitch in a world that consistently promotes anti-trust eh.

[Brian d marge]

Confidence is a bitch in a world that consistently promotes anti-trust eh.

confidence , that dirty slut

Stephen

[Brian d marge]

I just watched that whole thing again and never saw the oil.
I made that bit up , my bad,,, seeking attention , sorry

Stephen

[mashman]

I made that bit up , my bad,,, seeking attention , sorry

Stephen

You realise that you're going to end up in discreditation hell for those remarks.

[Brian d marge]

btw , an anagram of "debit card" is Bad credit

who would of thunk

Stephen

With any luck, the new minister responsible for regulating New Zealand’s supermarket duopoly will tell them, with great dignity and politeness, to go fuck themselves. hahahahahahahaaaa

[mashman]

btw , an anagram of "debit card" is Bad credit

who would of thunk

Stephen

With any luck, the new minister responsible for regulating New Zealand’s supermarket duopoly will tell them, with great dignity and politeness, to go fuck themselves. hahahahahahahaaaa

Gizza job.

[BMWST?]

It maybe a. But sensationalist or there maybe a hidden story behind it
But it still doesn't distract from the idea that A: they should be in at least temporary housing or at least offered housing and/ or B: we have become or are becoming a nation of "me" first
I believe ,as do others and the programme itself highlighted, is due to economic theory/conditions
Stephen
there is temporary housing i guess there aint enough of it.

[Brian d marge]

Gizza job.


jazz big o

Stephen

[Slicksta]

I dropped out of school at 5th form went to work in retail now at 26 I still work in retail and actually really enjoy it.
Brought a house too on retail wages by myself its not that hard you just have to buy a house and get yourself set up before you have a family planning is everything.

When ever speaking to chaps with more grey hair than I they never seem to think the 50s/60s was a glorious time of great wealth and prosperity for all families often skimped by not actually acquiring as many material possessions as what most average families have today.
Perhaps I am wrong but it seems over the years things improve and everyone thinks they are getting worse.

[Brian d marge]

I dropped out of school at 5th form went to work in retail now at 26 I still work in retail and actually really enjoy it.
Brought a house too on retail wages by myself its not that hard you just have to buy a house and get yourself set up before you have a family planning is everything.

When ever speaking to chaps with more grey hair than I they never seem to think the 50s/60s was a glorious time of great wealth and prosperity for all families often skimped by not actually acquiring as many material possessions as what most average families have today.
Perhaps I am wrong but it seems over the years things improve and everyone thinks they are getting worse.

cost of house in 1950 $8,450.00 , 1960 $12,700.00 ,

In 1950 the average income per year was $3,210.00 and by 1959 was $5,010.00

so the average mortgage was about 20% of your income , of course it was better

Stephen

[MisterD]

so the average mortgage was about 20% of your income , of course it was better

Yeah but most families would have had one car, TV's were rare, "eating out" meant fish & chips, fashion labels?, foreign holidays?...

House price inflation is an effect of dual-incomes and cheap credit, not a cause of it.

[Banditbandit]

When ever speaking to chaps with more grey hair than I they never seem to think the 50s/60s was a glorious time of great wealth and prosperity for all families often skimped by not actually acquiring as many material possessions as what most average families have today.
Perhaps I am wrong but it seems over the years things improve and everyone thinks they are getting worse.

"Better" or "Worse" depends on how you define it ...

When I left school in the early 1970s there was an "unemploymetn crisis" in Ndew Zealand .. previously there had been jobs for everyone - but in 1973 there were 2,000 unemployed people in the whole country - that's right - not just in one city but across the whole country ... That's significant as most families had at least one, and probably only one, breadwinner .. and so they could feed, clothe and houe themselves ... that's no longer true - some families are living on Governmet handouts and inothers both paretns work just to feed, clothe and house the family ...

Back then, average house prices were about four times the average annual wage ... and there were a few really really expensive houses - but most houses were average to good and people could afford to buy one ... House prices have increased ahead of wages and now they are too expesive for some peopel to buy ... Now some people expect to buy a $1million plus house in Auckland ... (somethign like 15 suburbs in Dorkland have average hous eprices of more than $1million - ridiculous ...) ... a $1million house is the same price as four $250,000 houses ... so one family gets a house and three others don't - there's a massive change in the wealth distribution in this country ... and it impacts on many things ...

Al that money tied up in expensive real estaste is doing bugger all for our economic growth and investment - capital is locked up in land and bricks and morter ...

The expectations of a small group of people is that they will get rich .. but they can only do that at the expense of other people ... pay your workers minimum wage and get to cream off huge profits ...

Corporations are paying millions of dollars in bonuses to senior managers .. where do you think the moey comes from ???

Yes, we have more material goods available to us now .. does that make us happy? It makes some people happy and a lot of people poor ...

Yes, I think thngs were better back then ..

[mashman]

jazz big o

Stephen

bag o jizz

[Brian d marge]

Yeah but most families would have had one car, TV's were rare, "eating out" meant fish & chips, fashion labels?, foreign holidays?...

House price inflation is an effect of dual-incomes and cheap credit, not a cause of it.

thats right

Tvs were new, so expensive , basically the efficiencies of modern production wasnt there . Also import taxes..

Fashion label oh they were there alright but remember NZ was operating in a closed/protected import environment so "prada" wasnt exactly available and if it was it was stung by import tax

So people couldnt afford and didnt buy .

Stephen

not in a position to check the details right now can do if req

[SPman]

Our top income decile starts at a mere $72,000.
The top one per cent begins at $170,000
The top 0.4 per cent at $250,000.
Presiding over this tiny group are the chief executives of large companies who receive an average salary of $1.5 million.
Meanwhile, 70 per cent of New Zealanders earn less than $43,000
50 per cent earn less than $24,000

- Max Rashbrooke, - `Inequality: a New Zealand crisis '

Between 1997 and 2006,for example, transnational corporations made NZ $50.3 billion in profits from their New Zealand operations, yet only 32 per cent of this sum was reinvested domestically.

As of 2011 a global super-entity of 147 interlinked firms predominated. All of the top 50 except one were financial institutions. Wade comments that `such concentration provides financial firms with the leverage to colonise the governments of nation states and shape public policy in line with their preferences`


http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/09/03/wealth-defence-what-you-dont-know-about-john-keys-real-agenda/

[SPman]

cost of house in 1950 $8,450.00 , 1960 $12,700.00 ,

In 1950 the average income per year was $3,210.00 and by 1959 was $5,010.00

so the average mortgage was about 20% of your income , of course it was better

Stephen - 1959 - $5,010? I thought it was around 1,000 quid ($2,000) Most people of our aquaintance (mainly tradesmen) earned around 1,000 - 1,100 pounds a year.....only Freezing Workers earned more than that. A "man's wage" of 20-22 quid a week was considered good in 1960.

[avgas]

Do ya reckon they've asked and been told that they're on a list? S'ok though, while they wait they can go and shelter in the cardboard church mebee, or perhaps the stadium is finished by now?
I found it ironic that they were sleeping in a tent but the truck cab was empty.........

Donate a tent, save the stupid.

[mashman]

I found it ironic that they were sleeping in a tent but the truck cab was empty.........

Donate a tent, save the stupid.

:girlfight: you know what I meant sonny :D

[Brian d marge]

- 1959 - $5,010? I thought it was around 1,000 quid ($2,000) Most people of our aquaintance (mainly tradesmen) earned around 1,000 - 1,100 pounds a year.....only Freezing Workers earned more than that. A "man's wage" of 20-22 quid a week was considered good in 1960.
I'm a child of the 60s , I got that figure from the new Zealand museum , when I get home later tonight , I'll will reconfirm double check ... It was the national average ...probably those aucklanders bumping the average up again

Stephen

[BoristheBiter]

Our top income decile starts at a mere $72,000.
The top one per cent begins at $170,000
The top 0.4 per cent at $250,000.
Presiding over this tiny group are the chief executives of large companies who receive an average salary of $1.5 million.
Meanwhile, 70 per cent of New Zealanders earn less than $43,000
50 per cent earn less than $24,000

- Max Rashbrooke, - `Inequality: a New Zealand crisis '

Between 1997 and 2006,for example, transnational corporations made NZ $50.3 billion in profits from their New Zealand operations, yet only 32 per cent of this sum was reinvested domestically.

As of 2011 a global super-entity of 147 interlinked firms predominated. All of the top 50 except one were financial institutions. Wade comments that `such concentration provides financial firms with the leverage to colonise the governments of nation states and shape public policy in line with their preferences`


http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/09/03/wealth-defence-what-you-dont-know-about-john-keys-real-agenda/

All I want to know is where did he get his stats from as the last census that is able to be viewed is from '06.
Also maybe the fact that 25% is on the unemployment benefit might have something to do with it.
http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2006CensusHomePage/QuickStats/quickstats-about-a-subject/incomes/personal-income-by-work.aspx

Just another lefty one sided pile of shit journalism that the internet is famous for.

[Ocean1]

Our top income decile starts at a mere $72,000.
The top one per cent begins at $170,000
The top 0.4 per cent at $250,000.
Presiding over this tiny group are the chief executives of large companies who receive an average salary of $1.5 million.
Meanwhile, 70 per cent of New Zealanders earn less than $43,000
50 per cent earn less than $24,000

- Max Rashbrooke, - `Inequality: a New Zealand crisis '

Between 1997 and 2006,for example, transnational corporations made NZ $50.3 billion in profits from their New Zealand operations, yet only 32 per cent of this sum was reinvested domestically.

As of 2011 a global super-entity of 147 interlinked firms predominated. All of the top 50 except one were financial institutions. Wade comments that `such concentration provides financial firms with the leverage to colonise the governments of nation states and shape public policy in line with their preferences`


http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/09/03/wealth-defence-what-you-dont-know-about-john-keys-real-agenda/

Wonder what the extreme right's figures look like...

And on a completely non-oppositional hand I also wonder what those transnational corporations paid in wages over that time.

I get sooooo sick of reading shit that's so heavily spun you can hear it humming. And to be honest I've long since given up believing anything having the slightest resemblance to "proof" of someone else's opinion.

Just call me Thomas Covenant.

[Brian d marge]

Wonder what the extreme right's figures look like...

And on a completely non-oppositional hand I also wonder what those transnational corporations paid in wages over that time.

I get sooooo sick of reading shit that's so heavily spun you can hear it humming. And to be honest I've long since given up believing anything having the slightest resemblance to "proof" of someone else's opinion.

Just call me Thomas Covenant.

We know that , possibly the ONLY 2 facts you have ever produced,

Stephen

As for Thomas Covenant while that is a fitting name , both he an you good self are fantasy novelists , A more fitting first name might have been "John" .

chavannes motto

[Ocean1]

We know that , possibly the ONLY 2 facts you have ever produced,

Stephen

As for Thomas Covenant while that is a fitting name , both he an you good self are fantasy novelists


It's somewhat axiomatic that you should be as wrong wrt opinion as you often are about facts. An equal opportunity failure, in fact.

Take mate Thomas, for example: He’s not, in fact a novelist of any sort. Perhaps you got a bit flustered and confused in analysing your research.

Again.

[puddytat]

Just another lefty one sided pile of shit journalism that the internet is famous for.

You're more than welcome to come up with opposing arguments & articles from the Right Wing Bloggs.........Oh wait .... there aint fuck all of them....:motu:

[BMWST?]

Re read that article , it says "wealth creation " which could be "savings"

yes , As I pointed out , "abe Economics " is about getting the money to flow "quickly" If you "save " that’s good the bank can lend , ( bank or financial institution ) but the money must create "capital wealth" which then drives production ( but production needs consumption)

( least that’s how I read it )

So the "more the bank lends and the more the money is used to create Capital wealth ( plant and machinery etc) the more production rises. The more production the more consumption rises and the money flows ie drives the economy

but what happens if no one is buying ? ie not spending what happens to the value of the "wealth " ??and production?? and if money is the conduit for capital transfer the more "Money " you can move the greater your accumulation of capital wealth , possibly creating a divide between those that can , and those that cant .

least that’s how I read it

As for wages , I invest money in a new plant , to make cars , I invest in robots ,,the cost of cars drop due to efficiencies but what about the worker ? retrains ?


the link needs to be thunk about more and possibly a re-reading of Hayak ( I which he could have discovered the paragraph )



Stephen

and this is where it falls down.This analasys is a model of perpetual motion.But if you sack all your workers and install robots who the fuck is gonna buy the cars?The robots!?And the same is true of Globalisation.If you outsource everything thats fine,but you wont have anyone at home to buy.

[puddytat]

The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant by Stephen Donaldson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chronicles_of_Thomas_Covenant
John Key gets my vote to play Lord Foul.

[Brian d marge]

It's somewhat axiomatic that you should be as wrong wrt opinion as you often are about facts. An equal opportunity failure, in fact.

True , you have been 100% correct in all the the facts you have posted. Not sure about the health and beauty one , but the others are 100% correct in all you have posted.

Take mate Thomas, for example: He’s not, in fact a novelist of any sort. Perhaps you got a bit flustered and confused in analysing your research.

See below .

Again.


and this is where it falls down.This analasys is a model of perpetual motion.But if you sack all your workers and install robots who the fuck is gonna buy the cars?The robots!?And the same is true of Globalisation.If you outsource everything thats fine,but you wont have anyone at home to buy.

thats right , and was one of the questions I raised !


The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant by Stephen Donaldson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chronicles_of_Thomas_Covenant
John Key gets my vote to play Lord Foul.
Thats what I thought to . I would have changed the title to " The Chronicals of John Thomas Covenant " that would fit nicely.

Stephen

[Brian d marge]

- 1959 - $5,010? I thought it was around 1,000 quid ($2,000) Most people of our aquaintance (mainly tradesmen) earned around 1,000 - 1,100 pounds a year.....only Freezing Workers earned more than that. A "man's wage" of 20-22 quid a week was considered good in 1960.

ok rechecked I found what happened I clicked the link to an AMERICAN site . Any way thanks for that. FROM the 1950 census

http://www3.stats.govt.nz/New_Zealand_Official_Yearbooks/1950/NZOYB_1950.html

i get a house to be worth 1368 pounds ( thats better ) and a income of "under 300 pounds per year ( 50.8% of people) which gives a ratio of 36.48 %

If anyone can get a better figure than under 300 ,please !

in 2013 the average house price was $ 371 000 and the average income , 48600 ( roughly 371x2/25 ) I get 61 %

If anyone has any better figure let me know

The original point still stands , though at 36% of income in 1950 it would have still been stressful to buy a house if the marker for Mortgage stress was 30 % of income

Stephen

[BoristheBiter]

You're more than welcome to come up with opposing arguments & articles from the Right Wing Bloggs.........Oh wait .... there aint fuck all of them....:motu:

That's because right wingers have the intelligence to think and work stuff out for themselves and don't need some jerno hack to manipulate stats to try and make an argument.

Still haven't seen any facts to back your argument yet either but like lefty arguments they never do.
But just for you here are some points that are over looked in his statement.
1) all ages are used in his post,
2) all income (work, investment and benefit) is used in his post,
3) all work (full, part time) is used in his post,
4) all stats he uses is from the 2006 census making them 8 years old,
5) all work types and qualifications have been used in his post,

also fails to show that over 9% are unemployed or not in the lab our force. but are earning over 30K

Funny if you look at the 2006 census you will find that most over the median are in between 24 and 60 maybe that correlates to employment. Who would have thunk.

[Ocean1]

True , you have been 100% correct in all the the facts you have posted. Not sure about the health and beauty one , but the others are 100% correct in all you have posted.

You're still struggling with what's fact and what's opinion. Let me help you out, there: that was opinion, albeit particularly relevant and qualified opinion.


see below

Puddytat's reference?

Yes, it shows that you were wrong, (even on your second attempt) and that Thomas Covenant is not in fact a novelist.

Your problem in discerning the real world from the fantasy world is sorta consistent with your problem with facts and opinion, innit?

[Ocean1]

The original point still stands , though at 36% of income in 1950 it would have still been stressful to buy a house if the marker for Mortgage stress was 30 % of income

Stephen

Aye, no doubt.

And as I've said before almost all of the difference in historic house costs is down to the size of the houses. In 1950 a family home was almost universally 100 sqM, now it's well over 200. The rest is explainable by the costs of technology and features that simply weren't available then and would have been considered unaffordable luxuries two generations ago.

Quick google for those who bleat about unsupported opinion....

Here y'go, only goes from 1976 at 121sqM to 2011 at 219, but you get the idea, double the size and what would you expect to happen to the price?: http://www.creative.auckland.ac.nz/webdav/site/nicai/shared/about/research/architecture-planning/housing-researchers-conference/2010%20Conference%20Proceedings/Marriage%20AHRC%202010.pdf

[MisterD]

The rest is explainable by the costs of technology and features that simply weren't available then and would have been considered unaffordable luxuries two generations ago.

You also need to factor in that in 1960 (estimated by Stats NZ) the population was 2.4 million and we're now at 4.48 million, plus ease of travel means that we're not as isolated as we were so foreign money is also exterting upwards pressure.

[puddytat]

That's because right wingers have the intelligence to think and work stuff out for themselves and don't need some jerno hack to manipulate stats to try and make an argument.

Still haven't seen any facts to back your argument yet either but like lefty arguments they never do.
But just for you here are some points that are over looked in his statement.
1) all ages are used in his post,
2) all income (work, investment and benefit) is used in his post,
3) all work (full, part time) is used in his post,
4) all stats he uses is from the 2006 census making them 8 years old,
5) all work types and qualifications have been used in his post,

also fails to show that over 9% are unemployed or not in the lab our force. but are earning over 30K

Funny if you look at the 2006 census you will find that most over the median are in between 24 and 60 maybe that correlates to employment. Who would have thunk.

Well I cant see a problem in using all the above in his article......
See ,like my parents (who are presently enjoying the fruits of staying with the the super scheme that got phased out way back when which was a lefty thing) , you seem like an atypical anal retentive right winger. Why?
Is it because you cant talk to your mates about things because "kiwi blokes dont do that'' 'cause its not cool to acknowledge that your idea of how it should be is not working out how it should & you dont want to be a whinger? Do you talk to your partner (I dont know which way you swing) about the state of the planet or just about Womans weekly stuff.
Your full of it here becuase you hide behind your screen.
So standing up for what you believe in makes you a whinger? FFS.
Is it because when confronted by an inconvienient truth & you were to pay it some mind , then your little bubble looks rather fragile?

[BoristheBiter]

Well I cant see a problem in using all the above in his article......
See ,like my parents (who are presently enjoying the fruits of staying with the the super scheme that got phased out way back when which was a lefty thing) , you seem like an atypical anal retentive right winger. Why?
Is it because you cant talk to your mates about things because "kiwi blokes dont do that'' 'cause its not cool to acknowledge that your idea of how it should be is not working out how it should & you dont want to be a whinger? Do you talk to your partner (I dont know which way you swing) about the state of the planet or just about Womans weekly stuff.
Your full of it here becuase you hide behind your screen.
So standing up for what you believe in makes you a whinger? FFS.
Is it because when confronted by an inconvienient truth & you were to pay it some mind , then your little bubble looks rather fragile?

Yep but he didn't did he? and neither have you come back with anything.

So as you have nothing constructive to add or any rational argument against differing views you lower to personal attacks. now who's hiding behind a keyboard?

Maybe you should just re-read what you have posted here then look up the word hypocrite and see if you can find the similarities.

come back when you have something significant, well anything other than insults, to add.

[Brian d marge]

Aye, no doubt.

And as I've said before almost all of the difference in historic house costs is down to the size of the houses. In 1950 a family home was almost universally 100 sqM, now it's well over 200. The rest is explainable by the costs of technology and features that simply weren't available then and would have been considered unaffordable luxuries two generations ago.

Quick google for those who bleat about unsupported opinion....

Here y'go, only goes from 1976 at 121sqM to 2011 at 219, but you get the idea, double the size and what would you expect to happen to the price?: http://www.creative.auckland.ac.nz/webdav/site/nicai/shared/about/research/architecture-planning/housing-researchers-conference/2010 Conference Proceedings/Marriage AHRC 2010.pdf

using 120 sqm as a base , ending up with a slightly lower , 0.50 still up . some other stuff , will post when have more time

Stephen

[Swoop]

Helen Kelly.

A teacher who is no longer a teacher. A lawyer who never was a lawyer. Now a union boss.
Gotta give her credit - she saw a way to upgrade her career and do less work.
I was at a meeting with her the other day. She speaks very well, especially off-the-cuff.
I wonder if she will be deciding the winner of "NZ's Next Top Liarbour" sideshow?

[avgas]

:girlfight: you know what I meant sonny :D
Getting on lists and asking for help is for amateurs.
Want something done, what is stopping you?

Many people climb out of poverty on their own accord. None have done it with purely on assistance.

So my donate a tent comment stands. Plenty of abandoned cars to sleep in. I wouldn't wait for the reconstruction to create shelter.

[avgas]

I was at a meeting with her the other day. She speaks very well, especially off-the-cuff.
I wonder if she will be deciding the winner of "NZ's Next Top Liarbour" sideshow?
The best liars are the ones that are uninterrupted and swift.
The worst are the ones that you can see are lying.

I imagine her office chair is very comfy, and her ambitions of power, high.
The people she represents......no so much.
Poor them.

I don't know who pulls the red strings - but I suspect she will have her say regardless.

[avgas]

an anagram of "debit card" is Bad credit
Hey that looks like fun, let me try
WELFARE = FEEL WAR
STOCK PRICE = COCKS TRIPE

[mashman]

Getting on lists and asking for help is for amateurs.
Want something done, what is stopping you?

Many people climb out of poverty on their own accord. None have done it with purely on assistance.

So my donate a tent comment stands. Plenty of abandoned cars to sleep in. I wouldn't wait for the reconstruction to create shelter.

Lack of money/learners plate/skills (an assumption on that last bit) that a single mother with 3 kids been missed off of your list somewhere.

Fair point on the tent... but it's some time down the track innit and she has 3 kids, needing help ain't a bad thing.

[avgas]

Lack of money/learners plate/skills (an assumption on that last bit) that a single mother with 3 kids been missed off of your list somewhere.
Fair point on the tent... but it's some time down the track innit and she has 3 kids, needing help ain't a bad thing.
Everyone needs something. I ain't saying don't help her. I am saying she needs to wake up to the fact that she is in a problem and asks the right questions.
I imagine someone in Chch has some spare timbre and roofing iron to slap a shack over the tent. Or an abandoned car to sleep in.

Once she has that she can see what else the world has to offer.

Drug addicts sleep in tents. You would assume anyone else would be more observant. But in saying that - I think it is bit ridiculous that there are people in tents, and people being chased out of buildings that are better that tents in the red zone.
Needs to be a middle ground in that regard. CERA should have some common sense and let vagrants stay in these houses rather than get cops to chase them out.