Nigel Latta's new series [Archive]

R650R

30th July 2014, 07:30

Good to see the rich ones with that plan b project. Obviously they've seen the predictions for the breakdown of the society as this continues.
Actually had an employer years ago in Auckland do the higher wages thing and it improved productivity and stopped high staff turnover overnight.
After he left though the process stopped and strangely enough the high staff turnover problem resumed, damages rose and customers left.

Same at another company. Great gear and conditions, they were creaming it profit wise. Then they got greedy and found ways to ripoff and shaft the existing staff so new workers could be hired on lower wages.
Strangely enough their trucks started rolling over and they went bust... and the feckers are scratching their heads wondering how it happened...

Oh well roll on the nay sayers whove been lucky to have walked into good jobs and never taken the risk of moving into something else and think all the poor should just work harder at second jobs that aren't there.
Saddest part was that family borrowing more money than the fines would have been for No WOF...

Liked how Nigel wasn't shy of fingering the banks as the cause, I think a lot of people heavily invested or only in property are in for a shock at the next crash. And their will be a next one as the banker money junkies haven't changed their strategy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koY6kXhQDQo

swarfie

30th July 2014, 07:40

Jeez that Irishman had it sussed didn't he. Hit the nail fair and square!

mashman

30th July 2014, 07:46

This is a global issue, not just an NZ issue. Plan B was laughable, primarily because they want to hand the well being of society over to the business community. You do realise that we are currently living under Plan B right? I love the intent, but if all you're going to change is the amount of money in people's pockets, whilst it may bring some form of short term relief to a few, it will leave society in exactly the same position, society will not change on that basis. Good program though.

MisterD

30th July 2014, 08:03

willytheekid

30th July 2014, 08:40

R650R

30th July 2014, 08:49

MisterD

30th July 2014, 08:51

Couldn't be fucked watching it huh?

Pretty much. I guess it was a re-tread of the Bryan Bruce doco from the last election campaign?

MisterD

30th July 2014, 08:53

...same issues discussed, different messenger

You're not helping your case. Nigel Latta makes me laugh when he does his parenting stand-up comedy schtick.

willytheekid

30th July 2014, 08:57

Pretty much. I guess it was a re-tread of the Bryan Bruce doco from the last election campaign?

lol, at least ya honest mate ;)

...Give it a watch, its really well done:yes:....but I prefer Brands wee rant :laugh:

pritch

30th July 2014, 08:59

I liked our Irish friend.

A while back bankers were in the news so frequently that journalists and others were seeking an appropriate collective noun for a group of bankers.
They decided on "wunch". As in, "A wunch of bankers".

Woodman

30th July 2014, 11:31

Scuba_Steve

30th July 2014, 12:02

Had a past CEO tell a group of us that he loved it when unemployment was high as they could screw down the wages of new employees. These guys go from business to business making the spreadsheets look better, collect their bonus, then fuck off to do the same to another company.:weird. Its ingrained and will take a lot of changing.

And as above it's the career CEO that's fucked everything. They do short term gain with massive long term loss all for personal benefit, while jumping company to company destroying them all on the way. On the other-hand people who have built their company form the ground up are usually pretty decent they know what it takes to survive & they're usually in it for the long term so won't cut off their noise to spite their face mostly because unlike the career CEO, which is gone when the damage is done, they'd be destroying themselves.

swarfie

30th July 2014, 12:03

Just watched. Very interesting.

Unfortunately a lot of businesses see employees as liabilities to be managed. A lot of this comes from the fact that they spend a good part of their time staring at spreadsheets. Had a past CEO tell a group of us that he loved it when unemployment was high as they could screw down the wages of new employees. These guys go from business to business making the spreadsheets look better, collect their bonus, then fuck off to do the same to another company.:weird. Its ingrained and will take a lot of changing.

I work for an Australian owned company that is owned by an Italian/Australian that couldn't give a ruby coloured rodents posterior about his NZ workers. Used to be NZ owned and the difference in attitude towards it's employees was night and day compared to this prick. It's all about profit now and getting bigger and bigger and bigger and....:tugger:

mada

30th July 2014, 12:09

mada

30th July 2014, 12:15

I work for an Australian owned company that is owned by an Italian/Australian that couldn't give a ruby coloured rodents posterior about his NZ workers. Used to be NZ owned and the difference in attitude towards it's employees was night and day compared to this prick. It's all about profit now and getting bigger and bigger and bigger and....:tugger:

Problem is the trickle effect works in this regard... it has trickled down to many NZ owned companies too.

I have seen many a small/medium sized business kiwi employers adopting the ruthless approach of short term profits before everything else - hiring foreign workers for significantly less, paying them below minimum wage, forcing them to work longer hours, dodgy contracts etc. When someones visa runs out or is up for renewal they can merely drop the worker with out needing to fire them or dismissing them.

Most of these businesses are located in the bigger cities, but have seen it spread rurally over the last few years with treatment of Filipino farm workers too.

A big issue that he didn't delve into in the doco was the general move in the labour market for more "flexible" employment, ie. "self employed contractors" and the implications of this.

Woodman

30th July 2014, 12:38

Problem is the trickle effect works in this regard... it has trickled down to many NZ owned companies too.

I have seen many a small/medium sized business kiwi employers adopting the ruthless approach of short term profits before everything else - hiring foreign workers for significantly less, paying them below minimum wage, forcing them to work longer hours, dodgy contracts etc. When someones visa runs out or is up for renewal they can merely drop the worker with out needing to fire them or dismissing them.

Most of these businesses are located in the bigger cities, but have seen it spread rurally over the last few years with treatment of Filipino farm workers too.

A big issue that he didn't delve into in the doco was the general move in the labour market for more "flexible" employment, ie. "self employed contractors" and the implications of this.

Flexi rosters are becoming quite common now, so instead of having a bit of overtime for the underpaid occaisionally, their hours are worked out ahead of time so they only ever do their contracted 40 hours per week, including weekend hours.

Mind you i somewhat blame the employment laws for having low wages and not the "living wage". Some just would not work any harder to get the living wage making the extra cost not worth it.

swarfie

30th July 2014, 12:41

He made mention of how surprised he was at "The Warehouse" advocating for the minimum wage of $18.40 but failed to mention that most workers are having to get several or more than one job to make ends meet. Employers can get away with not providing a 40 hour week for their employees these days. They then employ more workers part time to get around paying penal rates. Sucks IMO. At least I still work a minimum of 40 hrs (and often more, with overtime rates thrown in) in one job...got that to be thankful for I guess.

mada

30th July 2014, 13:00

Flexi rosters are becoming quite common now, so instead of having a bit of overtime for the underpaid occaisionally, their hours are worked out ahead of time so they only ever do their contracted 40 hours per week, including weekend hours.

Mind you i somewhat blame the employment laws for having low wages and not the "living wage". Some just would not work any harder to get the living wage making the extra cost not worth it.

Ouch that flex roster sounds like shit. I've always considered myself bloody lucky for the areas that I've worked in where pay and contracts have been reasonable.

Your last sentence definitely has merit. Plenty of small businesses have been screwed over because of shit workers with poor productivity (I guess again its an example of how the trickle effect has worked so well - an increase in shit employers, but also an increase in shit workers). In my opinion a "living wage" is an ambulance at bottom of the cliff approach when the root problems are like you said employment law, job security, but also employment culture (many work places don't seem to understand how much a good work culture increases productivity), and wider things like housing/debt etc. However there needs to be a reign in of the excessive salaries at the top, at a minimum it can be applied to the public service - where "market rates" should have no fucking relevance.

Voltaire

30th July 2014, 13:10

Things were better for workers under compulsory unionism, collective bargaining and award payrates. Only highly skilled people in high demand industries have individual bargaining power now

Really, my memory of Unions is lazy Pommy bastards.
I found Aussie unions just a bad.
Anyone remember the Boilermakers..... Wharfies........ Tanker Drivers.
Clearly an old skool labour voter.:msn-wink:

Voltaire

30th July 2014, 13:11

swarfie

30th July 2014, 13:14

Isn't that the Walmart employment model...some good video clips on that lot.

Haha...You're only interested in the ugly but-cracks :banana::clap::rolleyes:

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 13:16

Great, Nigel Latta is the new Gareth "expert on everything" Morgan. Anyone know what he thinks of cats, or North Korea?

He should have got the memo from the Discovery Channel by now, it's a well known fact that you can only be an expert on everything if you're a Physicist.

Anyone with enough of the right information can be an expert. What you're an expert in is more or less defined by the information you have, and if this particular expert had a different set of information he'd have probably had a different conclusion.

The generally accepted theories that income inequality is firstly a worthwhile measure of the justice inherent in a society and secondly that the income gap is becoming wider aren't actually correct. You have to select your data very carefully to produce information that goes even part way to demonstrating either of those theories. No surprise that the more socialist elements of the world have been quite careful, they've also been very busy publishing the fuck out of their theories.

Whereas the real truth is that equality of personal income will be "just" when there's equality of personal production, and not until. And the real fact is that global income equality is moving in the opposite direction to that claimed by these fuckwits: it's converging.

The vast majority of people on this planet have never had it so good. A theory supported by most experts who've got no particular axe to grind. But, y'know, now that you're all worked up about it don't let the facts slow you down any. :rolleyes:

mada

30th July 2014, 13:25

Anyone with enough of the right information can be an expert. What you're an expert in is more or less defined by the information you have, and if this particular expert had a different set of information he'd have probably had a different conclusion.

The generally accepted theories that income inequality is firstly a worthwhile measure of the justice inherent in a society and secondly that the income gap is becoming wider aren't actually correct. You have to select your data very carefully to produce information that goes even part way to demonstrating either of those theories. No surprise that the more socialist elements of the world have been quite careful, they've also been very busy publishing the fuck out of their theories.

Whereas the real truth is that equality of personal income will be "just" when there's equality of personal production, and not until. And the real fact is that global income equality is moving in the opposite direction to that claimed by these fuckwits: it's converging.

The vast majority of people on this planet have never had it so good. A theory supported by most experts who've got no particular axe to grind. But, y'know, now that you're all worked up about it don't let the facts slow you down any. :rolleyes:

Yes a big global conspiracy of lefties. Meanwhile in NZ..... :rolleyes:

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 13:35

Yes a big global conspiracy of lefties. Meanwhile in NZ..... :rolleyes:

... The vast majority are measurably better off than their parents.

Fact.

mada

30th July 2014, 13:37

How about this for a taxpayer rort:

Employers accused of abusing scheme When the Government job subsidy ends so, too often, do jobs, putting dejected employees back on the hunt for work.

Nearly a third of employees who find work, partly thanks to a Government subsidy for their employers, are not kept on once the money runs out.

Employment advocates say this is evidence the system is not working.

Employers are able to access Government subsidies for the wages of people they hire off the benefit, for a six-month term.

Work and Income launched Job Streams in July last year, which combined all the available schemes. In the first year, about $20 million was spent on subsidy schemes Flexi-Wage Basic and Flexi-Wage Plus, which includes funding for mentoring.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10907881

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 13:37

So you are happier with the current situation of WINZ having to top up wages with Working for Families etc.

Then why did they take so much off them in the first place?

Pretty fucking stupid roundabout game innit?

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 13:42

How about this for a taxpayer rort:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10907881

Of course it's a fucking rort, if they were worth their wages they'd be employed without the subsidy.

I know a couple of business that do OK with those schemes, keeping people on after their subsidy expires. They're better men than me, I've never had one that was worth anywhere near what they cost me. Usually the reverse.

willytheekid

30th July 2014, 13:47

...The generally accepted theories that income inequality is firstly a worthwhile measure of the justice inherent in a society and secondly that the income gap is becoming wider aren't actually correct.:rolleyes:

For you!
https://sanitationupdates.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/toilet-paper.jpg
...Can ya guess why? :laugh:

(income gap NOT becoming wider :killingme...can I borrow your hidy rock sometime?)

swarfie

30th July 2014, 13:47

Then why did they take so much off them in the first place?

Pretty fucking stupid roundabout game innit?

+1 Gotta agree with that. If some of them rich tuckers were paying their share of the tax take instead of trying to avoid paying it, it'd be a better society for sure. Me being a wage earner means there's no way of avoiding it like some. I've got no problem paying my share but we'd all be a shitload better off if everyone did the same.

mashman

30th July 2014, 13:50

You have to select your data very carefully to produce information that goes even part way to demonstrating either of those theories. No surprise that the more socialist elements of the world have been quite careful, they've also been very busy publishing the fuck out of their theories.

:killingme... aye, it's only the left that are selective with their figures <_<. Can I borrow some of your myopia please Scrooge McFuck.

scrivy

30th July 2014, 13:51

... and getting bigger and bigger and bigger and....:tugger:

It's called an erection Nev.... I'm not surprised a guy of your age can't remember what one is.....:bleh::devil2::first::whistle::corn:

Scuba_Steve

30th July 2014, 13:51

(income gap NOT becoming wider :killingme...can I borrow your hidy rock sometime?)

No need for the rock, just get a pair of these (I'm sure even Ocean could spare 1 if needed)

http://cdn5.triplepundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/wearingblinders.jpg

mada

30th July 2014, 13:53

Whereas the real truth is that equality of personal income will be "just" when there's equality of personal production, and not until. And the real fact is that global income equality is moving in the opposite direction to that claimed by these fuckwits: it's converging.

This helps me understand why someone like Tony Marryatt deserved a $70,000 pay rise while working as Chch City CEO, that $70,000 being well in excessive of the median salary for most kiwis.

Two great myths: 1) the gap is not widening, and 2) all those being paid shitloads deserve it cos they work harder

scrivy

30th July 2014, 13:56

+1 Gotta agree with that. If some of them rich tuckers were paying their share of the tax take instead of trying to avoid paying it, it'd be a better society for sure. I've got no problem paying my share but we'd all be a shitload better off if everyone did the same.

Yip, and there-in lies most of the problem. Big corporates - Apple, Gurgle, Faecesbook etc have nice offshore accounts that they deposit millions/billions into, and pay a gnats testicle of tax on.

There's Trillions of $ worldwide that are due into theirs states coffers. Imagine how many more services we joe public would have or maybe lower tax rates ourselves if that money was obtained.
The crooked goobermints have let this happen.

scrivy

30th July 2014, 13:59

Two great myths: 1) the gap is not widening, and 2) all those being paid shitloads deserve it cos they work harder

Damn straight!
It absolutely is widening. And do bankers deserve to be paid insane bonuses when the real honest hard working people have had their houses foreclosed on??
They are scum.

I cannot believe in this day and age that some wackos in the US have not gone about shooting the fuck outta bankers, politicians.....

Voltaire

30th July 2014, 14:04

So you are happier with the current situation of WINZ having to top up wages with Working for Families etc. I bet you are an employer or are able to bargain individually to have the attitude you have. Most people are not as lucky as you.

Oh No....its time for my Get Off Your Arse rant...

My Dad arrived from Ireland with a suitcase and had to work for the mines for a year as part of the package.
He worked for himself for 40 years till he retired, told me to get a Trade.

Yeah I have been lucky, lucky enough to find an apprenticeship in the Mulddoon " Wage Freeze " era, work lots of overtime, go to Aussie, work hard there, then the UK for a couple of years till the recession hit and I was unemployed for the first time ever.....went to Lewisham College got a City and Guilds in Refrigeration, came back to NZ, worked up to Building Controls and then for myself????
As they say the harder I work the luckier I get.:msn-wink:

I gave my two boys the " get a trade" talk as they were not Uni types.

Both now working as apprentices.

People will always be at WINZ, just as you will always have rich and poor.

swarfie

30th July 2014, 14:10

Damn straight!
It absolutely is widening. And do bankers deserve to be paid insane bonuses when the real honest hard working people have had their houses foreclosed on??
They are scum.

I cannot believe in this day and age that some wackos in the US have not gone about shooting the fuck outta bankers, politicians.....

I wouldn't hold your breath too long there Scrivy....

That add on TV makes me cringe...."The Banks made a record profit". Why should they be proud of the fact they do it every year? ARSEHOLES

This is turning into a real moaning match :woohoo:

oldrider

30th July 2014, 14:12

Things were better for workers under compulsory unionism, collective bargaining and award payrates. Only highly skilled people in high demand industries have individual bargaining power now

If workers want to give themselves an immediate pay rise they can stop paying their union fees and spend it on themselves!

The unions took their fees but sold out on their conditions while they focussed on spending all their time on politics instead of their members interests!

The most useless politicians are generally ex union executives or broken down ministers of religion just take a look at the ones that are there now. :rolleyes:

mada

30th July 2014, 14:14

Oh No....its time for my Get Off Your Arse rant...

My Dad arrived from Ireland with a suitcase and had to work for the mines for a year as part of the package.
He worked for himself for 40 years till he retired, told me to get a Trade.

Yeah I have been lucky, lucky enough to find an apprenticeship in the Mulddoon " Wage Freeze " era, work lots of overtime, go to Aussie, work hard there, then the UK for a couple of years till the recession hit and I was unemployed for the first time ever.....went to Lewisham College got a City and Guilds in Refrigeration, came back to NZ, worked up to Building Controls and then for myself????
As they say the harder I work the luckier I get.:msn-wink:

I gave my two boys the " get a trade" talk as they were not Uni types.

Both now working as apprentices.

People will always be at WINZ, just as you will always have rich and poor.

That's a great story that is overwhelmingly common and similar to many other peoples family stories from the past. The other common one is the overnight property millionaires, who hedged their bets in the early 2000s on the property market through loans and are now freehold thanks to their renters.

But incase you haven't noticed things have changed quite a bit.

We could tell the hundreds of thousands of unemployed, and the 6 out of 10 young ones that now go to Uni, don't bother - go into trades. But we would still have the same problem, in fact if you think about it objectively you would probably not recommend that - as your boys lives would become harder if they had to compete with that much more labour and the flow on effect of decreased wages.

The matter of the fact is not only are jobs becoming rarer for those going to uni, they are for labouring jobs too.

Good luck getting into dairy or cattle farming if you have no family running one. You will now be competing for that low wage, long hours job with a Filipino who is prepared to work even longer hours, and for poorer conditions (many of which are illegal) and who is also likely to have a veterinarian background.

scrivy

30th July 2014, 14:15

That add on TV makes me cringe...."The Banks made a record profit". Why should they be proud of the fact they do it every year? ARSEHOLES

At least they give back to their 'shareholders'....

How can the BIG BANKS not make a big profit every year???? They just keep passing out more loans to all and sundry, and they have a nice big fat interest rate to go along with it......
Why did the banks not reduce credit card interest rates when the OCR was at a record low???

mada

30th July 2014, 14:19

Not necessarily. There was a new boss hired of a power lines company with a $180k bonus if they met a performance target so what did they do to help meet it but put prices up. I wonder whether they would have meet the target otherwise but it sure is an easy way without hard work.

This reminds me of the laughable "selling off shares in our power companies won't result in price hikes". :msn-wink:

scrivy

30th July 2014, 14:19

Good luck getting into dairy or cattle farming if you have no family running one. You will now be competing for that low wage, long hours job with a Filipino who is prepared to work even longer hours, and for poorer conditions (many of which are illegal) and who is also likely to have a veterinarian background.

Ah yes, good old Globalisation........
Reducing our wages, living conditions, morals, ethics, and increasing our costs of compliances, living and houses.

Tazz

30th July 2014, 14:30

http://www.theonion.com/articles/scientists-rich-people-poor-people-may-have-shared,36547/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=LinkPreview:2:Default

pritch

30th July 2014, 14:33

Yeh I agree with you:

the head of Treasury is not really an expert in his field and his comments that inequality is not good and worse than before, and that GDP is not the best measure of how well our country is doing are completely groundless. What would he know?

:rolleyes:

Well Treasury don't actually have a very good record as to the accuracy of their predictions. Alhough I guess we mainly read about it when they get them wrong - again. Although there was a fairly recent instance of concern about them withholding information from government ministers, they were suspected of offering only the alternatives favoured by Treasury officials.

There was an interview with the head of Treasury some years ago. At the time it was the public perception that nobody in Treasury had ever held a "real" job. Their staff going straight from university to Treasury. He was asked if that was true, he replied, "No". He was then asked how many of the economists at Treasury had held a job outside of Treasury, and the answer was, "One".

These were the guys who were advocating doing away with all subsidies, that we should all bear the pain because we would ultimately gain. The same guys who, at the same time, could buy a multiple course lunch in their canteen on the Terrace for $5.00.

Other economists, just as qualified and possibly more experienced, apparently feel free to criticize Treasury. Now perhaps psychologists feel the same?

mada

30th July 2014, 14:39

Well Treasury don't actually have a very good record as to the accuracy of their predictions. Alhough I guess we mainly read about it when they get them wrong - again. Although there was a fairly recent instance of concern about them withholding information from government ministers, they were suspected of offering only the alternatives favoured by Treasury officials.

There was an interview with the head of Treasury some years ago. At the time it was the public perception that nobody in Treasury had ever held a "real" job. Their staff going straight from university to Treasury. He was asked if that was true, he replied, "No". He was then asked how many of the economists at Treasury had held a job outside of Treasury, and the answer was, "One".

These were the guys who were advocating doing away with all subsidies, that we should all bear the pain because we would ultimately gain. The same guys who, at the same time, could buy a multiple course lunch in their canteen on the Terrace for $5.00.

Other economists, just as qualified and possibly more experienced, apparently feel free to criticize Treasury. Now perhaps psychologists feel the same?

Ok so what I understand from this then.....

You can only trust someone if they are experienced in their field, but if they are experienced in their field you can only trust them if they are experienced outside their field, but if both - then you still can't trust them.

So in summary trust no one. But instead of shooting and debating the message, shoot the messenger.

Seems like a legit form of debating.

Voltaire

30th July 2014, 14:53

That's a great story that is overwhelmingly common and similar to many other peoples family stories from the past. The other common one is the overnight property millionaires, who hedged their bets in the early 2000s on the property market through loans and are now freehold thanks to their renters.

.

Probably the same ones who lost money in the 78 stockmarket pyramid games and decided never to gamble again.
Yes you can make a lot of money by leverage, tax deductions and renters, they just pay the mortgage off and you don't have to do a thing :laugh: :rolleyes:
Still houses might be dear, but consumer electronics, cars travel are way cheaper and you can download all the movies and music you want ( legally of course):msn-wink:

buggerit

30th July 2014, 15:22

Anyone with enough of the right information can be an expert. What you're an expert in is more or less defined by the information you have, and if this particular expert had a different set of information he'd have probably had a different conclusion.

The generally accepted theories that income inequality is firstly a worthwhile measure of the justice inherent in a society and secondly that the income gap is becoming wider aren't actually correct. You have to select your data very carefully to produce information that goes even part way to demonstrating either of those theories. No surprise that the more socialist elements of the world have been quite careful, they've also been very busy publishing the fuck out of their theories.

Whereas the real truth is that equality of personal income will be "just" when there's equality of personal production, and not until. And the real fact is that global income equality is moving in the opposite direction to that claimed by these fuckwits: it's converging.

The vast majority of people on this planet have never had it so good. A theory supported by most experts who've got no particular axe to grind. But, y'know, now that you're all worked up about it don't let the facts slow you down any. :rolleyes:

Wellington is City, not a planet, you should try earning a living outside it sometime:msn-wink:

pritch

30th July 2014, 15:23

Ok so what I understand from this then.....

You can only trust someone if they are experienced in their field, but if they are experienced in their field you can only trust them if they are experienced outside their field, but if both - then you still can't trust them.

So in summary trust no one. But instead of shooting and debating the message, shoot the messenger.

Seems like a legit form of debating.

Don't see how you gat that out of what I wrote, but hey go for it. This is KB, reading and comprehension skills are optional.

mada

30th July 2014, 15:25

Probably the same ones who lost money in the 78 stockmarket pyramid games and decided never to gamble again.
Yes you can make a lot of money by leverage, tax deductions and renters, they just pay the mortgage off and you don't have to do a thing :laugh: :rolleyes:
Still houses might be dear, but consumer electronics, cars travel are way cheaper and you can download all the movies and music you want ( legally of course):msn-wink:

I saw many of my own family members get rich that way, borrow and buy up large - doing the DIY work themselves, then using the rents to become mortgage free while also making capital gains. Sure it involved them working doing repairs, maintenance etc, but on a wider scale it was not ECONOMICALLY PRODUCTIVE for the country or society or the communities as a whole where they invested. And where's most of the money? Sitting in the bank, now gaining interest off those trying to climb on the ladder...

The last sentence makes me think you've forgetten priorities. Usually what comes first is having a roof over ones head/ an income, doing everything to sustain the first two, then food, and then anything else. Consumer electronics and movies have absolutely fuck all relevance to anything when the cost of the a roof over ones head is so much and families barely have enough to feed their children, and are so desperate they have to borrow from loansharks to pay for a car to get fixed for WOF simply so they can continue to get to their work. When one of life's problems comes up such as a family funeral etc. there simply is no extra cash for it.

What you would do if it was you?

If you were on minimum wage and only just managing to pay off the bills (RENT, PETROL, minimal shit food) and were living in Wellington and one of your sons passed away in Auckland, but you could not afford to take time off work nor the travel costs to see him, what would you do? Skip the rent? Borrow from a loan shark? Skip the funeral???????

willytheekid

30th July 2014, 15:28

Ok so what I understand from this then.....

You can only trust someone if they are experienced in their field, but if they are experienced in their field you can only trust them if they are experienced outside their field, but if both - then you still can't trust them.

So in summary trust no one. But instead of shooting and debating the message, shoot the messenger.

Seems like a legit form of debating.

:wacko:

http://dategirldiaries.com/wp-content/uploads/128765477805673526.jpg

...Annnd back to rocking slowly in the corner for me!:D (My head...you brokes it!)

scrivy

30th July 2014, 15:30

What you would do if it was you?

I would want the stupid fucken government to build a 3.1 Billion dollar highway....... :weird::rolleyes::whistle::oi-grr::facepalm:

Were all doomed 'cause of those coonts in power.....

mada

30th July 2014, 15:38

Don't see how you gat that out of what I wrote, but hey go for it. This is KB, reading and comprehension skills are optional.

I get what you're saying that sometimes Treasury is full of shit with their predictions and I agree. They have had their biases (mostly towards further de-regulation, privatisation, free market etc) and at times own agenda. However for most of their work they have been pretty impartial and straight up. Political parties left and right attack them on this basis because they are not consistent with National and Labour policies.

First poster was saying docomaker was not an expert so the doco is full of shit. When clearly the docomaker has tried to make a balanced doco including a more impartial/ and a potentially right swinging authority - such as treasury in the doco.

There really is no other party who would be better to include and is an expert in terms of NZ's experience when it comes to discussing GDP, inequality, and potential causes. Unless ofcourse people think we can trust chief economists from the Aussie banks or political hacks from NatLabs to give us their rose-tinted opinion?

James Deuce

30th July 2014, 15:42

Ocean is absolutely right. The effects of reducing wages and job opportunities in Western economies is offset by massive increases in living standards for people who a generation ago were living in a dump with no electricity or access to first-hand food or water. We don't get to see that. The convergence in living standards will mean a reduction in living standards for a minority, of which even the poorest in NZ are a member of. We are, each of us, stupendously rich compared to most of the world's population.

In regard to the "experten" discussion though, there are no expert economists. Economics is as far from a science as Morris Dancing is from Orbital Mechanics, though Morris Dancing can be explained by mechanical engineering, rotational inertia, and a positive attitude, therefore making it more scientific than Economics as well as more relavant to a generally happy life.

oldrider

30th July 2014, 15:48

Well Treasury don't actually have a very good record as to the accuracy of their predictions. Alhough I guess we mainly read about it when they get them wrong - again. Although there was a fairly recent instance of concern about them withholding information from government ministers, they were suspected of offering only the alternatives favoured by Treasury officials.

There was an interview with the head of Treasury some years ago. At the time it was the public perception that nobody in Treasury had ever held a "real" job. Their staff going straight from university to Treasury. He was asked if that was true, he replied, "No". He was then asked how many of the economists at Treasury had held a job outside of Treasury, and the answer was, "One".

These were the guys who were advocating doing away with all subsidies, that we should all bear the pain because we would ultimately gain. The same guys who, at the same time, could buy a multiple course lunch in their canteen on the Terrace for $5.00.

Other economists, just as qualified and possibly more experienced, apparently feel free to criticize Treasury. Now perhaps psychologists feel the same?

Treasury were the brains behind "Rogernomics" ... Rodger and his cronies were just puppets and it was Muldoon who gave them the opportunity and the reason!

We should pay more attention to departments like treasury etc! ... "Yes minister" we elect numbskulls and they turn to their advisors ... who actually run the country!

Ultimately we get the governments that we deserve! :doh:

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 15:53

Fuck me what a bunch of whiny arsed bastards. If you spent as much effort actually producing shit as you do bleating about how unfair it is that you don't have a new iphone you might actually notice some improvement.

Excuses don't cut it. Never have.

Hitcher

30th July 2014, 16:00

Who is Nigel Latta?

MisterD

30th July 2014, 16:01

Who is Nigel Latta?

A man with many very fine and commonsensible things to say about the art and science of bringing up children.

oldrider

30th July 2014, 16:02

Who is Nigel Latta?

He could be the former but on reflection he is probably the latter! :scratch:

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 16:08

Ocean is absolutely right. The effects of reducing wages and job opportunities in Western economies is offset by massive increases in living standards for people who a generation ago were living in a dump with no electricity or access to first-hand food or water. We don't get to see that. The convergence in living standards will mean a reduction in living standards for a minority, of which even the poorest in NZ are a member of. We are, each of us, stupendously rich compared to most of the world's population.

But we do get to see it. You have an excellent Korean motorcar, not a Marina. You have several TVs that cost a couple of days work each, not a Philips K9 that took you 3 years of saving to get. And I'm sorry but anyone that doesn't see that their living standards are hard wired to tech innovations that make the industrial revolution look like selecting a slightly bigger rock to pound lunch with and the huge growth of global trade is, quite literally an idiot.

The choice is as it always should be: do something productive with your professional life, something that others want to pay for, or join the ever growing 1st word social welfare deadweight that will inevitably drag the rest of the 1st world back to the stone age.

mada

30th July 2014, 16:24

The choice is as it always should be: do something productive with your professional life, something that others want to pay for, or join the ever growing 1st word social welfare deadweight that will inevitably drag the rest of the 1st world back to the stone age.

I like that type of cut throat view of society, every man for himself! Helps us understand why so many people nowadays turn to producing and selling meth. At least they earn and spend more than they receive in benefits right?

Voltaire

30th July 2014, 16:29

I saw many of my own family members get rich that way, borrow and buy up large - doing the DIY work themselves, then using the rents to become mortgage free while also making capital gains. Sure it involved them working doing repairs, maintenance etc, but on a wider scale it was not ECONOMICALLY PRODUCTIVE for the country or society or the communities as a whole where they invested. And where's most of the money? Sitting in the bank, now gaining interest off those trying to climb on the ladder...

The last sentence makes me think you've forgetten priorities. Usually what comes first is having a roof over ones head/ an income, doing everything to sustain the first two, then food, and then anything else. Consumer electronics and movies have absolutely fuck all relevance to anything when the cost of the a roof over ones head is so much and families barely have enough to feed their children, and are so desperate they have to borrow from loansharks to pay for a car to get fixed for WOF simply so they can continue to get to their work. When one of life's problems comes up such as a family funeral etc. there simply is no extra cash for it.

What you would do if it was you?

If you were on minimum wage and only just managing to pay off the bills (RENT, PETROL, minimal shit food) and were living in Wellington and one of your sons passed away in Auckland, but you could not afford to take time off work nor the travel costs to see him, what would you do? Skip the rent? Borrow from a loan shark? Skip the funeral???????

Clearly not a situation I would like to be in, glad my old man left his impoverished family 40 acre farm in the West of Ireland and took a punt.
He was going to go with his Brother but he ended up stuck with the farm, they tossed a coin to decide on where they were applying to go....New Zealand or Rhodesia.

mada

30th July 2014, 16:36

Clearly not a situation I would like to be in, glad my old man left his impoverished family 40 acre farm in the West of Ireland and took a punt.
He was going to go with his Brother but he ended up stuck with the farm, they tossed a coin to decide on where they were applying to go....New Zealand or Rhodesia.

Good bet, very lucky not to go with Rhodesia!

Mine great great greats were lucky too coming over from Donegal during the potato famine.

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 16:46

I like that type of cut throat view of society, every man for himself! Helps us understand why so many people nowadays turn to producing and selling meth. At least they earn and spend more than they receive in benefits right?

As opposed to the view that someone else is always going to provide for you? Time to grow up, son, learn to wipe your own arse.

And I think you'll find the rate of convicted criminals is considerably higher amongst what you call the "lower socio-economic class". They're forced to it by roving gangs of senior exec's ravening for their bonuses no doubt.

R650R

30th July 2014, 16:52

Yeah I have been lucky, lucky enough to find an apprenticeship in the Mulddoon " Wage Freeze " era, work lots of overtime, go to Aussie, work hard there, then the UK for a couple of years till the recession hit and I was unemployed for the first time ever.....went to Lewisham College got a City and Guilds in Refrigeration, came back to NZ, worked up to Building Controls and then for myself????
As they say the harder I work the luckier I get.:msn-wink:

I gave my two boys the " get a trade" talk as they were not Uni types.

Lucky you, although we are still effectively in a wage freeze for many industrys thanks tot he artificial rate of inflation used by news and employers...
Soon even you and your boys will be in same boat as everyone else. Our universities are training people from previously near third world countries in the skilled trades. And just look at the influx of skilled migrant workers for the chch rebuild. Soon the Elite will get the numbers right and each trade will gradually be driven down in its value as far as wages go.

The vast majority of people on this planet have never had it so good. A theory supported by most experts who've got no particular axe to grind. But, y'know, now that you're all worked up about it don't let the facts slow you down

So got any 'facts' to back up this generic number of the 'vast majority' whove never had it so good. Is it the whole world or just developed western countries???

But we do get to see it. You have an excellent Korean motorcar, not a Marina. You have several TVs that cost a couple of days work each, not a Philips K9 that took you 3 years of saving to get. And I'm sorry but anyone that doesn't see that their living standards are hard wired to tech innovations that make the industrial revolution look like selecting a slightly bigger rock to pound lunch with and the huge growth of global trade

Standard of living is not defined by how much your Tv cost or where your car was made... BTW the new tvs are cheap cause they are made in overseas sweatshops and its debateable wether modern cars represent better value for money over old given how quick they wear out and the expense to replace electronic components that fail eg airbags electric windows etc...
Sure there's some hi tech stuff in our homes but the real important stuff like cost of accommodation and food has risen dramtically.
Then theres the rampant crime and disorder driven by alcohol and drugs, kids aren't safe to explore places on their own etc...
Communication has suffered with the interweb and cellphones laying slaughter to the engrish language so young and old don't know what each are saying...
We only have huge growth in global trade as treasonous fools in govt opened the watertight doors that tariffs were and let jobs be offshored. oh wow look at all those logs we're exporting, oh wow look at all that cheap crap flatpack furniture laden with formaldehyde made in Chinese sweatshop.

sidecar bob

30th July 2014, 17:38

wether modern cars represent better value for money over old given how quick they wear out and the expense to replace electronic components that fail eg airbags electric windows etc...

Oh fuckin dear, someones talking out their arse again. Seriously, you are just guessing arent you.

mada

30th July 2014, 17:46

As opposed to the view that someone else is always going to provide for you? Time to grow up, son, learn to wipe your own arse.

And I think you'll find the rate of convicted criminals is considerably higher amongst what you call the "lower socio-economic class". They're forced to it by roving gangs of senior exec's ravening for their bonuses no doubt.

LOL in real life mate. I like how you assume that because of my views I must be someone with my hand out.

How about the view that helping out one another and those less fortunate generally leads to us all benefiting from a better and fairer society? And it doesn't necessarily involve simply giving more money. If we are playing the assumption game I would hate to think about your views on those with disabilities and the support they should receive... survival of the fittest eh.

The lower SES certainly figure in crime stats more, both as perps and as victims. But does govt. wiping peoples arses really explain why crime rates between fairer western nations and more unequal western nations are so much different? Does the American government wipe its citizens arses so much more than Norway that it results in a 400 times higher murder rate?

http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Norway/United-States/Crime

In unequal societies the poor are not the only ones who suffer, the rich pay through being victims of crime too..

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 18:49

So got any 'facts' to back up this generic number of the 'vast majority' whove never had it so good. Is it the whole world or just developed western countries???

This western enough for you? http://www.nber.org/papers/w15433

What about this: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_317365.pdf

And actually the west has done less well than the developing nations: http://www.heritage.org/index/pdf/2007/index2007_chapter1.pdf

And for general review and some useful links: http://www.rd.com/best-of-america/cheer-up-17-reasons-its-a-great-time-to-be-alive/

"This generation has experienced more peace, freedom, leisure time, education, medicine, and travel than any in history. Yet it laps up gloom at every opportunity. Consumers do not celebrate their wonderful field of choice and, according to psychologists, say they are “overwhelmed.” When I go to my local superstore, I do not see people driven to misery by the impossibility of choice. I see people choosing."

You ungrateful bastard.

Standard of living is not defined by how much your Tv cost or where your car was made... BTW the new tvs are cheap cause they are made in overseas sweatshops and its debateable wether modern cars represent better value for money over old given how quick they wear out and the expense to replace electronic components that fail eg airbags electric windows etc...
Sure there's some hi tech stuff in our homes but the real important stuff like cost of accommodation and food has risen dramtically.
Then theres the rampant crime and disorder driven by alcohol and drugs, kids aren't safe to explore places on their own etc...
Communication has suffered with the interweb and cellphones laying slaughter to the engrish language so young and old don't know what each are saying...
We only have huge growth in global trade as treasonous fools in govt opened the watertight doors that tariffs were and let jobs be offshored. oh wow look at all those logs we're exporting, oh wow look at all that cheap crap flatpack furniture laden with formaldehyde made in Chinese sweatshop.

If you measure standards of living in terms of how many Austin Allegros you have then I have good news: everyone else can't give the remains away fast enough. I was in London, working a stone's throw from Dagenham when the press published the series of inside stories about night shift production. It didn't exist. Literally. Nobody was surprised, it'd been obvious for years that the union had Ford UK and the rest of the auto industry firmly en route to extinction, pausing only to produce the most outrageously crap cars of all time. By comparison the Great Wall range of vehicles are outstanding quality at about a tenth of the cost.

As for food prices: I have a vegie garden. My vegies cost me far more than supermarket ones because I'm a shit gardener, but how many of those supposedly unable to afford local market prices grow theirs?

Accommodation? You're wrong, see if you can find historic comparative prices for hrs worked per metre floorspace. You could ask our Japan correspondent, he's up with it.

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 18:57

LOL in real life mate. I like how you assume that because of my views I must be someone with my hand out.

How about the view that helping out one another and those less fortunate generally leads to us all benefiting from a better and fairer society? And it doesn't necessarily involve simply giving more money. If we are playing the assumption game I would hate to think about your views on those with disabilities and the support they should receive... survival of the fittest eh.

The lower SES certainly figure in crime stats more, both as perps and as victims. But does govt. wiping peoples arses really explain why crime rates between fairer western nations and more unequal western nations are so much different? Does the American government wipe its citizens arses so much more than Norway that it results in a 400 times higher murder rate?

http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Norway/United-States/Crime

In unequal societies the poor are not the only ones who suffer, the rich pay through being victims of crime too..

I didn't suggest you were. But you defend massively unproductive behaviour in the name of "justice".

It's not.

As for the disabled, if the average Kiwi wasn't draining the consolidated fund as much as they currently do we'd be able to look after those than can't do so themselves a fucking sight better than we currently do.

Nor did I suggest govt handouts had anything to do with crime. Get your causal links sorted, dude, what actually causes crime is criminals. In spite of the outrageously soft touch that is social welfare NZ, not because of any lack of support.

Scuba_Steve

30th July 2014, 19:03

By comparison the Great Wall range of vehicles are outstanding quality at about a tenth of the cost.

Well that's confirmed my suspicions, have you ever been tested? I believe they offer home help for people with intelligence such as yours

R650R

30th July 2014, 19:09

I have a vegie garden. My vegies cost me far more than supermarket ones because I'm a shit gardener, but how many of those supposedly unable to afford local market prices grow theirs?

I'm a shit gardener too, enjoyable activity but a walk to the supermarket makes more sense time and money wise.
So how many landlords out there (cause the poverty stricken generally aren't home owners) would let tenants dig up the backyard for a vege garden???? not many I suspect...

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 19:37

I'm a shit gardener too, enjoyable activity but a walk to the supermarket makes more sense time and money wise.
So how many landlords out there (cause the poverty stricken generally aren't home owners) would let tenants dig up the backyard for a vege garden???? not many I suspect...

Why the fuck wouldn't they? If a prospective tenant asked me if he could dig a garden in the back yard I'd pay for seeds, and I'd say he'd be all the more likely to be there in a couple of years time.

Never pass up an opportunity to encourage good productive enterprise.

yokel

30th July 2014, 19:43

My economic solution would be take woman out of the work force and them back in the kitchen.
The reduction in available labor would lead to nice pay increase for all yay!

James Deuce

30th July 2014, 19:57

Why the fuck wouldn't they? If a prospective tenant asked me if he could dig a garden in the back yard I'd pay for seeds, and I'd say he'd be all the more likely to be there in a couple of years time.

Never pass up an opportunity to encourage good productive enterprise.
It's a question of power, and like teachers, landlords are mostly in it for the "financial investment" closely followed by holding a large measure of power over how their tenants experience life.

I haven't experienced a single landlord in the last 4 years that would let us do that, despite offering to leave behind raised garden beds and an irrigation system.

Voltaire

30th July 2014, 20:11

I'm a shit gardener too, enjoyable activity but a walk to the supermarket makes more sense time and money wise.
So how many landlords out there (cause the poverty stricken generally aren't home owners) would let tenants dig up the backyard for a vege garden???? not many I suspect...

Are you serious? My experience with tenants is that they can't even mow a lawn let alone use a spade.:rolleyes:

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 20:21

It's a question of power, and like teachers, landlords are mostly in it for the "financial investment" closely followed by holding a large measure of power over how their tenants experience life.

I haven't experienced a single landlord in the last 4 years that would let us do that, despite offering to leave behind raised garden beds and an irrigation system.

It's been a long time since I rented, and if my landlord then had told me I couldn't plant a garden I'd have understood perfectly, I would have likely left the place worse off than when I arrived. I don't see that as a demonstration of power, simply not wanting yet another tenant to cause more work when they leave.

Now, from the other side of the deal I can afford to indulge my libertarian fantasies: If they want to make their lives better on the back of their own efforts then who am I to say no? No vegie gardens, but one of my tenants built a damned fine fence in lieu of a couple of weeks rent. I like to think of it as tax avoidance, pure and simple.

Don't suppose you're interested in a bit of freelance gardening?

James Deuce

30th July 2014, 20:26

At the risk of looking like I have an excuse, two disabled kids and commuting from Greytown doesn't leave me any time to scratch my arse.

Ocean1

30th July 2014, 20:37

At the risk of looking like I have an excuse, two disabled kids and commuting from Greytown doesn't leave me any time to scratch my arse.

In that case can I interest you in half a dozen slightly ragged, protein enhanced lettuces and a dozen eggs?

pritch

31st July 2014, 09:49

mashman

31st July 2014, 10:04

Latta at one point made comments criticising the way companies are sometimes run for short term gain, that management become remote from the staff. Regarding the latter part of that comment and since you may not all read the Moto GP thread, here's an example published today that's relevant to motorcycling.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/race/motogp-race/the-problem-at-ducati/

Sounds about right given too many of my workplace experiences. Being one of them thar folk that would go to a person's desk in order to gather requirements before converting them into tech speak I can remember way too many occasions where the user explains how to make things easier, primarily because they understand their business area, but the changes required don't fit the strategy of the business. Even chortled my way through a company policy meeting once where they outlined the company practices and you could see the stunned faces on those on the shop floor :facepalm:. World's fucked man... good read though.

swarfie

31st July 2014, 10:28

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/race/motogp-race/the-problem-at-ducati/

A good read. Mat's a bloody good journo and that article explains a lot about why Ducati haven't been there for quite some time. I feel sorry for Crutchlow....trying to push runny poos into a tigers mouth in a dark den I would say. Explains why he appears to be going backwards after leaving his Yamaha ride. And the same management attitude is endemic in a lot of companies IMO. :violin::facepalm:

Ocean1

31st July 2014, 11:13

Latta at one point made comments criticising the way companies are sometimes run for short term gain, that management become remote from the staff. Regarding the latter part of that comment and since you may not all read the Moto GP thread, here's an example published today that's relevant to motorcycling.

http://www.motorsportmagazine.com/race/motogp-race/the-problem-at-ducati/

You don't reduce mass by reducing fastener size, you hollow the wee fuckers out.

What makes Nigel think that set of behaviours represents running a company for short term gain? I can't see any gain in such behaviour at all, short or long, it's the definition of a management that doesn't know what they're selling: the skill and efforts of their staff. In a free market attempting to sell anything else is always fatal, your clients are free to simply go somewhere that does it right.

Banditbandit

31st July 2014, 11:40

Don't suppose you're interested in a bit of freelance gardening?

Come October I'm sure there are a few plants that Axkle will want you to look after ..

Banditbandit

31st July 2014, 11:51

You don't reduce mass by reducing fastener size, you hollow the wee fuckers out.

What makes Nigel think that set of behaviours represents running a company for short term gain? I can't see any gain in such behaviour at all, short or long, it's the definition of a management that doesn't know what they're selling: the skill and efforts of their staff. In a free market attempting to sell anything else is always fatal, your clients are free to simply go somewhere that does it right.

Yeah .. but my experience of many companies is that they do exactly that - go for short term gain .. so stupid - but hey, that's the world we live in.

Voltaire

31st July 2014, 12:14

Too many companies are run by people who know nothing about the industry (technically speaking) they are in charge of. They all have a "she'll be right attitude" when their way of doing things is questioned.

I was working for a Multinational in Ireland during the boom years... I was doing sales, the Manager told me " all that matters is the numbers"

I looked him up on Linkdin ( work Facebook) the other day and hes now UK National Manager so he must have been right :innocent:

swbarnett

31st July 2014, 12:24

What makes Nigel think that set of behaviours represents running a company for short term gain?
This illustrates a disrespect for front line employees. That leads lower salaries and poorer conditions. Less money being spent on employees leads to higher profits - in the short term.

mada

31st July 2014, 12:32

I was working for a Multinational in Ireland during the boom years... I was doing sales, the Manager told me " all that matters is the numbers"

I looked him up on Linkdin ( work Facebook) the other day and hes now UK National Manager so he must have been right :innocent:

That management style is common too in the civil service.

Short term gains, quick cash, and "good stats" lead to pricks like Krim Dot Con and others getting into this country. :facepalm:

mashman

31st July 2014, 12:39

Too many companies are run by people who know nothing about the industry (technically speaking) they are in charge of. They all have a "she'll be right attitude" when their way of doing things is questioned.

Aye... it seems to be a common misnomer that because you know the industry you understand how any given business in that industry works i.e. policy, practice, culture etc... Tis a massive oversight that the shop floor are overlooked when it comes to searching for ideas in regards to productivity.

mashman

31st July 2014, 12:42

This illustrates a disrespect for front line employees. That leads lower salaries and poorer conditions. Less money being spent on employees leads to higher profits - in the short term.

... which then leads to less money being spent in the economy as the numerous front line employees tighten their belts etc... Something that a well paid management does not offset.

Ocean1

31st July 2014, 14:14

Yeah .. but my experience of many companies is that they do exactly that - go for short term gain .. so stupid - but hey, that's the world we live in.

Must have been damned short experience, no commercial entity in a free market ever makes any money behaving like that. And don't be confused with businesses working in a shrinking market, in those cases it's poor management not to reduce costs appropriately. Which has nothing to do with short term gains, quite the opposite, it allows them to remain viable longer giving them more options to improve and in the process ensuring that the shrinking market continues to sustain their employees.

This illustrates a disrespect for front line employees. That leads lower salaries and poorer conditions. Less money being spent on employees leads to higher profits - in the short term.

The hysteresis inherent in the results of a move from good teamwork to shit teamwork is zero, there is no time at which it's profitable to pay your people less than they're worth in terms of their value to the company. The real trick is agreeing with them what they're worth, and let's not forget that it's ultimately the company's clients that define that. There's a few recognised methods to make that work reasonably smoothly, but you have to recognise that you're dealing with people, and while people generally behave in ways that are predictable individually their behaviour isn't always beneficial to everyone involved: the team.

So amongst all of this general denigration of employers let's not lose sight of the fact that while everyone may be worthy of respect some employees aren't worth their pay packet. That destroys a team just as effectively as an ineffective manager. What do you do about them?

Banditbandit

31st July 2014, 14:20

So amongst all of this general denigration of employers let's not lose sight of the fact that while everyone may be worthy of respect some employees aren't worth their pay packet. That destroys a team just as effectively as an ineffective manager. What do you do about them?

Yes - and as a manager I have faced exactly that situation ... I tried several strategies to improve their performance - and sometimes that worked. (On the basis that happy staff work harder and better) If it didn't work, after a while they no longer worked for me ...

But what springs to mind was something I've seen from an American "hatchetman" - employed by companies to do the nasty work of restructuring and getting rid of employees.

He said that he always went into a company and asked "what do you want me to do?"

If they replied; "get rid of the dead wood" ... or words to that effect, he said he always threw the question back with; "did you hire them dead or did you kill them off?"

swarfie

31st July 2014, 14:39

Yes - and as a manager I have faced exactly that situation ... I tried several strategies to improve their performance - and sometimes that worked. (On the basis that happy staff work harder and better) If it didn't work, after a while they no longer worked for me ...

But what springs to mind was something I've seen from an American "hatchetman" - employed by companies to do the nasty work of restructuring and getting rid of employees.

He said that he always went into a company and asked "what do you want me to do?"

If they replied; "get rid of the dead wood" ... or words to that effect, he said he always threw the question back with; "did you hire them dead or did you kill them off?"

Hell yeah can't argue with that. About 5 years back we had a big clean out where I work and got rid of the dead wood. Some of them had been festering for years (poms most of them) and just dragging the rest of us down with them. Best thing that ever happened IMO. It's mostly a sweet place to work now with a much more focused team. Not to say the big honcho from Oz still isn't a prick though :brick:

Banditbandit

31st July 2014, 14:46

Hell yeah can't argue with that. About 5 years back we had a big clean out where I work and got rid of the dead wood. Some of them had been festering for years (poms most of them) and just dragging the rest of us down with them.

So .. where they hired dead or where they killed off?

swarfie

31st July 2014, 14:50

So .. where they hired dead or where they killed off?

Bit of both to be honest. Some of them were okay when I first started there (almost embarrassed to say but that was 37 years ago) and grew rotten over time and others were just friggin useless from birth <_<

Voltaire

31st July 2014, 15:23

Bit of both to be honest. Some of them were okay when I first started there (almost embarrassed to say but that was 37 years ago) and grew rotten over time and others were just friggin useless from birth <_<

Bet your looking forward to cheap bus rides :innocent:
Criky.....I've been working for 34 now. Only 6 more years that nice Mr Muldoon promised me :yes:

swarfie

31st July 2014, 15:31

Bet your looking forward to cheap bus rides :innocent:
Criky.....I've been working for 34 now. Only 6 more years that nice Mr Muldoon promised me :yes:

No cheap bus rides for me while I got bikes to ride. Muldoon was a lying prick and there was nothing nice about him :lol:

It'll be "Work till ya 70 mate, we've got lots more tax to squeeze out of ya yet" by the time we get to have cheap bus rides Bro :(

swbarnett

31st July 2014, 21:00

there is no time at which it's profitable to pay your people less than they're worth in terms of their value to the company.
The very fact that you believe that says to me that you're one of the good ones. However, you can underpay people for a short time before they start to push back. By the time this happens the CEO has their bonus and is on to ruin the next company.

So amongst all of this general denigration of employers
I don't think anyone's denigrating employers per se. Hell, without them most of us would be up shit creek without a paddle. What is behind this is the desire to have employers show their employees in real, tangible ways that they are valued. Paying someone a wage that doesn't even allow them to feed themselves does just the opposite.

Ocean1

31st July 2014, 21:19

What is behind this is the desire to have employers show their employees in real, tangible ways that they are valued. Paying someone a wage that doesn't even allow them to feed themselves does just the opposite.

There is a class of employers that don't appreciate the value of their staff. I particularly dislike some of the asset management multinationals, mostly because I work for some of them and I can see the lack of effective productivity across the board. They also tend to be large enough to dominate whole industries. In short they're monopolies, and there's simply no such thing as an effective entity in such a position.

There's also a class of employee that doesn't appreciate the fact that there needs to be a link between his productivity and his wages. Whether that's enough to feed him or not is completely irrelevant.

swbarnett

31st July 2014, 23:33

There's also a class of employee that doesn't appreciate the fact that there needs to be a link between his productivity and his wages. Whether that's enough to feed him or not is completely irrelevant.
Yes, there are some that won't pull their weight no matter how much you pay them. Better to get rid of them than pay them a pittance. That's better for the company and the employee in the long run.

It's a pretty poor state of affairs, though, when someone in full employment that's doing their job well can't feed themselves. There are a number of jobs that don't directly produce anything of value to the company. How do you asses the value of a cleaner? How do you assess the value of a manager? Neither directly contribute to the company's profits. They are merely facilitators that provide a better work environment for those that do.

To my mind the absolute minimum value to be placed on jobs that are not directly productive is a living wage.

PrincessBandit

1st August 2014, 07:02

Manys the time I've wondered whether some sort of global catastrophe where we are effectively returned to a very basic level of existence would ultimately benefit us. Sure, there will always be the exploiters who take advantage of the misery and need of others, but a lot of our present problems seem to be driven by greed (can be individual, business, government), the desire for power/control, and the insatiable desires of a consumer society.

While the prospect of some kind of worldwide meltdown and NZ becoming once again an isolated nation, kind of like I imagine it was in the 1800's, is scary I sometimes try to imagine us as a self-sufficient nation of get-on-and-do people NOT reliant on the cheap labour of other countries spewing out goods we don't really need; living off the land; helping our neighbours and community; not poisoning the environment with toxic chemicals (all part of the stuff that makes our life "easier") etc. (I really am an idealist deep down, with a cynical coating on the outside).

Of course, I understand that medical progress (amongst other things) is dependent often on world-wide research, big global drug companies etc. and no one would want a return to the days of epidemics that decimate populations for lack of the medical advances that have been made. Sadly I can't see there ever being some kind of balance between the two - the "simple" but hard living of a less consumer driven society but with the health benefits of our current existence.

swbarnett

1st August 2014, 12:50

it has been said global warming will be the catastrophe that will happen as oil and coal will have to be left in the ground to stop it if you believe the greenies. Or a nuclear war which the threat of has never gone away its just it does not make the news like back in the 60s 70s.
"Global warming" is a natural process that's happened many times over past epochs (as evidenced in choral core samples). Are we causing this one? Maybe, maybe not. I don't think we'll ever know for sure.

The thing with global warming is that the wrong question is being asked. It's not a case of "How do we stop it?". More a case of "How do we adapt?".

Hell, it may even be short-lived. Afterall, headlines in the '70s spoke of a new ice age on the immediate horizon.

Voltaire

1st August 2014, 12:58

"Global warming" is a natural process that's happened many times over past epochs (as evidenced in choral core samples). Are we causing this one? Maybe, maybe not. I don't think we'll ever know for sure.

The thing with global warming is that the wrong question is being asked. It's not a case of "How do we stop it?". More a case of "How do we adapt?".

Hell, it may even be short-lived. Afterall, headlines in the '70s spoke of a new ice age on the immediate horizon.

Yes I suppose 9 billion people and all the associated cows, coal fired power stations, deforestation and co2 spewing motor vehicles are just part of the natural

process. That 70's article was probably written by someone from the greatest consumers on the planet :baby:

Banditbandit

1st August 2014, 13:07

Hell, it may even be short-lived. Afterall, headlines in the '70s spoke of a new ice age on the immediate horizon.

The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. Some Climate change scenarios include Ice Sheets advancing south from the Artic Circle to cover Europe

If the temperature in the Artic Circle rises, then the sinking cold water north of the British Isles that sucks in warmers water from the Carribean will no longer sink .. no longer drawing warmer water north - the Gulf Stream stops .. and stops warming the British Isles and the west coast of Europe .. then temperatures in that area will drop - possibly enough to have major ice sheets across a fair chunk of Europe ..'

It's not hard to find this information - I'm sure you can use Google.

Voltaire

1st August 2014, 13:56

It's not hard to find this information - I'm sure you can use Google.

no need, there are still a pile of late 70's newspapers to paraphrase stuff from :innocent:

ellipsis

1st August 2014, 14:02

NZ becoming once again an isolated nation, kind of like I imagine it was in the 1800's, .

...the thought of all those poor little people that never thought about where the water comes from and where the shit flows away to and how to chop a bit of kindling or use a shovel or catch your tea...and....and...no fuel for riding willy nilly round the country...oh no!...

oldrider

1st August 2014, 14:05

Some of us who were there are still alive and (almost) kicking! :whistle:

swbarnett

1st August 2014, 14:19

Yes I suppose 9 billion people and all the associated cows, coal fired power stations, deforestation and co2 spewing motor vehicles are just part of the natural

process.
Yes, we do emit a lot of "greenhouse" gases. However, one thing that most people are missing is that carbon based gases are only part of the equation. A large part of the green house affect is due to water vapour. I think the oceans have the monopoly on that one.

That 70's article was probably written by someone from the greatest consumers on the planet :baby:
It was more than just that. If I understood correctly it was the "accepted" theory at the time.

swbarnett

1st August 2014, 14:21

The two concepts are not mutually exclusive.
Yes, I know that. The Gulf stream is the only thing keeping Europe as warm as it is. Even without any temperature change if that failed Europe would freeze. What I'm talking about is a true ice age i.e. cooling over the entire planet.

James Deuce

1st August 2014, 15:40

Anthropogenic climate change is an accepted scientific fact.

CO2 is just one index among many, but the big problem we have is the reduction in albedo of the Earth resulting in more warmth being absorbed by the climate, increasing suspended water vapour which traps the heat absorbed by the sea. There's a lot of blather about the Arctic ice cap being quite big in the last couple of years compared to the previous decade. But it ain't any where near as thick as it should be and it disappeared earlier than ever before. It's all out there, in simple terms so simple folks can understand, but no one wants to use public transport, so we can all just die instead. Makes perfect sense.

Climate and weather are two very different things. Many don't want to know that so they'll point at an unseasonal snow storm and decry the fact that their own laissez faire attitude to burning stored sunlight for easy energy is causing long term problems.

The planet doesn't give a fuck about how warm it is. Our inability to change or adapt to change in a rational fashion will kill a lot of people, plants, and animals, not the planet. The biggest reduction in diversity since the Permian extinction should be a hint, but, no, we're all experts so we should argue with those who know. Btw the climate science community in at 99% accord that anthropogenic warming as a trend (2 degrees C in the last century) is a real thing. Not fantasy, not conspiracy. But we won't change our attitudes until the entire population of Bangladesh drowns. Just like the global tsunami warning system couldn't get any funding until lots of people were killed by one. Meh. I never liked any of you anyway.

swbarnett

1st August 2014, 16:33

Anthropogenic climate change is an accepted scientific fact.
Sorry, no such thing. The best we get is accepted theory.

Science is like that. Everything we know is just what seems to fit the observations at the time. We can never know what new observations will come to light in the future that will shed doubt on the theory (or support it).

The universe is far too complex for any scientist (or group of scientists) to rightly claim that they know exactly how it, or any part of it, works with complete certainty.

Banditbandit

1st August 2014, 16:52

Sorry, no such thing. The best we get is accepted theory.

Gravity is just a theory too - but I don't see you ignoring that ...

MisterD

1st August 2014, 16:54

Sorry, no such thing. The best we get is accepted theory.

Oh please, not the abuse of the word "theory" as applied to science, you may as well sit with Ed in the creationist corner if you're going to do that.

I will agree though that AGW isn't a "theory" yet either. No matter how many scientists Al Gore might like to say reckon it's a "fact", or how many think it's a pretty strong hypothesis. Until there's an actual equation that works and predicts future behaviour accurately, it's not a theory.

swbarnett

1st August 2014, 17:16

Gravity is just a theory too - but I don't see you ignoring that ...
I ignore it all the time. Actually I seldom think of it.

It's still only a theory. Have you seen The Matrix? For all we know nothing around us is real.

Oh please, not the abuse of the word "theory" as applied to science,
The word "fact" implies 100% certainty. Something that doesn't exist in science.

you may as well sit with Ed in the creationist corner if you're going to do that.
I don't see the connection. Besides, creation and evolution are not necessarily contradictory. Creation talks about what "god" supposedly did. Evolution (if you're religiously leaning) describes the method used.

I will agree though that AGW isn't a "theory" yet either. No matter how many scientists Al Gore might like to say reckon it's a "fact", or how many think it's a pretty strong hypothesis. Until there's an actual equation that works and predicts future behaviour accurately, it's not a theory.
Fat chance of that in a chaotic system.

mashman

1st August 2014, 17:43

R650R

1st August 2014, 18:00

Anthropogenic climate change is an accepted scientific HYPOTHESIS.

CO2 is just one index among many, but the big problem we have is the reduction in albedo of the Earth resulting in more warmth being absorbed by the climate, increasing suspended water vapour which traps the heat absorbed by the sea. There's a lot of blather about the Arctic ice cap being quite big in the last couple of years compared to the previous decade. But it ain't any where near as thick as it should be and it disappeared earlier than ever before. It's all out there, in simple terms so simple folks can understand, but no one wants to use public transport, so we can all just die instead. Makes perfect sense.

Climate and weather are two very different things. Many don't want to know that so they'll point at an unseasonal snow storm and decry the fact that their own laissez faire attitude to burning stored sunlight for easy energy is causing long term problems.

The planet doesn't give a fuck about how warm it is. Our inability to change or adapt to change in a rational fashion will kill a lot of people, plants, and animals, not the planet. The biggest reduction in diversity since the Permian extinction should be a hint, but, no, we're all experts so we should argue with those who know. Btw the climate science community in at 99% accord that anthropogenic warming as a trend (2 degrees C in the last century) is a real thing. Not fantasy, not conspiracy. But we won't change our attitudes until the entire population of Bangladesh drowns. Just like the global tsunami warning system couldn't get any funding until lots of people were killed by one. Meh. I never liked any of you anyway.

There are no Climate Change FACTS and there never can be as there is no control experiment to measure against.
Everything about climate change is hypothesis, not to mention the oxymoronic term itself as climate by nature is never constant, its the reason why we have weather forecasters who cant even get tommorows weather right!!!!

Anyone ever notice that when all that seasonal artic ice shelf melts that theres no discenable rise in sea levels????
The predicted sea level rises are bullshit, as if the planet gets hot enough to melt that ice it will also heat the oceans enough to drive more water into atmosphere as water vapour.

The only thing we do know for certain is that money is involved, aka the carbon tax scam. You can still 'pollute' as long as you pay.

We will all die from a USA initiated nucluear war long before the ice ever melts...

swbarnett

1st August 2014, 18:11

The predicted sea level rises are bullshit,
The sea level does appear to be rising. Some of the pacific islands are already almost under water.

However, appearances can be deceiving. It's more likely that the tectonic plates are titling (after all, they are floating on magma). Measurements taken from either side of one plate have shown that one side is sinking (hence the apparent sea level "rise") and the other is rising (producing an apparent sea level "drop").

mashman

2nd August 2014, 00:25

There are no Climate Change FACTS and there never can be as there is no control experiment to measure against.
Everything about climate change is hypothesis, not to mention the oxymoronic term itself as climate by nature is never constant, its the reason why we have weather forecasters who cant even get tommorows weather right!!!!

Anyone ever notice that when all that seasonal artic ice shelf melts that theres no discenable rise in sea levels????
The predicted sea level rises are bullshit, as if the planet gets hot enough to melt that ice it will also heat the oceans enough to drive more water into atmosphere as water vapour.

The only thing we do know for certain is that money is involved, aka the carbon tax scam. You can still 'pollute' as long as you pay.

We will all die from a USA initiated nucluear war long before the ice ever melts...

So, given all of the evidence that has been put forwards so far in regards to climate change, would you say that knowing that the climate will change is not a fact? I care not whether it gets too hot or too cold or slightly hotter or slightly colder and I really don't give a shit if it gets hotter or colder than 0.000000000000000000000001 degrees of stuff, but we are technologically capable of dealing with that either eventuality.

I'd prefer comets falling from the sky, followed by meteor showers and tidal wave, followed by fault line that cannot sit still v's war. At least one of them can be prevented :D

Voltaire

2nd August 2014, 08:23

So, given all of the evidence that has been put forwards so far in regards to climate change, would you say that knowing that the climate will change is not a fact? I care not whether it gets too hot or too cold or slightly hotter or slightly colder and I really don't give a shit if it gets hotter or colder than 0.000000000000000000000001 degrees of stuff, but we are technologically capable of dealing with that either eventuality.

I'd prefer comets falling from the sky, followed by meteor showers and tidal wave, followed by fault line that cannot sit still v's war. At least one of them can be prevented :D

We/they might be technically capable of slowing/stopping Global Warming but there is hardly much of a will to do it. India and China ( Google) say they are building 4 coal fired power stations a week. That and all the on going wars around the place.:(

ellipsis

2nd August 2014, 09:19

. You can still 'pollute' as long as you pay.

...that seems to be the system that they play...

mashman

2nd August 2014, 09:23

We/they might be technically capable of slowing/stopping Global Warming but there is hardly much of a will to do it. India and China ( Google) say they are building 4 coal fired power stations a week. That and all the on going wars around the place.:(

Ahhhh the side effects of a consumer driven economy and an ever changing climate. Unfortunately there is plenty of a will to do it... but it seems as though our representatives lack the will to implement that will. War :facepalm: what a solution for growing the economoney.

scrivy

2nd August 2014, 09:56

The only thing we do know for certain is that money is involved, aka the carbon tax scam. You can still 'pollute' as long as you pay.

We will all die from a USA initiated nucluear war long before the ice ever melts...

Can someone tell me where all the money generated from the carbon tax fraud has gone??
....and yes, the US will initiate the nuclear war.... well, maybe not push the first button, but cause it to be pushed... :nono:

Scuba_Steve

2nd August 2014, 09:59

Can someone tell me where all the money generated from the carbon tax fraud has gone??

Yes; some of the big receivers are Al Gore, BP Oil, Shell Oil, Rothschild

oldrider

2nd August 2014, 10:19

....and yes, the US will initiate the nuclear war.... well, maybe not push the first button, but cause it to be pushed... :nono:

Saw this this morning along the lines of your question?:http://drsircus.com/world-news/projecting-evil-onto-russia

Still reading it myself! :eek:

scumdog

2nd August 2014, 10:19

Can someone tell me where all the money generated from the carbon tax fraud has gone??
..

Ah yes, 'carbon credits' and 'carbon tax' - the biggest scams since the Emperors New Clothes!:crazy:

unstuck

2nd August 2014, 13:03

Scuba_Steve

2nd August 2014, 17:51

Crazy sheep running is circles:devil2::weird::weird:

That was from Parliament TV the other night wasn't it?

unstuck

2nd August 2014, 17:54

That was from Parliament TV the other night wasn't it?

Could have been. I thought it summed up KB nicely.:msn-wink:

Woodman

2nd August 2014, 19:02

Was watching on the teev the other week where an extinction expert was talking and he stated that the human race was already on an unstoppable extinction process.:violin: Various factors including over population,climate change, pollution etc. Dunno how long it takes, but we only got ourselves to blame so enjoy the ride while you can guys.:shit:

swbarnett

2nd August 2014, 19:12

we only got ourselves to blame
I don't see why anyone has to be to blame. It's a natural process with only one inevitable end. And this will not be the first time it's happened - just the first time with nowhere else to go (unless we manage to colonise another planet first).

Woodman

2nd August 2014, 19:16

I don't see why anyone has to be to blame. It's a natural process with only one inevitable end. And this will not be the first time it's happened - just the first time with nowhere else to go (unless we manage to colonise another planet first).

Thats a very good point. :niceone:

scumdog

3rd August 2014, 12:45

Ocean1

3rd August 2014, 14:03

Was watching on the teev the other week where an extinction expert was talking and he stated that the human race was already on an unstoppable extinction process.:

If you take the same sick person to see a physician, a psychiatrist and a surgeon they'll get proscribed drugs, counselling and surgery, respectively. That's not a guess, btw, it's an effect that's the subject of a lot of studies funded by health authorities worldwide.

An extinction expert is only ever going to see the human race as involved in an extinction process.

Try asking an anthropologist what humans' do best: Survive.

If you want useful advice chose your experts carefully.

MisterD

4th August 2014, 09:22

mashman

4th August 2014, 09:52

Oh dear, it seems Our Nige has cheery picked his data to support the conclusion he wanted to reach. Wonder when he's standing for the Labour Party?

http://offsettingbehaviour.blogspot.co.nz/2014/07/whole-latta-derp.html?spref=tw

Nah, he'd be better of as a nat. Peeps using statistical analysis to measure the health of the nation in order to excuse themselves from any societal responsibility for issues that are happening day in and day out in too many lives should be shot!

MisterD

4th August 2014, 09:59

Peeps using statistical analysis to measure the health of the nation in order to ....

What, as opposed to dreaming up their own unworkable solutions in order to be able to say "not my fault"?

mashman

4th August 2014, 10:05

What, as opposed to dreaming up their own unworkable solutions in order to be able to say "not my fault"?

lol... those dreaming up the real solutions accept their complicity, hence they are doing something about it. The rest of ya'll are sitting their with your thumb up yer butt praying that the numbers spat out by the propaganda machine show that the economy is growing and then rely on that tidbit of info to assume that all is well with the world. Meh, your choice, but inherently unsound.

avgas

4th August 2014, 12:23

Try asking an anthropologist what humans' do best: Survive.
Wouldn't an Anthropologist say "Who?"
Seeing as we have only existing on this rock for 1/1000th of the time the dinosaurs did......at best.

I agree with the rest of your statement though. Humans might be fucking shit up - but the place was doomed regardless. Nothing lasts for ever......even the sun has a clock.

mada

5th August 2014, 23:41

Scuba_Steve

6th August 2014, 12:55

Todays episode on Education:

Pretty eye opening stuff - especially tech wise. Can't believe how much its changed in the space of 10 years and the awesome stuff kids are doing in tech classes.

Yea I'm thinking I got ripped off in school, shit looks MUCH better now especially for people like me who suck with books but fucking rock that shit when we get hands on

unstuck

6th August 2014, 15:17

Yea I'm thinking I got ripped off in school, shit looks MUCH better now especially for people like me who suck with books but fucking rock that shit when we get hands on

I spent more time at high school helping the caretaker out with mowing lawns and fixing shit, so I kinda got them sort of lessons.:2thumbsup

R650R

6th August 2014, 18:08

Thought the education episode seemed bit wishy washy but at least the kids seem engaged which is the important bit.
Our high school tried some experimental hands on stuff like that about 25 years ago. It all turned to custard though when some munter planted dope crops in the vege garden part and all the tools got nicked that we were going to strip an early Suby motor with...
The ipads for Phys Ed seems overkill though...

Scuba_Steve

6th August 2014, 20:23

I spent more time at high school helping the caretaker out with mowing lawns and fixing shit, so I kinda got them sort of lessons.:2thumbsup

Think caretakers were gone by the time I hit high school, it was all outsourced. Primary school had one but apparently shoveling coal was considered too dangerous for kids

unstuck

7th August 2014, 05:45

Think caretakers were gone by the time I hit high school, it was all outsourced. Primary school had one but apparently shoveling coal was considered too dangerous for kids

The only thing wrong with our caretaker, was he smoked winfield and I smoked pall mall. He used to let me climb to the top of the incinerator to have a smoke, and that was an awesome view from up there.:niceone:

ellipsis

7th August 2014, 10:18

...my year at a catholic high school was more about making sure the couple of homo teachers in black robes, didn't get, any, 'hands on', experience and perfecting my kick to the nuts to disable bigger bully cunts...and reading...oh, and figuring out how to disable the lights on the train before we entered the rail tunnel...there were a couple of girls who didn't mind being fingered, as long as no one could see...

...we also learned some basic fire fighting skills... the science blocks were about a hundred yards from the main Chch gasworks tank and the pressure on the shitty bunsen burner valves was far too great stop them leaking and filling the rooms...even on the coldest of Chch mornings the doors were opened by 7am and before we entered someone generally through a match in to clear up the residual gas still skulking around the desk legs...

unstuck

7th August 2014, 10:25

We used to visit Carmel college from time to time, which was a catholic girl school on Aucklands north shore, damn were those chicks horny.

But then my wife found out and stopped me going.:shifty:

Nah, not really.:msn-wink:

oldrider

7th August 2014, 11:10

mashman

7th August 2014, 12:03

You must learn to keep your hands out of your pockets! :killingme

Only when they're full of loose change.

unstuck

7th August 2014, 12:07

You must learn to keep your hands out of your pockets! :killingme

Nothing wrong with a game of pocket pool.:nono:

Voltaire

7th August 2014, 12:13

unstuck

7th August 2014, 12:18

Rosmini College...?

Nah, I went to long bay college. But had a car, and liked long lunchbreaks and spacies at a dairy in milford.:devil2:

Swoop

7th August 2014, 13:42

Todays episode on Education:

Pretty eye opening stuff - especially tech wise. Can't believe how much its changed in the space of 10 years and the awesome stuff kids are doing in tech classes.
Thank fuck this thread of drivel has returned to topic.
That was an excellent episode! Genuinely interesting and a superb insight into the classrooms of today.
I realise Pakuranga College is a good school and continues a tradition of such. The comments regarding the "Decile" rating was very interesting. We certainly have made a rod for our own back with that system.

Sadly there are still the raving academics who try and funnel everyone into an "academic" pathway/career. Panelbeating as a course? Brilliant idea. One of the wealthiest men in NZ started as a panelbeater.

We used to visit Carmel college from time to time, which was a catholic girl school on Aucklands north shore, damn were those chicks horny.
It wasn't called Carnal College for nothing...