The 2017 Election Thread

[Ocean1]

Let's hope that they have NO access whatsoever to the treasury portfolio.

Correct. When he was promised "more seats" by national but was then shafted by Bolger / Shipley swapping seats and renegging on the deal.


It is odd to see so many NZF "ministers" and is well out of proportion to the numbers represented on election night.
So much for "negotiations", as I posted previously this was nothing less than a hostage situation.


Let's hope that another massive natural disaster does not hit the country.

I think it just did.

Well, in so far as the stupidity embodied in the concept of MMP can be said to be natural.

The NZ dollar isn't quite in free fall but it's clear the rest of the world aren't impressed with our economic prospects.

[James Deuce]

For sure - but let me Channel the spirit of Cassina for the moment:

Would you say that in those situations (just like riding) there are decisions that you can make that can limit your exposure and mitigate risk?

In our case, no.

[jasonu]

Yeah but Bill is a bloke. Seriously she doesn't even try to flash herself at all. She is representing our country now, the least she could do is get a complete makeover.

Already been discussed...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11908121

[Crasherfromwayback]

There is something that deeply irks me about the result, it's something along the lines of the party with the largest vote share didn't get to form a Government, all because of the Whims of one Winston Peters.

This (to me) seems to go against every principle of Democracy.
.

Ummmm, for starters, more people voted FOR change, than to retain status quo. Not sure why you'd have trouble grasping that simple fact. This is EXACTLY why we have MMP, and why it's a good idea.


Yeah but Bill is a bloke. Seriously she doesn't even try to flash herself at all. She is representing our country now, the least she could do is get a complete makeover.

Fuck you're a clown. She's not there as eye candy, what a retarded thing to say. How 'bout you post a pic of your missus for us to critique?

[TheDemonLord]

In our case, no.

So, by that - are you saying you have no agency? Are you saying that there is not any decisions that you could make to change your situation?

I disagree with that sentiment.

[TheDemonLord]

Ummmm, for starters, more people voted FOR change, than to retain status quo. Not sure why you'd have trouble grasping that simple fact. This is EXACTLY why we have MMP, and why it's a good idea.

By that logic then - every single election under MMP, even the ones where the incumbant party stayed in Power, the people voted for Change. Because no party since the implementation has had an absolute majority - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_New_Zealand#General_elections_2

Further by that logic - every election where the incumbant party stayed in power (in your reasoning) was invalid - because the people voted FOR change.

The simple fact that you seem to have trouble grasping is that the biggest proportion of people voted for National. That they are not in power shows why MMP is flawed. FFP is also flawed, the Electoral college is also flawed etc. etc. ad infinitum ad nauseum.

That a single person (Winston Peters) effectively got to decide the next Government of NZ, regardless of the Election results is an absolute affront to Democracy.

[Brian d marge]

Ummmm, for starters, more people voted FOR change, than to retain status quo. Not sure why you'd have trouble grasping that simple fact. This is EXACTLY why we have MMP, and why it's a good idea.



Fuck you're a clown. She's not there as eye candy, what a retarded thing to say. How 'bout you post a pic of your missus for us to critique?Woof woof https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171019/292d6b50d848abe0f25988779137eb42.jpg

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Crasherfromwayback]

The simple fact that you seem to have trouble grasping is that the biggest proportion of people voted for National.

Ummmm...no they didn't. :msn-wink:

[pritch]

You can be in that state in an instant without knowing it has happened. And EVERYONE, without fail, just labels you a fuckwit failure and you deserve it. Irrespective of circumstance. As soon as it has happened you are part of the problem. There is no delineation between bad luck, poor management, or zero opportunity. As soon as you are poor, asset-less and without debt, you are a non-person bludger.

Interesting comments. Lately I have been seeing people arguing against this on the interweb. Basically it's victim blaming, but it has the added benefit of permitting those who could help ignore the problem with a completely unbothered conscience.

I hope our new Government can hold itself together for three years. A rather kinder approach than what we have had for the last nine might be benfeficial, if they can do it without breaking the bank.

If Winston gets me a better Gold card I will drink to his health. :drinkup:

[TheDemonLord]

Ummmm...no they didn't. :msn-wink:

Ok - fair point, let me rephrase slightly:

it is that the biggest single proportion of people voted for National.

[Honest Andy]

We have a government that is made up of people and policies that more than 50% of voters wanted.

So Mmp is still working.

Sour grapes doesn't change the maths...

[TheDemonLord]

Interesting comments. Lately I have been seeing people arguing against this on the interweb. Basically it's victim blaming, but it has the added benefit of permitting those who could help ignore the problem with a completely unbothered conscience.

I hope our new Government can hold itself together for three years. A rather kinder approach than what we have had for the last nine might be benfeficial, if they can do it without breaking the bank.

If Winston gets me a better Gold card I will drink to his health. :drinkup:

Victim Blaming?

If you tell someone that maybe they did things that either invited, expidited or failed to guard against Disaster - is this Victim Blaming? I find there is something very insidious and corrupt with the notion of Victim Blaming - in which it grants people to act in a manner without a care for the consequences of their own actions, then absolve themselves of any responsibility when something negative as a result (or partial result) befalls them - and screeching like a toddler "VICTIM BLAMING!" at anyone who dares to suggest that maybe they ought to think a little bit more next time.

[pritch]

Ok - fair point, let me rephrase slightly:

it is that the biggest single proportion of people voted for National.

That's nice but it is entirely irrelevant.

Whoever Winston went with, the result would have represented the majority of voters. Some people have trouble grasping that but it's only 'cause they don't ike the result, they don't like MMP, or both.:violin:

[TheDemonLord]

We have a government that is made up of people and policies that Winston wanted.

So Mmp is still broken.

Sour grapes doesn't change the maths...

Indeed....

[Voltaire]

Other than Winston Peters and his cronies having more say than their Grey Powered 7% deserves I'm not unhappy with a

change of actors on the stage.

He's just NZ version on Donald Trump promising a world that is gone, gone, gone, whooaaah...da da da.....

I had a Parrot Dog Bitter Bitch....felt it was the right combination of bitterness to go with Mike Hoskings.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Ok - fair point, let me rephrase slightly:

it is that the biggest single proportion of people voted for National.

Too bad.


We have a government that is made up of people and policies that more than 50% of voters wanted.

So Mmp is still working.

Sour grapes doesn't change the maths...

Absolutely!

[Honest Andy]

But fuck all that...

It's time for a ride! Who's with me?

Too slow...
BRAAAAAAAAAAPPPP

[TheDemonLord]

That's nice but it is entirely irrelevant.

Whoever Winston went with, the result would have represented the majority of voters. Some people have trouble grasping that but it's only 'cause they don't ike the result, they don't like MMP, or both.:violin:

It seems rather clear that Winston had a score to settle with National, so I reject your notion that it represented the Majority of Voters. It represented Winston's own interests.

That and this is an anomoly compared to every other MMP coalition (where the party with the single biggest vote share formed the Government).

So I'm interested how you explain every other government - were they also a representation of the Majority of Voters?

[1billyboy]

Ok - fair point, let me rephrase slightly:

it is that the biggest single proportion of people voted for National.

Yeah but more people voted NOT for National.:brick:

[TheDemonLord]

Yeah but more people voted NOT for National.:brick:

So then, every other election result then is invalid - cause last election more people didn't vote for National, same with the election before that, When Labour last won an election, more people didn't vote for Labour etc.

I'll ask again - if that is the line of Logic you wish to trot out - how do you explain EVERY MMP election thus far?

[pritch]

Victim Blaming?

If you tell someone that maybe they did things that either invited, expidited or failed to guard against Disaster - is this Victim Blaming? I find there is something very insidious and corrupt with the notion of Victim Blaming - in which it grants people to act in a manner without a care for the consequences of their own actions, then absolve themselves of any responsibility when something negative as a result (or partial result) befalls them - and screeching like a toddler "VICTIM BLAMING!" at anyone who dares to suggest that maybe they ought to think a little bit more next time.

I was briefly in a conversation last night which reflected on a time when young people who didn't have a job were directed to the freezing works, the woollen mills, the car factory, or the toll room. Those jobs are all gone. Other big employers like the Post Office and Railways are but shadows of their former selves. Rubbish trucks used to have a crew of four, now there is just the driver. This is all more "efficient", but as a result of decisions taken by successive governments, and the drive for ever lower costs, many people are now facing an entire lifetime without a job. Sure, it would help if they had a degree, or two, but some of those people are having difficulty getting a job.

It isn't just the unemployed. In many western countries the working poor are really struggling. We have them here too.

In time those we have excluded from sharing in the benefits* of our society may well come to resent this, and we may be presented with more social problems than we'd like. We could try to ease the problem somehow, but nah, it's easier to blame the victim. Victim blaming is real and it's here. Right here in this thread in fact.





* No pun intended

[Brian d marge]

I was briefly in a conversation last night which reflected on a time when young people who didn't have a job were directed to the freezing works, the woollen mills, the car factory, or the toll room. Those jobs are all gone. Other big employers like the Post Office and Railways are but shadows of their former selves. Rubbish trucks used to have a crew of four, now there is just the driver. This is all more "efficient", but as a result of decisions taken by successive governments, and the drive for ever lower costs, many people are now facing an entire lifetime without a job. Sure, it would help if they had a degree, or two, but some of those people are having difficulty getting a job.

It isn't just the unemployed. In many western countries the working poor are really struggling. We have them here too.

In time those we have excluded from sharing in the benefits* of our society may well come to resent this, and we may be presented with more social problems than we'd like. We could try to ease the problem somehow, but nah, it's easier to blame the victim. Victim blaming is real and it's here. Right here in this thread in fact.





* No pun intendedNever did like working .. best to leave that malarkey to robots

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[1billyboy]

So then, every other election result then is invalid - cause last election more people didn't vote for National, same with the election before that, When Labour last won an election, more people didn't vote for Labour etc.

I'll ask again - if that is the line of Logic you wish to trot out - how do you explain EVERY MMP election thus far?

It come down to how much support the big 2 get from the small parties. History of what has happened in the past is fun to watch.:weird:

[TheDemonLord]

I was briefly in a conversation last night which reflected on a time when young people who didn't have a job were directed to the freezing works, the woollen mills, the car factory, or the toll room. Those jobs are all gone. Other big employers like the Post Office and Railways are but shadows of their former selves. Rubbish trucks used to have a crew of four, now there is just the driver. This is all more "efficient", but as a result of decisions taken by successive governments, and the drive for ever lower costs, many people are now facing an entire lifetime without a job. Sure, it would help if they had a degree, or two, but some of those people are having difficulty getting a job.

It isn't just the unemployed. In many western countries the working poor are really struggling. We have them here too.

In time those we have excluded from sharing in the benefits* of our society may well come to resent this, and we may be presented with more social problems than we'd like. We could try to ease the problem somehow, but nah, it's easier to blame the victim. Victim blaming is real and it's here. Right here in this thread in fact.





* No pun intended

Interesting points - So let's talk about them.

For sure - times have changed and to a point I agree in part that as a society, we have failed to keep pace - as you say, people used to go to the local 'big employer' in small town NZ, get a job, work for 35 years, get their golden watch and retire.

The first thing I would point out however is that the level of upskilling, training (paid, subsidized and free) is enormous - now, I'll be the first proponent to point out that not everyone are geniuses who are going to be able to enter complex fields (such as Law, Engineering and my own beloved IT) - but that is not to say that there aren't intermediate and starter positions that are available.

The next is something I've heard in particular from people living in Small town NZ - that people are reluctant to move out of their town and reluctant to move to an Office job - the age old "I don't want to be stuck in an office all day" - if people aren't willing to move to get a job or aren't happy with the job choices available, that somewhat tempers my sympathy

Finally is that for the last 10? or so years - the Trades have been understaffed, In line with your description of the plight of the poor - there was a generation where only a select elite few went to University - the rest became apprentices in trades - this one I see more a a societal/government issue - in that Trades weren't seen in a positive light and the Apprenticeship system had it's heart ripped out (I'm sure someone with more experience/knowledge on this can elaborate at length - I've only briefly read about it)

Now - onto whether or not the poor should reap the benefits,

First point here is that even if we got rid of all the government implemented Benefits systems - the Poor in a modern western country are infinitely better off than the poor in any other country - They don't have to worry about the threat of War (in the same way as the poorest people in central Africa do), They have charities that will clothe and feed them (Auckland City Mission, the Sallies etc.) They have access to legal recourse and recognition of their rights.

This leads to the next question - what level of existence should someone be entitled to? Do they have a right to the Internet? Do they have a right to insulation? Do they have a right to take a holiday?

This is especially poignant when asked in regards to someone who does not work, who does not contribute to society in any way. Tax breaks and assistance programs for people on low income jobs - okay, whilst I may not be overly fond of them, the people they help are contributing to society.

Then finally on this thought - what right do the people who contribute nothing have to dictate to those who DO contribute something, how much they should get?

[Crasherfromwayback]

Then finally on this thought - what right do the people who contribute nothing have to dictate to those who DO contribute something, how much they should get?

Well, even the people that do fuck all except crime, still contribute. Hey, if not for them, prison wardens wouldn't exist!:innocent:

[James Deuce]

hey have charities that will clothe and feed them (Auckland City Mission, the Sallies etc.) They have access to legal recourse and recognition of their rights.


No they don't. You do not have access to legal recourse if you have no money and no access to debt. You've obviously never tried to access a "charity". They have very narrowly defined conditions for access to their "services". You have no rights if you have no address and no debt. You have the right to die in the street. A society that relies on charity to help its most vulnerable has failed. A society in which people have no access to legal representation has also failed. You cannot use legal aid for a civil case.

Seriously, the debt thing is now the defining mark of citizenship in modern society.

[James Deuce]

So, by that - are you saying you have no agency? Are you saying that there is not any decisions that you could make to change your situation?

I disagree with that sentiment.

We had no agency. We were not informed or involved in the process that related to our "downfall". We have since won 4 court cases but are yet to see a cent. In the meantime we were rendered penniless and I was listed as bankrupt in the Gazette without any court process and listed as having been on the wrong side of a mortgagee sale without it having been registered in court. And before you start the apologetic gabble about there being systems in place to prevent that, there aren't. An agency can list you as bankrupt tomorrow, merely by filing papers with MBIE tomorrow. No court case required. Doesn't matter it it's the wrong person either. The burden of proof falls on the "victim". Which is completely impossible without a starting fee of about $300k to fix both of those problems.

[TheDemonLord]

No they don't. You do not have access to legal recourse if you have no money and no access to debt.

Are you saying that if a homeless, penniless person was assaulted, that the police would turn up and go "Oh, hang on a sec, you don't have any money, sorry".?
Are you saying that Pro Bono doen't exist?


You've obviously never tried to access a "charity". They have very narrowly defined conditions for access to their "services".

And long may it continue... but as a private organization, they absolutely have the right to define the conditions for access to their services.


You have no rights if you have no address and no debt.

The former (from my understanding) is only an issue for the posting of legal documents, but there are normally ways around it. The later, whilst I think I know what you are referring to - I'll let you elaborate.


You have the right to die in the street.

Death is the only real right that anyone has.


A society that relies on charity to help its most vulnerable has failed.

Why? By what Metric do you define success or failure?


A society in which people have no access to legal representation has also failed. You cannot use legal aid for a civil case.

You can represent yourself in a Civil case, and you can get Legal aid for a criminal case - ergo everyone has access to Legal Representation.

However - suppose I concede your point for the hypothetical point I was making - if things were as bad as you describe them are they better or worse than the 3rd world.


Seriously, the debt thing is now the defining mark of citizenship in modern society.

Well, that's a matter of opinion.

[James Deuce]

You cannot represent yourself in a civil case. Unless you want to make things worse.

I cannot elaborate.

Pro bono has to be offered. And you have to have enough money to pay for the hour of a lawyer's time at a decent large practice to be able define what your issues are and what legal branches will be required to investigate. You're oversimplifying everything because it suits your flawed logic that people have access to everything you do. They don't.

[TheDemonLord]

We had no agency. We were not informed or involved in the process that related to our "downfall". We have since won 4 court cases but are yet to see a cent. In the meantime we were rendered penniless and I was listed as bankrupt in the Gazette without any court process and listed as having been on the wrong side of a mortgagee sale without it having been registered in court. And before you start the apologetic gabble about there being systems in place to prevent that, there aren't. An agency can list you as bankrupt tomorrow, merely by filing papers with MBIE tomorrow. No court case required. Doesn't matter it it's the wrong person either. The burden of proof falls on the "victim". Which is completely impossible without a starting fee of about $300k to fix both of those problems.

Okay - I don't know the exact ins and outs of what occurred to you - however you say that you had no agency - yet you state you've won court cases - that sounds like Agency to me.

That there are problems with systems and processes etc. is a separate issue - and it's a very fine distinction:

Having no access to any system to get any form of redress = no agency
Having access to a system that is flawed/broken/doesn't pay out = You have agency, you have rights, but it isn't working properly.

Even if the net result is the same, they are philosophically different

Don't get me wrong - Systems are created by humans, humans are inherently flawed therefore systems are inherently flawed - but in light of this, do we throw the baby out with the bathwater?

[TheDemonLord]

You cannot represent yourself in a civil case. Unless you want to make things worse.

But you CAN do it - I never said it was a good idea, but it is possible.


I cannot elaborate.

Hairy Muff.


Pro bono has to be offered. And you have to have enough money to pay for the hour of a lawyer's time at a decent large practice to be able define what your issues are and what legal branches will be required to investigate. You're oversimplifying everything because it suits your flawed logic that people have access to everything you do. They don't.

Indeed it has to be offered - and I agree I'm simplifying some things - I never said people have the same access to everything I do, only that there is a base level of access that exists for everyone in the west, that doesn't exist for the same strata of people who exist outside of the west.

[Ocean1]

We have a government that is made up of people and policies that more than 50% of voters wanted.

So Mmp is still working.

Sour grapes doesn't change the maths...

And yet again: If Labour, NZ first and teh greens had gone to the poles with whatever policy set they've cobbled together over the last couple of weeks and achieved a majority then you could make that claim.

As it stands, you literally have a government that nobody voted for. It's a farce.

[Paul in NZ]

Its MMP... I put this on my Fb page and I'm too lazy to re jig it for here but I hope people will stop all the crazy talk. Its DONE and change is coming. Embrace it...



Well it’s a new day and the sun came up and the trains were still on time. In short not much has changed except of course, one man who has read the water a little better than others now has a greater say than he actually earnt. Even that’s arguable – he saw that the social contract that the voters had with the government had been strained and he took his chance. That’s MMP, it was always going to happen and I have no complaint with it.

I’ve never been a Winston fan – never will be but when he said its time to put a human face on capitalism I think he sold it. Boom – the unspoken elephant in the room.

Its not all Nationals fault. Governments all over the world have been struggling since the global financial crisis bail outs to remake the connection to the social contract. We are all tired and sick of going backwards. We are tired of all the gains going to the very very few, even the bankers that caused the crisis got away scot free and their bonus. Globalisation and neo liberalism has transferred the wealth out of the hands of the very poor and even the normally comfortable middle classes are struggling (not to mention shrinking). The money not spent on mental health and education stifle opportunity and widens the gap and we are sick of it.

Gareth Morgan had his chance BUT smart as he is – he still doesn’t get it. It’s not my generation the robbed the younger ones of the chance to own a house. It’s a toxic mix of global and local conditions rather than a deliberate application of greed. Winston picked up on it and hes ridden that wave right to the shore, well that and Labours and the Greens wiliness to swallow more dead rats than National.

Historically once the social contract is broken and particularly when there is a larger than normal group of younger members of society, the voters usually pick and extreme left or right alternative. The contracts broken so why not smash it completely and rebuild something new. Its what happened with trump, Greece and Brexit. In that light we got off lightly and have a superior solution.

The next 3 years are a great opportunity. Like I said, I’m not a fan of Winston or the new PM for that matter BUT I am excited to see some new ideas and a new direction for NZ because lets face it the old way was going nowhere

[Ocean1]

We are all tired and sick of going backwards. We are tired of all the gains going to the very very few, even the bankers that caused the crisis got away scot free and their bonus. Globalisation and neo liberalism has transferred the wealth out of the hands of the very poor and even the normally comfortable middle classes are struggling (not to mention shrinking). The money not spent on mental health and education stifle opportunity and widens the gap and we are sick of it.

You're right, there's a bunch of feeling about that shit. Only none of it's actually correct.

Maybe the rampant jealousy is caused by the press, the fact that angst sells coincidentally echoing populist resentment, but it's bullshit nonetheless.

[Katman]

You're right, there's a bunch of feeling about that shit. Only none of it's actually correct.

Maybe the rampant jealousy is caused by the press, the fact that angst sells coincidentally echoing populist resentment, but it's bullshit nonetheless.

It's funny - I will now forever picture you with Mike Hosking's sour face.

https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/e/c/x/7/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349. 1mea8q.png/1508461264609.jpg

[eldog]

Death is the only real right that anyone has..

:Offtopic: The right to choose to die and how is missing. Its not like a switch or video game you can turn on and off and/or have another go.

ok the language is wrong but you get the message I hope.

trying not to derail the thread here

[eldog]

FWIW, I thought National seemed quite pleased to have dodged the bullet.
Now they can kick back and use their knowledge (they have been in control for a while), knowing they don't have to prove anything and still be reasonably popular.

Should be quite interesting for 5 minutes..... and that's when the fight started.

Had Enough of - Winston Already..... boring

a lot of people voted for change for change sake, sometimes the devil you know is the better deal.

Lets see how Labour goes when the work starts and the honeymoon is over.....

always willing to give people the benefit of the doubt.

[jasonu]

ghjtyjrthurjurtu

332977

[Crasherfromwayback]

ghjtyjrthurjurtu

]

Dem grapes taste mighty sour eh! Lucky you're not in NZ U I guess. Me?, I'm fucking chuffed National have been unseated. Good riddance.

[Ocean1]

It's funny - I will now forever picture you with Mike Hosking's sour face.

https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/m/e/c/x/7/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349. 1mea8q.png/1508461264609.jpg

Hey, why not, you're wrong about literally everything else.

[Woodman]

Fuck you're a clown. She's not there as eye candy, what a retarded thing to say. How 'bout you post a pic of your missus for us to critique?


Lol. anyway, Labour is shit.

[Katman]

Lol. anyway, Labour is shit.

Lol. anyway, suck it up Princess.

[Oakie]

Lets see how Labour goes when the work starts and the honeymoon is over..... Labour are always willing to give people the benefit of the doubt.

Fixed that for you.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Lol. anyway, I like eating shit.

You'll have plenty of time then. Looking forward to the pics.

[Trade_nancy]

And yet again: If Labour, NZ first and teh greens had gone to the poles with whatever policy set they've cobbled together over the last couple of weeks and achieved a majority then you could make that claim.

As it stands, you literally have a government that nobody voted for. It's a farce.

Excellent paraphrasing of my thoughts...well said..but the victory goes to the teams that cobbled together a relay race to beat a solo sprinter.

[YellowDog]

Excellent paraphrasing of my thoughts...well said..but the victory goes to the teams that cobbled together a relay race to beat a solo sprinter.

The Aussies summed it up pretty well:

[Berries]

Jeez, they say the English whinge.

[Trade_nancy]

Jeez, they say the English whinge.

But only whingers say that..

[ellipsis]

The Aussies summed it up pretty well:


...have you checked out how their shit is going?...

[Crasherfromwayback]

The Aussies summed it up pretty well:


...have you checked out how their shit is going?...

Five diff prime ministers in 5 years hardly makes them winners. But hey... The haters that can't handle the facts can cry all they want.

[YellowDog]

For me, the funny part about it is that JA wasn't even an (elected) MP last year and she is now PM.

No experience, just ideology and her PC shit. I like some of her policies, but she seems to be clueless over how to appropriately fund what she is now committing to implement.

Both WP and JA use statements like 'building affordable housing'. What does that mean to any of you? If the average salary is around $45k per year, presumably $200k is what affordable translates to?

My opinion is that the only saving grace is that she herself recently bought an Auckland house for around $1m, so I am hoping that forcing mortgage interest rates up to 10% is something she would want to avoid, though she won't exactly be on an average wage!

Yes National received a deserved slap in the face from WP, as they have shat on him from a great height (more than once), BUT in my view, he has deceived many of his voters, and taken them down a route he would not ever have voted for. Lucky for him, his career will be over, after this term, and he can retire with satisfaction.

[riffer]

For me, the funny part about it is that JA wasn't even an MP last year and she is now PM.

Eh? She came in to Parliament as a list MP in the 2008 election. I think what you mean is, up until this election she did not hold an electorate.

[riffer]

So then, every other election result then is invalid - cause last election more people didn't vote for National, same with the election before that, When Labour last won an election, more people didn't vote for Labour etc.

I'll ask again - if that is the line of Logic you wish to trot out - how do you explain EVERY MMP election thus far?

It's quite easy. In the previous three elections National hadn't fucked over every single other support party in their quest to try and do it all themselves. With Labour at 24% their election plan was to destroy everyone else and rule alone. Unfortunately for them, they didn't quite get there and they were left with no mates. That's hubris for you.

[YellowDog]

Eh? She came in to Parliament as a list MP in the 2008 election. I think what you mean is, up until this election she did not hold an electorate.

Yes of course. What I meant was, personally receiving votes herself, because I believe that the country did actually voted for her. The result is remarkable and very tough for anyone to say anything other than "good job well done".

As I am sure you will gather, from my duff statement, I'm not a fan of the MMP system and strongly believe that the electorate should decide upon the individuals (including Bill English) :no:

[Grumph]

As I am sure you will gather, from my duff statement, I'm not a fan of the MMP system and strongly believe that the electorate should decide upon the individuals (including Bill English) :no:

I am a fan of MMP and maintain that we get a more diverse range of MP's from it - with a wider range of life experience too.
The putting party leaders on the list thing is unavoidable I suppose. Our local MP was a minister and invisible around the district. In opposition I doubt that will change and she'll probably go list next time. Won't help things here anyway as the local council told her to go back to Wgtn and mind her own business when she got involved in local problems...

[YellowDog]

I am a fan of MMP and maintain that we get a more diverse range of MP's from it - with a wider range of life experience too.
The putting party leaders on the list thing is unavoidable I suppose. Our local MP was a minister and invisible around the district. In opposition I doubt that will change and she'll probably go list next time. Won't help things here anyway as the local council told her to go back to Wgtn and mind her own business when she got involved in local problems...

Well that's fair enough. But I see MMP as a way of giving Political Science graduates a chance to practice their text book idealisms. My son is potentially one of those and totally clueless. Considers himself to be a great thinker :o

[Crasherfromwayback]

No experience, just ideology and her PC shit.

Yes National received a deserved slap in the face from WP, as they have shat on him from a great height (more than once), BUT in my view, he has deceived many of his voters, and taken them down a route he would not ever have voted for. Lucky for him, his career will be over, after this term, and he can retire with satisfaction.

Dude...you prob need to read up a lil more on Jacinda, and her relevant experience eh.

As for Winnie and his party, same again. Do some reading. If you'd bothered to check their website before and during the election, you would've noted that their policies and hopes for the future far better aligned with Labour than National, and in fact, most of their supporters and voters wanted them to go with Labour. Suck it up mate. It's MMP working as it actually should. Giving the smaller parties a say. If it was back to the bad old days of first past the post, those people that didn't like Labour and National, wouldn't bother voting, knowing it was gonna only ever be one or the other. How's that good? This way, if you're a Green person or whatever, it's well worth your time and effort to get out and vote, because you can and will make a difference. And what's wrong with that? The National fans have never had a problem with MMP when they win...now it's the end of the fucking world! What a bunch of bad sport, sad arsed cunts. Again...Suck it up.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Excellent paraphrasing of my thoughts...well said..but the victory goes to the teams that cobbled together a relay race to beat a solo sprinter.

When did those Nazi cunts sprint for anything? The fascist clomp of jackboots (and the anguished puffing of Brownlee and Bennett as they try to keep up) is the sound of those fuckers.

[YellowDog]

Dude...you prob need to read up a lil more on Jacinda, and her relevant experience eh.

As for Winnie and his party, same again. Do some reading. If you'd bothered to check their website before and during the election, you would've noted that their policies, and hopes for the future far better aligned with Labour that National, and in fact, most of their supporterrs, and voters wanted them to go with Labour. Suck it up mate. It's MMP working as it actually should. Giving the smaller parties a say. If it was back to the bad old days of firsp past the post, those people that didn't like Labour and National, wouldn't bother voting, knowing it was gonna only ever be one or the other. How's that good? This way, if you're a Green person or whatever, it's well worth your time and effort to get out and vote, because you can and will make a difference. And what's wrong with that? The National fans have never had a problem with MMP when they win...now it's the end of the fucking world! What a bunch of bad sport, sad arsed cunts. Suck it up.

I do agree with some of that. I know a number of voters whom have their MP vote to National and their party vote to WP. It's about perspective and that is personal to each and every voter, so there's no right or wrong.

Yes I read about Jacinda and also about Winston. I do believe some of it. Most I don't, due to a serious lack of credentials. But that's just my opinion.

Whether LAB/NZ1/GRN have enough support, to have much impact, remains to be seen. Assuming all of the coalition partners will support the coalition, on every vote, is unwise.

Having to discuss a policy and compromise for differing opinions, before pushing it through, has to be a good thing - IMO.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Assuming all of the coalition partners will support the coalition, on every vote, is unwise.

Having to discuss a policy and compromise for differing opinions, before pushing it through, has to be a good thing - IMO.

I'd never assume anything of the sort. And that, is exactly what MMP is all about. So I'm not sure what your prob with the outcome is, other than it's obviously not the one you were hoping for. :msn-wink:

[YellowDog]

I'd never assume anything of the sort. And that, is exactly what MMP is all about. So I'm not sure what your prob with the outcome is, other than it's obviously not the one you were hoping for. :msn-wink:

And I'm not sure what you problem is either or why you think that has anything to do with MMP. I said something positive and come out with that - lol

Have a good day :)

[Crasherfromwayback]

The Aussies summed it up pretty well:


And I'm not sure what you problem is either or why you think that has anything to do with MMP. I said something positive and come out with that - lol

Have a good day :)

Not sure what you think is/was so positive about your post regarding what Aussies wankers had to say sorry mate? And like I said, not like they haven't had FIVE diff PM's in 5 fucking years! Hardly makes them the best to comment on our state of affairs eh?

I'll def have a good day too. I've had an xtra spring in my step since Thurs night.

[Ocean1]

The Aussies summed it up pretty well:

The one thing I like about Aussies, they have an ingrained aversion to PC bullshit.

And that headline absolutely nailed it. :laugh:

[Crasherfromwayback]

And that headline absolutely nailed it. :laugh:

Not really. They need a pic of the Nat supporters if they want to show us the real losers. :msn-wink:

[Woodman]

Not really. They need a pic of the Nat supporters if they want to show us the real losers. :msn-wink:

The losers will be the people who voted labour so they could now miraculously afford to buy a house.

[Crasherfromwayback]

The losers will be the people who voted labour so they could now miraculously afford to buy a house.

Lol. You're such a fuckwit. I actually have a nice place to call home, but I'd also really like others to one day be able to afford one. Must make me a loser I guess. You Stupid Cunt.

[oldrider]

Interesting little charade by Winston - it doesn't really matter who is the government anyway!

Unless they take back control of the monetary system - they will just do a variation of the same old same old! (like shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic!)

Time will reveal all and they have a little under three years left - interesting if nothing else! :corn:

[Crasherfromwayback]

Interesting little charade by Winston - it doesn't really matter who is the government anyway!

Unless they take back control of the monetary system - they will just do a variation of the same old same old! (like shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic!)



Dude, Winnie and Lab are the only ones that have publicly said things need to change around the current neo liberal system. Please pay attention.

[YellowDog]

Not sure what you think is/was so positive about your post regarding what Aussies wankers had to say sorry mate? And like I said, not like they haven't had FIVE diff PM's in 5 fucking years! Hardly makes them the best to comment on our state of affairs eh?

I'll def have a good day too. I've had an xtra spring in my step since Thurs night.

I still don't get how you come to the conclusions about me that you do. I found the Aussie headline highly amusing, that's all. I wasn't making a statement. No idea you could see how what I said about the coalition partners, having to compromise to get bills passed, as being anything but positive. Agree about change being over due.

BUT it would have been nicer if the country got the chance to vote for what they are actually getting:

I guess we'll have to disagree on that one :yes:

Happy for you that you have a spring in your step :)

[Crasherfromwayback]

Happy for you that you have a spring in your step :)

That attachment you added in your post, is fucking so laughable, and it shows you don't actually understand MMP at all.

[eldog]

From a business perspective most of the customers we have preferred to have kept the status quo.
boring yes but no surprises there.

general slowing down now while they wait to see economic direction.:whistle:

[YellowDog]

That attachment you added in your post, is fucking so laughable, and it shows you don't actually understand MMP at all.

Not my attachment, not my words or my opinion, just an alternative perspective.

Agree it's laughable, that's why I posted it.

I don't like or agree with MMP. No law against it (yet).

Nats shat on WP, last time around, from a great height. This is payback time for the old codger and also his swan song.

I enjoy politics and find it an entertaining subject. That's my right and privilege.

If I can get free tuition fees for the first year, I just might go and do a further education course. Always fancied being called 'Dr' :lol:

[Crasherfromwayback]

I don't like or agree with MMP.

Why not? And why would you like to revert to FPTP?

[YellowDog]

Why not? And why would you like to revert to FPTP?

Because I strongly believe that the role of an MP needs to be done by someone elected by the people.

Too many PC academic twats (in all parties) get to be MPs and speak for their party and not the people. I don't agree that the party should be able to decide, as this lacks transparency, and can be used to promote hidden agendas.

On the flip side, 3 years isn't long enough to change anything for the good and they can be just as quickly booted out.

Going for a ride now.

TTFN.

[Crasherfromwayback]

On the flip side, 3 years isn't long enough to change anything for the good and they can be just as quickly booted out.

.

Well, there's something we can agree on!

[Woodman]

Dude, Winnie and Lab are the only ones that have publicly said things need to change around the current neo liberal system. Please pay attention.

We will see what the market says........

[Swoop]

Should we start a "broken promises" list?

We already have:
1: Tax on water = broken.
2:

[Ocean1]

Should we start a "broken promises" list?

We already have:
1: Tax on water = broken.
2:

It's the left's specialty, they've got fuck all else to offer.

For my part I'll be quietly making sure that none of the extra money they'll be spending is mine.

[Katman]

Should we start a "broken promises" list?

We already have:
1: Tax on water = broken.
2:

Fucks sake, you moan if a tax is being introduced and then you moan if it isn't introduced.

Get a fucking grip.

Fuckwit.

[YellowDog]

We will see what the market says........

You can't have your cake AND eat it!

NZ = small right wing capitalist economy. It's not wealthy enough to be anything else, unless it drops the green thing and starts mining/quarrying/drilling its vast wealth in natural resources (Aussie style). Jacinda wants to reinvent the wheel, because she thinks, whilst her style of policies has failed everywhere else in the world, for similar sized economies, she'll make them work.

When a small capitalist country, like NZ, starts spending money on social projects that the country can't afford, the markets will descend into free-fall, to find a level appropriate to the new economic model. We'll see what that is, once the spending starts. No point saying "I told you so", as it is Economics 101. This adjustment is well overdue.

The people of New Zealand (some of them) have made the decision that, social neglect has reached the point where attention to it is far more important than international standing, foreign investment, and not borrowing vast amounts of money the country can't afford to pay back. Let's all respect that decision and at least give them a chance.

There's not a lot of cash in NZ, so policies that discourage foreign investment, will be a serious mistake. Interest rates, taxation, and blatant racism, need to be considered seriously, prior to implementation. Hiring Bill English, as a finance consultant, might be a good idea. He's been pretty good on that front.

This won't be a bad thing for all, so let's just see where it goes. A nice bit of resulting hyper-inflation will give many of us relatively free houses. Not the no-hopers though, they'll still be sucking off the economy, but that goes with the territory and they will have even less motivation to get off their arses.

ANOTHER PLUS - NZ will be far more attractive place to do business with, with the currency being 5% - 10% cheaper (which is a good thing). AND as a strong exporter, with free trade agreements around the world, you never know, it might just work!

No idea as to how it will actually all play out, but it will certainly be fun to watch. I can't wait to see WP/GREENS fighting the socialist stuff out.

There's no such thing as bad news, if you have the right attitude :yes:

[Brian d marge]

You can't have your cake AND eat it!

NZ = small right wing capitalist economy. It's not wealthy enough to be anything else, unless it drops the green thing and starts mining/quarrying/drilling its vast wealth in natural resources (Aussie style). Jacinda wants to reinvent the wheel, because she thinks, whilst her style of policies has failed everywhere else in the world, for similar sized economies, she'll make them work.

When a small capitalist country, like NZ, starts spending money on social projects that the country can't afford, the markets will descend into free-fall, to find a level appropriate to the new economic model. We'll see what that is, once the spending starts. No point saying "I told you so", as it is Economics 101. This adjustment is well overdue.

The people of New Zealand (some of them) have made the decision that, social neglect has reached the point where attention to it is far more important than international standing, foreign investment, and not borrowing vast amounts of money the country can't afford to pay back. Let's all respect that decision and at least give them a chance.

There's not a lot of cash in NZ, so policies that discourage foreign investment, will be a serious mistake. Interest rates, taxation, and blatant racism, need to be considered seriously, prior to implementation. Hiring Bill English, as a finance consultant, might be a good idea. He's been pretty good on that front.

This won't be a bad thing for all, so let's just see where it goes. A nice bit of resulting hyper-inflation will give many of us relatively free houses. Not the no-hopers though, they'll still be sucking off the economy, but that goes with the territory and they will have even less motivation to get off their arses.

ANOTHER PLUS - NZ will be far more attractive place to do business with, with the currency being 5% - 10% cheaper (which is a good thing). AND as a strong exporter, with free trade agreements around the world, you never know, it might just work!

No idea as to how it will actually all play out, but it will certainly be fun to watch. I can't wait to see WP/GREENS fighting the socialist stuff out.

There's no such thing as bad news, if you have the right attitude :yes:U do realize hyper inflation hits people on fixed incomes ..... Such as pensions

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Woodman]

You can't have your cake AND eat it!

NZ = small right wing capitalist economy. It's not wealthy enough to be anything else, unless it drops the green thing and starts mining/quarrying/drilling its vast wealth in natural resources (Aussie style). Jacinda wants to reinvent the wheel, because she thinks, whilst her style of policies has failed everywhere else in the world, for similar sized economies, she'll make them work.

When a small capitalist country, like NZ, starts spending money on social projects that the country can't afford, the markets will descend into free-fall, to find a level appropriate to the new economic model. We'll see what that is, once the spending starts. No point saying "I told you so", as it is Economics 101. This adjustment is well overdue.

The people of New Zealand (some of them) have made the decision that, social neglect has reached the point where attention to it is far more important than international standing, foreign investment, and not borrowing vast amounts of money the country can't afford to pay back. Let's all respect that decision and at least give them a chance.

There's not a lot of cash in NZ, so policies that discourage foreign investment, will be a serious mistake. Interest rates, taxation, and blatant racism, need to be considered seriously, prior to implementation. Hiring Bill English, as a finance consultant, might be a good idea. He's been pretty good on that front.

This won't be a bad thing for all, so let's just see where it goes. A nice bit of resulting hyper-inflation will give many of us relatively free houses. Not the no-hopers though, they'll still be sucking off the economy, but that goes with the territory and they will have even less motivation to get off their arses.

ANOTHER PLUS - NZ will be far more attractive place to do business with, with the currency being 5% - 10% cheaper (which is a good thing). AND as a strong exporter, with free trade agreements around the world, you never know, it might just work!

No idea as to how it will actually all play out, but it will certainly be fun to watch. I can't wait to see WP/GREENS fighting the socialist stuff out.

There's no such thing as bad news, if you have the right attitude :yes:

Thats a fucking good post.......

[Crasherfromwayback]

Should we start a "broken promises" list?

We already have:
1: Tax on water = broken.
2:


It's the left's specialty, they've got fuck all else to offer.

For my part I'll be quietly making sure that none of the extra money they'll be spending is mine.

Guess it's better than not mentioning any GST increase in the run up to the election, then raising the GST rate right after it eh? Maybe you prefered that? Being arse raped right off the bat??

[Ocean1]

U do realize hyper inflation hits people on fixed incomes ..... Such as pensions

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

You do realise that pensions are indexed to wages?

Not that it matters much if the tooth fairy income/asset tests for eligibility...

[Ocean1]

Guess it's better than not mentioning any GST increase in the run up to the election, then raising the GST rate right after it eh? Maybe you prefered that? Being arse raped right off the bat??

You're right, when they found labour had left the cupboards bare in the face of the global recession I'd have rather they just stopped paying dole bludgers altogether instead.

And if you think that was an arse raping you're going to just hate what comes next.

[Swoop]

Fucks sake, you moan if a tax is being introduced and then you moan if it isn't introduced.

Get a fucking grip.

Fuckwit.

Sadly you disrespect my right to represent the "leftist/labour/democrat" way of doing buisness. Protesting, moaning rioting in the streets when you don't get your way is the accepted practice, don't cha know!

You, being a professional moaning wanker, should know this already.

[YellowDog]

This is for Crasher, to show there's no hard feelings:

[Katman]

Sadly you disrespect my right to represent the "leftist/labour/democrat" way of doing buisness.

Pick up your bottom lip Princess.

[Brian d marge]

You do realise that pensions are indexed to wages?

Not that it matters much if the tooth fairy income/asset tests for eligibility...Actually , I had forgotten that , not that it helped the germans much and yes if the tooth fairy continues to be involved things just get worse

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Swoop]

Pick up your bottom lip Princess.

Not likely to happen Gay-boy.
You'd probably want to put your cock in, like with your normal red-rep requests for faggotry action.

[husaberg]

You're right, when they found labour had left the cupboards bare in the face of the global recession I'd have rather they just stopped paying dole bludgers altogether instead.

And if you think that was an arse raping you're going to just hate what comes next.
Thats utter horsehit why not show some figures to back it up?

[Ocean1]

Thats utter horsehit why not show some figures to back it up?

Which particular fact did you have a problem with?

[husaberg]

Which particular fact did you have a problem with?
It was the total lack of facts i had an issue with.............



On November 8, 2008, John Key's new National-led government inherited an economy with low unemployment, budget surpluses and low debt.
The government inherited debt of $10.2bn, but borrowed heavily in subsequent years. Debt is now $61.8bn - six times what it was.
When National took office in 2008, annual net migration was sitting at just 4,700. in 2017, it hit record levels of at 72,500, with no signs of abating.

[eldog]

It was the total lack of facts i had an issue with.............

Hasnt stopped cassina :yes:

[Crasherfromwayback]

Thats utter horsehit why not show some figures to back it up?


Which particular fact did you have a problem with?


It was the total lack of facts i had an issue with.............

Yep. Need some toilet paper for that mouth there, Ocean1. Talking a fair old amount of shit. And to wank on about a water tax, that'd more than likely not even effect you. vs raising GST which effects every one, on everything? Fuck off.

[YellowDog]

Where's Mashman?

He's an excellent Marxist and would value is take on all this stuff.

[gsxr]

"
On November 8, 2008, John Key's new National-led government inherited an economy with low unemployment, budget surpluses and low debt.
The government inherited debt of $10.2bn, but borrowed heavily in subsequent years. Debt is now $61.8bn - six times what it was.
When National took office in 2008, annual net migration was sitting at just 4,700. in 2017, it hit record levels of at 72,500, with no signs of abating. "

http://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/debtclock/newzealand

That isnt a small debt.

[husaberg]

Where's Mashman?

He's an excellent Marxist and would value is take on all this stuff.
Mashman stood as an mp in the last election and got 214 votes.... i are guessing at least one of these was his own...
If he had 22495 more votes he could have been an MP;)

[Luckylegs]

The losers will be the people who voted labour so they could now miraculously afford to buy a house.

Odd. I voted (not national) in the hope that others might be able to afford to buy a house.

Fuck this world is full of selfish cunts

[Ocean1]

It was the total lack of facts i had an issue with.............

All spin.

The facts remain: Labour blew the tax from the highest revenue years in NZ history. Spent the lot. And there certainly was a GFC, I'm sure you remember, it was fairly widely reported, and with zero savings and with cutting non essential (dole) spending likely to result in unattractive whining then borrowing money was pretty much a necessity. Borrowing well less than most OECD countries was seen in hindsight by actual economists as a pretty good performance.

All clear?

[Ocean1]

Yep. Need some toilet paper for that mouth there, Ocean1. Talking a fair old amount of shit. And to wank on about a water tax, that'd more than likely not even effect you. vs raising GST which effects every one, on everything? Fuck off.

When you find yourself disagreeing with facts it's generally recognised as a good idea to review your belief system.

[husaberg]

All spin.

The facts remain: Labour blew the tax from the highest revenue years in NZ history. Spent the lot. And there certainly was a GFC, I'm sure you remember, it was fairly widely reported, and with zero savings and with cutting non essential (dole) spending likely to result in unattractive whining then borrowing money was pretty much a necessity. Borrowing well less than most OECD countries was seen in hindsight by actual economists as a pretty good performance.

All clear?
Spin lol. thses are cold hard facts.

On November 8, 2008, John Key's new National-led government inherited an economy with low unemployment, budget surpluses and low debt.
The government inherited debt of $10.2bn, but borrowed heavily in subsequent years. Debt is now $61.8bn - six times what it was.
When National took office in 2008, annual net migration was sitting at just 4,700. in 2017, it hit record levels of at 72,500, with no signs of abating.

So where is your facts. BTW the GFC first occured when Labour was in Goverment.:shutup:

[TheDemonLord]

Where's Mashman?

He's an excellent Marxist and would value is take on all this stuff.

But Marxists don't value anything :laugh::laugh::laugh:

[YellowDog]

"
On November 8, 2008, John Key's new National-led government inherited an economy with low unemployment, budget surpluses and low debt.
The government inherited debt of $10.2bn, but borrowed heavily in subsequent years. Debt is now $61.8bn - six times what it was.
When National took office in 2008, annual net migration was sitting at just 4,700. in 2017, it hit record levels of at 72,500, with no signs of abating. "

http://www.nationaldebtclocks.org/debtclock/newzealand

That isnt a small debt.

Nah really.... it is very small debt indeed.

We are in a world economy and got through the GFC relatively unscathed. Many developed countries are completely screwed, beyond recovery.

The country needed migration, as it was disappearing up its own arsehole, with no one to pay taxes to support the older generation.

Immigration was very tightly controlled, except for a huge back door, that was gaping wide open. Quite dumb really. Lots of valuable people were rejected, with far less desirables, looking to milk, rather than produce, were let in by the boat load. An absolute shambles. Heads should have rolled.

Does anyone on here believe that the new government understands the primary issues more than the last one?

I don't consider Winston and Jacinda to have any idea at all. Just lots of ignorant generalisations. They don't know what they don't know and there is no chance of qualified advisers available to help them out.

I guess that if you say anything with enough passion and perceived conviction, it must be true.

It's called politics :yawn:

[Woodman]

Odd. I voted (not national) in the hope that others might be able to afford to buy a house.

Fuck this world is full of selfish cunts

Would be fantastic if it was easy, but generally it never has been. My point was that labour won't (can't) change that overnight, nor can they change that in the next 20 plus years.

[YellowDog]

Would be fantastic if it was easy, but generally it never has been. My point was that labour won't (can't) change that overnight, nor can they change that in the next 20 plus years.

Lowering the LVR to 10% and 5%, for first time buyers, might help a lot of people now and give others hope for the future :yes:

[Crasherfromwayback]

When you find yourself disagreeing with facts it's generally recognised as a good idea to review your belief system.

Best you have a look in the mirror then matey. You're still talking shit.

[Woodman]

See what happens when we get a labour government. The All Blacks lose, and this is just the start.

[YellowDog]

Interesting to read that the Czechs now have a leader, whom polled less than 30% of the vote:

Ano (Yes): 29.6%
Freedom and Free Democracy party (SPD) : 10.6%
Civic Democratic party: 11.3%
The Czech Pirate Party: 10.8%
Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSCM): 7.8%
Social Democrats (CSSD): 7.3%

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/the-latest-centrist-babis-leads-early-results-in-czech-vote/2017/10/21/f3fe7df2-b666-11e7-9b93-b97043e57a22_story.html?utm_term=.e88578b761bf

[nerrrd]

See what happens when we get a labour government. The All Blacks lose, and this is just the start.

Not like 'lucky' John Key, with the GFC, pike river, and three major earthquakes.*

*the point being there's no causal relationship here, move along

There won't be any fundamental change I'm guessing, for all the reasons smarter people on here understand better than me. Just more fiddling around the edges. OK so Winston was in the forefront while 'coalition idol' was being played out, but Labour's still got the most control over things, and so far I don't see any concrete evidence that they'll be any less centrist than National. Given Jacinda's lack of experience I can't see that changing, others will be driving things behind the scenes.

So what spending there is may shift towards health and education, but given the horror stories coming out of health especially (since the current model appears to be collapsing around it's own ankles) that's probably a good thing.

And if the government falls over we'lll just have another election and the Nats will be back anyway. Same shit, different day.

[Ocean1]

given the horror stories coming out of health especially (since the current model appears to be collapsing around it's own ankles) that's probably a good thing.

Got any numbers to go with that dude?

Outside of the number of media feeding frenzy quotes from insiders with a vested interest, obviously...

[Ocean1]

And so it begins: https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/98122008/kermadec-ocean-sanctuary-put-on-ice-by-nz-first-catching-greens-unaware :laugh:

[YellowDog]

And so it begins: https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/98122008/kermadec-ocean-sanctuary-put-on-ice-by-nz-first-catching-greens-unaware :laugh:

The Greens can wait until he disappears down that mine shaft, never to be seen again, before getting back on track. Chances of the old codger making it, back out of there, must be quite slim.

Jacinda could learn a thing or two from them too: https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/ardern-rejects-scope-of-new-zealand-kingmakers-immigration-cuts/ar-AAtN1mk?ocid=spartandhp

Not going to cut immigration? - Wait until his down that mine shaft, before you start changing his tune for him :lol:

I love politics and all of the parties (except Colin Craig) :yes:

[nerrrd]

Got any numbers to go with that dude?

Outside of the number of media feeding frenzy quotes from insiders with a vested interest, obviously...

'Insiders with a vested interest', 'Professionals at the coalface who actually know what's going on and have a duty of care'...'po-tay-to', 'po-tah-to' :bleh:

Just wait until the docs start telling the DHBs, 'no, I can't work extra shifts because it's against my Hippocratic (or whatever it is now) oath'. No coincidence it was a NZer who sponsored that change.

The sky is falling, the sky is falling...!!!

[husaberg]

Got any numbers to go with that dude?

Outside of the number of media feeding frenzy quotes from insiders with a vested interest, obviously...
One in nine Kiwis are not getting the GP care they need because they cannot afford it, Ministry of Health survey figures show.
The latest New Zealand Health Survey estimates more than 500,000 people have unmet healthcare needs because of the cost of a GP visit.
The figure has remained constant since 2011, and Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners president Tim Malloy warned the risks of patients avoiding doctors' visits for years could result in greater inequity in healthcare

He blamed the problem on what he said was an annual funding gap of about $45 million, created by a funding formula based on enrolment numbers, rather than on the number of times a practice saw its patients.
"The formula they use to correct for each year is fundamentally flawed," he said.


Survey of almost 6000 health workers found:
90% Say the health system doesn’t have the staff and resourcerequired to give New Zealanders the healthcare they need when they need it.
61% Say New Zealanders access to health care over the last fiveyears has decreased.
72% Say their workload and work pressures aren’t reasonable.
84% Say their workload and work pressures have increased overthe last five years.
90% Say the Government’s current level of health funding isaffecting New Zealanders’ access to healthcare.
82% Say the Government’s current level of health funding isaffecting their workload and work pressure.

A 2016 workforce survey by the Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners found 44 per cent of all GPs plan to retire within 10 years – up from 36 per cent just two years ago.
Otago Medical School associate professor Sue Pullon​ said the smpending shortage could be traced back to the 1990s, when annual positions in GP training were halved from 100 to 50.

. Health professionals make difficult ethical decisions about life and death – treatment or no treatment – and this requires considerable judgment, autonomy, specialisation and knowledge. Yet, under-funding and restricted resources mean the service runs largely on goodwilll. Could this be the reason we have experienced ongoing strike action by junior doctors since 2006? Is it why senior doctors have also threatened industrial action? Perhaps it is the reason our health service relies so heavily on internationally-trained medics – over 40 per cent at last count and the highest level of any country in the OECD.
<strike>
</strike>NZ also relies on the highest rate of internationally-qualified nurses (at 25 per cent) in the OECD.
<strike></strike>

[husaberg]

http://www.watchme.co.nz/entertainment/like-mike/whats-wrong-with-labour/

http://www.watchme.co.nz/entertainment/like-mike/hard-work/

http://www.watchme.co.nz/entertainment/like-mike/when-hosking-met-jacinda/

http://www.watchme.co.nz/entertainment/like-mike/election-golden-showers/

http://www.watchme.co.nz/entertainment/like-mike/why-my-love-for-john-isnt-flagging/

http://www.watchme.co.nz/entertainment/like-mike/why-are-new-zealanders-dumb/

[Ocean1]

One in nine Kiwis are not getting the GP care they need because they cannot afford it, Ministry of Health survey figures show.
The latest New Zealand Health Survey estimates more than 500,000 people have unmet healthcare needs because of the cost of a GP visit.
The figure has remained constant since 2011, and Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners president Tim Malloy warned the risks of patients avoiding doctors' visits for years could result in greater inequity in healthcare

He blamed the problem on what he said was an annual funding gap of about $45 million, created by a funding formula based on enrolment numbers, rather than on the number of times a practice saw its patients.
"The formula they use to correct for each year is fundamentally flawed," he said.


Survey of almost 6000 health workers found:
90% Say the health system doesn’t have the staff and resourcerequired to give New Zealanders the healthcare they need when they need it.
61% Say New Zealanders access to health care over the last fiveyears has decreased.
72% Say their workload and work pressures aren’t reasonable.
84% Say their workload and work pressures have increased overthe last five years.
90% Say the Government’s current level of health funding isaffecting New Zealanders’ access to healthcare.
82% Say the Government’s current level of health funding isaffecting their workload and work pressure.

A 2016 workforce survey by the Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners found 44 per cent of all GPs plan to retire within 10 years – up from 36 per cent just two years ago.
Otago Medical School associate professor Sue Pullon​ said the smpending shortage could be traced back to the 1990s, when annual positions in GP training were halved from 100 to 50.

. Health professionals make difficult ethical decisions about life and death – treatment or no treatment – and this requires considerable judgment, autonomy, specialisation and knowledge. Yet, under-funding and restricted resources mean the service runs largely on goodwilll. Could this be the reason we have experienced ongoing strike action by junior doctors since 2006? Is it why senior doctors have also threatened industrial action? Perhaps it is the reason our health service relies so heavily on internationally-trained medics – over 40 per cent at last count and the highest level of any country in the OECD.
<strike>
</strike>NZ also relies on the highest rate of internationally-qualified nurses (at 25 per cent) in the OECD.
<strike></strike>

So outside of the media feeding frenzy quotes from insiders with a vested interest you got nothing.

We've done this before dude, health spending in real terms has increased more in the last decade than at any time in our history, you no listen.

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2010/10-01/23.htm

[Ocean1]

'Insiders with a vested interest', 'Professionals at the coalface who actually know what's going on and have a duty of care'...'po-tay-to', 'po-tah-to' :bleh:

Just wait until the docs start telling the DHBs, 'no, I can't work extra shifts because it's against my Hippocratic (or whatever it is now) oath'. No coincidence it was a NZer who sponsored that change.

The sky is falling, the sky is falling...!!!

They're certainly an uppity bunch.

There's a thing about health that most people completely miss: It's a cost that doesn't simply represent a diminishing return on expenditure, it's a cost that actually creates further expenditure. Health issues that a generation ago were untreatable are now being successfully treated, (often at a cost that simply wouldn't have been acceptable 10 years ago) and those patients WILL be back, requiring more expenditure. Fix them up again and...

[husaberg]

So outside of the media feeding frenzy quotes from insiders with a vested interest you got nothing.

We've done this before dude, health spending in real terms has increased more in the last decade than at any time in our history, you no listen.

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2010/10-01/23.htm
Btw you do realise those figures are for Labours increases rather than nationals they only came to power in November 2008.
By then the budgets for the next year were set.
https://i.memecaptain.com/gend_images/e2t_cQ.jpg
Funny Some of what you are so readliy dismissing is ministry of healths own figures retard:killingme
In case you missed it we have an aging population so the nats miniscule funding increases are not going far enough.
The best way to measure Government spending is to compare it to the size of the economy. And in this sense, an argument can be made that health funding has actually gone down in "real terms". This can be seen in the Budget analysis carried out by Victoria University's School of Government and the New Zealand Institute for Economic Research, which says "Real per capita spending in health will fall slightly the coming Budget year (-0.1 per cent), but over the forecast period is projected to fall to 7.5 per cent below current levels by 2021"




They're certainly an uppity bunch.

There's a thing about health that most people completely miss: It's a cost that doesn't simply represent a diminishing return on expenditure, it's a cost that actually creates further expenditure. Health issues that a generation ago were untreatable are now being successfully treated, (often at a cost that simply wouldn't have been acceptable 10 years ago) and those patients WILL be back, requiring more expenditure. Fix them up again and...

https://78.media.tumblr.com/55d9722c8e374f156838660ecbadd2ab/tumblr_mv4wmfnC4X1s0utpeo1_500.gif (https://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj-0sqp44LXAhVHyrwKHbq5D8wQjRwIBw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tumblr.com%2Ftagged%2Frpg%25 3A-let-them-eat-cake&psig=AOvVaw2SBnQgDw5UekvPVimHyQq4&ust=1508711726657991)

[Ocean1]

Funny Some of what you are so readliy dismissing is ministry of healths own figures retard:killingme

Yeah? Which items from your above confirmation bias trawl do you believe represents moh numbers?

[husaberg]

Yeah? Which items from your above confirmation bias trawl do you believe represents moh numbers?

One in nine Kiwis are not getting the GP care they need because they cannot afford it, Ministry of Health survey figures show.
The latest New Zealand Health Survey estimates more than 500,000 people have unmet healthcare needs because of the cost of a GP visit.
The figure has remained constant since 2011,

Funny how you personally feel national party figures are beyond questioning. yet people who actually work in the health system according to you are self interested idiots who know nothing about healthcare.

[eldog]

you guys should go to the ED dept on a Saturday arvo.
oh yes

see the drunk guys outside having a fight then get admitted for treatment.
Ahead of the people who have been waiting......

then get told you will see some specialist who you have seen leave hours ago......LOL

there really needs to be more transparent details on public health sector.
We should start with Salaries and 'benefits' from the top-down.

ever been to a private health clinic?
what sort of cars are the doctors driving? mini minors?

Dentists are another - you should check the hours....

I am not saying people should be worked hard, it just that most of NZ is struggling

[Grumph]

I am not saying people should be worked hard, it just that most of NZ is struggling

This is true. There's nothing like actual experience either yourself, a family member or friend having to go through the system to firstly, be diagnosed, then referred, then wait....to find out just how stretched and poorly resourced the health system actually is.

The "unable to afford doctors visit" is also sadly accurate. Particularly in the elderly.

But this would seen to be helpful in Mr Ocean's eyes as it will reduce the numbers needing help....

[Ocean1]

One in nine Kiwis are not getting the GP care they need because they cannot afford it, Ministry of Health survey figures show.
The latest New Zealand Health Survey estimates more than 500,000 people have unmet healthcare needs because of the cost of a GP visit.
The figure has remained constant since 2011,

Funny how you personally feel national party figures are beyond questioning. yet people who actually work in the health system according to you are self interested idiots who know nothing about healthcare.

I haven't mentioned the national party at all let alone their figures. Now who is it that's claiming moh figures show one in nine Kiwis can't afford a GP visit?

Nor did I call health care workers idiots. They are, however without a shadow of doubt interested in the taxpayer spending even more on healthcare than the already huge recent increases.

But none of that's going to influence your pet hatred for anything that threatens your beliefs, and I'm certainly not wasting my time with it.

[Ocean1]

This is true. There's nothing like actual experience either yourself, a family member or friend having to go through the system to firstly, be diagnosed, then referred, then wait....to find out just how stretched and poorly resourced the health system actually is.

The "unable to afford doctors visit" is also sadly accurate. Particularly in the elderly.

But this would seen to be helpful in Mr Ocean's eyes as it will reduce the numbers needing help....

See, if you can read that I'm in favour of helping fewer people then I guess it's only a small extra step to believing that the health system funding has been neglected.

Have another wee read, dude, it may suit you to believe that, but neither is actually correct.

[Brian d marge]

The numbers with bad teeth
Unbelievable

Appalachian centrefolds become desirable after one visit to CHCH

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[husaberg]

Got any numbers to go with that dude?

Outside of the number of media feeding frenzy quotes from insiders with a vested interest, obviously...


One in nine Kiwis are not getting the GP care they need because they cannot afford it, Ministry of Health survey figures show.
The latest New Zealand Health Survey estimates more than 500,000 people have unmet healthcare needs because of the cost of a GP visit.
The figure has remained constant since 2011, and Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners president Tim Malloy warned the risks of patients avoiding doctors' visits for years could result in greater inequity in healthcare

He blamed the problem on what he said was an annual funding gap of about $45 million, created by a funding formula based on enrolment numbers, rather than on the number of times a practice saw its patients.
"The formula they use to correct for each year is fundamentally flawed," he said.


Survey of almost 6000 health workers found:
90% Say the health system doesn’t have the staff and resourcerequired to give New Zealanders the healthcare they need when they need it.
61% Say New Zealanders access to health care over the last fiveyears has decreased.
72% Say their workload and work pressures aren’t reasonable.
84% Say their workload and work pressures have increased overthe last five years.
90% Say the Government’s current level of health funding isaffecting New Zealanders’ access to healthcare.
82% Say the Government’s current level of health funding isaffecting their workload and work pressure.

A 2016 workforce survey by the Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners found 44 per cent of all GPs plan to retire within 10 years – up from 36 per cent just two years ago.
Otago Medical School associate professor Sue Pullon​ said the smpending shortage could be traced back to the 1990s, when annual positions in GP training were halved from 100 to 50.

. Health professionals make difficult ethical decisions about life and death – treatment or no treatment – and this requires considerable judgment, autonomy, specialisation and knowledge. Yet, under-funding and restricted resources mean the service runs largely on goodwilll. Could this be the reason we have experienced ongoing strike action by junior doctors since 2006? Is it why senior doctors have also threatened industrial action? Perhaps it is the reason our health service relies so heavily on internationally-trained medics – over 40 per cent at last count and the highest level of any country in the OECD.
<strike>
</strike>NZ also relies on the highest rate of internationally-qualified nurses (at 25 per cent) in the OECD.
<strike></strike>


So outside of the media feeding frenzy quotes from insiders with a vested interest you got nothing.

We've done this before dude, health spending in real terms has increased more in the last decade than at any time in our history, you no listen.

http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2010/10-01/23.htm


They're certainly an uppity bunch.

There's a thing about health that most people completely miss: It's a cost that doesn't simply represent a diminishing return on expenditure, it's a cost that actually creates further expenditure. Health issues that a generation ago were untreatable are now being successfully treated, (often at a cost that simply wouldn't have been acceptable 10 years ago) and those patients WILL be back, requiring more expenditure. Fix them up again and...


Yeah? Which items from your above confirmation bias trawl do you believe represents moh numbers?


One in nine Kiwis are not getting the GP care they need because they cannot afford it, Ministry of Health survey figures show.
The latest New Zealand Health Survey estimates more than 500,000 people have unmet healthcare needs because of the cost of a GP visit.
The figure has remained constant since 2011,

Funny how you personally feel national party figures are beyond questioning. yet people who actually work in the health system according to you are self interested idiots who know nothing about healthcare.


I haven't mentioned the national party at all let alone their figures. Now who is it that's claiming moh figures show one in nine Kiwis can't afford a GP visit?

Nor did I call health care workers idiots. They are, however without a shadow of doubt interested in the taxpayer spending even more on healthcare than the already huge recent increases.

But none of that's going to influence your pet hatred for anything that threatens your beliefs, and I'm certainly not wasting my time with it.
The ministry of healths own survey.

The latest New Zealand Health Survey estimates more than 500,000 people have unmet healthcare needs because of the cost of a GP visit.
http://www.health.govt.nz/publication/annual-update-key-results-2015-16-new-zealand-health-survey
Really you never mentioned the national party or their figures really........
But don't worry the real figures are much worse

New research published today in the New Zealand Medical Journal reveals a staggering 25 per cent of adults are not able to get the primary health care they need, 16.5% of which missed out on a GP due to cost,


We've done this before dude, health spending in real terms has increased more in the last decade than at any time in our history, you no listen.


Then you tried to justify that statement using what was labours increased spending on healthcare you really are stupid.

[YellowDog]

I was looking at what the outside world thought of Jacina Ardern. Read a reasonable article at ft.com, with a video too.

So she was one of Tony Blair's policy advisers. I'm not sure if that is good or bad. Never liked the man, whom was a traitor to his party, as well as his country. People whom got in his way, with obstacles like 'the truth', disappeared and had their characters publicly shamed (as they do).

I have pasted the article below. It makes a big thing of the currency drop, which I don't, as it has been over valued for waaaay too long. The TPP think isn't very interesting, but I can see where they are coming from. As Trump has ditched it, it is no longer as meaningful.

The immigration policy seems fairly sensible, but that's before Winston spits the dummy.

I don't have a problem with letting the alliance see what they can change. The Housing/Health/Homelessness bullshit worries me, a bit, as she seems totally clueless about those and will just blow loads of cash, achieving nothing. Change and restructure are not the same thing and you can't do what you can't do (not sure she realises).

The areas where I hope she focusses on and goes full steam ahead, over and above the other trivia, are with the plan to force landlords to make their properties healthy & safe, and also with the indicated educational investment. I'm still in 2 minds about the first year of tertiary education, but it might prove to have some merit (I'll see what I can enroll for).

Also, kicking the central bank up the arse, will be a good thing. Working people (not drop-kick losers), deserved of a future, and should be able to borrow money with just a 5% - 10% deposit. The 20% LVR is unfair, prohibitive, and counter productive, to what the government wants to achieve.

"Jacinda, give the poor bastards a chance in life, instead of focussing on your unsustainable lefty money burning shit, and you just might get re-elected in 3 years and you won't need the senile old codger for support."

It's just a shame that I am too busy to be her adviser :hug:


Here's the article:
__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Jacinda Ardern set to become New Zealand PM

Former Tony Blair adviser forms Labour-led coalition with support from minor parties
Jacinda Ardern, left, is expected to take the top job with the support of Winston Peters' New Zealand First party © AFP/AP

October 19, 2017
by Edward White in Taipei and Jamie Smyth in Sydney

Jacinda Ardern is set to become the next prime minister of New Zealand, capping a spectacular rise to power just months after taking control of the opposition Labour party in the middle of an election campaign.Ms Ardern, 37, a former policy adviser to Tony Blair, will become one of her country’s youngest prime ministers and the third woman to lead a government after winning the support on Thursday of the nationalist New Zealand First party headed by Winston Peters.A final coalition deal is expected to be ratified by the Green party on Thursday, ushering in the first Labour-led coalition in almost a decade.“We aspire to be a government for all New Zealanders and one that will seize the opportunity to build a fairer, better New Zealand,” said Ms Ardern. She will head a centre-left government that is likely to refocus economic policy around delivering public services, toughening immigration and foreign ownership rules.New Zealand’s currency was down as much as 1.6 per cent against the greenback on Thursday, following weeks of negotiations, at one stage as low as $0.704.Ms Ardern said the coalition would seek to renegotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, which had been strongly supported by the previous National-led government. It would also focus on tackling a shortage of affordable housing, delivering public services and protecting the environment. Bronwyn Hayward, head of politics at the University of Canterbury, said: “The TPP has been quite a divisive issue in New Zealand and Labour will focus on renegotiating aspects related to foreign ownership of housing and land, as well as investor dispute mechanisms. ”The government was likely to ban offshore ownership of housing and seek to reduce immigration, which is running at record levels.A planned review of the Reserve Bank Act could result in an expanded role for the central bank, said Shamubeel Eaqub, an economist with Sense Partners. This could see the Reserve Bank of New Zealand “being directed to focus on not just inflation, but also much greater priority on exchange rate volatility and full employment”, Mr Eaqub said.Mr Peters, the leader of the minor party that was left holding the balance of power after the September 23 election failed to deliver a clear winner, said people had voted for change. The National party, which had led a centrist government since 2008, won 56 seats in the 120-seat parliament, Labour 46, New Zealand First nine, the Greens eight and the rightwing ACT one.Mr Peters has since been in talks with Bill English, the National party leader and incumbent prime minister, and the Labour leader.Ms Ardern’s rise followed a whirlwind election campaign that led to a Phoenix-like resurgence for Labour. ”Grant Duncan, associate professor at Massey University, said: “Ardern is an outwardly warm, engaging and intelligent person that has tapped into a desire for change. “But she is also capable of being tough and her remarkable rise shows that you underestimate her at your peril.”
__________________________________________________ _____________________________________

Under estimate her at your peril. I'd say that was virtually impossible :wacko:

[Ocean1]

The ministry of healths own survey.

Really you never mentioned the national party or their figures really........
But don't worry the real figures are much worse



Then you tried to justify that statement using what was labours increased spending on healthcare you really are stupid.

Fuck me, enough bullshit to choke a galloping gish horse.

And none of it even slightly addresses the fact that health funding has never been higher.

[husaberg]

Fuck me, enough bullshit to choke a horse.

And none of it even slightly addresses the fact that health funding has never been higher.
So you don't believe the ministry of heaths own figures
show us all the figures then that shows in real terms the healthcare funding has never been higher in real terms.

remember you posted this
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=333003&d=1508624168
Note this was Labours spending not nationals spending you deluded idiot
look at the dates.

The release of the figures follow leaked documents revealing proposals for wholesale changes to the governance and funding of district health boards.
It found Core Crown health expenditure nominally increased from about $13.1b in 2009-10 to about $15.6b in this financial year.
It was $485m lower than the expenditure growth required to maintain 2009-10 funding levels, taking into account inflation and population growth.


Its estimated that $2.3 billion was needed to restore funding for 2017/18 to 2009/10 levels. Only $0.8 billion was provided so the shortfall compared to 2010 is $1.4 billion.
This shortfall has steadily grown over those years. It means that the next Government will need to find well over $2 billion for 2018/19 if it wishes to restore the value of funding. • The Health Vote is forecast to rise slightly as a proportion of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), but only because of the pay equity settlement for care and support workers. If it had maintained the proportion of GDP it had in 2009/10, it would be $1.6 billion higher in 2017/18. • District Health Boards (DHBs) are underfunded by an estimated $107 million below what they need to cover increased costs and demographic changes. •

[Crasherfromwayback]

Fuck me, enough bullshit to choke a galloping gish horse.

And none of it even slightly addresses the fact that health funding has never been higher.

It matters not one flying fuck if funding has never been higher, if the need for more is rising at a much higher rate though eh?. It's called a shortfall. Bit like building 1000 houses a year, yet importing 73000 people a year, 95% of whom, want to live in Auckland. But no, keep importing Asians, who'll continue to vote National, because they let them in. Once you control the Auck vote, you'll gen have enough to get in despite what the rest of the country wants. Change. That's what we (you know, the majority) of Kiwis wanted. And do you know what happened? That's just what we finally got. So again, suck it up mate. Get another box of tissues...and get it all out before it eats you alive.

[Brian d marge]

Snip,. .A planned review of the Reserve Bank Act could result in an expanded role for the central bank

And at this point one realizes ....

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[eldog]

Snip,. .A planned review of the Reserve Bank Act could result in an expanded role for the central bank

And at this point one realizes ....

now that a lot of deadwood has been removed, we could Nationalise everything

[eldog]

This is true. There's nothing like actual experience either yourself, a family member or friend having to go through the system to firstly, be diagnosed, then referred, then wait....to find out just how stretched and poorly resourced the health system actually is.

The "unable to afford doctors visit" is also sadly accurate. Particularly in the elderly.

But this would seen to be helpful in Mr Ocean's eyes as it will reduce the numbers needing help....

disorganised was what I saw.
Hand holding

and only a couple of overworked people making decisions, the rest .......

however, a recent family member required emergency services, it actually worked as it should.
Just could inform patient a bit more about how long they want them stick around so planning could be done.
- Transport, food, recovery and help required. Turned out OK.

[jasonu]

One in nine Kiwis are not getting the GP care they need because they cannot afford it, Ministry of Health survey figures show.
The latest New Zealand Health Survey estimates more than 500,000 people have unmet healthcare needs because of the cost of a GP visit.
The figure has remained constant since 2011, and Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners president Tim Malloy warned the risks of patients avoiding doctors' visits for years could result in greater inequity in healthcare

He blamed the problem on what he said was an annual funding gap of about $45 million, created by a funding formula based on enrolment numbers, rather than on the number of times a practice saw its patients.
"The formula they use to correct for each year is fundamentally flawed," he said.


Survey of almost 6000 health workers found:
90% Say the health system doesn’t have the staff and resourcerequired to give New Zealanders the healthcare they need when they need it.
61% Say New Zealanders access to health care over the last fiveyears has decreased.
72% Say their workload and work pressures aren’t reasonable.
84% Say their workload and work pressures have increased overthe last five years.
90% Say the Government’s current level of health funding isaffecting New Zealanders’ access to healthcare.
82% Say the Government’s current level of health funding isaffecting their workload and work pressure.

A 2016 workforce survey by the Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners found 44 per cent of all GPs plan to retire within 10 years – up from 36 per cent just two years ago.
Otago Medical School associate professor Sue Pullon​ said the smpending shortage could be traced back to the 1990s, when annual positions in GP training were halved from 100 to 50.

. Health professionals make difficult ethical decisions about life and death – treatment or no treatment – and this requires considerable judgment, autonomy, specialisation and knowledge. Yet, under-funding and restricted resources mean the service runs largely on goodwilll. Could this be the reason we have experienced ongoing strike action by junior doctors since 2006? Is it why senior doctors have also threatened industrial action? Perhaps it is the reason our health service relies so heavily on internationally-trained medics – over 40 per cent at last count and the highest level of any country in the OECD.
<strike>
</strike>NZ also relies on the highest rate of internationally-qualified nurses (at 25 per cent) in the OECD.
<strike></strike>

How much is a GP visit?

[Brian d marge]

now that a lot of deadwood has been removed, we could Nationalise everythingOnly the currency .... And sandshoes there's work to be done.

Ps . I'm being serious hahaha


Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Crasherfromwayback]

How much is a GP visit?

Normally around $55.00. But if your GP, like mine, is as busy as fuck and you can't get in, a visit to the after hours emergency clinic is around $100.00. How many can afford that?

[Swoop]

The facts remain: Labour blew the tax from the highest revenue years in NZ history. Spent the lot.
Ahh. But we got a high-performance, low-maintenance, world class rail system which was demanded by the public and able to be used 24/7 by commuters and freight companies at exceptionally low costs in return!
:(

See what happens when we get a labour government. The All Blacks lose, and this is just the start.

They had to lose.
South Africa, Argentina, Wales and Australia formed a coalition and declared a moral victory!

[eldog]

Normally around $55.00. But if your GP, like mine, is as busy as fuck and you can't get in, a visit to the after hours emergency clinic is around $100.00. How many can afford that?

probably not many - I have no idea on this, community services card?
I was at the dentist a little while ago - a bloke came in and wanted to pay his bill, seems like social welfare were going to pay it but he didn't have his card, $10 a week I think.

but busy is relative, bit like airports - they schedule all the flights to come in batches with rest periods in between

[eldog]

Ahh. But we got a high-performance, low-maintenance, world class rail system which was demanded by the public and able to be used 24/7 by commuters and freight companies at exceptionally low costs in return!!

The freight trains definitely appear to be much longer

In Auckland the area is too narrow that trains service IMHO
and the parking areas are way too small and patrolled by thieves

reliability ?

recent travellers have suggested trains generally run on time, with same sort of breakdowns as the London Underground

[Katman]

Waaaahhhh!!!!


Waaaahhhh!!!!


Waaaahhhh!!!!

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/children-crying-isolated-white-background-91842096.jpg

[Brian d marge]

Normally around $55.00. But if your GP, like mine, is as busy as fuck and you can't get in, a visit to the after hours emergency clinic is around $100.00. How many can afford that?Here in Japan a filling is 25 dollars ( 3000 yen) a doctor is 20 ..and hospital is 25% of cost .....

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Brian d marge]

The freight trains definitely appear to be much longer

In Auckland the area is too narrow that trains service IMHO
and the parking areas are way too small and patrolled by thieves

reliability ?

recent travellers have suggested trains generally run on time, with same sort of breakdowns as the London UndergroundThe wrong snow , too much sunlight or rain , 11 min late due to points failure at Clapham junction?

Im impressed if NZ rail have reached the level of service offered by British rail

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[eldog]

:Offtopic:
The wrong snow , too much sunlight or rain , 11 min late due to points failure at Clapham junction?

Im impressed if NZ rail have reached the level of service offered by British rail

level of service similar, usually on time ish, the occasional line not available, different train but similar in that respect.

The amount of trains/people moved - Yeah, nah totally different.

but it is better than it was before.

preferred Berlin then London then Paris underground experience
Hong Kong and China was another experience - quite pleasant really
(haven't been to Japan)

still think London Oyster card is the best.

[Ocean1]

So you don't believe the ministry of heaths own figures
show us all the figures then that shows in real terms the healthcare funding has never been higher in real terms.

remember you posted this
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=333003&d=1508624168
Note this was Labours spending not nationals spending you deluded idiot
look at the dates.


Its estimated that $2.3 billion was needed to restore funding for 2017/18 to 2009/10 levels. Only $0.8 billion was provided so the shortfall compared to 2010 is $1.4 billion.
This shortfall has steadily grown over those years. It means that the next Government will need to find well over $2 billion for 2018/19 if it wishes to restore the value of funding. • The Health Vote is forecast to rise slightly as a proportion of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), but only because of the pay equity settlement for care and support workers. If it had maintained the proportion of GDP it had in 2009/10, it would be $1.6 billion higher in 2017/18. • District Health Boards (DHBs) are underfunded by an estimated $107 million below what they need to cover increased costs and demographic changes. •

Look at the graph fuckwit, none of the opinion, (some of it from labour sources) you're posting agrees with the simple fact that we're spending significantly more on health than ever.

And I didn't at any stage suggest that all of that was under a national govt.

So unbunch your panties before you launch into yet another completely unrelated gallop.

[Ocean1]

It matters not one flying fuck if funding has never been higher, if the need for more is rising at a much higher rate though eh?. It's called a shortfall.

There has never and will never be enough funding to fulfill expectations of health care.

Again, doesn't change the fact that the taxpayer is spending significantly more on health than ever before.

None of the bloated rhetoric claiming otherwise makes that a shortfall of anything other than infantile expectations.

[Grumph]

How much is a GP visit?

With the appropriate cards, $45. Without them at the same GP, $70.

Fillings from $110 - $200 plus depending on amount of work.

Tooth removal at DHB public clinic once you've realised you can't afford fillings - about $50 per tooth with the right cards.
This goes a long way to explaining Brian D'marg comment about Appalachian standard of teeth in ChCh...

[jasonu]

Normally around $55.00. But if your GP, like mine, is as busy as fuck and you can't get in, a visit to the after hours emergency clinic is around $100.00. How many can afford that?

Aren't kids and seniors free? Those that actually work for actual money can surely afford $50-$100. That leaves dole bludgers and other welfare spongers who already get free money and if that lot layed off the fags, booze, gear, Big Macs, $7 lattes and KFC for a bit I'm sure they would have more than enough for the occasional visit to the Quack.

[Grumph]

Aren't kids and seniors free? Those that actually work for actual money can surely afford $50-$100. That leaves dole bludgers and other welfare spongers who already get free money and if that lot layed off the fags, booze, gear, Big Macs, $7 lattes and KFC for a bit I'm sure they would have more than enough for the occasional visit to the Quack.

Kids uder I think 8 are free. Seniors, fuck no. Full price unless you qualify for a community services card - ie long term illness or disability.

Seriously? dole bludgers ? just when did you leave NZ ? DSW or whatever their current name is are better at sniffing out the reluctant to work and cutting the benefit than the Gestapo were at finding Jews - and quicker too.

[husaberg]

Got any numbers to go with that dude?

Outside of the number of media feeding frenzy quotes from insiders with a vested interest, obviously...


Look at the graph fuckwit, none of the opinion, (some of it from labour sources) you're posting agrees with the simple fact that we're spending significantly more on health than ever..

In real terms National has underfunded healthcare. They have funded in in real terms less than it was previously this is a fact. due to population increase aging population and increased wagess and opperating cost they have continuied to underfund healthcare
This is why you posted labours data by mistake thinking it proved your point it was an epic fail.






Got any numbers to go with that dude?

...
I gave all the figures you think you know better you retard


We've done this before dude, health spending in real terms has increased more in the last decade than at any time in our history, you no listen.
http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2010/10-01/23.htm


Look at the graph fuckwit, none of the opinion, (some of it from labour sources) you're posting agrees with the simple fact that we're spending significantly more on health than ever.

And I didn't at any stage suggest that all of that was under a national govt.
.

Yet you post data from labours term in power what part of that can you not understand. then claim you are talking about the last decade when National was in power.
But then claim you make no reference to National Fuck you need to sort yourself out

[Ocean1]

In real terms National has underfunded healthcare. They have funded in in real terms less than it was previously this is a fact. due to population increase aging population and increased wagess and opperating cost they have continuied to underfund healthcare
This is why you posted labours data by mistake thinking it proved your point it was an epic fail.






I gave all the figures you think you know better you retard

Yet you post data from labours term in power what part of that can you not understand.

Labour have been in power since 1950?

Go away.

[Ocean1]

Here's your failing health system: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/interactives/2017/july/mirror-mirror/

Ranks an abysmal 4th best.

[husaberg]

Here's your failing health system: file:///C:/Users/Mark/Downloads/Schneider_mirror_mirror_2017%20(1).pdf

Ranks an abysmal 4th best.
learn how to post a link

Labour have been in power since 1950?
Go away.
You are the one who is telling us all about nationals massive increase in healthcare spending in the last decade yet trying to use Labours data to attempt to show it.;)


We've done this before dude, health spending in real terms has increased more in the last decade than at any time in our history, you no listen.
http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2010/10-01/23.htm
This is from your link that shows what should be happening
http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/wp/2010/10-01/23.htm/twp10-01-056.gif

How about some real Data as expressed as a GDP for Nats healthcare underfunding you say doesn't exist
333032
Like Hoskings you are a real sore loser suck it up and swallow more of nationals bullshit

You're right, when they found labour had left the cupboards bare in the face of the global recession .

For the record The last Labour goverment produced nine consecutive Budget surpluses,NINE this was the strongest continuous economic growth since World War II and then on day one National comes in they start saying that labour had left the books in a dire state. What a load of Shit.

The Helen Clark-led Labour Government cut Government debt from 23 per cent when it came into power to 5 per cent

National Debt shot up under National, from 5 per cent when it came to power to nearly 25 per cent now today.

Yet despite this since in Government stopped contributions to the national super fund in 2009. Yes they stopped putting money aside to fund national super in the future.
National has also never been able to get the unemployment rate down to the 4 per cent mark achieved by Labour.

The Consumer Price Inflation (CPI) is now running at 2.2 per cent, and it is the very basics that are running higher.
According to the latest information, average hourly earnings rose just 1.3 per cent last year, 66 per cent of Kiwi workers got less than 2 per cent wage increase last year, and 45 per cent got no pay rise at all.

[Brian d marge]

Have word about economics it goes south real quick ....oh wait u are..



Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[jasonu]

Let the taxing begin.
I get a kick out of someone saying they will move out of Auckland to save maybe $20 extra a week for petrol.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11936852

[Voltaire]

Let the taxing begin.
I get a kick out of someone saying they will move out of Auckland to save maybe $20 extra a week for petrol.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11936852

And North Shore types moaning about they pay for trains they don't get.....who do they think paid for the Harbour Bridge....the tooth fairy?

[mada]

Most international cities have tolls, high petrol prices, etc..

Auckland fails with its shit public transport (mostly road based) that is not cheap compared to overseas equivalents.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Fuck Auckland. The rest of the country has been paying extra taxes for their shit for fucking decades.

[Woodman]

Let the taxing begin.
I get a kick out of someone saying they will move out of Auckland to save maybe $20 extra a week for petrol.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11936852

I like the comment about how you have to take a car to the airport because "who would take all their baggage on public transport"? :facepalm:

[eldog]

Fuck Auckland. The rest of the country has been paying extra taxes for their shit for fucking decades.

'bout time you guys built a wall and a gate, just north of South Auckland I reckon, would keep the whingers in.:cry:

But we can send our shit down your way if you like.

[eldog]

I like the comment about how you have to take a car to the airport because "who would take all their baggage on public transport"? :facepalm:

I took all my baggage on a tour of Europe - all on public transport - no worries

strangely I was dropped off at the airport in NZ by car.

[eldog]

Most international cities have tolls, high petrol prices, etc..

Auckland fails with its shit public transport (mostly road based) that is not cheap compared to overseas equivalents.

Auckland being spread out, it should have had a transport system like that in Melbourne or Sydney
Perth is supposed to be quite good for public transport (I haven't been there)

Trains spreadout and interconnection with buses

not a couple of lines FFS.

too late now.

[GazzaH]

Never too late! It takes leadership, forming and selling the vision, systematically putting things in place to achieve it, and managing the process competently throughout.

Oh and incentives ... which equates to profits and compensation for those who invest and participate in the process, despite opposition and cynicism from the naysayers.

The likes of Telford didn't do it just for the sheer love of engineering.

[mada]

Never too late! It takes leadership, forming and selling the vision, systematically putting things in place to achieve it, and managing the process competently throughout.

Oh and incentives ... which equates to profits and compensation for those who invest and participate in the process, despite opposition and cynicism from the naysayers.

The likes of Telford didn't do it just for the sheer love of engineering.

Takes a lot of $$$$ now to plan and build as all the nimbys now think their little tin shitbox house is worth $1 million +

More underground works then I guess

[mada]

Fuck Auckland. The rest of the country has been paying extra taxes for their shit for fucking decades.

I quite like the idea of councils being able to use GST from rates, council charges etc. for local infrastructure.... Central govt. doesn't deserve a cent of it.

[Swoop]

You voted for liarbour, so here come the taxes.

Not that you weren't warned this would happen.

[husaberg]

You voted for liarbour, so here come the taxes.

Not that you weren't warned this would happen.

If Auckland in the future gets charged extra money for fuel that the rest of the country curently subsidises, to pay for infrastructure the rest of the country also currently heavily subsidises, yet doesn’t use or need or want.
I honestly can't see the rest of the country shedding many tears over it. Afterall user pays is right wing ideal is it not?

It was National who adopted the practice of taking most the money from the road user charges and fuel levies that traditionally went to the local councils ,this money was what was used to repair the roads that the road user charges and fuel levies were actually generated on .
National instead raped the rural roading system to give this money to the “roads of national significance“ IE AUCKLAND.

[neels]

If Auckland in the future gets charged extra money for fuel that the rest of the country scurently ubsidises to pay for infrastructure the rest of the country also currently heavily subsidises, yet doesn’t use or need or want.
I honestly can't see the rest of the country shedding many tears over it. Afterall user pays is right wing ideal is it not?
Strangely, the right wing 'user pays' mentality doesn't seem to apply to building roads in Auckland so they can all drive with one person in one car on the motorway at 10kph, I have recently experienced this at 2pm on a weekday and it's just fucking stupid.

Imagine what the rates would be if they had to fund their own overconsumption of fossil fuels to drive from the suburbs to their place of work a ridiculous distance away, just so they can avoid the high density housing that actually makes sense for the size of the population, that cities in developed countries with sensible public transport systems have.

[Voltaire]

Fuck Auckland. The rest of the country has been paying extra taxes for their shit for fucking decades.

Really....last time I was in your small town all it seemed to do was Govt stuff, hardly what you call productive :lol:

I see they have got rid of electric buses and replaced them with.... 44 gallon drum roll...diesel buses.:msn-wink:

[husaberg]

Strangely, the right wing 'user pays' mentality doesn't seem to apply to building roads in Auckland so they can all drive with one person in one car on the motorway at 10kph, I have recently experienced this at 2pm on a weekday and it's just fucking stupid.

Imagine what the rates would be if they had to fund their own overconsumption of fossil fuels to drive from the suburbs to their place of work a ridiculous distance away, just so they can avoid the high density housing that actually makes sense for the size of the population, that cities in developed countries with sensible public transport systems have.
As far as i can make out the Auckland economy is based on driving to cafes to be seen at said cafes drinking coffee.
They need a large dense population density to both serve the coffee and observe the drinking as well as to drink the coffee to make it totally successful.
It’s a real shame that this coffee drinking does not actually directly correlate to either rugby or Rugby league success.

[mada]

You voted for liarbour, so here come the taxes.

Not that you weren't warned this would happen.

The tax lie is similar to the poverty lie.

Relative to the rest of the world we have sweet f all poverty. Relative to the rest of the world, especially Western countries we pay sweet f all tax.

[FJRider]

They need a large dense population density to both serve the coffee and observe the drinking as well as to drink the coffee to make it totally successful.


The question that needs to be asked ... how dense do the population need to be ... to live (for want of a better word) in Auckland ... ??? <_<

[FJRider]

The tax lie is similar to the poverty lie.

Relative to the rest of the world we have sweet f all poverty. Relative to the rest of the world, especially Western countries we pay sweet f all tax.

Half the current population have relatives in the rest of the world ... :lol:

[eldog]

The question that needs to be asked ... how dense do the population need to be ... to live (for want of a better word) in Auckland ... ??? <_<

Most of the population are dense.:crazy:

in auckland

[eldog]

As far as i can make out the Auckland economy is based on driving to cafes to be seen at said cafes drinking coffee.
They need a large dense population density to both serve the coffee and observe the drinking as well as to drink the coffee to make it totally successful.
It’s a real shame that this coffee drinking does not actually directly correlate to either rugby or Rugby league success.

It’s because we have enough spare time to do a couple of hours work in between coffee bing drinking.

akl population is so diverse and apathetic, they don’t support local clubs or events.

look at the crowds at games...... so many.
Only recently has the transport even remotely being up to the task.
then again we can watch it on tv/web why bother going to pay lots of $$$ to watch and then feel ripped off when buying food/drink and spend 10 or so minutes waiting in a food queue.

so no wonder rugby & league are falling behind up here.

i suspect if akl Council gets money back from govt or a fuel levy, then it won’t be long before other centres do the same.

i would like to see the fund become more accountable and spent in the areas it is supposed to.
i would also like to see that the jobs are done properly and are tested after guaranteed time to be up to a standard, repaired rather than the quick cheap chip seal over like current that lasts a few weeks or is so slippery when it rains causes accidents.

from what I hear and saw a while back South Island roads are much better, maybe it’s the coarser stone chip spec.

interested in your views on SI road specs

[eldog]

Half the current population have relatives in the rest of the world ... :lol:

They are coming to live in a town near you.:Oops:

[husaberg]

The question that needs to be asked ... how dense do the population need to be ... to live (for want of a better word) in Auckland ... ??? <_<
I initially thought it was a typo, then i realised it was a Freudianslip. So i left it in.
Your mother;)
<strike></strike>

[husaberg]

It’s because we have enough spare time to do a couple of hours work in between coffee bing drinking.

akl population is so diverse and apathetic, they don’t support local clubs or events.

look at the crowds at games...... so many.
Only recently has the transport even remotely being up to the task.
then again we can watch it on tv/web why bother going to pay lots of $$$ to watch and then feel ripped off when buying food/drink and spend 10 or so minutes waiting in a food queue.

so no wonder rugby & league are falling behind up here.

It would be all to easy to be apathetic over the Auckland sporting results



i suspect if akl Council gets money back from govt or a fuel levy, then it won’t be long before other centres do the same.
i would like to see the fund become more accountable and spent in the areas it is supposed to.
thats how it used to be only the heavy vehicle levies were spent where they were accrued and generated from National changed that.

i would also like to see that the jobs are done properly and are tested after guaranteed time to be up to a standard, repaired rather than the quick cheap chip seal over like current that lasts a few weeks or is so slippery when it rains causes accidents.

from what I hear and saw a while back South Island roads are much better, maybe it’s the coarser stone chip spec.

interested in your views on SI road specs
Yes we have corser chip, on most part due to the rainfall. inregards to fine chip they use finner chip on reseal jobs. something to do with seal adhesion
Grips not an issue here the roads here are roads are falling to bits due to the increased traffic but lower funding. The money is being siphoned off to latte land.

[eldog]

It would be all to easy to be apathetic over the Auckland sporting results

Yes we have corser chip, on most part due to the rainfall. inregards to fine chip they use finner chip on reseal jobs. something to do with seal adhesion
Grips not an issue here the roads here are roads are falling to bits due to the increased traffic but lower funding. The money is being siphoned off to latte land.

We spend a lot of money up here on crap repairs with a lot of money spent on H&S hand holding
Rather than the job and the result, often 2 weeks or less the repairs start falling apart.

or lots of loose chip to really piss you off on your ride

all for better road design/construction at the start, esp on high traffic loading areas.

[Grumph]

You voted for liarbour, so here come the taxes.

Not that you weren't warned this would happen.

It has amused me today to see the moaning from Auckland - the fuel prices I see quoted are at least 10c per litre lower than I pay here.

Welcome to fuel price equality...

[Crasherfromwayback]

I see they have got rid of electric buses and replaced them with.... 44 gallon drum roll...diesel buses.:msn-wink:

Who told you that?

[Crasherfromwayback]

I quite like the idea of councils being able to use GST from rates, council charges etc. for local infrastructure.... Central govt. doesn't deserve a cent of it.

Yep. Sounds good to me!

[Crasherfromwayback]

You voted for liarbour, so here come the taxes.

Not that you weren't warned this would happen.

Sorry mate. Even *if* certain extra taxes are introduced, surely it can't be as bad as National increasing GST right after the 2008 election, despite never mentioning a single word about doing so, in the run up to the election?

I mean...lets see...GST gets paid on every fucking thing you spend money on. Your fucking house (and you're no doubt spreading fear about CGT), petrol, food we need to survive. electricity, you fucking name it...and you want to wank on about a few extra taxes that may appear now? Seriously? When a rise in GST cripples every single cunt in NZ? Fuck off. Get a fucking grip.

[jasonu]

And North Shore types moaning about they pay for trains they don't get.....who do they think paid for the Harbour Bridge....the tooth fairy?

The bridge had toll booths so user pays.

[gsxr]

It has amused me today to see the moaning from Auckland - the fuel prices I see quoted are at least 10c per litre lower than I pay here.

Welcome to fuel price equality...

There is already a 5 cent tax on petrol the rest of the country pays for for roads for Auckland alone if it is actually apportioned to that or just goes into the big pot now. But that tax still exists even though many will never ever consider even visiting Auckland.
Everytime I have have spent in Auckland I have wasted a portion of my life

[Swoop]

If Auckland in the future gets charged extra money for fuel that the rest of the country curently subsidises, to pay for infrastructure the rest of the country also currently heavily subsidises, yet doesn’t use or need or want.
How quickly the regions forget the decades that Auckland was bled dry of road funding to prop up the rest of the country's roads. The spending on the motorway system is long overdue and is only just catching up now.
Personally I would like to see a policy of "no further spending on new roads" in Auckland, only maintaining what currently exists.
ALL other road funding gets diverted into public transport infrastructure.


As far as i can make out the Auckland economy is based on driving to cafes to be seen at said cafes drinking coffee.
You may need to get those glasses checked. Substantial industry and business is based in Auckland and failure of infrastructure would trickle on to the rest of the country.
It would be nice if a LOT of businesses would bugger off into the regions again and support those areas. Seriously.


The tax lie is similar to the poverty lie.
The approach of labour is that their tool kit only has one tool. They also like to use it.


Sorry mate. Even *if* certain extra taxes are introduced, surely it can't be as bad as National increasing GST right after the 2008 election, despite never mentioning a single word about doing so, in the run up to the election?
Absolutely, but if the coffers hadn't been emptied as their parting gift to NZ by Heilen Klerke and that cunt Cullen wasting it on a failed trainset, that would not have been needed.
It would be nice to see principles applied by labour, by reversing the GST decision (they ain't gonna do that) and other national decisions if they feel so aggrieved by them.

As for building 100,000 houses in 10yrs? That is one promise they will not keep either. Perhaps they don't realise the tradie shortage NZ has and foreign workers will be "Verboten!" by Winston.

Happy times ahead.

[husaberg]

c



You may need to get those glasses checked. Substantial industry and business is based in Auckland and failure of infrastructure would trickle on to the rest of the country.
It would be nice if a LOT of businesses would bugger off into the regions again and support those areas. Seriously.


Absolutely, but if the coffers hadn't been emptied as their parting gift to NZ by Heilen Klerke and that cunt Cullen wasting it on a failed trainset, that would not have been needed.
It would be nice to see principles applied by labour, by reversing the GST decision (they ain't gonna do that) and other national decisions if they feel so aggrieved by them.

.
Sorry to burst your bubble but Aucklands hardly an economic powerhouse, Aucklands GDP per capitia is barely above the national average.$58,717 vs $54,178.
Aucklands economy is substantially parasistic on the rest of the nation.
I would be intersted to see the figures to back up the asertion that Labour had emptied the coffers.
Quite the contary in fact they had paid off most of NZs substantial national debt, National spent the whole time borrowing adtitional money.

[eldog]

. The spending on the motorway system is long overdue and is only just catching up now..

It is far away from catching up.
The second Victoria tunnel was never implemented, like the northwestern which is in its second revision in ten years......

all planned for never ever put in properly.

bit like travelling anywhere out west:sleep:

for public transport you should check out the Sydney metro upgrade and extension 8.6 billion

www.sydneymetro.info

[eldog]

Sorry to burst your bubble but Auclkands hardly an econonic powerhouse Aucklands GDP per capitia is barely above the national average.$58,717 vs $54,178.
Aucklands economy is substantially parasistic on the rest of the nation.
I would be intersted to see the figures to back up the asertion that Labour had emptied the coffers.
Quite the contary in fact they had paid off most of NZs substaintial national debt, National spent the whole time borrowing adtitional money.

Would like to see GPD based on the number of employed people not just the number of people.
plenty of unemployed, children workers, i am sure we could exploit:argue:

[husaberg]

Would like to see GPD based on the number of employed people not just the number of people.
plenty of unemployed, children workers, i am sure we could exploit:argue:
As Aucklands uemployment figure is only .1% less than the natonal av it wouldn't effect the GDP much.;)

[eldog]

As Aucklands uemployment figure is only .1% less than the natonal av it wouldn't effect the GDP much.;)

you could have fooled me
there seems to endless people doing nothing in south Auckland - day and night

[Crasherfromwayback]

Read this.........

http://www.noted.co.nz/currently/politics/where-is-jacinda-arderns-honeymoon/

[oldrider]

Three years of "Yes Minister" government as all the newcomers seek out parliamentary advice from their public servant advisers - should be interesting at least! :corn:

[jasonu]

Read this.........

http://www.noted.co.nz/currently/politics/where-is-jacinda-arderns-honeymoon/

Boo fucking hoo.
We are well used to that over here with out new Prez. The lib media hasn't stopped since he got in.

[Grumph]

Three years of "Yes Minister" government as all the newcomers seek out parliamentary advice from their public servant advisers - should be interesting at least! :corn:

Don't think so...This lot have come in with actual ideas and seem prepared to change things. I look forward with interest to seeing how it's done.




Boo fucking hoo.
We are well used to that over here with out new Prez. The lib media hasn't stopped since he got in.

Take another look, the world media hasn't stopped pointing and laughing at him yet - and it's going to take more than we've seen so far to change that.

[husaberg]

you could have fooled me
there seems to endless people doing nothing in south Auckland - day and night
They are clearly coffee baristas working alternate shifts.
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/183438-The-2017-Election-Thread?p=1131068950#post1131068950

[Crasherfromwayback]

Boo fucking hoo.
We are well used to that over here with out new Prez. The lib media hasn't stopped since he got in.

Lol. If you think you can compare the welcome to Jacinda to Trump, you're fucking simple. One deserves it.

[Swoop]

for public transport you should check out the Sydney metro upgrade and extension 8.6 billion
I'm sure Sydney could use it.
I was using the London Underground recently, so comparing what exists there and what will happen once Crossrail opens, and with what Auckland (or Sydney) has...

NZ. Doing shit on the cheap, since "forever"...

[RDJ]

Just back from an assignment in Sydney

1. trains in evenings and weekends - scarce. Waits up to 45 minutes.
2. road maggot cycle lanes everywhere - unoccupied by the Lycra Brigade but no-one else allowed in them
3. Religion of Peace (TM) adherents all over the place... aggressively so, & they get right in your face if you're not enthusiastically onboard with Sydney's Sharia-complacency

I don't see Sydney as an example to emulate. That is all.

[oldrider]

Don't think so...This lot have come in with actual ideas and seem prepared to change things. I look forward with interest to seeing how it's done.

Especially interested in their plans for the reserve bank act etc and what priority they give it? :wait: It is in the "also-run" basket at present - watch this space! :msn-wink:

[eldog]

The bridge had toll booths so user pays.

only when your leaving Auckland...... they should have put it on the other way around and charged the earth

and one at Penrose... both ways

[eldog]

Just back from an assignment in Sydney

1. trains in evenings and weekends - scarce. Waits up to 45 minutes.
2. road maggot cycle lanes everywhere - unoccupied by the Lycra Brigade but no-one else allowed in them
3. Religion of Peace (TM) adherents all over the place... aggressively so, & they get right in your face if you're not enthusiastically onboard with Sydney's Sharia-complacency

I don't see Sydney as an example to emulate. That is all.


its what they plan to do.......

Its def not the place to emulate, but the idea that the trains could have been spread out over a bigger area like a spiders web

too late now

RoP? - its been a while since I have been there. I have an invitation to go back for a visit to a sick mate (been dying for ages) soon might be the right time. Can also check out the motorbike accessory shops but usually the prices are better here just not the selection

[eldog]

Three years of "Yes Minister" government as all the newcomers seek out parliamentary advice from their public servant advisers - should be interesting at least! :corn:

and Yes Prime Minister, takes me back......

[nerrrd]

c
Sorry to burst your bubble but Aucklands hardly an economic powerhouse, Aucklands GDP per capitia is barely above the national average.$58,717 vs $54,178.
Aucklands economy is substantially parasistic on the rest of the nation.
I would be intersted to see the figures to back up the asertion that Labour had emptied the coffers.
Quite the contary in fact they had paid off most of NZs substantial national debt, National spent the whole time borrowing adtitional money.

But we're talking income taxes/levies aren't we? Not GDP. Auckland has the biggest population by far. By far (there's 1.4 million of us). That's nearly four times the next biggest (Christchurch). I think it's a stretch to say that we (as in the citizens of Auckland) aren't paying our way. It's not like we can turn the city into a dairy farm, after all.

Oh and please stop judging the whole city by all the media luvvies you see/hear on tv/radio. They may live in Ponsonby and flit from cafe to cafe but the rest of us don't. I don't even like coffee. You're all so judge-y.

[husaberg]

But we're talking income taxes/levies aren't we? Not GDP. Auckland has the biggest population by far. By far (there's 1.4 million of us). That's nearly four times the next biggest (Christchurch). I think it's a stretch to say that we (as in the citizens of Auckland) aren't paying our way. It's not like we can turn the city into a dairy farm, after all.

Oh and please stop judging the whole city by all the media luvvies you see/hear on tv/radio. They may live in Ponsonby and flit from cafe to cafe but the rest of us don't. I don't even like coffee. You're all so judge-y.

Auckland dosn't pay its own way its subsidised by the rest of the country in regards to fuel and roading tax. which is what we were discussing
Most of auckland is also built on the best dairy farming country in the world.

[nerrrd]

Auckland dosn't pay its own way its subsidised by the rest of the country in regards to fuel and roading tax. which is what we were discussing
Most of auckland is also built on the best dairy farming country in the world.

But...


The state highway network has almost 11,000 kilometres of road, with 5981.3km in the North Island and 4924.4km in the South Island. It provides a vital link to almost 83,000km of local roads – 17,298.3km urban and 65,600.7km rural. The length of road per person in New Zealand is one of the highest in the world.

...so there's many more kilometres of roads in rural areas than in urban areas, but many more people in urban areas than rural (particularly Auckland). That suggests it's the other way around doesn't it? Plus in cities you burn a lot more fuel to get anywhere (particularly sitting in traffic in your SUV, which most city dwellers prefer these days.)

And I don't think farming the one tenth of the common ground I have access to in my flat is going to help our GDP.

[husaberg]

But...



...so there's many more kilometres of roads in rural areas than in urban areas, but many more people in urban areas than rural (particularly Auckland). That suggests it's the other way around doesn't it? Plus in cities you burn a lot more fuel to get anywhere (particularly sitting in traffic in your SUV, which most city dwellers prefer these days.)

And I don't think farming the one tenth of the common ground I have access to in my flat is going to help our GDP.
No buts about it Auckilnd roads are the most expensive per KM to build and maintain.


One of the Government's new roads of national significance is set to be the most expensive ever built anywhere in the world.Infrastructure New Zealand has calculated Auckland's proposed East West Link will cost $327 million per kilometre.
"It's an enormous amount of money on a very short link of dubious value that does a great deal of destruction to the natural environment," Greater Auckland author Patrick Reynolds says.
It's an arterial road linking State Highway One at Sylvia Park to State Highway 20, estimated to cost $1.8 billion.



Infrastructure New Zealand came up with the comparison but says while expensive, it will be worth it.
"Very important," Infrastructure New Zealand chief executive Stephen Selwood says. "We have another million people coming to Auckland by 2050 we really need to be getting on with providing transport infrastructure needed to support the cities growth."
National backed the plan last month, adding it to its roads of national significance, and promised it would be built if it's re-elected.


the money from the rural roads where the road user charges are being generated are having the levy money from both the fuel level and the RUC are having money siphoned off to go to Auckland so they can enjoy cheap petrol prices and not have to pay for they own roads repairs maintence and new builds..

[oldrider]

Auckland dosn't pay its own way its subsidised by the rest of the country in regards to fuel and roading tax. which is what we were discussing
Most of auckland is also built on the best dairy farming country in the world.

Auckland is there because economically it is more gratifyingly popular than any other place in NZ - the rest of NZ needs it probably more than even Auckland does!

[nerrrd]

Yeah but like I said before, as individuals Auckanders will be paying far more in fuel taxes than anyone else.

Commercially it's a whole different ball game I'm sure, although I suspect a fair chunk of those road user charges are trucks driving to and from...Auckland? Come to think of it there are one or two diesel cars/Buses/Trucks etc moving around Auckland every day.

[husaberg]

Yeah but like I said before, as individuals Auckanders will be paying far more in fuel taxes than anyone else.

Commercially it's a whole different ball game I'm sure, although I suspect a fair chunk of those road user charges are trucks driving to and from...Auckland? Come to think of it there are one or two diesel cars/Buses/Trucks etc moving around Auckland every day.
You can say it a hundred times more and then a thousand times again as well, but it will still be utter crap.
​If Auckland is indeed paying its fair share already why is it that they need to take funding from the rest of the country then?

[Graystone]

No buts about it Auckilnd roads are the most expensive per KM to build and maintain.

the money from the rural roads where the road user charges are being generated are having the levy money from both the fuel level and the RUC are having money siphoned off to go to Auckland so they can enjoy cheap petrol prices and not have to pay for they own roads repairs maintence and new builds..

That makes sense though, as surely they have the highest traffic density, and thus the highest amount of Tax and RUC generated per KM as well.

In any case, surely it is as much a disincentive to drive everywhere, as it is a fund-raising measure, they could gain roading funding the same was as any other regional council if it were purely about the funds.

[mada]

Toll the shit out of the motorways during peak hour traffic too. Put the money into better public transport.

Hopefully it might now be a goer given the previous Govt. was only too happy to sit on its hands and do nothing for new ideas until it came time to try and get votes.

Helen's Tunnel has been good for re-directing traffic but the significant problem IMO is that most Public Transport involves some trip around or near the CBD.

Need direct rail from West to South.

Would love to see Whenuapai turned into Commercial Airport too.

[pritch]

But...
...so there's many more kilometres of roads in rural areas than in urban areas, but many more people in urban areas than rural (particularly Auckland). That suggests it's the other way around doesn't it? .

No. The whole country had an additional tax added to the price of petrol to finance Auckland's roading. That has already been mentioned in this thread, try and keep up.

[nerrrd]

No. The whole country had an additional tax added to the price of petrol to finance Auckland's roading. That has already been mentioned in this thread, try and keep up.

Yeah but the government fixes the amount of tax paid in petrol to keep up the roads. Everybody (including Aucklanders) contributes to that taxation. For the whole country. Sure everybody is now paying an extra 5c on top of what is already being contributed (for the whole country) but that 5c is earmarked for Auckland alone. It doesn't mean that all the tax paid from petrol is only being used in Auckland, does it?? Otherwise you guys really would have shitty roads. By which I mean all Aucklanders are already 'subsidising' everybody else's roads by paying the existing tax, it's just how putting it all into a kitty works.

And the extra 10c is a regional tax only to be paid in Auckland. If you're complaining that we're complaining about another 10c on top because we don't deserve the cheap petrol we already have in Auckland compared to elsewhere, take it up with the fuel companies, they're the ones fixing the prices (they don't get to change the amount of tax being collected).

Maybe if I put it this way: the individual citizens of Auckland must be collectively already contributing by far the largest amount of tax from petrol (RUCs aside) to the kitty than all the other 'cities' put together, it's a straight numbers game. It's up to the government to dish it out as they see fit once they've collected it. I believe there have been a couple of major road projects in Wellington and Christchurch as well which we've all had to pay for, or 'subsidise' if you want to put it that way.

We (I) don't get a say in the matter, its all worked out in Wellington, yet you blame 'Aucklanders'. Waah it's not fair. So there.

[FJRider]

By which I mean all Aucklanders are already 'subsidising' everybody else's roads by paying the existing tax, it's just how putting it all into a kitty works.

If you're complaining that we're complaining about another 10c on top because we don't deserve the cheap petrol we already have in Auckland compared to elsewhere, take it up with the fuel companies, they're the ones fixing the prices (they don't get to change the amount of tax being collected).

Maybe if I put it this way: the individual citizens of Auckland must be collectively already contributing by far the largest amount of tax from petrol (RUCs aside) to the kitty than all the other 'cities' put together



Your ideas ...

1. Aucklander's subsidize EVERYBODY else with the existing tax.

2. Aucklander's don't deserve the cheap petrol you already have in Auckland.

3. Auckland must already contribute the largest amount of tax from petrol.



Auckland roads have already received the bulk of the national road funding for many years.

The cheap fuel means per head of population ... you pay less for petrol than elsewhere.

A third of the population lives in (or near) Auckland ... and yet you claim Auckland contributes the largest amount of tax from your cheap petrol ... ???



I don't think maths is your strong-point ... <_<

[husaberg]

Yeah but the government fixes the amount of tax paid in petrol to keep up the roads. Everybody (including Aucklanders) contributes to that taxation. For the whole country. Sure everybody is now paying an extra 5c on top of what is already being contributed (for the whole country) but that 5c is earmarked for Auckland alone. It doesn't mean that all the tax paid from petrol is only being used in Auckland, does it?? Otherwise you guys really would have shitty roads. By which I mean all Aucklanders are already 'subsidising' everybody else's roads by paying the existing tax, it's just how putting it all into a kitty works.

And the extra 10c is a regional tax only to be paid in Auckland. If you're complaining that we're complaining about another 10c on top because we don't deserve the cheap petrol we already have in Auckland compared to elsewhere, take it up with the fuel companies, they're the ones fixing the prices (they don't get to change the amount of tax being collected).

Maybe if I put it this way: the individual citizens of Auckland must be collectively already contributing by far the largest amount of tax from petrol (RUCs aside) to the kitty than all the other 'cities' put together, it's a straight numbers game. It's up to the government to dish it out as they see fit once they've collected it. I believe there have been a couple of major road projects in Wellington and Christchurch as well which we've all had to pay for, or 'subsidise' if you want to put it that way.

We (I) don't get a say in the matter, its all worked out in Wellington, yet you blame 'Aucklanders'. Waah it's not fair. So there.
As you are a bit slow on the uptake here is it in a nutshell the money that is being generated on rural roads from fuel levies and RUC charges that should be going to maintain these roads is now being used to fund roads in Auckland.
This money is not generated in anyway shape or form from vehicles running and damaging Auckland roads.
Labour intends to fix this, user pays.................. National siphoned money to try and fix fix Aucklnders stupidity. which is of course pointless.


That makes sense though, as surely they have the highest traffic density, and thus the highest amount of Tax and RUC generated per KM as well.

In any case, surely it is as much a disincentive to drive everywhere, as it is a fund-raising measure, they could gain roading funding the same was as any other regional council if it were purely about the funds.
If that was true why do they need money that rightfuly belongs to the regions?
the RUC and fuel levies were tradionally split between the goverment for the highway maintence and the local areas for local road road maintence. National took money from the regions share to give it to mainly Auckland.
the biggest damagers of roads are not lots of cars they are heavy vehicles.

[nerrrd]

Your ideas ...

1. Aucklander's subsidize EVERYBODY else with the existing tax.

2. Aucklander's don't deserve the cheap petrol you already have in Auckland.

3. Auckland must already contribute the largest amount of tax from petrol.



You're right, it's not.

However I only said the citizens of Auckland contribute more than the citizens of all the other 'cities' in New Zealand - I think that's Wellington, Christchurch, Dunedin, Hamilton and maybe Tauranga? Given we're nearly four times bigger than the next biggest (Christchurch) I figured that was a safe bet. As an individual citizen, I can only contribute via taxes/levies/income tax. I haven't got a clue (there that should be fun for you to quote) on the commercial side of things.

Maybe we don't, but as I said that's up to the fuel companies.

See first point above, the citizens of Auckland must collectively contribute more. We spend longer in our cars than anybody else does (you know, going to cafes and such) and we have by far the most cars on the road. Again, as individuals, not including businesses (but there are a fair number of those in Auckland too).

This is fun.

[Ocean1]

https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/2015/10/14/is-auckland-costing-new-zealand-too-much/

[nerrrd]

Here's the breakdown of taxes on fuel.

http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/sectors-industries/energy/liquid-fuel-market/duties-taxes-and-direct-levies-on-motor-fuels-in-new-zealand

Presumably it's the National Land Transport Fund that we're all contributing to. Also I don't see a category for "Tax just for bloody Aucklanders so they can bleed the rest of the country dry..."

[FJRider]

You're right, it's not.

We've noticed ...


This is fun.

The points you're missing ...

ALL the tax from fuel sales go into the same Government account. They dont care where the most come from. You buy fuel ... you pay tax.

Tax paid with fuel costs may not be the same in each area. Fuel sold at all outlets are usually based on volume of fuel sold. The less sold ... the more you pay at the pumps.

Auckland's traffic problems are caused by Auckland's drivers.

If a large portion of the population cause a problem ... Shouldn't they pay the larger portion to fix it ... ??

[FJRider]

... Also I don't see a category for "Tax just for bloody Aucklanders so they can bleed the rest of the country dry..."

It's inclusive ...

[husaberg]

Here's the breakdown of taxes on fuel.

http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/sectors-industries/energy/liquid-fuel-market/duties-taxes-and-direct-levies-on-motor-fuels-in-new-zealand

Presumably it's the National Land Transport Fund that we're all contributing to. Also I don't see a category for "Tax just for bloody Aucklanders so they can bleed the rest of the country dry..."
The RUc and a proprtion of the Fuel levies is meant to go to the regions, they are the ones being bled dry, the regions pay for their own roads you tosser.



Between 2002 and 2003, however, overall funding by Transfund was increased by $150.9m (+15.9%). Half of the regions received an increase in funding, while the remaining half experienced reduced funding. The largest increase in funding by region was for Auckland region, which was increased by 65.6% to $312.3m. This has raised Auckland’s funding as a proportion of total Transfund funding from an average of 20.5% over 1999-2002 to 28.4% in 2003.



A Government policy priority for land transport is to relieve severe traffic congestion.5 This has resulted in a greater allocation of funds to the Auckland region, especially for construction of state highways. Between 2002 and 2003, funding for the improvement and replacement of state highways within the Auckland region was raised by $76.04m (138%), thereby accounting for 61.5% of the total increase in land transport funding allocated by Transfund to the region. In contrast, most other regions had substantial reductions in funding allocations for state highway construction over the same period

333123

[Brian d marge]

Don't fund the country side ...get em in high density stack and pack cities ...
It's the only way

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Graystone]

If that was true why do they need money that rightfuly belongs to the regions?
the RUC and fuel levies were tradionally split between the goverment for the highway maintence and the local areas for local road road maintence. National took money from the regions share to give it to mainly Auckland.
the biggest damagers of roads are not lots of cars they are heavy vehicles.

How does it rightfully belong to other regions? By tradition?

Anyway, I was referring to the proposed auckland regional fuel tax, the region could get the funds through other regional sources like the rest of the country has to, taxing fuel directly merely offers a disincentive to use the road, thus reducing the funding required in the first place. It seems pretty clever to me.

[husaberg]

How does it rightfully belong to other regions? By tradition?

Anyway, I was referring to the proposed auckland regional fuel tax, the region could get the funds through other regional sources like the rest of the country has to, taxing fuel directly merely offers a disincentive to use the road, thus reducing the funding required in the first place. It seems pretty clever to me.
It belongs to the regions where it was generated because it was generated damaging the roads of that region.
National put through a law change to rip off the regions to give it to parasitic tossers in Auckland who can't pay their on way or understand why they should have to.

[nerrrd]

It's inclusive ...

LOL


The RUc and a proprtion of the Fuel levies is meant to go to the regions, they are the ones being bled dry, the regions pay for their own roads you tosser.



333123

Only that's not exactly what it says here:


Revenue for land transport comes mostly from motorists through fuel excise duty (petrol tax), road user charges on diesel vehicles (RUC), and vehicle licensing charges. The Land Transport Management Act 2003 ring-fences this revenue for investment in land transport, including building and maintaining State highways and local roads.

State highways are funded entirely by central government, with maintenance responsibilities and expenses falling on the NZ Transport Agency(external link).

The costs of building and maintaining local roads are shared between central government (through the NZ Transport Agency) and local councils. Councils contribute to the cost of their land transport activities from rates and borrowing, in what is known as the ‘local share’.

And 2003 was a while ago, just sayin'.

But I give up, Auckland sucks and we all suck and I suck and so on. And it's personal and such. And it's not like Wellington had anything to do with making any of the funding decisions involving Auckland, no sir.

Meanwhile 1 million or so of us travel around in circles paying 60c per litre into the Transport Fund and it works out to nine tenths of bugger all apparently.

[husaberg]

LOL



Only that's not exactly what it says here:



And 2003 was a while ago, just sayin'.

But I give up, Auckland sucks and we all suck and I suck and so on. And it's personal and such. And it's not like Wellington had anything to do with making any of the funding decisions involving Auckland, no sir.

Meanwhile 1 million or so of us travel around in circles paying 60c per litre into the Transport Fund and it works out to nine tenths of bugger all apparently.

It is exactly what it says there
Its just you are too ill informed to be able to figure it out

The costs of building and maintaining local roads are shared between central government (through the NZ Transport Agency) and local councils. Councils contribute to the cost of their land transport activities from rates and borrowing, in what is known as the ‘local share’.
The percentage of the RUC and Fuel levies that came from the area where they were generated was progressivly reduced under national.

In other words all the rest of the regions are effectively paying for your roads and stupid transport decisions from revenue generated on our roads.

In May 2014, the NZ Transport Agency Board agreed that the minimum funding assistance rate would be 52%, one percentage point below the national co-investment rate of 53%. At the time this was considered sufficient 'headroom' to enable councils who needed it to receive an enhanced funding assistance rate.
Subsequently the Board has decided to reduce the minimum funding assistance rate by one percentage point to 51% which will enable a larger group of approved organisations to receive an enhanced FAR, spreading the impacts of the transition to the new FAR regime more evenly.
Some approved organisations may have made commitments in the 2015/16 financial year on the basis that their minimum normal FAR would be 52%. To recognise those councils who may have made such commitments, the lowest rate that they will receive for this period is 52%.
Funding assistance rates are part of a co-investment system that recognises there are both national and local benefits from investing in the land transport network. To ensure that both partners adopt a co-investment approach, it is important that councils continue to have 'skin in the game', so we have set the maximum FAR at 75%.
Councils' actual funding assistance rates for the 2015–18 NLTP are set out in Attachment 1 [PDF, 175 KB] (https://nzta.govt.nz/assets/Planning-and-investment/docs/far-board-meeting-20141031-attachment-1.pdf) of the NZ Transport Agency board paper 31 October 2014.
3. Transition

The transition period for the new funding assistance rates system is nine years, or three NLTP investment periods. However, many approved organisations are likely to complete the transition to their normal funding assistance rate sooner.
For the 2015–18 NLTP, councils' normal funding assistance rate will decrease by no more than one percentage point per year.



“The critical issue for New Zealand,” McDonald says, “is the very large subsidy Auckland receives from the rest of New Zealand because of its low exports per capita. Its living standards are heavily underwritten by the provinces.”
Given that the overwhelming bulk of the nation’s wealth is produced in the provinces by exporting primary products, it is highly debatable that Auckland will be the nation’s economic centre of gravity




And no one seems to worry about the cost of retrofitting the city with better sewage pipes, oxidation ponds, roads, parks and schools, and expanding hospitals. Some reckon this could be as much as $17 billion over the next decade alone. Who is going to pay for it all – and how – doesn’t seem to enter the debate. If the government has to stump up, it’s effectively another tax on the rest of New Zealand, including the provinces which generate so much of our export wealth.


“Auckland’s population growth is increasing the negatives: more spending on infrastructure and government services; eating up more agricultural land for housing; a less attractive living environment for existing residents; more demand for urban water use at the expense of more productive uses; greater population pressure on the environment generally; and an increasing dependence on the rest of New Zealand to subsidise its weak export performance – which reduces the living standards of everyone else.”

McDonald emphasised to North & South that unlike the US, which can manufacture a big proportion of what it needs within its own borders, New Zealand can’t and has to have a large export base to fund its imports – whether oil, cars, medicines or appliances. So exports are the vital component of our wealth and Auckland, with its low share of national exports, is a laggard in that respect.

[nerrrd]

It is exactly what it says there
Its just you are too ill informed to be able to figure it out

The percentage of the RUC and Fuel levies that came from the area where they were generated was progressivly reduced under national.

In other words all the rest of the regions are effectively paying for your roads and stupid transport decisions from revenue generated on our roads.

Well I am ill informed, and I don't do maths, but that seems to be saying that at least 51% of any region's transport funding is coming from the National Transport Fund, to which we all contribute. Auckland's getting 51%, like a lot of other places, some other regions are getting more. I guess your point is it used to be more?

Anyhoo I don't know who 'McDonald' is, and I can't speak to GDP because I'm not an economist. I have noticed that economists have a distinct habit of disagreeing with each other, however, and of not being able to predict global financial crises.

The only transport decision I've made is buying a motorcycle, which some people might well consider to be 'stupid'. So in that sense, I don't pay as much as a car driver in fuel tax, but I pay it at the same rate as every other private motor vehicle owner in the country.

And Auckland sucks, I suck etc etc

[husaberg]

Well I am ill informed, and I don't do maths, but that seems to be saying that at least 51% of any region's transport funding is coming from the National Transport Fund, to which we all contribute. Auckland's getting 51%, like a lot of other places, some other regions are getting more. I guess your point is it used to be more?

Anyhoo I don't know who 'McDonald' is, and I can't speak to GDP because I'm not an economist. I have noticed that economists have a distinct habit of disagreeing with each other, however, and of not being able to predict global financial crises.

The only transport decision I've made is buying a motorcycle, which some people might well consider to be 'stupid'. So in that sense, I don't pay as much as a car driver in fuel tax, but I pay it at the same rate as every other private motor vehicle owner in the country.

And Auckland sucks, I suck etc etc

Incorrect Auckland is currently getting the lions share of the roading budget, using the roads of national significance budget that has been taken out of the regional funding every other region is paying for it. their infastructure is being run down and not only are they losing their own generated funding they are having to dig into their own local funding attempt to make up for the lost revenue.
they are then having to pay for additional funds through rates to make this shortfall. its a double whamy. You are clearly to thick to comprehend how the system works.

[Ocean1]

https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/2015/10/14/is-auckland-costing-new-zealand-too-much/

"Auckland’s a bit of a problem. If the city’s prospering while small towns decline, isn’t it because the government is spending too much money trying to pump growth into Auckland and too little elsewhere?

In short, is Auckland costing New Zealand too much?

The answer, in a word, is no. If anything, the government’s spending a little bit less in Auckland than it spends elsewhere."

[nerrrd]

Incorrect Auckland is currently getting the lions share of the roading budget, using the roads of national significance budget that has been taken out of the regional funding every other region is paying for it. their infastructure is being run down and not only are they losing their own generated funding they are having to dig into their own local funding attempt to make up for the lost revenue.
they are then having to pay for additional funds through rates to make this shortfall. its a double whamy. You are clearly to thick to comprehend how the system works.

Well I'm confused, I thought your pdf said locally speaking we were all getting at least 51% out of the Fund, and yes Aucklanders pay a shitload in rates for our local roads too.

Also found this: http://www.transport.govt.nz/land/roadusercharges/where-does-the-money-go/

According to this 26% of the total income is from heavy RUC vehicles...so a quarter is a fair bit, but maybe not as much as you seem to think? Most of the rest of the fleet would be in urban areas, wouldn't they?

Couldn't find any figures on Roads of National Significance, but from the list I found 3 out of 7 are in Auckland - plus I'm betting the roads around Kaikoura are pretty significant also. I'm only guessing, but do you think, maybe, they just might be borrowing money to pay for these? I know, unlike the government to borrow billions of dollars willy nilly, but just maybe? And by the government, I mean Wellington, not Auckland.

[husaberg]

Well I'm confused, I thought your pdf said locally speaking we were all getting at least 51% out of the Fund, and yes Aucklanders pay a shitload in rates for our local roads too.

Also found this: http://www.transport.govt.nz/land/roadusercharges/where-does-the-money-go/

According to this 26% of the total income is from heavy RUC vehicles...so a quarter is a fair bit, but maybe not as much as you seem to think? Most of the rest of the fleet would be in urban areas, wouldn't they?

Couldn't find any figures on Roads of National Significance, but from the list I found 3 out of 7 are in Auckland - plus I'm betting the roads around Kaikoura are pretty significant also. I'm only guessing, but do you think, maybe, they just might be borrowing money to pay for these? I know, unlike the government to borrow billions of dollars willy nilly, but just maybe? And by the government, I mean Wellington, not Auckland.

There is a lot of confusion and guessing in your last post, why not post something when you know the facts, because as it is you clearly can't figure out the funding model despite repeated attempts to educate you thus far.
But as i am feeling generous i will give you a hint the equal share allocated for the regions has been lowered.
Aucklands on the whole has been raised as a percentage they are reciving more than their share of what they contribute, so to say you pay a higher amount is factually untrue as it is a percentage.
Also you need to figure out the difference between repairs from a natural disaater such as an earthquake and normal road mantenance..
Also lastly if Auckland was generating such vast income from fuel levies and RUCs as you believe, Its pretty simple you wouldn't need to be funded by the regions or the RONS.
You will get a regional fuel levy in the future and no one other than Aucklnders will give a shit about it. Everyone alse in the regions will probably just laugh about it.

[Ocean1]

https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/2015/10/14/is-auckland-costing-new-zealand-too-much/


Share of NZTA spending, 2005-2014 Share of population growth, 2006-2013 Share of projected population growth, 2013-2043

Auckland 48.5% : 55.0% : 61.5%
Canterbury 5.9% : 6.4% : 13.9%
Wellington 10.1% : 10.3% : 5.2%
Waikato 13.7% : 10.4% : 7.8%
Bay of Plenty 8.0% : 4.4% : 4.1%

"Although Auckland has received a large share of new road spending over the last decade, this may just be enough to keep up with current and projected population growth."


:whistle:

[husaberg]

https://www.greaterauckland.org.nz/2015/10/14/is-auckland-costing-new-zealand-too-much/


Share of NZTA spending, 2005-2014 Share of population growth, 2006-2013 Share of projected population growth, 2013-2043

Auckland 48.5% : 55.0% : 61.5%
Canterbury 5.9% : 6.4% : 13.9%
Wellington 10.1% : 10.3% : 5.2%
Waikato 13.7% : 10.4% : 7.8%
Bay of Plenty 8.0% : 4.4% : 4.1%

"Although Auckland has received a large share of new road spending over the last decade, this may just be enough to keep up with current and projected population growth."


:whistle:
What you missed out was the NZTA spending was on "new and improved roads" not maintence, do try and follow.
Please explain why the rest of the country should fund new roads for Auckland, User pays after all. Or do you perfer a more communist approach comrade Stalin?
If there are all these new tax payers why should the rest of NZ still need to pay for Aucklands lack of planning and lack of use of public transport.
Lets look to see if everything balances out.
333141

[Ocean1]

What you missed out was the NZTA spending was on "new and improved roads" not maintence, do try and follow.
Please explain why the rest of the country should fund new roads for Auckland, User pays after all. Or do you perfer a more communist approach comrade Stalin?
If there are all these new tax payers why should the rest of NZ still need to pay for Aucklands lack of planning and lack of use of public transport.
Lets look to see if everything balances out.
333141

What? I'm the only one not allowed to cherry pick references?

Well darn. :laugh:

And your pick is the rate of spending increases are high in areas with high population growth?

Meh.

[husaberg]

What? I'm the only one not allowed to cherry pick references?

Well darn. :laugh:

And your pick is the rate of spending increases are high in areas with high population growth?

Meh.
Look again its the disparity in funding sources its hardly a cherry pick when its compared to its north island neighbours.............
AS you see Aucklands being proped up by the other regions funding.
Its hardly user pays now is it Mr Stalin?

[Ocean1]

Look again its the disparity in funding sources its hardly a cherry pick when its compared to its north island neighbours.............
AS you see Auckalnds being proped up by the other regions funding.
Its hardly user pays now is it Mr Stalin?

So funding % levels should remain the same regardless of population % growth?

[nerrrd]

There is a lot of confusion and guessing in your last post, why not post something when you know the facts, because as it is you clearly can't figure out the funding model despite repeated attempts to educate you thus far.
But as i am feeling generous i will give you a hint the equal share allocated for the regions has been lowered.
Aucklands on the whole has been raised as a percentage they are reciving more than their share of what they contribute, so to say you pay a higher amount is factually untrue as it is a percentage.

But the evidence you provided doesn't show that. So aren't you speculating as well?


Also you need to figure out the difference between repairs from a natural disaater such as an earthquake and normal road mantenance.

Was talking about the roads of national significance, I thought you said that was the main reason most of the money was going to Auckland.


Also lastly if Auckland was generating such vast income from fuel levies and RUCs as you believe, Its pretty simple you wouldn't need to be funded by the regions or the RONS.
You will get a regional fuel levy in the future and no one other than Aucklnders will give a shit about it. Everyone alse in the regions will probably just laugh about it.

Well, you haven't provided any figures that say we are being funded by the regions so far - just that we're getting 51% for our local roads, no more or less than anyone else [actually it is less than some regions]. And the regional fuel tax (which I'm not particularly happy about you're right, but I'll pay it if Wellington allows us to have one because I won't have any choice) is to pay for trains and public transport infrastructure, I believe, not roads.

[Edit Ok I don't have much time at the moment to look into the other stuff above, but the NZTA funding contribution isn't broken down by regions, it's a general pool; don't we need to know what percentage of that pool is contributed by each region and compare that to the amount being distributed to each region overall before we can say who is paying for whom?? Regardless of whether the NZTA contribution is going up or down by however much? Sorry for the continued speculation but it still doesn't make sense to me]

[husaberg]

But the evidence you provided doesn't show that. So aren't you speculating as well?]
Yes i did provide the evidence


Was talking about the roads of national significance, I thought you said that was the main reason most of the money was going to Auckland.?
The resaon the money going to auckland is they are clearly useless



Well, you haven't provided any figures that say we are being funded by the regions so far - just that we're getting 51% for our local roads, no more or less than anyone else [actually it is less than some regions]. And the regional fuel tax (which I'm not particularly happy about you're right, but I'll pay it if Wellington allows us to have one because I won't have any choice) is to pay for trains and public transport infrastructure, I believe, not roads.]
Yes i have you just can't read a graph

[Edit Ok I don't have much time at the moment to look into the other stuff above, but the NZTA funding contribution isn't broken down by regions, it's a general pool; don't we need to know what percentage of that pool is contributed by each region and compare that to the amount being distributed to each region overall before we can say who is paying for whom?? Regardless of whether the NZTA contribution is going up or down by however much? Sorry for the continued speculation but it still doesn't make sense to me]
Its not a lack of time on your behalf, its a profound lack of intelligence.

[husaberg]

So funding % levels should remain the same regardless of population % growth?
User pays is a corner stone of your own ideology, is it not.
Surely if they have more users they can pay for it themselves.
After all they are the users of the roads not the rest of the country
Why should the rest of the country fund Aucklands poor planning and allocation of resources and inability to use public transport

[Ocean1]

User pays is a corner stone of your own ideology, is it not.
Surely if they have more users they can pay for it themselves.
After all they are the users of the roads not the rest of the country
Why should the rest of the country fund Aucklands poor planning and allocation of resources and inhability to use public transport

I haven't seen anything which suggests they get more than their share of road funding.

But I'm encouraged by your retreat from the socialist ideology of govt control of resources.

[Voltaire]

We do get to spend more time using our roads though :rolleyes:

If I'm working in the city I have a choice of:
Train, Bus, scooter/bike or car.

The scooter/bike option takes me about 30 minutes and I can get free parking.
The train takes about 1 hour 10 minutes including the walk.
took the bus once about 10 years ago and it took forever, but their lanes are good for the scooter/bike option
Car....nope.

Auckland is only going to get more densely populated and driving South on Friday at 7:30 the traffic was bumper to bumper as far south as Pukekoke on ramp.

I liked Feilding, had a pub, Thai takeaways and supermarket. I could get used to wearing gumboots all day.

[Ocean1]

Car....nope.

Aye, I read somewhere that the average speed on Orks motorways was 56kph.

Light rail is the solution, but it's extreeeeemly expensive to retrofit to an existing city if you didn't have the common sense to do it as it grew.

Maybe if we stopped working for other people's families we could start working for some infrastructure that benefits everyone instead.

[Katman]

Its not a lack of time on your behalf, its a prfound lack of intelligence.

So many pots, so many kettles.

:facepalm:

[nerrrd]

I haven't seen anything which suggests they get more than their share of road funding.

But I'm encouraged by your retreat from the socialist ideology of govt control of resources.

See that's what I thought.


Yes i did provide the evidence


The resaon the money going to auckland is they are clearly useless



Yes i have you just can't read a graph

Its not a lack of time on your behalf, its a prfound lack of intelligence.

Well thanks for explaining it all so clearly (that was sarcasm, by the way, not that I need to explain that to you with your prfound abundance of intelligence.)

[husaberg]

See that's what I thought.



Well thanks for explaining it all so clearly (that was sarcasm, by the way, not that I need to explain that to you with your prfound abundance of intelligence.)
The problem is you don't actuallly think at all you just decide you know the answer, then belligerently refuse to ever consider whatever is shown to you its called a STEVIE complex.
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/183438-The-2017-Election-Thread?p=1131069687#post1131069687


I haven't seen anything which suggests they get more than their share of road funding.

But I'm encouraged by your retreat from the socialist ideology of govt control of resources.
AS above
i never retreated into socialist idealism i just pointed out that you the champion of right wing ideals is suggesting that we should all fund Auckland for the greater good.
Some might call the hypocritical i call that just you being consistant.

[Brian d marge]

The problem is you don't actuallly think at all you just decide you know the answer, then belligerently refuse to ever consider whatever is shown to you its called a STEVIE complex.
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/183438-The-2017-Election-Thread?p=1131069687#post1131069687Oi don't bring me into this .... I only think when I'm on the piss,. I rarely if at all do it at work ... And as for the answer just ask I know them all.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[nerrrd]

The problem is you don't actuallly think at all you just decide you know the answer, then belligerently refuse to ever consider whatever is shown to you.

Yes, i'm definitely the belligerent one.


As you are a bit slow on the uptake here... National siphoned money to try and fix fix Aucklnders stupidity. which is of course pointless.


...the regions pay for their own roads you tosser.


National put through a law change to rip off the regions to give it to parasitic tossers in Auckland...


...You are clearly to thick to comprehend how the system works.


...The resaon the money going to auckland is they are clearly useless

Its not a lack of time on your behalf, its a profound lack of intelligence.

Kudos on fixing the spelling in that last one though.

[Ocean1]

The problem is you don't actuallly think at all you just decide you know the answer, then belligerently refuse to ever consider whatever is shown to you its called a STEVIE complex.
https://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/183438-The-2017-Election-Thread?p=1131069687#post1131069687


AS above
i never retreated into socialist idealism i just pointed out that you the champion of right wing ideals is suggesting that we should all fund Auckland for the greater good.
Some might call the hypocritical i call that just you being consistant.

I don't have right wing ideals, they're all mine.

And there wasn't anything in your wee graph showing Orks get more of their share of road funding the first time you posted it.

[husaberg]

I don't have right wing ideals, they're all mine.

And there wasn't anything in your wee graph showing Orks get more of their share of road funding the first time you posted it.
Yes Genghis Khan
Err...its the same graph when i first posted that it is now.
You might want to look at how it works. It doesn't balance.
It mute anyway because if Auckland was actually self funding as you and the SS Berligerent keep suggesting, prey tell why would it need an additional fuel tax to fund it roads.

Mayor Phil Goff has welcomed the introduction of fuel tax and says the city "has to pay its share" in developing "desperately needed" projects, including a light rail link between the CBD and the airport.

Both current Auckland Mayor Phil Goff and his two-term super city predecessor Len Brown pushed for a fuel tax only to fall on deaf central government ears.


Influential lobby group the Automobile Association is not "in principle" opposed to an Auckland regional fuel tax.
Its infrastructure and Auckland transport spokesman Barney Irvine said business cases for expensive public transport works like light rail must be consulted on."We want to see really clear business cases, we'd like Aucklanders to have a say on it."


Why also would it need the additional funding of the RONS being thrown at it.
Intersting that even National in a way admted that others would foot the bill

On 16 March 2009, Transport Minister Steven Joyce announced that the government will not proceed with regional fuel taxes. Regional fuel taxes will be partially replaced by smaller increases in national fuel taxes.