Referendum on Asset Sales

[Bassmatt]

That's irrelevant if the courts are reluctant to send criminals to jail in the first place, and powerless to keep them imprisoned for any significant length of time except for the worst offenders. How many times have you read of career criminals ruining the lives of innocent people, just to be given a pathetically weak sentence so they can do it all over again? If JK and his party were anything other than a bunch of lefties, they would at least take this problem seriously rather than sweep it under the carpet and pretend it doesn't really matter. The fact that they're taking the whole "4kmh over the speed limit" thing so seriously should make it obvious where their priorities lie. It's obvious revenue gathering.

They are creating the demand for the prisons first. And the corporations running them get paid for a full prison no matter how many inmates its holding is so the length of sentences is irrelevant in that respect.

[Jantar]

After reading the question I feel I have to vote NO.

I do not agree with partial sales of Meridian, Mighty River and Solid Energy. They should have been 100% sales.
I do not agree with partial sale of Genesis. That is the only state owned power comapnay that has discretionary generation in both islands, so it should remain 100% under state control.
I do agree with partial sale of Air New zealand as long as the goverment retains majority ownership.

So the question is poorly worded, and even if 100% of the people vote NO, it can still be a mandate for 100% asset sales.

[huff3r]

And selling stuff that earns us money is not ...

Especially when JK himself even admitted that the dividends the govt was receiving from the assets under the hammer are worth more than the interest on the debt.

And that's just the dividends from the bits they sold/are selling.

[oldrider]

Especially when JK himself even admitted that the dividends the govt was receiving from the assets under the hammer are worth more than the interest on the debt.

And that's just the dividends from the bits they sold/are selling.

Make that ... "partially selling"!

[Banditbandit]

The debt stretches back generations.

That's actually true - however the debt has increazsed substantially under DonKey's government ...

Stop lending would be the first option, but selling stuff we're paying interest on is also a good idea.

Don't you mean stop borrowing ??

[slowpoke]

I'm buggered if I can see the logic in selling something for a pittance when it is going to make you a fortune in the long term. But all good, the exchange rate against the Aussie dollar is very favourable so great time to jump the ditch and watch the NZ taxes get jacked up from a distance (no choice if the income stream is massivley reduced).

In years to come people are going to look back on this decision and cringe.

[Oscar]

That's actually true - however the debt has increazsed substantially under DonKey's government ...

You're not that dumb - you know that's political BS.

Whomever won the election in 2008 had to borrow to keep NZ afloat after the GFC.

[Banditbandit]

You're not that dumb - you know that's political BS.

Whomever won the election in 2008 had to borrow to keep NZ afloat after the GFC.

What ??? Were we goign to sink into the ocean ???

Yes, I accept within your logic and within the current bullshit system the propoganda perpetrated by the Goverment that appears to be true ..

Equally, the GFC was created by people and countries borrowing too much .. How come a crisis created by borrowing too much forced people to borrow even more ??? That's never going to be a good solution ... Or it means that this financial manmagement stuff is just bulshit and a paper chase with litle or no basis in reality - other than we get caught up int ehbulshit and it costs real peoppel real jobs and real living standards ...

From a different perspective, the GDFC was casued by righ people sucking up al the money into fewer and fewer hands and leaving ordinary peopel with fuck all ... Marx predicted the GFC (not in actual dates and details, but he described the efefct of late period capitalism and such crises) .. but of course Marx is a Communist and therefore BAD - even if his predictions are coming true ..

Look at how much money got poured into Dubai and other UAE schemes .. billions and billions - when they are are people starving in the world . and we have that level of wealth and luxury ...

Something is badly wrong with the picture ..

[Oscar]

What ??? Were we goign to sink into the ocean ???

Yes, I accept within your logic and within the current bullshit system the propoganda perpetrated by the Goverment that appears to be true ..

Equally, the GFC was created by people and countries borrowing too much .. How come a crisis created by borrowing too much forced people to borrow even more ??? That's never going to be a good solution ... Or it means that this financial manmagement stuff is just bulshit and a paper chase with litle or no basis in reality - other than we get caught up int ehbulshit and it costs real peoppel real jobs and real living standards ...

From a different perspective, the GDFC was casued by righ people sucking up al the money into fewer and fewer hands and leaving ordinary peopel with fuck all ... Marx predicted the GFC (not in actual dates and details, but he described the efefct of late period capitalism and such crises) .. but of course Marx is a Communist and therefore BAD - even if his predictions are coming true ..

Look at how much money got poured into Dubai and other UAE schemes .. billions and billions - when they are are people starving in the world . and we have that level of wealth and luxury ...

Something is badly wrong with the picture ..

Wow, that was a Mashy-esque diversion from a simple statement.
I was not commenting on the GFC, I was merely saying that whoever was elected in 2008 would have had much the same response to it.

But for what it's worth, the GFC was caused by a combination of reckless mortgage lending in the US, certain EU countries trying to artificially inflate their people's standard of living and some very dodgy banking practices. What you describe is the result, not the cause.

[MisterD]

I was merely saying that whoever was elected in 2008 would have had much the same response to it.

Ya reckon? Labour have opposed every spending cut that National have put through...

[oldrider]

Ya reckon? Labour have opposed every spending cut that National have put through...

They gotta be seen to be earning their keep ... they are the "opposition" (thank Christ) after all.

[avgas]

The debt stretches back generations.
Stop lending would be the first option, but selling stuff we're paying interest on is also a good idea.

If that were the case, Solid Energy and SCF would have been first on the block.
Beehive and KiwiRail would have been a tie for 3rd.

[avgas]

You're not that dumb - you know that's political BS.
Whomever won the election in 2008 had to borrow to keep NZ afloat after the GFC.

Did the government make less tax (aka income) that year?

(though I know labour would have done the same - doesn't make it right)

As far as I can pick - Christchurch was the only really good reason why we lost over the last few years. The others were financial bailouts......

[Oscar]

Did the government make less tax (aka income) that year?

(though I know labour would have done the same - doesn't make it right)

As far as I can pick - Christchurch was the only really good reason why we lost over the last few years. The others were financial bailouts......

Christchurch is one of the reasons our economy is revving up.

[Drew]

Ya reckon? Labour have opposed every spending cut that National have put through...

What a daft thing to say.

It's very easy to oppose something, when you don't have to come up with a viable alternative.

I oppose a lot of road rules, as they pertain to me. Doesn't mean fuck all though does it?