The 2017 Election Thread

[Ocean1]

China was just an example. There is a lot of other money out there that we can have. I just can't get my head around the fact that we have been giving away the water for free. Even 10 cents per litre would have been a good earner.

What's this "we" Tonto? The bottlers are certainly not giving it away, and I see no reason for anyone else to benefit from their business.

[Ocean1]

Yep - and how much of that irrigation water goes back into the atmosphere from the drying process ? Is it even condensed ? If Fonterra had some brains they'd be condensing it and exporting it as the purest water obtainable...
But yes, simply eliminating the middle process - dairying - would give better returns.

I read a report on water use across the Canterbury plains the other day. The upshot of which was there is no way to clean up the waterways without eliminating dairying as an option. Much of the report focused on how shocking and unacceptable that might be.

I'm absolutely fine with, having identified a problem with that permitted use we just change the district plan to remove that option immediately. In fact I think govt thinking was to phase it out, saving a bunch of cockies from teh dole queue.

I like my idea better. But I'm not relying on the local revenue it adds to the economy, and I'm not a 5th generation cocky.

PS: you must have tasted 100% pure water, no? It's fucking horrible. I'm not saying you need actual fecal coliform solids in there but by comparison the local river water is delicious.

[Ocean1]

Water will be the new oil, and it won't cause global warming.

It's a damned fine idea, a splendid example if the possible triumph of clean enterprise over dirty old money grubbing capitalism.

Except for the capital required to make it work.

And the dirty old oil the water's wrapped in.

[bogan]

Oh yes, Gareth has definitley proposed a wealth tax. Teh greens danced around the issue last elections but refused to rule it out and it's on the long list of taxes Labour cite as potential sources of revenue but won't confirm or deny until/unless elected.

They all obviously know damned well how that shit would be received, or they'd front with their plans.

In any reasonable democratic system failing to confirm or deny such a dramatic tax policy change should automatically rule them out of contention.

Edit: The thing that I found interesting about the water thing was the recent resource consent application that was declined on the basis that the resource was, (pretended to be) limited. In spite of the fact the applicants proposed plans would have seen an increase of water in that catchment. Socialists, you can trust them ONLY to be irrationally envious of anyone more resourceful than themselves.

Can't find any reference to a wealth tax in TOP's policy list, but yes, transparency in such a dramatic policy change should be absolutely essential, and certainly will need to be for any party looking to get my vote.

[Ocean1]

Can't find any reference to a wealth tax in TOP's policy list,

................

[Grumph]

I read a report on water use across the Canterbury plains the other day. The upshot of which was there is no way to clean up the waterways without eliminating dairying as an option. Much of the report focused on how shocking and unacceptable that might be.

I'm absolutely fine with, having identified a problem with that permitted use we just change the district plan to remove that option immediately. In fact I think govt thinking was to phase it out, saving a bunch of cockies from teh dole queue.

I completely agree with phasing it out - at least in canterbury. Most of the soils aren't really suitable for it anyway.

A guy I served on MCI committee with farmed down the road from me. One of the first to put in big centerpoint irrigators - around 16 years ago. He used them as they should be used - to irrigate crops. he had his ground set up in pie slice divisions and grew a wide range of cash crops.
When he retired and sold the farm it was of course one of the first dairy conversions in the area....and the easiest.

[Woodman]

What's this "we" Tonto? The bottlers are certainly not giving it away, and I see no reason for anyone else to benefit from their business.

The foreign fresh bottled water companies are getting our (NZs) water for free as I understand it. To me that seems ludicrous and we(NZers) are nissing out on billions of $$$$$ revenue.

[Ocean1]

The foreign fresh bottled water companies are getting our (NZs) water for free as I understand it. To me that seems ludicrous and we(NZers) are nissing out on billions of $$$$$ revenue.

Who's water?

And on what basis are you suggesting that we have any right to charge them for it? Any basis that differs from my right to charge you for it I mean.

[Ocean1]

I completely agree with phasing it out - at least in canterbury. Most of the soils aren't really suitable for it anyway.

A guy I served on MCI committee with farmed down the road from me. One of the first to put in big centerpoint irrigators - around 16 years ago. He used them as they should be used - to irrigate crops. he had his ground set up in pie slice divisions and grew a wide range of cash crops.
When he retired and sold the farm it was of course one of the first dairy conversions in the area....and the easiest.

Aye, it sort of pisses me off that the local authorities allowed that to get so far out of hand. I mean the evidence has been there that it's not a sustainable activity for some time. Now you've got billions of private money invested that's at risk.

[Woodman]

Who's water?

And on what basis are you suggesting that we have any right to charge them for it? Any basis that differs from my right to charge you for it I mean.

It is New Zealands resource as far as I am concerned and is something we should be charging for. Its as simple as that.

Try going to any other country and taking their water and see how free it is.

[sidecar bob]

It is New Zealands resource as far as I am concerned and is something we should be charging for. Its as simple as that.

Try going to any other country and taking their water and see how free it is.

Each country has an over supply of something theyre not going to miss. Plenty of kiwi guys Get a Thai Mrs.

[Ocean1]

It is New Zealands resource as far as I am concerned and is something we should be charging for. Its as simple as that.

Try going to any other country and taking their water and see how free it is.

Genuine socialist dogma, the politics of envy.

If you're all that cut up about someone else making money out of selling something for more than they're paying then you could always do the same.

At least you'd see exactly how easy and free it is.

[Voltaire]

I had a vege stir fry the other day, usually put meat in, saved about 7000 litres of water.

Google search shows it takes a lot of water to make lots of shit.


Typical values for the volume of water required to produce common foodstuffs

Foodstuff Quantity Water consumption, litres
Chocolate 1 kg 17,196
Beef 1 kg 15,415
Sheep Meat 1 kg 10,412
Pork 1 kg 5,988

It takes 24 gallons of water to make 1 pound of another everyday material: plastic. In fact, it takes at least twice as much water to produce a plastic water bottle as the amount of water in the water bottle

It takes an estimated 39,090 gallons of water to make a car

After all, 29 gallons of water were used to produce that glass of cabernet sauvignon

[bogan]

................

Interesting, also interesting is the way they skirt around that wording on their site...

I had a vege stir fry the other day, usually put meat in, saved about 7000 litres of water.

Google search shows it takes a lot of water to make lots of shit.


Typical values for the volume of water required to produce common foodstuffs

Foodstuff Quantity Water consumption, litres
Chocolate 1 kg 17,196
Beef 1 kg 15,415
Sheep Meat 1 kg 10,412
Pork 1 kg 5,988

It takes 24 gallons of water to make 1 pound of another everyday material: plastic. In fact, it takes at least twice as much water to produce a plastic water bottle as the amount of water in the water bottle

It takes an estimated 39,090 gallons of water to make a car

After all, 29 gallons of water were used to produce that glass of cabernet sauvignon

Take it one step further, one humane consuming all those things uses all the water, tax the fuck out of breeding.

[Ocean1]

I had a vege stir fry the other day, usually put meat in, saved about 7000 litres of water.

Google search shows it takes a lot of water to make lots of shit.


Typical values for the volume of water required to produce common foodstuffs

Foodstuff Quantity Water consumption, litres
Chocolate 1 kg 17,196
Beef 1 kg 15,415
Sheep Meat 1 kg 10,412
Pork 1 kg 5,988

It takes 24 gallons of water to make 1 pound of another everyday material: plastic. In fact, it takes at least twice as much water to produce a plastic water bottle as the amount of water in the water bottle

It takes an estimated 39,090 gallons of water to make a car

After all, 29 gallons of water were used to produce that glass of cabernet sauvignon

Which translates to the annual rainfall on....


Foodstuff Quantity Water consumption, litres
Chocolate 1 kg 17,196 .......... your bedroom roof
Beef 1 kg 15,415 .......... your kid's bedroom roof
Sheep Meat 1 kg 10,412 .......... your bathroom
Pork 1 kg 5,988 .......... your car


Perspective.


Also, as I suggested earlier I'd be a lot quicker to tax the use of those plastic bottles than water we have more than we can handle. Maybe there's an opportunity there to not be completely hypocritical in using NZ's clean green image to sell product in environmentally unfriendly containers by going back to those tetra, (?) cardboard things?