The 2017 Election Thread

[Voltaire]

Really? I dispose of over 1000 litres a month every month with nothing more that a "how is it mate" to the truck driver.
And it costs me nothing.

What?, you didn't have to go to the facility and do an audit, view all the H and S policies, Council Certs, Emergency Plans,

Groundwater test certs, Public Liability insurances and so on?

It probably goes to the same place but how do you know its not just dumped in a river?

Do you charge your customers a " Environmental "fee for ethical oil disposal?

How do you get rid of tyres...same bloke?

[husaberg]

It costs nothing for anyone to supply rivers, so I don't see why anyone gets to charge for their use, it does fuck all to prevent environmental abuse.

So why are yo not up in arms about how Farmers are charged for Irrigation water and have been for many years including multiple terms under National then.
whats your Ocean answer to cleaning the waterways?
Lots of rivers and lakes and watwerways have concessions on them where private enterprise charges and is charged for its use by goverment etities, Doc land as well.
Why was their is there no Ocean outcry about this? Is that because it was under National?

[Woodman]

You and berkboy can share some common ground.

Ironic, coming from KBs stupidest member.

[T.W.R]

Fuckin farmers waste as much as they use

Nearly thirty odd years ago environmental scientists said fresh water would be the oil of the future and it needed to be looked after.
And on the grand scale of things the usable amount of fresh water available is sweet F/A, it'll be too late to shut the gate after the horse has bolted as it's only a finite resource

[Ocean1]

So why are yo not up in arms about how Farmers are charged for Irrigation water and have been for many years including multiple terms under National then.
whats your Ocean answer to cleaning the waterways?
Lots of rivers and lakes and watwerways have concessions on them where private enterprise charges and is charged for its use by goverment etities, Doc land as well.
Why was their is there no Ocean outcry about this? Is that because it was under National?

No, my ethical perspective doesn't change with the govt, dude. If demand is higher than can be sustained then I think you simply regulate to control that, not fuck with fundamental riparian rights which have historically been heavily protected for a damned good reason.

Reticulation is another matter, it's entirely correct to charge for the cost of the infrastructure that gets water to your tap.

And you already saw my answer to cleaning up the waterways: stop shitting in them. Is pretty simple, you don't have to tax every fucking problem into submission.

[husaberg]

Ironic, coming from KBs stupidest member.

If only they could find away to tax people who perpetuate and propagate stupid conspiracy theories. I'd vote ACT if they would do that.
Of course the problem would be they (the tin foil hatters)have no money as they generally useless with little intelligence or skills.
Maybe we could farm them for organs?

[mashman]

but regulation is the right way to deal with activities that pollute waterways

No. Stopping production is. Regulation sets a new minimal level, which can then be studied for 20 years to see if it's working before a conclusion can be made. Ironically enough, anything other than stopping the production of useless shite that's produced for the sole purpose of making money, is doing absolutely nothing about anything. Your environment will die because you have allowed pollution, so long as someone has been taxed to pay for any cleanup that may potentially take place when the money can be made available. Stopping production stops the pollution and gives the chance of a cleanup an actual chance as yielding a positive result. Unfortunately, your system can't handle such a thing, because it's direct output is the very thing that is responsible for pollution in the first place. Regulation indeed

[Honest Andy]

Really? I dispose of over 1000 litres a month every month with nothing more that a "how is it mate" to the truck driver.
And it costs me nothing.

yeah that's being recycled, maybe for waste-oil burners and stuff like that

[husaberg]

No, my ethical perspective doesn't change with the govt, dude. If demand is higher than can be sustained then I think you simply regulate to control that, not fuck with fundamental riparian rights which have historically been heavily protected...

It is already regulated its just it not regulated enough.

Reticulation is another matter, it's entirely correct to charge for the cost of the infrastructure that gets water to your tap..

Ocean in case you missed it run of the river or ground water irrigation is consented, metered and charged already. not just the irrigation sheme that were set up by the farmers..........

And you already saw my answer to cleaning up the waterways: stop shitting in them. Is pretty simple, you don't have to tax every fucking problem into submission.

So how are you going to stop the shit getting into them then? how are you going to pay to police this? where is the money coming from?
Remember a lot of the waterway and environmental pollution comes from urbanites.

[Ocean1]

Fuckin farmers waste as much as they use

Nearly thirty odd years ago environmental scientists said fresh water would be the oil of the future and it needed to be looked after.
And on the grand scale of things the usable amount of fresh water available is sweet F/A, it'll be too late to shut the gate after the horse has bolted as it's only a finite resource

Were those NZ scientists?

Only we get somewhat more than our fair share of the world's fresh water here. About 560,000 million cubic meters a year.

If it didn't eventually escape off the edges of the country it'd be over 2 meters deep inside a year.

There isn't going to be any shortage of water in NZ for a while yet, too much water is far more of a problem than not enough.

[Ocean1]

No. Stopping production is. Regulation sets a new minimal level, which can then be studied for 20 years to see if it's working before a conclusion can be made. Ironically enough, anything other than stopping the production of useless shite that's produced for the sole purpose of making money, is doing absolutely nothing about anything. Your environment will die because you have allowed pollution, so long as someone has been taxed to pay for any cleanup that may potentially take place when the money can be made available. Stopping production stops the pollution and gives the chance of a cleanup an actual chance as yielding a positive result. Unfortunately, your system can't handle such a thing, because it's direct output is the very thing that is responsible for pollution in the first place. Regulation indeed

So in your world the right way to regulate pollutants is to not regulate them.

No surprises there.

[sidecar bob]

What?, you didn't have to go to the facility and do an audit, view all the H and S policies, Council Certs, Emergency Plans,

Groundwater test certs, Public Liability insurances and so on?

It probably goes to the same place but how do you know its not just dumped in a river?

Do you charge your customers a " Environmental "fee for ethical oil disposal?

How do you get rid of tyres...same bloke?

http://www.oilrecovery.co.nz
Dude, didn't you even google or pm me?
There ya go, a plug for the good blokes. I could have saved you a bundle.
If they're dumping it in a river I'd say they're in more shit than I am:
I don't sell tyres, but there's a creek near my house for all the old bike ones.

[Ocean1]

yeah that's being recycled, maybe for waste-oil burners and stuff like that

I once sold 60 tons of HFO from cleaning out the refinery's abandoned tankage back to them for not much short of their list price.

We weren't allowed in the pub to celebrate, what being black as fuck from head to foot.

[mashman]

So in your world the right way to regulate pollutants is to not regulate them.

No surprises there.

In my world, people realise that the state of their waterways is more important than profit and wouldn't pollute them in the first place, because people realise that that production results in that pollution. You have no idea of my world, because you've never tried to understand it. That's your prerogative, dude, but you're denying the evidence. See, I see people as capable of grasping a concept like, environmental responsibility, given that it's really rather important for an awful lot of things. No need to regulate anything.

[Ocean1]

It is already regulated its just it not regulated enough.

Ocean in case you missed it run of the river or ground water irrigation is consented, metered and charged already. not just the irrigation sheme that were set up by the farmers..........


So how are you going to stop the shit getting into them then? how are you going to pay to police this? where is the money coming from?
Remember a lot of the waterway and environmental pollution comes from urbanites.

Then regulate it more effectively.

Yes. I just don't agree with it.

What makes you think I have a problem with charging for regulation?