Mining and Labour trying to fuck it

[T.W.R]

I guess when all the straws are gone,some infants resort to red bling

Infants winge about it

[Quasievil]

Worked for a mining company have you????

I work for Mobil so yes I do, im fairly sure they make a fairly decent profit every year

If you have therefore you are an expert on profitability of mines generally.
So put your experience on the table if you want to be viewed as a expert on the subject.

[T.W.R]

I work for Mobil so yes I do, im fairly sure they make a fairly decent profit every year

If you have therefore you are an expert on profitability of mines generally.
So put your experience on the table if you want to be viewed as a expert on the subject.

You obviously missed the 1st post where I quoted you about Huntly.

if you worked for Mobil then you'd know in mining operations the actual work is tendered out over a set time period to keep overheads to a minimum. And I bet you were a pen pusher not actually getting your hands dirty at the coalface (so to speak).

And to add: it's funny how you didn't retort to that post or dismiss what is actually happening at Huntly

[Tank]

Now this is hilarious (about labour) from Kiwi blog this morning:

Quoting a release from Gerry Brownlee:

Labour’s hypocrisy over mining has been laid bare, says Energy and Resources Minister Gerry Brownlee, after new figures released by Crown Minerals today showed Labour approved more than 200 permits for mining on the Conservation Estate.

“This from the party that launched a campaign yesterday saying it was explicitly opposed to mining conservation areas – not just Schedule Four land, but conservation land full stop,” Mr Brownlee said.

Labour’s pledge of opposition to mining on conservation land is similar to their ax the tax campaign.

200 permits in just nine years!

“But if that wasn’t enough, we also have the release today of information that Labour approved a mining consent on land considered special enough to warrant Schedule Four status, the very behaviour Phil Goff has been decrying as unthinkable.

“It turns out Labour approved a permit in 2006 for mining gold, garnets and other gemstones on 168.5 hectares of land at Hart Creek, inside Paparoa National Park.

And they mined national parks.

“The information shows Labour were happy for mining to take place on 21,961 hectares of land, meanwhile the government is seeking approval to release a mere 7,058 hectares of Schedule Four land, of which as little as 500 hectares might be mined,” Mr Brownlee said.

My view is that mining applications should be decided on a case by case basis – as both Labour and National have done in the past. Economic benefits need to be weighed up against conservation value for each site.

Figures released by Crown Minerals [attached] show 218 permits were approved under a Labour government for mining inside Department of Conservation land between December 1999 and October 2008.

That is an average of one permit every fortnight was issued under Labour for mining on conservation land. I repeat one permit every fortnight.

a big case of pandering to the public with nothing to back it up again!!!!

[Quasievil]

You obviously missed the 1st post where I quoted you about Huntly.

if you worked for Mobil then you'd know in mining operations the actual work is tendered out over a set time period to keep overheads to a minimum

Yes I forgot that you worked at Huntly, thats fine and certainly Im not baiting your credibility in "whatever" capacity you where employed under, but I dont understand how you can say that mines are unprofitable as a general comment when clearly (based on international successful operations) they are profitable, look at Australia for example its a major revenue source for them.

At this stage of the debate we dont know locations/operations/ore type/processes or basically anything really so Im not willing to agree that that its not going to be a profitable exercise.

just regarding the long term thing i.e. that we wont see any benefits for years I except this, but thats fine as Im not sure a "fast quick buck option" exists .......sadly!!

Yes I still work for Mobil, but Im not privy to the upstream side of the business ;-)

[T.W.R]

but I dont understand how you can say that mines are unprofitable as a general comment when clearly (based on international successful operations) they are profitable, look at Australia for example its a major revenue source for them.

At this stage of the debate we dont know locations/operations/ore type/processes or basically anything really so Im not willing to agree that that its not going to be a profitable exercise.

just regarding the long term thing i.e. that we wont see any benefits for years I except this, but thats fine as Im not sure a "fast quick buck option" exists .......sadly!!

I didn't & haven't said that mines aren't profitable, just that the profit margin is minimal and as you say in the last sentence they wont see benefits for many years. There isn't & never will be fast buck options ever...there's far to much involved to even get a simple small scale mine operational let alone a large scale operation.
Operations like Australia are huge by comparison to NZ and took decades to get to that scale and it was only once they got to that scale that they made the impact on the countries revenue but even that is small by comparison to where the minerals & ore finally end up.

[Quasievil]

I didn't & haven't said that mines aren't profitable, just that the profit margin is minimal and as you say in the last sentence they wont see benefits for many years. There isn't & never will be fast buck options ever...there's far to much involved to even get a simple small scale mine operational let alone a large scale operation.
Operations like Australia are huge by comparison to NZ and took decades to get to that scale and it was only once they got to that scale that they made the impact on the countries revenue but even that is small by comparison to where the minerals & ore finally end up.

Ok I understand your comments......cheers, no argument from me, as clearly you have an educated opinion, I dont....not really, I just assumed that if the govt where going to start mining they would do it on the basis of it being of financial bennifits.
If what you say is actual fact (how can anyone know the complete situation and story) I would certainly change my complete argument in its entirety on the basis that whats the point? But like I said how can one know??

[T.W.R]

Ok I understand your comments......cheers, no argument from me, as clearly you have an educated opinion, I dont....not really, I just assumed that if the govt where going to start mining they would do it on the basis of it being of financial bennifits.
If what you say is actual fact (how can anyone know the complete situation and story) I would certainly change my complete argument in its entirety on the basis that whats the point? But like I said how can one know??

I'm no expert on the complete in & outs of the operational systems of the mines. But as history has it here in NZ especially with mines on the westcoast (underground), they were operating at a point the owners thought were profitable and when the margins of profit declined the mines were shut down because the expense was too much, even to the point that going opencast wasn't a process to be considered. Some went so deep they were extracting CHUCKIE rocks which is a very very rare event on a worldwide scale.
The cost involved with starting mines is staggering and by ways of comparison (for example) like the undertaking involved with building sports arenas , they do the groundwork set the budget, get a quote of costs, impliment the building of the arena with a time frame & budget and next thing there's unexpected problems and over the course of that time the budget gets blown out and when the arena is finally operational operates at a loss for a substantial period of time sometimes never returning a profit.
NZ's economy can't afford the loses involved to that scale.....once apon a time maybe they could have but there are too many leeches that bleed the system and they'd bleed the system dry if they could.

[mashman]

So you now understand where I'm coming from "Eutopia" (I'm talking life as we know it, but without a financial system ha ha ha... it'll just be life without a financial system... I don't have all of the answers (but removing money will change society for ever, and I would think we're intelligent enough that that change would probably be for the better for the whole of mankind), but that's what makes us all so unique... we ALL think differently...

ummmm and this is bad how??

Nothing wrong with creating jobs, am all for them, but believe that there are other issues that could use extra human resource before we go digging in the ground... Upgrading the country's infrastructure for 1.

Errrr Yeah and whats the point?

It's a rape and pillage of resources for MONEY. Futile... money makes the world go around... it's also responsible for some of the worst crimes on the planet...

Where do you get short term from, Huntly ,Waihi (my local mines) have been there for years and year and have whole communities built around them sustaining them and their families, how is this bad?

For years and years ONLY... it's not future proofing an industry... let alone a sensible use of resource... somewhere in the future we have to deal with the fallout... isn't that the point of obtaining money, to provide for the future?

What did you expect from your government.......Im intrigued

I expect my government to do what's right for the future of the people, not what's right for the immediate bank balance.

Like what ??

You've seen my question. Like that

Hardly fair, they need to make the coin to pay for a squillion things, not least of all Labour voting lifestyle bludgers.
Sideshow?? you shitting me, have you been to Australia lately Im fairly sure they have a massive industry around mining not to mention a very significant population employed in it.
Mining is a viable and good industry, managed correctly its a winner for NZ

Managed correctly ha ha ha ha... in the current version of life those who enter into the mining enterprise will want their cut. Whilst that seems fair, it's not when you consider the the CEO of a company couldn't actually go and mine the minerals for themselves, it takes rafts and rafts of people, yet they all get paid differently due to experience levels. Why? It's a crock of shit this, I know more than you do, so i'll have more money than you... without the coal face workers, nothing will happen.

Forced into Labour ??

Yes. FORCED... but this is where it gets icky... Changing peoples perceptions. If there's no financial system then you'll have very high unemployment... However, the essentials of life will still to be tended too. As such I would suggest the 5 hour, 4 day a week, week. There should be enough people to fill the positions. Why do it if there's no money involved? We have to eat, drink blah blah blah... for your fellow human... Currently we pay taxes to keep "the bludgers" (they are both rich and poor), why not ask them to partake in society, but at a minimal level for your fellow Kiwi. There is a culture here that wasn't "used" to money not 200 years ago... (shock horror) how did they ever survive without money?

Oh dear Mashman

Yes Quasi darling... was it good for you?

In all honesty I just want to be a stay home Dad... but that's not financially possible and the only way for me to be the stay home Dad, without impacting on the time I spend with my kids, is to win the lottery or be given a very well paid job that let's me work from home... Or for society to change. No Money, next to no Crime... you can't steal to sell, you don't need money to live, you will be fed and watered irrespective, although people like ourselves might look down our noses as it's for the good of the people (we do it now because they won't go out and earn money)...

One thign that's constant, in regards to money, is planning for the future. I got to this point when I was 24, me and my ex at Uni, living in an undesirable place in Glasgow (it was colourful though and the people weren't as bad as painted...) me bouncing doors by night, bowling alleys by day, scrambling down the back of the couch for money for nappies for my son etc... At that point in time I realised that money was a complete fucker... but unfortunately a necessity in our economy... and on occasion these thoughts come streaming back to me, Bikeoi raised them again this time... and pretty much everytime I think about my childrens future... all I can think of is that they are going to be the employee of the government... the way I look at it Quasi, you don't actually own your own business... you lease a franchise from the govt via tax... We're all slaves to a certain extent (it's all in the mind... BOLLOCKS)... we make some money, some steal it, some kill for it, the rich ones just want more of it etc... and on and on... I've dotted as many I's and T's over the years as I can... but there's no point in having this as a theory if PEOPLE LIKE YOU (not a bad thing mate, I almost want to be you) FILE IT IN THE TOO HARD BASKET...

I've thought up potential implmenetation plans, all sorts of disjointed information and thoughts... but people won't discuss it because it'll never happen. The only reason it'll never happen is because people can't let go of the concept of money (lord knows I've tried to convert my wife over the last couple of months... She understands it, but can't get her head around not having money)...

Anyway... yes I believe that it can be done...

As you can tell it's still just a rant... needs a few more minds.

[mashman]

I'm still waiting for you to explain to me, in your perfect system, how we'd decide who has to ride a Honda and who gets an Aprillia. Or a Moto Guzzi.

You can order what you like... You might have to wait though as there's a waiting list and the rocket cycles could be due out any time soon

[avgas]

Arrgh I just lost a massive message.
Cant be fucked retyping it. So will end with punchline.

What is definition of "Conservation"?
Like I have said before, I have nothing against mining. But there needs to be a balance - to me if a something is defined by a term. It needs to be assigned all the properties of that term. Otherwise what is the point?

[Pascal]

Like I have said before, I have nothing against mining. But there needs to be a balance - to me if a something is defined by a term. It needs to be assigned all the properties of that term. Otherwise what is the point?

True. This proposal from the government relates to:

(a) Removing 7000 odd hectares from Section 4
(b) Adding 12000 odd hectares to Section 4
(c) Allowing investigation to be determined on a case by case basis on the land
(d) Ensuring there is a consistent procedure for applications to DOC for this
(e) Requesting public submission on the process and what is happening

This is in contrast to, as we now know after our former masters hid this knowledge from us, the 200 odd permits that Labour approved. None of this seems to be quite as contentious as it is being made out. But, media feeding frenzy plus the typical Labour do as we say, not as we do politics have turned it into a right royal mess.

Personally I feel whatever is done needs to be well thought out, documented and have a good period for public submission as well as LISTENING to those public submissions.

[Ixion]

It's a rape and pillage of resources for MONEY. Futile... money makes the world go around... it's also responsible for some of the worst crimes on the planet...

No, it's not. Or, at least, not money for US.

Now, I'm no greenie. So I don't really care too much about the ecology stuff. But the conservation areas are public domain. And they're valuable. So if they get fucked up and become less valuable, then I , as a citizen, have suffered a loss. Just like having a house with a really nice garden. Increases the value of the property. If you then turn the garden into a dump , the property is less valuable. So, I think that mining in the conservation estate must decrease it's value - which is a net loss to ME.

Therefore, if that's going to happen , I expect to see BIG $$ returns (net of all expense) coming back to ME (and all the other people in NZ).

Let's look at what returns we, the people of NZ are going to get out of this.

I've seen figures quoted of 15 grams of gold per truckload. That's about half an ounce, roughly worth $500. So, for a million dollars worth of mineral, they have to cart 2000 truckloads of ore to the processing plant. And cart the 2000 truckloads (less the 15grams) back away again. That's 4000 truck movements in the Coromandel per year. (Won't that be fun)

But, it's very unlikley that the mining areas will be handy beside an existing road. So, to provide access we, the taxpayer, will be expected to put in new roads. At how many millions of dollars ?

And that 2000 truckloads is going to leave a big hole. At, say, 6 cu mtrs per truck, that's 12000 cu mtr. Say, a hole, very roughly, 12 foot deep and 200 foot across. (or narrower, but deeper)

So, we have : a net LOSS to me of an unknown value , but many many millions across the whole population, because of the mess the mining companies always leave when they pull out. Either the value of the conservation estate is reduced by millions or we (the taxpayer) have to pay millions to clean it up.

We (the taxpayer) have to pay more millions to cover the cost of new roads and/or more damage to the existing ones (4000 truckloads a year remember) .

We have an unquantified loss due to reduced tourism . Dunno how to measure that so I'll ignore it.

OK. That's the downside of every million dollars worth of mineral wealth. So what's the upside to ME and the other NZ citizens (I don't care about profits for overseas corporations).

Gee. We get 1% of the million. A massive $10000 per year. Woopy doo.

And some jobs. How many? Well 4000 trucktrips at half an hour a trip, 2000 hours a year. That's about a man year (on a 40 hour week basis) . So, one job.

And another job for someone to run the digger.

And I guess a manager or clerical person.

And one to run the processing plant. Total of maybe 4 jobs max. As someone noted, mining isn't a labour intensive industry.

If those 4 were all on the dole (about $12000 a year ? Summit like that). That $48000 per year.

Total value to NZ. $10000 plus $48000 . $580000.

Sure, these are wild approximations. And the mining companies are talking billions not millions. Which means more revenue, more jobs, but also means more expense , more mess. So the overall value equation remains the same

This has to be the biggest rort proposed since the original guys arrived offering sensational deals on muskets and bblankets

We pay millions , to get back $58000.

The only people who benefit are the overseas corporatiuons.

Bugger the ecology. it's a ripoff and I oppose it on that basis.

[MisterD]

Slightly O/T, but the buy-out of dairy farms by Chinese interests came up a while ago:

Cactus Kate on the dubious nature of that

[Quasievil]

Ive decided this thread is made up of to many assumptions, we dont know what the details are so kinda whats the point.

Good discussions tho guys pros and cons all good !!

Ave a loverly day

oh Mashman...........yeah baby it twas good for me ;-)