Is John a spineless pussy or what?

[oldrider]

Well here's an alternative interpretation from the underrated Monkey with Typewriter



If the Labour party continue to believe that JK is some bumbling clown and they just have to wait for teh electorate to come crawling back to them and beg to socially engineered a bit more, then they're looking at at least another two election losses. I reckon JK is probably the sharpest, quickest studying politician I'm likely to see in my lifetime, even if he is far too bloody soft and left wing.

That just about sums it up except to say that he has about as much political direction as a ship without a rudder!

[shrub]

I reckon JK is probably the sharpest, quickest studying politician I'm likely to see in my lifetime, even if he is far too bloody soft and left wing.

What exactly is 'left wing"? And I'm guessing you were born a couple of years ago and plan to shuffle off this mortal coil in about 4 years?

i know people who work with him, and he is widely considered to be a bit of a bimbo.

[pete376403]

.

His policies are still very much centrist - as it has to be to get traction with a decade of the state dependancy and lack of personal responsiblity that Labour infected New Zealand with. However, despite the absolutely fucked up legacy he has to deal with, he's managed to at least steer the good ship NZ back into the right direction. .

S'funny - Since 1949 to date National has held the government benches for about 42 years, Labour been the government about half that. Yet anything wrong in NZ is blamed on labour. Can they have been that effective at getting things done (even bad things) while National is so ineffective that even with twice as much time in power they can't fx it?

Anyway, back to the topic, JonKey - smarmy prick who doesn't really care which way the country goes as he has enough personal wealth to ride out any crisis anywhere he wants.

[oldrider]

S'funny - Since 1949 to date National has held the government benches for about 42 years, Labour been the government about half that. Yet anything wrong in NZ is blamed on labour. Can they have been that effective at getting things done (even bad things) while National is so ineffective that even with twice as much time in power they can't fx it?

Anyway, back to the topic, JonKey - smarmy prick who doesn't really care which way the country goes as he has enough personal wealth to ride out any crisis anywhere he wants.

Having been here and witnessed that period, what you say is relatively true!

Labour have made "most" of the significant changes but as to the value of those changes .... well ... depends on your persuasion!

National are generally more conservative and their changes have been in the main beneficial to the country, when compared to Labours!

There is not much difference between them really and the overall results are no different than if National and Labour were in "official" coalition with each other!

Then again the "electorate" is mainly socialist in New Zealand so they (politicians) cut their cloth accordingly!

The crappy left of centre governments that we get are what the people demand!

[Pascal]

S'funny - Since 1949 to date National has held the government benches for about 42 years, Labour been the government about half that. Yet anything wrong in NZ is blamed on labour. Can they have been that effective at getting things done (even bad things) while National is so ineffective that even with twice as much time in power they can't fx it?

Which government presided over the largest economic boom in recent history and then deliberately left the purse empty for the following government?

Yeah.

I blame a lot that goes wrong in NZ on Labour and some of it on the rest.

[Swoop]

I'd rather have a Career Politician, than a babysitting Manager. The Career Politician will only ever gain knowledge.

The "career" politico's we have had, have emerged from university and headed straight into politics. They should have gained some real-life knowledge before getting anywhere near Wellington's circular wind-tunnel.

Even the police do not recruit straight from school. They want people with a bit of life experience to make decisions on.

[shrub]

Which government presided over the largest economic boom in recent history and then deliberately left the purse empty for the following government?

Yeah.

I blame a lot that goes wrong in NZ on Labour and some of it on the rest.

Ah, you've been reading the national party press releases. National and Labour have almost identical economic policies and are as bad as each other. Almost all of our financial problems as a nation come from running a balance of payments deficit for decades, in other words we have been spending more than we earn. We are in a similar position to Ireland or Greece, the difference being they had sovereign debt whereas our debt was private.

NZ is mostly in the shit because we have gone and spend gazillians of cash on cars, TVs, houses and (sorry) flash motorbikes that we can't afford. We're kind of like the couple who keep drawing down on the equity in their house to pay for trips, cars and toys, then wonder why the nasty old bank starts saying bad things about raising their interest rates and stopping their credit.

Their are solutions, but they have escaped the financial masterminds in either party because they're hard work and won't win elections.

[Pascal]

Ah, you've been reading the national party press releases. National and Labour have almost identical economic policies and are as bad as each other. Almost all of our financial problems as a nation come from running a balance of payments deficit for decades, in other words we have been spending more than we earn. We are in a similar position to Ireland or Greece, the difference being they had sovereign debt whereas our debt was private.

I do not disagree that they're both freaking terribad. However, we both know that government expenditure over the last 9 years climbed astronomically and that the government ran massive surpluses. Whilst raking in revenue through taxation. There was not a thought for putting a bit away for a rainy day. Or even reducing the size of government.

Should get rid of the whole freaking lot.

As to personal debt, agreed. It's terrible. I made the mistake when I was a young fella and I wanted a TV, etc. Took me a damn awful time to pay off. Now, with the exception of our house, I buy everything cash. If we can't afford it, we can't afford it.

[MisterD]

We are in a similar position to Ireland or Greece, the difference being they had sovereign debt whereas our debt was private.

...and crucially we have our own currency for which the Reserve Bank can set appropriate interest rates.

[shrub]

...and crucially we have our own currency for which the Reserve Bank can set appropriate interest rates.

Which is a problem and the cause of many of our ills. The mechanism of driving up interest rates to slow growth/consumption works in theory but what has ended up happening is when the RB pushes up the OCR it attracts hot money from (primarily) Asian savers, which the banks then have to get rid of in the form of loans. As a result we have banks and non-bank lenders hustling for mortgages, which in turn has driven the property market into madness (aided by idiotic tax breaks) and has made consumer finance extremely easy to get which has pushed up consumption of imported consumer goods - mostly made in (yep), Asia.

The introduction of the core funding ratio was a good move, but it's being bypassed by clever bankers and therefore it's effectiveness is limited, so it needs to be tightened. In addition we need to curb population growth - 1% population growth = 3% GDP growth - if you're broke you don't have more kids even if your DPB increases.

Reducing inward migration by approx 40,000 pa would Largely close the current account gap, put a lid on the property market, reduce the attractiveness of rental properties, reduce consumption and reduce need for new infrastructure. We do need skills, so that's a challenge, and the legacy of a couple of decades of short sighted thinking by government and business.

We also need to lose fixed rate mortgages so the OCR has an immediate impact instead of the current lag and therefore it would help property become more realistically valued.

We need to stop our currency from being so attractive to traders by removing the floating exchange rate - we are too small for that, and Singapore have adopted a very effective system which makes their currency ugly and dirty for traders and speculators (like our man John). Our exporters struggle because they never know what their margins are going to be. I'd look at pegging our currency to our most traded currencies.

We need to invest in productive sectors, specifically equities in export oriented companies. FFS, the biggest company on the NZX is a bloody telecommunications company - how much money do they make us? We need to invest in companies that are earning money for NZ, not just moving money around.

We need to reduce our reliance on dairy. It is extremely risky to have so much of our income coming from one source, especially one that is as vulnerable as dairy. In a climate change environment, all we need are a couple of years of severe drought and/or flooding (like Australia), and dairy will stagger, and with it the NZ economy.

I'm not an economist by any stretch of the imagination, but these kinds of ideas would work better than tax cuts, cycle ways or even making Auckland into a super city. Pity they'll never happen.

[phill-k]

S'funny - Since 1949 to date National has held the government benches for about 42 years, Labour been the government about half that. Yet anything wrong in NZ is blamed on labour. Can they have been that effective at getting things done (even bad things) while National is so ineffective that even with twice as much time in power they can't fx it?

this just needed to be said twice, I wish Paul Henry was around to ask pretty-boy john that.

JK is not at the helm he is but the rudder of the national ship unfortunately those in the shadows who are steering him aren't very good at it, hence he wobbles all over the place.

Trouble is this time round I've know idea who I can vote for.

[terbang]

National are generally more conservative and their changes have been in the main beneficial to the country, when compared to Labours!

Muldoon's think big was conservative?

[phill-k]

Which is a problem and the cause of many of our ills. The mechanism of driving up interest rates to slow growth/consumption works in theory but what has ended up happening is when the RB pushes up the OCR it attracts hot money from (primarily) Asian savers, which the banks then have to get rid of in the form of loans. As a result we have banks and non-bank lenders hustling for mortgages, which in turn has driven the property market into madness (aided by idiotic tax breaks) and has made consumer finance extremely easy to get which has pushed up consumption of imported consumer goods - mostly made in (yep), Asia.

The introduction of the core funding ratio was a good move, but it's being bypassed by clever bankers and therefore it's effectiveness is limited, so it needs to be tightened. In addition we need to curb population growth - 1% population growth = 3% GDP growth - if you're broke you don't have more kids even if your DPB increases.

Reducing inward migration by approx 40,000 pa would Largely close the current account gap, put a lid on the property market, reduce the attractiveness of rental properties, reduce consumption and reduce need for new infrastructure. We do need skills, so that's a challenge, and the legacy of a couple of decades of short sighted thinking by government and business.

We also need to lose fixed rate mortgages so the OCR has an immediate impact instead of the current lag and therefore it would help property become more realistically valued.

We need to stop our currency from being so attractive to traders by removing the floating exchange rate - we are too small for that, and Singapore have adopted a very effective system which makes their currency ugly and dirty for traders and speculators (like our man John). Our exporters struggle because they never know what their margins are going to be. I'd look at pegging our currency to our most traded currencies.

We need to invest in productive sectors, specifically equities in export oriented companies. FFS, the biggest company on the NZX is a bloody telecommunications company - how much money do they make us? We need to invest in companies that are earning money for NZ, not just moving money around.

We need to reduce our reliance on dairy. It is extremely risky to have so much of our income coming from one source, especially one that is as vulnerable as dairy. In a climate change environment, all we need are a couple of years of severe drought and/or flooding (like Australia), and dairy will stagger, and with it the NZ economy.

I'm not an economist by any stretch of the imagination, but these kinds of ideas would work better than tax cuts, cycle ways or even making Auckland into a super city. Pity they'll never happen.

I like your reasoning, I think we should give you a go

[Indiana_Jones]

We need to reduce our reliance on dairy. It is extremely risky to have so much of our income coming from one source, especially one that is as vulnerable as dairy. In a climate change environment, all we need are a couple of years of severe drought and/or flooding (like Australia), and dairy will stagger, and with it the NZ economy.

This I do agree with, we can not put all our eggs in one basket as such. We're a young nation in the grand scheme of thing and we need private investment in other industries, of course we need incentives to do so. Would it be so crazy to suggest anyone setting up a new company with a certain capital gets a very reduced tax rate for the next 5-10 years?

Would be nice to see our nation grow, producing world class goods for the world. Would be awesome to own a NZ designed and produced car lol

But then again I'm just a working punter.... lol

-Indy

[mashman]

I'm not an economist by any stretch of the imagination, but these kinds of ideas would work better than tax cuts, cycle ways or even making Auckland into a super city. Pity they'll never happen.

Wealth distribution and the way it's taxed eh... I'm not having a pop at the wealthy, i'm sure they've worked their asses off for it.

I finally read the document I posted in post 77, and it makes for some very interesting reading and opened my eyes to certain economic "facts" that i'd completely ignored or not previously given a shit about. Boiled down:

The rich do not save, they have net worth and generally only buy expensive toys (from abroad?) or invest (in NZ?).
The poor, well they're poor and have very little "disposable" income to save.

What's the distribution ratio of wealth in NZ?

Anyhoo, best explained by the bank researcher...

"There is proof that high income earners, who saw their share of income go up in the U.S. in the nineties, and enjoyed the equity boom, reduced their savings rate as in our example. Indeed, in the real world, it went negative! Since that reduced savings rate was applied to their new enlarged chunk of income, sure enough the total savings rate fell sharply." hence we're not saving enough

"To summarize so far, plutonomies see the rich absorb a disproportionate chunk of the economy, their decision to lower their savings rate, often corresponding to the asset booms that often accompany plutonomy, has a massive negative impact on reported aggregate numbers like savings rates, current account deficits, consumption levels, etc." the things that the govt measure us against They blame the masses for problems that the riches saving habits cause

And we're asked to save ... the rich skew the figures and the rest pay for it

Which ever party lowers personal tax, as well as corporate taxes rates, is the winner in the, which political is economically strangling NZ, competition.

That being the case, National are fucking NZ's economy worse than Labour were before it... it's just a case of whether JK and chums know it... Either way, they're still fuckwits.

The "career" politico's we have had, have emerged from university and headed straight into politics. They should have gained some real-life knowledge before getting anywhere near Wellington's circular wind-tunnel.

Even the police do not recruit straight from school. They want people with a bit of life experience to make decisions on.

Fair enough... what does real life have to do with Politics?