Asset sale protests!

[puddytat]

Like I said earlier, where has this approach worked?
Ask the English if water privatisation was a good idea.Has their supply got better? Has prices dropped?
I think you right whingers are just clutching at straws if you think that the system which has bankrupted the world twice in the last 100 years is going to fix it. Usually a war is their solution.
You righties show an arrogance towards anyone who doesnt follow youre agenda or who cant afford to. You should learn from history that when you demonise & look down your noses at any one in a lower socioeconomic scale, that they only take it for so long....
And they vote for the left. Socialism is on the increase in Europe....why?

[carver]

I mean just look at what it's done for Waihi and Huntly! They are just booming, right?

All this crap about "Mum and Dad investors" is a crock too. Most Kiwis dont even have the 2-3k lying around to spend on shares, and the ones that might, will sell them to offshore interests as soon as a buck can be made so effectively nearly all of the future profits from the SOE's will go to big corporartes. Big corporates who have a track record of fucking the other 99% of the world ever since the industrial revolution started.

huntly doubled in size with the arrival of a power station, and meremere turned into a nigger shithole when the power plant shut down.

Like I said earlier, where has this approach worked?
Ask the English if water privatisation was a good idea.Has their supply got better? Has prices dropped?
I think you right whingers are just clutching at straws if you think that the system which has bankrupted the world twice in the last 100 years is going to fix it. Usually a war is their solution.
You righties show an arrogance towards anyone who doesnt follow youre agenda or who cant afford to. You should learn from history that when you demonise & look down your noses at any one in a lower socioeconomic scale, that they only take it for so long....
And they vote for the left. Socialism is on the increase in Europe....why?

in Europe, you will find they will arrive on a high tax, hardcore govt control model as a result of the euro crisis, either way, if you want stuff, you got to pay.

I see it this way

The socialist sees the rich and says: make him pay for me and what I want.
So the govt goes and takes by force some of what he has earned.

The Capitalist sees the poor and says, why should I pay for these useless people?
So the govt cuts back on things, and the dependents cry a bit.

It must really suck to depend on the state, I am glad I am reasonably self sufficient.

With big govt comes big control.

[MisterD]

I think you right whingers are just clutching at straws if you think that the system which has bankrupted the world twice in the last 100 years is going to fix it. Usually a war is their solution.

Which is utter, utter, bullshit. Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other force in the history of mankind.

I highly recommend reading "The Real Crash" by Peter Schiff (you know, the bloke that predicted the financial crisis). The lessons of the great depression aren't what you think they are.

Socialism is on the increase in Europe....why?

Because dumb deluded electorates will always vote for politicians who promise they can have their cake and eat it too.

[puddytat]

Bloody funny that the right or the left believe that they are correct given that they're both so full of shit that they get to the point where they won't cooperate for the benefit of their voters.

That is the crux of our problems.

[puddytat]

Because dumb deluded electorates will always vote for politicians who promise they can have their cake and eat it too.

right...so righties are no different then.

[mashman]

That is the crux of our problems.

Nahhhh, that can't be the case surely? Just look at the forum full of posters, they're individual thinking intelligent beings who want the best for their country and as such vote in the party that is most likely going to achieve that. How can they all be wrong? let alone those who are actually at the coalface making those decisions and enacting policy to make life better for everyone in the country. Surely it would be madness to ignore a sensible suggestion from a political party just because they are the opposition?

[MisterD]

[QUOTE=puddytat;1130357667]That is the crux of our problems.[/QUOTE

Ya reckon? The only reasons politicians of left and right co-operate, is to stitch everyone up for their own benefit.

The crux of the problem is that no politician will ever dare propose any policy that involves short-term pain for longer term gain. The definition of a bad policy is one that results in the other lot being elected next time.

[Brian d marge]

So you base your arguements on "odds" ... and guesswork.

Nice try , not even worth rising too ,,the evidence I have given many times before . ( I might collect it all and put in me notes)



But if Labour "continues the madness" ... that would be entirely dependant on them winning the election. And would show they are in agreement with the policy. Yes , but why, because the policy is sound OR because they have to

If operational costs are reduced/removed as part of sale conditions ... those costs are not returns as such, but savings. Either way ... it's still money in the bank. If tax breaks are given in return for greater operational costs covered ... The buyer company profit still remains viable. As do returns to goverment coffers.

Companies are there to do one thing , make profit. for example a supermarket is not there to provide you with a health dinner or even a service. They are there to maximise profits . So what will the new water company do .? sure as hell try to maximise profits ( well it should do )



If condition of sale is that the buyer pays operational costs ... those costs are not paid by our goverment/tax-payer .... Thus they save that money. That is not to say that job cuts wont take place ... that would be up to the buyer to decide. If it would cut their costs ... and still leave them able to provide the service

( which should happen in any organisation, but now we add a highly paid CEO , , note to self wonder if the pay rates are similar between civil service )

If they think they can't ... they won't buy in ... one would think ???

No doubt Toll thought they would make money ... as to why they didn't ... you'll have to ask them.

As for being no help to you ... I guess you can't please everybody. If this is part of your arguement ... thats is a rather selfish standpoint. No doubt the basis of all the protesters ... as I doubt if any of them have given any thought to a long term benefit the sales may reap. From comments made so far ... the protest is political, rather thand sound reasoning.

If services I ( or others) rely on are cut or increased in price then isnt a selfish arguement. especially when the pressures on my familys income are rising ...
Yes National did say they were going to sell assets, many people at that time said no .....but

Why ... as you suggested earlier when you mentioned Labour may agree with the sales .... or attempt a buy-out. Not that they may have any choice in the matter. A sales agreement ... is a sales agreement .... and binding.

yes it is binding , once done cannot be reversed without more money ,

History has shown , that it doesnt work , cant think of one case where it has lowered costs and given at the same time a better service ...The countrys that have rejected the IMP/world banks opinions are doing quite well , Argentina for example


Bottom line , you sell the assets , yet the money can and probably will help other areas ( research and development for example ) but the daily utility, prices will go up , , it happened before , in NZ and in other countrys , chances are it will happen again....but the asset has been sold ...its binding .....

I dont think, based on what happened before to NZ and other countries , that the selling of assets is a good idea. I hope to be proven wrong , I really do , but somehow I can see myself in a few years saying "I told you so" ala Acc ....electricity , student loan etc ..

Im quite happy to be proven wrong



Stephen

[Usarka]

I heard a guy on the radio suggesting that customers of Mercury who are against the sales should switch to another provider (eg Meridian who is also an SOE).

[Nova.]

listen/watch whole song ooorrrr, 1:20

woops

[BoristheBiter]

... take yer blinkers off Boris. How many banks have been bailed out over the last 5 years? and what damage has that caused to millions/billions of peoples lives? At least "my" idea negates that possibility... and it certainly doesn't blind me to the reality's of what is going on in the world. Hint for ya big fulla, there is no box to think outside of... just scared narrow minded people with limited imaginations, pathetic ideologies and so fearful of losing what they "have" that they'll do ANYTHING to protect it. Weak weak people.
I mentioned blue chip etc... because they are local examples of company's full of experts with excellent investment opportunities for Mum and Dad investors... and they offered low risk opportunities too. Is your head really so far up your own backside that you believe that there is an investment out there that doesn't bare any risk? Especially given the last 5 years, let alone discounting every recession that has gone before it and the failure of huge company's and the need for austerity in the so called golden age of mankind. Even by my standards that's naive.

Yes but your standards are pretty low.

Getting back to the point in this thread, you had your chance to voice your opinion and you chose (well you say you did) not to.
If you felt so strongly on this issue, there seems to be a few of you, maybe you should have voted better.

[mashman]

Yes but your standards are pretty low.

Getting back to the point in this thread, you had your chance to voice your opinion and you chose (well you say you did) not to.
If you felt so strongly on this issue, there seems to be a few of you, maybe you should have voted better.

The least you could try to do is hurdle such a low bar.

Why did you vote for National given that you didn't want asset sales? I see you mentioned you used to be a red like your family, the Social Credit, then the Nats... what drove those changes in your voting stance? Just curious...

My family are "tory", but I've never voted coz there ain't nuffink to vote for. (Even the guy collecting asset sales "protest" signatures at the station understood that.)

[BoristheBiter]

The least you could try to do is hurdle such a low bar.

Why did you vote for National given that you didn't want asset sales? I see you mentioned you used to be a red like your family, the Social Credit, then the Nats... what drove those changes in your voting stance? Just curious...

My family are "tory", but I've never voted coz there ain't nuffink to vote for. (Even the guy collecting asset sales "protest" signatures at the station understood that.)

Mate i wouldn't even have to lift my foot.

Why? I think they are the lesser of two evils. they are more likely to bring us out of the hole that has been dug.
Yes I knew they are going to sell half of the SOE's, had it been a complete sell off i never would have have voted for them.
The one thing they said they would do and haven't is getting rid of the Maori seats. I wonder why.

If Labour had put some money aside over the 9 years they were in power we wouldn't have the massive debt we have today. They have no idea on how to do anything other than hand out bribes for the greedy and they don't seem to be changing.

Use to vote labour as I had been told this was the thing to do (very old English Labour family).
Then changed to SC as they stood the same type of ideals I did (at the time).
Now the Nats as I could see voting for ACT would be a wasted vote. (how apt now it seems)
Next time who know's but I will still stand by the choice I make.

[mashman]

Mate i wouldn't even have to lift my foot.

Why? I think they are the lesser of two evils. they are more likely to bring us out of the hole that has been dug.
Yes I knew they are going to sell half of the SOE's, had it been a complete sell off i never would have have voted for them.
The one thing they said they would do and haven't is getting rid of the Maori seats. I wonder why.

If Labour had put some money aside over the 9 years they were in power we wouldn't have the massive debt we have today. They have no idea on how to do anything other than hand out bribes for the greedy and they don't seem to be changing.

Use to vote labour as I had been told this was the thing to do (very old English Labour family).
Then changed to SC as they stood the same type of ideals I did (at the time).
Now the Nats as I could see voting for ACT would be a wasted vote. (how apt now it seems)
Next time who know's but I will still stand by the choice I make.

So low it's underground eh... fuck yeah that makes it sound cool.

Why are/were they more likely to bring us out of the hole? Especially after they cut their tax revenue at the start of a recession/depression and have to borrow to cover the shortfall. Reports (yes unfortunately I'm "quoting" the media) say 1.1 billion in the first 9 months. Surely that's taking us even further into the hole? It would seem overseas borrowing has trebled under (45 billion as opposed to 15 billion, RBNZ figures that I've posted before) the current govt. Further into the hole? Then bailing out SCF (did they really have to pay interest as well?). Then the earthquakes ($30 billion over 10 years?) and still not a peep in regards to upping taxation, just more borrowing. Further into the hole? Granted the opposition may well have had to borrow from overseas too, but they were also going to tap into a currently untapped revenue source (CGT on housing) as well as others considering a financial transaction tax. Maybe they would have put the tax brackets back too. Granted I see no reason that any party would have done any better than the Nats, but we'd have still had out assets for when the next recession came along.

Ad for the labs. How did they waste their money? When was the last time a govt saved money? Don't they invest it these days?

So you're a flip flop voter who wants his vote to count so badly that you'll only vote for a winner... with a social conscience blip in between times . Each to his own I guess

[Brian d marge]

Are there any ultilities , ( or any other company for that matter ) that was a government Dept and then went private, that now delivers a cheaper or better service product


Stephen