Can anyone tell me why National are persisting with this asset sale programme.?
They apparently are still including the full profit from these outfits in their forward state of the economy figures (maybe one hand hasnt tild the other hand whats going on) and the popularity of the idea is very low.
Its the only decisison that they have made that they didnt have to make (ie: all their decisions about most other matters theyve had to make – eartnquake, international trading etc) and they decide to do something that hardly anyone wants.
I think they are on a pathway to lose the un-losable…..
I’m sure everyone would agree that Victoria University academic Jon Johansson is well qualified to hold his position of permanent commentator on TV1’s Q&A, being a political scientist and all. And I’m sure that if pressed any half knowledgeable political watcher would assume he has slightly left wing tendencies, and nothing wrong with that, so long as he’s able to put the personal aside in carrying out his professional political commentating duties. But still, it would be a bit interesting to know what he really thinks. And now, on two issues at least, his personal politics and the Prime Minister, we do.
You see I got picked up in a cab the other day by a lovely old talkaholic called Bev. Bev is in her 70s now and she lives alone. When she passes she’s leaving the proceeds of her freehold house, which she bought for $30,000 27 years ago, and what else is in her estate to the Sisters of Mercy, Women’s Refuge and the RSPCA. “I’m a socialist and proud of it,” she proclaims (three times), which is why she won’t do airport pick-ups. She says the airport company’s $6 levy on passengers as a rort. “I hate that bloody Infratil,” she says.
She loves watching TV, but not sport. She was from a soccer household, so didn’t watch much of the Rugby World Cup. She likes watching news, especially foreign financial news. And she loves watching our weekend political shows, Q&A and The Nation (well someone has to!) She remembers all the public figures she’s had in her cab. “That Carol Hirschfeld’s a socialist too – she told me so when I told her about the airport taxi charge. She didn’t know about it till I told her.”
Other gems were “that Fran O’Sullivan’s a real grump – she gave me a right serve.” And finally, “that nice Jon Johansson is another socialist; he told me so when I picked him up on his way to fly up to do Q&A. And, you’ll have to mind my language, I don’t speak like this but he did: he said he ‘effing hates John Key!’” So there you are. You probably assumed as much, but now you’ve heard it from dear old Bev.
Has anyone else seen the appalling student debt figures? The extravagance of this scheme, is stunning!
In summary, it says:
$10,000 270,040 people
$10,000-$24,999 209,071 people
$25,000-$49,999 110,186 people
$50,000-$99,999 29,203 people
$100,000-$119,000 1,500 people
$119,999-$139,999 617 people
$139,999+ 541 people
Can you imagine the response from any Board / or Bank Manager if you tried to run a business in this manner?
I thought people might get a kick out a recent Mark Steyn article – Adult Babies – which has at its centre two stories that I would not have believed had I not already come across from other sources.
Congresswoman DeLauro has introduced the DIAPER Act — that’s to say, the Diaper Investment and Aid to Promote Economic Recovery Act. So don’t worry, it’s not welfare, it’s “stimulus.”
It is actually beyond satire – as is this:
In fact, the federal government already provides free diapers for at least one lucky American. Stanley Thornton Jr. of California receives Supplementary Security Income disability checks from the Social Security Administration in order to sit around the house all day wearing a giant diaper and a giant onesie, sucking on a giant pacifier and playing with a giant baby rattle.
Stanley Jr. runs a website for fellow “adult babies” called BedWettingABDL.com.
Even so, I think Jon Stewart could do something with this. But the real point is that even if he did, it would provide a few yuks and ….. that would that. Nothing more would be done.
This is how government always slowly spins out of control – and how countries go down the toilet. As Steyn notes:
I believe I first heard of the “adult baby” phenomenon some years ago in London. If memory serves, there was a club, and the members lay around in giant cribs being read bedtime stories by a bosomy nanny. Minor celebrities and possibly backbench Tory members of Parliament may have been involved.
In those days, it was what we called a “fetish” and you had to do it on your own dime. Now it’s a “disability” and the United States government picks up the tab. And, if that’s not progress, what is?
“…Christian groups have drawn up plans to protect protesters by forming a ring of prayer around the camp outside St Paul’s Cathedral -
- should an attempt be made to forcibly remove them.
As the storm of controversy over the handling of the Occupy London Stock Exchange demonstration deepened on Saturday -
- Christian activists said it was their duty to stand up for peaceful protest in the absence of support from St Paul’s.
One Christian protester, Tanya Paton, said: “We represent peace, unity and love.
A ring of prayer is a wonderful symbol.”
With senior officials at St Paul’s apparently intent on seeking an injunction to break up the protest -
- the director of the influential religious thinktank Ekklesia, Jonathan Bartley, said the cathedral’s handling of the protest had been a “car crash”-
- and predicted more high-profile resignations from the Church of England.
The canon chancellor of St Paul’s, Dr Giles Fraser, and the Rev Fraser Dyer, who works as a chaplain at the cathedral – have already stepped down over the decision to pursue legal action to break up the camp…”
tom, I think diaper boy gets his SS check for being morbidly obese. Not the kind of story Jon Stewart would touch. Still, you’ve got 300 million people in the States, so you’re gonna get a few geniuses and a lot of wackos.
Just give him the money. He’ll piss it back into the economy the next day. Probably the cheapest option.
Just give him the money. He’ll piss it back into the economy the next day. Probably the cheapest option.
Well if you’re a classic Keynesian with a focus on spending as the engine of an economy rather than investment. As Steyn points out this story lines up perfectly with government spending as “stimulus”.
I see from the article that Tom Coburn (R) has already been vilified on this topic when he tried to do something about it, having noted that this “disabled” guy was somehow able to run a popular website and engage in complex carpentry such as building his own giant highchair. Sounds like he could be investing in the economy all on his own.
Not the kind of story Jon Stewart would touch.
Oh, of course There’s a narrative to maintain: let’s talk about our taxes paying for fireman instead.
I’m glad you you responded though. I think the original socialists who developed Social Security in the US would have burst a blood vessel at stuff like this, but your response is a clear demonstration that our modern centre-left will simply shrug their shoulders and move on.
It’s that attitude more than anything else that has convinced me that none of these insanities can be proactively changed. The only thing that can change this now is for the systems to run out of money.
I’d love to see someone go through these figures & investigate a sample of them in depth to determine how much, if any, of the money advanced will ever be repaid. Many of these loans were made to “students” who had left secondary schooling completely free from knowledge or skills & were encouraged into worthless courses of study at polytechnics which owed their existence to pandering of racial interests.
There are probably some accomplished practitioners of nasal irrigation & we probably have an incredible reserve of talented bone carvers but I have vague suspicions that they will fail to make the rich list in the immediate future.
It is ridiculous to list these loans as government assets when it is inevitable that 40-50% of their value will be written off anyway.
tom, don’t get me wrong, I’d much rather this guy was building giant highchairs on a commercial scale and adding value to the economy and paying his own way, but with 10% out of work and a culture of learned helplessness pervading many sectors of society, I’m simply saying there is no point in picking on him in particular.
Leave him to starve, and he’d probably take the easiest route and turn to crime. The welfare system my be an Albatross, but it is an economically and socially integrated Albatross that can’t just simply be amputated.
Regarding Stewart’s interview with Andrew Napolitano, what I found most compelling was firstly, Napolitano gave the consistent, simple Ron Paul libertarian take on free society, which is extremely seductive to liberals such as Stewart and myself. (too good to be true IMO, but certainly a goal to aim for)
Secondly, he didn’t overcomplicate the message, so whilst you are very familiar with the ideas being proposed, there are a number of other commenters on Kiwiblog who profess to be free marketeers, but are not fully aware of all that that entails.
That is why I felt that it was an outstanding interview, because it clearly set out in simple terms each side’s relative position without the usual vitriol.
What Nasska said.
On another note, is it compulsory to select players on cricket tours when the selectors know (1) the player is injury prone, overweight and unfit and (2) the player has yet see see through a series or tour without having to pull out? If it is not compulsory then WTF do they persist?
Which has been enabled, reinforced and expanded upon by these systems.
…. an economically and socially integrated Albatross that can’t just simply be amputated.
Which was the original intention of the creators of these systems and remains their trump card: Ha, ha. You try to change these systems and you’ll be out on your ear next election.
So no simple amputation – which is why I waste little time arguing with people who think it’s all just peachy if only rich pricks pay their fair share, and that the system can even be expanded – just a slow, painful death.
We already know that many have taken full advantage of student loan ‘entitlements’ and have taken out loans to the maximum and invested the (un-needed) funds in an interest bearing account.
We know that in some areas (the article itself mentions pilots) where there is a mis-match between the number of students receiving loans compared to the numbers available in the job pool. Then why do we keep on dishing out money?
50,000 recipients of interest free student loans are currently living overseas! What chance getting it back? Will the taxpayer expect to see this written off? Why?
I see that the total of 65+ year old ‘students’ getting interest free loans, is over 10,000. How are these new skills adding value to NZ? What chance repayment?
This whole interest free loans was another Labour election bribe [quelle surprise] that we simply could not afford at the time and cannot afford now. Its out of control and we should now look to claw it back. In fact, we also need to harden up and recover all outstanding debt – complete with an added (current Bank Rate) interest charge.
@ tom thanks. Not sure I see it quite so bleakly – Europe has a free kick on productivity if they are prepared to reform, question will be their willingness (witness Greek taxi driver protests). But it probably wont be enough against their demographics without (more) immigration. Canadia is the lucky country eh – hard and soft commodities and favourable demographics.
…”we need to harden up and recover all outstanding debt “…
It is tough to get blood out of a stone. We may as well pucker up & accept the loss as another (successful?) attempt by Labour to buy an election with our own money.
What can be done is to commercialise the whole concept & limit the scheme to people who have the ability to gain useful qualifications in skills which NZ Inc. actually needs, eg doctors who can speak English & engineers. It is called picking winners & if it is seen to be elitist then so be it.
“What can be done is to commercialise the whole concept & limit the scheme to people who have the ability to gain useful qualifications in skills which NZ Inc. actually needs, eg doctors who can speak English & engineers.”
Actually there is a free market for doing that. You dont have to like the fact that lawyers and accountants are needed to run a modern service based economy but we certainly don’t need the state tellling us what sort of grads are needed.
@nookin says: “is it compulsory to select players on cricket tours when the selectors know (1) the player is injury prone, overweight and unfit and (2) the player has yet see see through a series or tour without having to pull out? If it is not compulsory then WTF do they persist?”
Right on! This tour has taken on the usual pattern of previous trips – first, Kyle Mills pulls a muscle and returns to NZ / now Jesse Ryder does the same. Next (based on the ever-so-predictable pattern of previous tours), Jacob Oram will get injured in the next day or so and there will be reports that Brendan McCallum has a sore back.
How do you eliminate the pandering to the tyranny of the majority in a democratic system?
If you’re creating the system the best route is probably a constitution that basically says there are some (many?) things that a government will not be allowed to do, thereby removing those powers from the voters also. Write in the ability to make changes to said constitution but make sure the bar is set damned high – 75% of the voters (States actually, plus 2/3 of the Congress) for example – so there can be no question that it’s a huge majority and that you, as the minority, just have to suck it up. In short, less a “pure” democracy than a constitutional republic, which is what the USA started out as.
Unfortunately they included some language about the general welfare, which successive governments have driven a truck through, aided and abetted by the very courts that were supposed to prevent this crap. Not to mention the bloody Commerce Clause, which is about to undergo it’s greatest stress test in the next year or so as the Obamacare mandate pushes towards the Supreme Court.
In theory the same ends could also have been achieved via the standard process of changing the constitution, but as the founders expected (and as common sense would tell you), that 75% could vote for many things but not for a lifestyle obtained from the 25%. Practically nobody could see that working.
But now? Effectively the US population is trying to make that last one work – - and it’s not. And now that these systems for pandering to the tyranny of the majority are bedded in place I can see no way of removing them short of the drastic “solution” identified above. They will run out of money, at which point we start again – perhaps.
The free market is well capable of sorting out the winners & if it indicates that more lawyers & bean counters are desirable it will reward them as such. Trouble is that because the market is driven by supply & demand the signals are not always apparent to a school leaver with a five year course of study ahead of them.
You can stand back & observe that the market creates winners & losers, laissez faire & luck of the game old chap but we are discussing what the government should be loaning OUR money for. If we expect the funds to return with interest commonsense dictates that a career in medicine is more financially enabling than that to be expected in bone carving.
Not sure I see it quite so bleakly – Europe has a free kick on productivity if they are prepared to reform, question will be their willingness
I’m generally a very optimistic person but your question surely goes to the heart of the problem, and what we see in Greece is present in numerous other European countries. I hate to go all Marxian but it’s not a question of “willingness”: who on earth is going to vote to cut themselves off from such largess, especially when they doubt that others will also?
It’s a variation of The Prisoner’s Dilemma.
You also mentioned demographics, which is – literally – the real killer. The reality of this clash with people’s self-interest in continuing to gouge the government, will force the changes needed. That I’m optimistic about. But it’s such an awfully negative solution, involving so much pain over such a long period of time, that it’s difficult for me to count it as an “optimistic” solution.
a big ups for Shane Jones for slagging off the Leader of the Opposition, when he was standing next to him ,up at K Road yesterday when announcing that they will (they????) will pay 1/2 of Lens loop .. brave stuff
..(those lining up rubbing their hands in preparation/anticipation for their promised commonly-owned asset carve-up..and decades into the future of screwing the rest of us blind over energy costs/charges..)
…them/their political/media-spokepeople/acolytes are calling themselves/them ‘mums ‘n dads’..
..in reality they are our greedy super-rich…
(the front-runner in the end of year whoar-awards for ‘most-telling/illustrating television scene..(local division)..
..is still that q&a when holmes had all those local millionaires in one room…
..and he asked how many of them favoured a capital gains tax…on their earnings..
..not one of them put their hands up…(currently they pay zero tax on their earnings..in america there is 15% c.g.t..with calls for that to raise to the same tax rate workers are forced to pay..)
..so..combining that with the abysmally low rates here of the rich/corporates giving back in the form of supporting charities etc..
..that scene could not confirm more that our rich/millionaires..are..in the main/with some exceptions..greedy/clawing/selfish bastards/bitches…
..who couldn’t give a flying fuck about the rest of us..(they just want more more..
..and one of these ‘i don’t wanna pay any tax’er millionaires..had just received a multi-million gift/grant from the govt..
..(major brownie points there for really ‘playing’ the system..eh..?..and a clear example of how the 1%ers really actually love socialism..
..they profit from it…and have to pay no taxes on their profits..seems fair..eh..?
..bring in capital gains tax at 15%..and shortly afterwards increase it to the same rate workers have to pay..
I agree with your sentiments regarding the extravagance of our student loan scheme, it’s plainly obvious that New Zealand is being rorted by foreign students who come here and run up huge debts then skip out with their degree’s never to be heard from again.
It will be interesting to see if politicians canvas this issue during debates although I suspect this time around , student loans, doesn’t have appeal. However I believe the time is right to initiate a more strenous debt recovery programme as a warning to freeloaders and bludgers, our student loan scheme is not here to be abused.
tom hunter says:- “If you’re creating the system the best route is probably a constitution that basically says there are some (many?) things that a government will not be allowed to do”
Ahh, here we arrive on the same page. Question is, how do we wrest control from a self interested, conservative institution?
My view is this. Free market “choice” is driven to a large extent by persuasion wrought by marketing power. Vicious bi-partisanship does little or nothing to *sell* anyone’s idea. It serves only entrench bias.
I suggest that libertarians go on a charm offensive. Ignore the taunts, and don’t disparage your opponents and *sell* your message.
I find it ironic that the right are supposedly the innovators and marketers, but when it comes to selling their ideas, they fail so abysmally. Surely the political scene is simply just another free market, and yet the lefties seem to be winning the battle.
“Surely the political scene is simply just another free market, and yet the lefties seem to be winning the battle.”
Maybe I’m watching a different battle, but it seems the only time the lefties seem to be winning is when they’re promising bribes with other people’s money. Clearly it’s unsustainable, and is probably more so this election than it was in the last (and the one before that – which was won primarily from the abolition of interest on student loans).
Surely the political scene is simply just another free market, and yet the lefties seem to be winning the battle.
I think you’ll find that any entity that is competing in a marketplace with an entity offering the same stuff for free will lose the competition.
Steyn alluded to this with his quote from ABC news:
At a million-dollar San Francisco fundraiser today, President Obama warned his recession-battered supporters that if he loses the 2012 election it could herald a new, painful era of self-reliance in America.
Who the hell wants to be self-reliant when one can simply vote for the government to take care of you.
@Dave Dustin – it could be due to the new software that has secretly been installed. It taps into the mindset of the person operating the keyboard and as a result it automatically prompts adverts from the political party most liked by the commenter.
Or, perhaps DPF operates a commercial operation based on the principle that anyone can advertise and the more hits on the link he receives from Kiwibloggers, the more money he is paid. Indeed, the logical next step would be for you to hit on the Labour link as many times as you can stand – all the while knowing that, at least someone will benefit from their propaganda.
I used My Sky to record two election bits (Q & A and that 8.30p.m. show) yesterday.
I could not bear to watch through to the end of either of them. The evasive answers from all the politicians are making me ill.
Then I thought, I am very interested in politics and have contributed to this blog on occasions. If a political junkie like me is getting pissed off, then what are Joe and Josephine Bloggs thinking.
Actually, for people with an I.Q. in excess of 95, Don Brash is the ONLY one who comes through. But the main stream media have painted him as a loser. The real loser is my country. I am becoming depressed.
Better packaged and labeled as “freedom” and “self-determination”
Self reliance sounds like hard work.
“Escape the shackles of a loving, but overbearing guardian. Discover the power of freedom and self-determination and give yourself, and the ones you love the room to grow and flourish as a proud member of a forward thinking, tolerant and vibrant nation”
Did anyone else see the breathless report on TV last night about the ‘protest’ at the National Party gathering held at Sky City? In case you missed: the ‘protesters’ numbered about 12. And leading the charge was : Ta da….. – Sue Bradford!
So a parliamentary drop out (and rival candidate) stages a ‘protest’ of 12 at a National Party function and it gets TV airtime. FFS!
Anyone who still thinks that the phrases ‘Television New Zealand’ and ‘impartial news coverage’ can be used in the same sentence, are delusional. Or myopic. Or both.
National will use the proceeds from the mixed-ownership model to set up a Future Investment Fund of up to $7 billion to pay for new infrastructure without extra borrowing, National Party finance spokesman Bill English says.
So, until he spends it, what will Blinglish do with the 7billion? Stuff it under a matress, or invest it in shares in the newly privatised powercos?
Wouldn’t it make more sense to fund the new infrastucture out of the dividends of the powercos?
Of course it would, but Bill’s always been short on sense, long on ….hmmm, not much springs to mind.
And what about Shonkey’s original claim that assetts needed to be sold to reduce debt? Bill seems not to have got that memo.
Your Bev the socialist is a fraud.
If she was a real socialist she wouldn’t want that privately owned house to make a capital gain out of.
Furthermore she should not want to have a private estate to pass on to anyone. That type of thing only perpetuates inequality don’t she know?
A real socialist would have 100 % death duties with every thing going to the state to ensure a “fair” distribution of wealth.
Screw it. Even though I’ve written this a couple of times in Kiwiblog over the last few years I’ll put it in again since one topic is how we get out of this mess.
But first I will refer back to what I said in 2007:
what is National going to do should it win next November beyond babysitting the institutions of Labour and the Left. Nursing those things along, tiring all the time and steadily losing votes simply by being in Government and getting blamed for the insanities of those self-same institutions. Until the day comes, one or two election cycles down the road, when a revitalised Labour gets back into power and gets to push forward some more. Ratchet Socialism at its best.
So a year or so later, when this topic came up for the umpteenth time, I wrote the following suggestion:
I think that National, with Key leading, should be laying out the arguments now, and repeating them endlessly in specific areas so the message is reinforced. That message is simple:
– for their own sake, people cannot depend on government to the degree they do now.
– if this continues then sooner or later government will fail them, as it failed them in the 1970’s and 1980’s, and they will actually be worse off, not better.
– people must be given the chance and the incentives to begin supporting themselves and their loved ones, with the emphasis on making that support grow and strengthen steadily over time.
All these points can be hammered home by focusing on four key aspects of people’s everyday lives:
1 – retirement
2 – education
3 – healthcare (including work injuries)
The focus in each case should be on four arguments.
First, point out what has happened in these areas failing to live up to their socialist promises, and failing expensively.
Second, show how these areas will continue to degenerate if we keep doing what we’re doing now.
Third, argue the changes that must be made, with the emphasis being less on “revolution” in the public institutions, than focusing on growing private institutions that people are already turning to from the public bodies that are failing them. Giving individuals the financial incentives and legal defences that allow them to keep pushing in those directions.
Fourth, Don’t ignore the privileges granted by government – just tie them to the changes – via tax credits for example. I’m not that keen on tax credits but any fiscal issues they create short-term are outweighed by their political strengths. They turn the Left’s primary electoral argument against them, in that voting for the Left will mean losing your tax credits for (health insurance, retirement investments, etc, etc). The argument will certainly be made that such things “rob” the public institutions of money, but if that argument is engaged the whole process is stopped in it’s tracks right at the start, which is the Left’s intention anyway. Push it through and deal with the argument with actual spending and budget facts on the ground, rather then hypothetical, worst-case scenarios.
Instead, the left will be forced into making a choice between the privileges they prefer – direct government benefits and support via government departments – and individualised privileges already locked in that people are using to support their own choices, or the usual fantasy land where endless amounts of money will feed both choices.
In short, give people the means to at least start controlling their own solutions and their own lives, as they are already trying to do in these areas. Do that and the area that the left wish to play on will steadily shrink.
Of course I also said at the time:
Sadly I don’t think National will move in these directions and will find themselves polarised in bitter arguments over 1% tax cuts or 2% spending increases. Whatever moves to the private sector are being made now (i.e. Increased use of private hospitals) will have been made from the top down, via the public institutions, and as such a change of government will simply mean the rules being changed again in the future. That’s a failure.
Just for PhilU
Looks like Dr Richard Muller of BEST caught manipulating Climate Data again and tries to hide the decline . Climategate all over again.
Bests own data shows temperatures have done nothing over the past decade and more.
Nice expose by the Daily Mail. The media in the UK seem to be turning the corner and waking up to the warmists bullshit.
You cant argue with the integrity of their whistle blowing colleague Dr Judith Curry.
Hes a funny little censor isnt he. Deletes and alters comments on his blog.
How about discussing Bests actual data which show no increase. No? Cant do it?
Then of course there is the satellite data, you know the ones put up by Nasa which give us the UAH and RSS data for the last 30 years (launched oct 79) measuring temperatures in the Troposphere which show no increase also.
Very accurate measurement.
NO INCREASE FOR 30 YEARS.
So wheres the warming?
All_on_Red claims:- “Looks like Dr Richard Muller of BEST caught manipulating Climate Data again and tries to hide the decline.”
Wrong. A disgruntled colleague has accused him of it. Big difference.
Here are the facts:
NASA’s Goddard Institute and the National Climatic Data Center show that 2005 and 2010 tied for the planet’s warmest year since reliable, widespread instrumental measurements became available in the late 19th century, exceeding 1998 by a few hundredths of a degree.
Current estimates by the Climatic Research Unit show 2005 as the second warmest year, behind 1998 with 2003 and 2010 tied for third warmest year, however, “the error estimate for individual years … is at least ten times larger than the differences between these three years.
Lol Scott Chris, you want to debate the science? I’m always prepared to engage if you so desire.
Or you could just revert to your position that you support any token gesture to reduce emissions (subterfuge for wealth redistribution) even if it results in millions of people starving: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/nov/06/comment.biofuels
How about somebody who was in fact in Jon Johansson’s senior undergrad class on New Zealand Politics? Would they be a better person to comment than a taxi driver on a 20 minute airport trip? seriously though.
Yes it can be said that Johansson is socially liberal, he even will freely admit that the only reason he has not stood for parliament is that he wouldn’t be able to decide between the red team and the blue team. Economically i would say conservative with a little ‘c’, as he didn’t hold a whole lot of love for Labour’s election bribes. speaking of those bribes, they are a toll which is not well regarded, as they are somewhat condescending towards the electorate (then again, the electorate fell for them!).
so when watching Q&A, keep in mind that the prof has personal views, as do all people, but they vary from subject to subject, ending up with a net result of fairly neutral and equally harsh on both the main parties. His criticism of Key comes from Key running the popularity contest and living up to the ‘smile and wave’ conjecture by the opposition; when Key is actually incredibly smart and able to run a much higher standard of politics than he currently does, its just that perhaps the electorate would not grasp such a high level of thinking, and would possibly reject it as being “weirdo stuff”.
Johansson wrote a book which focussed on the game changer which Key promised to be, but that he hasn’t totally turned out to be. I think he, like many of us, would like more from Key than we are currently getting.
Isn’t it interesting that no matter what the current global crisis is, according to leftists, the solution is always the same: a benevolent world dictatorship of the enlightened elite, and mass transfer of wealth from rich nations to poor nations.
” 2005 as the second warmest year, behind 1998 with 2003 and 2010 tied for third warmest year” Even the hero of warmists Dr James Hansen describes the increases as “statistically insignificant”
Nice try though
The facts are, that the Pike River Mine already has significant overseas ownership through; the 2 Indian holders, foreign holders of shares listed on either the ASX or NZX and indirectly through foreign holders of NZO shares:
NZ Oil and Gas 31%
Gujarat NRE Coke 10%
Saurashtra Fuels 8.5%
Private minority shareholders holding 7.9%
Listed as PRC on the ASX and NZX 42.5%
(I couldn’t be assed looking for the latest PRC Top 20 list to see exactly what other significant holders are overseas based)
My bet is that if Solid Energy were to buy PRC, in fact more of it could come into NZ hands than is currently. But little facts like these should never get in the way of Red/Green lies.
The biggest question is though, why do the fucking muppet reporters at the Herald allow these blatant mistruths to go to print? One can only suspect that it is a) because they’re lazy, b) because they support the mistruths of the left, or both.
Climate science is of course a back yard Endeavor at best. I read so many experts on here that know so much climate science that they have a better grasp of the subject than ALL MAJOR SCIENTIFIC BODIES.
I am glad that KB attracts so many obvious geniuses to its ranks and await peer reviewed publication of all this knowledge so the scientific community can catch up.
I can not wait to start this fascinating debate again so we can spend weeks chasing down dodgy links and shoddy interpretations of irrelevant data collated by paid nutters and the scientifically illiterate then Posted by ex (has been) spurts(drips under pressure) on denial.
lee 01 says:- “All compulsory taxation is theft anyway.”
Well, some things we just have no choice over, such as opting out of a society that has decided to adopt the ideas of ownership and government. No getting away from the tyranny of the majority.
When did you or I ever sign anything saying we agreed to abide by society’s rules? Turns out that it is impossible to prove that anyone is morally obliged to become a member of society, and we are therefore not morally obliged to follow its rules.
Mind you, such a person would be considered ‘unreasonable’ by most philosophers.
No doubt you are familiar with the idea of the “social contract”:
Two elderly residents, a man and a woman, were sitting alone in the lobby of their nursing home one evening. The old man looked over and said to the old lady,
“I know just what you’re wanting, for $5 I’ll have sex with you right over there in that rocking chair.”
The old lady looked surprised but didn’t say a word.
The old man continued, “For $10 I’ll do it with you on that nice soft sofa over there, but for $20 I’ll take you back to my room, light some candles, and give you the most romantic evening you’ve ever had in your life.”
The old lady still says nothing but after a couple minutes, starts digging down in her purse. She pulls out a wrinkled $20 bill and holds it up.
“So you want the nice romantic evening in my room,” says the old guy.
“Get serious”, she replies. “Four times in the rocking chair.