Cactus v Cunliffe

Wednesday, February 8th, 2012 at 2:00 pm

David Cunliffe blogged:

$4.28 is less than I paid for the latte I just drank.

That is how much Craig and Carla Bradley can spend to feed each of their kids each day.

After rent, power, petrol and bugger all else.

Cactus helps with the budgeting:

1. Two cars of $160 a week. Beggars belief as to what cars they bought/financed.
2. Child support for SOCK of $132 a fortnight. So Craig can’t afford his first child. How on earth did Carla think this would end up?
3. Credit card debt. Go figure. Who gave them a credit card?
4. Petrol of $120 a week. So $280 a week is being spent on cars?
5. Wear shoes til they have a hole in them? Seen my shoe collection? I think most people do this. Even I resole. Especially if they are my favourites.
6. An old couch? So what most student flats have them and at 29 yo she’s not much past that.

She also notes:

The conclusion is that inequality is created by bad personal choices. No one forced these two to have three children of their own in addition to a SOCK. They didn’t accidentally have three children. The only thing the taxpayer should be paying for is Craig to have the snip.

Am I picking on Craig and Carla? Yes. But only because they have been silly enough to be used for this story. They are not the only family living like this. Will this be a permanent or temporary state for these people? Hard to tell. They have chosen to make life as difficult as possible for themselves that is for sure.

No one is forced to keep on having children. Of course there are situations, where even the best of planning fails, but this is the exception, not the rule.

Tags: , ,

Asset Sales and the Treaty

Tuesday, January 31st, 2012 at 12:51 pm

Danya Levy at Stuff reports:

The Government is being accused of selling Treaty rights to the highest bidder following suggestions Treaty protections will not be included in new legislation to enact the partial sale of state-owned assets.

Nationwide hui begin next week for the Government to consult Maori on its plans to sell up to 49 per cent of four state-owned energy companies and further reduce its shareholding of Air New Zealand.

The Government is required to pass legislation to remove the four energy companies from the State-Owned Enterprises Act to proceed with the sales.

If a company is no longer an SOE, then its obligations are the same as any other company, such as Air New Zealand.

But in all the fuss about asset sales and Maori, I like this investigation by Cactus Kate:

Ngai Tgahu know all about asset sales so should be supporting National’s privatisation programme. Here are just two recent examples of Maori more than happy to flog off their assets to foreigners who need OIO approvals.
In 2010 they sold 1348 hectares in Kaikoura to an American couple for 7.5 million dollars. They paid 8 million dollars so made a $500,000 loss.

In 2011 they sold 18,000 hectares of forest to a Swiss owned family company for 22.9 million dollars.

So Ngai Tahu sold twice as much land as the Crafar farms. Does Labour and the Maori Party think they should have not been allowed to do so?

UPDATE: The Maori Party are saying they may quit the Government if there is no treaty clause in the legislation removing the companies from the SOE schedule. This ratchets up the pressure on the Government considerably, but it is worth noting the Government can govern without Maori Party support.

If the Maori Party walk over this, they’ll presumably lose the constitutional review, their portfolios, and I imagine Whanua Ora. The second term was always going to be more challenging for National and the Maori Party – but I guess John Key was hoping flare ups would not occur quite so quickly.

The Maori Party do need to be careful about threatening to walk over an issue. That’s a card you can play only once or twice in a term. If you try to play it too often, then it loses its effectiveness and even backfires.

Tags: , ,

Cactus having fun

Monday, January 23rd, 2012 at 7:00 am

Cactus Kate has blogged her version of the agenda for the Labour Party Summer School.

Some extracts:

5.45PM Housekeeping
Here Charles Chauvel will show you all how to make your bed properly. So you can tell the staff to do it for you later.
5AM Coping With Loss
David Cunliffe will speak on his time dealing with disappointment. We haven’t told him (or Greg Presland) yet but you will all be away biking with Trevor at the same time except those of you in wheelchairs or who are heavily physically impaired.
8.00AM Breakfast
If you still can stand after the compulsory bike ride our esteemed Deputy Leader Grant Robertson will serve you a Blanketman breakfast in honor of his favorite constituent. Just to get you all going for the day on a high.
Neelam Choudary
Needs no introduction. How to catch sleazy Tories in a honey trap. Neelam did more damage to National in the last term than any Labour MP could manage.
6.00PM Dinner – Sausages on BBQ sponsored by The Mad Butcher

Indepth after dinner conversation on “Traitors in the media” featuring John Pagani and Chris Trotter with comparisons to “Thee Who Can’t be Named” from the pre 1990 era and Mad Dog Prebble. Guest historian Judith Tizard and Michael Bassett.

Prayers to Dear Former Leader Rt Hon Helen Clark and Skype to NYC. Followed by a bit of social media training to explain the phenomenon of Whaleoil and how to combat him. Alcohol will be provided so please bring a plastic cup.

As always, I recommend you read the whole thing and enjoy it all the more.
Tags:

Is it really about casualisation?

Thursday, January 19th, 2012 at 3:00 pm

The Maritime Union have said their strikes and industrial action is because they are against casualisation at Ports of Auckland. Labour have also said this is what they are concerned about.

However Cactus Kate blogs:

The problem with MUNZ’s, Fenton’s and the left’s argument about casualisation is that right now MUNZ is pursuing a case against POAL in the Employment Court to prevent the Port offering permanent jobs to “lashers”.
This is not a joke. They are AGAINST casuals getting permanent jobs.
It would be hilarious, if not so serious.
So what is it about?
You may think so, but not when the Union bullies (mainly old, white crusty’s like the charming couple we met yesterday on this blog) have the top jobs and like to take the overtime at their much higher rates rather than allow the lower paid workers to get permanent jobs.
It is indeed simply about patch protection. They don’t want outsiders working on the Ports. By outsiders, they mean Pacific Islanders and women. A MUNZ senior official was sacked for his racism against Tuvalu workers, and they have resisted workplace changes that would make it easier for women to work there – the result being 2/300 are women. We hear lots of people complaining that only 28% of Parliament is female – well how about a workplace which is so hostile to women they make up 1% of the workforce only?
If you think I am being harsh, read the extracts from the court documents Cactus has, and especially the letter from “Billy T James”
Tags: , ,

Cactus Kate on emotional abuse

Monday, January 9th, 2012 at 3:00 pm

Cactus Kate blogs:

Emotional abuse isn’t reported as is an horrific physical beating of a woman or kiddie with an instant death resulting. But it is definitely more prevalent and just as damaging. It isn’t a lower class, race or low incomed phenomenon either. Not all emotional abuse leads to physical poundings but all physical poundings seem to start with continuous emotional put-downs. It is statistically difficult to measure emotional abuse but we all can spot it when we see it in others.

Emotional abuse often can lead to physical abuse also. I’ve seen some people so emotionally abuse their partners that they lose all confidence in their own abilities, and become dependent on their partner. This means they then tolerate more and more shit from them, as they are too scared to be by themselves. And sadly, sometimes they will then even tolerate physical abuse.

I know of females who are otherwise successful intelligent high earning and achieving members of society putting up with some of the above. They are the sort of people you wouldn’t think would take to being abused at this mental level. Yet they put up with it. They don’t have to. No one is forcing them to stay.
I’ve seen their Partners, who are supposed to be the number one best friend and often father of their kids, subject them to abuse where they question their own worth. I cringe when I see the hate in the abusers eyes where even there are witnesses to their abhorrent behaviour. Say anything and you cease to be on the guest list. But it is very hard to sit there quietly listening to the mental warfare. I don’t want to watch it.
I will sometimes try and intervene later, and tell them they shouldn’t take that crap. But as Cactus says, many just put up with it, believing any relationship is better than no relationship.
I’ve seen unstable women behave as badly towards my male friends. Men deal with it differently and usually suffer in relative silence but when a woman emotionally blackmails a man by threatening to commit suicide if he leaves her, the sort of mind games at that level is hopeless to comprehend and impossible to counter. When she’s flaunting the fact she’s rooting around on him when he isn’t there, flirting with his friends, loudly saying his appendage isn’t big enough, sexual performance isn’t good enough or he doesn’t have a high enough income while she spends all his money. All designed to emasculate his existence and control him from a woman’s position of physical weakness.
It does go both ways indeed. Cruelty is not gender specific.
The first and only time a boyfriend upset me with a derogatory comment I didn’t even talk back, I threw all his clothes off the fourth floor balcony at Princes Wharf into the street, waited til he went to retrieve them then chucked his cellphone at him gloriously hitting him smack in the middle of his head. I didn’t see the point of subsidising him to hang around if he was going to at least be pleasant.
More people should do this.
On the purely evil emotional level I’ve known of deadbeat Dads unsuccessfully harassing mistresses into abortions and pretend to then be an advocate for solo Mums against the “evils” proposed by the likes of Paula Bennett. The most disgusting sort of hypocrite as they’ve damaged more lives than any proponent of controlling the welfare state will. Heaven help them when that child finds out the truth as to how little his or her father wanted them to be born.
Disgusting.
Once again it is a matter of individual responsibility not to be in an emotionally abusive relationship and therefore enabling another to be able to carry out this abuse.
It doesn’t take money or government intervention to be positive and encouraging to your partner and kids. Anyone can do it. It doesn’t need a whole government department to solve.
In fact being caring and pleasant to those you live with and purport to be supporting through life is one of the few things that money can’t actually buy.
So very true.
Tags: ,

Cactus visits Occupy Auckland

Thursday, October 27th, 2011 at 8:12 am

Please go to Cactus Kate and look at her photos of the Occupy Auckland site, and read her scathing commentary. The best journalism to date on the occupiers. Some extracts:

These people aren’t even Labour voters. They are worse than that. We are talking Alliance or Mana. Or even too stoned to vote.

I was not dressed in a suit which would be a sign of war. Given I had showered that morning and blonde it was quite apparent I was there on my Blackberry to take photos and perhaps I was the 1% enemy. Any competent protest movement would have at least questioned my presence. Alas not our Occupiers.

Now I’m not anti-weed. But it was soon evident that the non-violent, non-alcoholic protest was fuelled on dak. The rolling eyes of the 40 people I counted in the vicinity were proof they were either psychiatric patients, or stoned. Or perhaps both.

Superb.

Tags: ,

Cactus Kate MP

Saturday, June 25th, 2011 at 10:04 pm

Audrey Young reports:

Cathy Odgers, the author of the acerbic website Cactus Kate, is expected to be approved today as an Act candidate – one of the reasons sitting MP Heather Roy is likely to today announce she will stand down at this year’s election.

Heather has since announced her retirement. It is a shame that the internal politics of the last year played out the way it did. I’m someone who admired both Rodney and Heather, and think they both made good contributions to Parliament.

Cathy’s impending demotion to Parliament has appalled and excited many on the left. First we have Bomber.

Ladies and Gentlemen, let me be 1000% clear, Cathy Odgers is a hateful person who is the very last human being one would ever wish to enter politics.

I understand that Cactus is delighted with this endorsement by Bomber, and is considering turning it into billboards around Auckland.

At the Dim-Post, the commenters are salivating with excitement over her blog posts. I don’t think they realise that every journalist in NZ has probably already read them all.

But at Kiwipolitico, Lew endorses Kate’s candidacy:

It is in this vein that I endorse the rumoured candidacy of Cathy Odgers, aka Cactus Kate, for the ACT party in the forthcoming general election. If true, Odgers will be doing Aotearoa a genuine service, showing us all what ACT really stands for. …

But this endorsement isn’t all about foreshadowed electoral schadenfreude. Odgers, for all that I disagree with nearly every aspect of her politics, is intelligent, articulate and possessed of a sharp and analytical wit. By reputation she is driven, hard-working and will not tolerate time-wasters or time-servers. If her boasts about the expat lifestyle and her drinking habits are to be believed, she will be taking a considerable cut in pay and increase in workload if elected to parliament, so we might reasonably assume her intentions are genuine. In other words, aside from her politics — which is admittedly a very big aside — she’s just the sort of person we need more of in Parliament. It may be that the rigours of public office mellow her, or it may be that her prickly public persona hides one more rounded and reasoned. They often do.

I can’t wait until Cactus is interviewed on Campbell Live.

If Cactus does become an MP, I have the perfect job for her. Make her Minister of Revenue, with her job being to close down all the loopholes. Ultimate poacher turned gamekeeper :-)

Plus the Hon Cactus Kate MP has a certain ring to it.

Tags: , ,

A $1,000 pledge to charity

Sunday, May 29th, 2011 at 9:19 am

On Friday Trevor Mallard got upset that Whale Oil had called him a cripple and challenged Whale to a bike race, saying Whale would be too chicken and if he accepted he would not have a chance.

Yesterday Whale accepted the challenge so long as he can get provided a bike and that there be a second sport of his choosing – preferably boxing or shooting.

Cactus Kate has also jumped in, and offered $1,000 prize money. It goes to Labour if Trevor wins and ACT if whale wins. Kate also challenged me to match her grand.

I’m not overly keen to donate to ACT or Labour, but have agreed to donate $1,000 to charity based on who wins.

My $1,000 donation is dependent on Whale and Trevor actually agreeing to details of the competition (such as whether it is one sport or two) and actually competing. No donation if one defaults and it doesn’t happen. I’d also insist on them agreeing on an independent Judge to determine the winner.

If Whale wins I will donate $1,000 to the Mental Health Foundation.

If Trevor wins I will donate $1,000 to the Crippled Children Society, now known as CCS.

Tags: , , , ,

A double fisking for No Right Turn

Thursday, February 24th, 2011 at 7:00 am

No Right Turn has had a double fisking in the last couple of days. Cactus Kate, a tax expert, has fisked him over his claims of tax dodging by corporates (he failed to even read the notes to the accounts).

And on the other side of the spectrum constitutional law professor Andrew Geddis has politely rubbished his posts about the national state of emergency. We’ll start with that.

NRT blogged here and here that the calling of a national state of emergency is:

National states of emergency are intended for disasters affecting the entire country – wars, epidemics, that sort of thing. Instead, we’re seeing one cynically used for political purposes, essentially for spin. That is a gross abuse of power, and one we should not accept.

and

Make no mistake: this is a cynical political exercise, all about who gets the limelight (and hence the credit) in an election year. Again, it is a gross abuse of power. But entirely par for the course for National.

Now Professor Geddis has himself been very willing to criticise the Government when he feels they are acting inappropriately with regard to their powers. He criticised the Act responding to the last earthquake and the sacking of ECan. But in this instance he says:

To use a phrase much beloved of I/S himself, I call bullshit.

First up, the declaration of a national state of emergency does not mean that there is now a power to do all the horribly draconian things that he claims can be done in places like Invercargill, Whangarei or other places far from Christchurch. All the powers given under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (CDEMA) can only be exercised for the specific purpose of things like “saving life, preventing injury, or rescuing and removing injured or endangered persons”, or “prevent[ing] or limit[ing] the extent of the emergency”.

There is no way that these purposes can be said to exist outside of the immediate environs of Christchurch, so the specter of the police “clos[ing] public spaces in Invercargill” or the like in the wake of this declaration is a complete red herring.

So that puts paid to the so called gross abuse of power.  And as for why make it a national state of emergency:

But what about emergency situations where the resources of a single Group are inadequate to respond? There, help from other Groups may be needed. But getting that help requires those in charge of the affected Group to coordinate with those in charge of others, which is yet another task on top of the many they will have already. Furthermore, all they can do is ask for help – which other Groups may or may not be able to give, depending on availability.

However, now that there is a state of national emergency, two things can happen. First, the Director of Civil Defence Emergency Management can take over the coordinating role between different Groups and centralise that process. Second, the Director can instruct other Groups to initiate their own emergency management plans and thus release resources to help Canterbury.

These powers may not be as earth shattering as empowering the police to shut down central Invercargill, but neither are they insignificant. Indeed, it isn’t going overboard to say that the fate of people’s lives may depend on the bureaucratic niceties involved in the declaration of national emergency.

Geddis concludes:

So, like I say – I/S’s posts regrettably are bullshit. I rather fear that he’s fallen victim to exactly the disease he accuses John Key and National of … being so partisan in outlook that everything must have a motive other than the obvious one.

Sometimes even politicians just want to do the right thing.

Cactus Kate is equally blunt when it comes to I/S’s financial literacy. He blogged:

Infratil [PDF] reported a pretax profit of $106 million, but paid only $11 million in tax – an effective rate of 10.4%

This was part of a series to make everyone think that all these evil corporate are evading tax and not paying their fair share. He even got Trevor Mallard blogging in agreement, which tells us much about Trevor’s financial literacy. The difference is NRT is just a blogger, and Trevor was once an Associate Finance Minister.

Cactus Kate explains:

If you click on Infratil’s accounts for example (they are the only one I could find with a comprehensive explanation of their tax balances) on page 53 you will see that here they take the net profit before tax and show a line-by-line adjustment on the tax numbers. The explanation of deferred and current tax is even made by the company in its accounts at page 45 in relatively simple terms.

The explanation for Infratil not paying the full company tax rate is a massive $30.4 million write-back in the “Net investment realisations/impairment”.

It had absolutely nothing to do with tax avoidance, evasion, shirking of their duty or offshore structuring. No cheating. All accounts are audited and signed off by professionals using NZ accounting standards.

And the killer blow is:

If NRT looked at pg 53 he will see that for the 2009 year Infratil made a net loss of $93.8 million before tax, yet had a tax expense of $34.6 million? How can a company making a loss NRT and pay all that tax? Based on the raw presentation of his data this makes no sense at all does it? Why? Because you have to read the data contained in the tax reconciliation and interpreted what has happened in the company.

Perhaps before No Right Thought engaged his fingers defaming a very wide range of directors in New Zealand as “cheating” on company taxes, he may just like to learn how to read and engage his brain and find out just why each corporate hasn’t paid the full tax rate for that particular year.

When you get fisked by both Cactus Kate and Andrew Geddis/Pundit in the same week, you’re not having a good one.

Tags: , ,

Cactus Kate’s 10 tax policies for Labour

Friday, January 7th, 2011 at 4:53 pm

Labour have only two tax policies – remove GST off fresh fruit and vegetables, and reintroduce a rich prick tax.

To help them with their policy development, Cactus Kate has proposed ten tax policies for them:

  1. Reduce GST to 10%
  2. Require all trusts in New Zealand to be registered with the IRD with the name of the settlor and beneficiaries
  3. Farmers, the largest of polluters (according the the numbnuts measuring of carbon) should be taxed per head of animal per year with the cost that New Zealand has to pay to the invisible pie in the sky
  4. Anyone with assets or is a beneficiary or settlor of a trust with more than say $500,000 can no longer receive Superannuation.
  5. Reduce the deductible amount to 20% of the total interest expense on real property (land) such that land owned by farmers, property “investors” and the like cannot pay less or even no tax by increasing the interest deductions based on leveraging property.
  6. Reintroduce gift duty
  7. Introduction of a 20% duty for the sale of all property including primary residence and all forms of land.
  8. A new top tax rate of 45% on those rich pricks earning over $120,000 and an increase of the current top tax rate for income between $70,001 to $120,000 from 38 cents up to 40 cents.
  9. Abolish Marshall clauses (which excludes the shortfall in interest as a “gift”) where the loan is repayable on demand
  10. Taxing New Zealand citizens (passport holders) at a 45% deemed disposal rate on expatriating their wealth at the date of departure if they become non-resident and a 15% inbound transaction tax on their assets coming back in even while they are still non-resident.

I’m worried that they may adopt a few of them.

Tags: , ,

Whale v Frank

Tuesday, November 30th, 2010 at 9:35 pm

Whale has blogged about the Get Frank site, and use of bloggers material.

A number of bloggers back in 2007 gave permission for Get Frank to to use some of their posts on their site. At least one blogger was told:

as our adver­tis­ing grows we will be offer­ing all con­trib­u­tors the chance to take 50% of all adver­tis­ing rev­enue from their page(s) on a CPM basis.

I was one of those bloggers who gave permission. I can’t recall whether or not my e-mail made any mention of revenue sharing. I suspect I said yes on the grounds of liking to help a new site.

But Get Frank has gone on to be commercially successful, and the Bloggers Union (which is compulsory – like student associations) has been saying that those who provide the content should be getting a share of the revenue, which has been declined. So Whale has gone to war in his normal subtle way.

By coincidence, I had noticed around six months ago that Get Frank were still using my content and I made a mental note to myself to email them at some stage and say I think it is time to stop using my content, especially as I do get advertising revenue on my own site. But it was not a priority so I had not got around to it.

This flare up has been the catalyst for me to do so, and hence the permission has been terminated.

Cactus Kate has blogged on this also.

I blog primarily because I enjoy having a say. I do make some “pocket money” from advertising but on an hourly rate it would come to less than the minimum wage. So my motivation is not commercial. But I’d rather increase the money I made from my content, than have others do so, and receive nothing at all myself.

If Get Frank (or anyone) are interested in a commercial relationship in the future, my door is open.

Tags: , , , ,

Vote Williams and Whale?

Thursday, September 9th, 2010 at 8:07 pm

Cactus Kate has a brilliant idea:

I have previously endorsed Cameron Brewer as a candidate for the Auckland Supercity. I now add two more endorsements but only if you vote for them together. What the Supercity needs is checks and balances. There can be no greater check and balance for the incumbent candidate “Mayor” Andrew Williams than to elect in Albany, Cameron Slater aka Whaleoil.

What genius. Can you imagine it – Williams and the Whale having to sit around the same table for three years. Either they’ll become good mates (unlikely) or the Auckland Council will resemble live episodes of the Jerry Springer show. One could televise Council meetings on a pay per view channel.

Cactus also compares their vital stats:

Age: 51 v 41
Born: Hawkes Bay v Fiji
Weight: 110kgs with body paint, 95 without v fighting weight of 100kgs
Height: Scarcely taller than a parking meter v 5 foot 11
Drugs of choice: Alcohol and various prescription drugs v Melatonin and off depression meds
Mental State: Allegedly mad v certifiably mad
Education: Advanced Marketing Management Diploma from the International Marketing Institute of New Zealand v Whaleoil who hasn’t bothered making one up
Religion: Worships at the Gods of Caroma v Christian
Credit Card: Now only a personal one v no credit
Looks: Chubby preppy cheek v Angry Chopper Read
Spouse: Angry Jane v Angrier Spanish Bride
Work history: Diplomat to country where English is not a first language v IT and security
Drives: Black Nissan Maxima v Whaleoil Truck
Children: 24, 21 and 17 vs 14 and 12
Internet Presence: Hasn’t quite got used to it after 6 days blogging v Dominant
Supercity concept: Hates it v Loves it
Walking Style: wobbly lines utilising entire ratepayer resource of pavement v straight line won’t move for anyone
Favourite Attire: Custom fitted short man’s suit v Whaleoil t-shirt
Current employment: Bludging off the ratepayer v Campaigning to bludge off the ratepayer
Favourite Tipple: Anything on stock at GPK v Only when Cactus is in town
Favourite Hobbie: Gardening with his mate Little Andrew v Gardening on Spanish Bride’s orders with a chainsaw and round-up
Favourite MP: Winston Peters v Crusher Collins
Favourite restaurant: GPK v Daikoku looking down on GPK
Pet Hates: Cameron Slater v Winston Peters and Andrew Williams (those two really should have a drink together at GPK sometimes)
Nicknames: Clown/Cock of Campbells Bay, Mad Mayor v Whaleoil
Pets: Cute dog named Rimu v the Black Dog and David Farrar
Favourite Journalist: Late night calls with Jonathan Marshall v Jonathan Marshall……..Finally some common ground
PR/Media handling style: Combative v Combative
Weasel words: “Reducing rates – In the first year as Mayor we reduced the rates increase to 5.9%” v no weasel words
Pressure release: Late night abusive emails v All day abusive internet posts

Whether you’re from the right, the left or the centre – doesn’t the thought of Andrew Williams and Cameron Slater as fellow Albany Councillors for three years tempt you as proof there is karma?

Tags: , , , ,

Where’s Cactus?

Friday, August 13th, 2010 at 10:02 pm

The Dom Post reports:

Whanganui Mayor Michael Laws says a political agenda is behind the imminent release of his “intimate” text messages.

The claim follows a bizarre statement being released by Laws today, where he admitted a secret relationship with a woman whose life experiences were “completely different” to his.

Just wondering if anyone has seen Cactus lately?

Tags: ,

Recovery Day

Friday, July 2nd, 2010 at 12:27 pm

There are occassional days when I think the Law Commission may have got it right on the evils of alcohol. These days always occur the day after I hit town with Cactus Kate, and today is one of them.

The day started at lunchtime and ended up in town close to 2 am.

It’s not so much the damage to my liver which concerns me – it is the damage to my wallet. I am sure we personally lifted Auckland’s GDP by around 1% yesterday.

Half a dozen of us had lunch and drinks at Soul. We we trying to see if six of us at Soul could spend more than Parekura Horomia at a Chinese restaurant. We managed it, but it was a close thing.

Cactus ended up having to tip the waiter a three figure sum as way of compensation for Whale’ amusing but inappropriate “banter” with said waiter. The highlight was the waiter telling Whale to get fucked :-) . The tip should ensure we are allowed back there again.

Astonishingly Whale was not the worst behaved person yesterday. That came later in the evening in the form of a well known Auckland A-lister. I’ve never seen anyone offend and terrorise other party goers so well :-)

I also learnt a useful lesson. If you have been drinking champagne non stop for eleven hours, and then it runs out, swapping to straight vodka is a very bad idea.

Anyway am close to recovered now and meeting more friends tonight. Have to get my fun in now just in case the Government goes all nanny state on us, and actually implements the Law Commission’s recommendations!

Tags: ,

Cactus on Whale

Sunday, May 30th, 2010 at 6:44 pm

The Herald on Sunday had a story on Whale Oil today, and his wife was on TV3 news tonight. It’s difficult to see someone’s personal life and challenges laid so bare.

Cactus Kate has done a post on this, which says things so well, I’m going to do something I almost never ever do, and quote it in its entirety.

HoS appears to have been reading the sad plight of my mate and the mate of many bloggers, Whaleoil aka Cameron Slater.

Today is probably the most truthful article yet on Whaleoil because it was written with cut and pasted words from his wife and best mate aka Spanish Bride from his blog.

I’ve only known Cameron for a few years and all the time I have known him has been under the mantra of Whaleoil. Unlike SB, I have not known him as Cameron, before his spiral into depression.

I don’t know all the background of his fight with Fidelity and what led up to his depressive state, because I wasn’t there. SB was. She remarks that he was a different man before the events leading to his illness. I believe that now totally.

There is no one else I have ever met quite like Cameron as Whaleoil. His behaviour is outrageous. Friends compared notes and said that this is just him. It is not. What makes me astonished though with Fidelity’s conduct is that they do not seem to have at any stage lead him to get help. That is medical help and counselling for rehabilitation. It used to be humourous watching Whaleoil be outrageous. It is now not so fun anymore once everyone has worked out he has a genuine problem.

The answer with Doctors has always been to prescribe more bloody pills. Whaleoil is on more pills than patients at mental homes. I know this because unknown to him I checked his dosage on his pillpackets and asked someone I know who works at an actual mental hospital. He is sedated by a cocktail of these pills which leave him tired, moody and disconnected with the world. When I realised his dosage, I knew the seriousness of the black hole he had fallen into. He’s tried to come off the pills, that too has had bad consequences.

I hate pills as a solution for depression. They are not and they are over-prescribed. I hate watching all too many friends zombie around on them. They are not real people while sedated under the latest and greatest profit minded cure to make everyone “happy”. The underlying problem still remains and I can’t see any joy on being reliant on a pill to be happy, or even stable enough to get out of bed. It takes away the human nature of being happy and sad and managing both states.

Whaleoil does not think consequences, SB has highlighted that all too clearly. He will be fine sitting with you in a bar watching you drink (contrary to popular opinion he does not drink regularly and I’ve only seen him drunk once) then the slightest irritant across the bar and he will be talking about smacking another person’s head in. Change the topic and his attention away and he’s forgotten five minutes later of even being angry.

While medicated and unassisted emotionally with any form of therapy, he simply cannot work. The easiest question for doubters that he can be integrated into the workforce for a 40 hour week is this: would you want Whaleoil working in your office? Five minutes with him and any HR representative would instantly dismiss his job application. Fidelity’s treatment has turned an otherwise creative, intelligent mind into a zombie who now firmly believes he cannot work. At the moment I am on the side of stating that he cannot.

Whaleoil is a great friend because he cares about his friends, but an unreliable one. That is, even the slightest task you know he may not do it on time. As the reliable party in the relationship you have to organise everything around Whaleoil not being able to perform his part. This frustrates him when he realises what has happened.

Insurance companies are not paid to care. I feel however they are paid to follow contracts and assist their clients back into the workforce so they are not made to rely on payouts. There’s no doubt in my mind that Cameron Slater as Whaleoil is one of the most clinically depressed people I have ever met. While the original event leading to this depression may have been minor in the scheme of things Fidelity and the medical professionals who treated him from that point in time have failed miserably and created Whaleoil as we all read him today on his blog.

Fidelity created the monster that is Whaleoil. There is no doubt about that after watching him the past few months. Even when Fidelity were still paying him, the posts were written when he wasn’t actually getting better. On a few good days, a Whaleoil post can be brilliantly coherent, well-reasoned and rational. On a bad day a Whaleoil post can be the most offensive thing on the internet.

There is only so much that friends and family can do for Whaleoil. The frustrating thing is that no one can wave a magic wand and make him better. It has gone past that and I’ve seen everyone try. His close family we can see have tried everything. His wife and kids are amazing in the circumstance, their love is unconditional.

Whaleoil needs serious medical attention from medics without a conflict of interest from working for an insurance company or more medics who border on being criminals in my view – the depression script writers. They should be given Oscars for their script writing abilities. He needs a time out, away from the stresses of modern life getting back to basics of routine and normality. But most of all he needs help and therapy to re-connect with himself, his old self. The one that his wife speaks of but most bloggers would never have seen.

Cameron Slater.

Heard that he is a fucking great bloke.

If Fidelity Insurance found that bloke, I’m sure they would have a case closed and not look like the bunch of cunts they will be made to look like when it is disclosed they haven’t done a single thing, other than medication, to try and find him.

Cactus has said it all.

Tags: , , , , ,

The ACT Conference

Monday, March 1st, 2010 at 2:00 pm

I blogged on Saturday on Alan Gibbs address to the ACT Conference, which I enjoyed.

I missed the speeches by Emma Gibbs and David Seymour – which many said were the conference highlights.

I wasn’t impressed with parts of Muriel Newman’s speech. I can’t remember the exact words Muriel used but to describe the National/Maori Party confidence and supply agreement along the lines of the biggest disaster for race relations in all of history was excessively hyperbolic. One can legitimately criticise the agreement, without going so over the top. Also in response to a question on customary rights, I couldn’t believe the answer was that the Treaty of Waitangi extinguished any customary rights. Apart from being totally wrong, it also contradicted an earlier assertion that the Treaty had no legal effect.

John Armstrong has analysed Heather Roy’s speech, and I agree references to black swans and the like were less than wise.

The conference over all did not feel like the conference of a party in Government after 12 years of opposition. Most people were too focused on how the Government was not implementing all of their policies, rather than talking about the areas they were making a difference.

Rodney’s speech was positive and upbeat, but the real outstanding performance from Rodney was on the Sunday on Q+A. I recommend people watch it to see Rodney be frank about his mistakes, but also talk about the wins ACT has had, and what they will keep pushing for. The only negative mark I give him is talking about Key and English keeping on the policies of Clark and Cullen, rather than the more correct “some of the policies”.

Colin James covers that ACT has managed to have significant influence, beyond their five seats.

I thought Don Brash’s speech on closing the gap with Australia was good, as he made a great case for bolder policies needed – especially over spending. He should have chosen better language than “venal and ignorant” in talking about *some* voters, as it has diverted attention from the point he was making about the failing of the education system and the media on basic economic issues.

Of course for many the real highlight of conference was the after-match party hosted by Cactus Kate for the younger members. Had around 40 people in the penthouse suite at the Bolton, so was a very comfortable feel. Was great to catch up with old friends and make some new ones. An amusing aspect was seeing Chris from Dunedin wind various people up so well, I was sure he was going to get slapped.

Cactus, Jadis and I did some of the shopping for the party. Not sure New World has ever sold so much champagne in one go before!

The party ended a bit after 3 am and as we started a bit before 5 pm, it was a solid ten hour affair. Remarkably, there was almost no damage to the room – even after a couple of people from Young Labour snuck in!

Tags: , , , ,

Cactus forgets about use of money

Monday, January 25th, 2010 at 2:15 pm

Cactus Kate blogs on the recommendations of the Tax Working Group. With respect, I disagree with her on one aspect. She says:

Much has been made of building depreciation. Those who still think this is a starter should read up on the IRD website about “depreciation recovered” . It is erroneous to say that the current system doesn’t already have a clawback on sale where depreciation has been overclaimed. As it does for other fixed assets depreciated in business as well.

Now it is true that when a building is sold, you have to pay back the cost of the tax on the claimed depreciation. Everyone knows this. But Cactus misses the point – you get to have interest free use of that money in the interim – this is like interest free student loans, but even better.

It is effectively lending landlords taxpayers money for free. Residential buildings do not generally depreciate – they appreciate (along with the ladn they are on).

Let me give an example. Say you purchase a house and the building is deemed to be worth $200,000 of the total price. You can claim 3% depreciation diminishing value. In year one that is $6,000. Now if you pay 38% tax, then you effectively end up with $2,280 extra cash.

Now even if you are the worst investor in the world, let us assume you can at least earn the risk free rate of return of 6.29%. So you earn $143.41 of your $2,280.

Now that doesn’t sound much. However in year two you then have $2,423.41 of money to invest plus you claim $5,820 off your income as depreciation, which at 38% which is a further $2,212 to invest. So then your return courtesy of the taxpayer is $291.54.

If you sell your property after ten years, you will have claimed $52,515 off your income, resulting in reduced taxation of $19,956. But you will by then have $28,774 of extra money (at the conservative risk free rate of return), so after paying back the claimed depreciation you still have $8,818 left over.

If you keep your property for 30 years, then after paying back the depreciation you will have $106,639 surplus from being able to use that money interest free. Now this is in nominal terms, so won’t be as much in real terms. But it is still money for nothing and bad economics – just like interest free student loans are bad.

Depreciation is a necessary tax loss, when the asset really does depreciate, as it allows you to fund the cost of replacement. But when we have decades of evidence that residential buildings appreciate, not depreciate, I’d rather not give out interest free loans to property owners to claim a depreciation that doesn’t exist.

Tags: , ,

Cactus names her number

Thursday, January 7th, 2010 at 9:11 am

Cactus Kate names her number – 15, while commenting on Warren Beatty’s number of 12,775. Cactus notes:

And before he blogs on the subject, six of the 15 men know David Farrar hence why I am very nice to David. He is above all (and remember this girls) a very good referral source and dating agency as he knows a huge amount of centre-right wing thinking men ;) . Being exceptionally nice to him assists in keeping his gob shut.

Heh. She makes me sound like a pimp.

As I have been single the vast majority of that time, the reason the count is not higher is the difference between men and women I guess. I just can’t be bothered. That is, I would rather repeat with one of the 15 I know and actually liked than find new ones.

This is a big difference. Unless you are in love/lust with someone, a guy often loses interest after the score. Not all men of course, but a reasonable number. To some degree it is built in I reckon for the survival of the species – we’ve just learn over the centuries to practice monogamy.

Tags:

Cactus on Whale

Wednesday, January 6th, 2010 at 6:09 pm

Cactus Kate says far better than me, what my views are:

As I advise anyone who comes to Whaleoil’s attention, the best course of action is to be polite and either ignore what he has written or write to him in a manner which puts your side of the story and he will more often than not be reasonable enough to publish that. He has a short span of attention thanks to his depression and soon moves to a new target.

The worst course of action is to give Whaleoil opposition. He is mental. I mean this in a loving caring way to his friends, but to his foe he shows as much hatred as he does love for his friends. Whaleoil loves opposition, he loves conflict and more importantly will never back down.

Pinkos do not understand Whaleoil. They try to tar his friends with cries that we should control him and advise him not to do things. Well newsflash, we do and he doesn’t bloody listen. His actions are consistent with a mix of depression, medication and frontal lobe disfunction. There is no point in reasoning with him for after his depression and the medication he is on, there is limited reasoning. So what are we meant to do? Abandon him? That’s what a Pinko would do.

So we will all continue to support Whaleoil.

So say we all. Wonderfully said Cactus. From time to time I suggest alternate courses of action to the Whale. He always gives me a good hearing. Most of the time he ignores me, and very occasionally he agrees with me,. But mates don’t need to agree all the time, or even most of the time.

Tags: ,

Cactus and Whale on Act putsch

Sunday, December 20th, 2009 at 2:47 pm

Cactus blogs:

The political strategical stupidity in a coup is astounding in a party of 5 MP’s, 80% of whom are reliant for their place in Parliament solely on the electoral seat of the guy they plotted against as the party didn’t reach the 5% threshold. For that, the coup plotters deserve a slight fail. It would certainly have made a Constitutional sensation if there was a lost by-election and a Party was left with 4 MP’s having neither breached the 5% threshold or won an electorate seat. I can’t find out through internet resources as to what the outcome of that would actually be. A snap election with National polling on 60% the most likely outcome in hindsight.

For those who wonder, the ACT List MPs would remain in Parliament even if there was a by-election and ACT lost Epsom to National.

While Sir Roger is around he is a constant nuisance for anyone leading the Party. Heather Roy needed Sir Roger Douglas as co-leader or supporter as much as a hooker needs genital herpes to perform her job.

Heh Cactus has such a lovely turn of phrase.

All I have to say on the conclusion of the matter is that the coup plotters must now all fall on their swords, resign as MP’s and let the next candidates on the list: Hilary Calvert, Peter Tashkoff and John Ormond have a turn. I have no idea how any of those three would run as MP’s versus Boscawen, Douglas and Roy but anything must be better than a trio of turkeys who voted for an early Christmas. No idea what happened with David Garrett but one gives him the benefit of the doubt that he may very well have been at the pub at the time of the plotting.

Heh. I suspect Cactus is not the only ACT member upset with those Caucus members who thought a coup which would result in ACT ending up out of Parliament next election was a good idea.

Whale chips in:

Cactus is right when she says that the only thing worse than a leadership coup in a small party is a failed leadership coup. Especially so when you only need to get three out of five. …

Well traitors are traitors and there is only one solution. Death. I don’t mean physical death, I mean political death. The three of them are List MPs and the party could quite easily give them all the boot. …

I won’t repeat Whale’s suggested punishment for the person who leaked the putsch to the media!

Tags: , ,

Cactus Kate on 2025

Wednesday, December 2nd, 2009 at 4:53 pm

Heh. Cactus Kate calls Brash a wimp, and outlines her own policy agenda for increasing national incomes. Her proposals:

  • Restrict welfare to those unable to work due to disability
  • Sell all state houses in prime real estate areas, and buy new houses far away from the CBD on the basis most state house tenants don’t need to be close to the CBD as they don’t work
  • Abolish DPB and levy fathers directly for child support (unless unsafe). If mother under 25, means test on her parents income.
  • A flat tax rate of 10%
  • Have no tax at all for new companies employing at least ten people for their first two years
  • Raise GST to 15%
  • Abolish minimum wage and allow mass immigration of Filipinos to do low income domestic jobs, freeing New Zealand women up to engage in higher income jobs and/or leisure
  • Abolish public superannuation
  • Prioritise healthcare so those who smoke, drink excessively or are obese  got treated last
  • Abolish ACC for a fault based system
  • Surcharges for GP visits
  • Full fees for university courses with scholarships for top performers
  • No CGT, but a land tax and stamp duty

That should generate some debate!

Tags: ,

Is Lisa Lewis the NZ businesswoman of the year?

Sunday, November 29th, 2009 at 10:53 am

The SST asks the question:

Lewis, who last week also appeared online for Australian Penthouse, has been nominated for a prestigious national women’s business award, the Veuve Clicquot Business Woman Award – a title held previously by fashion designer Annah Stretton and reality TV queen Julie Christie.

Lewis has been nominated by Hong Kong lawyer Cathy Odgers, the author of a blog written under the pseudonym Cactus Kate.

Odgers said her nomination was the result of having a “hunt around for something to do where I could contribute in a life-changing way to another woman deserving of assistance in fighting discrimination in her chosen profession”.

The nomination procedure requires an extensive submission. Examples must be given of corporate social responsibility by the nominee, entrepreneurial drive, leadership skills and financial success.

Odgers described Lewis as an online pioneer in New Zealand for the provision of sexual entertainment services to a registered pay-per-view clientele. Of Lewis’s corporate social responsibility she writes: “Hamilton is a small town and in purveying her personal services she respects client confidentiality in a manner that would leave many lawyers and accountants hanging their heads in shame.”

Odgers said examples of Lewis’s entrepreneurial drive were her dedication and training “to ensure she can deliver the quality of service and required aesthetics her profession demands”.

“Lisa has kept her body in incredible shape using a complex cardio and weight-training regime combined with a stringent diet that many women would run away from in horror.”

Her leadership style was direct and she epitomised a Kiwi “can-do” attitude, said Odgers. “She fits into any social circumstance, whether surrounded by the grace and charm required of high society sipping Veuve Clicquot or with sweaty rugby players at a local pub over a beer.”

Kiwiblog wishes Lisa all the best in winning the title.

Tags: ,

The Apprentice – New Zealand

Sunday, November 1st, 2009 at 11:00 am

I’m with Cactus on this.

I can’t see the cream of NZ’s aspiring business leaders applying to be The Apprentice just to earn a six figure salary working for Terry Serepisos.

Most business graduates reckon they will be earning $100,000+ before they are 30 anyway.

But it is not just about salary. The US Apprentice worked so well as people would do anything to work for the Don. Not so much for the US$250,000 salary but for the prestige, and more importantly the wealth of contacts you gain. Working for Trump will get you through almost any door.

I think Serepisos has been very successful, and like what he has done with the Pheonix. He isn’t a bad choice for the role, but the problem is that with one or two exceptions there are no good choices.

Unlike the US, you don’t need to work for a top businessman, to gain access to top business and political leaders. We are a small enough country that people see them all the time.

So what was needed was a strong personality. Bob Jones would have been ideal 20 years ago. It would have been the best viewing possible.

Tags: , ,

Keith Ng Ltd

Monday, September 7th, 2009 at 7:33 pm

Heh. Upsetting either Whale Oil or Cactus Kate is an inadvisable thing. Upsetting them both together has consequences, as one can see at Gotcha with the registration of a new company called Keith Ng Ltd, registered in Belize.

If not sure what this is about, read this on Public Address and this from Cactus Kate.

Tags: , , ,

Cactus Kate on Obama

Monday, July 20th, 2009 at 3:00 pm

Cactus Kate blogs approvingly of a speech Barack Obama gave to the NAACP where he told parents to put away the x-box:

So last night we had the Obama speech/sermon to the NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People). Most of the first part of the speech was dreadful, about how he was going to spend more of mostly the white man’s money. Being at a coloured convention he received a thunderous applause for every trillion he stole.

But then Obama turned it all on the audience. He was brilliant. I think he wrote this part of the speech himself.

“Government programs alone won’t get our children to the Promised Land,”

“We have to say to our children, ‘Yes, if you’re African-American, the odds of growing up amid crime and gangs are higher, Yes, if you live in a poor neighborhood, you will face challenges that someone in a wealthy suburb does not.’

“But that’s not a reason to get bad grades, that’s not a reason to cut class, that’s not a reason to give up on your education and drop out of school. No one has written your destiny for you. Your destiny is in your hands and don’t you forget that.”

“I want them aspiring to be scientists and engineers, doctors and teachers, not just ballers and rappers,” Obama said. “I want them aspiring to be a Supreme Court justice. I want them aspiring to be president of the United States.”

Only a black President could give that speech.

Kate goes on to say:

If only we could have an effective co-President who made sound fiscal decisions

I agree. A lot of what Obama has done I have no problems with. His fiscal policies though are an unmitigated disaster (yes even worse than Bush and he was crap fiscally) and I think will lead to another US crash when they start printing money to pay the bills.

A short clip of part of the speech. He even urges parents to take action if their neighbour’s kids are misbehaving – including smaclking them!

Tags: , ,