Written By: - Date published: 8:30 pm, February 28th, 2009 - 66 comments
Categories: Media -
Tags: fran o'sullivan
Fran, you’re pretty smart, you can do maths, and you understand the economy. You’re ideology is fundamentally flawed but at least you’ve got the analytical tools.
So, how can you go and write something like this “It can cut a number of Labour’s own expensive prior election bribes, like making student loans interest-free.”
Fran, think about the macroeconomics. The only sensible economic policy at the moment is the one that every other country expect New Zealand is pursuing. That is, inject demand into the economy as an adrenaline shot to break the downward cycle and restore confidence, which then becomes self-sustaining. Ending interest-free loans will cause the hundreds of thousands of people of my generation to prioritise paying back the loan to avoid the interest costs. That will result in us decreasing our consumer demand. That’s de-stimulatory, Fran, it is pro-recessionary. And all so the Government could save a few million of the billions it will have to borrow anyway. That’s just dumb.
And, Fran, you’re far smarter than that.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
C’mon, why should underpaid trades apprentices, that are in short supply anyway, pay for dimbulbs to be ‘educated’.
(Let’s use that word [educated] for now. They aren’t really, but that’s another issue).
The fact is NZ is drowning in a surfeit of over educated dimbulbs most of them with a mental capacity that makes them more suited to being bus conductors or traffic wardens. (that’s right, they wouldn’t even make half useful tradesmen)
No free education. Make users pay, with charities and bursaries for youngsters who show promise but might be poor.
Universal free education merely makes the product almost worthless and many of the “educated” virtually unemployable. You know this is true.
Anyway, the real problem is government funded education. That’s really what needs changing. Vouchers would be a start.
Redbaiter,
I’m sure you own a rock somewhere so why don’t you go and “rest’ under it for a wee while. You are a singularly exasperating soul.
The government is attempting to increase credit liquidity so playing the supply side.
Anyway, I agree with Redbaiter, why should heartland NZ pay to support some whining middle class tosspots studying marxist politics while living in Kingsland drinking soy lattes on K Road.
[we generally don't allow handles that refer to an author or another commentator, too provocative/creepy. So I've suggested a different one]
That doesn’t mean I agree with you young Steve. There is a lot you need to learn yet.
Travellerev: Do you think that the interest free element of the Student loans should be dropped? As it is those very rich who can manage their income so that their student children are eligble for a Student allowance instead, avoid repayment and interest. My youngest son’s friend is in that position, while said son owes tens of thousands. It would be an insult to escalate the cost of Student Loans while wiping the loans for selected people.
“I?m sure you own a rock somewhere ”
How come you know that? Bet you don’t know its name.
Maybe I didn’t make myself clear enough for you Evie. I’m merely making the point that primary and secondary education should be paid for and that this would have two clear benefits-
1) reduce the number of over educated bozos cluttering universities with free loans that are a tremedous drain on the economy and,
2) add to the pool of apprentices.
The way it is now, these dipshits travel at virtually no real cost through an underperforming primary and secondary education system, and then travel on to tertiary, where they’re provided with free money, and there’s no real benefit to the taxpayer given so many of them are unsuited to a university education anyway.
Paying for secondary and primary would weed a lot of the useless twits out of the system and therefore reduce the massive debt burden of loans made to nitwits. A debt burden that apprentices have to shoulder. Quite unfairly.
Its OK for me to express such views isn’t it?
Oh shit we’re through the looking glass now, people.
Interest free student loans might be interest free for the borrowers but the money isn’t for the lender – the govt. All that foregone interest has to be paid somehow. Currently the country is borrowing to keep student loans interest free. Is that sensible and is it sustainable for perhaps another 10 years ?
I think loans should be interest free for a maximum of five years of full time study or until such time as a persons earnings exceed the repayment threshold (current about $18,000 I think).
Free money is a novel concept.
So burt, what do you think of the Nats policy of WRITING OFF loans for med, vet and other students who bond to certain locations then.
That has to be better than free money, its paying them to take it away.
RedLogix
IMHO
If it achieves it’s goal as a bond it will probably have the long term consequence of keeping the salaries of the groups who its available to less internationally competitive. Thus perpetuating the requirement to have the bond.If this is the case then we need to look at it as a social policy cost of having NZ trained people working in NZ.
Personally I would rather we made the jobs competitive on salary, the problem of repaying the student loans would also then go away. However I don’t write policy & I can’t control wages.
So you ducked the question.
Writing off a loan is a huge step further than making it interest free, yet you seem happy with the former and still bitchin about the latter.
(As it happens I’m happy with both, and this new loan policy has to be the one decision the Nats have made I can fully support so far.)
Oh and my pet rock is Jadis.
I didn’t dodge the question. I didn’t expressly say I don’t like it because I think it will achieve a goal, and it’s an important goal for NZ. I just don’t like how the goal is being archived. Where the people effected are state employees I would rather the ‘state’ just wacked an extra $10K or more on their salary.
These people leave the country for more money, we need to give it to them one way or another, but do we want a system that encourages hiring grads over more experienced staff. The unintended consequence will be that salaries do not need to rise as much as they should to attract ‘one group’ of staff therefore holding them low overall and driving experienced rather than freshly trained people off shore.
My pet rock is called Norman.
That’s lovely for you dear.
None of you righties have addressed the economic argument. ‘I don’t like interest-free student loans’ is not an argument to get rid of them as a counter-recessionary measure.
I am not necessarily a righty but I do disagree with you that fixing the recession is all about restoring confidence. Back a couple of years ago everyone was irrationally exuberantly overconfident, it was false confidence (and malinvestment) that caused the problem.
As I said the other day people are now realizing that:
a) their assets are not worth as much as they (wished) to believe
and
b) they have been spending too much because of point a)
Sorry Steve but I don’t think a shot of confidence is going to fix a) or b)
Steve. the interest differential is funded by the government through taxes. or if the government is not borrowing to lend, then it is foregone revenue. in return for returning the interest component of student loans, the government could decrease taxes by the same amount as it was spending on the interest/revenue differential. this would put more money in all new zealanders pockets, not just those with student loans. returning to interest bearing student loans would stimulate the economy, as the macro-economic effect of across the board tax cuts would be to increase consumption and/or savings.
“..more suited to being bus conductors or traffic wardens…”
do they still have bus conductors in NZ??
My friendly bus conductor clicks ny ticket when I flash him my tits.
Your friend must be gay. I would click your ticket when you didn’t flash me your tits.
“Oh and my pet rock is Jadis.”
Well of course it is.
I’m saying interest free loans are of little benefit to the taxpayer because there are too many dipshits at unversities anyway and the taxpayer would be better off training apprentices.
I am also saying it is unfair to expect apprentices to pay (thru PAYE) the interest on university loans taken out by people who are probably less intelligent than the apprentice anyway.
Do you think its fair that apprentices should pay? Leftists are all for “fairness” aren’t they??
I could tell you the real reason the left want people to attend university and its nothing to do with education.
Mr Pierson, the idea that people buying knick knacks in shop is something that is critical to a strong economy is just not correct. Especially when the knick knacks come from China. Consumer demand does not drive economies. It eventuates as a result of strong economies.
There is no point in arguing with you RB. I’ve worked many years in both University and industry settings. You meet intelligent and capable people in both. And dumbasses.
I’ve every respect for good tradespeople. my closest mate is one. There is as my father once said, no such thing as unskilled labour. All work takes skill.
But to assert that tradespeople are generally smarter than university graduates is so much palpable nonsense. They are both good at what they do, but in quite different aspects of human capacity.
And most technical and professional jobs these days demand a level of tertiary training simply as an entry point.
“There is no point in arguing with you RB”
Good. Don’t do it then. I’m quite happy for you to ignore me. Please feel free.
“I’ve worked many years ”
Oh. You do want to argue. Make up your mind.
( I can’t imagine a tradesman behaving so irrationally.)
Actually you’re probably quite a good example of a wasted tertiary education. Wouldn’t have made much of a tradesman either I’d venture. Its clipping bus tickets for you I’m afraid. Don’t be glum. Its not all bad. If you’re lucky, you’ll get a flash of Edna’s tits.
There is not much point in arguing with you because of your monomania, but however little there is, I’m bored and I will anyway. (Besides I’m running five different blogs and chats right now and it’s kinda fun cranking your handle as an idle distraction.)
In the meantime I suggest you stop drinking the water, I’ve poisoned it.
redbaiter has been particulary frothy today, I think the nurses at his rest home must have mucked up his meds.
from redbaiter –> “consumer demand does not drive economies.”
lol! Hey frothy chops, what does drive economies?? Do the nurses know you’re out of bed??
“lol!”
That you clearly think of yourself as so clever as you simultaneously reveal what an ignoramus you really are is pretty symptomatic of a lot of NZ’s problems. Such conceited arrogance it reminds me of Helen Clark, another half educated vain and arrogant dimbulb who thought public servants spending money at the Warehouse was the epitome of a strong economy. Or Zerobama or Krudd. All the same kind of leftist dipshit struggling with the same daft misconception.
Economies are strong when production is high and exports are high. If you’ve got those two essentials, then you can start spending on imported shit. The leftist twits interfering with the economies in most of the western world have it completely arse about face. As usual.
BTW your attempt to be clever with your references to “meds” is so banal and unoriginal I’d be embarrassed to try it myself. You’re apparently not. This is another thing that tells me all I need to know about the mental capability of Keith. Another sad pitiful leftist loser.
RB,
New Zealand HAS a strong economy with exports and imports of goods actually almost in balance with each other (within a billion or so, small enough not to matter so much.)
The real enduring weakness of NZ is that far too much of it was sold off to overseas owners in the 80′s and 90′s creating a massive structural imbalance. Sure at the time we gained a very small short term benefit from the cash we got for those assets, but since then the profits from these assets are now being exported back overseas each year, every year. To the tune of about 9% of GDP.
We are tenants in our own land RB, with no hope of paying off the money-lenders. That is the fatal flaw. It is something your hero Mr Douglas brought down on us all.
“You are a singularly exasperating soul.”
How ironic! The Dutch Einstein calling someone else exasperating. Akin to the pot calling the kettle black.
At least redbaiter has a “soul”.
“We are tenants in our own land RB, with no hope of paying off the money-lenders. That is the fatal flaw. It is something your hero Mr Douglas brought down on us all.”
good post RL. Speaking of Mr Douglas I’m beginning to think RB actually IS Roger Douglas. Think about it; the old timey language patterns (who actually says “knick knacks” anymore except your grandma?) Add that to the irrational evangelist frothy posts and the inverted reality economic theories and I think there’s a strong case to be made that RB is none other than the repugnant Roger Douglas!
Or am I being too unfair to Redbaiter?
Redblither: ‘I am also saying it is unfair to expect apprentices to pay (thru PAYE) the interest on university loans taken out by people who are probably less intelligent than the apprentice anyway.’
Of course you totally ignore all the taxes paid by graduates once they leave university and as the average income for someone with a degree is higher than those without a degree this means graduates make a significant contribution to future government tax income.
“as the average income for someone with a degree is higher than those without a degree”
Quite right about that point. So please tell me why it is essential that New Zealand taxpayers support tomorrow’s high income earners through interest free student loans. I somehow don’t think it is to stimulate consumer demand which seems to be the excuse de jour. What was the rationale last year or the year before that?
Lefties – finding new ways to express support for stupid ideas since ages ago.
“Of course you totally ignore all the taxes paid by graduates once they leave”
Of course you totally ignore all the taxes paid by apprentices once they are fully qualified tradesmen. Go away. Nobody whose name starts with four vowels could possibly be sane or rational.
“the repugnant Roger Douglas”
What an ignorant hateful zealot you are. Mr. Douglas was a Labour man. He just was not a socialist. Is this what things have come to on your watch in NZ? Where anyone who does not subscribe to the poison of European socialism becomes a figure of hate and scorn and is marginalized by those means?
You totalitarians are such a blight on the civilized world. This is a democracy you half educated bigot. Where political ideas compete. People are not sent to the gulags here for having opinions that challenge the socialist norm. Not yet anyway. Jack booted oaf.
Redbaiter: Time for you to have a coffee break I reckon, and I registered especially to say that. The clash of ideas is fine, flaming (and the deliberate baiting of it) is not. And definitely not here.
If I could ban you for a week I would.
RB ‘Of course you totally ignore all the taxes paid by apprentices once they are fully qualified tradesmen.’
Your the one saying trades good, degrees bad – not me. The trades make a huge contribution to our economy.
“I registered especially to say that.”
If you registered for the express purpose of muzzling the opinions of others than you should not have bothered. This is the blogosphere. Not “Letters to The Editor” where contributions are controlled by some timid jerk off left liberal too frightened to print anything that confronts the norm.
NZers need to speak out a lot more strongly to turn back the tide of suffocating left wing totalitarianism and pry their culture from the talons of a spent and dying ideology.
This is a thread on education. You’ve got a view, express it. Seeking to oppress the views of others is just repugnant Stal*n*st evil of the kind I have fought against all the time I have ever written on the internet. Fuck off is all I have to say to you and your poison. Think yourself lucky you earned that you oily condescending creep. You picked the wrong person to attempt to silence.
Seeking to oppress the views of others is just repugnant Stal*n*st evil of the kind I have fought against all the time I have ever written on the internet.
And how do you go about it? By using the foul, bullying language of a petty totalitarian tyrant who seeks to oppress the views of others.
It’s not working RB. Ever considered why?
Oh Go away Redillogix. Every post you make here reeks of spite and malice and utter outrage at the fact that others have different views to you and that they dare to express those views. You’re a miserable small minded low IQ twit with an extremely inflated opinion of your own worth.
You misuse the word “bullying”, another sly and sleazy attempt by the left to stifle discussion by categorising those who hold socialism in utter contempt as “undesirables’.
Here’s a clue. Bullying is traditionally a situation where the victim is unable to escape. Here, its all voluntary. Nobody forces you to communicate with Redbaiter. Nobody forces you to read his posts. Others choose not too and seem quite happy. They of course have the choice to ignore and exercize that choice and good on them.
Your whining is false and deceitful, in that its real objective is to appease the hurt and panic that arises in you when you see your precious ideology threatened by truth.
Now this is a thread on education. Shut the fuck up about Redbaiter and stick to the issue. Or ignore me.
As I’ve said before and many times, this is my preference.
RB, we’ve been crossing paths on blogs now for about 3-4 years. Has it not occured to you that I’m WAY over any of your silly formulaic insults? The more florid they get the more entertaining they become, but that’s about as far as it goes.
Sure I can understand why you would like me to ignore you. But I am going to exercise my choice not to. You cannot do anything about that.
Is there some reason why you keep referring to Redbaiter in the third person? I’ve seen you do this many, many time over the years. For someone who prizes his personal rights above all else, this always struck me as odd behaviour. Either YOU are Redbaiter and you take ownership of that persona, or YOU are not Redbaiter?
Who is the real person here?
“Has it not occured to you that I’m WAY over any of your silly formulaic insults”
I don’t care dipshit. Let me say it again. I don’t care. Either discuss the issue or fuck off. I do not have the slightest interest in your views on Redbaiter.
No hang on, I’m being far too liberal here. I don’t care for your views on anything. Just leave me alone and fuck off. I’ve got better things to do than argue politics with obsessive retards with no point of reference other than left wing doctrine.
I’ve got better things to do than argue politics with obsessive retards with no point of reference other than left wing doctrine
Then why are you here at all? It is plainly obvious that your point of reference (however correct and wonderful you believe it to be) shares almost nothing in common with most posters here at The Standard.
That means that almost every attempt at an on-topic discussion with you degenerates immediately into a slugfest of insults. Why do you keep doing this, when after years of trying, it must be plain to you that isn’t working?
Redbaiter: Is it true that you score points for yourself for every response that your insults bring?
1 for a mention by name.
2 for a counter-argument and
5 for an angry name-calling response.
I think that you are up to 999 so perhaps you could count a reply to yourself under another name to get you over the 1000.
Ianmac- What does it take to get through to you infantile knuckle draggers? I do not want to discuss Redbaiter, I want to discuss education. The topic of the thread. Get over your fixations.
” I do not want to discuss Redbaiter”
Then stop doing it you hypocritical fuckstick. no one is forcing you.