Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
5:30 pm, November 2nd, 2017 - 35 comments
Categories: Daily review -
Tags:
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
Iv had a good day in paradise the contest continues. I got a new device to post my blogs with the old one was stuffed so I’m testing the new one Ka pai
Canada gets a scientist/astronaut, we get a chisler/vulture capitalist.
One month into her new job as Canada’s Governor General, Julie Payette is taking on fake news and bogus science.
Payette was the keynote speaker at the ninth annual Canadian Science Policy Convention in Ottawa Wednesday night where she urged her friends and former colleagues to take responsibility to shut down the misinformation about everything from health and medicine to climate change and even horoscopes that has flourished with the explosion of digital media.
“Can you believe that still today in learned society, in houses of government, unfortunately, we’re still debating and still questioning whether humans have a role in the earth warming up or whether even the earth is warming up, period,” she asked, her voice incredulous.
“And we are still debating and still questioning whether life was a divine intervention or whether it was coming out of a natural process let alone, oh my goodness, a random process.”
https://www.thespec.com/news-story/7767752-governor-general-payette-takes-on-climate-change-deniers-and-horoscopes/
Any ‘red flags’ in her comments, for you. J90?
Who said that science is boring?
Very nice article on the bacterial diversity of the entire planet (Earth, of course) with an important link to climate change: https://sciblogs.co.nz/news/2017/11/02/bacterial-bonanza/
JP’s a genius.
Kalespiracy.
“Do you have like a tofu-flavoured chicken you can substitute in for me?”
oops
lol, I wasn’t sure whether to delete my comment or not.
Or Atheism? Ha!
Heather Simpson (H2) has returned to advise the new Labour Government.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/10/h2-helen-clark-s-top-advisor-returns-to-labour-party.html
“Goff has also said he wants to look at targeted rates to help meet the cost of the ambitious light rail plans to Auckland Airport and West Auckland – charging landowners more if the value of their property lifts because of proximity to the new tram routes and stops.”
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11939675
Interesting reasoning from Goff. However, wouldn’t targeted rates decrease a property’s value due to buyers being deterred by the higher rates?
Not necessarily; being close to amenities is usually a plus.
Yes, but the higher rates (as a result of targeted rates) would largely offset that gain.
Moreover, to realize any extra possible gain, the owner would have to sell, leaving someone else to face the burden of higher rates.
Additionally, targeted rates would take us out of the realm of “usually”.
Or the owners could catch the train and save on petrol & parking in the CBD and also be gentler on the environment. Their kids could also commute by PB to their private schools in town. Higher rates are a small price to pay for such luxury and being spoilt for choice IMHO.
How much higher are those targeted rates going to be anyway?
Owners and their kids may catch a bus, thus already have that benefit.
The rate has yet to be set, the concept is still to be explored.
They may, if they live near a bus stop. I think the catch is in the stuff you quoted:
We’ll wait & see.
With higher rates being a deterrent, the properties the next block over (where the targeted rates line is drawn) will more likely become of interest to buyers. Thus, their value will probably surpass those being hit with the higher rates.
And higher rates is another cost to add to home ownership/rents.
I think people will look at it more holistically and not so easily scared off by slightly (?) higher rates and the likes. Not everybody thinks (and reacts) the same way and what seems logical or predictable to one may not make any sense to another.
This is entirely speculative anyway because as you yourself said
Once the plan is open for public discussion you can submit your concerns and provide feedback as any Auckland ratepayer can.
With the way rates and the top pay rates (at the council) have been increasing, I don’t know too many that would welcome another rate increase.
But you’re right, it is subjective.
Yes, we can submit, but we can also toss it around here and see what people think of the concept. Goff seems rather keen on it.
For the record, I think it’s a bad idea.
Goff is heavily into ‘market forces’.
The benefits of being close to amenities would far outweigh the minor rates increase. In fact, it would probably encourage more gentrification while the poor get shoved out to the expensive areas to live on the edge of cities.
“The benefits of being close to amenities would far outweigh the minor rates increase.”
It depends on how “minor” that increase is. A number struggle to pay their current rates. And the more people pay in rates, the less they tend to spend elsewhere.
Oh no, a rate increase that offsets the benefits of living close to new amenities might restrict economic activity and slow economic growth. This is very concerning. Worrying. I will never vote Labour again! /sarc
Sorry, you can’t blame Labour for this; it’s that ghastly little Mayor Goff who’s the mastermind behind this.
there must be some way to be concerned about labour, surely…
seriously, though – the amenity value of living close to tramlines is no fuel or parking issues to get into town. That’s the bit that’s being ignored.
No matter what, Labour is at fault. That’s a given (a fact). Goff was in Labour so Labour is guilty by association.
Yes, I mentioned fuel & parking @ 7.1.1.1.
Let’s wait till we hear a proposal with some facts and then blame Labour, again 😉
As long as we are all aware, I didn’t bring Labour into this.
However, Phil Twyford raised it on the Nation today.
“The amenity value of living close to tramlines is no fuel or parking issues to get into town. That’s the bit that’s being ignored.”
It’s not being ignored. As highlighted above, it’s the ones staying the next block over (where the targeted rates line is drawn) that are more likely to be the ones to better capitalise from it.
“Achieving that goal will require what eminent economist Lord Nicholas Stern has called a “new industrial revolution” to transform the carbon-reliant world economy to one that produces zero net carbon emissions by the second half of this century.”
http://www.noted.co.nz/currently/environment/special-climate-report-goodbye-cool-world/
“But Sarah Thompson’s case has added to the pressure for tighter climate targets. ”
http://www.noted.co.nz/currently/environment/new-zealand-s-first-climate-change-lawsuit-rejected-by-high-court/
Except they have to walk farther.
@ McFlock (7.1.1.2.1.1)
A rate increase that will deter buyers, thus offset (perhaps totally) the perceived capital gain Goff believes is fair to capture.
So at worst the residents have no financial disadvantage from the tramline, and everyone gets cleaner air.
At worst the residents directly affected achieve little capital gain and get hit hard on their rates while those the next block over achieve all the benefits. Closer public transport, capital gains and no rate increase. Albeit, they will have to walk, ride or drive one block more.
Your WCS can exist only if the benefit to the community is less than the cost of making the new transport route, and the rates increase covers the total cost.
So… sounds like bullshit to me, especially from a non-NACT administration.
The National Party grief cycle. Stage three: bargaining.
It’s important to name these people in particular. Trevett, Watkins, Soper, Young, Kirk, Jones, van Beynen, and Hehir. Some of them will be desperately unhappy to have lost privileged access to the government.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/opinion/2017/11/mitch-harris-national-party-opposition-in-full-grief-cycle.html