Fair trade

Written By: - Date published: 9:35 am, March 8th, 2013 - 24 comments
Categories: capitalism - Tags:

Farrar and Mallard want us to give the NZRU a statue to trade back one of Holyoake that the government accidentally sold them along with the old State Services building. How about saying to the NZRU, ‘We accidentally sold you a statue but, hey, you remember all that money we gave you to under-write your loss-making tournament? Maybe you could give us our fucken statue back without being dicks about it?

24 comments on “Fair trade”

  1. tc 1

    Trade them a statue of the NZ Taxpayer being rogered by the NZRU for ongoing funds to run their so called professional game.

  2. Bunji 2

    Why would we want a statue of corrupt Holyoake back?

  3. fenderviper 3

    Farrer and Mallard…. what a team.

    Key will no doubt prefer to commision a plastic replica from somewhere in Asia and put the savings made toward a solid gold statue of himself holding the ‘rubber wool’ cup.

  4. prism 4

    Sounds reasonable that the NZR lot just return it, but could need an encouraging proviso perhaps – that we will continue to consider your future applications for support.

    • Mary 4.1

      Maybe Trevor and Tau could just go in and nick it, and if anyone tries to stop them they could just smack them up.

  5. Mary 5

    Mallard should put in a members bill that renationalises the statue.

  6. Red Rosa 6

    Send the Army along to take it back by force.

    After all, it was the distraction by Rugby World Cup work, which led to the inadequate training and the subsequent death of one of their soldiers in Afghanistan.

    • Lanthanide 6.1

      *subsequent suicide

      Which IMO is more damning. Deaths happen in the military, suicides shouldn’t.

      • Murray Olsen 6.1.1

        The US military has a huge problem with suicides, although many wait until after they return from the invasion zone. I don’t know about other countries, but I imagine that any young people that are sent to do unspeakable things to other human beings will be negatively affected by it.

        • McFlock 6.1.1.1

          That’s getting into speculation about the specifics of the case, though. And just because he was in the military doesn’t mean that he did unspeakable things.

          But the psychological welfare of troops was an evolving discipline throughout that 20C. The job in WW2 was to increase the percentage of frontline troops who actually fired their weapons in a meaningful way. Success achieved by Vietnam, but then the cost of that was increased mental health problems particularly when they returned home. Practises have improved in the US (not sure of NZ practices), like cooling off periods so the soldier doesn’t go straight from a warzone into shopping mall, but on the flipside long wars with no discernible benefit or moral justice tend to drag people down. And that’s without unit subcultures becoming self-destructive being taken into account.

          • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1.1

            Practises have improved in the US (not sure of NZ practices), like cooling off periods so the soldier doesn’t go straight from a warzone into shopping mall

            Practices and procedures improving is one side of the coin. Massive increases in optempo and perstempo (often against established doctrine) working against these improvements however, is the other.

  7. ghostwhowalksnz 7

    Do the NZRU actually own the building ?
    Doesnt seem to be a wise use of resources, normally leasing a bit of space is all they need.

    Could it be that Bob Jones is the owner of the land and building.

  8. Chris 8

    What money did the government give to the NZRU to under-write the tournament?

  9. McFlock 9

    I thought that the ORFU were a bunch of grasping cocks demanding (and getting) recurring handouts from the DCC simply because of small-town cronyism.

    Apparently they learned it from their umbrella organisation.

  10. infused 10

    It’s a Trojan Horse.

  11. Roy 11

    If the NZRU had an ounce of decency they’d return it anyway, since they got it due to an error.

  12. Catp 12

    Well, setting the profanity aside, I suspect the NZRFU are actually tenants – not owners of the property. That would make the statue a Landlord’s fixture. It might also be that the building h as in private ownership for a while and its only the moving out of the SSC that’s prompted anyone to notice.

    If so, will you retract?

    [no, because the implication of Farrar and Mallard’s idea is that we should trade a rugby statue to the NZRU to get the Holyoake statue back in return – Farrar was clearly fed that idea from someone in NZRU circles. If NZRU can trade the statue, they can gift it too. If need be, they just buy it off the landlord and give it back as a thank-you to the taxpayer. Zet]

    • Cato 12.1

      Well, I take your point. However, linking through to Kiwiblog, and then through to the Dominion article, it isn’t “clear” to me that the NZRU were behind much of anything. I suppose it’s ‘possible’ rather than ‘clear’ but there does not seem to be much to hang your hat on.

      In any event, it seems that the owner of the land (and the statue) quite likes it and so wouldn’t be inclined to sell or trade anyway.

      However, i would agree that a swap would be a dumb idea – the statue is well protected where it is.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts