Kiwis report future less bright under National

58 comments on “Kiwis report future less bright under National ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Peter Johns 1

   6 April 2010 at 4:43 pm

   Eddie – 2008 was before the recession really hit. I think this is a reasonable result since we have had the recession. If the survey was after the election, this is natural as a change of govt does this. Would be interesting if they did a survey in 2009.
   Clutching at straws as usual. Also, a very subjective survey. See the rich pricks are happy, maybe a target for PM Little in 2017?
   • Bright Red 1.1

     6 April 2010 at 4:53 pm

     “2008 was before the recession really hit”

     lolz. who is this moron? Don’t you remember the credit crunch? the sub-prime crisis? Lehmans Bank?

     The Germany, Hungary, Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, NZ, and the UK had all enetered recession before the election.

     There are literally hundreds of news articles on good news with “john key” and recession in them. Don’t try to pretend he didn’t know it was happening. Gods, the man is supposed to be an economic wonder.

     We all knew we were in an economic critics, yet he promised a brighter future anyway and has failed to deliver.

     Do you support failure, Peter John? Or just excuse it?
     • Peter Johns 1.1.1

       6 April 2010 at 6:58 pm

       September 2008 it happed fool. You are a jerk.
       Look at the Messiahs 10% unemployment bro.
       We are better off with National, Cullen spunked all of the dough up the wall before mid 2008 and to make sure he brought a fucked up train set.
       • BLiP 1.1.1.1

         6 April 2010 at 7:13 pm

         Geeze – why do youse trolls keep calling Blinglish a liar?
         • Pascal's bookie 1.1.1.1.1

           6 April 2010 at 8:03 pm

           Stopped clock syndrome all around I guess.
       • Pascal's bookie 1.1.1.2

         6 April 2010 at 8:02 pm

         Look at the Messiahs 10% unemployment bro.

         We are better off with National, Cullen spunked all of the dough up the wall before mid 2008 and to make sure he brought a fucked up train set.

         You can run with one or other of these pieces of rhetoric, but not both. If you are going to try, at least put a few hundred words between them.
2. Peter Johns 2

   6 April 2010 at 4:49 pm

   As for jobs, Fonterra want to open a new plane in Canterbury (50 jobs) and how abot mining? Jobs will come as confidence increases and stays high. Employers need confidence to employ. As you know, employment is always a lagger once recovery starts. With things like the 90 day probation, this will help in increasing employment faster as this reducers employer risk. Even the USA is having a slow jobs recovery, which is unusual for them.
   • Bright Red 2.1

     6 April 2010 at 4:58 pm

     the 90 day fire at will bill has been in over a year. any evidence it has created jobs?

     No mines will get under way for at least 5 years on s4 land and they don’t create many jobs any way.

     I’ll see your 50 jobs in Canterbury and raise you 100 jobs lost in Christchurch from one factory in the past month. http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/3460975/Cablemaker-to-shed-100-jobs-in-Christchurch
     • Peter Johns 2.1.1

       6 April 2010 at 7:03 pm

       the 90 day bill will help. It is human nature as an employer can take a chance he would not have been able to do in the past.
       Sure jobs are still being lost, but that is bc of the recession. That is not totally the governments fault, if they sudsidised everyone that was being laid off that would send the country broke.
       • Lanthanide 2.1.1.1

         6 April 2010 at 7:48 pm

         I don’t get it.

         If anything, the 90 day bill will *reduce* long term employment.

         If you have sufficient work that you need to hire another person, you need to hire another person regardless of whether you can fire them within 90 days or not. If you don’t have enough work for another person, having the 90 fire at will law won’t suddenly make you think “oh, I should hire another person even though I don’t have any work for them”.
         • mickysavage 2.1.1.1.1

           6 April 2010 at 7:59 pm

           Agreed Lanthanide

           The 90 day bill will do precisely nothing for unemployed. If a job is available there are currently plenty of trained competent workers ready to fill it. If the job is not there then the employer is not hiring.
       • Jum 2.1.1.2

         6 April 2010 at 9:35 pm

         Employers never think about getting rid of bad workers. They are so sure their decisions are correct they couldn’t countenance they’d make a bad decision.
       • prism 2.1.1.3

         7 April 2010 at 10:24 am

         Peter Johns
         Your ideas sound like half-digested guff from some other guy with third-rate information being sputtered out around a mouthful of half-digested hamburger.
         Try to take longer with your comments, think them through, and when we get the edit button back, check and correct so we get less incoherent rage.
   • Pascal's bookie 2.2

     6 April 2010 at 7:07 pm

     “Even the USA is having a slow jobs recovery, which is unusual for them.”

     Are you kidding?

     take a look at this graph: (which shows US job losses for the post wwii recessions)

     http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/job-losses-post-ww2.png

     What is happening there? (Hint: How would you describe job recovery for post 80’s recessions compared to pre 80’s). If you have to go back 30 years to find a ‘quick’ jobs recovery, then in what sense is a slow recovery unusual?)

     In the second instance, I’ll believe the world is in some sort of recovery when we get through the next couple of years of US mortgage resets, the commercial real estate market stops imploding, and US banks stop failing. And job numbers get back to where they were.
3. tc 3

   6 April 2010 at 4:49 pm

   We weren’t listening to the subtext which was a “relentless focus on cons’
4. tsmithfield 4

   6 April 2010 at 5:08 pm

   Eddie “Without question, the bulk of the blame for the decrease lies with the global recession. But we knew the global recession was underway in late 2008 and Key still made his promise. Now his is in power, he has a responsibility to live up to his promises by minimising the effects of the recession and promoting recovery.”

   Patience, Grasshopper… With the NZ dollar now at close to the lowest it has been for decades against the Auzzie, we will soon be enjoying a major export-led recovery.
   • Bright Red 4.1

     6 April 2010 at 5:18 pm

     In the real world – Trade Weighted Index at historically high levels, damaging exports http://nationalbank.co.nz/economics/exchange/nzdtwi.aspx

     the NZD is not low. If anything, it is overvalued.
     • lprent 4.1.1

       6 April 2010 at 5:42 pm

       Yeah I was surprised at how much the cost of the US server had plummeted this month due to exchange rate changes.

       I’d hate to be an active exporter right now because this is an out of season increase relative to the USD. But the trade-weighted index is almost as bad.

       The problem isn’t with what the exchange rate is. It is the volatility of the exchange rate that will kill exporters. The USD rate has increased what? 80% since the base in 2009. Who can be bothered taking that level of risk when looking at putting plant in, employing people, or stumping up the cash for a marketing campaign…

       The investment capital for any kind of exports apart from farming has pretty well dried up. Everyone is moving their operations offshore to a more stable currency zone.

       ts: If you think we’re likely to get a export lead recovery in the current environment, I think that you’re dreaming. I’ve been doing exports for 30 years, and current conditions are just impossible.

       What we may get is a drop in consumption led recovery. We already have it to an extent. Our terms of trade are the best that they’ve been a for a while. Less spending on imports.
     • Lew 4.1.2

       6 April 2010 at 6:11 pm

       In fact, it IS overvalued — by 10-25% according to the IMF. But what would they know. I take all my financial advice from a bloke called tsmithfield on the internets.

       L
       • nzfp 4.1.2.1

         6 April 2010 at 9:20 pm

         Hey Lew you said according to the IMF. But what would they know.. I’m inclined to agree and so does Professor Michel Chossudovsky director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), author of “The Globalization of Poverty and the New World Order” (September 10, 2003). Chossudovsky criticises the IMF and the World Bank and outlines the contours of a New World Order which feeds on human poverty and the destruction of the environment, generates social apartheid, encourages racism and ethnic strife and undermines the rights of women. The result as his detailed examples from all parts of the world show so convincingly, is a globalization of poverty.
         • Lew 4.1.2.1.1

           6 April 2010 at 9:28 pm

           nzfp, I don’t have to be a great admirer of the IMF to take their word over that of a random bloke on the internets.

           I’m also a bit cagey about these “teh banksters are keeping teh wrold poor!” conspiracy theories as well, but that’s admittedly just guilt by association, since those espousing said theories tend also to believe in giving peace a chance, crystal healing, the moon landings being a hoax, etc. But that’s by the by.

           L
           • nzfp 4.1.2.1.1.1

             6 April 2010 at 9:52 pm

             Hey Lew,
             In your response you said “guilt by association”, isn’t that a logical fallacy? Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to make this accusation if I specifically referred to the primary Bankers of the IMF and the World Bank? However I didn’t, I commented only on the well documented failures of IMF reforms, loans and conditionalities – specifically in the third world.

             Then you made the comment “those espousing said theories tend also to believe in giving peace a chance, crystal healing, the moon landings being a hoax, etc”, doesn’t this comment comprise of the logical fallacies Appeal to Ridicule considering the tone of your comment I would assert that it was meant to ridicule anyone who criticises the well documented IMF failures. Or what about Ad Hominem – after all you did refer to Professor Michel Chossudovsky – director of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), visiting professor at academic institutions in Western Europe, Latin America and Southeast Asia, economic adviser to governments, consultant for international organizations including the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the African Development Bank, the United Nations African Institute for Economic Development and Planning (AIEDEP), the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the International Labour Organization (ILO), the World Health Organisation (WHO), the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) – as “a random bloke on the internets”.

             Once we disreaged your logical fallacies, what exactly was your point? I guess that just leaves “I don’t have to be a great admirer of the IMF”, well I can agree with that and so too does Professor Chossudovsky.

             Have your read Chossudovsky’s book?
             • Lew …

               6 April 2010 at 10:30 pm

               I freely admit it’s a logical fallacy, but there’s the thing: absent the time and energy to educate myself about the intricacies of global financial systems (a topic which interests me but little), I go with a low-information rationality of discarding the rantings of obsessive moonbats; gold-standard Objectivists and apparently yourself included.

               You might be right. So might the Randroids. But I’m willing to take my chances.

               L
             • Lew …

               6 April 2010 at 10:36 pm

               And another thing — isn’t the excessive appeal to authority in your two preceding posts also a logical fallacy? Why, I think it is.

               The random bloke on the internets to which I was referring was tsmithfield in the first instance. Chossudovsky might be all that and a bag of chips — I have no quarrel with him and wouldn’t be qualified to critique his work anyhow. But that don’t mean I’ll naïvely believe his premises as relayed to me by yet another random dude on the internets, particularly when, for every one esteemed chap espousing these ideas, there are a thousand orthodox economists calling them a load of old bollocks.

               Low-information rationality. It’s a quick and dirty, but it gives you time to focus on the shit you care about. Which, for me, ain’t fractional reserve. Don’t let me stop you, though.

               L
             • nzfp …

               7 April 2010 at 12:31 pm

               Hey Lew,
               You said “The random bloke on the internets to which I was referring was tsmithfield” , I apologise, I concede I didn’t read your original post correctly.

               You said “I go with a low-information rationality of discarding the rantings of obsessive moonbats; gold-standard Objectivists and apparently yourself included.”

               Easy on the Ad-hominem would you please, “ad-hominem” is another logical fallacy, it’s used in place of an argument. In this case you have used it alongside another logical fallacy the “straw man” to obscure your admitted lack of knowledge of the IMF and it’s effects. Being ignorant of a topic isn’t a weakness, it’s really an opportunity to learn something new – especially if you approach it with an open mind.

               You said “You might be right. So might the Randroids”

               Again references to “Raindroids” linked to your referece to Alisa Rosenbaum’s (Ayun Rand) philosophy of “Objectivism” is another example of the “straw man“. We are not discussing Libertarianism, Objectivism, Ayun Rand or the Ludwig Von Mises school of Austrian Economics. We are discussing the IMF and it’s effects on the third world. I can only imagine that the reference to “New World Order” in the title of Chossudovsky’s book misled you to believe that it was a “conspiracy theory” book.

               You ask “isn’t the excessive appeal to authority in your two preceding posts also a logical fallacy”

               Well it could be misunderstood to be so if you don’t understand the concept of the logical fallacy. However, the definiftion of the “appeal to authority” logical fallacy is when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject. As you have freely admitted you have’t researched the IMF or the economists who support and criticise it’s actions so you wouldn’t know if “Chossudovsky” is an authority on the subject. My advice to you would be to read his book before you pass judgement. So in answer to your question, as I’ve already demonstrated “Canadian Economist Professor Michel Chossudovsky” – Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa’s credentials in a previous post – we can see that he is an authority on the subject and as such your assertion that this is a logical fallacy is incorrect.

               You said “for every one esteemed chap espousing these ideas, there are a thousand orthodox economists calling them a load of old bollocks”

               Well this is an example of the logical fallacy “Argumentum ad numerum (argument or appeal to numbers)“, you assert “there are a thousand orthodox economists”, now the burden of proof is upon you to produce these “thousand orthodox economists” and considering the context of your use of the “Argumentum ad numerum (argument or appeal to numbers)” the burden of proof is upon you to also prove these “thousand orthodox economists” are correct.

               Now that we’ve established your use of the logical fallacies, we can disregard those comments and examine what is left. To summarise your comments you admit to using a logical fallacy and that you don’t have the “time and energy to educate [yourself] about the intricacies of global financial systems”. Well I have to disagree, your posts have shown a fair degree of sophistication (look up the word “sophism“), especially considering that most people don’t know who Ayun Rand is, what her relationship was to Libertarianism and Objectivism, what her economic philiosphy was, or that she was influenced by Austrian Economist Ludwig Von-Mises of the Mises school of Austrian Economics, or that Austrian economics promotes a definition of money based on precious metals and other similar commodities.

               Considering we can disregard the majority of the rest of your comments as fallacious, that leaves us with “Low-information rationality. It’s a quick and dirty, but it gives you time to focus on the shit you care about. Which, for me, ain’t fractional reserve”.

               Well again I have to disagree, considering the time you took to engage me I would argue that you have thought a fair amount about economics and their affect on the world, but this is merely my opinion and should be treated as nothing more. I would however suggest that your philosophy of “low-information rationality” leaves a fair amount to be desired, especially if it reduces your arguments to the first sentence. There is nothing wrong with being informed, or educating yourself.

               All that aside, I would like to say to you that economics is not a black art and can be learned by anybody. You don’t need a Doctorate in neo-liberal (pretty much all that is taught in universities today) economics to understand how economies work. If you would like some pointers to where you can learn let me know and I’ll give you some suggestions.

               nzfp
             • Lew …

               7 April 2010 at 12:39 pm

               nzfp, You don’t seem to have gotten the message, so I’ll make it really crystal clear for you: I don’t give a fuck.

               It was a flippant offhand comment mocking tsmithfield’s assertion that the dollar was undervalued, and a reasonably good-natured jab at your unorthodox take on the nature of money. That’s it. I’m quite aware of the logical holes in my argument, as I said. But that’s ok — I don’t care about winning it. There are plenty of things I will argue long and hard about, but this ain’t one of them.

               But you sure did skewer that windmill.

               L
             • nzfp …

               7 April 2010 at 12:50 pm

               Hey Lew,
               Easy mate, I responded to your offensive remarks and use of ad-hominem. If you’re going to engage with someone – be genuine.
             • Lew …

               7 April 2010 at 12:55 pm

               NZFP, I’ll buy you a beer if you promise not to lecture me on the fractional reserve system, how’s that for a gesture of goodwill 😉

               L
             • nzfp …

               7 April 2010 at 1:00 pm

               Hey Lew,
               Hah hah fair enough. I’ll have one of those new Steinlager medium strengths with the red top 😉
             • nzfp …

               7 April 2010 at 1:01 pm

               Have one yourself too.
             • pollywog …

               7 April 2010 at 1:06 pm

               …well since you’re buying Lew 🙂
   • Zaphod Beeblebrox 4.2

     6 April 2010 at 6:12 pm

     We’ve been hearing that for the past year- good times are just around the corner, the Reserve Bank is going to raise rates, house prices are going to stabilise, unemployment is going to stop climbing, wages are going to start rising again blah, blah blah.

     Each month the projected date of all these things happening has been progressively pushed back. Meanwhile Australia and China moves ahead, the US starts to recover.
5. Lew 5

   6 April 2010 at 6:02 pm

   Eddie, it might now be less bright in absolute terms, but it’s more bright in relative terms than the probable counterfactual!

   That is to say, if the alternative had happened, there would have been a lesser increase in brightness — or, if you like, a greater increase in negative brightness.

   Either way you look at it, we’re clearly better off (even if the measures don’t show it). Surely it’s bright enough for you to see that?

   L

   😉
   • Lew 5.1

     6 April 2010 at 6:03 pm

     Bah, my url has gotten into the name, somehow (and the comment got moderated as a consequence). Can a clever mod fix it?

     L
6. tsmithfield 6

   6 April 2010 at 6:34 pm

   “In the real world Trade Weighted Index at historically high levels, damaging exports http://nationalbank.co.nz/economics/exchange/nzdtwi.aspx

   the NZD is not low. If anything, it is overvalued.”

   True. Against the likes of the Euro, Yen et al. We are overvalued. However, we have dropped back a bit against the US.

   However, Australia is a major export partner, accounting for over 20% of our exports, so the exchange rate differential is a big deal for us.

   http://www.economywatch.com/world_economy/new-zealand/export-import.html

   The differential will definitely be helping a lot of our exporters. Those who are finding it difficult in other markets at the moment may well be able to find buyers in Auz due to the exchange rate differential and the close proximity keeping freight costs and delivery times down.

   Also, Australia is a major source of tourism for us. With the exchange rate differential we will be getting a lot more tourists from Auz also helping the economy, especially given the cheap air-fares at the moment.

   BTW, have any of you heard of contrarian indicators. These come into play at extreme levels because there is not much further to move in a given direction, so a reversal is likely. For instance, extreme levels of bullishness or bearishness suggesting a likely turn in the market. Well, another of these is consumer sentiment. When this is at extreme levels it can indicate a turn in the market (e.g. darkest before the dawn).

   I am not sure how long the survey Eddie is referring to has been running, and there isn’t However, if this level is relatively extreme pessimism for the survey then it could indicate a turn is just around the corner.
   • Zaphod Beeblebrox 6.1

     6 April 2010 at 7:03 pm

     Good on you for being an optimist, TS, I’d like to believe good times around the corner- but i really can’t see it at the moment. Haven’t you noticed that as each month goes by the projected timing of teh Reserve Bank rates rise keeps being postponed- last I heard its the second half of next year (it was supposed to be late last year). The peak unemployment date keeps getting pushed back (now its Feb 2011! or three years after we went into recession). Wages keep falling and property prices are projected to keep falling. All the time Mr Smile and Wave says he’s seen figures (which I obviously haven’t) which suggest positive real GDP is around the corner- does he have some extra insight or is he just hoping?
     • tsmithfield 6.1.1

       6 April 2010 at 7:21 pm

       Zaphod: “Good on you for being an optimist, TS….All the time Mr Smile and Wave says he’s seen figures (which I obviously haven’t) which suggest positive real GDP is around the corner- does he have some extra insight or is he just hoping?”

       Despite coming from different political viewpoints I am sure we would all like to see the economy improving.

       I keep pretty close tabs on the world markets. It is getting fairly well accepted now that a recovery is underway even in the likes of the US which has been hit a lot worse than us.

       One piece of anecdotal evidence I have noticed from one of my businesses is that there has been a major increase in sales of piping systems for factories, suggesting that they are expanding their facilities for more production. If that is the case, then the economy might be about to turn around.

       I think interest rates are going to increase a lot sooner than what people think though. And interest rates aren’t completely under the control of our reserve bank either. There is a lot of countries trying to fund deficits at the moment so the cost borrowing is going to go up, regardless of what our reserve bank does.
       • Luxated 6.1.1.1

         7 April 2010 at 5:06 am

         One piece of anecdotal evidence I have noticed from one of my businesses is that there has been a major increase in sales of piping systems for factories, suggesting that they are expanding their facilities for more production. If that is the case, then the economy might be about to turn around.

         My personal inclination would be to say that companies are refitting or increasing spares capacity while it is cheap for them to do so i.e. during a recession.
         • Galeandra 6.1.1.1.1

           7 April 2010 at 8:26 am

           Like the esteemed Chinese commodity shoppers.
   • Lanthanide 6.2

     6 April 2010 at 7:54 pm

     If the exchange rate was much lower, the price of petrol would be significantly higher, which helps to kill the economy in itself…
7. Fisiani 7

   6 April 2010 at 7:35 pm

   worsening public services Yeah right….
   Tony Ryall gets the chance every question time to talk about the INCREASE in frontline health professionals under his watch
   rising unemployment Yeah right
   Predicted by some to reach 10% or even 11% but never even 9%
   rising crime Yeah right
   and clearly the fault of those in charge in 2000-2008 not those who received the hospital pass of social and economic neglect
   • nzfp 7.1

     6 April 2010 at 10:04 pm

     Hey Fisiani,
     Have you ever noticed that a $50 basket of goods from 1967 is worth $782.84 today? Does that seem fiscally responsible to you? Both National and Labour were in charge of our nation during that period, so both parties can accept responsibility for the 1,465.7% inflation over that period. However, when we consider a $5000 house from 1967 we find it is now priced at $214,583.95, that’s a 4,191.7% inflation rate, seems pretty high to me, in fact it is much higher then any of the other inflation indicators.

     The point I’m making here is that it’s not Nationals fault any more then it’s Labours, they are both equally responsible for economic irresponsibility.
   • nzfp 7.2

     6 April 2010 at 10:17 pm

     Hey Fisiani,
     Just to add to my last comment, if you earned $100/month in 1967, it would equate to $2,378.79 today, that’s an increase of 2,278.8%, which roughly matches the CPI. However recall that house prices over the same period increased by 4,191.7%, or roughly twice as much, have you ever asked what impact this has had on our society? The impact is obvious, we have transitioned from a one income family to a two income family with all of the increases in risk associated with that. We now need two incomes to afford the same housing that our parents could afford in 1967 on one income.

     This is a huge impact on our society. Consider an average family of four, mum, dad, two kids. Consider the following worst case scenario, dad gets sick and mum has to stay home to look after dad, the result is the loss of two incomes, the house and the livlehood.

     Both Labour and National are responsible for this societal change. They both need to shoulder the responsibility as it happened on both their watches.

     For a more detailed discussion on this topic, listen to an MP3 lecture “Elizabeth Warren — The Coming Collapse of the Middle Class: Higher Risks, Lower Rewards, and a Shrinking Safety Net” by American attorney and law professor Elizabeth Warren. Warren teaches contract law, bankruptcy, and commercial law at Harvard Law School. She is an outspoken critic of America’s credit economy, which she has linked to the continuing rise in bankruptcy among the middle-class.
8. Adrian 8

   6 April 2010 at 7:37 pm

   Dream on TS , the Auckland economy has slowed quite a bit since January, Treasury et al won’t know for another 3 months, but I know waste volumes are down considerably, watch this space. Exporters doing well, yeah right, at the moment every wine company is losing money on every box to the US and UK and only just breaking even in Aus, and that goes for everything else we produce. Unemployment is a helluva lot higher than is being admitted, 37% of applicants are being turned away from W&I without a cracker.
   • tsmithfield 8.1

     6 April 2010 at 8:03 pm

     Adrian, here is a link to a herald article from today:

     http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10636667

     Here is a quote from the article:

     “In New Zealand, the Reserve Bank was forecast to raise interest rates in June, and economic data today reinforced that expectation.

     Earlier today, a key gauge of business sentiment showed an improvement in optimism well ahead of the reality of economic recovery, but encouraging measures of investment intentions and construction activity.

     The New Zealand Institute of Economic Research’s (NZIER) Quarterly Survey of Business Opinion showed a seasonally adjusted net 36 per cent of firms surveyed in the March quarter expected conditions to improve over the next six months, compared with 23 per cent the previous quarter.”

     See. Business sentiment is improving quite markedly. This is likely to lead to increased investment and hiring.
     • Pascal's bookie 8.1.1

       6 April 2010 at 8:08 pm

       So it’s an improvement from ‘awfully fucked’ to ‘fucking awful’ then.

       It is an improvement for sure, and I’m not denying that aspect, but it’s still pretty much 2-1 against any improvement, and that’s in spite of quite a few months of happy talk.
     • Zaphod Beeblebrox 8.1.2

       6 April 2010 at 11:20 pm

       Everyone has been talking about the end of the recession for the past year- when is it going to happen?
     • Adrian 8.1.3

       7 April 2010 at 6:06 am

       And then this morning Brian Fallow “Business wakes up to slow recovery” gives the lie to everything you have asserted, and proves my point about the drop in waste volumes. Right wing self delusion ,”dream it and it will happen”, Yeah right. I’m in the South Island, unemployment here is about to go through the roof.
     • pollywog 8.1.4

       7 April 2010 at 8:20 am

       Earlier today, a key gauge of business sentiment showed an improvement in optimism well ahead of the reality of economic recovery,

       Who the fuck are these economic optimists ?…The fatcats who will benefit most from the taxcuts lining up which big boy toy to buy next with their undeserved windfall ?

       And what are they optimistic about ?.. that the rest of us poor saps will go back to buying crap we never needed in the first place and only bought to be seen to keep up with the joneses and avoid the shame of being seen to be poor ?

       My feeling is, the average schmuck has wizened up, tightened the belt and only buying neccessities. Meanwhile, the advertisers in the employ of the optimistic fatcats sucking up to the politicians carry on like nothing has changed, so it’s in their best interests to be harping on about a recovery that in all likelihood will probably never happen.

       And to base the recovery on exports. Sheeeeit, what is it exactly we are so shit hot at exporting that will lead to boom times ?… Hot air ? fuck me if there ain’t plenty of that shit all over the show.

       I’ve long felt that it’s a case of the well to do trying to grab as much loot as they can and protect it from the taxman in the hope it will insulate them against some reallllly bad times ahead while making noises to the less fortunate that it’s all milk and honey just over the horizon.

       Sure i can see a brighter future but i can’t see it being lit up by Key or Goff or anybody…except me and i may just be delusional :).
9. gutted 9

   6 April 2010 at 8:39 pm

   Collateral Murder
   Overview
   5th April 2010 10:44 EST WikiLeaks has released a classified US military video depicting the indiscriminate slaying of over a dozen people in the Iraqi suburb of New Baghdad — including two Reuters news staff.

   Reuters has been trying to obtain the video through the Freedom of Information Act, without success since the time of the attack. The video, shot from an Apache helicopter gun-site, clearly shows the unprovoked slaying of a wounded Reuters employee and his rescuers. Two young children involved in the rescue were also seriously wounded.

   http://www.collateralmurder.com/
   • nzfp 9.1

     6 April 2010 at 9:33 pm

     Did you watch it all the way through? The comment right at the end made me soo angry “who brings their children to a battle?” This is the U.S.A in all it’ depraved glory.
10. SPC 10

    6 April 2010 at 10:59 pm

    It’s a good time to be exporting to Australia and an even better time to be working for wages there. And a good time to be an Aussie with travel to Enzed (or UK/EU) – which may help our tourism.

    That being the case, wait for the Oz companies looking to buy up ours (investment profits if they are on the stockmarket) so they can expatriate the profits on our growing exports across the Tasman trade.
    • Zaphod Beeblebrox 10.1

      6 April 2010 at 11:40 pm

      Hey but apart from Fonterra, which they aren’t allowed to buy yet, theonly things they would be interested in would be a few prisons, PPP shares in schools, hospitals, some new tollways, Auckland ports, Auckland airport, Auckland water, some of ACC and some conservation leases that might ahve some minerals- all hypothetically, of course.
11. gingercrush 11

    7 April 2010 at 12:16 am

    Zaphod its called three consecutive quarters of GDP growth. Something you’ve seemed to miss. As for people thinking we’re in boom times. The only person talking that crap is Phil Goff.
    • Zaphod Beeblebrox 11.1

      7 April 2010 at 8:58 am

      Technically you’re absolutely correct (two consecutive quarters?), but while unemployment keeps climbing, does anyone believe that? Australia never went into negative growth, even though they thought they were in recession. If we are in recovery mode, it doesn’t say much for the NZ economy though. How bad are things going to get when Australia backs off its stimulus and pumps up its interest rates? Generally during a reovery growth spurts up for a while then flattens out- how bad are things liable to get once we flatten out?
12. pollywog 12

    7 April 2010 at 8:42 am

    I’d hate to own a family business that for generations has been just managing to stay afloat selling carpets or beds or mattresses or furniture or tiles or whatever. It must be getting near time when you’d think about torching it all for the insurance or maybe faking a your death so’s the missus and kids will be better off collecting personal insurance ?

    captcha : isolated
13. Comrade 13

    8 April 2010 at 4:32 pm

    Key promised heaps before election and we new the economy was bad then and he has done nothing to improve it. If I recall correct he was going to be paying money to workers made redundant. X number of dollars per week. Did this ever happen.?
    No thanks to useles Key and Hide look where Auckland has got with its Super City. Privatising of services etc.
    Key said he had all the answers for the ecomomy and things are worse now no thanks to him.
    All we can see on TV is his ugly dial spinning his bullshit all the time. He is opeining this place and that.
    Before long he wont have many places to open and we may see him less. That will be great.
    Look how Australia is going ahead.
    Did Key not mention he was going to curb the export of New Zealanders heading off to Australia for better paid jobs.? I dont recall numbers leaving reducing.
    All Key wants is to employ people at low wage rates and the Way Key is going we will be a third world country.
    Now Key is getting in Bed with the Maori Party so he can get enough support to get back in at next election which would be a big mistake. As he then will start selling off all our assets as he promised.
    Now the dollar is weaker do we se any more foriegn buy up.?

Links to post

1. Kim Knight: posted on 6 April 2010 at 3:40 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS