Open Mike 06/02/2018

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, February 6th, 2018 - 149 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

149 comments on “Open Mike 06/02/2018 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. The Chairman 1
    6 February 2018 at 8:13 am

    Should remaining to reside in NZ be a condition of free tertiary education?

    Is it fair or wise for taxpayers to fund the tertiary education of those that plan to leave and work overseas?

    • Ad 1.1
      6 February 2018 at 8:20 am

      Do you have any facts, data-led projections, completion stats, employment stats, pathway success stats, GDP contribution stats, economic sector contribution stats, or anything otherwise resembling reason to debate the issue?

      • The Chairman 1.1.1
        6 February 2018 at 9:08 am

        I wasn’t specifically looking to debate the issue, though I’m open to it.

        I was merely seeking peoples thoughts on the matter. But if you have some data that will help explain your answers or will further add to the discussion you are more than welcome to provide it.

    • Stuart Munro 1.2
      6 February 2018 at 8:40 am

      Not if the alternatives are not working but remaining in NZ, or working in an unskilled or unrelated role. A number of roles call for people with the kind of experience that can only readily be obtained internationally. Nigel Murray, the recently departed Waikato Health Board chief was recruited at a cost of over $100 000. It would have been better to have employed a qualified New Zealander, and to do so means ensuring that some reach the requisite levels of qualification and experience. We don’t do that by hobbling their career paths.

      Winston Peters’ year for year fee wipe out would be a reasonable return for the country. The idea of indebting young people at the commencement of their careers has fallen somewhat short of the miracle the neo-liberal economists promised.

      • halfcrown 1.2.1
        6 February 2018 at 8:50 am

        100%

      • The Chairman 1.2.2
        6 February 2018 at 9:35 am

        “Not if the alternatives are not working but remaining in NZ, or working in an unskilled or unrelated role”

        Does that mean you’re implying that working and in a related role should also be a condition for receiving free tertiary education?

        At least those not working or working in an unrelated role will still be contributing to the local tax take. And could possibility be in transition, eventually later securing a related role.

        It’s not hobbling their career paths. People will still be free to leave and seek better career paths offshore. However, if they do take that option they can’t expect the taxpayer to support it.

        Hard to see the country making a “reasonable return” when the people whose education we’ve paid for up and leave.

        • RedBaronCV 1.2.2.1
          6 February 2018 at 10:18 am

          The original far right talking point when the charges where brought in being regurgitated.
          Okay if you are going to charge for education why not charge for the lot?
          Don’t be arbitrary about it.
          Move overseas with secondary school aged kids and you’ll get arrested at the airport if you haven’t coughed up for all the education received to date.

          We take in plenty of people where education has been paid for elsewhere, without recompense – and why should we deprive other poorer countries of people they have struggled to educate to improve their own society?

          But to fix the money issue how about a higher education levy on high income earners in NZ with tertiary education and a further levy at the sales point on those multinationals selling into NZ with Head office offshore? See we can pay for it.

          • The Chairman 1.2.2.1.1
            6 February 2018 at 11:13 am

            Are you implying it should be extended to all education? Or implying it will be silly too?

            Whether or not other nations are happy to provide free education to their citizens only to see them leave, is totally their call. Not ours.

            Are you suggesting we shouldn’t accept them so as we don’t deprive them?

            It’s not that we can’t pay for it, but if we did what you suggested (tax the rich) along with charging those that permanently leave, there would be more money that could be going to better use than paying to educate people who up and leave.

            • RedBaronCV 1.2.2.1.1.1
              6 February 2018 at 11:58 am

              I’d be interested in your rational for only being concerned about free university education departing our shores. What about the investment that gets people to the university kick off.

              If we train our own people and pay them enough then we don’t have to deprive other countries of their hard won skills.

              Okay so we get some extra money in – is there a better use than education?- maybe we charge a small premium when they leave so it’s a business right?

              • The Chairman …
                6 February 2018 at 1:50 pm

                “What about the investment that gets people to the university kick off.”

                With school donation demands, it’s debatable whether primary, intermediate, and college are free.

                “If we train our own people and pay them enough then we don’t have to deprive other countries of their hard won skills.”

                Yes, but that is only if they don’t up and leave.

                By importing students, education is already a business bringing in export dollars.

                “Okay so we get some extra money in – is there a better use than education?”

                There is a better use than educating those that plan to leave.

                • Incognito …
                  6 February 2018 at 2:11 pm

                  All education, and many many other things for that matter, are (heavily) subsidised so to make the artificial distinction between free vs. not free is a false dichotomy IMO.

                  Primary and secondary are (mostly) compulsory by Law so again it is not appropriate to directly compare with tertiary education/training. That said, tertiary education/training is (as) critical for the country as a whole.

                  The word “planning” has a special meaning and goes further than “thinking about” or “considering”, for example. In my experience, few school leavers start tertiary education with firm plans in mind just about anything … In any case, how would you manage/administrate this? Fill out a form and ask: are you planning to leave NZ after the completion (!) of your study/training in XX years? If yes, we will pay your fees; if no, you’ll have to pay them yourself. Or do you suggest claiming back the money retrospectively when they try and board the plane to flee leave the country (for a holiday or for a job or something else altogether …)? Basically, it would be like trying to keep people hostage in NZ unless they pay up!? The current student loans & debt are already completely out of control if you ask me and suck up much of IRD’s time.

                • RedBaronCV …
                  6 February 2018 at 6:35 pm

                  Aha “the lets not answer the question but use “The distraction pass””:

                  Vote education last time I looked funded a rather large amount of education so why do you want to make it all repayable?

                  A business model that depends upon the existence of “work permits from the state” is not a business and that sums up most of our so called education business.

        • Stuart Munro 1.2.2.2
          6 February 2018 at 10:18 am

          “It’s not hobbling their career paths. People will still be free to leave and seek better career paths offshore. However, if they do take that option they can’t expect the taxpayer to support it. ”

          I was obliged to study and subsequently work abroad because certain treacherous weasels allowed the fishing industry to displace New Zealanders in favour of foreign slave workers. I’m back in NZ now, but employers prefer minimum wage or less foreign employees because they’ve been allowed to get them. I’ll probably have to leave again soon – not by choice, but from governance failure. Since I’m disadvantaged by it I don’t see why I should be paying for it.

          I’d cheerfully work at a respectable level in NZ – but I didn’t do my MA (or my captain’s tickets for that matter) to rot here on the dole or pack groceries.

          • The Chairman 1.2.2.2.1
            6 February 2018 at 11:21 am

            Your education didn’t disadvantaged you if you can go offshore and attain a better standard of living due to attaining it.

            • Stuart Munro 1.2.2.2.1.1
              6 February 2018 at 1:08 pm

              It didn’t advantage me if it won’t get me a job that pays my rent here. And fear not, I did my MA abroad, NZ didn’t pay for it.

              • The Chairman …
                6 February 2018 at 1:42 pm

                It wasn’t your education that robbed you of a decent job.

                • Stuart Munro …
                  6 February 2018 at 1:45 pm

                  No, it was the same scumbags who decided that education should no longer be free though. Guess that means I should repossess theirs. I’ll need a trephine.

          • Sumsuch 1.2.2.2.2
            6 February 2018 at 9:50 pm

            All puir to y’rr arm Munro.

        • Nic the NZer 1.2.2.3
          6 February 2018 at 10:33 am

          Fark sake. Entirely flawed neo-liberal analysis following on from placing a primary focus on the deficit and amount of government spending across the economy. NZ is not doing better by running a surplus its simply confiscating income from the non government sector when it does so. NZ is not doing worse when it runs a deficit its simply supplimenting income of the non government sector.

          The question is just do we want to employ more or fewer tertiary educators (which is where education funding goes) and the answer has nothing to do with if their students go overseas.

          • The Chairman 1.2.2.3.1
            6 February 2018 at 11:33 am

            Whether they go overseas or not relates to whether we’re getting bang for buck from our investment in them.

            Waste of our money, tertiary placings and time skilling them up only to have them leave.

            • Stuart Munro 1.2.2.3.1.1
              6 February 2018 at 1:13 pm

              Yup – giving employees unlimited access to foreign workers means that economically speaking all education is wasted. Now, I never gave my assent to the use of foreign slave workers. Tell me why I should pay for the destruction of my industry? Most of my former colleagues have killed themselves.

            • AB 1.2.2.3.1.2
              6 February 2018 at 1:45 pm

              “Waste of our money”
              It’s not your (or my) money. Some of it may come out of your (and my) taxes, but it’s not our money. It equally belongs to the next generation who need to be educated.
              “whether we’re getting bang for buck from our investment in them”
              We live in a society, not a commercial enterprise. We don’t “invest” in people and expect a return from them. We set the next generation on their paths with all the hope we can muster, just as the previous generation did for us.
              Stop the tedious, narrow-gutted financialisation of humanity itself – you sound like Bill English

              • Incognito …
                6 February 2018 at 2:20 pm

                Well said!

              • The Chairman …
                6 February 2018 at 4:13 pm

                “It’s not your (or my) money”

                I know, it’s our money.

                The next generation didn’t pay the tax that amassed it. But it is an investment in the education of the next generation. And if they up and leave, they are no longer part of our society. Therefore, providing them with free education does little to further the next generation in our society or our society overall.

            • Nic the NZer 1.2.2.3.1.3
              6 February 2018 at 4:15 pm

              As AB already said we don’t actually need to operate the government like its a business.

              • The Chairman …
                6 February 2018 at 4:55 pm

                There are benefits in doing so. Especially when dealing with money. But that’s not to say we should overlook the wider social impact of decisions being made.

                • Nic the NZer …
                  6 February 2018 at 5:18 pm

                  There are no benefits to running government as a business, which are worth having.

                  • The Chairman …
                    6 February 2018 at 5:32 pm

                    That’s subjective.

                    • Stuart Munro …
                      6 February 2018 at 10:31 pm

                      No.

                      Our ancestors fought long and hard for representation.

                      We are not about to piss it away so that a group of self-styled CEOs can rule us.

                      They try that crap at their peril.

    • savenz 1.3
      6 February 2018 at 9:29 am

      Not enough has been thought about for new residents and citizens who have kids and contribute little from an economic point of view but need schools, universities, doctors, hospitals, housing, infrastructure, government top ups for wages, etc. Or don’t work here but just own or rent property and have non working relatives living in NZ.

      Is it a fair system that those on the lower wages of NZ and therefore have only limited ability to earn but pay taxes to fund NZ end up being the paupers of the country and (remember having a meal break in NZ, is considered a ‘win’) and actually end up subsidising those who don’t live in NZ, probably were not born in NZ and actually have little interest in NZ apart from for their own enjoyment or to develop into a caricature of their own country (that they are escaping from).

      No statistics seem to be kept if the current migration strategy is successful. In terms of productivity in NZ, it clearly is not. In terms of housing and poverty it clearly is not.

      The problem with user pays is that is is arbitrary. Here in Auckland we are forced to pay millions and have our harbour stolen for America’s cup billionaires to have a good time, (on Auckland, rate payers) while those that benefit are listed corporations like Sky City. Yep now other’s have to pay for other people’s entertainment under those circumstances.

      • savenz 1.3.1
        6 February 2018 at 9:32 am

        The productivity loss is also caused by Kiwi’s now having to leave NZ to get a decent job and wages. We are putting in lower wages less productive people, while driving out the Kiwis’s who would increase wages and long term economic benefits to the entire country. The productivity statistics have shown this for years.

        • The Chairman 1.3.1.1
          6 February 2018 at 9:43 am

          One of the reasons graduates leave NZ in seek of better wages is to help pay off their student loan.

          • savenz 1.3.1.1.1
            6 February 2018 at 10:42 am

            The user pays, NZ is the cheap residency avenue for Asia to get to the west, has backfired in many ways.

            Firstly other countries are closing the overseas avenues, visa’s and working opportunities and benefits that Kiwis’s used to enjoy as it’s become a way to piggy back for other nations via NZ.

            The selling our education for money has made universities focused on that side (the money) and the quality has reduced and NZ has dropped in world ratings. Post graduate study has become for those that can afford it which don’t tend to be Kiwis. This is all hidden because there are plenty of overseas people who want to use the NZ education system as a back door to gain residency so the numbers are still there, but not for the right reasons. Even if it was, the jobs are not there for post graduates because our entire economy has been geared for low wages and no value add and the people being hired to do that from overseas can have questionable values.

            The Warehouse CEO has hired a Trump attending Chief Digital officer with links to Russian business, (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11981768) the National government ‘gifted’ Trump supporting Peter Thiel citizenship with his strong libertarian views and anti democratic manifestos https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/21/peter-thiel-republican-convention-speech. With Trump types being hired or bought into NZ to work and be in charge of strategic direction and their ideas being sucked up by politicians, we go deeper and deeper down the global rabbit hole and the NZ identity as practical, honest and fair people, go down with it. When it doesn’t work out for these types, no problem, get money, get what you want, move on, move on. The world is your oyster to make money for yourself.

            Wages and conditions have dropped across the board in NZ as has productivity with this type of thinking.

            More and more places in NZ are noticeably staffed by migrants groups shifting the cultural practises of NZ. When going to City hospital the entire staff were asian in the stroke unit. This was surprising because City hospital used to be multicultural and still is, in other wards.

            Like the globalisation of franchise stores and global brands which is turning many countries into clones of each others and local brands and culture becoming less and less visible, the same is happening in the workforce from low level jobs and businesses to high level. The same right wing, individualistic ideas which although do not seem to be working for the world, being promoted.

          • Draco T Bastard 1.3.1.1.2
            6 February 2018 at 12:04 pm

            That may or may not come into it. The major reason why NZ graduates leave is because there’s no work in NZ due to lack of development of the economy. Too busy trying to be a bigger farm.

            We do have the people and skills available to develop our economy but it’s being prevented by the dead-weight loss of profit.

      • The Chairman 1.3.2
        6 February 2018 at 9:57 am

        While I hear what you are saying and there is somewhat of a crossover, new residents is more an immigration matter. And there has been a bit of thought and discussion about the benefits and downfalls of that.

        • savenz 1.3.2.1
          6 February 2018 at 11:10 am

          Everything is interconnected. The problem with NZ and their one dimensional economic thinking, is that they like to think that everything is some simplistic silo, and you just think about education, just think about health, just think about super, just think about infrastructure. The reality though, is when you make changes, you should be looking at the entire picture.

          Housing was a perfect example. Politicians refused to accept that immigration affected it. For years and years the ‘experts’ which in NZ (who seem to be just a group of well connected networkers or participants and generally not experts at all in any real sense), told everybody that immigration did not effect housing. The classic group think.

          If they had looked at them both, then they could have avoided the crisis and the rapid house price gains, as well as other factors such as why it costs so much to build a house in this country, then a more holistic and quicker solution could have been gained. of course it kept National in power, councils rolling in dough and land zoning changing that made many millions, so I don’t think it was an accident. But the left wingers never provided any sensible solutions.

          BTW I think immigration is a good thing. But not the way NZ does it which is a way to keep neoliberalism alive.

          I also think free tertiary education is a good thing. But not the way NZ is trying to do it as a user pays system by stealth. That is where the immigration is coming in, costs are rising because there are more people needing a free education but the benefits of the new people are not there at all in terms of government figures when looked at in unison. Like the benefits of getting new people to house during a housing crisis rather than making employers do what they used to do, train existing people who already are housed there because they live there and pay them a living wage.

          • savenz 1.3.2.1.1
            6 February 2018 at 11:45 am

            In short back to the original question

            “Should remaining to reside in NZ be a condition of free tertiary education?”

            If the jobs are not being given to Kiwis or only low paid ones, then they are forced to leave the country. That’s the problem. It would be a double penalty to charge them if they are not even given equal opportunities and pay in their own country.

            And if the higher paid jobs are not being given to locals such as ‘The Warehouse’ situation where the chief digital officer is being bought in from overseas and given a work permit due to their “skills”.

            NZ companies are not bringing in high caliber people even at the higher level. For example the Warehouse guy came from Gloria Jeans a coffee chain which also has been found to have more than 100% of the daily fat needed in just one coffee, and been caught underpaying it’s employees. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_Jean%27s_Coffees

            You have to wonder about the survival of NZ business if this is the caliber of overseas hires to ‘transform’ business. It’s more likely to be a friend of someone else in the management team so there is safety in numbers at the exec table.

            If the NZ corporation bought in a guy from Amazon as their chief digital officer then you could understand it a work permit. Coffee franchises, nope, not buying it.

            No wonder NZ’s best and brightest are leaving as the opportunities are not there, and the overseas replacements are not exactly world leaders or gonna transform anyone’s business into a world leading one, judging from the wikipedia about the firm.

            • The Chairman 1.3.2.1.1.1
              6 February 2018 at 4:01 pm

              Due to the interconnections, are you saying that unless we make wider corrections throughout our economy first, it’s a waste of time providing free education due to the lack of employment opportunities (coupled with our low wages) students will leave our shores in numbers? Benefiting some other nations economy, at our expense?

              • savenz …
                6 February 2018 at 5:48 pm

                @The Chairman – nope I agree with a free tertiary education system for those citizens of NZ. But now somebody has deemed that every man and his dog should be citizens of this country from rich billionaires to someone’s mate who needs a job to petrol attendants.

                A lower and lower wages industry has developed around it and the problems continue.

                Investment needs to be made in people who have genuine intentions and links to this country because they are the ones sticking around and paying taxes and making NZ a better place socially, environmentally, culturally and economically. Most of those people already live here (surprise surprise) and there’s some migrants who make huge contributions, but many who NZ is a way to hide money, get out of their own country who they are still planning to work in, get dual citizenship, give jobs to overseas mates once they get their foot in the door, have a safe place for their relatives to go to and freebies or retirement here.

                If NZ immigration feels it needs to give citizenship and sweetheart deals with every overseas short term investment in a NZ, or that we are going to develop new jobs and economic benefits with low level IT workers, fruit pickers and Burger managers on zero hour contracts, work permits for overseas mates with B grade history, then somethings very wrong with both NZ’s identity, the politicians and NZ’s vision to operate in a global field and create high worth jobs. (not take them).

                In the old days you had to advertise a job for around 3 months and prove no NZer could do it, before a work permit was issued. Now its a free for all with free citizenship after a few years (or a good lawyer) or a fake or 2nd class degree, (which also means free health and public services and a years free tertiary for all) and how can a little country like NZ afford that approach with a free welfare system?

                The answer is, they can’t.

          • Craig H 1.3.2.1.2
            6 February 2018 at 12:30 pm

            This is, in my opinion, one of the best posts I have ever read on the Standard. I totally agree – almost everything in government is interconnected, and attempting to silo everything just doesn’t work.

      • Draco T Bastard 1.3.3
        6 February 2018 at 12:01 pm

        The problem with user pays is that is is arbitrary.

        The problem with user pays is that only the poor pay.

        The rich are rich because they don’t pay for anything.

        We cannot afford the rich.

        • Naki man 1.3.3.1
          6 February 2018 at 1:30 pm

          “The rich are rich because they don’t pay for anything”

          What is your idea of rich?
          How do the rich not pay for anything?

          • Cinny 1.3.3.1.1
            6 February 2018 at 2:01 pm

            Personally rich to me is hugs from my kids, 5 mins bike ride to the beach, the first peony flowers in the garden and the first crop of new spuds, being able to lend a hand, saying something to make someones day etc etc

            However at a guess the reference to rich is ‘monetary wealth’ re above discussion.

            How do the rich not pay for anything?

            By investing in the services of lawyers, accountants etc in order to exploit loopholes thereby creating financial gain, just need a healthy bank balance to start with and away we go.

            A rental porfolio during a housing crisis is a prime example.

            • Naki man 1.3.3.1.1.1
              6 February 2018 at 2:25 pm

              Cinny i mostly agree with your idea of what rich is.
              But i am interested to know what Dracos idea of rich is, perhaps being a millionaire?

            • Chuck 1.3.3.1.1.2
              6 February 2018 at 3:29 pm

              “Personally rich to me is hugs from my kids, 5 mins bike ride to the beach, the first peony flowers in the garden and the first crop of new spuds, being able to lend a hand, saying something to make someones day etc etc”

              I would tend to agree that is what the majority of people would also think…add in good health.

              “By investing in the services of lawyers, accountants etc in order to exploit loopholes thereby creating financial gain, just need a healthy bank balance to start with and away we go.”

              So maybe stop students from becoming lawyers and accountants? Force them overseas to earn a living? Or ban them altogether maybe? That will stop those evil rich people from exploiting the “loopholes”.

              “A rental porfolio during a housing crisis is a prime example.”

              Wow…ok so providing housing is not a good thing? And someone that owns a couple of rentals is “rich”.

              • Stuart Munro …
                6 February 2018 at 4:13 pm

                Landlords do not ‘provide housing’ unless they build it.

                • savenz …
                  6 February 2018 at 6:05 pm

                  @ Stuart Munro, Who provide houses then in NZ – the house fairy! Must explain the shortages!

                  Not sure if you are implying that developers are the hope for renters, the new landlords? Cos I live in Auckland and I can assure you what is being built does not look anything like affordable or rental housing.

                  The chance of a developer deciding to nobly rent out their McMansions currently being built I feel is short lived. Try getting the council and taxpayer to fund them to do it as great profit and you will be more on the money.

                  Seriously ether make a point that you believe the government should provide all rental housing rather than individuals, but semantics about landlords are not providing housing unless they build it, is the sort of ideological semantics that led to the shortage.

                  • Stuart Munro …
                    6 February 2018 at 10:25 pm

                    The great majority of landlords do not build the structures they rent. They compete with aspiring homeowners for the same structures.

                    Now, this is legal under current law, but they are not providing a public service. They compete with their tenants for housing with a view to self enrichment.

                    It isn’t completely odious, but pretending to virtue for doing so is.

                    • Chuck …
                      7 February 2018 at 8:53 am

                      “Now, this is legal under current law, but they are not providing a public service. They compete with their tenants for housing with a view to self enrichment.”

                      You are making the assumption that every tenant is also a house buyer.

                      The reality is that’s not the case. Most tenants are looking to rent, private landlords, therefore, provide “stock” that increases the supply of rental properties.

                      Landlords take on all the risk, in return, they expect as you say some “self enrichment”.

                    • savenz …
                      7 February 2018 at 9:45 am

                      How many aspiring homeowners can afford a house on their minimum wages zero hour contract or short term contracts with the bank fairy on board to give them a chance?

                      Can you afford to buy a house when your job might be gone next week and you have to relocate?

                      The dropping of NZ citizens entering the house market after rogernomics is not just about housing prices and shortages, its about the wage drops, the instability of work and the growing precariat situation for many including university graduates in this country, the competition with 180,000 work permits being issued and 70,000 new citizens a year and the ability for anybody in the world to buy property or assets here competing against locals with falling wages and poor job opportunities.

                      There are rental shortages not because landlords are renting them out (then there would be high house prices but plentiful rentals) but because the gain of people into NZ is extraordinary and they are buying the houses and living in them or their relatives are.

                      Only morons would be importing people for jobs that are rapidly disappearing and encourage competition for jobs against thousands of other people already in the country who are precariat, but hey, that’s the government thinking.

                      The ideology is that the government wants people to be pitted against each other and then make the ones still in a job, top the employeer’s wages up $200 per week per employee for working for families etc and other government grants. The ones not in a job are also on a benefit. Crazy but that’s how it’s working out.

                      Then we have to pay for all the new housing, transport and infrastructure needed for people, many whose job will be automated within a decade. Then taxpayers will pay to upskill everyone.

                      Then you have current businesses importing in B and C grade contractors and employees, driving productivity down so that’s not gonna save us, judging by the last decade of loss of productivity. I’d say it will get worse cos now you can’t even get from A to B with the massive transport screw ups and detours and small business being driven out of business by constant road works.

                      That’s why they call it, an ideology.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                6 February 2018 at 6:13 pm

                Someone who owns a could of rentals is a bludger. In fact, their the best show of how the rich don’t pay for anything.

                They go out, get a loan from the bank (which the bank creates on demand), ‘buy’ the house and then rent it out. The people who rent the place now pay for the mortgage, the upkeep of the house, the insurance on the house, the rates and the profit. Despite paying all that they don’t actually own it.

                Once they’ve paid off the house for the ‘owner’ the owners still has it and by still renting it out now has even bigger profits paid for by the renters.

                • Cinny …
                  6 February 2018 at 7:37 pm

                  Nailed it Draco, that’s the angle I was coming from 🙂

                • David Mac …
                  6 February 2018 at 7:37 pm

                  If you invested as much energy into making money as you do expressing concern over other peoples’ money you’d be a multi-millionaire.

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    6 February 2018 at 8:37 pm

                    Why would I do something so immoral?

                    • David Mac …
                      6 February 2018 at 8:46 pm

                      Because you love the idea of being rich. You talk about little else, money, money, money.

                    • David Mac …
                      6 February 2018 at 8:58 pm

                      I feel you should be pursuing something you can invest your heart in Draco, something like a co-op that prospers by enhancing itself. There’s room for a model like that in the current climate.

                      Those with $ thought about what we want and need. Steve Jobs didn’t get rich because he chased $. He got rich because he said “I want to hold a very clever phone that feels like sculpture.”

                    • McFlock …
                      6 February 2018 at 9:15 pm

                      You might want to pick an example of a mega-wealthy person who wasn’t an arsehole to people around him and didn’t steal credit for the work of others.

                    • ropata …
                      6 February 2018 at 10:48 pm

                      Usury was illegal for good reason in ancient cultures. It causes huge disparities of wealth and destabilises society. Profit is the surplus from others’ labour, and it should be shared with those who produced it.

                      Bezos is billionaire because Amazon drives workers such as Aaron Callaway like slaves. https://t.co/wkkg1Cl05r— Richard D. Wolff (@profwolff) February 5, 2018

                • JohnSelway …
                  6 February 2018 at 9:04 pm

                  I had a single home I never lived in because soon after purchase my wife and I split. We rented it out, we paid the rates, we paid house insurance (the tenant pays for their contents insurance of course).

                  It was rented at a fair price and eventually on-sold (to the tenants) at a reasonable price of which I made a small profit.

                  So no, it isn’t quite like you say it is Draco. Maybe in some instances but not a blanket assertion like you have made

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    6 February 2018 at 11:09 pm

                    Sounds exactly like I said. About the only difference is the term and the fact that you would have been splitting assets with your ex.

                    • JohnSelway …
                      7 February 2018 at 10:42 am

                      Well no – you said “The people who rent the place now pay for the mortgage, the upkeep of the house, the insurance on the house, the rates and the profit.”

                      Which they don’t. They paid for the mortgage yes (I made no profit from the weekly rent) but upkeep, rent, insurance and rates are all on me.

                      So it isn’t like you said

                • Chuck …
                  7 February 2018 at 9:15 am

                  “Someone who owns a could of rentals is a bludger. In fact, their the best show of how the rich don’t pay for anything.”

                  Ok so in your mind the starting point for a person being rich is a couple of rental properties.

                  “They go out, get a loan from the bank (which the bank creates on demand)”

                  With the bank adhering to the Reserve Bank of NZ guidelines.

                  “The people who rent the place now pay for the mortgage, the upkeep of the house, the insurance on the house, the rates and the profit. Despite paying all that they don’t actually own it.”

                  And?? over time a landlord will expect the rent to cover all the above costs. Initially, they don’t so the landlord takes on the risk he/she can cash flow the shortfall.

                  “Once they’ve paid off the house for the ‘owner’ the owners still has it and by still renting it out now has even bigger profits paid for by the renters.”

                  And?? the landlord has taken on all the risk, put time and effort into keeping the property tidy and rentable. Can they not expect something in return?

                  Now I know Draco your view is the state should provide ALL housing and no private ownership to be allowed (to stop anyone profiting from a house transfer). The reality is this will never happen.

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    7 February 2018 at 9:49 am

                    With the bank adhering to the Reserve Bank of NZ guidelines.

                    That doesn’t make how they operate right.

                    And?? over time a landlord will expect the rent to cover all the above costs.

                    Exactly. The rich don’t pay for anything.

                    the landlord has taken on all the risk, put time and effort into keeping the property tidy and rentable.

                    Actually, the landlord took no risk meanwhile the tenants were at huge risk from the landlord.

                    The state of rental housing in NZ tends to indicate that the landlords don’t put enough into maintaining rental properties.

                    Can they not expect something in return?

                    That’s a distractive question. The correct question is: Can someone expect to own something after someone else paid for it? And the answer to that is NO.

                    Now I know Draco your view is the state should provide ALL housing and no private ownership to be allowed (to stop anyone profiting from a house transfer).

                    Profit is a dead-weight loss that causes poverty and deprivation.

                    Why would a society want to keep that?

                    The reality is this will never happen.

                    Only if capitalism survives and it’s not looking like it will. It’s ongoing failure is becoming more and more obvious.

              • reason …
                6 February 2018 at 8:39 pm

                “So maybe stop students from becoming lawyers and accountants? Force them overseas to earn a living? Or ban them altogether maybe?” … Chucks strawman argument is so feeble its more like a childs stickman …

                Maybe just have consequences for corruption and low standards ….. creative or not…. chuck

                Housing speculation and landlord greed are exploitative and damaging to the housing needs of most citizens and society.

                Kids living in cars are paying for those portfolios …. unable to keep up the payments on all that speculative debt … that they never took on.

                • Chuck …
                  7 February 2018 at 9:30 am

                  “Maybe just have consequences for corruption and low standards ….. creative or not…. chuck”

                  We already do have consequences. Search the various court databases for examples.

                  So lets cut to the chase here…any lawyer or accountant worth their salt will advise their clients on the best way to structure an investment (be it a house or business) within the legal framework of the day.

                  • reason …
                    7 February 2018 at 9:47 pm

                    You’ve confused salt with cancer and gangrene chuck.

                    “The failure to tackle these major flaws in the globalized financial system has generated a spirit of lawlessness and unethical behavior that acts as a cancer attacking the integrity of the market system and the democratic ideal.”

                    ” Company directors committed to good governance and ethical policies find themselves competing on an unfair basis against corporate delinquents prepared to push tax avoidance to the limits.”

                    Any man worthy of the name …. would never be so low as to steal off children….

                    Just because john key was comfortable getting rich and taking money from the poor and their children …. does not make it any less sick.

                    Corruption is like infection …. You’ve got to Clean out the shit…. or the (professional) body rots. … Leaving a landscape of vultures.

                    • Chuck …
                      8 February 2018 at 9:04 am

                      You are a little confused to say the least reason.

                      I don’t think mum and dad kiwi with a couple of rental properties are running their affairs through a Caribbean tax haven.

              • Cinny …
                6 February 2018 at 10:36 pm

                Just like any industry in the world there are good people, greedy selfish bad people, manipulators and exploiters, it’s usuallly why there are codes of conduct etc, not sure of the correct terminology to help prevent dodgy accountants, lawyers and bankers etc.

                But… here’s the kicker… those making the laws, if they are crooked people, for example the PM who quit john key, create/change/manipulate/exploit laws and or priviledge to enable the dodgy accountants etc, they are the real loop hole cowboys. And they’ve been getting away with it/doing it for thousands of years. Panama Papers is a great example, and they deny, deny until they can’t deny any longer because to do so could cost them an election.

                Dont get me wrong there are some fantastic lawyers etc out there, but in the end its the top 1% of the top 1% that really pull the strings and to make a puppet dance all one needs to do is pull the right strings.

                Least that’s how I see it. More scientists, teachers, inventors, creators, hands on people, Dr’s, R&D etc etc please and thank you.

                Greed and ego really fucks people up.

          • Draco T Bastard 1.3.3.1.2
            6 February 2018 at 2:52 pm

            What is your idea of rich?

            People who live on ‘investments’ rather than actually producing anything of value.

            How do the rich not pay for anything?

            If they paid for anything then they wouldn’t have anything. They certainly wouldn’t be rich.

            Instead they get the poor to pay for them. That’s what ‘profit’ is – the poor paying for the rich.

            • Stunned Mullet 1.3.3.1.2.1
              6 February 2018 at 3:31 pm

              More daft dribble from DTB.

            • Chuck 1.3.3.1.2.2
              6 February 2018 at 3:47 pm

              “People who live on ‘investments’ rather than actually producing anything of value.”

              Example: Jacinda and Clarke want to develop a market garden that will grow vegetables to sell.

              They have to buy the land, invest in equipment and buildings, marketing etc…they ask James if he will lend them enough $ to enable there dream to become reality.

              James lends them the $. In your world Draco, Jacinda, and Clarke are good they produce something. While James is bad…he only invested in their business enterprise.

              If I make a wild guess Draco, you have never owned a business nor been self-employed? since you have no understanding of what profit is.

              • ropata …
                6 February 2018 at 4:03 pm

                That’s Econ 101 fantasy bullshit. Unfortunately all the market gardeners got bought out by multinational conglomerates and the vulture capitalists just sit in their New York offices deciding what to gamble on next. That’s the “investment” model of capitalism: privatise profits and socialise losses and crap all over the environment if you need to.

              • Stuart Munro …
                6 February 2018 at 4:17 pm

                Let’s look at another example shall we:

                Jenny Shipley and nefarious associates create a bank with $125 million of New Zealand’s money. They enjoy highly remunerated board seats in spite of having no qualifications whatsoever.

                This is what the rich not paying for anything looks like.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                6 February 2018 at 6:07 pm

                While James is bad…he only invested in their business enterprise.

                He didn’t actually do anything and he not only gets his money back but more of it. I.e, he didn’t pay for anything.

                Please note: In a well functioning society Jacinda and Clarke would have been able to loan the money directly from the government at 0% interest.

                f I make a wild guess Draco, you have never owned a business nor been self-employed? since you have no understanding of what profit is.

                Your wild guess is wildly inaccurate. And, yes, I understand profit and even why it’s dead-weight loss to society. And that’s true even in the neo-liberal hypothesis.

            • David Mac 1.3.3.1.2.3
              6 February 2018 at 7:38 pm

              What were your primary contributions to NZ last week Draco?

              • David Mac …
                6 February 2018 at 8:39 pm

                I’ll start your list with ‘Enriched the life of finger pointing wanker David Mac’

                I don’t want to be a ‘Has a personal dig’ kind of guy, sorry Draco, I still love you man.

    • Incognito 1.4
      6 February 2018 at 11:28 am

      You have a unique style of commenting that often raises the hackles of other commenters in such a way that you feel the need to explain/defend yourself. Yet, you keep doing the same thing over and over again and keep receiving the same responses!?

      You start a ‘non-debate’ with leading questions or statements baiting inviting comments, which you then ‘debate’ within your own narrowly-defined framework. Personally, I think this is (intellectually) dishonest and disrespectful to (the) other commenters.

      If you want to ‘non-debate’ whether there should be any conditions on receiving subsidised tertiary education I think you have to frame it better and provide more detail and context as to what you’re interested in. As it stands, it is poorly framed and seems to link residence to receiving “free tertiary education”.

      In my opinion we should try and uncouple (any) education as much as feasible from simplistic monetary and/or economic cost-benefit analyses and place the role of education on a much broader footing. You see, that immediately reframes the ‘non-debate’ and takes it into a very different direction.

      I suggest that you write a Guest Post instead of this scattering of comments and get your points across, clearly.

      Enjoy the rest of our national Waitangi Day.

      • The Chairman 1.4.1
        6 February 2018 at 12:45 pm

        Yes I admit I have a unique style of commenting, which brings a little diversity, thus a widening of the perspective helping to prevent this place from becoming a backslapping echo chamber.

        Politics is a heated topic, thus hackles being raised is to be expected. So to is having the man being played instead of the ball.

        Which, ironically, is what you are doing. The subject is providing free education for those planning to leave our shores, not me. Therefore, when met by comments like yours, sometimes I’ll defend myself, other times I’ll just let it go.

        They weren’t leading questions, there was no one answer being prompted. Evidently, you fall into your own description, “dishonest and disrespectful”.

        The reality is, I asked a couple of questions and a discussion evolved.

        And no, it wasn’t a narrowly-defined framework. Commentators could have and did take the discussion wherever they wanted too. My only expectations was/is the discussion remained topic related.

        Linking maintaining residence to receiving free tertiary education is exactly what the questions were/are about. I just wanted peoples thoughts on that, hoping the input from any discussion that evolved would help create a framework most would be comfortable with, if it was widely supported that is. A bit of online brainstorming as it were.

        ”In my opinion we should try and uncouple (any) education as much as feasible from simplistic monetary and/or economic cost-benefit analyses and place the role of education on a much broader footing”

        Can you expand on what you think this “broader footing” should be and how it will allow us to decouple from the cost of providing it.

        “You see, that immediately reframes the ‘non-debate’ and takes it into a very different direction.”

        Yes, and as it is on topic, I have no problem with that. Pity you had to spoil it by playing the man (and not the ball) first.

        • Incognito 1.4.1.1
          6 February 2018 at 2:56 pm

          Sigh …

          I’m not sorry for having spoilt your game of one-upmanship but I guess I have just been handed a yellow card for obstruction by the ‘referee’ (quelle surprise!). Shining a light on how you rig the game with your unique ball skills is my way of holding you a mirror but you failed to see the real image and only saw the virtual one.

          You want to hear people’s opinions, you want a discussion, you want to brainstorm, but you don’t want to debate!? Yet, you have a habit of countering people’s opinions in your unique way.

          If you don’t want to be perceived as a poison pen, then up your own game.

          https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-04-02-2018/#comment-1443379

          Stop the silly ‘play the ball, not the man’ stuff and up your game.

          Other commenters have already made very good comments about your narrow views on the role of education in society (not: the role in economy; get it?) and I have nothing further to add and will let you do the ‘digesting’ of those comments, which means you may want to consider them and maybe come to some kind of consensus or synthesis or take on a completely new idea even – that’s what ‘brainstorming’ is all about, isn’t it?

          • The Chairman 1.4.1.1.1
            6 February 2018 at 4:44 pm

            I’m not here to play games. And you didn’t spoil anything for me, it was your reputation I was referring too.

            And I see you’re intent on tarnishing it some more by continuing to play the man and not the ball.

            What happen to carrying on your input of the discussion. Seems it was a red herring to facilitate your playing the man.

            If your input to the discussion was genuine, you would have answered my questions and continued on with the discussion, yet you totally dropped that and decided to have another crack at me. Which, merely reflects back on you.

            As for debating the topic, if you read above in my reply to Ad, you’ll see I’m open to it.

            • Incognito 1.4.1.1.1.1
              6 February 2018 at 5:48 pm

              Deeper sigh …

              My “reputation”!? What on Earth are you waffling on about? I’m baffled by your comments about me, I honestly am. You seem to be unable to heed criticism of/on your style of commenting and aggressively and consistently resist it. By making it more personal than it really is you try to mount a defence, which is basically returning what you consider to be a ‘salvo’. I’m not the first to bring up your style nor will I be the last one; that much is obvious.

              Anyway, I’m not the TS style police and will just have to ignore your comments and associated ‘bandwidth’ from now on, which really is a shame because I sincerely believed you are quite capable of upping your own game. I like to point out that other regular TS commenters have upped their game because they were willing to listen and did not try to avoid having to make changes and this has led to an improvement of discourse here on TS – as rightly acknowledged by other regulars and moderators alike. Something for you to ponder or ignore, as you see fit …

              I have frankly no intention in repeating verbatim other people’s excellent comments and contributions to your ‘discussions’ (yes, plural) or to even paraphrase them. I have made a number of comments or sub-comments that were on-topic, one of which you have completely ignored, and if you’re not satisfied with my on-topic contributions then I’ll have to disappoint you, again.

      • greywarshark 1.4.2
        6 February 2018 at 1:47 pm

        incognito
        +1

    • Bill 1.5
      6 February 2018 at 12:29 pm

      Stupid question. Re-e-e-e-ally stupid.

      There are umpteen non-education related reasons coming right off the top of my head that would or could lead to someone leaving New Zealand.

      But they should be punished if they happen to have attended tertiary level education? For fuck’s sake.

      Or do you want a bureaucratic mine field of exceptions drawn up?

      Not so long ago, most OECD countries accepted that the costs of tertiary education was a good investment that would be recouped x fold through the general tax take. That’s still the case.

      But in spite of that, there’s been the whole drive to privatise debt through (among other measures) “user pays” bullshit and nonsense.

      The kid from the poor area of town deserves an education as much as the next kid. Tear down the socio/economic barriers. End.

      edit (so not quite “end”) And if they then decide to fuck off overseas to live their life, so be it.

      • Whispering Kate 1.5.1
        6 February 2018 at 1:14 pm

        Many graduates leave NZ for the lack of career opportunities and the higher salaries they can gain overseas. Having a Humanities degree certainly helps to earn better salaries because there is a larger field of work they can do. A family member of ours earned an MA in the Arts field and ended high up in the banking industry all over the world.

        This country has a small population, lack of opportunies and as somebody else commented here, concentrates on just one large farm and not enough adding value to our industries. We are mingey with our wages out here preferring foreign workers who are prepared to work for pittances.

        Until this country appreciates and respects its graduates this flow overseas will continue and why should they come home where their hard earned studies are treated with contempt. First year teachers for a start are expected to be doctors, psychologists, minders and lord knows what else and their salaries are a disgrace.

        Twenty years on our family member is still overseas – there was no loan to pay off so I suppose their conscience is clear – if they even think about it – good luck and we are happy for our family member.

        You only get what you are prepared to pay for.

      • The Chairman 1.5.2
        6 February 2018 at 1:21 pm

        You may see it as being punished, others may see it as giving taxpayers a fair go.

        Do we need exceptions? As the one size fits all approach is seldom fair, one could argue so.

        Will it be a bureaucratic mine field? Depends on how complicated we make it.

        Do you believe this report (in the link below) holds any water? And yes, I know it’s from the taxpayers union so please try to refrain from having a go at them and stick to the points raised, thanks.

        http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1708/S00606/how-free-tertiary-education-robs-todays-poor.htm

        I agree the kid from the poor area of town deserves an education as much as the next kid.

        Nonetheless, it’s a two way street, thus if they plan to repay society by leaving, in my eyes, that’s not right.

        • Stuart Munro 1.5.2.1
          6 February 2018 at 1:32 pm

          “if they plan to repay society by leaving, in my eyes, that’s not right”

          That would depend on “society” itself behaving ethically.

          As it stands you’re asking NZ employees to remain in what amounts to an abusive relationship. Very low wages by world standards – no bonuses, high cost and low standard of living. And a crass ceiling of boomer managers.

        • Cinny 1.5.2.2
          6 February 2018 at 2:07 pm

          Question please… how was NZ back when tertiary education was free? Were people leaving then to work overseas? If so why?

          Personally I quite liked NZ1st free tertiary education policy.

          Text has no tone, which can be a real bugger at times.

          Taking the kids to the beach, mental note pack some string and a handsaw to build a teepee, enjoy the rest of your day everyone 🙂

          • savenz 1.5.2.2.1
            6 February 2018 at 4:11 pm

            I also liked NZ free tertiary education policy. That was also when education was never about money and costs but about providing the service of education.

            Then someone decided that it was too elitist to have universities and then polytechs were awarded the same status. Then people who were builders etc had to pay to learn a trade where previously they were paid to do a trade and the whole education industry has burgeoned into practically everyone needing a degree to be qualified and everything costs a fortune from getting a plumber or builder to going to the dentist or doctor.

            Then there’s the new phase of education of getting overseas people into NZ for money (and the bribe of a good chance of residency) which has kicked off the new phase of lower and lower wages, fake degrees and employers demanding money and free labour to provide the ‘jobs’ for residency.

            NZ now has less qualified migrants than before and we are going into the new technology focused era (where even cafes can have robot baristas) and NZ has policy for the dinosaur ages.

            Not sure the new ways are helping most people, more like individuals exploiting other individuals for personal profit. And the government is completely blind to what they have done, and what the future holds in 10 Years.

            Waitangi Day reminds us of a certain agreement where Maori were supposed to be equal partners with the British settlers, but somehow now own only 5% of land. Nothing like history repeating itself and learn from mistakes.

            With the lack of controls in place and TPPA about to be signed, similar will have happened to NZ born residents as more and more land and assets are sold overseas and the power dynamic shifts away from local control.

          • ropata 1.5.2.2.2
            6 February 2018 at 9:05 pm

            Kiwis have always been travellers, tertiary education was a lot harder to get into, but teachers had a 2 year bond after training college to teach in areas of NZ where they were most needed, after that they were free to bugger off.

            NZ of the 60s/70s also had compulsory unions, zero unemployment, half the population, the Housing Corp, strong protectionism (and lots of small minded regressive attitudes). It was a completely alien land to modern NZ

            Diets, housing, infrastructure, demographics, climate, etc etc. Everything is different.

            • Cinny 1.5.2.2.2.1
              6 February 2018 at 11:37 pm

              Thanks SaveNZ & Ropata for your insight, much appreciated, helps me get my head around things 🙂

            • KJT 1.5.2.2.2.2
              9 February 2018 at 6:20 pm

              I had Teacher training bonded.
              Unfortunately when I Completed my training, in the interim, they imported a whole bunch of overseas Teachers and there were no jobs. Typical short sighted planning.
              Now they are really short of Teachers i have been too long out if the game. I think I have got past the stage of being a good Teacher.
              I still expect to have to have to pay back the bond.

        • Keepcalmcarryon 1.5.2.3
          6 February 2018 at 2:31 pm

          Can anyone see the Chairman nobly standing at the border turning away new cheap labor imports because their degrees were obtained with foreign government money because it’s “just not right”?
          Didn’t think so.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 1.6
      6 February 2018 at 2:07 pm

      Your suggestion is unworkable and most probably illegal under local and international law. See Article 13 of the UDoHR.

    • SPC 1.7
      6 February 2018 at 2:49 pm

      I prefer 100% fees with universal student allowance (plus AS for those required to live away from home).

      And the fees written off year for a year (5 years study written off with 5 years work here).

      • The Chairman 1.7.1
        6 February 2018 at 5:12 pm

        “And the fees written off year for a year (5 years study written off with 5 years work here)”

        Not a bad proposal, though we’d need to do the numbers to see if 5 years work is worth 5 years free study. It may result in being 2 for 1 or even 3 for 1. But the overall notion is a goodin.

    • patricia bremner 1.8
      6 February 2018 at 4:26 pm

      We used to have a two year “country service” clause in our Teacher Training Contract, back in the day. A “regional service” bond could be good.

    • McFlock 1.9
      6 February 2018 at 7:38 pm

      Society is better off when there are no barriers to education.

      Cost is a major barrier.

      Tertiary education, from trades to phds, should be unconditionally free.

  2. McLuckster 2
    6 February 2018 at 8:22 am

    This awesome campaign, initiated by a group of over 100 Mums mainly on Auckland’s North Shore, launched yesterday & I reckon it’s a winner. Eat Right, Be Bright wants a universal school dinner programme so that every NZ child receives a free, nutritious lunch in school or ECE. There was a piece on Seven Sharp yesterday about the campaign. The team have worked closely with Massey Uni and the Child Poverty Action Group over the last few months and have put together a great briefing document over on the website. Share this around good people… If you would like to get involved in making this happen email the team, they’re looking for local advocates up and down the country to drive the campaign in different communities… info@eatrightbebright.org.nz

    • Cinny 2.1
      6 February 2018 at 8:50 am

      FANTASTICO 🙂 Thanks ever so much for the info McLuckster. Will be backing this big time, spread the word and get involved.

    • mpledger 2.2
      6 February 2018 at 1:43 pm

      If we had the free (or cheap) lunch program that they have in France or Japan then I’d agree.

      But we’d get lumbered with the lunch program that is in the USA or England where it gets continually defunded to the point where it essentially a training regime to make children only accept fast food as edible.

      • The Chairman 2.2.1
        6 February 2018 at 5:18 pm

        Reminds me of that episode of Jamie Oliver’s when the kids in school struggled to name basic vegetables. Sad. Though most knew a potato is where chips come from.

      • Cinny 2.2.2
        6 February 2018 at 11:47 pm

        It doesn’t have to be like how you describe MPledger.

        Around these parts there’s vast horticulture to take advantage of and most of the primary schools have their own gardens anyway.

        On their website their write about utilising school kitchens, or the kitchen in a local hall or church for such a purpose. I doubt anyone is going to be mass producing junk food for kids lunches, some parents just ship their kids off to school with a cold pie everyday as it is.

        If you’ve ever been to a school at lunchtime you’d see the need. This organisation wants to push healthy food, as that is what will help kids the most.

  3. eco maori 3
    6 February 2018 at 8:28 am

    Good morning Breakfast people I was up late researching OUR Maori culture particularly Ngati Porou its a phenomenal that a lot of Ngati Porou historical storys as I call them instead of myths and legends as everyone else calls them ???????? are omitted from the internet . ECO MAORI knows WHY especially the storys of East Coast Maori Myths and legends by Colonel William Porter ?????? It make me happy that everything is running ls smovely at Waitangi this year Ka pai everyone . Ka kite ano p.s if the mokos are feed at school they will learn and behave a lot better when my mokos are turning up I always get the food they like it keeps them Quite most times lol

    • eco maori 3.1
      6 February 2018 at 8:46 am

      Every action has a equal and opposite reaction .So the grid girls haveing to find a new job is a small price to pay in the ultimate cause in the Quest for Ladys equality .
      One can not stop Ladys being treated as sex objects if we keep displaying them as that . ECO MAORI will never let my mokos be treated like this .
      Ka kite ano

      • eco maori 3.1.1
        6 February 2018 at 8:59 am

        Eco Maori wonders how our Maori LEADERs have taken my words last nite as a insult or a challange to lift all Maori cultured people up to the highest rung on there ladders of life this will benefit all people in Aotearoa .Ka kite ano

        • eco maori 3.1.1.1
          6 February 2018 at 10:31 am

          Many thanks to Hilary & Jeremy on TVNZ 1 at 7pm week nites for starting the debate on feeding the Mokos at SCHOOL .
          Eco Maori is laying a challange at the feet of the biggest Food profiting Organizations in Aotearoa Foodstuff & Progressive to start feeding all our underprivileged MOKOs at SCHOOL .This feat need not cost you the Papatuanuku to feed the underprivileged mokos at school look at Fonterra milk in schools you could work with Fonterra and other Organizations to achieve this challange I set for yous . I challange OUR maori leaders to get this challenge into the reality of Aotearoa namely EX AllBLACK ROBIN BROOKE who is part of one of the above mentioned Organizations . I know you have had alcohol problems and ECO says that drug should have advertising attached to it warning all the mokos of the side effects it has on a person .+ Anyone who thinks they are perfect come and see Eco and I will prove YOU WRONG. Whats the most important thing on Papatuanuku He tanga he tanga he tanga if we feed all OUR underprivileged MOKOs many more will grow to become Great big people with Mana like you. Ka kite ano

          Here is some good music mix I like to listen to while writing these post

    • Jimmy Ramaka 3.2
      6 February 2018 at 9:08 am

      Very little written history on the East Coast, my great grandfather had a close association with the East Coast early last Century however most of the family archives disappeared into thin air. The Native Land Settlement Company set up to develop Maori Land by Governor George Grey and Balfour I think, collapsed at some stage and the Bank of New Zealand foreclosed, leading to the loss of Maori Land particularly in the Northern Areas of the East Coast.

      Does anyone know any good information sources on East Coast Land History a lot of old land records have disappeared I believe ?

      • eco maori 3.2.1
        6 February 2018 at 7:06 pm

        I have set up a give a litte page to help fund my cause of suing the NZ Police for breaching my Whano / Family Privacy & Human rights . Any extra funds will be put in a Charitable Trust and used to help other common people with problems with the NZ Justice system . When I win my case I will repay the funds to the Trust with the huge Settlement ECO MAORI will get from the New Zealand Police

        https://givealittle.co.nz/cause/helping-eco-maori-sue-the-nz-police

        ANA TO KAI ka kite ano

        • eco maori 3.2.1.1
          6 February 2018 at 7:41 pm

          I wonder if the cops are going to try some low down tactic now I have launched that page hello Hillary & Jemmy I like you having Anik Moa as part of your show ka pai what do you think of that move I been planing that for a while some random stranger just turned up probable to sight me and the cops will use him to try and frame ECO Maori he was about 65 70 looked losted had tats maori designs all over his arm I v never seen him before . You should have heard the cops sirens going off when I posted my give a little page link here on the stranded .
          A poor broke Maori is not aloud to sue the new zealand police in there reality.
          The polices actions prove they are guilty of breaching all my human rights.
          I have a real good Law firm in mind to sue the police
          Ka kite ano

      • mauī 3.2.2
        7 February 2018 at 8:26 pm

        You could try searching using papers past – https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/

        You can search through digital versions of old newspapers by keywords you’re looking for.

  4. Carolyn_Nth 4
    6 February 2018 at 9:01 am

    The link in the TS sidebar to Edward Miller’s post on It’s Our Future, about the need for the Greens to play hardball on the TPPS, explains that the version the NZFirst-Labour government are signing up to, is no real change from the earlier version that thousands protested against.

    It explains that, by signing up to this agreement, NZF-Lab are entrenching a neoliberal system in NZ, and gives too much power to international corporates.

    This means that, for all Labour’s pretty tak about working to decrease poverty will have limited results in practice. It will block the real change needed to make a more equal society in NZ, and only allow the tinkering we are currently seeing.

    At the bottom of the post is a link to the kind of website I’ve been looking for in NZ: watermelon/eco-socialst site – seems to have started following Turei’s resigning as GP co-leader.

    • adam 4.1
      6 February 2018 at 9:31 am

      I said before the election and still hold to the position, that economically labour are not a left party.

      The signing of the TTPS is just a more overt example of that.

      On the good news front, at least we got a cult of personality.

    • Jimmy Ramaka 4.2
      6 February 2018 at 9:35 am

      Evidently the ISDS clauses have been removed and property ownership clauses ?

      Haven’t read it so no way am i endorsing Labour/NZF decision.

      • Carolyn_Nth 4.2.1
        6 February 2018 at 9:47 am

        If you read the article linked on the TS sidebar (here if you can’t do that), you will see Jane Kelsey is quoted as saying those clauses haven’t been removed,just put on ice. Currently Trump has withdrawn from the TPP, but once the US gets back on board, those clauses will be taken off ice.

        • The Chairman 4.2.1.1
          6 February 2018 at 10:18 am

          Additionally, Carolyn, from Jane Kelsey.

          The new government tried to protect NZ from ISDS in the TPPA-11, but failed.

          Australia signed a side-letter with NZ not to allow their investors to use ISDS against each other. But that side-letter was in the original TPPA and in other agreements. It’s not new to Labour.

          The new government says some other countries will sign a similar side letter, but won’t say who.

          Unless all the other ten countries sign side-letters, they don’t protect NZ from the risk of ISDS disputes.

          A provision that allowed investors to use ISDS to enforce infrastructure contracts has been suspended (not removed); but that is marginal and doesn’t change the TPPA’s special protections to foreign investors or the ISDS process through which they can enforce them.

          https://itsourfuture.org.nz/te-tiriti-o-waitangi-tino-rangatiratanga-tppa-jane-kelsey/

          As for Trump, Trump made an overt play for the US to rejoin the TPP a week after the revised deal. Resulting in Australia raising the prospect of late changes being made to bring the US on board, despite it being set down for signing next month.

          http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11983710

          • KJT 4.2.1.1.1
            6 February 2018 at 1:29 pm

            No one seems aware of the fact that even local councils will not be able to favour local business for contracts.
            And ISDS allows overseas companies to sue them if they bring jobs back, “in house”, or require them to pay a living wage.
            The TPPA sets neo-liberalism in concrete.

            • Incognito 4.2.1.1.1.1
              6 February 2018 at 1:43 pm

              The TPPA sets neo-liberalism in concrete.

              Yup.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 4.2.1.1.1.2
              6 February 2018 at 6:43 pm

              It mandates a government spending to gdp ratio, or enforces austerity by other means? It stops the government strengthening collective bargaining? It’ll stop the government from burying the failed SOE model?

              If trade = neoliberalism, how come neoliberal countries are so keen to impose economic trade sanctions?

              It all depends how you define “neoliberalism”, eh. That’s why “neoliberals” find it so easy to undermine their detractors: the noise to signal ratio.

              • KJT …
                8 February 2018 at 1:53 pm

                It mandates a government spending to gdp ratio, or enforces austerity by other means? It stops the government strengthening collective bargaining? It’ll stop the government from burying the failed SOE model?

                All of those.

                And Neo-liberalism is about corporate rights, and profit as the only economic motive.

                Not “Free trade”.

                • One Anonymous Bloke …
                  8 February 2018 at 3:31 pm

                  How will it stop the government from strengthening collective bargaining, as they have clearly signalled is their intent?

                  Re: ‘neoliberal’, it has too many definitions, and means different things to different people. To me it’s typified by unreasoned reliance on a ‘free’ market, the refusal to accept that government is one of the ‘market forces’, and myths about the relative competence of the private vs. public sectors.

                  But like I say, it means different things depending on who’s got the talking stick.

                  • Chuck …
                    8 February 2018 at 4:02 pm

                    “How will it stop the government from strengthening collective bargaining, as they have clearly signalled is their intent?”

                    It won’t – as you point out OAB this government is intent on strengthening collective bargaining.

    • eco maori 4.3
      6 February 2018 at 9:53 pm

      I think that TPP Is just another tool that the0.1% are going to use to control us the 99% I have dune a lot of research on this and i get a lot of info from the wise leftys people on this i can see that a lot of your opinions are genuine like mine
      Ka pai caroline north .I wont say to much as I mite get blocked .
      Ka kite ano

  5. adam 5
    6 February 2018 at 10:31 am

    The Great Green wall of China.

    For the last 6 days this video has been pushed on me YouTube, so I bite the bullet and watched it today.

    I’m in two minds over this concept, it has very few in the science community backing it up, but in places it seems to be working. If anything, I think it’s a reminder what happens when we cut down forest. The trees are there for a reason.

    https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/08/china-plants-billions-of-trees-in-the-desert/

    https://www.wired.com/story/ian-teh-chinas-great-green-wall/

    The video 9.36 long. With a party hack pushing the party line from about half way through video, interestingly she has a title Orwell would be proud of – consultant

  6. Ad 6
    6 February 2018 at 12:48 pm

    Great to see the US House Intelligence Committee approving the release of the Democrat version of the hearings’ intelligence:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-attacks-schiff-ahead-of-vote-on-democrats-russia-probe-memo/2018/02/05/abf388fc-0a8c-11e8-8b0d-891602206fb7_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_memovote-625pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.bf4bcebe75f8

    All on President Trump now to approve the clearances of the information contained, or else look his roasting of the FBI to be a purely partisan project.

    What a way to unite the Democrat and Republican members: defend the FBI together.

    Will be fun to see what Maddow and Hannity make of that.

    • adam 6.1
      6 February 2018 at 3:10 pm

      Maddow is looking unhinged. This whole process is playing into the hands of the t.v. personality.

      How about you help people in america? Any chance you could back them up? Where the muppet falls down is policy and campaign promises – not this circus sideshow b.s. which is bloody tiresome.

      • Ad 6.1.1
        6 February 2018 at 9:18 pm

        NBC, MSNBC and Fox are all “unhinged” for very good reasons.
        These are significant tests of the US governing structures, which will in the course of this year become major tests of the US constitution.

        I’m sorry you’re tired by it, but the political order has to play it all up to the ultimate levels, and play it out.

        The “people in America” will have to deal with this in the mid terms.
        The have been reacting pretty well in the statewide contests over the last 6 months.

        There are plenty of good sites, but for you I would recommend the US Economic Policy Institute.

  8. SPC 8
    6 February 2018 at 2:42 pm

    The new McCarthyism, Democratic resistance to Trump called un-American treason.

    https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/world/trump-calls-democrats-not-applauding-him-state-union-address-un-american-and-treasonous

    But note the Democrats are not innocent victims, given the bi-partisan support for limitation of free speech in the USA.

    https://theintercept.com/2017/07/19/u-s-lawmakers-seek-to-criminally-outlaw-support-for-boycott-campaign-against-israel/

  9. Ed1 9
    6 February 2018 at 6:12 pm

    Thre is an advertisement on TV urging New Zealanders to protest against a ship setting off explosions every 8 seconds, with the claim that this is harming whales. Is this true? – or do the whales just flee the area until it is quiet again?

    I would be very surprised if there was not evidence of harm, but I could not find even a reference to the ads, let alone support for the assertion in them, on the Greenpeace NZ site or the Green Party site. We would criticise unsupported assertions from the right – does anyone have evidence of harm?

    • Anon 9.1
      6 February 2018 at 6:54 pm

      Define harm. If I had to leave my house because someone next door was setting off explosions every 8 seconds I’d find that quite harmful, as I wouldn’t be able to go about any of my regular domestic affairs, and where would I even go?

      But yeah, I generally roll my eyes whenever greenpeace is mentioned. They’re not actually tied to the Green Party, though, are they?

    • eco maori 9.2
      6 February 2018 at 10:02 pm

      Explosions in water travel a lot farer hundreds of klm the sock wave does more damage in water than in air you just have to goggle it to find the answer to your question ka pai

  10. eco maori 10
    6 February 2018 at 10:54 pm

    bernard hickey is dick dont give him air time he caused a good familys business to go broke good hard working kiwis with his orders from shonky his web site.interest.blow,nz is sheit
    He would be like 5 peas in a pod with bull shonky dilley do and dickky & fancey car mike who
    ANA TO KAI

  11. Robert Guyton 11
    13 February 2018 at 8:04 am

    “Ironically, journalists were not invited to General Keating’s workshop on transparency and accountability a few months later. Lawyers, academics and NGOs were welcome, but media – those whose job it is to monitor powerful institutions like the NZDF – were banned.

    One attendee observed that “the workshop was notable for not addressing the elephants in the room” – the allegations in Hit and Run and The Valley. When Wayne Mapp, National’s former defence minister, stood and referred to one of these elephants, the silence was deafening.

    https://interactives.stuff.co.nz/2018/02/iraq-open-warfare/