Open mike 19/01/2012

81 comments on “Open mike 19/01/2012 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Jenny 1

   19 January 2012 at 7:02 am

   Only 300 workers in one port are involved at present…..

   Eddie

   While Athens may stand aloof and also make demands that other Greeks not become involved. Xerxes is to meet with Leonidas tomorrow.
   • alex 1.1

     19 January 2012 at 11:16 am

     Why isn’t the Labour leadership getting in behind the striking workers? Shouldn’t Shearer be visiting the pickets?
2. Jenny 2

   19 January 2012 at 7:07 am

   ‘

   Which side are you on?

   Which side are you on?

   One’s right and one’s wrong.

   Together we’re strong.

   Which side are you on?
   • mickysavage 2.1

     19 January 2012 at 8:45 am

     Embedding does not work …

     Check it out at http://youtu.be/N43Cm6ra0hY
     • mickysavage 2.1.1

       19 January 2012 at 8:58 am

       And a Billy Bragg version.  Just what you need to stir you into a day of leftist activity.
     • mickysavage 2.1.2

       19 January 2012 at 9:02 am

       And a beautiful version by Natalie Merchant with stunning old b&w photos.
       • Anne 2.1.2.1

         19 January 2012 at 6:52 pm

         Thank-you mickysavage.
         Beautiful and powerful!
3. Olwyn 3

   19 January 2012 at 8:26 am

   Those of us on the left need to get out there and show that we are to be taken seriously, while the Labour leadership works out where it stands. Darien Fenton and Phil Twyford have both spoken up, and quite a few Labour MPs have joined the support page on facebook, so there is some support out there. The strike on the 31st seems to have been called off, but if nothing is resolved we should be out supporting the next strike in large numbers.

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10779669

   To continue with your Greek theme Jenny, one could put David Shearer’s comment in Theseus’s mouth: “”I don’t think the Athenian youths and the minotaur are too far apart… I’d like to think they can come together”
   • mikesh 3.1

     19 January 2012 at 11:47 am

     They would do well to fear Greeks bearing gifts.
   • Jenny 3.2

     19 January 2012 at 8:16 pm

     Olwyn, I got the idea for the Greek theme from Eddie, when trying to justify why we shouldn’t support them, he said that the wharfies were only 300.

     In my opinion, if 300 can hold the line against the barbarians they deserve our full support.
   • Jenny 3.3

     19 January 2012 at 8:26 pm

     I am sure that in the end, by fighting back, the 300 Spartans/wharfies will earn the respect and backing of the Athenians/Labour Party eventually. Let us hope it is before they are all slaughtered.

     With the full backing of the Labour Party/Athens, the wharfies/Spartans will be unbeatable. Without that backing, less likely. If the wharfies are defeated the rest of the Labour Movement/Greece will suffer a setback, and the Labour Party/Athens will itself be affected.
     • marty mars 3.3.1

       19 January 2012 at 8:46 pm

       Appreciate the work you are doing on this issue Jenny and I am pleased that Hone and Mana have stated clearly their support for the workers

       “As for politicians saying that we should not get involved, what a load of crap…”

       http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1201/S00052/mana-we-support-the-wharfies.htm

       I’m not smart enough to put it into a classical analogy but I am glad courage is still around today.
4. The Voice of Reason 4

   19 January 2012 at 8:38 am

   Want to make a real difference for your own health and to help the world? This Standardista knows how!
    
   As indeed do these guys.
   
5. vto 5

   19 January 2012 at 8:42 am

   So Sione’s 2 makes jokes at the expense of gays, gym instructors and people name Marcel.

   That’s not bad for a bunch of bigoted coconuts.
   • Colonial Viper 5.1

     19 January 2012 at 8:48 am

     I see what you did there.
     • vto 5.1.1

       19 January 2012 at 8:52 am

       ha ha, yes, but I think you will find it is they who did it.
       • marty mars 5.1.1.1

         19 January 2012 at 9:33 am

         you just did it too dumbarse – you display the same attitude and both of you did it for humour – I know you were trying to make a point, a good point as it happens, but that is a fail and the point is lost, for no valid reason really other than your own personal stuff
         • vto 5.1.1.1.1

           19 January 2012 at 9:35 am

           touchy touchy
           • marty mars 5.1.1.1.1.1

             19 January 2012 at 9:40 am

             hint – you are not as ironic as you think you are

             and yes I bit – that’s what you wanted isn’t it?
             • vto …

               19 January 2012 at 9:45 am

               Irony had no part in it. Simply a large and rude crude mirror to themselves. Best way sometimes.

               By the way, why did you bite? What part of the point got up your nose? Wasn’t personal stuff was it?
               • marty mars …

                 19 January 2012 at 10:04 am

                 I find fakery offensive so some of your posts wind me up, but not too much vto – just giving you your fix
                 • vto …

                   19 January 2012 at 10:19 am

                   Fair enough. Seems to be my way sometimes – to make a point which has wound me up I will shove it back large and crude. Over-exaggerate, etc. It generally works to at least get the required attention, though not always the finer points and discussion.

                   A lot of humour, as lanthanide points out, is made at others expense. I guess what got me re Siones 2 is that as PI’s the people involved have probably suffered over the years from people making fun of their own characteristics and negative stereotyping. And here they are indulging in the same conduct. One that reinforces negative stereotypes. I guess it is very easy for humourists to slip into the easy trap of making fun of others rather than making fun with others (and it is clear that the particular joke I refer to is made by laughing at, not laughing with).

                   What would a comic, such as Oscar Knightley himself perhaps, have to say about it? Would be interested to hear.
                   • marty mars …

                     19 January 2012 at 10:42 am

                     good points – I wish people weren’t so mean to each other too
                   • millsy …

                     19 January 2012 at 11:48 am

                     Its perfectly possible to have good comedy without making it at the expense of ethnic groups and minorites, (or having some form of bodily function made reference to). People who indulge in that are just lazy. And I am definitely no prude.
                   • prism …

                     19 January 2012 at 1:13 pm

                     A good comedian can take the stereotype, work on it, present it to the audience who both understand it and feel some of it too and laugh at it, and all the time the content is saying yes we’re like that sometimes and sometimes it’s ridiculous and some of us can recognise it and laugh and sometimes it’s us being ourselves so suck it up. There is a complex silent dialogue running between the comedian and the audience.
   • Lanthanide 5.2

     19 January 2012 at 9:16 am

     A lot of humour is made at the expense of some specific group of people.
   • marty mars 5.3

     19 January 2012 at 9:27 am

     so you add more bigotry and that is supposed to do what – be ironic. Sad and useless vto.
     • vto 5.3.1

       19 January 2012 at 9:34 am

       Yep, you’ve got it marty mars – sione’s 2 – sad and useless. Thanks for the confirmation.
       • marty mars 5.3.1.1

         19 January 2012 at 9:36 am

         there was no comma
6. Willie Maley 6

   19 January 2012 at 9:22 am

   Just listening to Camoron Brewer on RNZ. Sounds like a mini Banks. 
    
   • Colonial Viper 6.1

     19 January 2012 at 9:39 am

     Imagine someone who has chosen Banks, Brash, Richardson and Hide as his role models. Madness multiplies madness.
   • logie97 6.2

     19 January 2012 at 10:48 am

     …that was my immediate reaction too. Sounded like a clone. (clown).

     That section was followed by a much more telling interview with Gordon Campbell from Scoop on Labour’s conspicuous absence from the waterfront issue. (Shearer should be in boots ‘n all, attempting to mediate and get things moving, while the Nats are still sunbathing and showing no concern). The NZ public would appreciate that from Shearer I am sure …)
     • millsy 6.2.1

       19 January 2012 at 11:44 am

       Yes, I think if Shearer offered to personally step in and mediate the the dispute, he would win a lot of points with the public – using his skills honed in the worlds hotspots to sort things out at home.
       • Colonial Viper 6.2.1.1

         19 January 2012 at 11:48 am

         Shearer will do so if his advisors decide that it fits with his ‘brand’.

         However predictable complaints from the Right that he is politically meddling in an Auckland city matter, that he is backing the unions ahead of the interests of Auckland city ratepayers, that he is interfering in the free market, will stay his hand.

         What alternative narrative has Labour got to fight back with.
         • logie97 6.2.1.1.1

           19 January 2012 at 11:56 am

           CV – Thinking out loud, but just who are these (even-more-powerful-and-superior-sages/come-advisors) who sit above the various spokespeople. It would seem they screwed up in the last election good time. What about a bit of personality taking over for once.

           (Muldoon could think for himself.
           Savage could think for himself.
           Lange could think for himself.
           Thatcher could think for herself.)
           • The Voice of Reason 6.2.1.1.1.1

             19 January 2012 at 12:07 pm

             There aren’t any, Logie. For example, last week it was supposed to be Pagani and Mallard, but that turned out to be a load of bollocks.
              
             The simple fact is that the Labour cannot afford a layer of Machiavellian manipulators and the organisation actually survives on the smell of an oily rag. Via parliamentary services, there are some taxpayer funded media and policy advisers, but nobody is operating at the level the fantasists of both the left and the right would have you believe.
              
              
       • Jum 6.2.1.2

         19 January 2012 at 12:42 pm

         Millsy,

         Excellent idea.
         • logie97 6.2.1.2.1

           19 January 2012 at 12:58 pm

           Hi Jum, seems you and I and Millsy (and a host of others) think alike – nice one.
7. Jum 7

   19 January 2012 at 11:27 am

   http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1201/S00050/the-food-bill-not-as-sweet-as-first-appeared.htm

   ‘…School fairs, churches, and community fundraisers could have sausage sizzle fundraisers with just food handler guidance (a best practice food safety pamphlet and no checking), yet a small grower wanting to sell some surplus plums or cabbages to the corner dairy has to enter the bureaucratic jungle: Register at a cost, apply for an exemption, or wait and hope that MAF and the Minister decide to make an exemption after the Food Bill is through, but no promises.

   It would appear that the only ‘charitable’ groups not able to run sausage sizzles or food stalls under food handler guidance, would be political parties/supporters, strong advocacy groups, and direct action groups such as Greenpeace. They would have to pay registration and undergo food safety plan verification for their sins. …’

   Giant Monsanto as international lobbyist will be loving this as it seeks to control the seeds (and the water supply) of tomorrow.

   I hope New Zealanders aren’t hoping Kate Wilkinson will stand up for their rights in their vegetable patches.

   Y’see, it’s all about taking away the ability for New Zealanders to save a few extra dollars – often the difference between living and surviving.

   ‘Cause just surviving means no energy to take on the thieves we have in government now as they seek to steal our SOEs and give them at rock bottom prices to their rotundtable business mates in New Zealand and internationally.

   What a shame that Kiwis lost in translation on pot/soma won’t even notice.
   • Colonial Viper 7.1

     19 January 2012 at 11:34 am

     It’ll simply end up criminalising large parts of society. What are people going to do. See their families go hungry in order to fulfil Wilkinson’s pet laws?

     Nah, never going to happen.
     • Jum 7.1.1

       19 January 2012 at 12:03 pm

       Colonial Viper,

       And then there is this to keep an eye on them…

       http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1201/S00051/improved-satellite-communications-for-nz-defence-force.htm

       ‘Any unused capacity can be made available to other government agencies.’

       Am I being unduly suspicious here?…
       • Colonial Viper 7.1.1.1

         19 January 2012 at 2:00 pm

         Not unduly suspicious, especially since US law enforcement now routinely use military designed Predator drones with the highest tech remote sensors for surveillance activity on civilian populations and protestors.
     • Lanthanide 7.1.2

       19 January 2012 at 1:27 pm

       Large parts of society are criminals and break laws every week, if not every day:
       – Driving/riding without a seatbelt
       – Talking on cell phones while driving
       – Failing to wait until the lights at a railway crossing turn off before driving through the intersection
       – Copyright violations
   • millsy 7.2

     19 January 2012 at 11:41 am

     Imagine the howls of outrage if Labour brought this bill in?

     We would have people going on about “Herr Clarkenfuhrer and her SS Feminazis closing down the school sausage sizzle”
   • Jum 7.3

     19 January 2012 at 12:06 pm

     ‘It would appear that the only ‘charitable’ groups not able to run sausage sizzles or food stalls under food handler guidance, would be political parties/supporters, strong advocacy groups, and direct action groups’

     NAct won’t be worried because they have, or more importantly are, all those super rich owners of all our assets – no fundraising for them.
   • Gosman 7.4

     19 January 2012 at 12:49 pm

     There’s a bit of a leap in logic from requiring exemptions if you attempt to sell your produce via a local dairy to being unable to grow food for your own or friends and relative consumption because of the law. Please explain how you make the statment “Y’see, it’s all about taking away the ability for New Zealanders to save a few extra dollars” with any validity.
   • McFlock 7.5

     19 January 2012 at 1:53 pm

     ‘…School fairs, churches, and community fundraisers could have sausage sizzle fundraisers with just food handler guidance (a best practice food safety pamphlet and no checking), yet a small grower wanting to sell some surplus plums or cabbages to the corner dairy has to enter the bureaucratic jungle: Register at a cost, apply for an exemption, or wait and hope that MAF and the Minister decide to make an exemption after the Food Bill is through, but no promises.

     Sigh. So now it brutally oppresses small-scale fruit wholesalers?
      
     This bit differs from the current Food Act how?
      
     • Jum 7.5.1

       19 January 2012 at 2:19 pm

       McFlock,

       Sigh…

       I used the first paragraph to give a little bit of a picture before highlighting the actual point in the second paragraph in my 12.06pm comment. I thought I should emphasise that with a second post to help those with only a few braincells.

       NAct only ever do anything that brings them gain and reduces the power of those agin them. Now if you prefer to play with the ‘few braincells’ types, carry on.

       And take the idiot gosman with you as an introduction to the rapacious world of Monsanto and just how far that operation will go to remove any freedom of individuals to keep and grow their own seeds and retain their own water supply.

       Whole brave new world out there McFlock. I didn’t like it on paper; I like it even less now.

       Crikey, I’ve just had an ‘orrible thought. Seeds…reproduction…men… Monsanto…

       (Soil and Health Sept/Oct 1999 – Monsanto now expanding monopolies from Seed to Water.)
       • McFlock 7.5.1.1

         19 January 2012 at 2:39 pm

         I would agree with you if a few of the below were true:

         Monsanto were the only people who submitted in favour of the Bill;
         There was a demonstrable difference in application that was more widespread than the current Food Act;
         Public health professionals made Bill submissions to the effect that it wasn’t needed, rather than in favour;
         bill opponents made statements that relied on actual facts, rather than a nebulous terror of global corporate evils;

          
         Although to give Penny credit, she does hunt down and link the primary documentation (which is lightyears ahead of our neighbourhood tory swine). I just don’t read the same significance into participating with international standards organisations as she does. A bit like the NZDF purchase of satellite bandwidth that you bring up – I don’t view that with any more trepidation than the LAV purchase.
         • Jum 7.5.1.1.1

           19 January 2012 at 3:05 pm

           McFlock,

           And because this is presently a ‘freedom to speak’ country, I will defend your right to say it.
           • McFlock 7.5.1.1.1.1

             19 January 2012 at 5:09 pm

             cheers for that. 
              
   • tc 7.6

     19 January 2012 at 5:06 pm

     The food bill’s has some very nasty outcomes such as destroying diversity of food sources via legislating this seed or no seed……this x or no x etc.

     This govt’s proven it can’t be trusted with an outcome that benefits everyone, gotta be fillig some mates pockets.

     It’s unecessary and we’d actually benefit by being diverse and not ‘one of the crowd’ which’s just what monsanto want………and they called clark’s mob a nanny state, key and co make them look like liberal weiners adopting this type of crap.
     • McFlock 7.6.1

       19 January 2012 at 5:16 pm

       “The food bill’s has some very nasty outcomes such as destroying diversity of food sources via legislating this seed or no seed……this x or no x etc”

         
          
       It took me ages to find out what exactly people were talking about with this bit. Turns out the inclusion of food seeds in the bill was inadvertant, and it would appear that this issue is being addressed (Q7). Call me again when they decide not to put forward the supplementary order paper.
         
       As I’ve said before, I wouldn’t trust this government to change a lightbulb – but I’ve seen a lot of panic on the basis of not much when it comes to the food bill. I mean, if it was all that then every garden centre would be up in arms at having to put together food safety plans.

        
       • tc 7.6.1.1

         19 January 2012 at 6:15 pm

         You assume people are paying attention but you’re right on the trust issue as Katey W has zero credibility on that front.

         Farmers in the US are being asked to pay for plants growing as a result of seeds blown from their neighbours GE Monsanto crop as they own that patent……we need to be vigilant.
         • McFlock 7.6.1.1.1

           19 January 2012 at 6:22 pm

           True enough, but paranoia means we overlook real threats because we’re obssessing over inflated ones.
           • Jum 7.6.1.1.1.1

             19 January 2012 at 6:42 pm

             McFlock,

             The real threat is this government running this country – how can we overlook that!?
             • Colonial Viper …

               19 January 2012 at 6:49 pm

               Tory Governments come and go. What we need to do is shift the debate in the community because that will limit what Tory governments can do when they are in – which they are inevitably every couple of terms.

               Notice how the Right wing have done that very effectively to Labour? They don’t care if a Labour govt can get in because they know they can ride it out as the electorate’s thinking (and participation) has been shifted to the right. And they won’t let Labour do anything too unacceptable.
               • McFlock …

                 19 January 2012 at 9:06 pm

                 snap – bang on
                  
         • Jum 7.6.1.1.2

           19 January 2012 at 6:41 pm

           Tc,

           Yes I spotted that – shameful act of aggression. Obviously, Monsanto has governmentS in its pocket.
         • Colonial Viper 7.6.1.1.3

           19 January 2012 at 6:51 pm

           Farmers in the US are being asked to pay for plants growing as a result of seeds blown from their neighbours GE Monsanto crop as they own that patent……we need to be vigilant.

           Actually farmers need to be invoicing Monsanto for the clean up – Monsanto is polluting their property without authorisation.
           • tc 7.6.1.1.3.1

             19 January 2012 at 8:18 pm

             No that’s nature doing what it does, Monsanto can easily say not us but our property you didn’t pay for nor ensure it stayed with its purchaser.

             Also these plants can often have the propagation gene switched off so back for seeds every cycle embedding the cycle.
             • Colonial Viper …

               19 January 2012 at 9:10 pm

               Monsanto can easily say not us but our property you didn’t pay for nor ensure it stayed with its purchaser.

               Its pollution mate. Whoever is the cause needs to clean it up.

               An oil spill from a deep sea well spreads through the ocean and along the beaches. You can’t just say “that’s nature just spreading things around, not our problem”.

               Further, the genes from those seeds damage the productivity of your own land. Thats damages right there mate.
8. randal 8

   19 January 2012 at 11:31 am

   I think David Shearer and the rest of the team are probably going flat out behind the scenes.
   they are not all media hogs.
   and I think credit must be given to the posters on the standard who kept the issue boiling till manager gibson backed off.
   people power dudes.
   cant beat it.
9. Wharfie 9

   19 January 2012 at 11:32 am

   The impact of outsourcing.
   The mention of the word itself raises serious concerns for current employees of any company where they thought they were secure in their employment. The loss of job satisfaction, productivity, company loyalty and a threat to quality of life are some of the emotions I am sure people are faced with on hearing their future is at stake. Outsourcing might assist the bottom line for companies but raises the bar in terms of risk for the worker. Pike River is a classic example of where things can go badly wrong. With a large part of the operation contracted out shortcuts were taken and health and safety became secondary, the outcome was catastrophic for 29 families.
   Dropping the contingency they carry is the main driver. No annual leave, no sick, no ACC levies and certainly no voice. As much as it grates against the grain of employers, the union movement sets the standard in ensuring workers are protected against harm in the workplace. Union covered sites are known to be some of the safest environments for people to work in. These concerns had been raised and unfortunately come to fruition at the Pike River mine resulting in the worst mining disaster in New Zealand’s history.
   Outsourcing has become very popular in particular with larger companies and corporations looking to maintain and increase the market share without carrying the additional cost to maximise future profit. The risk is still there in loss of quality service and control over that service delivery because they no longer control the labour; also violations of confidentiality and intellectual property are real risks to companies that outsource. Any contractor will minimise input in terms of safe labour levels, this creates another industry where those removed by outsourcing are call upon to fix these situations because the skill is lacking.
   Any improvement for people employed by contractors is very hard to achieve because in effect they are actually the contractor and there is a line that can’t be breached financially, so inevitably shortcuts and cost driven measures are put into play. Most employees are gun shy and will not join a union for fear of reprisal or putting their jobs at risk. The bottom line is outsourcing drains wealth for the sake of profit.
   Most advocates of outsourcing don’t consider the potential damage to their company with the risk of damage to their brand; it’s like taking a bath at the sewage plant saying I am saving on heating costs, the water is warm and no rates to pay like at home. How can you simply trade of your biggest asset at the flick of a pen especially when your huge investment in that asset is giving a return? That is of course all any employee asks, respect the investment I make and acknowledge it by securing my future.
   The human collateral damage is huge; families suffer at the hands of capitalism without conscience or thought given to the devastation within the family nucleus. It’s not very often you see outsourcing of the managerial tier, the boy’s club look after their own. It is always those on the bottom rung that have to step up and cop the hit whether it is redundancy or contracting out.
   Outsourcing is said to be for people who have little patience and a lot of money. The outcome for working-class people is to see wages and conditions driven down to compete; families suffer because without organized labour, maintaining a reasonable standard of income becomes next to impossible. The trade union movement will always rile against the outsourcing and undermining of our members livelihoods and for that matter the attack on working-class in general by corporations hell-bent on gaining a compliant workforce without basic workplace rights.
   • Jum 9.1

     19 January 2012 at 6:29 pm

     Wharfie,

     That block comment signifies everything about a charged situation which threatens to become a war of survival. Every sentence is loaded with importance.

     I recognise your anger; however these days it’s all about how you present it.

     It’s tough to read and digest huge blocks of print; I am reprinting it for you – it needs to be said, as often as possible.
     Save that passion and anger and belief in collective action for the many days ahead:

     ‘Wharfie 9
     19 January 2012 at 11:32 am

     THE IMPACT OF OUTSOURCING –

     The mention of the word itself raises serious concerns for current employees of any company where they thought they were secure in their employment.

     The loss of job satisfaction, productivity, company loyalty and a threat to quality of life are some of the emotions I am sure people are faced with on hearing their future is at stake.

     Outsourcing might assist the bottom line for companies but raises the bar in terms of risk for the worker.

     ********************Pike River is a classic example of where things can go badly wrong. With a large part of the operation contracted out shortcuts were taken and health and safety became secondary, the outcome was catastrophic for 29 families.

     Dropping the contingency they carry is the main driver.

     *********No annual leave, no sick, no ACC levies and certainly no voice.

     As much as it grates against the grain of employers, the union movement sets the standard in ensuring workers are protected against harm in the workplace.

     Union covered sites are known to be some of the safest environments for people to work in.

     *********************These concerns had been raised and unfortunately come to fruition at the Pike River mine resulting in the worst mining disaster in New Zealand’s history.

     Outsourcing has become very popular in particular with larger companies and corporations looking to maintain and increase the market share without carrying the additional cost to maximise future profit.

     The risk is still there in loss of quality service and control over that service delivery because they no longer control the labour; also violations of confidentiality and intellectual property are real risks to companies that outsource. Any contractor will minimise input in terms of safe labour levels, this creates another industry where those removed by outsourcing are call upon to fix these situations because the skill is lacking.

     Any improvement for people employed by contractors is very hard to achieve because in effect they are actually the contractor and there is a line that can’t be breached financially, so inevitably shortcuts and cost driven measures are put into play.

     Most employees are gun shy and will not join a union for fear of reprisal or putting their jobs at risk. The bottom line is outsourcing drains wealth for the sake of profit.

     Most advocates of outsourcing don’t consider the potential damage to their company with the risk of damage to their brand; it’s like taking a bath at the sewage plant saying I am saving on heating costs, the water is warm and no rates to pay like at home.

     How can you simply trade of your biggest asset at the flick of a pen especially when your huge investment in that asset is giving a return? That is of course all any employee asks, RESPECT the investment I make and ACKNOWLEDGE IT BY SECURING MY FUTURE.

     The human collateral damage is huge; families suffer at the hands of capitalism without conscience or thought given to the devastation within the family nucleus. It’s not very often you see outsourcing of the managerial tier, the boy’s club look after their own. It is always those on the bottom rung that have to step up and cop the hit whether it is redundancy or contracting out.

     Outsourcing is said to be for people who have little patience and a lot of money.

     The outcome for working-class people is to see wages and conditions driven down to compete; families suffer because without organized labour, maintaining a reasonable standard of income becomes next to impossible.

     *************
     The trade union movement will always rile against the outsourcing and undermining of our members livelihoods and for that matter the attack on working-class in general by corporations hell-bent on gaining a compliant workforce without basic workplace rights.

     Reply
     • Jenny 9.1.1

       19 January 2012 at 8:06 pm

       Good one Jum and wharfie, working together you have created a quality statement that would do well as a full post.

       Just click on contribute icon at the top of the page or on the link below:

       http://thestandard.org.nz/contribute-post/

       I think the moderators will find a suitable photo or graphic to go with your post.
       • Jum 9.1.1.1

         19 January 2012 at 8:15 pm

         Jenny,

         Up to you Wharfie; this is your baby.
10. Jum 10

    19 January 2012 at 12:34 pm

    http://sticknz.net/2010/10/22/a-solution-for-overseas-sales-of-agricultural-land-%E2%80%93-make-it-all-leasehold/

    It really annoys me that people like David Mahon continue to harp on about the Chinese being attacked on land ownership because they’re Chinese. That’s rubbish.

    Firstly, why would we seek to sell off freehold to a country that doesn’t allow its own land to be sold off?

    Secondly, why would we allow any land to be sold off to anyone to make money out of it and that money transferred out of NZ? There is absolutely no intelligent thinking in that option.

    Exporting earns international funds to balance our books. Selling our assets causes an imbalance in our books.

    Even leasing out which this link suggests removes income from New Zealand once the initial lease price has been spent.

    There must be some way to keep the vast bulk of the income from any investment in our country be it land or 42Below. Mining won’t do it; a low wage economy means little staying in the hands of NZ workers – 1% total isn’t it in monetary return for New Zealand for wrecking the land (nicely). That would be spent of course on tax cuts for those that don’t need it so they can buy up what’s left of our assets.

    But it’s a good idea by Key to try to make New Zealanders feel guilty for something they are not guilty of – xenophobia. Then they’ll shut up about the loss of priceless income generation forever.
11. Fotran 11

    19 January 2012 at 2:04 pm

    Where is Kiwi Bank (owned and capital fund supported regularly by NZ Post) finding est $50 million to $100 million to buy out Gareth Morgan, whose Kiwi Fund Management is shit poor.
    Morgan gets it Tax free of course.
    Whose paying – you and I the taxpayers are !!!!!
    We are mugs.
    • Chris 11.1

      19 January 2012 at 4:55 pm

      Kiwibank would pay for it from the profits it makes I assume. It has made over 70 million in the last 2 years alone.

      Also I would be very surprised if Gareth Morgan got the profits tax free. as a share trader any profits made by him through the sale of shares would be taxed. He may have some set-up which gets him out of it somehow but it would be something the ird would look at very closely
      • Colonial Viper 11.1.1

        19 January 2012 at 8:15 pm

        Capital gains on the value of a business are tax free mate.

        Exactly like the tax free capital gains his son made when selling TradeMe.
12. randal 12

    19 January 2012 at 2:16 pm

    yes its like clasping a viper to your bosom.
    he will be in there doing due diligence and hey presto he will own the bloody thing next year.
    just like the manager of POAL.
    • beachbum 12.1

      19 January 2012 at 2:21 pm

      Lets be consistent – POAL manager is either a numb nutz as he has been described here, or now you are suggesting that he actually has some ability to work out some scheme to own POAL????
      • Colonial Viper 12.1.1

        19 January 2012 at 3:09 pm

        He’s a numb nuts if his goal is to create a healthy productive work environment where competitive improvements can be implemented by the workers. Clearly he’s incompetent at that.

        However, he’s a scheming bastard if his goal is to engineer an excuse to break the union, help his former employer Maersk, and eventually position the port for partial privatisation.

        No inconsistency there mate, just your lack of imagination.
    • Jum 12.2

      19 January 2012 at 2:28 pm

      Randal,

      Yes, we know Gareth Morgan is not averse to asset sales. Kiwibank branches have been closed down in places which is against the original plan to be like the traditional post office was available to all and close enough to get to. When it has lost its advantage, the government will take that as an excuse to sell it. What am I saying!? They have never needed any excuse in the past to sell off our assets.
13. Pete George 13

    19 January 2012 at 3:44 pm

    A claim doing the rounds of the righty blogs.

    The problem with MUNZ’s, Fenton’s and the left’s argument about casualisation is that right now MUNZ is pursuing a case against POAL in the Employment Court to prevent the Port offering permanent jobs to “lashers”.

    You may think so, but not when the Union bullies have the top jobs and like to take the overtime at their much higher rates rather than allow the lower paid workers to get permanent jobs.

    Someone here should be able to clarify or refute this?
    • McFlock 13.1

      19 January 2012 at 3:54 pm

      Looking at the url for the source, and the commenter bringing it here, why bother? There’s a >80% chance that if I bother to look into it, it’ll be complete bullshit and I will sincerely regret wasting those five minutes of my life so thoroughly.
    • tc 13.2

      19 January 2012 at 8:21 pm

      Petey g seeking to assist the left…..LOL.
    • marty mars 13.3

      19 January 2012 at 9:01 pm

      that clam has been taken from a restricted area
14. Campbell Larsen 14

    19 January 2012 at 8:40 pm

    Petition against SOPA:

    If you want to sign go here:

    http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_the_internet_action_center_b/?vl
    • Campbell Larsen 14.1

      19 January 2012 at 8:47 pm

      Ooops – Jum beat me to it on ‘US Congress gets a Darwin award…’

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS