Open mike 19/05/2010

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, May 19th, 2010 - 29 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

It’s open for discussing topics of interest, making announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

Comment on whatever takes your fancy.

The usual good behaviour rules apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

29 comments on “Open mike 19/05/2010”

  1. r0b 1

    Bob Jones on taxes:

    “I’m the wrong person to talk to about that, I’m a libertarian. If I had my way there wouldn’t be any taxes at all, and it is feasible.

    “You just have to look at Dubai, obviously there is a slave labour element there, and ignore their current problems. That was just over-exuberance.”

    He’s – ummm – he’s kidding, right?

    • Pascal's bookie 1.1

      Usually is.

      At a guess, I’d say his point is that asking him if one tax policy is better than another on the grounds of ‘fairness’ is a bloody stupid thing to do. That’s making the question about Bob’s morality rather than the tax policy.

      Or not. He’s a stirrer at all times in any case.

    • Quoth the Raven 1.2

      It’s hard to tell if he’s serious or not because he is as thick as two planks. Look at his example. He takes the most egregiously non-libertarian one you could think of. They don’t pay much tax because the economy is largely state-controlled and they have huge oil revenues, not to mention the lack of social freedoms. We have much greater economic freedom.

      If Bob Jones is talking you can safely ignore him.

    • nzfp 1.3

      I’m not a libertarian (gold is not money – it’s a commodity but it’s not money), and I still believe there should be no taxes – on labour. Taxes on land and resources sure, taxes on companies and financial transactions sure – but not labour.

  2. just saying 2

    Govt Closes Loophole that Lets Speeding Drivers off the hook

    At a special news conference in Auckland today, John Key announced that his government would change the law to prevent thousands of speeding drivers every day speeding and off “scot free”.
    “This is a dangerous behaviour that causes enormous harm in our communites”, he a told a packed press gallery. Over time it would potentially save the country billions of dollars, he said. “We would need thousands more police officers, and literally millions more expensive speed cameras, to catch all those speeding on our roads”, Mr Key said. Enacting the new law would cost a fraction of this. The speed limit on all New Zealand roads is to be lifted to 200 kilometres per hour.

  3. Armchair Critic 3

    Another idiot who can’t tell the difference between “a crime” and “Wrong”.

  4. ianmac 4

    The Press today: Smith dismissed it as just law talk:
    “Canterbury University law professor Philip Joseph says the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Act, which was passed under urgency last month, breaches several principles of law, is “constitutionally repugnant”, contains “elements of subterfuge” and is a “constitutional affront”.

  5. Nick C 5

    Doesnt this just show how much of a failure the decision to buy kiwirail was?

    Cullen already paid an absurd price for it- all because he wanted to complete the deal in election year. Taxpayers will be burdened by this terrible investment for years to come.

    • Bright Red 5.1

      How much would you be able to sell the state highway network for? Nothing as a going concern – its costs far outweight its revenues – maybe something for the land. How much is it worth to the country, and therefore the government, to keep it operating? Incalculable, without it our economy would collapse.

      Totally different numbers. That was the same issue Labour faced as Toll ran the railways into the ground. Let a vital national asset be stripped to the point of collapse or pay to get it back.

      The value of Kiwirail to the country is not its value as an operating concern.

      The best solution would have been not selling it in the first place.

      • ianmac 5.1.1

        Well said Bright Red. Does State Highway 1 run at a profit Nick? If so by how much?
        When the Nats sell State Highway 1, what will be its value in dollars please? (I have some Chinese friends who will bid for it, then they intend to run it into the ground, before selling it back to you for a handsome profit.)
        Actually Nick your points are as usual rather tedious.

        • Bored

          I was about to echo Brights comments and ianmacs….so Nick C if you want to be useful how about asking a few relevant questiosn such as how much are you and I subsidising road transport operators? Or how can the road transport industry justify the wage structure for drivers? Etc etc….

        • nzfp

          Hah hah hah does air run at a profit Nick C, how about the police – do they run at a profit. Do the firemen run at a profit Nick, what about the public libraries, what profit do they run at. Does the ocean run at a profit, what about our public schools – much of a profit as a going concern? What about the water you drink, provided freely by nature, does it run at a profit? How about the sunlight, does it run at a profit, it’s provided freely by nature but it’s value is incalculable and without it we would all die. Sunlight represents a great opportunity for a monopoly there for you Nick, you could get rich monopolising sunlight – maybe you could monopolise sea-salt in India too. What about rain water – has rain water been privatised? Does rain water run at a profit too?

          Sorry Nick C don’t mean to be offensive but it was a great opportunity to highlight natural resources that belong – or should belong – to the public to be freely used by the public, like the nations infrastructure and even more importantly the nations credit (money).

    • Armchair Critic 5.2

      Doesnt this just show how much of a failure the decision to buy kiwirail was?
      No, it doesn’t. This just goes some of the way to providing equality of subsidies to the different modes of transport. Road is still more heavily subsidised.

    • nzfp 5.3

      Hey Nick C

      “Taxpayers will be burdened by this terrible investment for years to come.”

      We have other options. It will only be a burden if the Treasury and RBNZ formely commercial banking economists continue with the failed dogma of neo-liberal monetarism. Did you know that there are other options open to our government to fund all of our infrastructure? Our Treasury could print as much money as is necessary to create a sustainable public transport infrastructure and system. Because the money is spent on products and services (infrastructure) and not on banks to speculate on derivatives (USA TARP bank bailouts) there will not be inflation. Inflation can only occur if the money supply is expanded without an equal expansion of products and services within the economy.

      So in short I disagree – it will only be a burden if the government chooses to make it a burden. If it becomes a burden it becomes so because National wish it to be so.

  6. freedom 6

    To allow a high functioning productive society to operate succesfully, i can think
    of no area that is more vital than education. It is a pillar of the society’s belief in
    itself to develop and grow. It is a surveyor’s flag for the pioneers of the future.
    It is the badge of respect we show for those around us.

    i think a few of the people who most needed to learn this are finally starting to wake up

    I hope Tolley gets a chance to read this article, if anyone can directly send her a copy please do.
    I have sincere doubts the message i sent will get opened, let alone read.

    capcha: preparations

    • ianmac 6.1

      Ooops Freedom. Link doesn’t link for me. (I couldn’t get the process of linking with a few words to work either.)

      • Pascal's bookie 6.1.1

        There’s an extra ‘ at the end of the link:

        Try this

        • freedom

          thankyou for your assistance Pascal, i will check more closely next time.

          • ianmac

            Just got round to reading your link freedom. Very interesting. I have commented before on how I suspect that Anne might actually care but was landed with a policy which I think John Key announced during the election. “Another mess you have gotten us into John.”
            The Standards will not deal to the concerns and it has cost tens of millions so I wonder what Anne really believes and will she ever say even in ten twenty years?

  7. Quoth the Raven 7

    Some examples of policing in America

    By now you’ve probably seen the video of the SWAT stormtrooper raid in Columbia, Missouri, during which a gang of heavily-armed cops violently stormed a house in order to serve a search warrant on a suspected possible nonviolent marijuana user. Turned out that his partner and 7 year old child were also there at the time; so were their two dogs, which the cops went ahead to shoot and kill.

    In Detroit, a government police SWAT team on another hyperviolent warrant-serving raid killed a 7 year old girl named Aiyana Jones by shooting her in the neck while she slept on the sofa, in her family’s living room, in their hosue on Lillibridge St. on the east side of Detroit. The SWAT team tstormed the house in the middle of the night in order to serve a warrant for a murder suspect. Who, in press releases after the storming of the house and the killing of Aiyana Jones, was indeed found “in the location,” “within the scope of our search warrant.” Except the problem is that the house is a duplex and they got a warrant for the home of a completely innocent family

    A glimpse into our future after National and Labour have wrought their wickedness perhaps. We already have armed raids on peaceful tobacco growers. Though I’m sure that some here will celebrate that as progress.

    • nzfp 7.1

      Aahhh QTR, need I remind you of Ruatoki, welcome to the world of Tuhoe.

      • Quoth the Raven 7.1.1

        thanks for reminding me. I remember Ruatoki. A despicable action under the aegis of the decidedly authoritarian Labour party’s terrorism suppression act.
        And people vote for these fools? 🙄

        • nzfp

          Yeah under Labour, shock horror huh!
          Despite all the rip-off and insults from the bankster John Key and his rich mates, it was a Labour Government that was in power when the black clad ninja terrorists (special investigations group and armed defenders squad) kicked down doors in the sleepy valley of Ruatoki and raided Ngai Tuhoe.

          But don’t forget that Tuhoe prophet Ruakenana at Mauna Pohatu was the target of another Government sponsered terrorist raid. Then there’s always Tohu and Te-Whiti at Parihaka – remember the children and their haka that was charged down by mounted police terrorists.

          Why do I use the term terrorist – maybe because it’s an apt description and clearly defined by the Labour Government here.

          An act falls within this subsection if it is intended to cause, in any 1 or more countries, 1 or more of the outcomes specified in subsection (3), and is carried out for the purpose of advancing an ideological, political, or religious cause, and with the following intention:
          (a) to induce terror in a civilian population; or
          (b) to unduly compel or to force a government or an international organisation to do or abstain from doing any act.

          Looks like the Labour Government “induced terror” in the civilian Ngai Tuhoe population. Howard Broad sanctioned it and surprisingly (considering the controversy surrounding him) “New Zealand Solicitor General David Collins” ruled against the use of the Terrorism Suppression Act.

        • nzfp

          Oops, forgot about Bastion Point and the Government sponsored terrorist acts commited against Ngati Whatua – especially when their homes were burnt to the ground and they were forcibly evicted from their own land to advance a political ideology.

  8. Herodotus 8
    Pity this report has to come out on budget week, and I am sorry to see no mention of it within the sites I follow. So police refrain from follow up on child abuse becasue of what Traffic commin=tments and to assist in work load the lose files. How is it that the police can report on the S59 results but have let so many young innocient children down as ” Evidence of references to child- abuse investigation as not being “real policing” and to child-abuse investigators as “poor cousins”. No wonder we have an issue regarding the value that children have in our society. From this report Children are not real people. How very sad and what an inditement on all of us this is. And yet the political game continues and our children still suffer. Men and their games

  9. Ed 9

    I saw an article recently that referred to research on who pays most to charities – showing that the rich pay less both proportionately and in absolute terms.

    I cannot now find that article again – is anyone able to help with a reference?


Recent Comments

Recent Posts