Open mike 22/10/09

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, October 22nd, 2009 - 13 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

mike

We’re trying a daily “Open mike”.

This is a place for anyone to post comments on topics that might be of interest, and for any discussion following up on the comments. Over to you…

13 comments on “Open mike 22/10/09 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. travellerev 1
    22 October 2009 at 6:29 am

    The average New Zealander has this idea that parties like National presenting themselves as the middle class white guy party is all about making it right for the rest of us hard working middle class so to them it will come as a big surprise that New Zealand is number six on the list of countries with the widest income gap between the rich and poor and rising.

    • robin 1.1
      22 October 2009 at 7:34 am

      Holy selective smearing Batman

      “According to the OECD, New Zealand had the biggest rise in inequality among member nations in the two decades starting in the mid-1980s. The country’s economy emerged from recession in the second quarter, but with growth of just 0.1%, the central bank is likely to keep interest rates low until well into 2010.”

      And at No 1 on the list….Hong Kong

      “Renowned for its high concentration of Rolls-Royces, expensive real estate, and posh shops, the Chinese special administrative region has plenty of rich who enjoy showing off their wealth. However, Hong Kong also has one of the largest public housing sectors in the world, with about half the population living in government-supported or -subsidized housing estates. The city has no minimum wage—except for domestic helpers from the Philippines, Indonesia, and other countries.”

    • The Chairman 1.2
      22 October 2009 at 10:31 am

      It’s interesting to note that Singapore (a nation Key is inspired by) is number two on the list.

      It’s also worth noting that the Hong Kong Government derives a major proportion of its revenue from land. Land tax is one of the major taxes in Hong Kong.

  2. travellerev 2
    22 October 2009 at 6:44 am

    While New Zealand two years ago was rated number one in the press freedom ratings and it fell to the 7th place this year we are on the 13th place. I wonder why?

    Finland by the way is number 1 and the US is number 20.

    • lukas 2.1
      22 October 2009 at 7:25 am

      Amazing when you consider the recent piece on Helen Clarks relations with the press in NY in her UN job that was on Radio NZ yesterday. Can you really trust this rating if they have the US moving up when the Obama administration has declared war on Fox News?

    • robin 2.2
      22 October 2009 at 7:28 am

      Holy “NZ sucks campaign” Batman

      “New Zealand has slipped six places to 13th equal with Austria and Latvia, but still has the highest ranking of any Asian-Pacific country – ahead of Australia in 16th and Japan in 17th place.”

      “Respect for press freedom and lack of targeted violence against journalists enabled New Zealand, Australia and Japan to be regional leaders, the organisation said”

  3. Daveosaurus 3
    22 October 2009 at 7:30 am

    It is with regret that I must inform the public of New Zealand that their Tolleycopter is malfunctioning, yet again. The latest news is that, in order to make room for national standards testing, support for science at a primary level has been cut. Because, to this Nanny State, micro-managing the primary education system is more important than nurturing the genuine wealth creators of tomorrow.

    • Ianmac 3.1
      22 October 2009 at 9:09 am

      Her rationale for taking away the Advisory Service is rubbish. She said that perhaps a year or so later the Advisory Services could be re-instated. Just where are the Science Advisers for example going to be while waiting for a call up to Advise in 2011 or 12? Once you loose those skilled people they are gone.
      I do know of a school where they have increased the time spent on Numeracy and Literacy. The effect on teachers and kids has been a steady reduction in enthusiasm for learning. Science and Art provide the context for Numeracy and Literacy. Gone.

  4. Pascal's bookie 4
    22 October 2009 at 9:39 am

    That AF/PAK campaign sure is complimicated.

    http://www.newshoggers.com/blog/2009/10/dumbest-drone-strike-ever.html

  5. The Chairman 5
    22 October 2009 at 9:53 am

    Sweetener offered to fibre investors sees taxpayers being short-changed?

    In a bid to reassure private sector investors the Government will take on more financial risk.

    The Government still expects its investment of up to $1.5 billion to be at least matched by the private sector, but it could foot the entire bill if the fibre network became a white elephant.

    The Government will forgo its share of any dividends from local fibre companies for the first 10 years.

    Local fibre companies would initially be majority-owned by the Crown, through its investment vehicle Crown Fibre Holdings, but would gradually transfer from public to private hands.

    The Crown would retain a “golden share” (a share with enhanced voting rights).

    Full story here: http://tinyurl.com/yz2obp7

    So the taxpayer is paying for the infrastructure (private sector costs will be recouped through sales, which in the end also comes from the taxpayer/consumer).

    Effectively, the private sector is going to profit off the infrastructure we’ve paid and are taking the risk for.

    That’s just totally wrong and is a prime example of why we need to resurrect the public service model.

    This additional funding (1.5 billion) is due to the private sectors failure to deliver the promised technological advancements.

    If we are going to take all the risk fiscally backing the infrastructure and setting up a profitable business model, why give away all the reward to some unnecessary middleman? Socialising losses and privatising gains?

    The most effective solution would be to retain public ownership and provide the service at cost under the public service model.

    The whole objective is to provide the nation with cheap high-speed broadband. Therefore, the lower the overall cost the better the uptake will be.

    We are once again relying on the private sector to get it right. Their failure will be our expense and their gain will also come at our expense.

    It’s a lose-lose for that taxpayer.

    • Draco T Bastard 5.1
      22 October 2009 at 1:20 pm

      What a surprise – a business friendly (read – owned by business interests) ensuring that those businesses will get even more of the taxpayers $$$ for nothing.

  6. MikeG 6
    22 October 2009 at 11:49 am

    Why is Murray McCully doing his best to get NZ offside with the IRB? Do visitors to NZ really need to see yet another silver fern? I’m sure that they (the visitors) will be well aware that they are in NZ

Links to post

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.