Open mike 28/06/2015

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, June 28th, 2015 - 56 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen 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 …

56 comments on “Open mike 28/06/2015 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Saarbo 1
    28 June 2015 at 7:39 am

    Has anything highlighted NZ Heralds right wing/National party bias as much as the Auckland issue. So refreshing to read Metro’s great piece on this issue:

    http://www.metromag.co.nz/editors-blog/len-brown-the-brave/

    And these quote sum things up perfectly.

    The main reason we have runaway increases in house prices is that there are votes in it. The government believes home owners do not want it to control rising property prices.

    And the main reason the transport impasse exists is the government believes there are votes in that too. It will not allow anything that looks like a penalty for car drivers, and it does not believe public transport is the key to solving congestion on our roads.

    • sabine 1.1
      28 June 2015 at 8:26 am

      and yet the car drivers and home owners amongst the metro reading crowd will vote for national again and again for precisely the stated reason. Stupid, greedy, shortsighted. But as the old saying goes, i have mine and to hell with you.

    • Skinny 1.2
      28 June 2015 at 9:08 am

      There is plenty of soft Nat Jaffa’s that are starting to resent foreigners outbidding them on property. Add the resentment of close to 50,000 migrants arriving each year, many settling in Auckland and you have a catalyst for a blow back at the voting booths.

      Peters seems to be the only one making much noise. Labour have given Phil Goff Off the plumb Auckland Issues portfolio so he can enhance his changes of winning the Auckland mayoralty. If anyone needs to get angry it should be Goff Off. Come on you gutless wonder you should be all over this screaming from the top of sky tower. Perform or pass the portfolio on to someone who has some guts to front up.

      • Marvellous Bearded Git 1.2.1
        28 June 2015 at 11:13 am

        @Skinny
        Goff came out against the wharves. A 1000 times better than gutless Brown.

        • Skinny 1.2.1.1
          28 June 2015 at 11:46 am

          Goff Off played it safe by making the minimum amount of noise. He never pushed for the deep water port in Northland, Peters was campaigning in the buy election but had the sense to way into the reclamation debate. We all know Brown is woefully useless!

      • sabine 1.2.2
        28 June 2015 at 2:02 pm

        Phil Twyford is pretty good on the issue. But then its always a good day to just put down Labour it seems.

        • Skinny 1.2.2.1
          28 June 2015 at 5:57 pm

          Phil Twyford as Labour’s Transport spokesperson was very quiet on the issue actually, another play it safe stance. Admittedly he had been busy with Housing, but still it is his duty holding the portfolio. Spare me the put down nonsense I detest Labour wasting plum opportunities to be front footing issues that put them at the forefront.

    • Save NZ 1.3
      28 June 2015 at 9:09 am

      I think you will find that the government is not controlling property and transport due to receiving generous donations, to make money for themselves and ideology.

      Do not agree it is Home Owners fault.

      Most people agree with more public transport, but it is how it is implemented that is the problem.

      Most people myself included would expect the council to be spending our rates on transport for example, not propping up barristers by supporting illegal action by Ports of Auckland.

      It is the ridiculous waste of money, by the government and councils, that is one of the biggest problems and the hypocrisy of extra rating and taxes for transport and reduction of social services while they waste money against the interests of the rate payers.

      Labour should take a book out of the Nats, mimic the right discourse.

      Clean up government and councils to stop the out of control spending.

  2. Facetious 2
    28 June 2015 at 8:35 am

    The whole rates increase is a very bad joke on ratepayers. Blame Len Brown for his lack of leadership, and Rodney Hide for giving us the monstrous Super City. (Carnal) Left and (greedy) Right together to screw the population.

    • b waghorn 2.1
      28 June 2015 at 9:02 am

      So how would you fix the transport and housing problems?

    • Macro 2.2
      28 June 2015 at 7:45 pm

      Blame Key and co for failure to allow Auckland Council the proper process to raise the funds for developing needed infrastructure – so they have to lump it on ratepayers. By the way – if you live in Auckland – how do you feel about the possibility of Auckland in almost constant gridlock in a few years from now?

  3. Save NZ 3
    28 June 2015 at 9:06 am

    Almost $200 Million Donated to Representatives to Pass TPA

    http://economyincrisis.org/content/almost-200-million-donated-to-representatives-to-buy-yea-votes-to-pass-tpa

    On a similar note of ‘donations’, I actually think they should be called by their proper names, Bribes.

  4. te reo putake 4
    28 June 2015 at 9:31 am

    Colin Craig, hypocrite:

    “I think any ordinary person will realise a process when you don’t advise the person that you’re considering something, you don’t let them attend, you don’t even give them a chance to respond to allegations, is no proper process,”.

  5. rawshark-yeshe 5
    28 June 2015 at 9:48 am

    Long read, but worth it. The perfidy of Richard Cheney the Dick. This must never be allowed to happen here.

    http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/fracking-whats-killing-the-babies-of-vernal-utah-20150622?page=3

  6. Marvellous Bearded Git 6
    28 June 2015 at 11:28 am

    Greece voting right now on whether to have referendum on EU/ECB/IMF so-called “bailout package”

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2015/jun/27/greek-crisis-mps-referendum-tsipras-eurogroup-ministers-live

    Queues at the ATM’s overnight.

    • Marvellous Bearded Git 6.1
      28 June 2015 at 12:01 pm

      Greek parliament has voted 178-120 for a referendum but it looks moot after this statement (courtesy Zerohedge) form the Eurogroup:

      “The Eurogroup takes note of the decision of the Greek government to put forward a proposal to call for a referendum, which is expected to take place on Sunday July 5, which is after the expiration of the programme period. The current financial assistance arrangement with Greece will expire on 30 June 2015, as well as all agreements related to the current Greek programme including the transfer by euro area Member States of SMP and ANFA equivalent profits.”

      The financial markets will be interesting on Monday!!

      • maui 6.1.1
        28 June 2015 at 7:27 pm

        It’s going to be interesting times for the world watching on.. I assume the Government wants the referendum so they then have a mandate from the public to pull out of the Euro.

      • Tracey 6.1.2
        28 June 2015 at 7:59 pm

        The thing is, maybe Greece is playing a “nothing left to lose” game of chicken. At this point just maybe the EU and the bankers have more to lose if Greece pulls out cos they have to worry, that IF Greece ends up no worse off out than they are today, can find a better deal from another “bank” or Nation, which other EU countries might say “fuck it, we will default too”> THAT is one risk the IMF EU etc are taking by asking Greece’s fewer number of employed to work and pay tax to send out of their economy to meet interest payments…

        Since the austerity conditions attached to finance Greece’s unemployment has fallen not risen.

        • Kevin 6.1.2.1
          28 June 2015 at 10:19 pm

          Exactly. That is why the EU is playing hardball. They are terrified it will encourage other countries to tell them to sod off. I think it is appropriate that Greece be the first country to go down this path.

          • Tracey 6.1.2.1.1
            29 June 2015 at 1:01 pm

            Apparently there is precedent for sovereign default of debt and I am not suggesting defaulting will be easy for the Greek people but perhaps the best outcome is actually to give a 3-5 moratorium on interest payments…

            Perhaps printing their own money again might cause problems but it might also see more money in the local economy?

            BUT I definitely think that NOT just sitting meekly and nodding to the big boys would help Greece (as the previous government was doing while piling on more pain), so I say bravo for their stand. They are fucked whichever path they go down, for a while anyway.

  8. Sanctuary 8
    28 June 2015 at 12:29 pm

    It is time for the online left to be sure to expose at every opportunity the astro-turf “Auckland Ratepayers Alliance” for what it is – a out-and-out deceptive front for the extreme right, National party aligned so-called “tax payers union” created by Jordan Williams and that enemy of democracy, the right wing courtier David Farrar.

    http://www.taxpayers.org.nz/ratepayers_alliance_launch

    This so-called alliance tells lies about itself – on the “about” page of this “alliance” it claims the “Taxpayers’ Union” is a politically independent organisation. http://www.ratepayers.nz/about It has a couple of useful idiot muppets mentioned, presumably to give it a bit of credibility, but make no mistake – it is simply the right wing of the National party with a lampshade on it’s head as a disguise.

    This front group will try, by the look of Farrar’s frantic pushing of it, to run as a front for the Auckland Remuera elite and it’s hard right agenda.

    All Standardnista’s must be vigilant to expose this dishonest astroturf group in comments sections whenever it seeks publicity, be it on Facebook or in online electronic media. Attack them at every turn, and don’t let these anti-democratic right wing bastards get any media or popular traction through these sort of dishonest fronts!

  9. Philip Ferguson 9
    28 June 2015 at 1:12 pm

    One of the most shameful parts of NZ history is the White New Zealand policy that began at the start of the 1880s and culminated in 1920 legislation that finally barred the door to pretty much all Chinese immigration to NZ.

    I’ve stuck up seven lengthy pieces up on Redline on the development of the White New Zealand policy. The list is here: https://rdln.wordpress.com/2015/02/07/pieces-on-the-white-new-zealand-policy/

    A few minutes ago, I pasted up the 7th; it looks at the context of the 1890s parliamentary debates: https://rdln.wordpress.com/2015/06/27/white-new-zealand-pt-7-analysing-and-contextualising-the-parliamentary-debates-over-white-new-zealand-in-the-1890s/

    This latest piece examines what was happening in NZ society – NZ was now clearly a (capitalist) nation-state, in the early 1890s the long depression was still in process, the big estates (or a section of them) were being broken up, thwarted on the industrial field labour had turned to parliamentary politics and elected a LIberal government, in the early 1890s the suffrage movement was a big force.

    The main forces campaigning for White New Zealand were liberals, mainstream trade unionists, feminists, social improvers and do-gooders.

    Later, of course, the liberal racists would be joined by the early Labour Party, as we shall see in one of the articles to come.

    Phil

  10. Colonial Rawshark 10
    28 June 2015 at 2:19 pm

    Naomi Klein accepts invitation to Papal Climate Conference in Rome

    Says the Pope provides moral leadership on a topic too dominated by economic considerations.

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/28/pope-climate-change-naomi-klein

  11. Charles 11
    28 June 2015 at 3:41 pm

    Who or what am I, and what do I do? (Avoid post-plumber shock)

    (tl;dr skip to video at end)

    Feeling lost. We’ve all been there, at some point in our lives. Sometimes the answer is to do the modern equivalent of running away to join the circus, without having any acrobatic skills, and there is no circus anywhere near us, they wouldn’t have us even if we asked nicely and we‘re so confused that even the act of running away turns into a stumbling lolloping shuffle.

    It doesn’t matter how old we are, how much stuff we own, the balance of our bank account, or the long string of success or failure in our past. All we want is to be free to discover whatever it is that feels like it’s missing.

    So one day we’re sitting in a paddock together, me and a new friend of mine, and she was exasperated with herself and screamed out at the world that was far, far, away from where we were that moment, “What the fuck am I doing with my life!”. At the time, to my ears, it sounded ungrateful and ironic. You’ll get to hear a lot between the fence posts of a farm, doing what no one else really wants to do that much – unless they’re taking the wages back to the Islands.

    Such a place is one of NZ’s versions of The Circus for the Lost. It’s not very exciting, but has nice views, and while there is miles of wire there are no trapeze artists. You do get to hear a lot of detail about other people’s lives, although you never really meet the actual person, until maybe much later. So this gal was, despite her gold-star personality and high level of skills in a particular area; despite the considerable success she’d had overseas in her efforts; despite the more-or-less-privileged circumstances she (we) could maintain to even be where she (and we) was and were; she was discouraged and confused.

    And then there was the other dimwit, me, who had no idea which way was up, none of that gal’s talent, skill, or success, scratching my head thinking, she does know who she is, right, she knows what she can and does do, right? We weren’t young either. We were in our thirties, she was a few years older than me.

    Now the Buddhists just avoid all this trouble with a good belly laugh and a reminder that life is what it is – why encourage the anxiety? In NZ, though, we have a cultural aversion to large, perpetually jolly, people – by the time we’re ten we’re taught to be suspicious of them unless they come bearing gifts in December. Even the more yoga-pants oriented among us still want to know that our investment will return the percentage we thought it would. So we scrape around in self-help courses, community education, religions, go see an advisor, join the circus, find a counsellor or psychotherapist, or just talk to our friends endlessly about our troubles – trying to find some direction. It’s the Western way, and not many can completely escape it if they’re born into it. And in those books, lecture theatres, workplaces and coffee groups we find little snippets of information on what to do that doesn’t help one bit. Something is still missing. The steps are too far apart, or obscured.

    “All you have to do is buckle-up, stick at it, work hard and it’ll turn out. Takes time.”
    But time keeps running out. No amount of buckling, perseverance or hard work changes the situations they get into.

    “Get an education, choose an area that pays well and work hard!”
    They do have an education, but it’s “worthless”. No one will hire them

    “Start your own business!”
    With what? In what? How?

    “You have to really really really want it.”
    So what is that the definition of?

    “You have to get out there, off your ass and ask around.”
    They did, but couldn’t do it well enough. Everyone turned them down.

    “You just need to get back into the habit.”
    You mean you’ll make their life unnecessarily hard for kicks?

    “Keep your head down, knuckle down, don’t talk, pay your dues.”
    They found what they wanted, the thing they’re told they need – can momentarily attain it – but can’t hold onto it very long.

    The best we can see is pieces of a method but not the complete picture, the bits missing, who it might relate to or its overall relevance. Worse, you might run into this stuff:

    “Hey, Mary, these cakes you make, they taste great you should totally do this for a living!”
    Encouraged by her friends’ chatter, Jan makes several attempts, learns a lot, but ultimately fails. Why?

    “Find what you love and the money will follow!”
    Find what I love? What does that mean? Or you meet someone on your search who tells you if you were really doing what you loved it wouldn’t matter about them paying you below legal, unliveable wages.

    “Find out what makes you cry, and do that!”
    Some people don’t really feel all that passionately about anything, let alone love anything. Why should it matter anyway?

    “What are your interests? Find an industry that suits.”
    This person finds out that there is more to an industry than just applied skill and interest, and their attempts fail.

    And all the while, time passes, lots of it. These people still have to deal with their everyday lives, the additional task of neutralising repeated failure so as not to distort their ability to see straight, and culture and politics never lets-up telling them they’re lazy, bludgers, miscreants, losers. It’s not their fault. Not at all. In fact, there is nothing wrong with them that could be considered a fault.

    Why does “good” advice fail?

    Because to use “good” advice, people have to be the same personality type as the advice-giver (similar dominant cognitive functions), have very similar experiences within a similar culture (experience a similar trend in external events as the advice-giver did when they did what they did), similar intellectual skills (to re-interpret anything they are told to suit their specific situation), and hear the advice at the right location to act, and the right time in their life.

    Also, the advice-giver has to be particularly skilled to make sure the advice given carries all the necessary steps (which is very rare, most likely you’ll get slogans, as above). There’s a lot of details to consider when giving advice, and dismissing those details is more a favour to the ignorance of the advice-giver than the person who needs help.

    It’s how living in a bubble-of-belonging works. No one inside the bubble knows the steps to get in or out, because they never stepped outside the bubble and were born into it – they were moving along nicely inside the bubble because their personality type suited the values of the bubble. When you’re outside the bubble, the job of the bubble is to keep you out, and this is related to how privilege works. Unchecked, a person can unwittingly whack other people from inside the bubble, as with those slogan type advice snippets above. However, there is a happy ending to this story, because conforming to a culture of privilege is only one way to live your life, or one way to find a life to live, if you prefer.

    Is this an advice post?

    Nope, it’s more a unsolicited commiseration party, one you never knew you needed: However easy it is to do stuff once you find the start line or get into the swing of things, it can be difficult to find a start line or make that first swing in a world that is full of unusable, fragmented, misapplied advice – so lighten up on yourself. The people who rag on you for not being like them, they don’t know much.

    So what is this?

    Just undoing some of the common tangles before offering a different knot to try to tie-up loose ends. One particular piece of advice isn’t going to be universally suitable for everyone. 99.9% of the advice for finding direction I’ve heard in circulation has been totally useless to me. In it they ask questions that are usually oriented in one direction: What can we get from the World? Sometimes there’s slight variation: What do we feel we could get from the World? And if I hear another, “What would you do if you had all the money in the World…” again, I might just start burning down libraries. It’s amazing that human life has developed so far technologically, and yet no one can answer the simplest of questions – What am I? Who am I? Where am I?

    So when I heard a talk on TEDx recently, by chance, it caught my attention (because generally I don’t like TED talks. I think this one was part of a youtube autoplay). Here was someone changing the orientation of the questions: Yes, they were ego-centric and risked the associated pitfalls, but not as risky as most, they were even somewhat political,

    Who are you?
    What do you do?
    Who do you do it for?
    How do they change as a result?

    Here is the actual TEDx talk… credit where credit is due…

    How do they change? But… where’s the money… you didn’t mention passion… or finding what I love to do… or what I’m interested in…. or what I want to do… where’s the focus on what I get? That’s the point. These questions weren’t just about work, careers, personal sensory satisfaction or financial gain; they were about finding a personal reference point by noticing effect of actions; they were about identifying who you are at any particular time – and potentially working forward from there. How other people changed, and the name given to that change, was the description of what you did, and what you were. The obvious answers are obvious, but also there are hidden answers. For example, you might work at a gas station, and your name is Alice,

    Who are you?
    I’m Alice.

    What do you do?
    I pump gas, clean windows, check the oil, chat with people. Sometimes I’m here alone at night, watching the forecourt.

    Who do you do it for?
    You mean other than me earning minimum wage? I do it for the customers I guess. I mean, sure I work for the boss, but it’s the customer’s cars.

    How do they change as a result?
    They move on their way, knowing that they aren’t going to run out of gas, or their tyres ain’t going to pop on a dark road, or their engines burn out, or when I give directions, so they get to where they’re going.

    Alice works at a gas station, but she doesn’t often pump gas. She reinforces in people a sense of security, if they need it, reinforces a form of certainty that they might be running low on. She makes sure people don’t stop for avoidable problems. What is Alice really? What does Alice really do?

    Using that approach – a metaphorical interpretation of actions – anyone can locate where they are at, no matter where they are, regardless of socio-economic status. Everyone does something, and more importantly, they do it in a certain way and the effect it has is measureable.

    Although it’s not a silver bullet, it’s a lot more stable than thinking, “I’m plumber, therefore I fix pipes, dig holes and break small things. When I retire, or if I loose my job, I’ll be nothing, because I won’t be plumbing anymore.”. Avoid post-plumber shock.

    The title of the TEDx talk says “How to know your life purpose in five minutes”, which to me sounded a bit grandiose, because life circumstances often change, don’t they? People go through cycles with specific times for activities that come and go. “Life Purpose” isn’t always static. Also, that everyone’s life has an inherent purpose is a philosophical choice people make that might be true for some, but not a proven certainty for all… and the video takes ten minutes… so that’s funny too. I don’t agree with everything the speaker says (e.g. examining is living… for someone), but the questions are good for anyone stuck in common Western mind-traps. It did sound like a good way to track down some common themes that run through people’s lives.

    If people are thinking, “I need to do something, but what? There is so much going on in the world, but my skills don’t fit…”, or if they find themselves in any of the can’t-follow-good-advice catch-22s above and need to know what they are right now or have been while they’ve been in their current cycle, they can at least find that reference point and decide where to go from there. Some of the movement forward, after finding out, will take no effort at all, and may reveal why things didn’t work out earlier. It’s an out of the ordinary method, I thought, and useful to someone.

    • Tim 11.1
      28 June 2015 at 8:39 pm

      Thanks for sharing that Charles.

      • Chooky 11.1.1
        28 June 2015 at 10:27 pm

        +100…thanks Charles ….yes I am going to have to reread this tomorrow….there is a lot of thought in this…reminds me of a sociology text found in a university bookshop years ago ( I cant remember the name of the author but he was American and wrote 3 volumes and I was riveted…stood reading it for hours before i decided I would have to buy it)….the big existential questions…who am I? …what is my life purpose?…where do I fit into the scheme of things….questions of meaning

        …seems to me that networks, family and friends are really important these days….(to keep the wolves of alienation, anxiety and depression at bay, especially for those most disadvantaged… the unemployed, the young and the low income earner…the un housed, the mentally and emotionally fragile, the children and the elderly…and those without supportive families close by)

        …and that the little people have to stand up for themselves and their own human value …..and fight to get their rights/ wants/needs recognised …..they have to fight for their grassroots democracy ….against corporate, media , bankster, vested, overseas and systemmic religious institution interests….some of which are indistinguishable

    • maui 11.2
      28 June 2015 at 10:23 pm

      Thanks Charles, very thought provoking. I’m at a stage in my life where this is very appropriate. I find it interesting the expectations that capitalism has created, for instance it’s expected if you’re “working” you should be working a 40 hour week. Indeed in most cases this is what is required for survival.

      Also from doing some job searches on the net lately it seems the most frequent jobs going are construction, aged care, sales, administration. Either it was just me or most of the jobs seemed to be about keeping capitalism alive. There were few jobs that involved making the country/world a better place, I guess these jobs fall into what society calls unpaid “volunteer” work.

      I’ve also been investigating personality types lately (i.e Myers-Briggs) and it seems some personalities don’t like being told what to do and how to do it. Their whole world view is doing things their own way for causes they believe in. How could they then ever work effectively as an employee for a company?

      I was recently at a jobs expo and in a room full of stall holders there wasn’t much to get excited about. All the stalls were pretty sterile, commercialised and with an air of fakeness to them. One of the university stalls tried to lure you in with lego type robots on their desk – as if there was a job out there where you could build and play with robots all day.

    • Chooky 11.3
      29 June 2015 at 12:41 pm

      +100 thanks Charles….finally had time to watch the Ted Talk….and it is very good!…have passed it on!

  12. Penny Bright 12
    28 June 2015 at 7:22 pm

    Familiar with the work of Jane Burgermeister?

    Jane is providing regular updates of developments in Greece …. FYI

    EUROPE MUST SWITCH OVER FROM THE PRIVATE CREATION OF MONEY TO SOVEREIGN MONEY IMMEDIATELY

    Central to eurozone plans to handle a Greek default must be a switch over from the private creation of money to sovereign money.

    A default is now on the cards after controlled Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras torpedoed negotiations with the announcement of a trick referendum without warning the Greek delegation.

    http://www.handelsblatt.com/politik/international/auch-griechische-delegation-ueberrascht-tsipras-verschwieg

    A referendum makes a default inevitable but also blocks legislation to manage that default.

    As a result Greece will now default in chaotic circumstances, the Syriza government could be toppled, social division will increases and the danger of a civil war looms. The Greek parliament is due to vote on the referendum tonight.

    The impementation of the Chicago Plan Revisited could, and must, be done by legislative decree immediately. It would bring a return of prosperity to Europe. It would also drain the bankers of the funds they use to control the media and stage false flags and pave the way for political stability.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/9623863/IMFs-epic-plan-to-conjure-away-debt-and-dethrone-bankers.html

    Europe’s leaders have dodged the necessity to end the private creation of money, and in doing so, have brought Europe to the brink ot disaster.

    Even Martin Wolf from the Financial Times warned last year that private banks must be stripped of the power to create money.

    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/7f000b18-ca44-11e3-bb92-00144feabdc0,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F7f000b18-ca44-11e3-bb92-00144feabdc0.html%3Fsiteedition%3Dintl&siteedition=intl&_i_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.ie%2F

    Iceland has already prepared legislation to make the transition, and other countries must follow suit.

    If European leaders do not act soon, chaos may engulf all of Europe. It cannot be ruled out that the ECB and German central bank will be razed to the ground altogether by angry Germans, when they realize they have to foot the bill for Greece’s fractional reserve banking debt and their money is worthless.

    The bank runs in Greece are just a foretaste of what could happen across Europe in the coming days unless the creation of money is taken out of the hands of private banks and returned to soveriegn national banks.

    • G C Cameron 12.1
      28 June 2015 at 7:40 pm

      Well Penny, if banks are stripped of their ability to create money and can only loan out deposits – I hope the banks loan out your savings first. How would we expand the money supply Penny? Would the bank phone the government every time someone wants money for a house – a bit inefficient Penny!

      Or Penny, are you suggesting people only get home loans from the government directly?

      • McFlock 12.1.1
        28 June 2015 at 8:06 pm

        While there’s no real problem with your second option, the first is already the case. Only a moron would suggest that banks would employ someone to draw funds from the government for each and every mortgage, just because their reserve ratio needs to be 1:1.

      • Macro 12.1.2
        28 June 2015 at 8:52 pm

        Restricting banks lending on houses to only the amount of bank deposits is exactly what is needed. At present overseas banks are exporting billions in profits from NZ in money created solely from their unmitigated lending. This is not only ripping off the people of NZ – but also fuels the housing market causing escalation and inflationary pressures in the housing market.The only time where banks should be allowed to lend above and beyond their deposits is where that money is going into the creation of productive capacity and jobs within the economy. Lending on existing housing does not do that.

        The need for them to “have to create” all the extra money so that people can buy a house is a direct result of them creating and inflating the price of houses in the first place. If money was restricted – the price of houses would fall. What needs to happen is a slow but steady credit squeeze slowly reducing the money supply so that people would have surety in a managed reduction. Houses would then fall into line with the prices of other capital items in the economy, and not be overvalued as they are now.

        This is not a new concept nor is this the first time that economist have queried the freedom of allowing banks to create money unchecked. John Mc Murtry in his book “Unequal Freedoms – the Global market as an ethical system” Published in Canada in 1998 states on pp 316 -317

        How ca a regime so prejudicial to the public good persist with so little public opposition? The answer is that what is no seen is not opposed. Significantly, the Global market’s international co-ordinating body that has led the substitution of privatised government bonds for bank reserves is the Swiss based Bank of International Settlements, a socially accountable private banker committee that plots the world’s norms of money creations and supplies outside of the public’s gaze. The Bank Of International Settlements originally set up to bring German war reparations under banks control before the 1929 crash and Great Depression, later handed over Czechosolvarkia’s gold to Hitler after his invasion of Prague in 1938. Today it leads a policy of abolishing all reserves for bank loans, a carte blanche secretly passed into law in 1991. The banks view is that every one must have collateral for loans, but banks themselves do not have to have cash reserves to back up loans to governments or to individuals. Cash reserves are called an “unfair tax”, an Orwellian conception that Central Bankers cheerfully repeat. The logic of the bankers’ code exempts them they themselves prescribe as inviolate to everyone else. This is another symptom of our social disorder.

        He goes on – but I shall end there – so what Penny has referred to is not out of left field – nor it is un-thought – it is the concern of many who prefer to take a more expansive view of economic policy than the limited and failed economic policy of the conventional “wisdom”

        • G C Cameron 12.1.2.1
          28 June 2015 at 9:35 pm

          Well what Penny is suggesting is out of left-field because she suggested stopping banks (expanding the money supply by) creating money in the form of loans. If banks used a ‘fractional reserve 1:1 ratio’ – Banks would still be creating money through loans.

          Penny originally suggested banks should be “stripped of their ability to create money” – obviously she has amended her post~!!!

          • Macro 12.1.2.1.1
            28 June 2015 at 10:12 pm

            At the present time we have given Banks carte blanche to create money at the press of a key board. This is unhealthy to our economy and has to stop. Banks should be limited a 1:1 lending ratio on existing houses – they create no new productive capacity, nor extra employment. Obviously having let the cat out of the bag it is going to be extremely difficult to get it back in, and many people would suffer if a direct limitation was imposed at once. The only way banks can effectively be brought into line now, is to manage a steadily tightening credit squeeze with full public knowledge of why it was happening, and with full advice as to how and when it was being implimented, with appropriate advice for those affected, in order that people could plan accordingly.
            Yes those who buy at the top of the market would find themselves with a house that would not sell for what they paid. This is going to happen sooner or later anyway when the market collapses in the not too distant future.
            http://www.3news.co.nz/tvshows/paulhenry/interviews/reserve-bank-fears-housing-bubble-will-burst#axzz3eLks5tVX
            http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/picking-stocks-and-housing-bubbles-ck-150761

            A housing bubble occurs when there is an accelerating growth in real estate prices without a commensurate increase in the underlying fundamental value, Greenaway-McGrevy said. The bubble ends when the ability of people to buy or rent properties is compromised.

            “Eventually at some point economic fundamentals limit the degree to which people can pay for property,” he said. Income was the biggest factor. “If it becomes hard for people to rent or purchase a property in Auckland then you will begin to see demand for housing in Auckland tail off,” he said.

            In Auckland that point has not been reached.

            “Buyers are wary of being priced out by further increases in prices so as a result seem to be willing to pay premiums to secure properties,” said Quotable Value’s Auckland valuer James Wilson said.

            “Investors are still very active in the market, capitalising on low interest rates, high equity across their portfolios and rapidly rising prices.”

            http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/68222217/Aucklands-housing-bubble-expected-to-spread

            • G C Cameron 12.1.2.1.1.1
              28 June 2015 at 10:38 pm

              I disagree with having a ‘reserve ratio of 1:1’ – the money supply should be expanded as need. What you are suggesting sounds an awful lot like austerity.

              I like the BitCoin currency because it’s not dependent of continued expansion unlike ALL other paper currencies I know of.

              • McFlock …
                28 June 2015 at 10:52 pm

                The money supply is still expanded. Just not by the banks, whose primary focus is on their short term profit.

                It’s the reserve bank that expands the money supply by lending government bonds.

                • G C Cameron …
                  28 June 2015 at 11:27 pm

                  Lending to The Government and lending to Private Citizens are two different things. Though both expand the money supply. I don’t see the whole country lining up outside The Reserve Bank to take out loans.

                  I disagree. The money supply would be expanded when banks loan out money. The only time it would NOT be is if:
                  A. The bank takes your money (deposit) without your permission and loans it to your neighbour (which is theft)
                  B. The government outlaws banks and becomes the lender

                  • McFlock …
                    28 June 2015 at 11:43 pm

                    Are you shitting me? The bank doesn’t label your money, it promises you it will give you back that amount of money when you ask for it.

                    “Your” money is almost immediately lent to someone else or used to pay a depositor who is making a withdrawal.

                    If you ask for your money, and it can’t pay you back, it would get in shit – insolvency rumours, run on the bank, bam it’s broke. So if it lends to a hose purchaser at 6% to get a profit, what is the bank to do in case you want your money back? It borrows from the reserve bank at 3%. It credits your account 2%. And makes 1% profit.

                    With a fractional reserve of 10%, a bank borrows $1million from the reserve bank. That covers it lending up to $10million. Hence the expansion in the money supply.

                    With a reserve of 1:1, if the bank borrows $10million it can only lend out $10million.

                    The reduction in elasticity therefore gives the reserve bank more direct control over the economic accelerator. It would only be the RB that creates the cash (the digits it lends to the banks).

                    Nobody other than banks need borrow from the reserve bank – the banks just borrow the aggregate of what they think they’ll need at that particular OCR.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      28 June 2015 at 11:49 pm

                      Nobody other than banks need borrow from the reserve bank – the banks just borrow the aggregate of what they think they’ll need at that particular OCR.

                      Indeed. And ordinary people and companies cannot have accounts with the RBNZ; only registered banks.

                    • Colonial Rawshark …
                      28 June 2015 at 11:55 pm

                      If you ask for your money, and it can’t pay you back, it would get in shit – insolvency rumours, run on the bank, bam it’s broke. So if it lends to a hose purchaser at 6% to get a profit, what is the bank to do in case you want your money back? It borrows from the reserve bank at 3%. It credits your account 2%. And makes 1% profit.

                      the other thing to note is that the bank can always pay out the money first in the form of an electronic credit to your nominated bank account, and go looking for any additional reserves it needs to balance things out at the end of the day (either on the open market or from the RBNZ) *afterwards*.

                    • G C Cameron …
                      28 June 2015 at 11:59 pm

                      The Bank doesn’t loan my money out as such, it creates money on top of my deposit and loans that out. Then the whole process starts again when the newly created money is deposited.

                      The Reserve Bank is creating the money you say, ok fine, BUT the demand for the money creation is coming from the likes of ANZ, ASB, BNZ – so directly or indirectly these bank are creating the money. And dynamically (and corruptly sometimes, granted) responding to consumer demand.

                      Again, I don’t see the whole of New Zealand lining up outside the Reserve Bank to take out a loan.

                    • McFlock …
                      29 June 2015 at 11:54 am

                      BUT the demand for the money creation is coming from the likes of ANZ, ASB, BNZ – so directly or indirectly these bank are creating the money.

                      …but the demand for the banks to lend money that the reserve bank created comes from people who wish to borrow money, so by you logic mortgagees directly or indirectly create money.

                      I think you’re running around in circles. The point being, however, that a 1:1 ratio makes government policy, not bank self interest, the major determinant of the money supply.

                  • Colonial Rawshark …
                    28 June 2015 at 11:47 pm

                    I disagree with having a ‘reserve ratio of 1:1′ – the money supply should be expanded as need. What you are suggesting sounds an awful lot like austerity.

                    Expanding the money supply would be done either by the central bank (RBNZ) increasing central bank money available to the retail banks and instructing the retail banks to increase certain types of lending as the economy is deemed to require – or by Government spending the money into existence, investing those monies into strategic areas of the nation.

                    The retail banks could then take that increased availability of money and act as savings societies (which use a reserve ratio of 1:1) to extend private loans into the economy.

                    So no, it wouldn’t necessarily be austerity, its just that the Government determines whether the money supply needs to be expanded or tightened, and for what purposes.

                    Of course, we also need to be cogniscent that the world bankster cartel have taken down entire nations for less.

                    • G C Cameron …
                      29 June 2015 at 12:11 am

                      Good Post, I’m inclined to think you’re onto something with saving societies (it sounds good anyway). However, the ‘Government determining whether the money supply needs to be expanded’ – I’m not sure how they would determine that? Or if it would be more dynamic than the current system.

                      BitCoin is the best currency I’ve ever seen. Your ideas are interesting for sure Colonial Rawshark .

    • G C Cameron 12.2
      28 June 2015 at 8:06 pm

      Granted you did say private banks – I suppose there is something/much to be said for that in our current ‘reserve banking system’. Over issuance of new currency (money printing) obviously devalues a currency (see history for examples).

    • Chooky 12.3
      28 June 2015 at 8:12 pm

      Interesting discussion on the issues…

      ‘Greek pain’

      http://rt.com/shows/crosstalk/269752-greek-pain-eurozone-creditors/

      “Again Athens finds itself at loggerheads with its creditors, particularly the IMF. The Greeks appear to be willing to do only enough to stay in the Eurozone, while the rest of Europe is willing to offer it just enough support to stay afloat – all awhile making the Greek economy almost impossible to grow. Is the Euro a failure?

      CrossTalking with Mitch Feierstein, Stephen Haseler, and Scheherazade Rehman.

      • G C Cameron 12.3.1
        28 June 2015 at 8:31 pm

        I wouldn’t call the Euro a failure – it’s a unification of Europe at best, succeeding where many failed. The cracks seem to be showing though. Prophetically speaking I’d suggest on the horizon is the fast pace emergence of a religious system (papal), which will begin dominating Europe and the political systems therein.

        I have no doubt the Greek people are being denied dignity and austerity needs to end. Greece have been offered participation in the BRICS bank – so maybe some light at the end of the proverbial ‘tunnel’ for them?

      • Kiwiri 12.3.2
        29 June 2015 at 1:41 pm

        On a different note, Turkey must be breathing with a big sigh of relief that, despite their constant knocking on the doors of the white Judeo-Christian club, they were fobbed off with tonnes of excuses constantly and may well have saved themselves of a lot of ‘pain’.

        Let me guess – Turkey is not that enthusiastic about joining the EU now?

    • vaughan little 12.4
      29 June 2015 at 3:49 am

      thanks penny.

  13. b waghorn 13
    28 June 2015 at 8:38 pm

    http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11472481
    An interesting opinion on what’s happening in the antarctic.

    • Macro 13.1
      28 June 2015 at 9:03 pm

      wow! an excellent article from the Herald – not normally given to such in depth articles on this topic.