 |
| John Key's Cabinet meet to discuss the economic situation |
For those of you who thought John Key's "brighter future" was something other than a roaring bonfire upon which the hopes and aspirations of all but a privileged few are being thrown, how are you feeling now about your voting decision?
Couldn't resist...had to steal post...
ReplyDeletehttp://robertguyton.blogspot.co.nz/2012/03/fish-on-fires.html
Reading Naomi Klein on disaster capitalism, explains why they find it necessary to put us deeper in debt and fuck up NZ's economy.
ReplyDeleteWidespread industrial action - by Unions affiliated to the Labour Party may not be the harbinger of doom that you suggest.
ReplyDeleteeconomic growth projections revised downwards - Any budget that is not revised downwards when economic conditions deteriorate is a piece of academic idiocy.
more job losses - Why do Unions have a "last on, first off" policy if it is not a fact of life?
attacks on the welfare safety net - not on the safety net, that will always be there. Do you not understand what a safety net is?
selling our strategic assets - Do you not understand that anything more than 51% shareholding is a controlling interest? The strategy remains with the majority.
and no strategy to grow our economy - if it was easy, we would be doing it already.
For those of you who thought John Key's "brighter future" was something other than a roaring bonfire upon which the hopes and aspirations of all but a privileged few are being thrown, how are you feeling now about your voting decision? - Wasn't it a shame that the alternative Parties were so unappealling?
Phoenix
Phoenix, have you even begun to comprehend the long term damage to the country's balance sheet that privatisation will inflict?
ReplyDeleteNo-one said it was easy but simply replicating what's tried and failed before isn't a strategy either.
The most successful amongst us, terryb, are those to whom failure is the best teacher. They learn from the mistakes of others, and they test their own inventions to destruction. Weaknesses are conquered. You and I enjoy the fruits of those who pave the way with not only their courage, but with their attention to detail, and the elimination of failure. Where you and I might prefer to say "it will never work", they get on with making it work.
ReplyDeleteIn your own words "..simply replicating what's tried and failed before isn't a strategy either.
Phoenix
Is that a direct quote from Atlas Shrugged?
DeleteSteven Joyce I think.
DeleteOK Phoenix, I work for myself and have done so for well nigh 8 years now so I do understand a bit about getting on "with making it work". And yes failure is a great teacher indeed. But aside from quoting platitudes what are you saying? Every time I have raised the question of the long run effects of privatisation on our trade deficit the privatisation proponents responde with either a deafening silence or, as in your case, repetition of platitudes urging us to believe and it will be good. Well, like Scott, I'm a lawyer and in our world, evidence, not faith, is what wins arguments (and makes us profitable). So rather than try and patronise me how about engaging in some robust discussion using things called facts?
DeleteEvidence, terryb? Facts? In this exchange you have provided no evidence, and certainly no facts.
DeleteActually, my comments were not so much pro-privatisation as against defeatism and ideological blindness, where faith, or lack of it, is used as persausion to the unthinking.
Phoenix
"...my comments were not so much pro-privatisation as against defeatism and ideological blindness, where faith, or lack of it, is used as persausion to the unthinking."
DeleteOh so you're not a tory then?
You didn't provide any facts yourself btw. You just exhorted us all to worship the uber-rich for allowing us to live among them (as long as we don't get too close).
OK Phoenix on the assumption that you are not a troll are you really advancing the argument that if we believe it will be true?
DeleteI’m assuming not so I’ll begin by citing Brian Fallow who has described the privatisation proposal as ”a solution in search of a problem”. You’ll recall that the reasons for partially privatising the power companies have changed over the past year; at times it’s been about paying down debt, create a future fund, pay for new schools. This lack of clarity doesn’t inspire me allied with Fallow’s conclusion that the sales would not be “the solution to any fiscal problems”.
A major benefit of the privatisation would be to deepen the NZ Stock Exchange which would generally be a good thing so far as I am concerned. However, as Brian Gaynor points out in today’s Herald “the NZX's domination by regulated and monopolistic organisations is likely to increase with the proposed listing of Mighty River Power, Meridian Energy and Genesis Energy”. So the privatisation of the power companies is a bit of a mixed blessing.
As Brian Fallow also points out ”if "Mum and Dad" investors reduce their bank deposits, for example, to invest in the SOEs then, all else being equal, the banks will have to increase their offshore borrowing.” which will do nothing for New Zealand’s national savings. So the partial privatisation doesn't really seem to provide anything of great benefit to NZ.
And that's before the long term problem of how the privatisation will affect our investment deficit. For the purposes of measuring the investment balance if 25% of the shares are held by foreign shareholders, then that proportion of the profits will be deemed to be a liability of the country regardless of the actual remittances. It's the cumulative effect of this which has resulted in our steadily declining investment position. Why on earth would we want to increase that problem?
No matter how much you believe privatisation is not the answer.
@ Guy Smiley
Delete"You didn't provide any facts yourself btw." - No, I did not, nor did I claim to. All I provided was my opinion.
"You just exhorted us all to worship the uber-rich..." - I did not do that either. I was making a case for people who are successful. Let me expand with three examples of people who fit my description, none of whom could be described as "uber-rich".
1. NZer of the year a couple of years ago, Sir Ray Avery, took over from eye specialist Fred Hollows and expanded the artificial lens making capability in third world countries using local labour. Avery's life story is inspirational, from a childhood of neglect and abuse in England, where he spent part of his teen years living under a bridge, to an entrepreneurial analytical chemist whose current project is a hightech incubator for premature babies which he is developing in his garage.
2. I recently read the (auto)biography "When People Matter Most" by Colin Prentice with Ian Hunter. Prentice was a Secondary School Principal who achieved remarkable results with Macleans College and Mt Roskill Grammar School. I did not know of Colin Prentice before reading the book, and I have heard nothing of him since. His book shows some of the practical remedies to overcoming under-achievement that can be undertaken in our public schools. His results are testament to vision and its implementation. It is a simple recipe for success, but it did leave me wondering why his achievements are not common practice in our schools.
3. Arthur Lydiard coached three middle distance athletes to Olympic glory in the 1960 Rome Olympics. Peter Snell (800m gold), Murray Halberg ( 5000m gold), and Ray Puckett (marathon bronze). These successes required an enormous amount of faith on the part of the athletes, but they put into practice what Lydiard told them.
Accepting failure played no part in lives of any these people.
Phoenix
@ terryb
Delete"You’ll recall that the reasons for partially privatising the power companies have changed over the past year; at times it’s been about paying down debt, create a future fund, pay for new schools." - Perhaps there is scope for all three, maybe more.
"This lack of clarity doesn’t inspire me..." - Fair comment. The Government's case will need to be explained with clarity if it intends to proceed with the proposal.
"...allied with Fallow’s conclusion that the sales would not be “the solution to any fiscal problems"." - Fallow's "conclusion" is still just an opinion, however compelling it might be.
"As Brian Fallow also points out ”if "Mum and Dad" investors reduce their bank deposits, for example, to invest in the SOEs then, all else being equal, the banks will have to increase their offshore borrowing.” which will do nothing for New Zealand’s national savings." - Either the banks borrow offshore, or the Government (taxpayers) borrows offshore. Do you have a preference?
Banks have been steadily reducing the rate of return on bank deposits belonging to investors. Isn't the argument also for getting bank deposits out into the market economy?
Aren't all banks, except Kiwibank, "foreign" owned?
"For the purposes of measuring the investment balance if 25% of the shares are held by foreign shareholders, then that proportion of the profits will be deemed to be a liability of the country regardless of the actual remittances." - Foreign investors will be "lending" their funds to the NZ economy in return for the dividend (return on their investment).
Any such foreign investment would otherwise be funded by borrowing by the NZ Government for the same amount.
Phoenix
"You’ll recall that the reasons for partially privatising the power companies have changed over the past year; at times it’s been about paying down debt, create a future fund, pay for new schools." - terryb, lack of clarity aside, if this should go ahead, would you be against the proceeds going to:
Delete1. paying down debt
2. creating a future fund
3. paying for new schools
Should the Government fund a new school (for instance) by:
1. A Government bond paying (say) 7% for 8 years
2. A mortgage over the property at (say) 7% for 8 years
3. Investment by Kiwisaver Fund at (say) 7% for 8 years
4. Selling a minority shareholding in utilities costing (say) 7% in lost revenue over 8 years
5. Borrowing offshore at (say) 7% over 8 years
6. Reducing Government spending in other areas
7. Allowing a Charter School to meet the need (at the per capita cost of public schooling)
8. Selling redundant assets
9. Raising new taxes (unspecified method)
Phoenix
" they test their own inventions to destruction"
ReplyDeleteGuess that's what Key's doing now...
They are either stupid or puppets - they'd like us to believe the former.
ReplyDelete