Posts by Carlos
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I hate to be one proposing simple answers to complex questions but I strongly believe that the reason NZ can't convert it's near perfect set of conditions into a succesful economy is savings or spectacular lack thereof.
Australia's compulsory super savings has given them an enormous competitive advantage over us and what is our favoured retirement savings strategy? Borrowing money from a Japanese housewife, via an Australian bank to bid up the price of people's homes. Barking mad.
-
I have a question. What does Labour actually stand for ?
A fair question. As a 'swinging' voter I swung away from the Clark government in their last term because my perception was that they were increasingly standing for power more than principle.
Very little coming from the Goff team is convincing me this has changed (honourable exception: their shift on monetary policy) and this dog-whistling just confirms it. -
The four million New Zealanders elect the government known as the "crown" and are hence party to the treaty, just as the eighteen million Brits were in 1840.
The treaty is not, and never was, a personal treaty between the Windsors and Maori. It was a treaty between the British government (and it's successors, e.g. the government of NZ) and Maori.
But as Maori elect and and are elected to that government aren't the lines between the 2 parties to the Treaty blurred to the point where it is no longer useful as a 'constitutional' document. (Which in no way denies it's historical relevance or the need to address all historical wrongs). The Declaration of Independence is an example of a culturally significant historical document used as a reference point but not carrying legal weight.
-
Apropos nothing... if James Dean lived
-
Here in Denmark, one of the conservative parties tried to drum up some support by floating a law banning burkhas, which unlike the patches ban, is punishing the perceived victims. Polls immediately showed 65% support, but the idea has quietly fizzled as people wrestled with the practical issues of a ban.
Sadly in both countries the issue of having legislative dress codes being a slippery human rights slope doesn't loom large.The authorities here are having some success however fighting the gangs in what they call Operation Al Capone, where they're nailing them again and again on tax and other violations secondary to their apparently dodgy business models.
-
My favourite Friday blood sport Fox-baiting
[Fixed it. For YouTube (and some other) clips, just paste in the URL, including the http://, but no brackets or anything -- RB]
-
this looks like a typical example of what's wrong with NZ productivity: a couple around 60 with 3 rentals and a lifestyle block but not enough liquid assets to get them through even the next 5 years
Amen to that.
Kong is correct that there are way too many differences between Denmark and NZ to arbitrarily copy their system. However in my lifetime Denmark has gone from an economy dominated by supplying agricutural products to the UK (sound familiar) to one that supports global brands B&O, Carlsberg, Lego, Mærsk, Ecco and is a world leader in windmills, hearing-aids, thermostats, furniture and insulin amongst others.
I'm struggling to think of the Kiwi equivalents, and even if you play the 'Tyranny of Distance' card, theres a case for any Productivity Commission examing why we have struggled to produce similar value-added world beaters.But then the chances of Brash darkening the doorstep of this 'socialist paradise' in search of answers are very slim.
-
As someone living and working in Denmark over many years I would like to clear up a couple of points.
Firstly the immigration effect on unemployment. Yes Denmark has very strict immigration laws but these do not apply to most of Europe - I dont think a country of 5 million having open borders with about 400 million others is restrictive. (Possibly the unique language and high tax/cost of living are factors however.)
With respect to the 80% of salary unemployment benefit encouraging 'bludgers' - it should be pointed out that this entails making contributions (a form of insurance, ableit subsidised) and a one year qualifying period. Denmark also has a regular less generous safety net benefit for people not covered, with no other resources similar to NZ.
-
By claiming the label "New Zealander" for themselves a certain group of Pakeha are denying it to all other ethnic groups. That's an organised, aggressive and ignorant act, and resistance is to be expected.
Maybe, but I read Tze Ming's comments as conceding the label to 'a certain group of Pakeha' rather than resisting it.
-
On that definition I find it very hard to place myself in a seperate 'box' to my friends and family with Maori ancestry, whilst acknowledging that that will not be the case for everyone.
I would also acknowledge that there was strong championing of the 'New Zealander' issue by red-neck elements. I would resent them hijacking the term New Zealander.