Hard News: The Mood
256 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 11 Newer→ Last
-
A S,
alternatively, you could say that the things that damage roads (heavy trucks) should pay for their upkeep.
At the end of the day, who pays? It isn't the truckies. Its the general public, as always, because any price increase gets passed on. They already pay once for it already, why would any rational person think it made sense to pay twice?
That seems to be how the public is looking at it, and that could well be why the truck protest got so much support.
At least when road taxes cause prices to go up, the prices are an indicator of the cost of road transport. Subsidies would have hidden that cost.
An indicator of the cost of road transport? How much of the RUC take actually goes to better roads, and how much goes to other things? My understanding is that transport tax stays in the transport area, but as far as I can tell it doesn't mean that it gets spent on roading.
-
Russell, there's an equally lovely follow-up comment from LabourMustBeLiquidated this morning:
Do you not know that women are never ever responsible for anything that happens to them and are simply not capable of being violent themselves?
Just... wow.
-
The populace aren't that dense. There isn't much in it for them except for increased prices. Not really a great selling point.
They may not be that dense but I noticed quite some time back how quickly people jump to slogans (which they eventually believe without knowing why) that seem to come from 1zb or Leighton smith and they are also quite happy to start with "well I heard on Leighton Smith today....they even advertise!!!" It's time for a change" is particularly grating and not one person can constructively answer why when I ask. I have suggested with the economy sooo bad, the beer intake may have been reduced somewhat, then I spot that no it hasn't even done that.! Our country is a great lil' country. I cant think of a better one and I have been trying.We don't suffer here. We are not poor compared to many places in the world so I appreciate what we have and thank my lucky stars every day.
Right that's my mood today! As you were -
His comments on the Tony Veitch case:
Yeah, well, more fool you. There's a reason why I decided to scroll past that thread (and pretty much everything else Veitch-related) entirely, and it's not my hitherto undisclosed pre-cognative abilities.
-
Perhaps people realise perfectly well that truckies "paying their share" actually means the general populace paying more for everything via increased prices.
Exactly. I am trying, obviously not very well, to tease out how and why "the public" reacted, or perhaps didn't react overtly in the form of annoyance with the truckers. The truckers had their own agenda, but the public acceptance of it was something else - using it as an opportunity to vent? You could say, then, that the truckers' message was subverted.
There is no middle of the road outlet to articulate opinion - most people don't call talkback radio or write to the Herald or post online. But the public do use the high profile outlets they have available to express discontent. The fact that appears "irrational" is because there is no other frame to use. Only high profile, headline grabbers are reported. How is that any more irrational than the incongruence between values and policies espoused by Parties and their actions?
-
There is no middle of the road outlet to articulate opinion
But ... that's such a brilliant description of the truckers' demo.
-
Yeah, well, more fool you. There's a reason why I decided to scroll past that thread (and pretty much everything else Veitch-related) entirely, and it's not my hitherto undisclosed pre-cognative abilities.
Them's some scarey folk at kiwiblog. Perhaps David could name and shame people who make such comments?
-
No.
They did introduce a law that outlawed smacking. Smacking your children was legal before the passage of Sue Bradford's bill, and illegal following its passage. If that does not count as outlawing smacking then words have lost all meaning.
For me, the great pity about it all was the lost opportunity to make fresh legislation. It's a highly complex issue that rapidly became polarised and all discrimination lost. I think that some are unwilling to recognise the sheer ugliness that exists and the inability to find a truly workable response. A personal anecdote:
Some years ago, whilst living in another city, i called the police when I saw my neighbour beating up his naked wife on the front lawn. He was back the next day and from then on, made my life hell. Burgled my house and left a trail of destruction (no fingerprints, no proof), anything left outdoors - washing, firewood, toys plants - got pinched. I learnt to keep a minimal amount of petrol in my car, which did not have a locking petrol cap, or a garage to keep it in. Any time I went outside, he would crouch behind the fence and talk loudly about doing "someone" over in rather vile terms. Of course I moved out. The saddest thing was one of children giving me a flower "from mum" as I left. I had got a message to her that she could have sanctuary at my home anytime - she never came. I was told by a policeman that i had imposed my middle class values on these people and should have ignored them.
My point is that fear rules in some places and there are consequences for people who do try to do the right thing. I don't have a ready answer to it, nor do i think it's all a matter of legislation or "the gummint's fault". My personal answer was to move somewhere safer, but if we all did that, what would be left?
-
Talking of "The Mood" Canadians are up in arms over their iPhone pricing models. At a glance they look like something NZers can only dream of.
From the point of view of this Canadian, it seems like Rogers is gouging its customers because it can. This is a company that has always stuck its customers with additional system access fees and other nickel and dime charges. And people are fed up.
Best comment:
ha!
so you haven't seen the New Zealand plans then? Hope they provide vaseline with it..I would note that Apple are also pretty silent on the Voda deal. If these things do sell like hot cakes then, I'm sorry, I don't believe anyone who says we are going through hard times.
-
How much of the RUC take actually goes to better roads, and how much goes to other things? My understanding is that transport tax stays in the transport area, but as far as I can tell it doesn't mean that it gets spent on roading.
http://www.ltsa.govt.nz/funding/nltp/funding.html
<amateur calculations>
i found this... looks like the road user charges come to about $793M, fuel excise comes to $774M, state highway maintenance costs $1018M, local road maintenance costs $633. That makes an $84M shortfall, which the 10%(?) road user charge increase would cover quite nicely
</amateur calculations>http://www.publicaddress.net/system/topic,1205,hard_news_truck_off_etc.sm?p=57338#post57338
http://www.publicaddress.net/system/topic,1207,hard_news_the_mood.sm?p=57614#post57614 -
I would note that Apple are also pretty silent on the Voda deal. If these things do sell like hot cakes then, I'm sorry, I don't believe anyone who says we are going through hard times
I kind of agree with you Don (we're going to have to stop doing this :) ), but at the same time just because there were still people living the high life during the Great Depression, that doesn't mean it wasn't a very bad time indeed for a lot of people.
And if those things are being paid for by adding to our pretty worrisome levels of personal debt (and with the consequences that flow on when people can't pay it off) then we've one hell of an elephant in the room. Would you agree?
-
And if those things are being paid for by adding to our pretty worrisome levels of personal debt (and with the consequences that flow on when people can't pay it off) then we've one hell of an elephant in the room. Would you agree?
To a point. That's why the Cullen Fund and KiwiSaver are pretty important to our economy in the medium term. Two policies that will hopefully survive many changes in Government.
But the other point is that whilst it is obvious food and petrol prices are up it is not obvious that people are worse of than, say, 10 years ago. Maybe than 6 months ago but the long term trend is still steady improvement.
Again, I hope that trend survives many changes in Government and see no reason for it not to, unless someone cocks up badly.
-
Them's some scarey folk at kiwiblog. Perhaps David could name and shame people who make such comments?
Paul: Personally, I'd not have posted on this topic at all, and if I'd felt compelled to, I'd have put all comments in a moderation queue and weeded the psychos out. But, in the end, it's his house and his rules.
As recent reports have pretty strongly implied that Veitch is receiving legal advice, I really hope the DomPost is on rock solid ground. And while I'm not going to hold my breath waiting, I'd like some media outlets to engage in some honest self-examination about exactly what 'public interest' considerations were really involved here.
-
I'd have put all comments in a moderation queue and weeded the psychos out. But, in the end, it's his house and his rules.
Weeding the psychos probably involves simply deleting every other comment I suspect but I still think he kinda likes the psychos; it gives him something to denounce and boosts his hit-rate.
-
Weeding the psychos
I had an idea the other day, when I went to site that uses a simple arithmetic problem instead of a Captcha. You could have an intelligence test to validate posters, e.g:
Treaty Settlements have cost New Zealanders:
a. Far too much to featherbed them bloody maaaari.
b. Billions and billions of dollars
c. Less than the cost of an iPhone each. On the $250 plan. -
I'd like some media outlets to engage in some honest self-examination about exactly what 'public interest' considerations were really involved here.
Indeed. Am I the only one who wishes for the gory details to be reported after a conviction, or otherwise not at all?
-
Rich:
How about this:
Pick ONE option only :-
1) John Key is Ruth Richardson with a strap-on.
2) Helen Clark is kd lang with a strap-on.
3) All of the above.
4) None of the above.If that doesn't weed out all of the compulsive wingnuts, nothing will.
-
__Them's some scarey folk at kiwiblog. Perhaps David could name and shame people who make such comments?__
Paul: Personally, I'd not have posted on this topic at all, and if I'd felt compelled to, I'd have put all comments in a moderation queue and weeded the psychos out. But, in the end, it's his house and his rules.
True. I'd do it differently, put it that way. But, then, those guys would have been dismembered by the PA Women's XV if they'd tried that here. They're clearly not very bright.
Ironically, I suspect the real toll on David from giving the nutcases free reign would be commercial, assuming he's serious about generating advertising revenue. There aren't many advertisers who want to sit next to that kind of slime.
-
Indeed. Am I the only one who wishes for the gory details to be reported after a conviction, or otherwise not at all?
No you're not. But am I the only person who isn't naive enough to think Three isn't going to take every opportunity to sledge TVNZ (and vice versa), but wish that it wasn't disguised as hard news? I certainly thought the tone and exttent of Three's coverage of lthis on Sunday night wasn't strictly motivated by it's actual new value.
-
Aaargh! Let's try that again:
I certainly thought the tone and extent of Three's coverage of this on Sunday night wasn't strictly motivated by it's actual news value. News worthy? Debatably. A fricking hard-pron apocalypse, as the innocence of our children was destroyed! Destroyed I say! Hardly. Enormously embarrasing to a broadcaster that happens to be a direct competitor to Three? You bet your pert buttocks.
-
__if we're all going to be doing apocalyptic banality here's how__
Holy jaysus, I think my brain exploded. Owowowowowowowowow
-
Holy jaysus, I think my brain exploded. Owowowowowowowowow
Isn't it grand -- all those vocal pyrotechnics and treacle-thick orchestrations in the service of a tune of narcotic musical and lyrical banality.
-
True. I'd do it differently, put it that way. But, then, those guys would have been dismembered by the PA Women's XV if they'd tried that here. They're clearly not very bright.
Russell, as much as I respect as I have for the PA Women's XV I doubt that these guys are capable of understanding an alternative perspective. I also think it's encumbent on the blog owner to set the tone (which he does albeit at a low-standard... but there I go again).
-
Great to know Low over cooked it and the AAG has now been biffed in the compost. I wonder what flys & worms will crawl over it now.
Where's Kyle Chapman when you need him...?
They did introduce a law that outlawed smacking. Smacking your children was legal before the passage of Sue Bradford's bill, and illegal following its passage. If that does not count as outlawing smacking then words have lost all meaning.
This is surely disingenuous. It's not now illegal to smack children. What is now not possible is to claim "discipline" when you beat them.
-
F*&k Kyle Chapman is starting up again.
He's on a committee of wingnuts and last post was 4July08
Post your response…
This topic is closed.