Posts by Marcelo Rodriguez Ferrere
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Laila Harre had Roger Kerr for breakfast, lunch and dinner on the minimum wage issue on Morning Report today.
I agree entirely. The age-old 'a minimum wage prevents [insert unskilled minority here] getting a foot-hold in the labour maket' fallacy was expertly rebutted by Laila. Peter Conway, chief economist from the CTU also did a good job showing the sense - both economically and socially - of raising the mimimum wage.
The question becomes: why does Morning report even refer to Roger Kerr as being the natural opposition to Laila Harre (and others)? There may be adequate arguments opposing socially progressive policies, but they are lost in the mix when Roger Kerr's comments degenerate into a Friedman/Hayek rant.
Roger Kerr isn't a professional economist. Nor does he adequate represent business, as was posted a couple of weeks ago here. So why should Morning Report give him any airtime at all? Laila categorically destroyed his argument, but it would have been more informative had his argument had any economic sense in the first place.
-
Why was John Key so reluctant to give an answer about the Tour in the first place? Was he worried some listeners might think less of him for supporting the tour? If so, were those listeners the sector of the voting public he really cares about? Probably not.
I really doubt that centre-Right leaning people would swing their vote to the left because of Key's support of the Tour. They probably supported it themselves. Or like Key, they think it's 'a long time ago' and ceases to be of relevance.
So, yes, the question becomes, why the equivocation? It won't be a good stance to take when he takes on the Prime Minister this afternoon...
-
"He did quite well too, and was awarded a flash for his "devoted contribution to the club".
"And yet now he is contrasted with Brash for being less nerdy."
As a current (university, former school) debater, I'd just like to defend Key's decision in 1977 to make that devoted contribution. Certainly it makes me like him a (little) bit more. Perhaps that smile isn't an indication of smugness but devotion to the National cause - (whatever that is these days...)
In any case, a history in debating will mean Key can give us a better show in the Debating Chamber than his predecessor. Not a bad thing at all.
Oh, and debating isn't nerdy for the record. It's ultra-nerdy. And we're proud of that fact.