Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

1 | ... | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | ... | 268

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1965106 27-Feb-2018 14:14

Geektastic:
networkn:

Kind of interested to see peoples impression of the removal of the youth employment rates.

What I can't get past, is why I would employ someone 15-20 when I could get an adult for the same wage, likely more experienced etc?

I'm inclined to the view that persons aged up to 18 ought to be at school.

From 18 onwards you're an adult, so your wages should be determined by the usual factors.

I'd be inclined to largely agree, but then some people aren't suited for school, and secondly, what about after-school jobs? I left school earlier than I expected to, and worked full time since I was 16.

I was plenty bright enough to go to university, but a variety of factors made it difficult to concentrate at school and I, unfortunately, didn't have a great sense of discipline instilled me related to study. It's a great regret.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1965401 27-Feb-2018 22:06

networkn:

Pumpedd:

This thread is more about people trying to protect JA than anything else. Mark Richardsons comments apply here as well. She is a big girl....she must stand up on her own feet..pregnant or not.

To be completely fair to JA, she has not asked for any special treatment as a result of being young, female, inexperienced or pregnant. I think some people just jump to her defense for those reasons. THAT is what needs to stop.

I think the interview by the 60 minutes guy was too far. I don't object to it with the same vehemence of some, but it didn't sit well with me. Asking questions about conception was creepy. I didn't have a problem with him stating she was attractive per se.

I agree. She hasnt asked for it. But everywhere I go including these forums people are so protective of her. Kinda wrong in so many ways. She is just a career politician.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1965477 28-Feb-2018 08:51

Another example of the lack of oversight and care spending public money that is in danger of becoming a feature of this government:

"A businessman investigated by the Serious Fraud Office over Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (Cera) property deals is a shareholder in a new government-funded project.

Although Gerald Gallagher resigned as a director of Renew Energy in August last year, he remains a 26 per cent shareholder in the company, which last week got a $350,000 grant to investigate the feasibility of a waste-to-energy plant on the West Coast."

"But Gallagher's involvement appeared to blindside Jones who didn't know his background, when questioned by Radio New Zealand.

Jones was now seeking urgent advice from officials.

"I don't want to say anything about the individual until I've taken a legal briefing, for fear of myself being embroiled in legal action," he told RNZ.

A top-level investigation last April found Gallagher and former Renew director Murray Cleverley tried to use their positions for their own financial gain."

Herald

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1965482 28-Feb-2018 08:55

networkn:
Geektastic:
networkn:

Kind of interested to see peoples impression of the removal of the youth employment rates.

What I can't get past, is why I would employ someone 15-20 when I could get an adult for the same wage, likely more experienced etc?

I'm inclined to the view that persons aged up to 18 ought to be at school.

From 18 onwards you're an adult, so your wages should be determined by the usual factors.

I'd be inclined to largely agree, but then some people aren't suited for school, and secondly, what about after-school jobs? I left school earlier than I expected to, and worked full time since I was 16.

I was plenty bright enough to go to university, but a variety of factors made it difficult to concentrate at school and I, unfortunately, didn't have a great sense of discipline instilled me related to study. It's a great regret.

I can't comment about after school jobs really. I went to boarding school 36 weeks a year from the age of 8, so never had one.
Of course in those days the socialist diktat of Minimum Wage did not exist to mess with the market setting pay rates.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1965495 28-Feb-2018 08:58

For all the people who complain that a few of us are focused on the negatives of this new Government, why don't you post what you consider the Government is doing well in, or succeeding in?

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1965496 28-Feb-2018 09:01

networkn:
Geektastic:
networkn:

Kind of interested to see peoples impression of the removal of the youth employment rates.

What I can't get past, is why I would employ someone 15-20 when I could get an adult for the same wage, likely more experienced etc?

I'm inclined to the view that persons aged up to 18 ought to be at school.

From 18 onwards you're an adult, so your wages should be determined by the usual factors.

I'd be inclined to largely agree, but then some people aren't suited for school, and secondly, what about after-school jobs? I left school earlier than I expected to, and worked full time since I was 16.

I was plenty bright enough to go to university, but a variety of factors made it difficult to concentrate at school and I, unfortunately, didn't have a great sense of discipline instilled me related to study. It's a great regret.

In my opinion the minimum wage is just for young (or new/inexperienced) workers. The youth rate, IMO, was for young people just doing part-time holidays jobs or similar.

Anyone else should be on a higher wage, unless of course they are the slothful kind of employee who doesn't want to work hard.

Unfortunately not all employers hold he same views.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1965499 28-Feb-2018 09:06

I am more than happy to pay people based on their merit/productivity/experience or work output.

I just don't see employers hiring 15-17 year olds when they could probably reasonably easily find someone more experienced for the same money. At $14-15 an hour you can probably take a chance on someone to give them a go, esp on smaller less complex jobs, but at $20.20?

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1965506 28-Feb-2018 09:18

networkn:

I am more than happy to pay people based on their merit/productivity/experience or work output.

I just don't see employers hiring 15-17 year olds when they could probably reasonably easily find someone more experienced for the same money. At $14-15 an hour you can probably take a chance on someone to give them a go, esp on smaller less complex jobs, but at $20.20?

I suppose you could just give them less hours?

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1965507 28-Feb-2018 09:19

networkn:
I am more than happy to pay people based on their merit/productivity/experience or work output.

I just don't see employers hiring 15-17 year olds when they could probably reasonably easily find someone more experienced for the same money. At $14-15 an hour you can probably take a chance on someone to give them a go, esp on smaller less complex jobs, but at $20.20?

If it's comparitive, that is, if the rate for an older or more experienced worker is higher than $20.20, then $20 is cheap.

Though I wouldn't want to pay $20 for a casual student holiday worker.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1965517 28-Feb-2018 09:29

Exactly, I don't see the justification to pay a student $20.20 an hour to weed my garden for example.

I'm happy if they want to raise the youth rate in line with the increase of Minimum wage by %, but to abolish minimum wage just means the only time a student wanting part time work in the holidays gets employed, is if there are no more experienced adults available.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1965528 28-Feb-2018 09:37

networkn:
Exactly, I don't see the justification to pay a student $20.20 an hour to weed my garden for example.

I'm happy if they want to raise the youth rate in line with the increase of Minimum wage by %, but to abolish minimum wage just means the only time a student wanting part time work in the holidays gets employed, is if there are no more experienced adults available.

Absolutely, in principle I agree with a minimum wage rise, but still keeping things in balance. And probably a student in your example wouldn't expect $20 an hour, even though they would enjoy it.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1965530 28-Feb-2018 09:38

rjt123:
networkn:

Exactly, I don't see the justification to pay a student $20.20 an hour to weed my garden for example.

I'm happy if they want to raise the youth rate in line with the increase of Minimum wage by %, but to abolish minimum wage just means the only time a student wanting part time work in the holidays gets employed, is if there are no more experienced adults available.

Absolutely, in principle I agree with a minimum wage rise, but still keeping things in balance. And probably a student in your example wouldn't expect $20 an hour, even though they would enjoy it.

Legally, with changes Labour is intending to make, there will be no choice as I understand it, but to pay them $20 an hour.

MikeAqua

7773 posts

Uber Geek

#1965670 28-Feb-2018 11:22

It's hard to criticise or praise anything this government has done. There is at this stage a general lack of done.

Many balls are still in the air. Several look like they will be tricky to to catch, hence some serious repositioning of headline targets like houses and trees. Joens reduced the tree target from 1B to 500m when intevriewed on The Nation. And they are no longer govt targets but NZ Inc targets. House built and trees planted by the private sector will be counted as govt delivering their promises.

On the trees I understand the govt is having significant issues finding land to plant them on and has re-tasked a bunch of officials from their regular work to find land (preferably by leasing it).

The new trees will be used to build some of the houses - Jones (on The Nation) and Twyford (on The AM Show) have both said so.

Mike

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1965679 28-Feb-2018 11:27

MikeAqua:

It's hard to criticise or praise anything this government has done. There is at this stage a general lack of done.

Many balls are still in the air. Several look like they will be tricky to to catch, hence some serious repositioning of headline targets like houses and trees. Joens reduced the tree target from 1B to 500m when intevriewed on The Nation. And they are no longer govt targets but NZ Inc targets. House built and trees planted by the private sector will be counted as govt delivering their promises.

On the trees I understand the govt is having significant issues finding land to plant them on and has re-tasked a bunch of officials from their regular work to find land (preferably by leasing it).

The new trees will be used to build some of the houses - Jones (on The Nation) and Twyford (on The AM Show) have both said so.

Do they know how long trees take to grow?

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1965686 28-Feb-2018 11:29

Geektastic:

MikeAqua:

It's hard to criticise or praise anything this government has done. There is at this stage a general lack of done.

Many balls are still in the air. Several look like they will be tricky to to catch, hence some serious repositioning of headline targets like houses and trees. Joens reduced the tree target from 1B to 500m when intevriewed on The Nation. And they are no longer govt targets but NZ Inc targets. House built and trees planted by the private sector will be counted as govt delivering their promises.

On the trees I understand the govt is having significant issues finding land to plant them on and has re-tasked a bunch of officials from their regular work to find land (preferably by leasing it).

The new trees will be used to build some of the houses - Jones (on The Nation) and Twyford (on The AM Show) have both said so.

Do they know how long trees take to grow?

Funny, I was thinking exactly the same thing. Maybe they are going to take from other already mature crops and use these trees to replenish what they take. I'd consider that cheating though.

1 | ... | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | ... | 268