Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | ... | 268
Glurp
8269 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3797

Subscriber

  Reply # 1920140 15-Dec-2017 12:30
Send private message

6FIEND:

 

Whether or not that proves Joyce was right or wrong is probably a matter of opinion...  but I'm more "concerned" than "relaxed" about how it's playing out.

 

 

I am generally relaxed, but of course I am not directly affected by most things that might rightly concern others. On a broader philosophical perspective, I think every stable democratic country, including ours, has adequate safety mechanisms to avoid complete melt-down. If the government really screws up, it can be recalled. If it only fails in a moderate sense, that will be remedied at the next election. Some seem to be anticipating disaster and looking for that in every statement or decision and I think there is an element of mild hysteria there. I don't think the government is doing badly so far. Yes, there have been missteps. So what? They will learn from their mistakes. Whatever this government does, I do not believe it will break New Zealand. I just wish some were more inclined to give it a fair go.

 

   





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


517 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157
Inactive user


Reply # 1920142 15-Dec-2017 12:32
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Pumpedd:

 

MikeB4:
networkn:

 

MikeB4:

You have to admit based on your posting history you don’t believe we do anything right in NZ and from your post one would assume it’s a miracle we created this nation or it even survives.

 

 

 

C'mon Mike, you are better than that.

 



I agree with you and 6FIEND it was a very poor post on my part. I am in too much pain these last few weeks and probably should not be posting, but it serves as a distraction. Maybe I should take a break and up the pain meds.

 

 

 

Its Xmas Mike..do what you like doing.

 

 

yes. And Mikes post wasn't aimed at any regulars here, it was at another slightly less frequent poster here, the one that doesn't like kids, without naming names.  Maybe that is already realised, just saying so if it isn't

 

 

A veiled reference to me presumably, interesting assumption, (presuming my assumption was correct) that I don't like kids. But I am not easily offended...

 

 


13437 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1920145 15-Dec-2017 12:37
Send private message
13437 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1920148 15-Dec-2017 12:48
Send private message

rjt123:

 

tdgeek:

 

Pumpedd:

 

MikeB4:
networkn:

 

MikeB4:

You have to admit based on your posting history you don’t believe we do anything right in NZ and from your post one would assume it’s a miracle we created this nation or it even survives.

 

 

 

C'mon Mike, you are better than that.

 



I agree with you and 6FIEND it was a very poor post on my part. I am in too much pain these last few weeks and probably should not be posting, but it serves as a distraction. Maybe I should take a break and up the pain meds.

 

 

 

Its Xmas Mike..do what you like doing.

 

 

yes. And Mikes post wasn't aimed at any regulars here, it was at another slightly less frequent poster here, the one that doesn't like kids, without naming names.  Maybe that is already realised, just saying so if it isn't

 

 

A veiled reference to me presumably, interesting assumption, (presuming my assumption was correct) that I don't like kids. But I am not easily offended...

 

 

 

 

It wasnt. You are new here, the others will know, and that poster not liking kids, is his/her own frequent comments


Glurp
8269 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3797

Subscriber

  Reply # 1920159 15-Dec-2017 13:02
Send private message

rjt123:

 

A veiled reference to me presumably, interesting assumption, (presuming my assumption was correct) that I don't like kids. But I am not easily offended...

 

 

 

 

I don't think it was aimed at you at all. Another here is a more likely target.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 895


  Reply # 1920173 15-Dec-2017 13:19
One person supports this post
Send private message

I dont understand why some of you are making "personal comments" when they are NOT necessary in a topic about Jacinda Adern. 


Glurp
8269 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3797

Subscriber

  Reply # 1920175 15-Dec-2017 13:21
Send private message

Mike said he wasn't feeling well. We all have bad moments.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


714 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 565


  Reply # 1920184 15-Dec-2017 13:27
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

What I read at that time was that the allocation of future funds (or whatever they called it) was located in a different section of the financial breakdown document. Also named differently. With the subsequent attention, and that they said it was fully validated, I find it a stretch that one person noticed 11 bill is missing when everyone else including the validators didn't? Joyce spelled out what it was, and they stated where it was in the document.

 

 

I've noted previously that Joyce completely fumbled the messaging on this matter...   But his point wasn't that it wasn't validated, or that the allocation for future spending wasn't there - just that it was dramatically less than normal.  (And as a consequence, if "normal" service was to continue, there was a big shortfall of funding.)

 

tdgeek:

 

Labour is spending more, we all know that, National will have spent less, and had more spare. Its been known for a while that Labour are running closer, and Robertson said that just the other day. They will set priorities, some things will be towards the end, others sooner. But, yes, less wiggle room for sure.

 

 

The point is not so much that Labour are spending more, it's that almost all of Labour's spending has been done in the first mini-budget.  As I said, Labour (previously) ran at about 2.5bn additional spending announced each year.  National (previously) at around 1.5bn.  Robertson will need to restrain future spending to less than a quarter of what the last Labour government did if he is to meet his own budget.

 

tdgeek:

 

As to why does Labour spend more, thats another subject. Are they catching up deferred spending too quickly?  Are they giving cash away too much? Are they wasting money?

 

 

That's an interesting enough topic (for some political tragics like myself) to justify its own thread :-)

 

But for the next 3yrs, Labour are promising to spend significantly less.  Not more.


517 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157
Inactive user


  Reply # 1920223 15-Dec-2017 14:17
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

rjt123:

 

tdgeek:

 

Pumpedd:

 

MikeB4:
networkn:

 

MikeB4:

You have to admit based on your posting history you don’t believe we do anything right in NZ and from your post one would assume it’s a miracle we created this nation or it even survives.

 

 

 

C'mon Mike, you are better than that.

 



I agree with you and 6FIEND it was a very poor post on my part. I am in too much pain these last few weeks and probably should not be posting, but it serves as a distraction. Maybe I should take a break and up the pain meds.

 

 

 

Its Xmas Mike..do what you like doing.

 

 

yes. And Mikes post wasn't aimed at any regulars here, it was at another slightly less frequent poster here, the one that doesn't like kids, without naming names.  Maybe that is already realised, just saying so if it isn't

 

 

A veiled reference to me presumably, interesting assumption, (presuming my assumption was correct) that I don't like kids. But I am not easily offended...

 

 

 

 

It wasnt. You are new here, the others will know, and that poster not liking kids, is his/her own frequent comments

 

 

 

 

Haha ok, I wasn't at all concerned if it was, but I couldn't pick any other recent semi-frequent poster on this thread :)


13437 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1920224 15-Dec-2017 14:19
Send private message

6FIEND:

 

tdgeek:

 

What I read at that time was that the allocation of future funds (or whatever they called it) was located in a different section of the financial breakdown document. Also named differently. With the subsequent attention, and that they said it was fully validated, I find it a stretch that one person noticed 11 bill is missing when everyone else including the validators didn't? Joyce spelled out what it was, and they stated where it was in the document.

 

 

I've noted previously that Joyce completely fumbled the messaging on this matter...   But his point wasn't that it wasn't validated, or that the allocation for future spending wasn't there - just that it was dramatically less than normal.  (And as a consequence, if "normal" service was to continue, there was a big shortfall of funding.)

 

tdgeek:

 

Labour is spending more, we all know that, National will have spent less, and had more spare. Its been known for a while that Labour are running closer, and Robertson said that just the other day. They will set priorities, some things will be towards the end, others sooner. But, yes, less wiggle room for sure.

 

 

The point is not so much that Labour are spending more, it's that almost all of Labour's spending has been done in the first mini-budget.  As I said, Labour (previously) ran at about 2.5bn additional spending announced each year.  National (previously) at around 1.5bn.  Robertson will need to restrain future spending to less than a quarter of what the last Labour government did if he is to meet his own budget.

 

tdgeek:

 

As to why does Labour spend more, thats another subject. Are they catching up deferred spending too quickly?  Are they giving cash away too much? Are they wasting money?

 

 

That's an interesting enough topic (for some political tragics like myself) to justify its own thread :-)

 

But for the next 3yrs, Labour are promising to spend significantly less.  Not more.

 

 

I get the first bit, but an 11B hole isnt the same as a narrower window of spare funding

 

The spending is all in the mini budget? Al of it? Robertson has said they are sailing close, so this spending isnt going to be spent next week, he has said they will prioritise and so on, so I take that as here is the spending, but we need to manage it, it will be spread out

 

Yes it is an interesting topic, well worth another thread, leaving this one just for JA commentary


13437 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2428

Trusted

  Reply # 1920225 15-Dec-2017 14:21
One person supports this post
Send private message

rjt123:

 

 

 

 

 

Haha ok, I wasn't at all concerned if it was, but I couldn't pick any other recent semi-frequent poster on this thread :)

 

 

 

 

All good. His comments are shall I say, quite noticeable.


714 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 565


  Reply # 1920249 15-Dec-2017 15:00
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

The spending is all in the mini budget? Al of it? Robertson has said they are sailing close, so this spending isnt going to be spent next week, he has said they will prioritise and so on, so I take that as here is the spending, but we need to manage it, it will be spread out.

 

 

HYEFU showed a budgeted operating allowance of $21.7bn for new expenditure.   The cost of the policies agreed to by the new coalition government was put at $15.1bn  Obviously, that money isn't spent on day 1 (It isn't all taxed on day 1 either) it is the estimated cost over 4 years to deliver on the policies that were announced.

 

That means that there is a total of $6.6bn left in the pot of money that the government expects to take from taxpayers out to 2021.

 

On the surface, that seems like a reasonable amount, but because almost all new government policies are "ongoing" in nature (Eg. Putting 100 new cops on the beat might cost $10m, but it continues to cost that much every year from now on...) this makes the policies cumulative in cost.

 

So, if they announce $660m of new stuff in next year's budget.  Another $660m of new stuff in 2019, and so on out to the budget for 2021 that they will write in their final year of this term...  then they will have allocated all $6.6bn.  (660m + 1.32bn + 1.98bn + 2.64bn)

 

Again, to an everyday person, this might seem like a reasonable amount.  But in terms of governmental scale, this will require Lab/NZFirst/Greens to limit new spending to the same amount as Ruth Richardson did in the 90's.

 

The only alternative to that is to increase debt further, or increase taxes.


11912 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3861

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1920275 15-Dec-2017 16:08
Send private message

MikeB4:
Geektastic:

 

MikeB4: The train services in Wellington are very good.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good one. The train "services" on the Wairarapa line are a complete disgrace, with lower punctuality than most trains I have used in developing countries.

 

 

 

They are almost always late, three days out of 5 last week my wife reported no air conditioning in the carriages and having to stand most of the journey several days as well despite paying almost $400/month for her ticket and they still rely on doddering oldies punching pretty holes in cardboard tickets rather than any form of modern ticketing system/

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"very good" are not words I would employ when talking about that train 'service' - ignoring the fact that the lazy ******** were inconveniencing every user by going on strike the other day as well.

 



The Wairarapa is a siding. You have to admit based on your posting history you don’t believe we do anything right in NZ and from your post one would assume it’s a miracle we created this nation or it even survives.

 

 

 

It isn't a siding, it's a train service which is well patronised by long suffering commuters to Wellington (who pay rates to GWRC) and which deserves to be run at least as well as you suggest the other ones are. It isn't - ask anyone who uses it.






1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 895


  Reply # 1920279 15-Dec-2017 16:13
Send private message

Rikkitic:

 

Mike said he wasn't feeling well. We all have bad moments.

 

 

 

 

I wasnt referring to Mike. He was the one who apologised. 


1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 895


  Reply # 1920283 15-Dec-2017 16:17
Send private message

6FIEND:

 

tdgeek:

 

The spending is all in the mini budget? Al of it? Robertson has said they are sailing close, so this spending isnt going to be spent next week, he has said they will prioritise and so on, so I take that as here is the spending, but we need to manage it, it will be spread out.

 

 

HYEFU showed a budgeted operating allowance of $21.7bn for new expenditure.   The cost of the policies agreed to by the new coalition government was put at $15.1bn  Obviously, that money isn't spent on day 1 (It isn't all taxed on day 1 either) it is the estimated cost over 4 years to deliver on the policies that were announced.

 

That means that there is a total of $6.6bn left in the pot of money that the government expects to take from taxpayers out to 2021.

 

On the surface, that seems like a reasonable amount, but because almost all new government policies are "ongoing" in nature (Eg. Putting 100 new cops on the beat might cost $10m, but it continues to cost that much every year from now on...) this makes the policies cumulative in cost.

 

So, if they announce $660m of new stuff in next year's budget.  Another $660m of new stuff in 2019, and so on out to the budget for 2021 that they will write in their final year of this term...  then they will have allocated all $6.6bn.  (660m + 1.32bn + 1.98bn + 2.64bn)

 

Again, to an everyday person, this might seem like a reasonable amount.  But in terms of governmental scale, this will require Lab/NZFirst/Greens to limit new spending to the same amount as Ruth Richardson did in the 90's.

 

The only alternative to that is to increase debt further, or increase taxes.

 

 

Whilst the budget does go some way to delivering where it is needed, I am so confused as to why they are basically giving it to everyone. Why not target it where it is needed and have some money left over for other initiatives?

 

Between students and mini budget there isnt enough money left for inflation proofing education, health and police etc. Guess its good to be living in a wealthy country.


1 | ... | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | ... | 268
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.