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.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13
18738 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 2362975 29-Nov-2019 15:21
Send private message quote this post

sir1963:

 

tdgeek:

 

sir1963:

 

 

 

Or as we have had the majority of voters wanted labour but National won the most seats so National ruled.

 

No mandate at all.

 

And who got to decide on the MPs, why was only a small few able to decide who would be an MP, if you want a mandate then 50%+1 should be needed for each and every MP, otherwise that MP has no mandate from the voters.

 

 

Did you miss the 18 times I said, that in my two party system, where MP;s are elected in electorates, the ruling party is decided by popular vote? It seems to be clearly the most democratic, as the voters decide by casting votes. If you feel that parties like NZF and ACT are wonderful and we need such is in our government, then do what Mike suggests, disclose what deals you will do, as I ONLY want REAL VOTES to be used to decide an election

 

 

And WHO chose the candidates in each electorate ?

 

Sticking unpopular candidates into "safe seats" was a common ploy.

 

I am quite happy with the current system. I want compromise and moderation, I want differing view points.

 

 

 

 

The compromise I have seen this term is money waste. To the detriment of other policies. More to come this and next term


14589 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 2362981 29-Nov-2019 15:32
2 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

A few policies I would like to see from potential government parties are...

 

1. An extensive review and reform of local government.

 

2. Review of road transport and a regime to reduce the amount of goods trucked by road  throughout New Zealand and move it onto rail transport.

 

3. Urgent real review of the Resource Management Act.

 

4. A requirement on local councils to change the footpaths and grass verges into shared cycle/scooter/pedestrian pathways.

 

5. Stop the export of water.

 

6. Require all government vehicles where possible to be EV including Crown cars, non combat military, police etc

 

I am sure I will have some more by Christmas to go on my Santa list





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

There is no planet B

 

 


 
 
 
 


18738 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 2362982 29-Nov-2019 15:35
Send private message quote this post

A good list


14589 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Subscriber

  # 2362984 29-Nov-2019 15:37
Send private message quote this post

JaseNZ:

 

Hmmm , So following the electricity price review the government announced lower power bills would follow. Hard to do that when they are putting their prices up.

 

 

 

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/117818574/genesis-price-rise-sparks-fears-generators-will-pocket-214m-in-consumer-savings

 

 

And we have Rio Tinto pleading poverty due to the price of power to their smelter even though their profit was up as was their margin but hey they really need New Zealand's citizens to subsidize them.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

There is no planet B

 

 


1092 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  # 2362993 29-Nov-2019 15:45
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

sir1963:

 

 

 

Or as we have had the majority of voters wanted labour but National won the most seats so National ruled.

 

No mandate at all.

 

And who got to decide on the MPs, why was only a small few able to decide who would be an MP, if you want a mandate then 50%+1 should be needed for each and every MP, otherwise that MP has no mandate from the voters.

 

 

Did you miss the 18 times I said, that in my two party system, where MP;s are elected in electorates, the ruling party is decided by popular vote? It seems to be clearly the most democratic, as the voters decide by casting votes. If you feel that parties like NZF and ACT are wonderful and we need such is in our government, then do what Mike suggests, disclose what deals you will do, as I ONLY want REAL VOTES to be used to decide an election

 

 

Ironically its was a FPP vote to move to a Proportional system, and I believe the majority of people want to keep MMP.


18738 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 2363099 29-Nov-2019 19:20
Send private message quote this post

sir1963:

 

tdgeek:

 

sir1963:

 

 

 

Or as we have had the majority of voters wanted labour but National won the most seats so National ruled.

 

No mandate at all.

 

And who got to decide on the MPs, why was only a small few able to decide who would be an MP, if you want a mandate then 50%+1 should be needed for each and every MP, otherwise that MP has no mandate from the voters.

 

 

Did you miss the 18 times I said, that in my two party system, where MP;s are elected in electorates, the ruling party is decided by popular vote? It seems to be clearly the most democratic, as the voters decide by casting votes. If you feel that parties like NZF and ACT are wonderful and we need such is in our government, then do what Mike suggests, disclose what deals you will do, as I ONLY want REAL VOTES to be used to decide an election

 

 

Ironically its was a FPP vote to move to a Proportional system, and I believe the majority of people want to keep MMP.

 

 

For the 19th time I have no issue with proportional. Read my posts. My issue is detrimental small parties. Do you want National or Labour to try their best or do you want NZFirst to scuttle that with one billion trees (which hasn't happened) and PGF ? And various other wasteful spends?


1092 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  # 2363155 29-Nov-2019 20:26
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

sir1963:

 

tdgeek:

 

sir1963:

 

 

 

Or as we have had the majority of voters wanted labour but National won the most seats so National ruled.

 

No mandate at all.

 

And who got to decide on the MPs, why was only a small few able to decide who would be an MP, if you want a mandate then 50%+1 should be needed for each and every MP, otherwise that MP has no mandate from the voters.

 

 

Did you miss the 18 times I said, that in my two party system, where MP;s are elected in electorates, the ruling party is decided by popular vote? It seems to be clearly the most democratic, as the voters decide by casting votes. If you feel that parties like NZF and ACT are wonderful and we need such is in our government, then do what Mike suggests, disclose what deals you will do, as I ONLY want REAL VOTES to be used to decide an election

 

 

Ironically its was a FPP vote to move to a Proportional system, and I believe the majority of people want to keep MMP.

 

 

For the 19th time I have no issue with proportional. Read my posts. My issue is detrimental small parties. Do you want National or Labour to try their best or do you want NZFirst to scuttle that with one billion trees (which hasn't happened) and PGF ? And various other wasteful spends?

 

 

 

 

I have no issues with the small parties. Having to negotiate policy I believe makes for better policy, it takes the rough edges off it, as opposed to being just hammered home because they can.

 

I am happy with the tree planting , I would have liked to have seen that a % had to be native trees though. And I have no expectations that they were going to be planted instantly, it takes time to grow seedlings. But being a little late is still better than doing nothing.

 

We had no "Housing crisis" for years because of the dominance of national, and so they did nothing. As I say rough edges.

 

We had no underfunding of Nurses, or teachers for the same reason. Maintenance of buildings was delayed so they offer tax cuts, but all that did was cost more later on.

 

I view Nationals "lets get tough on gangs" as being a waste of money, it achieves zero while costing a fortune.

 

And I DON'T want tax cuts, I want quality healthcare, quality education, this costs, but the long term payback (20-30 years) is worth every cent. I want kids fed so they can learn, spending $1000 per child for 10 years to give them a real chance at a decent life is less than the cost of 1 year of prison, but the payback by having them employed is massive, and the kids of happy, employed people making a reasonable wage have a much much lower chance of turning to crime, so we get to break generation problems too.

 

 

 

 

 

 


 
 
 
 


1566 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2363307 30-Nov-2019 08:52
Send private message quote this post

sir1963:

 

I have no issues with the small parties. Having to negotiate policy I believe makes for better policy, it takes the rough edges off it, as opposed to being just hammered home because they can.

 

I am happy with the tree planting , I would have liked to have seen that a % had to be native trees though. And I have no expectations that they were going to be planted instantly, it takes time to grow seedlings. But being a little late is still better than doing nothing.

 

We had no "Housing crisis" for years because of the dominance of national, and so they did nothing. As I say rough edges.

 

We had no underfunding of Nurses, or teachers for the same reason. Maintenance of buildings was delayed so they offer tax cuts, but all that did was cost more later on.

 

I view Nationals "lets get tough on gangs" as being a waste of money, it achieves zero while costing a fortune.

 

And I DON'T want tax cuts, I want quality healthcare, quality education, this costs, but the long term payback (20-30 years) is worth every cent. I want kids fed so they can learn, spending $1000 per child for 10 years to give them a real chance at a decent life is less than the cost of 1 year of prison, but the payback by having them employed is massive, and the kids of happy, employed people making a reasonable wage have a much much lower chance of turning to crime, so we get to break generation problems too.

 

 

We gave $3bn over three years to a Buy NZ First a Seat fund and billions of dollars in aid to the Pacific in an attempt to outspend China. There's plenty of money for social investment AND tax cuts, but getting the public service to do anything in a cost efficient and timely manner is impossible. Even when the Govt does want to do something on a large scale, and no matter which Government it is, it takes too long or doesn't happen at all. 

 

The choice between lower taxes and better social investment isn't actually a choice at all. We can easily afford to do both. 


1566 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2363704 30-Nov-2019 21:21
Send private message quote this post

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/404519/government-signals-big-new-infrastructure-spend-looser-purse-strings

 

So, in other words, it was impossible to deliver what they promised in the 2017 campaign and stay under the BRR provisions like they said they would.


18738 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 2363939 1-Dec-2019 12:48
Send private message quote this post

GV27:

 

We gave $3bn over three years to a Buy NZ First a Seat fund and billions of dollars in aid to the Pacific in an attempt to outspend China. There's plenty of money for social investment AND tax cuts, but getting the public service to do anything in a cost efficient and timely manner is impossible. Even when the Govt does want to do something on a large scale, and no matter which Government it is, it takes too long or doesn't happen at all. 

 

The choice between lower taxes and better social investment isn't actually a choice at all. We can easily afford to do both. 

 

 

I agree that a lot of money funded NZF, thereby limiting other spending. Im not sure we can afford to do everything and have tax cuts. If we maintain current taxation, get everything into gear to improve what is lacking, whether that be health or education, transport, infrastructure, AND we have a standard surplus every year, then we can cut taxes, as they would actually be a result of over taxation.


18738 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 2363940 1-Dec-2019 12:51
Send private message quote this post

sir1963:

 

I have no issues with the small parties. Having to negotiate policy I believe makes for better policy, it takes the rough edges off it, as opposed to being just hammered home because they can.

 

I am happy with the tree planting , I would have liked to have seen that a % had to be native trees though. And I have no expectations that they were going to be planted instantly, it takes time to grow seedlings. But being a little late is still better than doing nothing.

 

We had no "Housing crisis" for years because of the dominance of national, and so they did nothing. As I say rough edges.

 

We had no underfunding of Nurses, or teachers for the same reason. Maintenance of buildings was delayed so they offer tax cuts, but all that did was cost more later on.

 

I view Nationals "lets get tough on gangs" as being a waste of money, it achieves zero while costing a fortune.

 

And I DON'T want tax cuts, I want quality healthcare, quality education, this costs, but the long term payback (20-30 years) is worth every cent. I want kids fed so they can learn, spending $1000 per child for 10 years to give them a real chance at a decent life is less than the cost of 1 year of prison, but the payback by having them employed is massive, and the kids of happy, employed people making a reasonable wage have a much much lower chance of turning to crime, so we get to break generation problems too.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We gave to buy small parties. If we get a surplus its not a lot. The vast majority of spending will happen under any Government, then we have spare funding, which goes to policies. What we ave NZF is huge

 

Underfunding of health and education is been the case for a long time, it still is.

 

Your last paragraph required funding. NZF will get it first.


18738 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

  # 2363941 1-Dec-2019 12:57
Send private message quote this post

sir1963:

 

I have no issues with the small parties. Having to negotiate policy I believe makes for better policy, it takes the rough edges off it, as opposed to being just hammered home because they can.

 

 

 

 

If a party gets a mandate, we have told them, hammer it home, unopposed. They campaigned, a majority voted them in, they can go for it. OR, they can cease some policies as some minor party bribed it away. AND the funds that have to be used to buy NZF dont go to policies that the majority voted for. Mandate is a joke. We had to allocate billions for a party that got a very very small % of the vote. Greens, silly as they can be at time, at least have NZ interest at heart. NZF doesn't. Maybe if they did they would be a huge third party, but they sound most of their life at below 5%, whether in a Government or not. Totally unbalanced.


1566 posts

Uber Geek


  # 2364004 1-Dec-2019 13:38
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

I agree that a lot of money funded NZF, thereby limiting other spending. Im not sure we can afford to do everything and have tax cuts. If we maintain current taxation, get everything into gear to improve what is lacking, whether that be health or education, transport, infrastructure, AND we have a standard surplus every year, then we can cut taxes, as they would actually be a result of over taxation.

 

 

The way you increase the tax take is by using funding to remove productivity constraints - usually that is by building infrastructure. However the public sector is a massive handbrake in this regard. Look at the drag on the CRL getting approved, Waterview was late, Transmission Gully is now going to be a year behind. That's before you even look at the infrastructure and housing we were meant to be getting this term, almost none of which is happening unless it's funded by the PGF, which ironically has too little oversight. 

 

There's just no consequences for the public sector. Who cares if something is delivered years later than it was meant to be delivered. No one's going to lose their jobs, right? 


1092 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  # 2364030 1-Dec-2019 14:30
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

GV27:

 

sir1963:

 

I have no issues with the small parties. Having to negotiate policy I believe makes for better policy, it takes the rough edges off it, as opposed to being just hammered home because they can.

 

I am happy with the tree planting , I would have liked to have seen that a % had to be native trees though. And I have no expectations that they were going to be planted instantly, it takes time to grow seedlings. But being a little late is still better than doing nothing.

 

We had no "Housing crisis" for years because of the dominance of national, and so they did nothing. As I say rough edges.

 

We had no underfunding of Nurses, or teachers for the same reason. Maintenance of buildings was delayed so they offer tax cuts, but all that did was cost more later on.

 

I view Nationals "lets get tough on gangs" as being a waste of money, it achieves zero while costing a fortune.

 

And I DON'T want tax cuts, I want quality healthcare, quality education, this costs, but the long term payback (20-30 years) is worth every cent. I want kids fed so they can learn, spending $1000 per child for 10 years to give them a real chance at a decent life is less than the cost of 1 year of prison, but the payback by having them employed is massive, and the kids of happy, employed people making a reasonable wage have a much much lower chance of turning to crime, so we get to break generation problems too.

 

 

We gave $3bn over three years to a Buy NZ First a Seat fund and billions of dollars in aid to the Pacific in an attempt to outspend China. There's plenty of money for social investment AND tax cuts, but getting the public service to do anything in a cost efficient and timely manner is impossible. Even when the Govt does want to do something on a large scale, and no matter which Government it is, it takes too long or doesn't happen at all. 

 

The choice between lower taxes and better social investment isn't actually a choice at all. We can easily afford to do both. 

 

 

 

 

We spend over 60 Billion on Welfare, Health and education.

 

They are looking at spending 10 Billion to shift the port of Auckland

 

We have spent way more than 3 Billion on the ChristChurch earthquake 

 

We are spending over 2.3 Billion on new planes for the airforce

 

 

 

So in the great scheme of things, spending 3 Billion to try and improve the economic prospects in the regions is quite reasonable.

 

Each job created in the regions is a benefit not paid and tax earned .

 

If we have every man, woman and child an extra $10 a week, that would come to over 2.5 Billion

 

$10 a week will do nothing for me, or for most people, but funding better cancer treatment, reducing hospital waiting lists, feeding kids at school, drug rehab programs , etc etc  will radically improve the lives of tens of thousands.

 

 

 

 


1092 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

  # 2364032 1-Dec-2019 14:44
Send private message quote this post

GV27:

 

tdgeek:

 

I agree that a lot of money funded NZF, thereby limiting other spending. Im not sure we can afford to do everything and have tax cuts. If we maintain current taxation, get everything into gear to improve what is lacking, whether that be health or education, transport, infrastructure, AND we have a standard surplus every year, then we can cut taxes, as they would actually be a result of over taxation.

 

 

The way you increase the tax take is by using funding to remove productivity constraints - usually that is by building infrastructure. However the public sector is a massive handbrake in this regard. Look at the drag on the CRL getting approved, Waterview was late, Transmission Gully is now going to be a year behind. That's before you even look at the infrastructure and housing we were meant to be getting this term, almost none of which is happening unless it's funded by the PGF, which ironically has too little oversight. 

 

There's just no consequences for the public sector. Who cares if something is delivered years later than it was meant to be delivered. No one's going to lose their jobs, right? 

 

 

One of the problems is the "people" wanted accountability in government departments, so they got it, but it costs a LOT.

 

Every financial transaction costs between $60-100 to process.

 

Every decision gets micro managed by the left and the right wings trying to find fault so they can blame the other.

 

Every time there is a change of government, there is a change in direction, that costs, particularly as each government wants to restructure.

 

Wages in government departments are typically lower than in private industry because the "people" want cost savings, so there can be a large flow on people coming in and out of departments.

 

Used to be government departments had guaranteed incomes for 3-5 years, with that they could plan, especially for longer term projects, now they get funded for 12 months with budgets having to be done every year, submitted up the chain to eventually get to government who makes a decision anything up to 6 months later.

 

But then again, we look at the finance companies who went broke, building companies that have gone broke, so private industry is no better in reality.


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter and LinkedIn »



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:





News »

Ring launches indoor-only security camera
Posted 23-Jan-2020 17:26


New report findings will help schools implement the digital technologies curriculum content
Posted 23-Jan-2020 17:25


N4L to upgrade & support wireless internet inside schools
Posted 23-Jan-2020 17:22


Netflix releases 21 Studio Ghibli works
Posted 22-Jan-2020 11:42


Vodafone integrates eSIM into device and wearable roadmap
Posted 17-Jan-2020 09:45


Do you need this camera app? Group investigates privacy implications
Posted 16-Jan-2020 03:30


JBL launches headphones range designed for gaming
Posted 13-Jan-2020 09:59


Withings introduces ScanWatch wearable combining ECG and sleep apnea detection
Posted 9-Jan-2020 18:34


NZ Police releases public app
Posted 8-Jan-2020 11:43


Suunto 7 combine sports and smart features on new smartwatch generation
Posted 7-Jan-2020 16:06


Intel brings innovation with technology spanning the cloud, network, edge and PC
Posted 7-Jan-2020 15:54


AMD announces high performance desktop and ultrathin laptop processors
Posted 7-Jan-2020 15:42


AMD unveils four new desktop and mobile GPUs including AMD Radeon RX 5600
Posted 7-Jan-2020 15:32


Consolidation in video streaming market with Spark selling Lightbox to Sky
Posted 19-Dec-2019 09:09


Intel introduces cryogenic control chip to enable quantum computers
Posted 10-Dec-2019 21:32



Geekzone Live »

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


Support Geekzone »

Our community of supporters help make Geekzone possible. Click the button below to join them.

Support Geezone on PressPatron



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.