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 | 14 | 15
10358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3190

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1043523 14-May-2014 10:48
2 people support this post
Send private message

MikeAqua: "The rich keep getting richer under national" etc

The rich get richer under any government, but when the left of centre parties are in opposition they highlight, that the rich are getting richer.  It's a fact of life that some people are good at accumulating wealth.  The real problem is that the poor are getting poorer.

It is possible in a wealthy economy with heavy taxation to have a socialist system that functions reasonably well, still allows people to accumulate wealth and provides an incentive to take risk and innovate.  This is what the Nordic countries have historically managed to achieve.  It should be noted that the rich get richer in Nordic countries too, but a decent standard of living is provided to almost everyone, due to strong and expensive social policies.

Those countries have abundant natural resources which they exploit extensively.  Forests, fish, aquaculture, oil, geothermal electricity.  They have developed export industries based on these industries e.g. Nokia, Ikea, Marel and countless companies who sell expertise and technology in the oil, fishing and aquaculture sectors.

The wealth and IP arising from natural resources have enabled their economies to afford socialist policies, and provide incomes high enough that you can tax the stuffing out of people and despite the high cost of living in those countries they can still have a nice lifestyle.

The greens would like to introduce a whole lot of socialist policies without exploiting natural resources.  How will they fund them? 

You can tax the rich for a while, but that isn't actually creating the wealth you need to support social policy.








We could be richer if we more actively explored and exploited our natural mineral wealth. Look at how wealthy Norway has become as a result of that - their surplus fund is worth over US$850 billion!!

Imagine what NZ could do with that kind of wealth? Now, maybe we don't have it but I darned well want full geological surveys done of everywhere (no sacred cows) to find out so that we can actually have an informed discussion.





11555 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5265

Trusted

  Reply # 1043526 14-May-2014 10:50
One person supports this post
Send private message

Geektastic:
MikeAqua: "The rich keep getting richer under national" etc

The rich get richer under any government, but when the left of centre parties are in opposition they highlight, that the rich are getting richer.  It's a fact of life that some people are good at accumulating wealth.  The real problem is that the poor are getting poorer.

It is possible in a wealthy economy with heavy taxation to have a socialist system that functions reasonably well, still allows people to accumulate wealth and provides an incentive to take risk and innovate.  This is what the Nordic countries have historically managed to achieve.  It should be noted that the rich get richer in Nordic countries too, but a decent standard of living is provided to almost everyone, due to strong and expensive social policies.

Those countries have abundant natural resources which they exploit extensively.  Forests, fish, aquaculture, oil, geothermal electricity.  They have developed export industries based on these industries e.g. Nokia, Ikea, Marel and countless companies who sell expertise and technology in the oil, fishing and aquaculture sectors.

The wealth and IP arising from natural resources have enabled their economies to afford socialist policies, and provide incomes high enough that you can tax the stuffing out of people and despite the high cost of living in those countries they can still have a nice lifestyle.

The greens would like to introduce a whole lot of socialist policies without exploiting natural resources.  How will they fund them? 

You can tax the rich for a while, but that isn't actually creating the wealth you need to support social policy.








We could be richer if we more actively explored and exploited our natural mineral wealth. Look at how wealthy Norway has become as a result of that - their surplus fund is worth over US$850 billion!!

Imagine what NZ could do with that kind of wealth? Now, maybe we don't have it but I darned well want full geological surveys done of everywhere (no sacred cows) to find out so that we can actually have an informed discussion.


we have more to gain from tourism and sustainable Agriculture than we have from holes in the ground and wrecked landscape




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

 

 It's our only home, lets clean it up then...

 

Take My Advice, Pull Down Your Pants And Slide On The Ice!

 

 


 
 
 
 


10358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3190

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1043527 14-May-2014 10:51
Send private message

KiwiNZ:
Geektastic:
MikeAqua: "The rich keep getting richer under national" etc

The rich get richer under any government, but when the left of centre parties are in opposition they highlight, that the rich are getting richer.  It's a fact of life that some people are good at accumulating wealth.  The real problem is that the poor are getting poorer.

It is possible in a wealthy economy with heavy taxation to have a socialist system that functions reasonably well, still allows people to accumulate wealth and provides an incentive to take risk and innovate.  This is what the Nordic countries have historically managed to achieve.  It should be noted that the rich get richer in Nordic countries too, but a decent standard of living is provided to almost everyone, due to strong and expensive social policies.

Those countries have abundant natural resources which they exploit extensively.  Forests, fish, aquaculture, oil, geothermal electricity.  They have developed export industries based on these industries e.g. Nokia, Ikea, Marel and countless companies who sell expertise and technology in the oil, fishing and aquaculture sectors.

The wealth and IP arising from natural resources have enabled their economies to afford socialist policies, and provide incomes high enough that you can tax the stuffing out of people and despite the high cost of living in those countries they can still have a nice lifestyle.

The greens would like to introduce a whole lot of socialist policies without exploiting natural resources.  How will they fund them? 

You can tax the rich for a while, but that isn't actually creating the wealth you need to support social policy.








We could be richer if we more actively explored and exploited our natural mineral wealth. Look at how wealthy Norway has become as a result of that - their surplus fund is worth over US$850 billion!!

Imagine what NZ could do with that kind of wealth? Now, maybe we don't have it but I darned well want full geological surveys done of everywhere (no sacred cows) to find out so that we can actually have an informed discussion.


we have more to gain from tourism and sustainable Agriculture than we have from holes in the ground and wrecked landscape


I contend that we do not in fact know the answer to that question at this point in time and that we need to.





2008 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 336

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1043529 14-May-2014 10:54
2 people support this post
Send private message

The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples money - M Thatcher.




When you live your life on Twitter and Facebook, and are only friends with like minded people on Twitter and Facebook, you are not living in the real world. You are living in a narcissistic echo chamber.

 


My thoughts are my own and are in no way representative of my employer.


536 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 37


  Reply # 1043535 14-May-2014 11:03
Send private message

I ended up firmly in the middle of the green square and it is no surprise which way I have voted in the past few elections.

Having said that I think as much of an outcome for a country depends on the quality of the government, rather than where it lies on the spectrum.  For example you can have countries that do well on the authoritarian right (e.g. Singapore) as well as on the libertarian left (e.g. Scandanavia).  On the other hand bad govts can ruin a country no matter where on the political spectrum they lie.

I also think despite many politicians in the Anglophone world moving to the right and decrying socialism, equating it with economic ruin, the Scandanavian countries have been doing economically well.



2487 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 447


  Reply # 1043540 14-May-2014 11:16
One person supports this post
Send private message

The politicians (and public I think) havent worked out how MMP works - or should work.

Instead of automatically deriding an idea that another party has - just because its not your idea - its ok to look and say - 'yes - that could work'.
Its not stealing - its not always against your principles - sometimes a good idea is just a good idea.
I would have respect for a government that actually considered ideas that others had.

Under MMP there can (and should be) some mix and match.
We dont have a purely left or right government - we can have various alliances depending on individual policies.

For example, while not a "green" idea - I think there is merit in looking at the idea of increasing kiwisaver contribution rates rather than just bumping up interest rates periodically. Makes sense to me to actually store the money away for kiwis to use later rather than just make banks bigger profits. Some economists like it some dont - but at least look at it a bit further.

The Greens idea of a green fund for kickstarting business development seems sensible enough to me - depending on how its implemented. Even capitalist business needs a nudge to get started sometimes. We cant just depend on trees and milk forever.




Nothing is impossible for the man who doesn't have to do it himself - A. H. Weiler

698 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 399

Trusted

  Reply # 1043541 14-May-2014 11:16
Send private message

Looks like I'm pretty close to the Dalai Lama. Which is quite a coincidence, since I have a quote by him stuck to my computer screen.





Awesome
4780 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1059

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1043569 14-May-2014 11:35
One person supports this post
Send private message

This surprised me actually. Thought I would be closer to the middle on both axis





Twitter: ajobbins


10358 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3190

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1043624 14-May-2014 11:59
Send private message

geekiegeek: The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples money - M Thatcher.


Very true then and just as true now.





1034 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 43

Trusted

  Reply # 1043641 14-May-2014 12:09
Send private message

Hmmm, I think I've voted for three different parties in the last three elections.


5261 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2499


  Reply # 1043717 14-May-2014 12:48
Send private message

geekiegeek: The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples money - M Thatcher.


The problem with glib one-liners such as that, is that they end up getting quoted - disingenuously for "political effect" - like some kind of slogan - when they actually aren't verbatim quotes from the person attributed to have said them, when the "shortened version" you have quoted is out of context, and even if quoted correctly and in context (of the era as well as the particular circumstances which M Thatcher was discussing), then should beg comparison with the alternatives. 

When there never has been, isn't now, and presumably never will be either a "pure" socialist or capitalist state, instead all being in arguable positions on a continuum between one and the other, then it's pointless name-calling.  The reason why I say "arguable position on the continuum" is that there's inevitably corruption of principles often around basic human rights and freedoms and morality - and trying to pin that down to allocate a score isn't ever going to be easy.



372 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 42

Subscriber

  Reply # 1043749 14-May-2014 13:02
Send private message

As the originator - heres my compass



2888 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1505

Subscriber

  Reply # 1043751 14-May-2014 13:04
Send private message

I've taken the rest on a semi regular basis, and over the last X many years my results have pretty much always fallen within the box marked on here.





Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

 

Thinking about signing up to BigPipe? Get $20 credit with my referral link.


3333 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1251


  Reply # 1043763 14-May-2014 13:08
One person supports this post
Send private message

The point is you can do it all.  It's not either or.  There is strong Tourism in Nordic countries as well as extractive industries and primary production.  You don't have to 'wreck' the landscape either.  Have you been to the Coromandel? Tourism scenery and mining.  Ditto Central Otago. Ditto West Coast.  Taupo has tourism scenery and geothermal electricity.

You do have to manage well to balance activities.  Where does good management happen? In wealthy countries.

How do countries get wealthy? Generally, by using natural resources.

But in NZ we have gone banaas: Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone

Just print more money ...

KiwiNZ:

we have more to gain from tourism and sustainable Agriculture than we have from holes in the ground and wrecked landscape




Mike

5261 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2499


  Reply # 1043796 14-May-2014 13:23
Send private message


And proud of it.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15
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:





News »

Spark doubles down on wireless broadband
Posted 24-Jan-2018 15:44


New Zealand's IT industry in 2018 and beyond
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:50


Introducing your new workplace headache: Gen Z
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:45


Jucy set to introduce electric campervan fleet
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:41


Hawaiki cable system will be ready for service in June 2018
Posted 22-Jan-2018 12:32


New Zealand hits peak broadband data
Posted 18-Jan-2018 12:21


Amazon Echo devices coming to New Zealand early February 2018
Posted 18-Jan-2018 10:53


$3.74 million for new electric vehicles in New Zealand
Posted 17-Jan-2018 11:27


Nova 2i: Value, not excitement from Huawei
Posted 17-Jan-2018 09:02


Less news in Facebook News Feed revamp
Posted 15-Jan-2018 13:15


Australian Government contract awarded to Datacom Connect
Posted 11-Jan-2018 08:37


Why New Zealand needs a chief technology officer
Posted 6-Jan-2018 13:59


Amazon release Silk Browser and Firefox for Fire TV
Posted 21-Dec-2017 13:42


New Chief Technology Officer role created
Posted 19-Dec-2017 22:18


All I want for Christmas is a new EV
Posted 19-Dec-2017 19:54



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.