|
Vagabundo posted:Dropped 5 places to be exact, right out of the top 10. Good work NZ.
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2012 23:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 21:00 |
|
|
Varkk posted:Have you seen how a newspaper or other news organisation is run? The paper's size is based on the ads sold, not on how much newsworthy stuff has happened. Basically the news articles are just filler between the ads. As a result the journalists are run at a bare minimum with daily requirements for certain numbers of stories of a certain number of words. So if they can fill most of that quota just regurgitating a press release that came accross their desk then they will. Also proper investigative reporting might lead to a story which puts a major advertiser in a bad light so you can't do that. No, I actually genuinely was aware of none of this. It doesn't really surprise me given the quality of the poo poo they produce, but it is disappointing. Bring back Kane, he'll sort the newspapers out. I know nothing of the newspaper business at all, but I genuinely have to wonder sometimes if there would be a market for a newspaper, small, with properly written/researched articles. Maybe not even a daily, but a weekly. Who knows. Anything would be better than what we get. Dead Alice posted:NZherald NEWSPAPER OF THE YEAR EDIT: I will say one thing for the Herald, I really, really enjoy Mary Holm's financial advice - seems to be very well informed and write incredibly well thought out advice. Comrade Blyatlov fucked around with this message at 00:43 on Mar 8, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 00:37
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:
I expect that is how a lot start out, but then they turn into The Listener or IDIOT CONSPIRACY THEORIES MONTHLY when it's time to pay the bills.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 01:04
|
|
|
Newspapers just need to stick to their knitting. Noone can cover local news as well as the local rag. The Wellingtonian is pretty bloody good. They have the best sports writer in the country (Joseph Romanos) and Gordon Campbell writing editorials.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 02:04
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:EDIT: I will say one thing for the Herald, I really, really enjoy Mary Holm's financial advice - seems to be very well informed and write incredibly well thought out advice. I can't help but get the impression that she doesn't think buying houses is any harder for Gen Y than it was for boomers. I can't recall her ever saying as such, but I have that idea for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 06:00
|
|
|
She's said several times if you sacrifice enough you can do it. She may be right or wrong, I'm not really sure.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 06:08
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:She's said several times if you sacrifice enough you can do it. She may be right or wrong, I'm not really sure. House prices are up 400% over the last 20 years and wages have gone nowhere. She's wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 06:14
|
|
|
I think I've seen her compare house prices with inflation and conclude that houses haven't appreciated that fast relative to the CPI, but that doesn't account for wage/student loan differences and those are the real killers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 06:38
|
|
|
ClubmanGT posted:I think I've seen her compare house prices with inflation and conclude that houses haven't appreciated that fast relative to the CPI, but that doesn't account for wage/student loan differences and those are the real killers. This - a lot of student loan debt is people borrowing for everyday costs because part-time work isn't available or doesn't pay enough to cover everything (especially if you are at somewhere like AUT or Auckland Uni and have to deal with Auckland rent and transport costs). When you combine this with a lot of people getting degrees but not finding that the job market can support them at the end of it I think you're staring at a large chunk of a generation for whom home ownership is a distant fantasy unless they move out to the provinces. A fair amount of this gets cloaked by the interest-free scheme but if that was removed things would get ugly very quickly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 07:01
|
|
|
GooseLoon posted:This - a lot of student loan debt is people borrowing for everyday costs because part-time work isn't available or doesn't pay enough to cover everything (especially if you are at somewhere like AUT or Auckland Uni and have to deal with Auckland rent and transport costs). When you combine this with a lot of people getting degrees but not finding that the job market can support them at the end of it I think you're staring at a large chunk of a generation for whom home ownership is a distant fantasy unless they move out to the provinces. The whole thing is a house of cards. The universities can't afford to keep teaching domestic students, we're pumping out more and more grads than our economy can support and there's no real prospect of the economy picking up any time soon. It's kind of telling that there's something like one job at SJS for every three active members. People want to work, and don't want to come out of uni with debt, but it just isn't going to happen. Throw in the stated 10 hour per paper per week minimum expected contact/study time and you're not really left with a heap of hours in the day either. But of course, the first letter through the door at the Herald in response to claims of a debt burden is "STUDENTS SHOULD SURRENDER THEIR PASSPORTS UNTIL THEIR DEBT TO SOCIETY IS PAIDDDDDDDDDDDDD". Student loans are just another form of intergenerational theft. It sounds overly dramatic, but it's the truth, and not calling it what it is won't help change things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 07:37
|
|
|
I guess the field I'm studying is pretty rare in that I have a guaranteed job at the end of it, then? As for my usual bitching about the media, they're not even bothering to tell the loving truth here: http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/6545365/Lost-Australian-teens-survive-on-rotten-meat They were lost for five days, they would not have died had they not eaten that rotten meat, survive really isn't the right word, goddamnit stop trying to sexy things up and just tell the loving truth aarrggghghhhh
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2012 07:44
|
|
|
ClubmanGT posted:Throw in the stated 10 hour per paper per week minimum expected contact/study time and you're not really left with a heap of hours in the day either. Pffffffft that 10 hours contact time thing is bullshit. I made it through without worry about any of that poo poo and look at me now! Working a lovely job unrelated to my degree in another country. Wooooo. Wait a minute
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 09:33
|
|
|
Pozzo posted:Pffffffft that 10 hours contact time thing is bullshit. I made it through without worry about any of that poo poo and look at me now! Working a lovely job unrelated to my degree in another country. Wooooo. You obviously didn't work hard enough. Stop wanting everything to be handed to you right now, you Gen Y child. That's why none of us can afford houses, you see.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 09:48
|
|
|
Just kill everyone over 60
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 09:51
|
|
|
The worst part is I'd probably act the same way if I'd been born in that generation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 09:57
|
|
|
Goat Bastard posted:The worst part is I'd probably act the same way if I'd been born in that generation. Anyone who can do basic maths should realise that a $50k mortgage at 20% interest works out cheaper than a $500k mortgage at 5%. But that's what people will keep telling you, even when you point it out to them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 10:00
|
|
|
ClubmanGT posted:Anyone who can do basic maths should realise that a $50k mortgage at 20% interest works out cheaper than a $500k mortgage at 5%. But that's what people will keep telling you, even when you point it out to them. No the problem's pretty clearly your work ethic, and nothing else.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 10:18
|
|
|
ClubmanGT posted:Anyone who can do basic maths should realise that a $50k mortgage at 20% interest works out cheaper than a $500k mortgage at 5%. But that's what people will keep telling you, even when you point it out to them. YOUR GRANDFATHER DIDN'T GET HIS ARSE FILLED WITH LEAD IN EGYPT SO YOU COULD BE AN UNGRATEFUL LITTLE poo poo!
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 10:24
|
|
|
The most interesting writing I've read about asset sales and the left. He doesn't like comments so I'll spare you the click. Idiot/Savant quote:Back in December, David Cunliffe made some noises about reversing National's privatisation, saying that a future Labour government would simply buy back stolen state assets. Then, in a typical display of Labour chickenshitness chickenshittage, he backed away from it, for fear of offending international markets. A credible threat to renationalise powerstations could massivly depress the expected return from sale. And on the left credible means one party: Labour. What the gently caress does Labour do here? One option would be to claim to be bound by the outcome of any referendum - ensures you stay on the right (popular) side of the issue. And, assuming you'd want to, how do you threaten to sabotage an asset sale while still acting like a sensible and sober government in waiting? As an aside on assett sales, I think the point is that JK doesn't really care about the return so much, but rather a he's wanting to get down to the real business of transforming the economy. Imagine a NZ where every mum and dad is pumping money into our stock markets, the state owns nothing and private businesses compete for all state spending. Neo-liberal status:  It can't happen with a populace who haven't trusted in the NZ market since the 86 crash - the only stock Mum and Dad investors ever looked at was Telecom (another ex-gvt monopoly). Chuck another 10 or 12 blue chip stock options on the barbie and suddenly our markets fatten up. From wafer thin to the something like a slice of vogels. In other words - when you're dreaming of whole markets, then who cares if the sale price is a few billion shy of where it could have been? dusty fucked around with this message at 12:22 on Mar 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 12:15
|
|
|
dusty posted:
Anecdotally, as someone who's worked for both the government and businesses competing for state spending, what you would get is a lot of companys promising everything and delivering the bare minimum to keep the money flowing in. The quote in a staff meeting that really drove it home for me was "The Ministry of X has a budget of Y million dollars this year, we need to get as much of that flowing towards us as we can". Of course the person speaking didn't intend to actually improve any of the services that the company provided, just to suck more money while keeping the same expenditure, or even lowering it if possible. And to be fair, why shouldn't he? The Free Market by its very nature is not capable of providing low cost, high value public services. Edit: Of course a lot of the existing bureaucracy is as big or even bigger of a money sink. I guess what I'm trying to say is the public service is hosed, and probably will be for the rest of our lives, because no one is willing to address the real issues (which are massively inefficient processes, not "back office staff", or "beneficiaries", or any of the other buzz words that people love to hate). Goat Bastard fucked around with this message at 12:55 on Mar 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 12:41
|
|
|
Goat Bastard posted:You obviously didn't work hard enough. Stop wanting everything to be handed to you right now, you Gen Y child. If I had wanted something handed to me I might have put more effort in...although nah, probably not. I kind of went to uni just for something to do. Nice way to pass a few years, you know?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 20:06
|
|
|
Pozzo posted:If I had wanted something handed to me I might have put more effort in...although nah, probably not. I kind of went to uni just for something to do. Nice way to pass a few years, you know? Really it's our own fault for not joining the army.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 20:40
|
|
|
dusty posted:And, assuming you'd want to, how do you threaten to sabotage an asset sale while still acting like a sensible and sober government in waiting? Hi, I'm the National candidate for the electorate of Aspirational New Zealand. Do you have a moment to to talk about KiwiSaver? Oh, it's a good deal, isn't it? Of course I'm in it! What fund are you in? Oh. Did you know that fund owns 10% of Mighty River? Labour wants to take that away from you. They don't think people like you and me deserve to own a power company. No, I'm sure what it would do to your super. Nothing good, I expect. Oh, and meet me - National's conduit to iwi. Oh, I know you'll never vote for us, but just wanted to drop by and remind you that it was Labour that took your beaches and it's Labour that's going to take your SOE shares. Don't forget that. And so on. Labour's response will be a scathing blog from Clare Curran and dead silence from David Shearer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2012 21:15
|
|
|
Trouble Man posted:Hi, I'm the National candidate for the electorate of Aspirational New Zealand. Do you have a moment to to talk about KiwiSaver? Oh, it's a good deal, isn't it? Of course I'm in it! What fund are you in? Exactly. National has done a great job of capturing the issues of the aspirational voter. To vote national is to aspire to own a boat, bach and bmw. Shearer knows opposing asset sales is one thing, but actively trying to blow them up with threats of renationalisation is another. It puts a much bigger line in the sand. So it depends how many people are sensitive to the issue, and how the line is run. In the last term I asked a few Labour employees about where the numbers had changed in the loss in 2008 - most seemed really sensitive to the loss of pakeha women in regional cities. The type of voter who pays attention whenever "kiwi mums and dads" is used in an assett sales speech from Key. Labour hasn't found a credible voice to engage that voter since they soured off Clark with smacking. A whole heap of recent policy has been geared towards her (from both parties) as she's the biggest and most identifiable swinging block of voters. She's the voter who couldn't stomach Don, but likes John. This demographic that is being targetted with policies like WFF, special Hercepten funding, National Standards, early childhood education. She's in favour of welfare reform. And I have no idea how this demographic feels about assett sales. dusty fucked around with this message at 02:32 on Mar 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 02:28
|
|
|
I think 'Joe Bloggs average person on the street' doesn't really understand enough nitty gritty details about asset sales. But when asked, they feel compelled to be against on the basis of misguided patriotism and not wanting to seem stupid for not really getting it. I think this is probably the reason why the public isn't so fired up about the issue, despite the polls saying people are against it. Yeah, they may disagree, but they don't really understand or care about share structures in an SOE. It doesn't really affect their lives. How many regular people could actually named the state-owned power companies, let alone have informed opinions about their operational strategy? Obviously, some people are against it for very well researched reasons, but 95% of people don't really think about policy between elections which is why screeching about 'family silver' sometimes resonates. Not everyone is a political junkie or pointy headed public servant who lives in Treasury reports all day. I actually think Shearer may be in the same ideological boat as Goff in that he's not super fired up about asset sales but some of his MPs are, so he's forced to at least pay lip service. I don't think he would be re-nationalising anything if Labour got in and nor would Cunliffe. miss_chaos fucked around with this message at 04:01 on Mar 10, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 03:57
|
|
|
Labour party leader repeatedly refuses to publicly endorse port workers as recently as yesterday, yet turns up at protest action. Assumably in a "personal capacity" again, right? Mate, just get off the fence if you want to. quote:Speaking to NZ Newswire during the protest, Labour Party leader David Shearer said the large turnout showed members of the public were behind the port workers and that unions across New Zealand were standing together on the issue.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 09:54
|
|
|
dusty posted:Exactly. National has done a great job of capturing the issues of the aspirational voter. To vote national is to aspire to own a boat, bach and bmw. The problem for National is when they start to sound like they're selling snake oil. That happened at the tail-end of the Bolger and Shipley-led governments, which saw them get chucked out in 1999 (Peters quitting the coalition and pretty much turning them into a lame-duck government for the last year or so didn't help either, mind) and then curbstomped 3 years later. From the looks of things, they've either reached that point or are getting dangerously close to it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 10:00
|
|
|
miss_chaos posted:Labour party leader repeatedly refuses to publicly endorse port workers as recently as yesterday, yet turns up at protest action. Assumably in a "personal capacity" again, right? Mate, just get off the fence if you want to. Interesting to see that despite the media whitewash, today's weekend herald more than half of the letters to the editor were supporting the dockworkers and being seriously loving freaked out about the implications if this is to become the norm.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 10:16
|
|
|
There was a protest today in Auckland and there have been a lot more unions getting in on the strikes, like the firefighters. Between 2010 with the teachers and 2012 with the dockworkers, firefighters and so on, how many strikes and/or industrial disputes have there have there been? I don't remember a whole series of them happening like this in quite some time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 10:28
|
|
|
Vagabundo posted:There was a protest today in Auckland and there have been a lot more unions getting in on the strikes, like the firefighters. Between 2010 with the teachers and 2012 with the dockworkers, firefighters and so on, how many strikes and/or industrial disputes have there have there been? I don't remember a whole series of them happening like this in quite some time. Yes, not since the 1990's in fact, I wonder if there is some kind of correlation? Also I remember in the 90s National taking on the firefighters union and losing, it seems the public is very quick to get behind the people who put out fires and save lives.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 10:57
|
|
|
I also heard tell of some Aussie dockworkers who refused to unload a ship that had been worked on in Auckland by non-union workers. I don't know if the directors of POA realise just how far-reaching this might be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 10:58
|
|
|
Varkk posted:Yes, not since the 1990's in fact, I wonder if there is some kind of correlation? Vernon Small compared this government to the Bolger/Shipley one. Not too far off the mark, I guess. Also, I wonder how the push for a Citizen Initiated Referendum re: the asset sales will go. It's putting the government in an awkward position - they're standing against it, but that opens them up to criticisms that they're not willing to listen to the public. If they say "we won the election, we have a mandate," then someone from the opposition can just say "if that specific issue actually has public support, why don't you just prove it?" If the CIR goes ahead and the result goes the way that everyone's guessing it would (i.e. overwhelmingly against), then that just torpedoes the claim of a mandate doesn't it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 11:10
|
|
|
Two Finger posted:I also heard tell of some Aussie dockworkers who refused to unload a ship that had been worked on in Auckland by non-union workers. I don't know if the directors of POA realise just how far-reaching this might be. I'm not sure they really care because they are making the workers redundant anyway now and have been using non-union labour at Auckland while the strikes were on with greater productivity rates. Union labour at Wellington and Lyttleton tried to blacklist the ship but were forced to unload after legal action.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 12:36
|
|
|
miss_chaos posted:I'm not sure they really care because they are making the workers redundant anyway now and have been using non-union labour at Auckland while the strikes were on with greater productivity rates. Union labour at Wellington and Lyttleton tried to blacklist the ship but were forced to unload after legal action. I dunno. That was a fair few thousand people outside the gates today, way more than I expected. The ITF exist for a reaon too. Lets just wait and see what happens before closing the case file.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 13:05
|
|
|
Vagabundo posted:Vernon Small compared this government to the Bolger/Shipley one. Not too far off the mark, I guess. National's easy response is to ask whether Labour will be campaigning on legalizing smacking next election. The big risk for the left is that the CIR doesn't get enough signatures - which would reinforce National's narrative that only the chattering classes really care.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 21:22
|
|
|
Trouble Man posted:National's easy response is to ask whether Labour will be campaigning on legalizing smacking next election. Except that doesn't actually stack up as it's a poor example. Aside from the issues with the wording in the question "smacking as part of good parenting", there was also a significant number of people who either voted against smacking, put in unusable votes or just plain didn't respond. The people who voted for smacking aren't 85%, it was actually around 40% of the eligible voters. Trouble Man posted:The big risk for the left is that the CIR doesn't get enough signatures - which would reinforce National's narrative that only the chattering classes really care. We'll see how that goes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2012 23:35
|
|
|
Vagabundo posted:You know what? That's pathetic. Just absolutely pathetic. I hate to bring this up again, but this is the internet and refusing to admit you are wrong and clinging on to positions forever is mandatory, so I just have to. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/christchurch-earthquake/6555662/Quake-recovery-boss-pleased-with-progress and http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/christchurch-earthquake/6555219/Japanese-scientists-view-quake-damage and http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2017720117_japan11.html point to you being full of poo poo and I'd like an apology for besmirching the good name of Christchurch residents 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2012 04:41
|
|
|
ledge posted:I hate to bring this up again, but this is the internet and refusing to admit you are wrong and clinging on to positions forever is mandatory, so I just have to.  Eat poo poo, son. It's funny how you cherrypick meaningless articles, when there are entire sections and suburbs of Christchurch that are sitting abandoned, while large chunks of the city itself is still awaiting deconstruction. Oh but never mind that, they've got a temporary rugby stadium and a mall made of shipping containers!
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2012 04:59
|
|
|
Vagabundo posted:
My point, made in a tongue in cheek manner but whatever, was that Japan hasn't had some miraculous recovery where everything is already back to normal, but that Japan is having a hard time as well. Nothing about how good or bad the recovery process is in Christchurch. There are a lot of people here who think it is taking far too long, myself included. It's like recovering from a major earthquake isn't simple and doesn't happen slowly because people don't know how to pick themselves up, or whatever crap you decided was the cause of Christchurch not being fully reconstructed already was. And cherry pick? http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/10/2685252/reconstruction-plans-stir-debate.html http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57394899/hospital-faces-problems-in-post-tsunami-japan/ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-08/japan-s-3-11-triple-catastrophe-endures-in-broken-families-divided-towns.html http://blogs.wsj.com/japanrealtime/2012/03/10/march-11-one-year-onreconstructing-miyagi/ http://www.bendbulletin.com/article/20120310/NEWS0107/203100371/ http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/success-in-public-spending-cuts-turns-to-hurdle-in-japan-quake-rebuilding/467331/ Oh and http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T120310004464.htm My god, it took them a year to remove a bus that had been dumped on the top of a two story building. To quote you... Vagabundo posted:You know what? That's pathetic. Just absolutely pathetic. apparently. Note: I don't actually think that that is pathetic, I'm perhaps just a bit more aware than you are about how loving difficult getting things fixed can be in these situations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2012 05:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 21:00 |
|
|
The Japanese suffered mostly from the tsunami. The earthquake was a big deal, sure, but most of the damage came from a big gently caress off wave of water. The earthquake was centered 72 kilometers off the coast. Christchurch, however, had an earthquake almost directly beneath the city. Aftershocks also happen regularly directly beneath the city. Because of these aftershocks, it's drat near impossible to get some building done. Who wants to build when an aftershock could come along and topple it back down again? Who pays for that? For the most part, Christchurch has been waiting for things to settle down before the rebuild can happen. Japan, on the other hand, doesn't have to worry too much about another tsunami. Sure, it could happen, but the odds of another one like that are slim. They're probably getting aftershocks, yes, but I doubt they're of the same distance/magnitude that Christchurch experienced. A quick look at http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Maps/10/140_35.php shows they're mostly still centered off the coast. Saying all that, however, the aftershocks have died down a lot. It's been quiet for the past few months so hopefully things can start picking up now. Hopefully insurance companies will start dishing out the money and approving policies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2012 06:49
|
|
