Showing posts with label Politics.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics.. Show all posts

Saturday, May 18, 2013

Democracy.

Kia-ora


It is notable that ordinary citizens, whatever their political views, do not trust politicians to act in the best interests of New Zealanders.
 
A distrust that is richly deserved!
 
And vote by overwhelming majority, for any measures which restrict politicians power and increase democracy.

It is no accident that Switzerland is the most stable, prosperous and peaceful state on earth.

Compare Switzerland to so called "representative democracies". An oxymoron equal to, "intelligence agencies".

Sunday, August 19, 2012

A Challenge.

Kia-ora

 
A challenge
“And, out of interest, does anyone know of any research into privatization that shows it to be generally effective at improving a service, increasing efficiency and leaving its lowest level workers with a living wage? All I read currently is that the investors get richer, the management can pay itself what it likes, the customers pay more and more for worse service and the lowest level workers are told they need to find a second job just to survive because they are a valueless kind of replaceable resource.”


I have not found a single case where this can be answered in favour of privatisation. Can You?

Saturday, August 4, 2012

The "Wealth Creator" myth. Stealing the commons. Part two.

Kia-ora 

One of the memes the wealthy and their sycophants prefer to repeat is that, "the wealthy create wealth".

Lies the Rich Perpetuate.

That is demonstrably wrong.

"The wealthy got their wealth by entrepreneurship and starting new business" ?.
Well! no. Most are wealthy because they are born with it. The majority of the rest because they gamed our system to make money from existing assets and public utilities. Morally, no different from robbing someones house.

How Allan Gibb's made a Mint out of a Former Public Utility.
""Gibbs spotted his opportunity early in 1990 when he did his hallmark one-page analysis of what Telecom might be worth. "It was a lovely, fat company, with huge margins and a lazy balance sheet. It was obvious if you could keep the margins it would be a fantastic business." Like an alpha predator, he went for the throat"".

"The wealthy  became wealthy through start-ups and entrepreneurship. Selling people products they want".?

Less than 1% of the wealth held by wealthy households in the USA is invested as so called "angel capital". In reality the wealthy avoid risky start-ups, like the plague. They prefer privatizations of State utilities and financial products where there return is assured by tax payer funding. Those that are too big or too essential for the State to allow them to fail.
Affluent Survey.

In New Zealand many people bought into the myth that "if they wealthy were allowed to keep more of their wealth they would invest more in the productive economy and we would all be better off".
New Zealand went so far and fast with this Neo-liberal piece of B-s that, like Ireland, we were held out as a poster child for other countries.

The infamous "trickle down effect".

After 35 years of tax cuts for the wealthy, asset sales, anti-union legislation, deregulation of banking/finance and wage and welfare cuts.

We have;
 Huge capital losses to offshore bankers and profit takers.
Growth well behind the OECD average.
Increasing child poverty.
Steeply rising prices. Especially for privatised utilities.
Median wages are dropping while the wealthy get 17% annual increases.
Billion dollar bailouts for financiers.
Millions of dollars to reinstate previously privatised essential infrastructure.

Anyone who still believes that giving the already wealthy more of our wealth is the answer is either seriously deluded, or venal.

Friday, July 27, 2012

Agenda for today.

Kia-ora

NZ has a whole generation of managers, cannot call them leaders, who have no vision apart from cutting staff, costs and services.


It was an accountant who told me once, "do not put an accountant in charge, they know the cost of everything, and the value of nothing".

Then they act surprised when their skilled staff head for Australia, their customers head elsewhere and their business tanks.

The same logic has now been applied to the whole country.

Saturday, June 2, 2012

Police Assault Protesters in New Zealand.

Kia Ora

Recent protests, against Government policy, by Students in Auckland were greeted by an overwhelming and aggressive police presence.

New Zealand Police have just made it clear they consider there is no right to protest, if it “inconveniences” anyone.
In fact the students were going about their lawful business. PROTESTING IS STILL LEGAL IN NZ.
The police obstructed members of the public and assaulted them. WHILE THEY WERE GOING ABOUT LAWFUL BUSINESS.

Just like police in the UK.

Of course knowing you are likely to be violently assaulted by police, if you protest, has rather a dampening effect on free speech.

No doubt that is what is intended by the police overreaction.

Practicing for when the population finally realises, like the Greeks,  how much they have been lied to and exploited.

How long before we see the other repressive actions of an authoritarian dictatorship, to legitimate dissent,  here. Like the "kettling" in the UK.

Saturday, November 5, 2011

Show me the Money??

Kia-ora

Show me the Money??

Easy. The wealthy stole it!

One of the No-Liberal memes is if you allow more of the wealth produced by workers to be retained by the wealthy they will invest more and everyone will benefit. The trickle down theory.

This graph from the New York Times NYT gives the lie to this theory.

Given more money the wealthy simply spend of gamble it in more and more dysfunctional ways.
The effect of policy on inequality



 We can see the same effects in Britain and New Zealand. The effects of Britains belief in voodoo economics.

In New Zealand we have an even stronger correlation.

NZ Governments economic records.
From the Nationalisation of banks and a socialist Labour Government which ended the 1930's depression ahead of most of the rest of the world. To the great recession caused by the adoption of Neo-Liberal dogma from 1984. The rise in incomes and prosperity generally when the Neo-Liberal prescription was relaxed a bit in 2000.

The detrimental effects on a country, by all measures, even their own ones.


of the Neo-Liberal, cut wages, cut taxes, sell everything, deregulate give to the wealthy are conclusively proven.

Looks like even the ratings agencies prefer more left leaning administrations.

What Our Financial Masters Really Think of Democracy.

Kia-ora

On the axed Referendum.

"In Athens, several ministers and governing party MPs called for Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou to step down in favour of a coalition national unity government that would approve Greece's bailout package without a referendum,"".

The so called representatives of the people. Do not want the people to decide on how to respond to a package.
To bail out even more bankers who made bad lending decisions and pushed prices up to increase their income..

It is becoming very obvious who the real rulers of the world are.

Revealed the capitalist network that runs the world

Despite the lip service to "Representative Democracy".

It is not the citizens of each country.

Monday, October 24, 2011

Occupy Wall Street.

Kia-ora

The response from the Neo-Liberal establishment to OWS, shows they know how effective  bottom up changes can be.

Why we should protest.

Management 101. Effective change management.
1. Establish a consensus that there is a need for change.
2. Figure out what needs to be changed. Again by consensus.
3. Invite ideas and positive changes from the shop floor.
4. Managers should act as facilitators and supporters of change agents.

Lasting and effective changes, need to have the active support of the majority of the workforce, at all levels.
Authoritarian managers are rarely effective at making lasting changes. People always find a way to derail changes they do not support.

Despite some of the best research on Management and Leadership coming from the USA. Places like the USA, NZ and UK ignore it. Leaving effective implementation to Germany, Japan and Scandinavia.

It is strange that despite all the research that says they are less effective, the cult of the Authoritarian Manager/National Leader still remains. Maybe the answer lies in the research about Authoritarian followers. Those who like certainty, even if it is leading them into a country like Somalia.

OWS is at stage 1 at present.

The first stage.

What is frightening politicians, who dream of absolute power, is they know OWS will grow.

We will soon see the solution is democracy. Very scary for those who have been ripping us of while accepting a Parliamentary salary from us.

Why should we leave our future up to a power hungry, greedy minority.

We are the 99%.

In the meantime. We can do our part in supporting stage one. Worldwide. 
Occupy Wall Street.

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

On internet Surveillance and Interception.

Kia-ora


Years ago, when you applied for a marine radio operators licence, you had to sign a statement that you would maintain "secrecy of correspondence".

"Secrecy of correspondence" was the legal principle that, "Under no circumstances would you divulge the contents of any radio message to a third party".

In other words privacy of communication was sacrosanct.  All radio operators hearing a message,  including Government radio operators , were only allowed to divulge the existence or the contents of a radio message to "the proper recipient".

I am sure this was often honoured in the breach by intelligence agencies.  But the principle that an individuals right to privacy overrode any other interests ,for any reason, was there.

Similarly it has been a legal principle,  in most "democratic" States, that phone calls can only be intercepted on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.
Usually by a judicial or court order. Police are not allowed to listen to private phone calls at random.

WHY THEN! Are we allowing the State, and even worse, private ISP companies and copyright holders to breach a our privacy IN CASE WE ARE BREAKING THE LAW.

WE DO NOT ALLOW THEM TO BREACH OUR "PRIVACY OF COMMUNICATION", ON THE TELEPHONE, LIKE THIS.

Sure they have all sort of laudable reasons. Protecting copyright holders, attempting to limit paedophilia and catching organised criminals. But anyone, who wants to intercept other forms of communication to prevent these crimes, has to see a judge.

Of course reasonable people support intercepting paedophiles and terrorists on the internet. Who wouldn't.

However, those people can easily find ways and means to bypass internet scrutiny.

While the rest of us have our rights to privacy and free and open communication with our friends trampled on.

Once a Government starts internet scrutiny do you think they will stop with intercepting illegal traffic. How long before they intercept Wikileaks, The New Zealand Socialist Party. The Labour party!  Anything which embarrasses them!

How long before the SIS and police start making lists.

Of people who are not comfortable with the present Government.

They have done it before.

Saturday, August 13, 2011

Pambazuka News.

Kia-ora


"Through the voices of the peoples of Africa and the global South, Pambazuka Press and Pambazuka News disseminate analysis and debate on the struggle for freedom and justice."

Pambazuka News.

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Campaign for MMP in New Zealand.



Kia-ora

Campaign for MMP

MMP has shown its worth as an electoral system, in keeping some rein on extremist politicians.

Just recently by slowing or stopping the path of a Government bill, to take away some of an individuals rights when before the courts.

MMP saves right to trial by jury


Monday, August 8, 2011

"Good' and bad Dictators.

Kia-ora

A good Dictator is one who lets the US corporate world burgle his country.
A bad Dictator is one who does not!

Democracy is fine. So long as it meets the objectives of the USA
""Washington and its allies keep to the well-established principle that democracy is acceptable only insofar as it conforms to strategic and economic objectives: fine in enemy territory (up to a point), but not in our backyard, please, unless properly tamed"".

Washington is happy to support radical Islamic Government in Saudi Arabia, repressive dictatorships in Columbia, Indonesia,Tunisia and UAE and governments with scant regard for human rights in other countries.

As Chile, Honduras, Iran, Venezuala, Indonesia and, recently, Libya (and  the citizens of the USA) have found the one thing you cannot do is keep some of the local wealth from exploitation by US corporates.
That is the trigger for the USA to replace the Government by one more pliable.
It does not matter that, in most cases, the new Government is a repressive and cruel dictatorship, so long as US interests are served and the Neo-Liberal gravy train for the worlds rich continues.

Gaddafi is no saint, but he was not as bad as many regimes the USA continues to support.

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Democracy Recap.

Kia-ora

I find myself on the Standard again defending the principle of Democracy against the same old arguments.

My answers in italics.

Arguing for democracy.

“On top of that is the very real threat of Tyranny of the Majority.”

That is a joke! At the moment we have a tyranny of a very small, wealthy minority.
What is worse is Government by minority in the USA, UK and NZ keeps voting for less taxes for the wealthy putting the economy in deficit and shutting our society down.
Looking at two BCIR decisions in California is cherry picking unless you look at how it has worked fine elsewhere.

“Transfer that scenario to NZ and I wonder if the Homosexual Law Reform Bill (1986) would have been passed had it gone to referenda?”

Judging by the polling at the time the majority in NZ supported the bill. It was parliament who held it up. I suspect a majority are also happy about gay marriage.
It is a minority of religious people, supported by Government who are too scared of them to revisit the issue, who are holding up a sensible abortion reform law.


“Or the Prostitution Law Reform Bill of 2003?”

Maybe, maybe not. I suspect the majority could have been persuaded by sensible argument. But it is not a consideration against democracy that some people do not like the decisions. Many more do not like most of the decisions of our present Government.


“Heck, women didn’t get the vote in Switzerland until 1971!! Until then, numerous referenda on the issue had been voted down.”


Again in NZ it was Parliament that held this up. Indications were that the majority view was women should have equal rights. The decision in Switzerland reflected their society not their political system. The same thing would have happened no matter what form of Government they had.


“I have a very real fear of lawmaking-by-referenda – especially law that is complex. For example, who can forget Norm Withers’ referendum held in 1999, which asked, “Should there be a reform of our Justice system placing greater emphasis on the needs of victims, providing restitution and compensation for them and imposing minimum sentences and hard labour for all serious violent offences?”?”


The Government censored the senior judge who argued against more severe sentencing.
Again this needed a more informed level of public discussion, instead of point scoring politicians.
You mean the majority may not agree with you! If you think you have a better way it is up to you to prove it will work.
Who are you to say you can understand complex issues but the public cannot.
The majority did oppose section 59. Not I suspect because they wanted to go out and beat their kids, but as I did, because the police already have more powers than the level of maturity and skills of the average police-person can handle.
Given more discussion and less of the disgusting name calling and BS from both extremes we may have got a better law.
Similarly with the FS and SB law a lot more discussion and time was required to make a durable solution which was OK for the majority of both ethnicity.


“Lawmaking by referenda, to me, is a lazy way to make law. It involves little thinking; very little participation by the public; and only superficual knowledge of issues – usually by media. Complex issues devolved to a simple “Yes” or “No” tick.”


Doesn’t work that way in Switzerland. Politicians have to work hard at getting views across, making legislation work or it will be voted out.
Research shows that on the whole BCIR makes better decisions than politicians.
New Zealanders have shown over time that, contrary to your belief, the majority believe in fairness and equality for minorities. How many really oppose fair treaty settlements for example.


“It would be like handing over the justice system to internet messageboards/Fora, for a verdict. It would be the ultimate ‘McDonaldisation’ of our political system.”

And handing it over to the prettiest politician on TV is not!

““Would you like fries with that “No” vote to adequately fund criminal rehabilitation programmes?””


I suspect given the evidence of increased crime figures, if they are abandoned, the public would quickly vote them back.

When people know that they will actually make a difference they will take more interest and demand they are properly informed.


Why would anyone fully consider how they vote in a referendum when they know it will ignored.
Like most people your objections are really. “We cannot have democracy because the decisions may not reflect the ones I would make”.


Well. I am happy to test my ideas against the collective intelligence of the public. Are you?

Saturday, June 25, 2011

The Politics of Envy.

Kia-ora


Thanks to Art Uncut for this one.

""If an individual realises that those in the socio-economic group they were born into die a decade younger on average, or that their children's life chances are significantly less than the children of those who can afford private education, or that the wages of those in 'higher' socio-economic groups have risen many, many times faster in the last thirty years than the wages of those in their own, and as a result of this realisation gets a bit angry, I think that we should call this 'legitimate grievance' rather than 'petty jealousy'. The phrase 'politics of envy' is very ugly indeed. I hope in the future this phrase is deemed unacceptable in the way that racist or homophobic terms are now deemed unacceptable"". 

Saturday, June 4, 2011

IMF. Rape.

Kia-ora

 IMF's "Rape" of the world.
"If DSK is guilty, I suspect I know how it happened. He must have mistaken the maid for a poor country in financial trouble. Heads of the IMF have, after all, been allowed to rape them with impunity for years."

Exactly. AND where NZ is doomed to follow.

Unless we vote out a National Government.

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

On Retirement Pensions and the Age of Entitlement.

Kia-ora

On Retirement Pensions and the Age of Entitlement.

What was wrong with the surcharge?

This is a mantra. “We cannot afford superannuation” which has been repeated so long and so often that even those who should know better repeat it.

And what did Government’s do with the more than a million, in today’s dollars, I paid in tax that they cannot afford to pay me a small proportion on retirement.

Do we really want to return to the days when most elderly people were totally impoverished when their working lives ended.

In fact super has been so effective in removing poverty amongst the elderly it should be extended to everyone in the form of a guaranteed minimum income. There is no excuse for having people with inadequate food and housing in a country which is capable of supplying an excess of both internally.


Super and other benefits are easily affordable if those who get the most benefit from our society paid their fair share.

We are fast becoming a country which does not look after its children, the sick or the old.


What does that say about us?

Monday, May 30, 2011

Kia-ora

National is driving even more New Zealand jobs offshore as they drive up the dollar with borrowing for tax cuts for their voters. National borrowing for election bribes. Sound familiar to anyone who was around during the Muldoon National Government in the 70's and early 80's.

None of the borrowing would be necessary if we had kept reasonable progressive tax rates. Like Australia, Scandinavia and other more successful countries, instead of following failed States like Ireland, the UK and the USA.

Bernard Hickey on Investment

It was the neo-liberals from the first ACT government, in 1984, on that made NZ hostile to investors in productive business. Since then productive investment in NZ has been less than 1/3 of the rate before 1980.

Why invest in NZ when the median income is too low paid to buy your products and you can make more money from gambling in finance and land speculation.
The Government even bails you out when the speculation fails.

Not to mention the grossly overpriced NZ dollar due to the, way past its used by date, reserve bank act, AND, lately, Nationals borrowing for tax cuts to those who have benefited most from our infrastructure and educated workforce.
Kia-ora

I hate to say this, but our last chance of defeating the Neo-Liberal tide in NZ are sleep walking their way to defeat.
At this late stage they can only rearrange the chairs, but Goff is too colourless to counter Key.

Labour should have introduced new blood at the top when Helen Clark left. AND! grown a spine!

Over 60% of New Zealanders oppose National's policies, but will vote for Key anyway because Labour has failed in providing a credible alternative. Labour needed to show a clean break with the past and a clean break from failed Neo-Liberal policies. Most of the front bench were there during the introduction of more market policies and asset sales in the 80's. They are not credible now half-heartedly advocating a reversal of those policies.

Many people did not vote for Labour last election because after 9 years they did little apart from lightening the Neo-Liberal dogma a bit.,
Keeping most of the same top figures, from the past, indicates they are more interested in keeping their jobs than being re-elected to Government to prevent NACT's demolition of New Zealand.
Matt McCarten on Labour.

Another 3 years of National's cut taxes to the rich, sell assets and borrow will certainly "leave the cupboard bare" leaving little room to maneuver for the next Government.

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

The Green Alternative.

Kia-ora

The New Zealand Greens show there are credible alternatives to National's Neo-Liberal slash and burn.

Some Alternatives for a Green budget.

In fact they have been advocating socially and environmentally responsible alternatives for some time.

The Green new Deal.

Media prefer to ignore sensible discussion of policy to concentrate on sound bites and irrelevance about celebrities.

The Labour party is "missing in action". I suspect they feel that New Zealand is so unrecoverable, after 30 years of Neo-Liberal "stuffing" that they do not want to be in power

Monday, May 9, 2011

The trouble with facts.

Kia-ora

It puzzles many of us why people so often vote against their own interests. For most New Zealander's voting for more Neo-liberal government is like "Turkeys voting for Christmas" but they still do.


An article in the Standard about the reasons why the facts do not always influence people.

Monbiot-on-the-left

And one about the psychology of denial. Psychology of crankery.  Or it could be titled. Do you have a Don Brash in your life.