I have pointed out how investing in stocks or shares can achieve outstanding returns. I tipped Bradken (ASX: BKN) back then, you can read about it here >>>http://kenhorlor.blogspot.com/2016/06/advantages-of-investing-in-stocks.html
Check out Bradken now; AUS$3.19
Jan 21 they were AUS$0.38
Jun 9 they were AUS$1.22
As at Nov 30...they are AUS$3.19
That's just one year; AUS$50,000 invested upon my tip on June 10, would have acquired 40,000 shares (rounding and allowing for brokerage and such), and that stake would now be worth AUS$127,600.
Also, check my portfolio tracker, now up 48% this year. http://www.siliconinvestor.com/portfolio.aspx?fid=521
My favourites, Oshkosh (NYSE: OSK ) and Trinity Industries (NYSE: TRN) are up 103% and 72% respectively
November 30, 2016
Kaikoura Earthquake: Dredging the Harbour
Who is paying for dredging Kaikoura harbour?
After the earthquake, which measured 7.8 on the Richter scale, the harbour floor has been raised and now the Whale Watch and Seal Watch businesses cannot take to sea. The floor is solid rock, and dredging will involve cutting, drilling and blasting.
Whale Watch is owned by the Ngai Tahu tribe and their commercial interests are substantial, they own commercial property and many businesses. That said, were they earthquake insured, and was the harbour asset insured by whoever owns it? If not why not? It's not like they didn't have fair warning as there have been thousands of earthquakes a few miles south of them and one of those quakes substantially wrecked the central business district of Christchurch with eastern residential areas a write-off as well.
In relation to the the port of Lyttelton, the port company received a large insurance payout as a result of the 2011 earthquake and those funds are being applied to port redevelopment. Are you with me so far?
The taxpayer should not be paying to dredge the harbour at Kaikoura as that is propping up private interests. If the taxpayer is stumping up, then they should receive a share of the businesses that operate out of that harbour - including Whale Watch.
Now I don't want to sound churlish. Heaven forbid, but I've noticed complete silence on the subject of who is paying for this job of dredging Kaikoura harbour.
After the earthquake, which measured 7.8 on the Richter scale, the harbour floor has been raised and now the Whale Watch and Seal Watch businesses cannot take to sea. The floor is solid rock, and dredging will involve cutting, drilling and blasting.
Whale Watch is owned by the Ngai Tahu tribe and their commercial interests are substantial, they own commercial property and many businesses. That said, were they earthquake insured, and was the harbour asset insured by whoever owns it? If not why not? It's not like they didn't have fair warning as there have been thousands of earthquakes a few miles south of them and one of those quakes substantially wrecked the central business district of Christchurch with eastern residential areas a write-off as well.
In relation to the the port of Lyttelton, the port company received a large insurance payout as a result of the 2011 earthquake and those funds are being applied to port redevelopment. Are you with me so far?
The taxpayer should not be paying to dredge the harbour at Kaikoura as that is propping up private interests. If the taxpayer is stumping up, then they should receive a share of the businesses that operate out of that harbour - including Whale Watch.
Now I don't want to sound churlish. Heaven forbid, but I've noticed complete silence on the subject of who is paying for this job of dredging Kaikoura harbour.
November 29, 2016
NYSE: Harley-Davidson
Is Harley-Davidson (NYSE: HOG) a good buy I keep asking myself.
I enjoyed the book "Growing Up Harley-Davidson" by Jean Davidson. It's the kind of book that grows on you over time. But something that struck me was how much motorcycles were part of everyday life back in the day. Motorcycles were used to get to work, go anywhere, and with sidecar they carried the family too.
Now in most of the developed world, motorcycles are a luxury item for the most part, maybe sport bike at times too, and tourer rarely.
Harley-Davidson sit at the top of the tree, they're big and hardly a sport bike. They're too expensive to be a family get around. They appear to be a status symbol with a loyal following. And that following is getting older all the time. Evidently the average age of people who attend the bike gathering at Sturgis in the northern Black Hills of South Dakota, is 52. All the hotties are professional models and shipped in and paraded around. Many of the riders haul their bikes in, ride them around for the event and then haul them behind their RV back to where they came from. A bit lame eh.
Where are all the young people getting into a Harley? Is the Fast and Furious generation interested in these bikes?
In the developing world the scooter or step-thru is the motorcycle of choice. They do everything on these bikes, but Harley-Davidson does not make anything like that. I read how sales of step-thu's are taking off in China. One example was of a gum boot manufacturer (Wellington's) setting up in China by taking over a bicycle factory. The workforce were all the previous bicycle workers and they duly arrived at work riding their push bikes. Within a year and on higher pay they had all bought a step-thu motorcycle.
If you think about all of Asia being like the above example, Harley-Davidson are missing out completely.
Then there are scrambles (Motocross) and trials bikes. Often they're two-stroke. Harley-Davidson has nothing in this segment either. They got out of Buell, which I understand fitted into the Enduro segment.
But following the Peter Lynch, Beating the Street type of thinking, the Harley-Davidson company may still represent value to an investor. The brand is worth a lot, and perhaps is not fully exploited (have they got a Kardashian on board?).
Currently it is hard to find an NYSE company that is sound and cheap. Harley-Davidson appears to be that at a P/E of less than 16. They also pay a dividend.
I'm of two minds and am interested in what you all think. Does Harley-Davidson need to broaden its offering?
I enjoyed the book "Growing Up Harley-Davidson" by Jean Davidson. It's the kind of book that grows on you over time. But something that struck me was how much motorcycles were part of everyday life back in the day. Motorcycles were used to get to work, go anywhere, and with sidecar they carried the family too.
Now in most of the developed world, motorcycles are a luxury item for the most part, maybe sport bike at times too, and tourer rarely.
Harley-Davidson sit at the top of the tree, they're big and hardly a sport bike. They're too expensive to be a family get around. They appear to be a status symbol with a loyal following. And that following is getting older all the time. Evidently the average age of people who attend the bike gathering at Sturgis in the northern Black Hills of South Dakota, is 52. All the hotties are professional models and shipped in and paraded around. Many of the riders haul their bikes in, ride them around for the event and then haul them behind their RV back to where they came from. A bit lame eh.
Where are all the young people getting into a Harley? Is the Fast and Furious generation interested in these bikes?
In the developing world the scooter or step-thru is the motorcycle of choice. They do everything on these bikes, but Harley-Davidson does not make anything like that. I read how sales of step-thu's are taking off in China. One example was of a gum boot manufacturer (Wellington's) setting up in China by taking over a bicycle factory. The workforce were all the previous bicycle workers and they duly arrived at work riding their push bikes. Within a year and on higher pay they had all bought a step-thu motorcycle.
If you think about all of Asia being like the above example, Harley-Davidson are missing out completely.
Then there are scrambles (Motocross) and trials bikes. Often they're two-stroke. Harley-Davidson has nothing in this segment either. They got out of Buell, which I understand fitted into the Enduro segment.
But following the Peter Lynch, Beating the Street type of thinking, the Harley-Davidson company may still represent value to an investor. The brand is worth a lot, and perhaps is not fully exploited (have they got a Kardashian on board?).
Currently it is hard to find an NYSE company that is sound and cheap. Harley-Davidson appears to be that at a P/E of less than 16. They also pay a dividend.
I'm of two minds and am interested in what you all think. Does Harley-Davidson need to broaden its offering?
November 28, 2016
Rugby Quidditch
J.K. Rowling invented the sport of Quidditch in her ripping yarn about Harry Potter and his friends. It's a game that resembles Australian Rules Football, except players ride broomsticks, which I'm sure you'll agree isn't exactly practical in the muggle world.
I have devised rule changes to the game of Rugby Union which incorporates Quidditch. Please refer to the image below for the scoring zones.
Here's how I'd change the game of Rugby to create Rugby Quidditch:-
Scoring:-
As now a try is five points, conversion two, drop kick three and penalty three points.
Then add; four points if scoring in the goal placed between the uprights above the crossbar (shown as yellow in the diagram), scoring is achieved by kicking a goal on the full (a punt) during general play and from beyond the 22 metre line (also a drop kick in certain instances, see note in blue at the foot of this post below).
Then in the areas shown in pink on the diagram, if a try is scored in that area it counts as a Seek (new scoring term, still five points for the try with the conversion to follow as normal). Further, from beyond the line of the 22, if the ball kicked by the player designated Seeker drops on the full into the area, and lands without being touched in flight by any opposing player, the score is four points and the score also counts as a Seek.
Three Seeks scored in one game by the same team and the game ends, meaning the Snitch has been caught. If the team that catches the Snitch is ahead on the scoreboard then they win, if behind then they lose.
Note that I've created some new things; a player is designated Seeker (likely the First Five Eighth/Fly Half), and only they can kick to the pink scoring area. If a team is behind on the scoreboard then they wouldn't want to score on the area in pink as it contributes to ending the game (the team would want to catch up). Conversely any team that was ahead would be trying to end the game and score in that area by scoring a try or by their Seeker kicking into it on the full from beyond the 22 metre line. Thus, defence would be paramount.
General rule changes:-
Penalty kicks to touch could be restarted with a tap kick as in Rugby League, the option would be with the attacking team to choose; tap, lineout or scrum.
Lineouts would have no lifting in them, it would be a contest to jump.
Scrums would be liberalised and twisting the scrum allowed.
Rucking would return; if a player is on the ground and in the way of the ball, the feet could be used to move them out of the way (as you used to able to do), and the ball moved with the feet, thus speeding up play.
If the ball passes through the yellow goal between the uprights off the kick-off, from a drop kick or penalty kick, this is either worth no points or no extra points (the goal worth four points must be scored off a punt from beyond the 22 metre line during general play).
Have a look at the diagram below, the extra goal and the scoring zones could be adjusted in size:-
Possible variation:-
The introduction of a Bludger; this is complicated so may not work. Bear in mind I've done away with lifting in the lineouts and gone back to rucking to make the game more difficult as I've introduced more ways to score. In effect I've reintroduced elements of the 1970's type of game.
A Bludger would change the game entirely. This would be a round ball that was soft on the outside but very heavy, with a core inside the ball that moved, making it somewhat irregular in flight. The Bludger could be possessed by any team and could only be used to take out a player carrying the oval shaped rugby ball (representing the Quaffle).
The Bludger would be secondary to the rugby ball itself, when play is dead, the Bludger is dead. When play restarts any player may keep the Bludger or challenge for it, the normal rules of offside and no forward pass still applies.
With this variation, I'd think two referees would be needed. If the Bludger goes out the linesman (assistant referee) would throw the Bludger in backwards over his head from where it went out, as in Aussie Rules. If the game is stopped before that can be done, then the Bludger is thrown in after play resumes.
How would it work? Take the Beauden Barrett runaway try for the All Blacks against France last weekend. If the French team possessed the Bludger they could throw it at Barrett to bring him down and prevent him scoring a try. It is most likely the Bludger would be held by the fullback, but it may also have a use with the flankers.
[Update: as a drop kick occurs in general play; then if the kick originates beyond the line of the 22 and passes through the goal marked yellow, then the score counts four points. Also, off a penalty kick or conversion, if the ball hits the goal marked yellow and rebounds into the field, it will count as a score either three or two points, only the uprights and cross bar rebound can prevent a score from a place kick]
The introduction of a Bludger; this is complicated so may not work. Bear in mind I've done away with lifting in the lineouts and gone back to rucking to make the game more difficult as I've introduced more ways to score. In effect I've reintroduced elements of the 1970's type of game.
A Bludger would change the game entirely. This would be a round ball that was soft on the outside but very heavy, with a core inside the ball that moved, making it somewhat irregular in flight. The Bludger could be possessed by any team and could only be used to take out a player carrying the oval shaped rugby ball (representing the Quaffle).
The Bludger would be secondary to the rugby ball itself, when play is dead, the Bludger is dead. When play restarts any player may keep the Bludger or challenge for it, the normal rules of offside and no forward pass still applies.
With this variation, I'd think two referees would be needed. If the Bludger goes out the linesman (assistant referee) would throw the Bludger in backwards over his head from where it went out, as in Aussie Rules. If the game is stopped before that can be done, then the Bludger is thrown in after play resumes.
How would it work? Take the Beauden Barrett runaway try for the All Blacks against France last weekend. If the French team possessed the Bludger they could throw it at Barrett to bring him down and prevent him scoring a try. It is most likely the Bludger would be held by the fullback, but it may also have a use with the flankers.
[Update: as a drop kick occurs in general play; then if the kick originates beyond the line of the 22 and passes through the goal marked yellow, then the score counts four points. Also, off a penalty kick or conversion, if the ball hits the goal marked yellow and rebounds into the field, it will count as a score either three or two points, only the uprights and cross bar rebound can prevent a score from a place kick]
New Zealand Government Put Their Own Interests First
What has been the first announcement from the government following the recent earthquakes, the worst of which has left State Highway 1 blocked and Kaikoura township isolated, hmm?
Oh that's right, they've made a major announcement to build themselves new buildings in Wellington. Suck on that Kaikoura, see, they really don't care about you.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/86929531/new-office-block-for-mps-on-the-cards
And that goes for the rest of the lower South Island too, you can just be fodder for the price gouging now going on.
Yes, price gouging, transport operators have lifted prices by as much as 20%, well the extra distance they travel doesn't change their fixed costs, and only adds a marginal increase in variable costs; taken across the whole load there is no way every shipment needs to increase by anywhere near as much (this is a simple arithmetic exercise but I guess if you're an investor then some of the listed transport companies make good buying right now).
C'mon New Zealand, you need to take this country back from these incompetent fools.
Oh that's right, they've made a major announcement to build themselves new buildings in Wellington. Suck on that Kaikoura, see, they really don't care about you.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/86929531/new-office-block-for-mps-on-the-cards
And that goes for the rest of the lower South Island too, you can just be fodder for the price gouging now going on.
Yes, price gouging, transport operators have lifted prices by as much as 20%, well the extra distance they travel doesn't change their fixed costs, and only adds a marginal increase in variable costs; taken across the whole load there is no way every shipment needs to increase by anywhere near as much (this is a simple arithmetic exercise but I guess if you're an investor then some of the listed transport companies make good buying right now).
C'mon New Zealand, you need to take this country back from these incompetent fools.
New Zealand: Sitting on a Goldmine
New Zealand has an abundance of natural resources, oil and natural gas, coal, agricultural land, you name it. There used to be an oil field up in Murchison, everyone has forgotten about it now. Someone lit a 'living flame' up there not so long ago, from a fissure where gas emits naturally.
If we're talking coal I describe it like this; coal from the Ruhr valley in Germany can power German industry for the next few hundred years (one of the world's biggest industrialised economies). Well, there is more coal on the West Coast of the South Island than in all of the Ruhr, and that's not counting the rest of New Zealand. By that measure, NZ can be powered by coal for the next few thousand years. It's a glut of natural resources. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
But given all these advantages I still think the one big thing New Zealand is sitting on, that I'm sure Americans would exploit fully, is not even this type of resource. The resource that we fail to fully exploit, it's so obvious we look at it every day, is an intellectual one, it's the people of the country itself and what they know.
What am I going on about? Start with soil, there are much more fertile areas out there, much better than anywhere in New Zealand. I swear that there are soils elsewhere so rich that if you were hungry you could eat it. Sow a seed and next day the plant is knee high (okay I made that bit up).
But what this does is develop lazy farmers. New Zealand farmers have to work on their soil, they have to make it work, and the reward is knowledge about how to farm.
Then take Africa, all of sub-Saharan Africa to be precise, and they have soil that needs work, constant management, except wars and arbitrary national boundaries have jiggered their prospects - until recently. But that is about to change, that's right, sub-Saharan Africa is emerging and it is vast, with farmland aplenty and they need the intellectual property to harness that potential.
I'm not talking about New Zealand farming Africa. Africans farm it, what NZ needs to do is license them to use our intellectual property, our computer programs, our systems, our guidance, our technology. You could take NZ's agricultural graduates, all of them, every year and send them to Africa and after two hundred years you'd have not even scratched the surface.
New Zealand should endeavour to be the Microsoft of food production. Why is it not doing this? Then there is Asia and South America, the world is literally NZ's proverbial oyster. But start with Africa first as they're honest and will pay, the rest of the world not so, they'd just rip NZ off, so start with Africa first, learn how to set things up; software engineering, consultancy, farm management, you name it, then roll the whole thing out with embedded security.
Xero I hear you say. No not them, and most of NZ's software companies are headed in the wrong direction, in my opinion (I don't own any Xero shares and likely will never own any), think agriculture and those areas that badly need farm technology to feed their people.
If we're talking coal I describe it like this; coal from the Ruhr valley in Germany can power German industry for the next few hundred years (one of the world's biggest industrialised economies). Well, there is more coal on the West Coast of the South Island than in all of the Ruhr, and that's not counting the rest of New Zealand. By that measure, NZ can be powered by coal for the next few thousand years. It's a glut of natural resources. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
But given all these advantages I still think the one big thing New Zealand is sitting on, that I'm sure Americans would exploit fully, is not even this type of resource. The resource that we fail to fully exploit, it's so obvious we look at it every day, is an intellectual one, it's the people of the country itself and what they know.
What am I going on about? Start with soil, there are much more fertile areas out there, much better than anywhere in New Zealand. I swear that there are soils elsewhere so rich that if you were hungry you could eat it. Sow a seed and next day the plant is knee high (okay I made that bit up).
But what this does is develop lazy farmers. New Zealand farmers have to work on their soil, they have to make it work, and the reward is knowledge about how to farm.
Then take Africa, all of sub-Saharan Africa to be precise, and they have soil that needs work, constant management, except wars and arbitrary national boundaries have jiggered their prospects - until recently. But that is about to change, that's right, sub-Saharan Africa is emerging and it is vast, with farmland aplenty and they need the intellectual property to harness that potential.
I'm not talking about New Zealand farming Africa. Africans farm it, what NZ needs to do is license them to use our intellectual property, our computer programs, our systems, our guidance, our technology. You could take NZ's agricultural graduates, all of them, every year and send them to Africa and after two hundred years you'd have not even scratched the surface.
New Zealand should endeavour to be the Microsoft of food production. Why is it not doing this? Then there is Asia and South America, the world is literally NZ's proverbial oyster. But start with Africa first as they're honest and will pay, the rest of the world not so, they'd just rip NZ off, so start with Africa first, learn how to set things up; software engineering, consultancy, farm management, you name it, then roll the whole thing out with embedded security.
Xero I hear you say. No not them, and most of NZ's software companies are headed in the wrong direction, in my opinion (I don't own any Xero shares and likely will never own any), think agriculture and those areas that badly need farm technology to feed their people.
November 27, 2016
New Zealand: Change Needed
At some stage New Zealand will implode. Everything will simply stop working, and it'll be back to basics. What went wrong? I explain it like this: New Zealand gave up the British Empire model which concentrated on national development above all else and adopted the US consumerist approach, and since then everything has gone downhill.
This is not to say that everything the United States does is wrong, they've developed a pretty impressive economy, and there's the rub, when adopting the American way foreigners often cherry pick. What consumers end up doing is buying lots of pretty things, and the hard work involved in building a complete infrastructure is avoided.
New Zealand is one such country. Any visitor to NZ will find a modern set-up; roads. bridges, ports, airports, cities, when you flush the toilet the waste runs somewhere and is treated, and when you turn the tap on fresh water flows limitlessly. Put your rubbish bin out on the right day and voilà, the contents are spirited away. You get the idea.
Thing is, almost all of this infrastructure was put in place during a time when it was hard to buy something. If you wanted to buy a car, you needed permission to do so unless you had overseas funds. And assuming you could buy that new car, you had to take the colour it was delivered in. As a result, secondhand cars could sell for more than new ones. This sounds really bad, right? In a way it was but the upside was a country got built in less than a hundred years.
I will illustrate using the example of the bridge I use every day, just down the road from where I live. It's a solid structure, put there back in the 1940's. The steel on it was made in London, how I know this is under the bridge I can see the name of the manufacturer stamped onto each beam. Yet the bridge was built at a time when it was hard to even buy a car to use that bridge.
Here's what I'm getting at, does anyone believe for a minute that that bridge can be replaced easily, even though I can now buy whatever car my heart desires? Which is better, car not so good and wonderful bridge, or luxury car and bridge falling down?
I won't be alive to see the inevitable, but my children will be and I'm worried about them. Things will go bad very quickly, it will be when the pipes in the ground expire, the bridges finally give up the ghost, when the roads become so potholed or congested you can't get anywhere. It will seem to happen all at once because all of these things were built at about the same time, so they will expire at about the same time.
What is the solution? Given that New Zealand has drifted for so long, the solution needs to be radical. I don't believe the current crop of politicians have it in them to make the hard decisions. What is needed is complete reform of the political process in New Zealand.
New Zealand can begin by reducing the size of government. At the central government level, there are currently over 40 ministries and departments, add to that other entities that are government owned or controlled, as well as local and regional government. This in a country of only 4.5 million people. No wonder nothing gets done, the only employment available is in endlessly planning what not to do (I'm being facetious).
Look at it like this; if California was to exit the United States, Calexit, it would likely form into six independent states, all being part of the newly independent California which would be the world's fifth largest economy. Any one of those six Californian states would be larger than all New Zealand. Has that sobered you up?
Reform New Zealand by taking the following steps; get rid of the Governor-General and instead elect a President and Vice-President who run the country like CEO and Deputy CEO (the President takes over the Governor-General's residence, the Vice-President gets Premier House). The President would appoint an advisory committee to oversee things, and this would replace the current Cabinet. The advantage of a system like this, like that of the USA, is specialist skills can be recruited that would not otherwise be elected. I wouldn't call them ministers however, but rather something like adviser or secretary.
Reduce the size of parliament from over 120 now, to only 60, do away with MMP, each member of parliament would represent a territorial electorate, elected on first-past-the-post.
Merge all those central government ministries, departments and agencies into eight, no more than ten departmental groups.
From a further eight, no more than ten industry groups, the job would be to design the framework for output, set goals and referee the game played within the economy.
Have a board running each sector and industry group, the majority on each board to comprise members of parliament, the balance directly elected from employers, unions, Maori, church, and members of the public.
Do away with all regional and local body authorities.
How would this work? There would be sixteen, no more than twenty state sector, public service and industry groups. Each sector group would, apart from running things, propose laws by referring anything to the President for signature. These become regulations within existing legislation. How many laws do you need for heavens sake? New legislation would need to be passed through parliament but I'd restrict their sitting days to one calendar month for this purpose. Laws could be sent down to the parliament from the office of the President, or arise from the sector groups, or the members themselves.
Remember, the government is embodied in the office of the President, so there is no reason for the parliament to vote on any grounds other than what is in the best interest of the nation. Political parties may be useful to advance policy, but would be meaningless in terms of trying to defeat a government as that can only happen upon the outcome of the vote at the general election.
In practical terms let's look at transport and use that example to see how things would function.
The transport group would own and control all roads, ports, rail and airports. It could be overseen by a board of nineteen members, a chairperson, and eighteen other members, nine of whom, along with the chairperson must be elected parliamentarians. The other nine board members come from sector groups who hold their own elections; two from employers, two from unions, one Maori, one church, plus three members of the public voted for in the general election.
This group then sets about building and repairing the infrastructure, with the chairperson reporting directly to the President or Vice-President (CEO's). This is how to get something done. Think multinational companies and how they operate.
New Zealand would be better off with this structure. Citizens would have almost direct access to the top, and they'd get a vote in matters that directly affected them; if a bridge needed repair or replacement the locals would contact the area manager, who reports the matter to the area committee, then on to the board as a whole who sign off or reject the proposal. Decisions would be made in weeks, perhaps months, not the decades it sometimes takes now.
Politically, the President and deputy are forced to work with the parliament, but the House of Representatives becomes a body that chooses who will sit on the state sector and industry groups, the government is essentially the President and advisory committee and the President appoints sector group chairpersons.
The result would be a cost-effective way of doing things, as well as a speedy way of developing the country. General elections would be held every three or four years, with the sector groups voted on at the same time. There would be no local body elections, and staffing could change, with general managers and area managers taking over from mayors and council CEO's.
Services would likely improve. Take healthcare as an example. Each city would no longer have a divided health board. The hospitals would be run by an area manager, reporting to a general manager and chairperson. Those employees would have performance pay based on their health outcomes. The risk is they may prune waiting lists to make it look like they're doing a swell job. But then it just comes down to how their performance is measured, and to eliminate possible anomalies.
The great part of this approach is that each state sector and industry group can be measured and a report card issued. Ultimately a report card can be produced on even the President, resulting in an overall negative or positive score. Clearly the state sector group led by the Auditor-General would need independence from political interference to achieve this aim.
The report card could be issued just before the general election, putting anyone standing for re-election on the spot.
Taxation would need to change. I propose that with this much smaller government, that GST be reduced to 10%, the same as Australia. Direct personal tax would stay the same, but I'd scrap Working for Families, which is the silliest thing I've ever seen. I'd make cigarettes cheaper, I don't see the need to pay poor people to smoke, just make the ciggies cheap to begin with (what I'm saying is that families on low earnings are paid for each child through Working for Families, and the parents then buy cigarettes at $30 a packet, why not make the smokes $10 a packet and do away with the middleman, Inland Revenue in this case).
Council rates would become property tax, paid directly to central government, it could even come out of each pay packet.
I'd scrap user pays. If you're a citizen or permanent resident, all government services would be free, including obtaining a passport.
At birth all New Zealanders would be registered and documented, being issued an identity smart card. This would hold all biometric information; health data, criminal history, test scores and the like (backed up in the cloud of course). When applying for work in the public sector, this card must be produced (not in the private sector this would breach privacy and not be valid).
The first thing this identity system would deliver is the ability to teach children based on their needs, and deliver Olympic medals. Using this system I'd have all children tested at age six, nine, twelve, fifteen and eighteen. The test would be of personality, dexterity, attention span, intelligence, muscle, physical dimensions (height, wingspan etc), stamina, speed, and overall health.
Then based on the result, children would be placed in classes (and schools) that best suited their needs and they'd be directed to sports that suited them as well. Tall to basketball and volleyball, fast to sprinting, supple to gymnastics, geniuses to mathematics, practical to engineering and trades. New Zealand has the Plunket book, why this has not been extended and digitised I have no idea, the country is sitting on a gold mine (get it, gold mine boom boom).
This is not to say that everything the United States does is wrong, they've developed a pretty impressive economy, and there's the rub, when adopting the American way foreigners often cherry pick. What consumers end up doing is buying lots of pretty things, and the hard work involved in building a complete infrastructure is avoided.
New Zealand is one such country. Any visitor to NZ will find a modern set-up; roads. bridges, ports, airports, cities, when you flush the toilet the waste runs somewhere and is treated, and when you turn the tap on fresh water flows limitlessly. Put your rubbish bin out on the right day and voilà, the contents are spirited away. You get the idea.
Thing is, almost all of this infrastructure was put in place during a time when it was hard to buy something. If you wanted to buy a car, you needed permission to do so unless you had overseas funds. And assuming you could buy that new car, you had to take the colour it was delivered in. As a result, secondhand cars could sell for more than new ones. This sounds really bad, right? In a way it was but the upside was a country got built in less than a hundred years.
I will illustrate using the example of the bridge I use every day, just down the road from where I live. It's a solid structure, put there back in the 1940's. The steel on it was made in London, how I know this is under the bridge I can see the name of the manufacturer stamped onto each beam. Yet the bridge was built at a time when it was hard to even buy a car to use that bridge.
Here's what I'm getting at, does anyone believe for a minute that that bridge can be replaced easily, even though I can now buy whatever car my heart desires? Which is better, car not so good and wonderful bridge, or luxury car and bridge falling down?
I won't be alive to see the inevitable, but my children will be and I'm worried about them. Things will go bad very quickly, it will be when the pipes in the ground expire, the bridges finally give up the ghost, when the roads become so potholed or congested you can't get anywhere. It will seem to happen all at once because all of these things were built at about the same time, so they will expire at about the same time.
What is the solution? Given that New Zealand has drifted for so long, the solution needs to be radical. I don't believe the current crop of politicians have it in them to make the hard decisions. What is needed is complete reform of the political process in New Zealand.
New Zealand can begin by reducing the size of government. At the central government level, there are currently over 40 ministries and departments, add to that other entities that are government owned or controlled, as well as local and regional government. This in a country of only 4.5 million people. No wonder nothing gets done, the only employment available is in endlessly planning what not to do (I'm being facetious).
Look at it like this; if California was to exit the United States, Calexit, it would likely form into six independent states, all being part of the newly independent California which would be the world's fifth largest economy. Any one of those six Californian states would be larger than all New Zealand. Has that sobered you up?
Reform New Zealand by taking the following steps; get rid of the Governor-General and instead elect a President and Vice-President who run the country like CEO and Deputy CEO (the President takes over the Governor-General's residence, the Vice-President gets Premier House). The President would appoint an advisory committee to oversee things, and this would replace the current Cabinet. The advantage of a system like this, like that of the USA, is specialist skills can be recruited that would not otherwise be elected. I wouldn't call them ministers however, but rather something like adviser or secretary.
Reduce the size of parliament from over 120 now, to only 60, do away with MMP, each member of parliament would represent a territorial electorate, elected on first-past-the-post.
Merge all those central government ministries, departments and agencies into eight, no more than ten departmental groups.
From a further eight, no more than ten industry groups, the job would be to design the framework for output, set goals and referee the game played within the economy.
Have a board running each sector and industry group, the majority on each board to comprise members of parliament, the balance directly elected from employers, unions, Maori, church, and members of the public.
Do away with all regional and local body authorities.
How would this work? There would be sixteen, no more than twenty state sector, public service and industry groups. Each sector group would, apart from running things, propose laws by referring anything to the President for signature. These become regulations within existing legislation. How many laws do you need for heavens sake? New legislation would need to be passed through parliament but I'd restrict their sitting days to one calendar month for this purpose. Laws could be sent down to the parliament from the office of the President, or arise from the sector groups, or the members themselves.
Remember, the government is embodied in the office of the President, so there is no reason for the parliament to vote on any grounds other than what is in the best interest of the nation. Political parties may be useful to advance policy, but would be meaningless in terms of trying to defeat a government as that can only happen upon the outcome of the vote at the general election.
In practical terms let's look at transport and use that example to see how things would function.
The transport group would own and control all roads, ports, rail and airports. It could be overseen by a board of nineteen members, a chairperson, and eighteen other members, nine of whom, along with the chairperson must be elected parliamentarians. The other nine board members come from sector groups who hold their own elections; two from employers, two from unions, one Maori, one church, plus three members of the public voted for in the general election.
This group then sets about building and repairing the infrastructure, with the chairperson reporting directly to the President or Vice-President (CEO's). This is how to get something done. Think multinational companies and how they operate.
New Zealand would be better off with this structure. Citizens would have almost direct access to the top, and they'd get a vote in matters that directly affected them; if a bridge needed repair or replacement the locals would contact the area manager, who reports the matter to the area committee, then on to the board as a whole who sign off or reject the proposal. Decisions would be made in weeks, perhaps months, not the decades it sometimes takes now.
Politically, the President and deputy are forced to work with the parliament, but the House of Representatives becomes a body that chooses who will sit on the state sector and industry groups, the government is essentially the President and advisory committee and the President appoints sector group chairpersons.
The result would be a cost-effective way of doing things, as well as a speedy way of developing the country. General elections would be held every three or four years, with the sector groups voted on at the same time. There would be no local body elections, and staffing could change, with general managers and area managers taking over from mayors and council CEO's.
Services would likely improve. Take healthcare as an example. Each city would no longer have a divided health board. The hospitals would be run by an area manager, reporting to a general manager and chairperson. Those employees would have performance pay based on their health outcomes. The risk is they may prune waiting lists to make it look like they're doing a swell job. But then it just comes down to how their performance is measured, and to eliminate possible anomalies.
The great part of this approach is that each state sector and industry group can be measured and a report card issued. Ultimately a report card can be produced on even the President, resulting in an overall negative or positive score. Clearly the state sector group led by the Auditor-General would need independence from political interference to achieve this aim.
The report card could be issued just before the general election, putting anyone standing for re-election on the spot.
Taxation would need to change. I propose that with this much smaller government, that GST be reduced to 10%, the same as Australia. Direct personal tax would stay the same, but I'd scrap Working for Families, which is the silliest thing I've ever seen. I'd make cigarettes cheaper, I don't see the need to pay poor people to smoke, just make the ciggies cheap to begin with (what I'm saying is that families on low earnings are paid for each child through Working for Families, and the parents then buy cigarettes at $30 a packet, why not make the smokes $10 a packet and do away with the middleman, Inland Revenue in this case).
Council rates would become property tax, paid directly to central government, it could even come out of each pay packet.
I'd scrap user pays. If you're a citizen or permanent resident, all government services would be free, including obtaining a passport.
At birth all New Zealanders would be registered and documented, being issued an identity smart card. This would hold all biometric information; health data, criminal history, test scores and the like (backed up in the cloud of course). When applying for work in the public sector, this card must be produced (not in the private sector this would breach privacy and not be valid).
The first thing this identity system would deliver is the ability to teach children based on their needs, and deliver Olympic medals. Using this system I'd have all children tested at age six, nine, twelve, fifteen and eighteen. The test would be of personality, dexterity, attention span, intelligence, muscle, physical dimensions (height, wingspan etc), stamina, speed, and overall health.
Then based on the result, children would be placed in classes (and schools) that best suited their needs and they'd be directed to sports that suited them as well. Tall to basketball and volleyball, fast to sprinting, supple to gymnastics, geniuses to mathematics, practical to engineering and trades. New Zealand has the Plunket book, why this has not been extended and digitised I have no idea, the country is sitting on a gold mine (get it, gold mine boom boom).
November 25, 2016
Donald Trump and the Emoluments clause
Early indications are Donald Trump doesn't fully understand the kinds of responsibilities the President of the United States bears, and the need to avoid any real or potential conflicts of interest.
It was troubling to read that in his meeting with Nigel Farage (UKIP and Brexit), he lobbied him to oppose wind farms that impacted his gold course in the U.K.
Many recent Presidents have placed their assets and interests into a blind trust. This is the method favoured by many leaders worldwide:-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/11/23/trumps-claim-that-the-president-cant-have-a-conflict-of-interest/
Then there is the US Constitution and its little known clause relating to receiving benefits from foreign sources:-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/11/21/the-emoluments-clause-is-donald-trump-violating-its-letter-or-spirit/?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.430f799e5589
It'll be interesting to see if Trump modifies his approach after he's sworn in.
It was troubling to read that in his meeting with Nigel Farage (UKIP and Brexit), he lobbied him to oppose wind farms that impacted his gold course in the U.K.
Many recent Presidents have placed their assets and interests into a blind trust. This is the method favoured by many leaders worldwide:-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/11/23/trumps-claim-that-the-president-cant-have-a-conflict-of-interest/
Then there is the US Constitution and its little known clause relating to receiving benefits from foreign sources:-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/11/21/the-emoluments-clause-is-donald-trump-violating-its-letter-or-spirit/?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.430f799e5589
It'll be interesting to see if Trump modifies his approach after he's sworn in.
November 24, 2016
The Snob's Guide: Moving to New Zealand
Snob's Guide to New Zealand is now a book, available from Amazon in paperback or kindle
Paperback: www.amazon.com/gp/product/1727804147
Kindle: www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07J9XRCWK
It has been reported that many Americans are considering moving to New Zealand now that Donald Trump has been elected President. New Zealand websites like realestate.co.nz and the NZ government immigration website have reported massive increases in traffic from the US.
This is welcome news to Kiwis (the nickname for a New Zealand national is Kiwi). Kiwis like Americans, even if they find them somewhat loud at times, with peculiar habits. They particularly like Americans liking guns as Kiwis love guns too, and sport, which Americans seem keen on, even if their Superbowl seems strange, why do the players not actually play?
But hang on a minute there mate. It's not all beer and skittles in the shaky isles. As a result I've compiled this list as a guide to where to live if you want people to take you seriously, and see you as not being just a typical immigrant. The list is in order of importance, first being most desirable and of higher worth socially - from a snob's point of view of course:-
1. Wellington
The capital city of New Zealand and the cultural heart of the nation. Even educated people overseas often get this wrong. I once read a list of capitals in a book on the Second World War by Max Hastings: he wrote London, Washington, Canberra and Auckland. What? That last one is NZ's largest population centre, NOT the capital.
The original reason Wellington was made the capital is it sits in the middle of the country. It's also very windy, which is a good thing, the winds come in the afternoon and nights, making the mornings beautifully clear. Within Wellington my suburb picks are Mt Victoria, Mt Cook, Berhampore, Newtown and Island Bay.
If staying in the region but not the city itself, then the Kapiti Coast is favoured. Bear in mind there are only two ways into the city, and the commute can be long. This is not a problem if you're going in the opposite direction to the traffic, which some manage to organise.
Wellington is vulnerable to earthquakes, there is no getting around this if you live in New Zealand.
2. Nelson
A town at the top of the South Island, located on Tasman Bay. This is where the hippies congregated in the 60's. Courtney Love's mother brought her daughter among them, and the young girl attended Nelson College for Girls before being asked to leave.
Italians settled in the city after the war, and earlier the region was settled by the English, with Germans also settling in the Moutere district, between Richmond and Motueka. Therefore it is somewhat artistic and possibly intellectual.
New Zealand is a rugby mad country (both rugby union and rugby league ) but Nelson is the one area in New Zealand where this is not the case. Nelson is the only region in New Zealand where basketball is the top sport, followed closely by volleyball. An American living in Nelson who likes either basketball or volleyball, or both, will get along famously.
There is no American football in NZ. Some may claim there is, but they're just yanking your chain. If you're not prepared to let that go, do not come to New Zealand as Kiwis think anyone who plays Gridiron is a pansy.
3. Christchurch
The largest city in the South Island. Large earthquakes in 2010 and 2011 badly damaged the city. There is a lot of rebuild work but the city is hard to live in. Not for the faint hearted this one, but it's a nice place nonetheless.
Christchurch is rugby heartland (even though the first game of rugby was actually played in Nelson - go figure, and it was actually Aussie Rules by mistake but everyone forgets that...pfft). It's more narrow-minded and insular than the above cities, hence it gets a lower place.
4. New Plymouth
The North Island's top regional town. Known for oil and milk cows. Easy drive anywhere and no earthquakes.
5. Gisborne
Poverty Bay in the North Island. Much cheaper houses and no-one will laugh if you live there. They will laugh if you live in Hamilton, Napier/Hastings, Palmerston North and Wanganui. The latter two are not that bad really, John Cleese hates Palmerston North, which is a good reason to like it.
6. Dunedin
Used to be the largest city in NZ back in the day, deep south, COLD. Even more insular than Christchurch.
7. Westport
My pick of the South Island west coast, nice town, nice people, coal and gold. Their girls basketball team won the nationals for small schools not so long ago, this town has energy despite Holcim closing the very pretty cement works. With Westport you've got National Parks at your doorstep, my favourite being the Nelson Lakes, but Abel Tasman and Kahurangi are in the area as well (for Abel Tasman you'd better live in Nelson, see above).
8. Whangarei
The warm heart of the North. The region is known for farming and they have an oil refinery and cement works too. Anywhere in Northland is good but the schools are dodgy. The local Maori are politically active, which is a good thing, if you want to learn to speak Maori then this is where to live.
9. Islands
New Zealand has hundreds of Islands, many of them habitable; Waiheke, Great Barrier (both Auckland), D'Urville is the largest in the Marlborough Sounds but many others also. There are too many to list, but remember, this is a remote country with 4.5 million people, you have to look after yourself, if a tsunami cuts off your access, you may be jiggered.
10. Remote locations
Sewart Island, Chatham and Pitt Islands. These are for the adventurous only and to survive you need an economic reason to live there; tourism, farming and fishing being the main ones.
Other remote locations include eastern Southland, south Westland, East Cape and the central North Island. If you like living off the grid then these locations may be for you.
Not for Snobs:
Auckland - déclassé, people who live in Auckland think New Zealand ends at the Bombay Hills just south of the city. They are referred to as Dorklanders, or Jafa's (Just Another Fucking Aucklander). Living in Auckland, while easy enough and enjoying higher incomes, earns no points at all on the snob index.
Invercargill - derided by the Rolling Stones, it was once vibrant but is now falling in population and struggles to find a reason to exist. They do things like offering qualifications from their Polytech for no fees just to attract people (see my snob's guide to education in NZ, this option is a no-go). [Update: Invercargill has changed over the years and it is now much improved, those zero fees courses they offer have attracted diversity and people with energy]
Queenstown - a tourist trap, beautiful scenery and one dimensional. Then when you want to go somewhere, you're miles away from anywhere. Forget this place, vacation in Queenstown, that's all.
Blenheim - a poor man's Nelson
Living in New Zealand poses challenges. You need to be independent in finances and nature. If you like being surrounded by people and not being alone, then New Zealand may not be for you. On the other hand, if you think for yourself and are a bit of a loner, then Kiwis will love you, it's a country of 4.5 million individualists (that's why it has no great army or multinational company, it's a bit like a lunatic asylum where everyone is off doing their own thing, usually breaking in land, but they could be surfing, writing, arguing the fall of the Roman empire, or whatever - the latter discussion more likely to be heard in Wellington jsyk).
Maori culture:
Maori language and culture is undergoing a renaissance of late. This means it is not hard to get involved or to learn the native language. Maori and sign language are the two official languages of NZ, English isn't official but like the US, it's pre-eminent. Maori television is often better than the rest, Maori politicians are often highly principled. The emerging Maori middle class appear to place sport at the top of their tree, particularly team sports, like rugby (both kinds), Netball for girls (it's like the original basketball, which was exported to England and they never updated the rules, played across the British Commonwealth) and others such as basketball.
Traditionally, Maori lived in the countryside on Maori land (some Maori land exists in cities like Nelson, it was a planned settlement) while Pakeha (white New Zealanders ) lived in the cities. Okay so I'm grossly simplifying but I need to keep this brief. This arrangement stemmed from the end of the New Zealand Wars. In short, the British flagged beating Maori up and the settlers wanted the wars to stop so they could start making money.
Then in the 1950's NZ started to industrialise, spurred on by their WWII experience. The USA built an interstate highway system, while NZ decided to make steel and stuff. Firstly, Maori were recruited to work in these factories, then when that source of labour was exhausted, they brought Pacific Islanders in, places like Samoa (actually originally German but NZ effectively owned it since WWI when the Kiwis invaded, providing the Allies their second victory, after Togoland fell - no I'm not making this up, look it up).
Gangs:
The result of these changes was dislocation from tribal roots. Thus in the cities gangs took hold. There are lots of these gangs, Maori, Pacific Island and mixtures of both. The largest of these are the rival Mongrel Mob and Black Power. Yes, New Zealand has biker gangs (called bikies in NZ and Australia) which are largely Pakeha, and Hells Angels has a chapter in NZ (the oldest outside of North America).
Just so you know - all these groups are criminals; they choose to be criminals and they are not good people. The prison population is growing and only the US can rival Kiwiland in that regard.
The reach of these gangs should not be underestimated. Many have a family member that belong to one. This can go right to the top in NZ society.
What to do?
I suggest you come to New Zealand and look around first. Assuming you can immigrate, think like a snob first, it does matter, then consider practicalities such as income, airports, roads, services, banks, etc.
Paperback: www.amazon.com/gp/product/1727804147
Kindle: www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07J9XRCWK
It has been reported that many Americans are considering moving to New Zealand now that Donald Trump has been elected President. New Zealand websites like realestate.co.nz and the NZ government immigration website have reported massive increases in traffic from the US.
This is welcome news to Kiwis (the nickname for a New Zealand national is Kiwi). Kiwis like Americans, even if they find them somewhat loud at times, with peculiar habits. They particularly like Americans liking guns as Kiwis love guns too, and sport, which Americans seem keen on, even if their Superbowl seems strange, why do the players not actually play?
But hang on a minute there mate. It's not all beer and skittles in the shaky isles. As a result I've compiled this list as a guide to where to live if you want people to take you seriously, and see you as not being just a typical immigrant. The list is in order of importance, first being most desirable and of higher worth socially - from a snob's point of view of course:-
1. Wellington
The capital city of New Zealand and the cultural heart of the nation. Even educated people overseas often get this wrong. I once read a list of capitals in a book on the Second World War by Max Hastings: he wrote London, Washington, Canberra and Auckland. What? That last one is NZ's largest population centre, NOT the capital.
The original reason Wellington was made the capital is it sits in the middle of the country. It's also very windy, which is a good thing, the winds come in the afternoon and nights, making the mornings beautifully clear. Within Wellington my suburb picks are Mt Victoria, Mt Cook, Berhampore, Newtown and Island Bay.
If staying in the region but not the city itself, then the Kapiti Coast is favoured. Bear in mind there are only two ways into the city, and the commute can be long. This is not a problem if you're going in the opposite direction to the traffic, which some manage to organise.
Wellington is vulnerable to earthquakes, there is no getting around this if you live in New Zealand.
2. Nelson
A town at the top of the South Island, located on Tasman Bay. This is where the hippies congregated in the 60's. Courtney Love's mother brought her daughter among them, and the young girl attended Nelson College for Girls before being asked to leave.
Italians settled in the city after the war, and earlier the region was settled by the English, with Germans also settling in the Moutere district, between Richmond and Motueka. Therefore it is somewhat artistic and possibly intellectual.
New Zealand is a rugby mad country (both rugby union and rugby league ) but Nelson is the one area in New Zealand where this is not the case. Nelson is the only region in New Zealand where basketball is the top sport, followed closely by volleyball. An American living in Nelson who likes either basketball or volleyball, or both, will get along famously.
There is no American football in NZ. Some may claim there is, but they're just yanking your chain. If you're not prepared to let that go, do not come to New Zealand as Kiwis think anyone who plays Gridiron is a pansy.
3. Christchurch
The largest city in the South Island. Large earthquakes in 2010 and 2011 badly damaged the city. There is a lot of rebuild work but the city is hard to live in. Not for the faint hearted this one, but it's a nice place nonetheless.
Christchurch is rugby heartland (even though the first game of rugby was actually played in Nelson - go figure, and it was actually Aussie Rules by mistake but everyone forgets that...pfft). It's more narrow-minded and insular than the above cities, hence it gets a lower place.
4. New Plymouth
The North Island's top regional town. Known for oil and milk cows. Easy drive anywhere and no earthquakes.
5. Gisborne
Poverty Bay in the North Island. Much cheaper houses and no-one will laugh if you live there. They will laugh if you live in Hamilton, Napier/Hastings, Palmerston North and Wanganui. The latter two are not that bad really, John Cleese hates Palmerston North, which is a good reason to like it.
6. Dunedin
Used to be the largest city in NZ back in the day, deep south, COLD. Even more insular than Christchurch.
7. Westport
My pick of the South Island west coast, nice town, nice people, coal and gold. Their girls basketball team won the nationals for small schools not so long ago, this town has energy despite Holcim closing the very pretty cement works. With Westport you've got National Parks at your doorstep, my favourite being the Nelson Lakes, but Abel Tasman and Kahurangi are in the area as well (for Abel Tasman you'd better live in Nelson, see above).
8. Whangarei
The warm heart of the North. The region is known for farming and they have an oil refinery and cement works too. Anywhere in Northland is good but the schools are dodgy. The local Maori are politically active, which is a good thing, if you want to learn to speak Maori then this is where to live.
9. Islands
New Zealand has hundreds of Islands, many of them habitable; Waiheke, Great Barrier (both Auckland), D'Urville is the largest in the Marlborough Sounds but many others also. There are too many to list, but remember, this is a remote country with 4.5 million people, you have to look after yourself, if a tsunami cuts off your access, you may be jiggered.
10. Remote locations
Sewart Island, Chatham and Pitt Islands. These are for the adventurous only and to survive you need an economic reason to live there; tourism, farming and fishing being the main ones.
Other remote locations include eastern Southland, south Westland, East Cape and the central North Island. If you like living off the grid then these locations may be for you.
Not for Snobs:
Auckland - déclassé, people who live in Auckland think New Zealand ends at the Bombay Hills just south of the city. They are referred to as Dorklanders, or Jafa's (Just Another Fucking Aucklander). Living in Auckland, while easy enough and enjoying higher incomes, earns no points at all on the snob index.
Invercargill - derided by the Rolling Stones, it was once vibrant but is now falling in population and struggles to find a reason to exist. They do things like offering qualifications from their Polytech for no fees just to attract people (see my snob's guide to education in NZ, this option is a no-go). [Update: Invercargill has changed over the years and it is now much improved, those zero fees courses they offer have attracted diversity and people with energy]
Queenstown - a tourist trap, beautiful scenery and one dimensional. Then when you want to go somewhere, you're miles away from anywhere. Forget this place, vacation in Queenstown, that's all.
Blenheim - a poor man's Nelson
Living in New Zealand poses challenges. You need to be independent in finances and nature. If you like being surrounded by people and not being alone, then New Zealand may not be for you. On the other hand, if you think for yourself and are a bit of a loner, then Kiwis will love you, it's a country of 4.5 million individualists (that's why it has no great army or multinational company, it's a bit like a lunatic asylum where everyone is off doing their own thing, usually breaking in land, but they could be surfing, writing, arguing the fall of the Roman empire, or whatever - the latter discussion more likely to be heard in Wellington jsyk).
Maori culture:
Maori language and culture is undergoing a renaissance of late. This means it is not hard to get involved or to learn the native language. Maori and sign language are the two official languages of NZ, English isn't official but like the US, it's pre-eminent. Maori television is often better than the rest, Maori politicians are often highly principled. The emerging Maori middle class appear to place sport at the top of their tree, particularly team sports, like rugby (both kinds), Netball for girls (it's like the original basketball, which was exported to England and they never updated the rules, played across the British Commonwealth) and others such as basketball.
Traditionally, Maori lived in the countryside on Maori land (some Maori land exists in cities like Nelson, it was a planned settlement) while Pakeha (white New Zealanders ) lived in the cities. Okay so I'm grossly simplifying but I need to keep this brief. This arrangement stemmed from the end of the New Zealand Wars. In short, the British flagged beating Maori up and the settlers wanted the wars to stop so they could start making money.
Then in the 1950's NZ started to industrialise, spurred on by their WWII experience. The USA built an interstate highway system, while NZ decided to make steel and stuff. Firstly, Maori were recruited to work in these factories, then when that source of labour was exhausted, they brought Pacific Islanders in, places like Samoa (actually originally German but NZ effectively owned it since WWI when the Kiwis invaded, providing the Allies their second victory, after Togoland fell - no I'm not making this up, look it up).
Gangs:
The result of these changes was dislocation from tribal roots. Thus in the cities gangs took hold. There are lots of these gangs, Maori, Pacific Island and mixtures of both. The largest of these are the rival Mongrel Mob and Black Power. Yes, New Zealand has biker gangs (called bikies in NZ and Australia) which are largely Pakeha, and Hells Angels has a chapter in NZ (the oldest outside of North America).
Just so you know - all these groups are criminals; they choose to be criminals and they are not good people. The prison population is growing and only the US can rival Kiwiland in that regard.
The reach of these gangs should not be underestimated. Many have a family member that belong to one. This can go right to the top in NZ society.
What to do?
I suggest you come to New Zealand and look around first. Assuming you can immigrate, think like a snob first, it does matter, then consider practicalities such as income, airports, roads, services, banks, etc.
November 23, 2016
Kaikoura Earthquakes: Bring Back Ministry of Works?
Chris Trotter is proposing New Zealand re-create the Ministry of Works, given the monumental clean-up required after the Kaikoura earthquakes:-
>>Read about it here<<
It's a good idea, the old MOW should never have been sold off. The NZX-listed Opus now claims to be a direct descendant.
Back when the original MOW was established, there were very few of those newfangled bulldozers in the country. Now there are, and there is no shortage of earthmovers, civil engineers and contractors.
What is more needed, and Trotter does not directly address this, is a fully prepared disaster relief agency, which I propose we roll into the defence force. Such an organisation would have bridges, water purification and desalination units, temporary accommodation and the like, paramedics and hospital supplies, with the ability to get ashore in New Zealand or in the Pacific Islands.
Then with the disaster relief in place, proper planning can be undertaken and reconstruction carried out. With the events in Kaikoura, you just know that right now, not a lot is being done by the government, they're just as likely to permanently close State Highway 1 through Kaikoura.
>>Read about it here<<
It's a good idea, the old MOW should never have been sold off. The NZX-listed Opus now claims to be a direct descendant.
Back when the original MOW was established, there were very few of those newfangled bulldozers in the country. Now there are, and there is no shortage of earthmovers, civil engineers and contractors.
What is more needed, and Trotter does not directly address this, is a fully prepared disaster relief agency, which I propose we roll into the defence force. Such an organisation would have bridges, water purification and desalination units, temporary accommodation and the like, paramedics and hospital supplies, with the ability to get ashore in New Zealand or in the Pacific Islands.
Then with the disaster relief in place, proper planning can be undertaken and reconstruction carried out. With the events in Kaikoura, you just know that right now, not a lot is being done by the government, they're just as likely to permanently close State Highway 1 through Kaikoura.
November 22, 2016
New Zealand needs a Brexit of its own
The current system is not working. What we have now is a group of established politicians who are almost impossible to remove from office, lording it over the country. It matters very little which party they belong to but National and Labour are the stand-outs.
We need to take our country back. The only way I see this happening is if a new party is established that gets control of the political process and reinstates first past the post General Elections rather than the MMP system we now have.
On that journey, this movement could stand for other things as well and not be a single issue party, which has a short shelf life. Here are some ideas:-
Defence
We know how exposed NZ is to natural disasters and just how ill prepared the country is. The latest Kaikoura earthquakes remind us only too well that NZ was very lucky. We were celebrating 75 years of the navy which meant visiting Navies could help out. The country can't rely on luck, it needs a fully functioning disaster relief programme ready to go. This is not cheap, take our bridges as an example, NZ does not have a stock of Bailey Bridges to put up in a hurry to get bridges open.
In the Kaikoura example, the HMNZS Canterbury, a so-called multi-role vessel could not put supplies ashore in a two metre swell. And we paid far too much for the NH90 helicopters, we could get this kind of lift for half the price (or double the capacity).
Additionally, there appears very little civil construction ready to go to work immediately which is quite shameful.
Manufacturing
NZ is weaker now than when it headed down the 'Rogernomics' road in the 1980's. Manufacturing jobs have been lost, with the workforce largely working in service sectors. This should be reversed, NZ needs to build a viable secondary manufacturing sector.
Immigration
With house prices escalating, immigration should be curtailed until prices stabilise.
Mining and Forestry
Drill baby drill, and let's get our trees back. Enough said.
Government
Shrink the size of central government.
Transport
NZ needs a viable air, road, rail and coastal shipping infrastructure. The blocking of rail and road on SH1 after the quakes should be a sobering lesson as to why NZ needs a coastal shipping industry.
Treaty of Waitangi
The treaty settlement process has become a boondoggle for vested interests. We need to end the treaty gravy train.
I have no idea what the name of this party would be but NZ badly needs it. Of existing parties, NZ First may look the closest, but the problem is it is dominated by one man, Winston Peters, and like National it is the party for old people. Any new party has to embrace the younger voter.
We need to take our country back. The only way I see this happening is if a new party is established that gets control of the political process and reinstates first past the post General Elections rather than the MMP system we now have.
On that journey, this movement could stand for other things as well and not be a single issue party, which has a short shelf life. Here are some ideas:-
Defence
We know how exposed NZ is to natural disasters and just how ill prepared the country is. The latest Kaikoura earthquakes remind us only too well that NZ was very lucky. We were celebrating 75 years of the navy which meant visiting Navies could help out. The country can't rely on luck, it needs a fully functioning disaster relief programme ready to go. This is not cheap, take our bridges as an example, NZ does not have a stock of Bailey Bridges to put up in a hurry to get bridges open.
In the Kaikoura example, the HMNZS Canterbury, a so-called multi-role vessel could not put supplies ashore in a two metre swell. And we paid far too much for the NH90 helicopters, we could get this kind of lift for half the price (or double the capacity).
Additionally, there appears very little civil construction ready to go to work immediately which is quite shameful.
Manufacturing
NZ is weaker now than when it headed down the 'Rogernomics' road in the 1980's. Manufacturing jobs have been lost, with the workforce largely working in service sectors. This should be reversed, NZ needs to build a viable secondary manufacturing sector.
Immigration
With house prices escalating, immigration should be curtailed until prices stabilise.
Mining and Forestry
Drill baby drill, and let's get our trees back. Enough said.
Government
Shrink the size of central government.
Transport
NZ needs a viable air, road, rail and coastal shipping infrastructure. The blocking of rail and road on SH1 after the quakes should be a sobering lesson as to why NZ needs a coastal shipping industry.
Treaty of Waitangi
The treaty settlement process has become a boondoggle for vested interests. We need to end the treaty gravy train.
I have no idea what the name of this party would be but NZ badly needs it. Of existing parties, NZ First may look the closest, but the problem is it is dominated by one man, Winston Peters, and like National it is the party for old people. Any new party has to embrace the younger voter.
November 21, 2016
Trump Appointments: Old White Guys
Just when I thought things were looking good under Trump, things head south. Mitt Romney may get secretary of state, really? And where are the women in Trump's team? So far it looks like a bunch of old white guys. C'mon Mr Trump, surely you can do better.
November 20, 2016
Novel: The Crushing Son
My blog has been very busy lately. Thank you to all my readers.
Readers can show their appreciation by buying a copy of my second novel, The Crushing Son.
The Crushing Son <<Amazon Link
Used copies are available from $6.95 new from $9.67
Readers can show their appreciation by buying a copy of my second novel, The Crushing Son.
The Crushing Son <<Amazon Link
Used copies are available from $6.95 new from $9.67
November 18, 2016
European Voters Ignored
Europe may be in for a backlash on the scale of Brexit or Trump if the bureaucrats in Brussels keep ignoring voters:-
BRUSSELS trampled over the result of a Dutch referendum
On a wider scale, giving the Ukraine any hope whatsoever that they can be part of Europe, just moves the region closer to war. Russia won't stand for it. So why keep poking Russia with a stick?
Trump to Double Growth?
While Donald Trump said enough during the campaign to cancel himself out as any kind of decent human being, we have to now deal with four years of his administration. Will it be good for business and investment, or not?
My guess is there will be growth in construction jobs, that's Trump's thing. Overall the following link appears very bullish, read on and consider if any of it comes to pass:-
My guess is there will be growth in construction jobs, that's Trump's thing. Overall the following link appears very bullish, read on and consider if any of it comes to pass:-
How President Trump will double growth and jobs
November 14, 2016
Trump off to a Good Start
Never judge a book by its cover, or so they say. Those protesting Donald Trump likely do not hold with that view.
But let's keep an open mind shall we. His appointment of Reince Priebus as chief of staff and Stephen Bannon as chief strategist and chief counsellor has the look of a man who intends to effect change. On the one hand Priebus is there to keep the ship on course, while Bannon is there to shake things up.
https://www.ft.com/content/704a2dfc-a9ca-11e6-a0bb-97f42551dbf4
The voters expect something to be done about their falling standard of living and job security. If things continue to go downhill, expect an even firmer backlash. My guess is the GOP know it and they're looking over their shoulders.
But let's keep an open mind shall we. His appointment of Reince Priebus as chief of staff and Stephen Bannon as chief strategist and chief counsellor has the look of a man who intends to effect change. On the one hand Priebus is there to keep the ship on course, while Bannon is there to shake things up.
https://www.ft.com/content/704a2dfc-a9ca-11e6-a0bb-97f42551dbf4
The voters expect something to be done about their falling standard of living and job security. If things continue to go downhill, expect an even firmer backlash. My guess is the GOP know it and they're looking over their shoulders.
November 09, 2016
Donald Trump Next US President
It looks like Donald Trump has won the race to the White House. What an upset, the pollsters will have to review their methods as they got it badly wrong - again.
If we're going to be honest, Hillary Clinton lost two weeks ago when her campaign stalled and she lost all momentum. It wasn't the FBI investigation or Wikileaks, it was her approach to campaigning that cost her victory.
Hillary Clinton treats her campaign like a parade to victory. She swans around the place, gracing the masses with her presence. Meanwhile her opponents roll their sleeves up and ask the voters to back them, that they'll effect change for them. Which message or approach sounds better? She stalled against Obama, and now Trump too.
Trump was backed by what I call angry pick-up truck man. On my recent visit to the USA I saw them everywhere with their Trump/Pence bumper stickers. They sit behind the wheel of their trucks looking very pissed off. These angry, mostly white men, were going to vote come what may. They'd remember to vote no matter what. Contrast that with Hillary, I didn't see any evidence of her campaign apart from television attack ads. Lame.
If we're going to be honest, Hillary Clinton lost two weeks ago when her campaign stalled and she lost all momentum. It wasn't the FBI investigation or Wikileaks, it was her approach to campaigning that cost her victory.
Hillary Clinton treats her campaign like a parade to victory. She swans around the place, gracing the masses with her presence. Meanwhile her opponents roll their sleeves up and ask the voters to back them, that they'll effect change for them. Which message or approach sounds better? She stalled against Obama, and now Trump too.
Trump was backed by what I call angry pick-up truck man. On my recent visit to the USA I saw them everywhere with their Trump/Pence bumper stickers. They sit behind the wheel of their trucks looking very pissed off. These angry, mostly white men, were going to vote come what may. They'd remember to vote no matter what. Contrast that with Hillary, I didn't see any evidence of her campaign apart from television attack ads. Lame.
November 08, 2016
DNC Leak 2
Wikileaks have released more of the hacked Democratic emails. Latest reports show collusion between mainstream media and the Democratic campaign (CNN, no surprise really, everyone knew this went on), and that the Putin link to the hack was fabricated.
November 04, 2016
Cubs World Champions
The Cubs did it, phew. I thought I was going to die of a heart attack when the Indians drew even, but the Cubs pulled it off. Now we can all party for a year or more. As a side note, it was good to see LeBron James so passionate about Cleveland. Maybe some other time LeBron, this was the Cubs year.
November 03, 2016
Chicago Cubs
I'm hoping that by the time anyone reads this the Cubs will have won the World Series.
World Champion Chicago Cubs has a certain ring to it.
World Champion Chicago Cubs has a certain ring to it.
November 02, 2016
Steven Adams Staying With Oklahoma City Thunder
The Oklahoman is reporting that NZ's Steven Adams has signed a contract extension for $22.4 million a year. This must surely put New Zealand players on the map. New Zealand basketball talent is a lot better than you'd think, there should be more Kiwis playing in the NBA. Let's hope the scouts find their way Downunder more often.
This deal puts Adams in the front rank of the genuine big men of the NBA. It is reported that he could have got more had he waited, as teammate Andre Roberson is doing, but my guess is Adams wants to create a legacy, not just earn the big bucks. He can create that legacy in two ways; either he stays with OKC for the foreseeable future and picks up a championship there, and he's actually more attractive as a trade, being slightly cheaper after the ink dries on this deal. That means better teams can take him on under their salary cap if things don't work out at OKC down the line.
It's all about the championships, and playing for your country, and this is where NZ has to hope a deal can be secured, putting Adams in the black singlet of New Zealand. Every player wants to play for their country (if fit of course). Look at the NBA talent turning out for their countries, Australia has no problem getting their NBA players to turn out. It has been mooted that NZ can no longer afford insurance on Adams. But this is where it gets interesting; given what Adams will now be earning, he can pay the premiums himself as a donation to the national body, such payment being tax deductible. So it's a win-win.Whatever issues exist between NZ Basketball and Adams, they have to be resolved.
Oh and now Adams is in the top rank of the top rank, he's going to get hit on. Imagine the Kanye/Foxx rap video Gold Digger. Well the totty in that video is just what actors and rappers qualify for, NBA stars of Adams ilk will be inundated by totty ten times hotter than that. He'll need to get himself a wife or a personal lifestyle manager. A single man, the amount of money we're talking about and that kind of fame, well let's just say he could wear it out.
This deal puts Adams in the front rank of the genuine big men of the NBA. It is reported that he could have got more had he waited, as teammate Andre Roberson is doing, but my guess is Adams wants to create a legacy, not just earn the big bucks. He can create that legacy in two ways; either he stays with OKC for the foreseeable future and picks up a championship there, and he's actually more attractive as a trade, being slightly cheaper after the ink dries on this deal. That means better teams can take him on under their salary cap if things don't work out at OKC down the line.
It's all about the championships, and playing for your country, and this is where NZ has to hope a deal can be secured, putting Adams in the black singlet of New Zealand. Every player wants to play for their country (if fit of course). Look at the NBA talent turning out for their countries, Australia has no problem getting their NBA players to turn out. It has been mooted that NZ can no longer afford insurance on Adams. But this is where it gets interesting; given what Adams will now be earning, he can pay the premiums himself as a donation to the national body, such payment being tax deductible. So it's a win-win.Whatever issues exist between NZ Basketball and Adams, they have to be resolved.
Oh and now Adams is in the top rank of the top rank, he's going to get hit on. Imagine the Kanye/Foxx rap video Gold Digger. Well the totty in that video is just what actors and rappers qualify for, NBA stars of Adams ilk will be inundated by totty ten times hotter than that. He'll need to get himself a wife or a personal lifestyle manager. A single man, the amount of money we're talking about and that kind of fame, well let's just say he could wear it out.