The day has finally arrived and the UK has formally handed in their resignation from the EU. I never thought I'd see the day.When I was born there was still such a thing as the British Empire - just. It was falling apart but it still existed. I've got an Atlas from the period and it has places like Nyasaland and Rhodesia in it. Today they're Malawi and Zambia/Zimbabwe.
For at least 30 years I've been banging on about how Britain should get out of the EU. How could it be any good for Britain, you can see who's benefiting when you take a trip to Germany; the latter got a new country while the former got screwed over. It's as plain as the nose on my face.
Places like Australia and New Zealand have fared well after the Empire. But there's still that nagging in the back of the mind of an older sibling departed. What is the 'home' country? The UK of course. It still has the best universities, arts, invention. I know people in the UK and one recently said to me that two countries are still thought of by them as 'us' and that was Australia and New Zealand. I chimed in with what about Canada? And he said they were more like America Lite. Note that Canada, you're slipping.
It's funny to listen to the EU and commentators saying Britain must do this and it must do that. What Britain can do is say shove it. If you can't leave, what was the point in joining in the first place. I see no reason why Britain can't negotiate new trade agreements while organising their exit. If for some reason they cannot, then do so in secret. What is Germany going to do about it, go to war?
What we are talking about is a culture clash. The system was never going to work for Britain. On the continent, the German, French and other European elites run things. They're Count Von Wotsit or can trace their lineage. They act like that too. Brussels is there to entrench their perks. But in Britain, the pantechnicon drivers of the Midlands decide things and every British politician knows it. If you want to know where this all originates then study the Battle of Agincourt. What I'm saying is that in Britain, knights don't run the show, they're given status on sufferance.
So my advice to the UK is this; step up to the mark and lead again. The 'colonies' can do pretty well without you but we'd rather have you around to do our thinking for us, or at least the higher level thinking. Stop pretending not to be a superpower for goodness sake. Build your Navy back and start being Hornblower again (fictional character CS Forester wrote, good books). Not so much Flashman though, him we can do without.
>>Win Prizes here <<
March 30, 2017
March 26, 2017
Result of the Rugby School Sevens
Nelson College finished in 4th place. The tournament consisted of 12 teams split into two groups. Nelson College finished top of Group B with only one loss to the eventual last place finisher in the group, the Royal Belfast Academical Institution. I'm assuming Nelson were resting players in that game.
Through to the Cup round the next day; Nelson lost both games, firstly the semi-final against Hilton College from South Africa, 14-17. Then they lost to Rugby School 19-24 in the playoff for 3rd and 4th.
The tournament was won by Hilton, beating Clifton College from England 22-7. Clifton had come second to Nelson in Group B, while Hilton had come second in Group A.
Not a bad effort then from Nelson who fielded a team converted from the 15-a-side game, they'd worked on sevens over the southern hemisphere summer leading up to travelling to England. In my head I said they had to qualify for the cup round and they did that, phew. My guess is they ran out of steam and that explains the second day losses.
Through to the Cup round the next day; Nelson lost both games, firstly the semi-final against Hilton College from South Africa, 14-17. Then they lost to Rugby School 19-24 in the playoff for 3rd and 4th.
The tournament was won by Hilton, beating Clifton College from England 22-7. Clifton had come second to Nelson in Group B, while Hilton had come second in Group A.
Not a bad effort then from Nelson who fielded a team converted from the 15-a-side game, they'd worked on sevens over the southern hemisphere summer leading up to travelling to England. In my head I said they had to qualify for the cup round and they did that, phew. My guess is they ran out of steam and that explains the second day losses.
March 23, 2017
Case Study: Martin Jetpack vs Fletcher Building
I often get asked, what do I avoid when investing in a company. My answer goes something like, I avoid dogs and lemons. Which brings me to these two companies, Martin Jetpack and Fletcher Building. They're both New Zealand businesses, the former being listed on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX MJP), while the latter is listed on both the ASX and NZX (ASX FBU).
First things first, Martin Jetpack is not a jet. It's a contraption which one pilot flies while strapped into. The product can best be described as hype. An early version of the contraption flew at Oshkosh in 2008 and I'm informed the reaction from onlookers there was a wide yawn. They'd seen this before with the SoloTrek XFV which flew back in 2001 some seven years earlier.
The inventor wanted everyone to believe he'd worked on his flying thing for 30 years from his garage in the suburbs of Christchurch, but this assertion was never independently verified. It is truly incredible to think that shareholder money went into this thing. It has yet to enter commercial production and I'm not even sure if anyone outside the company has flown it (put under independent scrutiny). My bet is it will never enter commercial production and if it does the company will promptly go bust as it is a silly proposition with little or no practical use.
Then we have Fletcher Building. This is a large business which carries out wide scale construction projects, and it is NZ's only locally based manufacturer of cement. When the Christchurch earthquakes hit, the only company capable of a rebuild that big was Fletcher Building.
You know Formica, everyone knows what Formica is, well Fletcher own it, and Laminex as well. Get the idea? Fletcher has fingers in many pies. Having said this though, Fletcher does tend to underperform and that's why I own no part of it, but that could change, and here's why: its share price fell 10% in one day on Monday and continues to fall. This is because of a profit downgrade due to cost overruns on two large projects. Construction is a risky business and they've been burned. But heck, 10% off the value in one day?
That's right, completely silly businesses like Martin Jetpack, which has never made anything useful and likely never will, ride up to $1.25 highs then plunge to 14 cents today. Then a solid company like Fletcher is punished harshly for business as usual.
What I'm saying is the market overreacts. It panics on bad news and gets all excited about hype. All commonsense seems to fly out the window. Fletcher Building are a solid buy, Martin Jetpack a joke.
First things first, Martin Jetpack is not a jet. It's a contraption which one pilot flies while strapped into. The product can best be described as hype. An early version of the contraption flew at Oshkosh in 2008 and I'm informed the reaction from onlookers there was a wide yawn. They'd seen this before with the SoloTrek XFV which flew back in 2001 some seven years earlier.
The inventor wanted everyone to believe he'd worked on his flying thing for 30 years from his garage in the suburbs of Christchurch, but this assertion was never independently verified. It is truly incredible to think that shareholder money went into this thing. It has yet to enter commercial production and I'm not even sure if anyone outside the company has flown it (put under independent scrutiny). My bet is it will never enter commercial production and if it does the company will promptly go bust as it is a silly proposition with little or no practical use.
Then we have Fletcher Building. This is a large business which carries out wide scale construction projects, and it is NZ's only locally based manufacturer of cement. When the Christchurch earthquakes hit, the only company capable of a rebuild that big was Fletcher Building.
You know Formica, everyone knows what Formica is, well Fletcher own it, and Laminex as well. Get the idea? Fletcher has fingers in many pies. Having said this though, Fletcher does tend to underperform and that's why I own no part of it, but that could change, and here's why: its share price fell 10% in one day on Monday and continues to fall. This is because of a profit downgrade due to cost overruns on two large projects. Construction is a risky business and they've been burned. But heck, 10% off the value in one day?
That's right, completely silly businesses like Martin Jetpack, which has never made anything useful and likely never will, ride up to $1.25 highs then plunge to 14 cents today. Then a solid company like Fletcher is punished harshly for business as usual.
What I'm saying is the market overreacts. It panics on bad news and gets all excited about hype. All commonsense seems to fly out the window. Fletcher Building are a solid buy, Martin Jetpack a joke.
March 21, 2017
Alleged New Zealand War Crime
Journalist and writer Nicky Hager has written an explosive new book launched today. Titled, Hit & Run, it describes a NZ SAS revenge raid in Afghanistan which was supposedly approved in advance by the Prime Minister at the time, John Key. Was the expected launch of this book the reason for John Key's surprise resignation?
An audio from Radio NZ of the lauch can be found here: http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=201837462
An audio from Radio NZ of the lauch can be found here: http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=201837462
March 19, 2017
NBA Regular Season
Following on from what I said earlier, that NBA players are given too many easy looks, watching games as the regular season moves into the critical stage, I notice play is now much more competitive. Not so many easy looks, teams that are trying to make the playoffs are definitely contesting and getting up on shooters to put them off.
The pattern I observed earlier I put down to professionalism. In order to survive so many regular season games, teams do not play so competitively. Now the season is at the do or die stage, the intensity has lifted.
I've always admired the play of Matt Barnes. He looks the complete player to me, but he's been something of a Nomad. But he finally got lucky and is now with the Golden State Warriors after being waived by the Sacramento Kings. The Kings must have pulled off one of the worst trade deals of all time in trading away DeMarcus Cousins, and then getting rid of Barnes to make room for the three players they acquired. Barnes may have the last laugh if the Warriors win the title. This is possible now Andrew Bogut has broken his leg and the Cavaliers don't have his muscle on the inside.
The pattern I observed earlier I put down to professionalism. In order to survive so many regular season games, teams do not play so competitively. Now the season is at the do or die stage, the intensity has lifted.
I've always admired the play of Matt Barnes. He looks the complete player to me, but he's been something of a Nomad. But he finally got lucky and is now with the Golden State Warriors after being waived by the Sacramento Kings. The Kings must have pulled off one of the worst trade deals of all time in trading away DeMarcus Cousins, and then getting rid of Barnes to make room for the three players they acquired. Barnes may have the last laugh if the Warriors win the title. This is possible now Andrew Bogut has broken his leg and the Cavaliers don't have his muscle on the inside.
March 17, 2017
Rugby School 2017 International Sevens Tournament
A plug here for my old school, Nelson College. On Friday March 24 & Saturday March 25 they will be competing in a Rugby Sevens tournament hosted by Rugby School in England. The tournament is part of the celebrations surrounding Rugby School's 450th year.
Check out the draw here: http://www.rugbyschoolinternational7s.co.uk/Competition.asp?TSID=3851
Twelve teams will take part. They're split into two groups, the top two in each group go through to compete for the top prize after the group round robin. Nelson College face Clifton College (England), Llandovery College (Wales), Michaelhouse (South Africa), Royal Belfast Academy (Northern Ireland) and Shawnigan Lake School (Canada).
I have no idea of the respective strengths of each school, though Rugby Union teams from England, Wales and South Africa are usually tough. The South Africans will be big and fast, all their teams are.
The Nelson College team is made up of 1st XV players from the longer version of the game. They play in the Crusader region 1st XV competition. Nelson won this competition once in 2007. The standard of Rugby played in the Crusaders region is pretty high, so Nelson will be able to compete, maybe even win in England, wouldn't that be great.
A very old Rugby competition Nelson College competes in is the annual Quadrangular tournament, played between Wanganui Collegiate, Wellington College, Nelson College and Christ's College (Christchurch). These four are the 'old school' in NZ, Wanganui and Christ's being private, while Wellington and Nelson are state schools and publicly funded.
Nelson College played the first game of Rugby Union in New Zealand, against a team from the town, Nelson Football Club. The game caught on and spread throughout NZ, becoming a passion for many. The man credited with introducing the game to NZ was Charles Monro, a former pupil of Nelson College who learnt the game in England. The story goes that he returned to Nelson to find the Nelson Football Club playing a game more akin to Australian Rules Football. He changed them over to Rugby School rules and organised that first game against his old school up the road.
If you are in England and looking to see some attractive Rugby then head along to the games next week at Rugby School. Tickets are only 5 pounds.
(How to find the school: https://www.rugbyschool.co.uk/rugby-Live/assets/File/8132%20Rugby%20how%20to%20find%20us%20flyer%20update%20v1.pdf)
Check out the draw here: http://www.rugbyschoolinternational7s.co.uk/Competition.asp?TSID=3851
Twelve teams will take part. They're split into two groups, the top two in each group go through to compete for the top prize after the group round robin. Nelson College face Clifton College (England), Llandovery College (Wales), Michaelhouse (South Africa), Royal Belfast Academy (Northern Ireland) and Shawnigan Lake School (Canada).
I have no idea of the respective strengths of each school, though Rugby Union teams from England, Wales and South Africa are usually tough. The South Africans will be big and fast, all their teams are.
The Nelson College team is made up of 1st XV players from the longer version of the game. They play in the Crusader region 1st XV competition. Nelson won this competition once in 2007. The standard of Rugby played in the Crusaders region is pretty high, so Nelson will be able to compete, maybe even win in England, wouldn't that be great.
A very old Rugby competition Nelson College competes in is the annual Quadrangular tournament, played between Wanganui Collegiate, Wellington College, Nelson College and Christ's College (Christchurch). These four are the 'old school' in NZ, Wanganui and Christ's being private, while Wellington and Nelson are state schools and publicly funded.
Nelson College played the first game of Rugby Union in New Zealand, against a team from the town, Nelson Football Club. The game caught on and spread throughout NZ, becoming a passion for many. The man credited with introducing the game to NZ was Charles Monro, a former pupil of Nelson College who learnt the game in England. The story goes that he returned to Nelson to find the Nelson Football Club playing a game more akin to Australian Rules Football. He changed them over to Rugby School rules and organised that first game against his old school up the road.
If you are in England and looking to see some attractive Rugby then head along to the games next week at Rugby School. Tickets are only 5 pounds.
(How to find the school: https://www.rugbyschool.co.uk/rugby-Live/assets/File/8132%20Rugby%20how%20to%20find%20us%20flyer%20update%20v1.pdf)
March 15, 2017
John Key
John Key has set his retirement date from the New Zealand Parliament now he's stepped down from being Prime Minister. He's going on April 14th.
He had good political instincts but I've just received a notice announcing his retirement and in it he makes a statement which illustrates why I don't like him:
"We got New Zealand back on its feet, got people into jobs, got back into surplus, and tackled natural disasters"
This is an insult to all hard working Kiwis. For starters, NZ was not off its feet when he came into office. Maybe overseas that was the case but NZ was relatively unscathed by the GFC. Then NZ had been in surplus and was on track to get back in the black without National at the helm.Unemployment was also falling by the time National came to power, so that had nothing to do with Key there either. And lastly, natural disasters happen, you don't tackle them, don't be silly, you react and deal with the aftermath and those who did that were the people living in the affected areas.
So go and live in your holiday home in Hawaii John Key, take up whatever chairmanship has been offered to you, or whatever the reason was for your leaving, and don't let the door hit you on the way out. All in all, you left NZ worse off than when you took office.
[Edit to add: Now we know why John Key resigned. The Pike River mine disaster families have many hours of video footage taken from inside the mine, taken after the explosion, which shows John Key had been lying for years. The video footage will be bled into the media during the election year, and Key simply didn't want to have to campaign while explaining why he lied. Key handed a hospital pass to his hapless and weak deputy Simon "Bill" English]
He had good political instincts but I've just received a notice announcing his retirement and in it he makes a statement which illustrates why I don't like him:
"We got New Zealand back on its feet, got people into jobs, got back into surplus, and tackled natural disasters"
This is an insult to all hard working Kiwis. For starters, NZ was not off its feet when he came into office. Maybe overseas that was the case but NZ was relatively unscathed by the GFC. Then NZ had been in surplus and was on track to get back in the black without National at the helm.Unemployment was also falling by the time National came to power, so that had nothing to do with Key there either. And lastly, natural disasters happen, you don't tackle them, don't be silly, you react and deal with the aftermath and those who did that were the people living in the affected areas.
So go and live in your holiday home in Hawaii John Key, take up whatever chairmanship has been offered to you, or whatever the reason was for your leaving, and don't let the door hit you on the way out. All in all, you left NZ worse off than when you took office.
[Edit to add: Now we know why John Key resigned. The Pike River mine disaster families have many hours of video footage taken from inside the mine, taken after the explosion, which shows John Key had been lying for years. The video footage will be bled into the media during the election year, and Key simply didn't want to have to campaign while explaining why he lied. Key handed a hospital pass to his hapless and weak deputy Simon "Bill" English]
March 14, 2017
Turkey vs Holland
Turkey and the Netherlands (aka Holland) can't go to war because they don't share a boundary and otherwise have no real ability to attack each other. So their recent spat is just that, or is it electioneering on both sides. Want to bet the Dutch PM and the Turkish President have actually had a talk on the phone and concocted the dispute to help one another out? Hmm, at the very least they're probably seeing the need to keep kicking the can down the road.
March 12, 2017
Trump's First Big Test
I believe the first big test Donald Trump will face will not be over immigrants, the wall, Syria or the dismantling of Obamacare. I believe the first big test will be in the Far East, and how he handles China's expansion in the South China Sea and how he handles North Korea. It looks to me like China is using North Korea as a fake, push there yet take more in the South while no-one is looking. Well they are looking and noticing but are otherwise occupied. Can Trump walk softly while carrying a big stick?
March 09, 2017
The Decline of American Express
Has anyone noticed the decline of American Express?
Sometimes I get sidetracked by minutiae. I don't let it get out of hand and I get back on track soon enough, but the latest small thing to come to my attention that I think reflects a larger issue is with Amex.
Specifically I'm talking about their Turbo rewards offer. Cardholders of long-standing were enrolled in the programme for free, now they're going to charge $99 a year for the privilege.
Why bother is my reaction, when you can get instant cash back with Platinum Visa. With Platinum Visa you see the reward immediately, but with Amex you have to go on a circuitous route to finally redeem whatever it is they're offering. Because you never see the cash back immediately the question always hangs in the air that the points earned may not always be worth what they started out as. I don't trust frequent flyer programmes for the same reason.
My big issue with the $99 charge (NZ Dollars, the charge or the rules as they apply may be different where you live, but carefully note their deception) is it is sold as something free in the promotional material received by post and email. Here is the critical statement and I ask you to decipher what it actually means:
"Best part is, the annual Turbo enrolment fee of $99 has been waived for you until 31 August 2017, so you can give it a try."
It looks like they're saying that if I get in now, then $99 is waived for the next year. No, what it actually means is I am currently enjoying a free promotion and at 31 August 2017 I will be charged $99. In very fine print you can only read with a magnifying glass, it says the cardholders can continue after the anniversary date for a fee.
It gets worse, because I called earlier about this and was automatically re-enrolled, if I undo this re-enrolment and certain $99 charge, right now, then I also leave the scheme and lose 5 months or so of Turbo. Fine I say, do that as I'm off to Platinum Visa and see ya later, I'm not going to be using American Express any longer.
American Express these days, seems to rely on deceptiveness, that is a worry I have to say. The larger issue must be they're coming under pressure and becoming greedy for money. The same thing happened to Diners, remember them? They just withered away. I've still got a Diners card, call me old-fashioned. My advice, steer clear of Amex, and redeem any points outstanding if you get the chance.
See this Bloomberg article on how Amex lost Costco https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-how-amex-lost-costco/
[Update: I've got to get out more often - what just happened to me is a direct result of the argument between the CEO of Costco and the CEO of Amex, where the CEO of Costco told the CEO of Amex he was considered just another vendor like someone selling ketchup (read the above link for the full story). In one decision 10% of Amex membership departed and so last year Amex moved to shore up their membership by enticing them with more reward points (funny thing is I was thinking of dropping Amex for separate reasons but stayed with them as I was planning travel overseas). Then hungry for money they looked to convert those same members to a paying basis. Their revenue stream had been shrinking (I suspect Costco represented a large proportion of Amex revenue given how much Costco consumers spend each trip). So what Amex were doing to me and others was effectively taxing their old time members. Wow, just wow, breach of trust or what.]
Sometimes I get sidetracked by minutiae. I don't let it get out of hand and I get back on track soon enough, but the latest small thing to come to my attention that I think reflects a larger issue is with Amex.
Specifically I'm talking about their Turbo rewards offer. Cardholders of long-standing were enrolled in the programme for free, now they're going to charge $99 a year for the privilege.
Why bother is my reaction, when you can get instant cash back with Platinum Visa. With Platinum Visa you see the reward immediately, but with Amex you have to go on a circuitous route to finally redeem whatever it is they're offering. Because you never see the cash back immediately the question always hangs in the air that the points earned may not always be worth what they started out as. I don't trust frequent flyer programmes for the same reason.
My big issue with the $99 charge (NZ Dollars, the charge or the rules as they apply may be different where you live, but carefully note their deception) is it is sold as something free in the promotional material received by post and email. Here is the critical statement and I ask you to decipher what it actually means:
"Best part is, the annual Turbo enrolment fee of $99 has been waived for you until 31 August 2017, so you can give it a try."
It looks like they're saying that if I get in now, then $99 is waived for the next year. No, what it actually means is I am currently enjoying a free promotion and at 31 August 2017 I will be charged $99. In very fine print you can only read with a magnifying glass, it says the cardholders can continue after the anniversary date for a fee.
It gets worse, because I called earlier about this and was automatically re-enrolled, if I undo this re-enrolment and certain $99 charge, right now, then I also leave the scheme and lose 5 months or so of Turbo. Fine I say, do that as I'm off to Platinum Visa and see ya later, I'm not going to be using American Express any longer.
American Express these days, seems to rely on deceptiveness, that is a worry I have to say. The larger issue must be they're coming under pressure and becoming greedy for money. The same thing happened to Diners, remember them? They just withered away. I've still got a Diners card, call me old-fashioned. My advice, steer clear of Amex, and redeem any points outstanding if you get the chance.
See this Bloomberg article on how Amex lost Costco https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2015-how-amex-lost-costco/
[Update: I've got to get out more often - what just happened to me is a direct result of the argument between the CEO of Costco and the CEO of Amex, where the CEO of Costco told the CEO of Amex he was considered just another vendor like someone selling ketchup (read the above link for the full story). In one decision 10% of Amex membership departed and so last year Amex moved to shore up their membership by enticing them with more reward points (funny thing is I was thinking of dropping Amex for separate reasons but stayed with them as I was planning travel overseas). Then hungry for money they looked to convert those same members to a paying basis. Their revenue stream had been shrinking (I suspect Costco represented a large proportion of Amex revenue given how much Costco consumers spend each trip). So what Amex were doing to me and others was effectively taxing their old time members. Wow, just wow, breach of trust or what.]
March 07, 2017
NBA: LeBron James Hunting Back-to-Back Titles in Cleveland
I noticed Andrew Bogut signed with the Cleveland Cavaliers of the NBA. Cleveland are looking for a big man to rough up the Golden State Warriors on the inside, and what better player to do that than the big Aussie who won a title with the Warriors.
Also note the Cavs added Kyle Korver for his three point accuracy, and Derrick Williams for more thuggery (I mean that politely of course, I admire such things, bring back the biff I say).
It's yet to be seen if this strategy will work. I'm watching carefully, there are aspects to their formula I agree with. What's my formula?
Three things needed to win titles:
1. An intense hatred of losing. Not a joy of winning, or just don't like losing. The type of players needed hate losing so much they throw up after the game. How to find these players is more interesting, I look for players that are an attitude problem. This has only backfired once when one player I recruited needed to be waived as he was going to be killed by his teammates.
2. A heightened sense of personal accountability. Players that do it the right way and if they foul up they put it right - immediately. I call this having a turbo up their arse.
3. Luck. A certain amount of luck, Think Napoleon noting there were two types of general, good generals and lucky generals and of the two he preferred lucky generals. Lucky players have the knack of looking at the ref and getting the call their way.
Also note the Cavs added Kyle Korver for his three point accuracy, and Derrick Williams for more thuggery (I mean that politely of course, I admire such things, bring back the biff I say).
It's yet to be seen if this strategy will work. I'm watching carefully, there are aspects to their formula I agree with. What's my formula?
Three things needed to win titles:
1. An intense hatred of losing. Not a joy of winning, or just don't like losing. The type of players needed hate losing so much they throw up after the game. How to find these players is more interesting, I look for players that are an attitude problem. This has only backfired once when one player I recruited needed to be waived as he was going to be killed by his teammates.
2. A heightened sense of personal accountability. Players that do it the right way and if they foul up they put it right - immediately. I call this having a turbo up their arse.
3. Luck. A certain amount of luck, Think Napoleon noting there were two types of general, good generals and lucky generals and of the two he preferred lucky generals. Lucky players have the knack of looking at the ref and getting the call their way.
March 06, 2017
The Retirement Income Problem
Once again New Zealand is being subjected to more lies, damn lies and statistics. I've listened to the barrage of propaganda that NZ's universal form of superannuation is unaffordable and most of what I've heard is untrue or skewed toward an agenda.
That agenda is to raise the age of entitlement to national superannuation. Superannuation started out at age 60, then it was raised to 65, now NZ's incompetent Prime Minister, Simon "Bill" English, wants to kick-start another 'debate' on the issue. That's a coded message for lifting the age of entitlement to 67 or even 68.
Winston Peters, leader of NZ First opposes the move and good for him. He's said he won't allow any coalition involving NZ First to countenance such a move.
New Zealand superannuation is not a large sum of money for each person who qualifies, but it is paid twice monthly for their entire life from age 65 and even if they work fulltime and no matter how rich they are.
What New Zealanders are told when this debate arises, is that the population of those aged over 65 is going to rise to an unsustainable level and will become unaffordable. What is never mentioned is that this is a population bubble and when the cost will begin to fall due to natural attrition. Kiwis are left to imagine the cost remaining high indefinitely.
I've got a few suggestions and these do not involve changing the official retirement age of 65:
1. Allow people to retire earlier but receive less. A sliding scale could be used but anyone choosing the earlier option would not catch up to those retiring at age 65 until they were 70 (for those who chose 60);
2. Currently immigrants need to be resident for 10 years and no less than 5 of those over 50 years of age. Change that to 15 years permanently resident, no less than 7 years of which over the age of 50.
3. Anyone over the age of 65 and in fulltime employment cannot qualify for national superannuation but they can receive a tax credit at 40% of national superannuation (encourages staying in employment).
The following are macro policies the NZ government could employ:
A. Reduce the size of government. Halve it, that's the head count I'm talking about. And sink the cost of departments by moving them to the regions.
B. Own overseas infrastructure. That's right, when a toilet flushes in London, NZ gets paid. Or if goods are put on a train in the US for export, NZ gets paid.
C. Borrow.
Do these things.
[Update: Simon English has quickly followed up his comments by announcing the retirement age will rise to 67 by 2040. National has decided to screw over the young. Never underestimate National's pure greed, they always line their own pockets first. But even this shows English is an idiot, it's more decisions that are not really decisions at all. He did the same thing back when he was Treasurer in the late 90's with his pathetic and microscopic tax cuts (Helen Clark won the next election, everyone went to sleep listening to Simon the Sleep Inducer).
The policy as announced will exacerbate the brain drain as the young won't want to stay around to fund everyone's retirement but them, and student loans on top of that, as well as facing ridiculous house prices created by successive governments unwilling to do anything about it.]
That agenda is to raise the age of entitlement to national superannuation. Superannuation started out at age 60, then it was raised to 65, now NZ's incompetent Prime Minister, Simon "Bill" English, wants to kick-start another 'debate' on the issue. That's a coded message for lifting the age of entitlement to 67 or even 68.
Winston Peters, leader of NZ First opposes the move and good for him. He's said he won't allow any coalition involving NZ First to countenance such a move.
New Zealand superannuation is not a large sum of money for each person who qualifies, but it is paid twice monthly for their entire life from age 65 and even if they work fulltime and no matter how rich they are.
What New Zealanders are told when this debate arises, is that the population of those aged over 65 is going to rise to an unsustainable level and will become unaffordable. What is never mentioned is that this is a population bubble and when the cost will begin to fall due to natural attrition. Kiwis are left to imagine the cost remaining high indefinitely.
I've got a few suggestions and these do not involve changing the official retirement age of 65:
1. Allow people to retire earlier but receive less. A sliding scale could be used but anyone choosing the earlier option would not catch up to those retiring at age 65 until they were 70 (for those who chose 60);
2. Currently immigrants need to be resident for 10 years and no less than 5 of those over 50 years of age. Change that to 15 years permanently resident, no less than 7 years of which over the age of 50.
3. Anyone over the age of 65 and in fulltime employment cannot qualify for national superannuation but they can receive a tax credit at 40% of national superannuation (encourages staying in employment).
The following are macro policies the NZ government could employ:
A. Reduce the size of government. Halve it, that's the head count I'm talking about. And sink the cost of departments by moving them to the regions.
B. Own overseas infrastructure. That's right, when a toilet flushes in London, NZ gets paid. Or if goods are put on a train in the US for export, NZ gets paid.
C. Borrow.
Do these things.
[Update: Simon English has quickly followed up his comments by announcing the retirement age will rise to 67 by 2040. National has decided to screw over the young. Never underestimate National's pure greed, they always line their own pockets first. But even this shows English is an idiot, it's more decisions that are not really decisions at all. He did the same thing back when he was Treasurer in the late 90's with his pathetic and microscopic tax cuts (Helen Clark won the next election, everyone went to sleep listening to Simon the Sleep Inducer).
The policy as announced will exacerbate the brain drain as the young won't want to stay around to fund everyone's retirement but them, and student loans on top of that, as well as facing ridiculous house prices created by successive governments unwilling to do anything about it.]
March 05, 2017
Most Read Posts - Last Month
I have thousands of readers worldwide, but which posts get read is a hit and miss affair. The following are my most successful posts from the last 30 days:
1. Did Prince Charles and Camilla Have a Child?
2. Was Super Bowl 51 Rigged?
3. Trump's Big Fail
4. Three or more Essential Reads for Investors
5. New Zealand Shopping for Aircraft
6. Market Report UK
7. My 3 Rules for Stock Market Investment
8. Innovative Water Export Scheme
9. Adrian Orr is worth it
10. Dance Moms.
That last one is more recent and it's chugging along nicely so it will rise. No-one cares too much about the NBA being rigged, it must not be news or something.
1. Did Prince Charles and Camilla Have a Child?
2. Was Super Bowl 51 Rigged?
3. Trump's Big Fail
4. Three or more Essential Reads for Investors
5. New Zealand Shopping for Aircraft
6. Market Report UK
7. My 3 Rules for Stock Market Investment
8. Innovative Water Export Scheme
9. Adrian Orr is worth it
10. Dance Moms.
That last one is more recent and it's chugging along nicely so it will rise. No-one cares too much about the NBA being rigged, it must not be news or something.
March 04, 2017
Snap Inc
We've seen the hype, Snap has listed on the NYSE and the company now has a market capitalization of around 28 billion dollars. It's not a profitable business, so why the backing from investors? The only answer must be that investors are taking a punt, or gambling in other words.
By market cap, Snap is now worth more than Terex (3.51), Genesee & Wyoming (4.60), Martin Marietta Materials (14.22), Navistar (2.38) and Winnebago (1.14): they all add up to 25.89 billion. Call me old fashioned but I just ran off a list of companies that actually do something. Snap lets you do silly things with photo's and you share them. Fun yes, but is this a real thing with real value?
So by my measure Snap is not something to invest in.
By market cap, Snap is now worth more than Terex (3.51), Genesee & Wyoming (4.60), Martin Marietta Materials (14.22), Navistar (2.38) and Winnebago (1.14): they all add up to 25.89 billion. Call me old fashioned but I just ran off a list of companies that actually do something. Snap lets you do silly things with photo's and you share them. Fun yes, but is this a real thing with real value?
So by my measure Snap is not something to invest in.
March 03, 2017
Spark (aka Telecom NZ) and Email Migration
Spark (aka Telecom NZ) have announced they're moving email from the Yahoo platform to one located in New Zealand. Warning: it's worse than Yahoo. I suggest anyone reading this and also using Spark webmail, start using Gmail. Make a note of your contacts and let them know what's up, that you're now using Gmail.
I've now migrated to the new platform and it's rubbish. For instance, I get hundreds of Spam messages a day, which previously were all neatly stacked away in the Spam folder. Not now with the new Spark service, all Spam messages go to the Inbox, and there is no way to select these messages and mark them as Spam. To deal with each message you have to open each and every one. And then I have to actually look at each Spam message and create a file rule diverting this unwanted message. Seriously, this is so farcical I doubt anyone could make this up. It would take me half the day every day. The alternative is to blacklist, even though I don't necessarily want to do that. Again, this process would take a month maybe more.
What you cannot do is tick each message and then click "Mark as Spam' or some such. Then if you make a mistake, go into the Spam folder and click 'Not Spam'. Oh no, Spark wouldn't think of that, they're that stupid.
Who knows what else is wrong, I won't be staying around to find out as I now use Gmail for just about everything. The only times I use Spark webmail now is when it is an old contact for whom it would be too hard to get them to change.
The thing to think about here, if you are overseas and thinking about moving to New Zealand, is you have to deal with this kind of thing all the time in NZ. Spark (aka Telecom NZ) is a large company by NZ standards but they do as they like, the problem with that being they're idiots. They do stuff half-arsed. As customers we've been putting up with this shit for more than 10 years. It's a downhill slide, we started out with a useful webmail and anti-spam detection that worked. Then they moved onto the Yahoo platform and their anti-spam was worse, but now with the latest change, we get nothing, they've thrown in the towel altogether.
The thing to think about here, if you are overseas and thinking about moving to New Zealand, is you have to deal with this kind of thing all the time in NZ. Spark (aka Telecom NZ) is a large company by NZ standards but they do as they like, the problem with that being they're idiots. They do stuff half-arsed. As customers we've been putting up with this shit for more than 10 years. It's a downhill slide, we started out with a useful webmail and anti-spam detection that worked. Then they moved onto the Yahoo platform and their anti-spam was worse, but now with the latest change, we get nothing, they've thrown in the towel altogether.
March 01, 2017
Labour Panic
The Prime Minister of New Zealand is an ineffectual buffoon living in his own delusional world of make-believe. He cannot organise a piss-up in a brewery, so what does the main opposition party do? They throw one of their better campaigners overboard that's what.
Annette King was an effective deputy and well liked. More importantly she was good at keeping on message and she had no ambitions for the top job. Labour leader Andrew Little is a somewhat grey man and Annette King's more down to earth style was a useful counterpoint. Most Labour voters still identify with the type of person Ms King was, than they do the book-worm nerd that Andrew Little is. You can imagine King on the loading dock reading the riot act to the union membership but not Little. He'd get laughed at, Little by name, Little by nature.
King, at 69 was likely considered too long in the tooth. Big mistake that as she would be needed in any future coalition negotiations if Labour was to find itself in position to form a government.
Instead what we have is the almost certain elevation of Jacinda Ardern to the position of deputy to Little. Another lightweight standing alongside.
The line-up looks like this:
For National it's Bill English (ineffectual) and Paula Bennett (Westie) vs Labour's Andrew Little (lightweight) and Jacinda Ardern (even more lightweight).
So it's National to be re-elected in September then, unless another party rises to challenge the status quo and becomes King maker.