Living in New Zealand

Kiwis - a boat problem

2012-01-25T14:35:00.000-08:00

This is one of the more amusing stories to come out in NZ. It seems there is a 'Kiwi boat people' issue, as well as 'fly-by-night' Kiwis coming into Australia. Yes, a Kiwi resident multimillionaire has exposed to risk to Australia of people coming to Australia by boat or plane. Presumably these are low-flying planes which fly from the West Coast of NZ to some private 'bush' airport in Australia. It seems equally plausible that such avenues might be used for drugs into Australia....the implication being that NZ is a 'weak link' in Australia's border protection.

This issue comes to hand because of the Kim Dotcom fiasco. Australia seems more concerned about the influx of Arabs. Do we have a problem on our 'rear flank'...it would seem so. If we don't control the 'Kiwi situation', we might never stop them. :) These birds were flying when they left Australia. Some 50mil years after....they are flying back. You can't question their judgement...this Australia Day!

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Wanganui: Small town thinking for big town problem

2012-01-13T20:30:00.001-08:00

NZ residents of Wanganui are being asked whether they ought to approve a $141 million flood mitigation plan - a huge cost burden for a depopulating town, when there is a far more prudent and lucrative opportunity - build a hydro-electric scheme. My thoughts posted at Wanganui Chronicle letters below:

How about a flood mitigation scheme upriver to avoid the prospect of a flood and generate hydro-electricity for a century for free. Maybe the city could get free electricity, to offset the extortion by the power companies after stage 2 of the privatisation/self-regulation. Perhaps the council could finance the scheme through its EnergyDirect investment (50% owned by the council)....though maybe self-regulation precludes such vertical integration. I forget.

I might add - a few greenies might be flooded out of the valley at the same time. Seriously, though, why spend $141.4 million on remedial work when you can create something of value or productive, that ultimately serves 2 purposes, perhaps 3 (water supply in times of drought).

This of course is too abstract for councils accustomed to reactionary solutions. Why spend on costs when you can create assets. Of course Annette Main, whose property lies in this vicinity could be expected to have a vested interest, so maybe no progress will be made. Perhaps she needs to keep a back seat in our extortion-based political system.

Think about the following figures - electricity prices in NZ - page 148 of the Ministry of Development website. Comparing the ratio of residential electricity prices / industrial electricity prices - suggests a 2.5x premium for residential consumers over bulk electricity consumers. Its the worst ratio in the world...then look at the same ratio for gas...its even worse 4.8x - so consumers are being ripped off by producers and distributors of gas and electricity despite the capital cost of these assets being fully sunk by govt by the 1980s, and no fuel cost for the 70% of generating capacity which is hydro.

Perhaps rate payers ought to convince the council to 'invest' in new generating capacity rather than spending on 'damage prevention'....that's a rather expensive contingency planning 'cost' for an event that may not occur; protection which might not work; and work that offers no improvement. Perhaps council could even protect ratepayers from the extortionate prices of the national powerco's by offering ratepayers a cost+ROI electricity price; or better still adopt market pricing, and retain the power asset revenue to alleviate future rates. Concessional electricity prices could also be used to attract new industries. You wanted jobs didn't you. Cheap electricity is known to attract jobs. But will you allow a dam on the Wanganui River?? If it protects your homes?

Am I missing something?

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

The case for privatising NZ electricity assets

2012-01-04T12:54:00.000-08:00

According to the NZ Herald, Ernst and Young has produced a report which suggests NZ state-owned assets are reaping high returns; in fact higher returns than the median for private sector businesses. This poses a case of – why sell – when the public enterprises are more profitable, and the government has a lower ‘risk-free’ cost of capital than the private sector. There are problems with this analysis:

1. The fact that electricity assets are making huge earnings can actually be a good time to sell. The problem is that they are doing so because they are able to extort higher profits from the public because of poorly conceived self-regulatory electricity market. The NZEM is self-run and designed with private companies in mind. The implication is that these assets in private hands would lead to very high electricity prices, and either a lot of complaints by investors to re-regulate, or the high cost option of the govt buying back these assets. Think ahead NZ!

2. NZ’s economy is not growing, so you might reasonably expect these generators to use their market power to extract or ‘extort’ higher earnings from higher prices…because its not a competitive market, and the option-incentive for CEOs will be similarly driving all CEOs to make the same decision. The problem is CEOs have an expectation of driving higher profits. They can’t do that in NZ…so why are they not going overseas? Because they are too small, so hard to make profits. Most companies who invest abroad lose money.

3. Hydro-electricity assets are strategically important because no other substantial hydroelectric dams will be permitted by an ‘environmentally conscious’ NZ population. Hard to imagine any new dams being justified. More likely higher-cost wind capacity because its incremental, particularly with new molten-salt solar storage plants being under development. Expect solar wind farms around Nelson and greater island inter-connection.

4. There is a big overhang in the electricity market – the prospect of Rio Tinto not finding a buyer for their aluminium smelter, or the prospect of its closure in the next 5 years. This will result in 13% of NZ’s electricity demand ceasing to exist, so there is really no new demand for electricity in the short term. That means higher electricity prices on existing assets to justify lower sales. CEO’s will be forced to raise prices (since they can) to get higher salaries.

5. This of course underpins the ‘incentivisation’ idea of John Key. The idea that market discipline and ingenuity is going to see these CEOs extract higher returns. They will – but by mostly rising prices. Running a hydro plant is not rocket science!

The solution is to not sell hydroelectric power assets – except Solid Energy – which is a thermal project. The market is not a legitimately fair market regime, and the assets are politically sensitive in the sense that electricity costs are important for NZ’ers. If NZ wants to be competitive, this is not the way to go for small business or consumers. Next you will have to raise welfare benefits to adjust for higher electricity prices. It is really a hidden form of taxation. I’ve seen it all before in Australia.

“Labour says the Government delayed the release of the report until after Parliament rose for the holidays because it knew it undermined the economic case for partial privatisation”.[i]

Probably true; but then the Labour Party was too dumb to actually raise these concerns anyway. The argument was always there to be made, with or without the Ernst & Young analysis. In fact, I have made the case on Facebook, to the Labour member for Wanganui, and on my blogs. Doesn’t the Labour Party do its research? No, they seem to rely on policy from the top….and its all political ‘reactionary’ rhetoric. There are no analysts in the party…all party bureaucrats relying on analysis by government bureaucrats.

The fact that Mighty River earned a yield of 8.2% on its investment of course does not mean the asset will be sold for $3.5billion. However the fact that it’s a “no-growth” asset in terms of limited potential to build more dams because of environmental risks, and planning objections to wind farms, means any new capacity is high-initial-cost, but there is no population growth anyway. CEOs need incentives to stay in the job. You need to be sure there is no option incentive for CEOs to extort higher profits.

The problem I find is that NZ needs to have an intellectual debate about the values of this country. Either this is a socialist paradise or it’s a market economy. If you are looking at a ‘market economy’, then you need to look at foreign markets or increasing immigration. If you are looking at immigration, then it has to be significant volume to achieve growth in profits and asset values. That is what will retain people, and stop their movement abroad. This of course means NZ’ers need to come to terms with a NZ with a different cultural identity…this is the problem…most older NZ’ers don’t want this, so NZ is destined to remain a welfare state, with high costs and low-value opportunities.

Prime Minister John Key said the companies would "reap the benefits of sharper commercial disciplines, more transparency and greater external oversight".[ii]

Sorry, but this is not going to happen in a privatised market. Higher prices is what you can expect as the political pressures for lower prices evaporate. Greater external oversight? I doubt it. After privatising – the government is going to change the market structure? I doubt concerns about sovereign risk will allow it, and if the buyers are American, the FTA agreement will not allow it, i.e. They will sue the NZ govt. Of course if these assets are sold, then investors who retain these stocks will pay. My advice is take a stag ‘traders’ profit on these assets. Foreigners will not be interested in them. Too much sovereign risk.

“Ernst & Young's report shows the three companies have performed well compared to their private sector counterparts”. [iv]

That is because you are not comparing ‘like-with-like’. Other businesses can sell assets abroad. Australian power companies are servicing growth markets. You need to keep the context. When you buy a house in ‘no growth’ Wanganui, you expect a higher yield than ‘growing’ Auckland, i.e. Wanganui 12-13%, Auckland 5-6%. That is life, so expect 12% from these power assets; but these CEOs will push it higher to get an incentive bonus, so be very careful how the boards of these enterprises incentivise their executives.

Labour finance spokesman David Parker said the state-owned power companies' strong performance was "no surprise to me….This is further proof that these companies are already well run and profitable, and that they're not going to be better run as a consequence of private ownership…It further underscores that the only way these companies are going to make more money substantially is by increasing prices”. [vi]

True enough….but I suspect he does not know the reason why. It’s not because the yield is high or they are particularly well-run; it’s because they have the power to raise prices.

A recession and a self-regulated market context are not the right time to sell power assets. By all means sell Air NZ and Solid Energy, but again first eliminate the spectre of a 'carbon tax', as that nonsense science will only undervalue the Solid Energy assets. Empirical science is a scam. These scientists don't really understand their methodology. Such is the quality of public education. The biggest problem is the lack of critical thinking taught in our schools - public or 'religious dogma' inspired private schools. Privatise public schools by all means - but first discover rationality.

References

[i] “Government’s sell off-firms are top performers” by Adam Bennett, NZ Herald, website, Jan 5, 2012.

[ii] “Government’s sell off-firms are top performers” by Adam Bennett, NZ Herald, website, Jan 5, 2012.

[iv] “Government’s sell off-firms are top performers” by Adam Bennett, NZ Herald, website, Jan 5, 2012.

[vi] “Government’s sell off-firms are top performers” by Adam Bennett, NZ Herald, website, Jan 5, 2012.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

NZ 2011 election - dirtiest election ever?

2011-11-17T02:29:00.000-08:00

This article and the hounding that NZ Herald and other journalists are giving to the National Party and ACT Party highlights the extent to which the media are interfering in the NZ election. This would have to be the most corrupted election I've seen since President Arroyo was caught in a 'real tape scandal', where President Arroyo stands accused of benefiting from election bribing. This issue is currently being investigated in the Philippines. But back to the 3rd world:

1. Labour and Greens are trying to discredit the National Party and ACT Party because of their 'private conversation'. Nothing controversial was said except they referred to NZ First Party supporters as dying out; hehe funny 'private' joke, and the imminent resignation of Don Brash. Oh, and surprise surprise, Winston Peters is expounding the fact that Catherine Isaacs is being vetted by Key as the new leader. Should that surprise anyone? She is has 2nd ranking on the party list Winston. Winston Peters discredited himself here.

2. Greens Party people are caught sabotaging National Party billboards; and many in the party are supporting the action, saying party supporters would have welcome the moves. Yes, I guess because a chick is being unfairly treated, we ought to break the law indulgently. You'd think the media would be more interested in this story, but they are more interested in tarnishing the reputation of John Key. I don't much like John Key's pragmatism, but I think his credibility stands up a great deal better than the Green's ideology. Yet there is nothing in the media; and far from two people (John Key and John Banks) being scandalised for a harmless 'private' conversation, we have 50+ Greenies defacing billboards, and members unapologetic for the action, and the media doesn't think this story is newsworthy. Wow.

How biased can the media get. I hope the Elections NZ decide that the news media has tarnished the credibility of this election, and call upon the media to pay compensation, and for a new election to be held; hopefully in a new parallel universe where Don Brash is not ACT Party leader, so they can secure 15 seats! What a shocker!

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

The misappropriation of political information

2011-11-15T10:37:00.000-08:00

The NZ Herald has attempted to defend its story by garnering the support of a 'victim' of the 'News of the World' scandal in the UK. The effort is rather pathetic. Consider the lawyers arguments:

Barrister Mark Lewis said “The "teapot tape" should be released and is in no way comparable to the News of the World scandal”.[i]

Really? In no way the same? Not even a little? They occurred on the same planet? They involved taped conversations between known parties; journalists with a personal interest in the activities.

Barrister Mark Lewis: "The News of the World were really using what is lazy journalism - they were hacking people's phones to get cheap stories".[ii]

What difference does it make whether the journalists were lazy or deliberate in their activities. The issue is not whether they tried to record the incident; the issue is whether they are attempting to profit from it after the fact.

The fact that these politicians made parts of their conversations or the imagery pertaining to the conversation available or ‘public’ does not mean that every aspect of their life has to be exposed. The fact that the media asked for permission to publish the tapes is evidence enough of that.

“Mr Lewis said he believed it was in the public interest for the transcript of the tape to be released”.[iii]

How can he know if the releasing the tape is in the public interest without knowing the contents of the tape. Ethically, only the police can determine what is ethical or proper to do in this case, as well as the journalist and media executives who have viewed its contents. They will be morally and legally liable if they misuse the information. If there is any criminal content; this would not even necessarily justify release of the taped information, though I suggest it should in order to permit collaboration of evidence.

Barrister Mark Lewis: "There is a difference between the News of the World hacking into someone's phone to find out private information and seemingly - whether accidentally or on purpose - effectively a journalist investigating some kind of political statement”.[iv]

This barrister really has no concept of philosophy. There is a distinction to be made between private and public lives. i.e. You cannot plant video cameras in public toilets. That is the principle involved. Yes, hacking into someone’s private communication represents a higher level of deceit, but both actions are morally reprehensible. A barrister should know that.

Barrister Mark Lewis: "But if it's particularly a political statement which affects the future government or the ways to achieve future government in a country, then that's something in the public interest and it sounds like it should be reported without the unfavourable comparison to what was clearly a criminal act”. [v]

Well, that is fine if the content of the tape was public, or if the content which the media sought to publish was ‘public policy’, but they are after scandal. So it’s a big ‘if’ that this barrister has not even explored. Even if there is content which might be deemed ‘in the public interest’, that is for the owner of the private information to decide. Only if the evidence suggests illegality should this information go to the police; and otherwise there ought to be no publication without the intellectual property owners authorisation. It has been duly rejected by John Key.

Why a barrister is inclined to screw up on this point is that they fail to see the broader context of public accountability; which is a respect for principles. In a sense, the barrister is saying that we will discard principles for the right to affirm the public's interest....whatever that is. i.e. He is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

According to the NZ Herald,

“News Corp is trying to negotiate a settlement with the Dowlers and has offered them £2 million (NZ$3.9 million)”. [vi]

Barrister Mark Lewis’ comment on the John Key-John Banks tape recording therefore entails a ‘conflict of interest’, and I would suggest his inflaming the NZ political issue could well make him liable to legal action by the PM, John Banks, the ACT Party and the National Party. The conflict of interest arises because he is apparently trying to render his case as more serious, unique, and thus of greater significance. This would of course justify a greater pay-out for his client.

“Mr Lewis said there was a difference between taping the PM speaking about something which could be deemed "very crucial politically" and recording him talking about personal matters, like his health or his family”. [vii]

Actually there isn’t. If the media is so hungry for public policy so that the public can get to know their political candidates, then I’m sure there is no shortage of time available by them; particularly the minority candidates who seldom get much. The reality is that the media wants us to think there are some important sound-bites on here. Maybe there is some crude language or embarrassing comments about Don Brash. Maybe they even hint to the resignation of Don Brash after the election. These are private opinions; they are strategic concerns of the people who did not intend to make them public. The notion that a journalist can accidentally benefit from secret tapes is ridiculous, whether they intended to do it or not. It could only sponsor a raft of ‘disorganised crime’ or purposeless crime. i.e. Smuggling of drugs. Oh sorry, I did not know my BF planted drugs in my baggage, but since I did not know, its ok if I sell them in the destination country.

Barrister Mark Lewis: "If it's to do with how the country is governed then that's good journalism".[viii]

Actually its poor journalism because apparently the action was not deliberate, and the decisions since show poor moral judgement by all concerned.

Barrister Mark Lewis: "The public choose their politicians ... they really ought to know wherever they are in the world".[ix]

Nonsense. Politicians are not always public persons; they also have private lives, and it is the decision of the politician, not the media, to decide when it is public or private, or it can be determined from the context. Voters should only be interested in the public policies of politicians; the fact that they make private comments, etc is really of no importance because they are not well-considered, deliberate or analytical thoughts, as I am conveying here. If my analysis is flawed, then I can be rightly criticised for it. Some of my writing is less well-considered, and whilst I can be criticised for it, I hold myself to a lower standard for that. It is a question of context. I could care less that John Brash curses Don Brash in private or public; the issue is whether they are effective politicians. In that assessment, I do not think people should hold them to unreasonable standards, nor sanction the use of misappropriated information/property.

Mr Lewis suggests a better comparison would be with ‘former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's gaffe when a microphone he was wearing picked up his comments that Labour supporter Gillian Duffy was a "bigoted woman".[x]

Frankly, I actually think this is a similar situation. If the journalists intentionally released that information and they had good reason for believing they were private thoughts; then they ought not to publish it. If he was making those comments to specific people, as opposed to strangers, then that is private.

Barrister Mark Lewis: "Politicians need to be careful about TV cameras and microphones. They should watch out that things aren't recording". [xi]

Notwithstanding the practical value of anticipating ‘crouching tigers’, we would tend to argue that we do not live in a caveman society, but rather a conceptual society where we expect people to act in accordance with the law, and that the law will entail consonance with ethical principles and more importantly human nature. Where is the ethical principle that the victim is 100% responsible for the consequences of their actions and others actions.

“Mr Key said his police complaint was based on principle. "What happens when it moves to other high profile New Zealanders having a conversation with their wives about personal issues?” [xii]

This is a fair comparison, but the following ethical justification by John Key is not.

John Key: "What happens if a couple of high profile New Zealanders have a conversation about their son or their daughter being suicidal - a Sunday paper reports that and that child takes their own life. We're at the start of a slippery slope here and I for one am going to stand up and ask the police to investigate it".[xiii]

A defining quality of a “suicidal” people is that they have a propensity to commit suicide. John Key seems to be embarrassing a utilitarian or consequential or pragmatic conception of justice here – sadly. The issue is the means by which a person acquires the information. Certainly if the information was misappropriated and caused embarrassment, it could precipitate suicide. This might reasonable considered a ‘causal’ connection between the illegitimate action and the suicide.

References

[i] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[ii] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[iii] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[iv] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[v] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[vi] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[vii] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[viii] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[ix] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[x] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[xi] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[xii] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

[xiii] “Prime Minister's 'cheap shot” by Amelia Wade, NZ Herald, website, Nov 16, 2011.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Speech by Don Bash - election 2011 campaign launch

2011-11-12T17:40:00.000-08:00

Don, I took the opportunity to identify the problems I have with your recent speech. You have my partial support…sadly not my vote since I don’t vote..since I don’t sanction the process.

On 13 November 2011 12:00, Don Brash wrote:

ACT: THE RIGHT PARTNER FOR THE JOHN KEY GOVERNMENT

AN ADDRESS BY DON BRASH, LEADER

ACT 2011 CAMPAIGN LAUNCH

13 NOVEMBER 2011

Ladies and gentlemen,

New Zealand needs ACT! New Zealand’s a wonderful country.

Blah blah blah…you should try Australia…Kiwis love it J too

We live in a country which is bigger than Britain, with more natural resources per person than almost any other country on Earth.

A country which has more fresh water per person than almost any other country on the planet.

I would have noted the oil & gas potential, quite startling for a country of 4million people. Basically NZ has an offshore basin the size of Europe. Other than that there is the titanomagnetites of West Coast Nth Island and Southland lignitic coal, there is not much mineral wealth really aside from the oil potential. Yes, NZ has farming, a great climate and water supply, but not a startling benefit. The lack of development of oil & gas is due to isolation and lack of political support.

A country which gave women the vote before any other country, and has one of the oldest democracies in the world.

Democracy is not such a triumph...after all its engrossed us in the current problems. You should be canvassing a meritocratic democracy.

A country where we can say with certainty that, no matter how vigorously we disagree with each other about politics, nobody will get shot, or beaten to death, in political turmoil.

Yeh, but crime rates are not impressive, and economic based injustice (i.e. bank fees, currently the basis of a common law action in Australia) are real rproblems, not to mention state-sanctioned systematic statutory abuses. i.e. Punitive, arbitrary laws.

A country which has produced Ed Hillary, and Kiri Te Kanawa, and Kate Sheppard, and Katherine Mansfield, and Jean Batten, and Apirana Ngata, and Bill Buckley, and Angus Tait, and Bill Gallagher, and Ernest Rutherford – a man ranked by some as close to Newton and Einstein in terms of his contribution to our understanding of physics.

Not so impressive...might get you votes though.

It is a wonderful country.

But ladies and gentlemen, this country is at risk. Far too many people are finding it hard to make ends meet. Far too many young people can’t get a job. Far too many people fill our jails. Far too many children are poorly fed and poorly housed. Far too many families break down in acrimony and violence. Far too many young people come out of school unable to read and write. Far too many working age adults languish on a hand-out. Far too many towns and cities spew untreated waste into our once-clean streams and rivers.

And to a large extent these are the social costs of the under-performance of our economy. Once, we were one of the richest countries in the world. Our productivity was up with the best.

One has to acknowledge that a collapse in commodities was party to blame - it hit Australia too.

But then we were hit by the loss of our best export market, and by the disastrous policy response to that. By 1984, New Zealand was on the verge of bankruptcy. We were rescued by Sir Roger Douglas, the Minister of Finance who went on to found the ACT Party, and for more than 10 years productivity started growing strongly again.

This seems somewhat controversial; and not supported by evidence, as NZ does not seem to have gone on to create any great industries in this time. I suggest you need to argue this point, i.e. Arguing that minimum wages were an obstacle, if they were?? Do they pre-date this period, etc.

But when Winston Peters became the Treasurer in 1996, and even worse when Helen Clark became Prime Minister in 1999, the momentum ended.

She introduced the envy tax for those on higher incomes; she reversed many of the labour market reforms; she introduced legislation giving local authorities the power to do whatever they wished; and she massively increased government spending towards the end of her reign – an increase which set up the years of deficit since 2009.

Today, the Government is borrowing hand over fist; $20 billion in the last year, hundreds of millions of dollars every week, the equivalent of hundreds of dollars a week for every household.

Govt is borrowing $20bil - is this not misleading because its because of the earthquake relief. Otherwise its mostly private debt. Govt debt is not so bad I seem to recall. Not bad for a farm commodity producer with a lot of oil potential.

Productivity growth has fallen away – to an estimated 1% annually according to the Reserve Bank.

Yep...NZ workers have a sense of 'lifestyle' entitlement. A country with few resources other than oil 'potential', and you have to rely on labour, like Singapore, then you need a new education system. But you really need a new political system, and NZ, being the first to adopt women voting, ought to be the first. It has the legal framework best suited for change. It could lead the world.

Despite the best export prices in a generation and weak import demand, the balance of payments is still in deficit – with that deficit projected to increase over the next few years. And as a result our debt to the rest of the world gets bigger, year by year – not yet at Greek or Spanish levels, but damned uncomfortable just the same.

Agreed.

Two credit rating agencies have downgraded us, and as a former Governor of the Reserve Bank I know that that’s an ominous sign.

The IMF projects growth in per capita income over the decade to 2016 to be half the growth they project for Australia over the same period. In fact, 148 countries are expected to grow faster than we will over that period. We would have been in a state of national mourning if even one other country had beaten us at rugby – we seem relaxed at being 149th in the economic growth stakes!

The gap between incomes here and incomes across the Tasman continues to grow. When National came to power, the gap was 35%; now it’s closer to 40%. As a result, New Zealanders leave in ever-increasing numbers; nearly 300,000 over the last decade.

Not realistic comparison. Can I suggest comparing NZ with South Australia. Even then, wage levels in Sth Aust will be set by Australian context. Like NZ, Sth Australia is probably depopulating, except it might have turned around with the commodities recovery and mining boom. The lesson for NZ is that Sth Australia spent $25mil on a Mineral Discovery Program - geophysics across the entire state. This is why resource development is key to retaining population growth in NZ. NZ needs a $50mil geophysics program to test offshore areas. Set up a state oil enterprise; do the work, then farm out the most prospective areas to foreign companies on 'market terms', then sell off the enterprise to NZ'ers.

Just last week, the Herald on Sunday wrote of the Kiwi families living in Australia but longing to come home. Couples like Adrian and Jules Paalvast, with three New Zealand-born sons – longing to return to New Zealand, but feeling unable to do so because Adrian makes three times the salary in Australia that he could make in New Zealand, thus enabling Jules to stay home with her four children.

A survey of 4,000 13-year-olds recently found that an astonishing 27% of them wanted to leave New Zealand permanently when they were old enough to do so.

Dealing with this challenge should be the dominant theme in the election campaign – but it’s not. The serious danger is that we could reach a tipping point, the point at which so many New Zealanders have left that it becomes a cumulative process, with each new departure easier to justify than the last one. Some suggest we may already have reached that point.

At this critical time in our country’s life, voters face a stark choice: do they want a centre-left government headed by Phil Goff or do they want a centre-right government headed by John Key? There are no other options available.

Hang on - aren't you a 3rd choice?

We in the ACT Party are in no doubt at all about which of these two men offers the better prospect for our great country, and we have already declared publicly that we will give Confidence and Supply to a John Key-led Government.

Hmmm...after having bagged him out.

The Labour Party is advocating policies which nobody who cares for our long-term future could support – massively more borrowing than even National proposes; employment legislation which would see a return to the industrial mayhem which prevailed before 1991; a $15 minimum wage which would lead quite directly to more unemployment; an end to the 90-day trial period in employment contracts; a capital gains tax; a big increase in the compliance costs imposed on small businesses because of the exemption of fruit and vegetables from GST; a huge increase in the costs of the farming sector as a result of bringing biological emissions into the ETS in 2013; and an instruction to the Reserve Bank to stop worrying about inflation and start focusing on the exchange rate. This is crazy stuff.

Why is a capital gains tax a bad thing given your arguments about the deficit? You might ask whether now, a sustained recession, is the time to adopt tax cuts. Relying on private sector stimulus at a time of recession does not strike me as sensible, i.e. When you – Don Brash - were RB governor (2002) was the time for this. Opportunity lost now.

As an aside, I understand as well as anybody the problem which big swings in the exchange rate cause for exporters. I spent almost 14 years of my life trying to reduce those big swings. Alas, there are no easy ways to eliminate them, not at least if keeping inflation under control is also an objective. The Labour Party pretended they knew what to do about this issue in 1999, when they were campaigning to win the election in that year, and promised to have the whole Reserve Bank framework put under a microscope. When they won the election, they duly appointed a monetary policy expert from Sweden to do exactly that, and after months of study, the expert declared the New Zealand monetary policy framework world’s best practice.

It may sound good to exporters for Labour to say that they will smooth out those exchange rate fluctuations and keep inflation under control: believe me, no central bank has yet discovered how to do that.

So there’s not the slightest chance that ACT could support Labour after the election.

But like many others, we want a John Key-led Government to deal more decisively with the challenges which our country faces than has been the case over the last three years.

The Government has introduced National Standards in the school system, and some of our schools are world class. But far too many young people are coming out of 10 or 12 years of school barely literate. Parents who scrimp and save to send their children to independent schools are forced to pay twice for the privilege, once through taxation and a second time through school fees. The school system remains highly centralised – with a centralised curriculum, and a centralised and bureaucratic remuneration system.

There has been a pleasing reduction in violent crime in the last three years, and the ACT Party can take some of the credit for that – we supported National in increasing police numbers, especially in South Auckland, and we were responsible for getting the Three Strikes legislation passed, so that repeat violent and sexual offenders spend longer in jail.

This is not social policy; its repression. Discipline is not education.

But there is still far too much senseless violence, and too often the police prosecute the victim of that crime, as when Virender Singh was prosecuted a year or so ago when he tried to defend himself with a hockey stick while being attacked by five drunken youths.

Right now, the world economy is looking more ominous than at any time in my life-time. I spent a few days visiting London and Washington late last month to get a first-hand picture of just how bad things might get. I came home deeply worried – the Eurozone is in serious trouble because of irresponsible government spending in the countries of southern Europe; the United Kingdom and the United States are struggling under massive government deficits; and Japan seems unable to get to grips with its own massive government debt. The scope for the world economy to endure a prolonged and deep recession is all too evident.

Good argument to make.

In this threatening global environment, we believe the Government needs to urgently focus its spending on those who most need it, to flatten and reduce taxes in order to encourage investment, and to radically reduce the bureaucracy which makes life so miserable for homeowners, farmers, and manufacturers – indeed, for anybody wanting to do something!

Acknowledging that you are in a recession but not recognising that private investment is not going to fly is unrealistic. Why can't you 'contextually' validate the concerns of Labour for the plight of those who have lost their jobs or in long term unemployment, and to offer 'conditional support' for those on welfare, so they don't just stay on welfare...so they become ACT Supporters. i.e. Don't assume that people on welfare are happy on welfare. The problem is that you guys peddle a false dichotomy - harsh vs soft. There is a contextual, principled position. Call it the 'third way'. But its not a compromise; its just contextual, so realistic, as opposed to detached dogmatism or over-simplistic rationalism.

Realistically, ACT is the only party which can help National do what John Key and the rest of the Cabinet know needs to be done. And Friday’s “cup of tea” shows clearly that John Key knows that.

You will not impact on John Key unless you are able to increase your vote, and that requires differentiating yourself from NP. John Key will not achieve anything. He is a pragmatist. He lacks the intellect. NP-ACT = 3more years of what we just had, with a NP scared to act. All the most surprising when you have a wolly like Phil Goff in opposition. Utterly clueless. But it is a recession, so you need to be empathetic....not detached. There is value in cutting costs in this period, but not at the expense of demand. Refine rather than cut. i.e. Better education policy.

Over the last three years, ACT has ensured stable centre-right government – indeed, we enabled John Key to announce that he was in a position to form a government on the night of the last election, because we had pledged support to National in advance, as we have done again.

Again and again, we supported National Party-initiated legislation when without our support legislation would have failed.

Unconditionally? Are you saying that you are just a patsy for the NP? Because the electorate might punish you if this is the implication; most particularly if that is their perception, or you are telling them so. i.e. To punish the electoral system. This statement is a particular concern with the MMP up for debate. Don, sometimes I think you could not have done a better job of destroying the ACT Party. We'll see. Is John Banks the final kick in the teeth? We'll see.

We gave voice to widespread public concern about the Anti-Smacking law, the Marine and Coastal Area Act, and the Emissions Trading Scheme, though ultimately in vain.

Yep, we need access to oil. ETS is a tax scam...unsupported by good science. Too much political influence...helps to cite arguments.

http://www.thegwpf.org/press-releases/2296-flawed-climategate-inquiries-failed-to-restore-confidence-in-uk-climate-science.html . Nothing wrong with the Anti-Smacking idea in principle, just wrong execution.

We can claim much of the credit for the retention of the right to silence in criminal cases.

And as I’ve mentioned, as a result of our initiative, the Three Strikes legislation was passed. As a result of our initiative, students are no longer obliged to join a union. As a result of our initiative, the Productivity Commission was set up. As a result of our initiative, the 2025 Taskforce was set up, and the National Party committed to promoting policies which would close the income gap with Australia by 2025. (National doesn’t talk about closing that gap much anymore, because they know they don’t have a plan to close it. ACT does!)

Well, its hard to close a gap during a recession; who is spending money. So not fair to beat them up for no efforts now; but yes with respect to Helen Clark.

So we’ve shown we can work with National, and can deliver positive benefits for New Zealand. But much remains to be done.

Indeed.

In the last few weeks, National has gone some way towards policies which we strongly support by proposing quite far-reaching welfare reform, some useful changes in employment law, and some steps in the right direction in enabling employers to take on teenagers at less than the adult minimum wage. They’ve even made some tentative suggestions for reforming the Resource Management Act. We support all these moves – as far as they go.

But let me set out what we would like to achieve in the next Parliament.

There are nine policy areas we’ll be looking to work with National on to improve the lives of all New Zealanders, and perhaps especially those New Zealanders whom the major parties seem to have forgotten – those who struggle to keep small and entrepreneurial businesses alive, the farmers and those who provide services in rural communities, the self-employed taxi drivers and dairy owners (for whom earning even $13 an hour for the hours worked seems a distant dream), those struggling to cope with the burden of bureaucratic officials and senseless red-tape.

Pass Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill and Regulatory Standards Bill

1) First, we want to ensure that the two Bills introduced by Rodney Hide in the last Parliament are passed into law – namely the Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill and the Regulatory Standards Bill.

The Spending Cap Bill would not require any reduction in government spending – indeed, it would explicitly allow government spending to increase as our population grows and as prices rise, and it would allow for a complete exemption from the cap to deal with a national emergency, such as the Christchurch earthquakes – but it would prevent future governments engaging in the kind of grossly irresponsible electoral bribes which the Clark Government undertook in the last three years of that Government’s life. For this reason, we believe its passage is well overdue.

Similarly, the Regulatory Standards Bill – opposed by most government departments and supported by most people in the private sector – would raise the bar on new legislation and regulation to the considerable benefit of everybody.

Only a party vote for ACT will get these two fundamentally important pieces of legislation passed into law!

The problem with this is that its arbitrary and context dropping. What if there was another earthquake - this time in Auckland. What about a war?

Reduce government spending relative to the size of the economy to enable radical tax reduction, and a lower exchange rate

2) Second, we will be pushing for a faster reduction in government spending – relative to the size of the economy – than that currently envisaged. At the moment, government spending is a larger share of the total economy than in any year of the last Labour Government. And yet there are a number of spending programmes which National criticised strongly when in Opposition but which remain untouched – programmes which have little or no merit in terms of any concept of social justice.

Getting spending under control more quickly would have three important benefits.

It would hasten the day when we’re no longer borrowing from our children to make life more enjoyable for ourselves.

It would enable tax rates to be reduced and flattened. We’re especially keen to get the company tax rate reduced – that’s vitally important if we’re to see a strong increase in investment in New Zealand. Yes, our company tax rate was reduced last year, but taken together with the change in depreciation allowances the overall effect was to increase the effective corporate tax rate. In any event, our company tax rate remains at 28%. That in fast-growing Singapore and Hong Kong is only 17%.

By how much could tax rates be reduced? The 2025 Taskforce showed that, if government spending could be reduced to the same share of GDP that it was in 2005, at the end of Labour’s second three-year term in office, then the top personal tax rate and the company tax rate could both be reduced to 20%. I’m not confident that that’s still possible, but a radical reduction of both rates could certainly be achieved.

Because of the crucial need to raise wages and salaries by increasing investment, we favour accepting that there will need to be an ongoing gap between the company rate and the top personal rate (as there is currently) by introducing a radically lower company tax rate at 12.5%, with the top personal rate as low as revenue will allow, perhaps 25%. We don’t doubt that that would have a very dramatic effect on investment, and therefore on wages, salaries and jobs.

Another substantial benefit of getting government spending reduced more quickly is that it would help reduce the exchange rate – vitally important if farmers and other exporters are to generate the strong growth in exports that our high level of overseas debt demands.

This is partly because much of the borrowing being undertaken by the government is being done by selling bonds to foreigners – and of course those foreigners have to buy New Zealand dollars to buy the government bonds.

It’s also partly because tighter restraint on government spending would almost inevitably prompt the Reserve Bank to further reduce the Official Cash Rate, and that too would reduce the upward pressure on the exchange rate. Yes, the OCR is lower now than at any time in our history, but it’s also higher than in any other developed country except Australia. There can’t be much doubt that if the OCR were, say, 1% rather than 2.5%, the exchange rate would be lower and export growth would be stronger.

Only a party vote for ACT will get government spending back under control quickly, and take the pressure off exporters!

You cannot expect to retain people in NZ if you start cutting spending - you need to find more productive ways of employing them. You need to live as effectively through this recession as possible. I would suggest your best bet is farm stimulus and oil & gas stimulus...that is where NZ spending has to go to displace any cuts you make. You will be sending NZ public servants to Australia. Australia loves big govt.

Radically reduce bureaucracy

3) Third, we will be pushing for a strong attack on bureaucracy. And by that we don’t simply mean a reduction in the number of bureaucrats, though that would no doubt be part of it. We mean taking an axe to some of the more ridiculous rules and regulations which those bureaucrats enforce:

· The rule which enables Auckland Council planners to tell a home-owner to paint her white house black or brown because it’s near the Kaipara;

· The rule which requires a retailer of farming equipment in Masterton to get approval before erecting a sign on his own property;

· The rule which requires a farmer to get approval before building a hay-barn on his own property;

· The rule which enables local authority planners to designate a farm as having outstanding landscape value, without any suggestion of compensation for the loss of value which that designation involves;

· The rule which requires a farmer to get a building consent to replace his home after it’s burnt down;

· The law which enables local authorities to tightly constrain the supply of land, with disastrous consequences for housing affordability for most young New Zealanders.

Fixing these frustrating and expensive rules would almost certainly require a fundamental reform of both the RMA and the Local Government Act, and quite possibly an amendment to the Bill of Rights Act to ensure that the right to peaceful enjoyment of one’s own property is enshrined in law.

Only a party vote for ACT will make a serious dent in the inane bureaucratic rules which cost us a fortune and ruin our lives!

Take an axe to the Emissions Trading Scheme

Agreed, but that means taking an axe to the science. There is a James Cook University (impartial Australian) academic who is your man! Start attacking the science. This ought to be a big issue for you. You should be getting out there on this issue. There is a lot of cynicism about climate change, and a great way of winning NP votes, and Green conversion to NP votes.

4) Fourth, we also want to take an axe to the Emissions Trading Scheme. Whatever you believe about the causes of climate change, it makes no sense at all for New Zealand, producing just 0.2% of global greenhouse gas emissions, to have the only all sectors, all gasses, ETS in the world.

No other country penalises farming for its production of greenhouse gases, and yet that is a major part of the ETS in New Zealand.

Yes, National proposes to defer the inclusion of agriculture into our ETS until 2015; Labour proposes to include it from 2013.

Key will not support it; he just knows that the evidence is fake, but wants the Gillard govt to quit first.

But even now agriculture is hurt by the effect of the ETS on the price of electricity, petrol, diesel, and coal. If biological emissions were to be included in the ETS on the basis proposed by the Labour Party, it would have an absolutely devastating effect on the viability of a great many farms. Even the deferment proposed by the National Party would at best leave farmers paying thousands of dollars for their use of on- and off-farm energy. New Zealand’s farming sector – the most efficient producer of food in the world – doesn’t deserve that kind of punishment.

Indeed, there’s a strong argument that biological emissions don’t add to greenhouse gases at all: every unit of carbon emitted by pastures, crops and animals was first absorbed from the atmosphere.

Only a party vote for ACT can protect farmers – and the rest of us – from the ETS!

Give parents effective control over their children’s education

This is good policy. But I think you need to make the argument for it. Wish I could help on this issue, as I'm currently writing a book on parenting.

5) Fifth, we want taxpayer funding to “follow the child”, to give parents an opportunity to send their children to any school willing to take them, as already happens with Early Childhood Education. This would enable parents to send their child to an independent school if that was their preference, or to an “integrated school”.

And to enable parents to make an informed choice about which school is best suited to their child, we would open up SchoolSMART, a website run by the Ministry of Education which holds information about schools, about pupils’ performance, about teacher performance and about other indicators. National once campaigned to make this information available to parents. In Government, they haven’t done it.

Hmm...sounds nice but actually I'm not a fan of this approach to performance enhancement because it drops the context in which teachers perform. Stick with your policy above with greater autonomy for principals and let the principals deal with the issue.

We would recognise long-established and well run state schools, such as Auckland Grammar, Epsom Girls, McLean’s College, Rangitoto College, Wellington College and Christchurch Boys High School, as “trust schools”, and allow them to operate substantially free from bureaucratic control – including giving them the ability to establish other campuses, perhaps by acquiring schools which might be losing pupils.

Only a party vote for ACT will give parents a chance to choose the school which best suits their child, and boards of trustees and principals a chance to run their schools free from the stifling hand of Wellington bureaucrats!

Promote a multi-party consensus on changes to New Zealand Superannuation

6) Sixth, we will push for a multi-party consensus on changes to New Zealand Superannuation to ensure its long-term viability as our population gradually ages.

I have utter sympathy for NZ'ers - there are few opportunities to make money here as there is no market size or growth. Expand the swimming pool so bigger and more fish can grow. I think the only way to get NZ'ers to save is to give them easier access to the Australian market place. My suggestion is that NZ needs to:

1. Facilitate easier access to the Australian market place for NZ investment, i.e. Allow NZ'ers to invest in Australia's economic success, as well as allow NZ companies to raise money in Aust easily.

2. Offset this lost domestic investment by facilitating greater foreign investment in NZ, i.e. Like with my oil investment initiative.

The Labour Party has recently announced their support for a gradual increase in the age of eligibility, as we proposed months ago. They’ve adopted the proposal of the Retirement Commissioner, which would see the age of eligibility reach 67 by 2033.

We think that that’s too slow, not affecting in any material way the baby boomer generation.

The Australian Labor Government has announced that the age at which Australians will become eligible for their taxpayer-funded pension scheme will reach 67 by 2023, 10 years earlier than the Labour Party has proposed here.

But whether by 2023 or 2033, this issue needs to be put on the agenda. Most other developed countries are gradually increasing the age at which their citizens become eligible for taxpayer-funded retirement income, and for the same reason. We’re all living longer. It’s totally irresponsible to pretend that no increase will be needed.

Only a party vote for ACT will ensure that this issue is addressed in a timely way!

Promote a safer, more secure, society

7) Seventh, we will push to make New Zealand a safer and fairer place by ensuring that the victims of crime are not subject to unfair scrutiny by the police when they try to defend themselves, and ensuring that young offenders are appropriately dealt with before their criminal activities escalate.

The statute books already entitle people to use reasonable force to defend themselves and their property. But in practice it’s all too common for the police to charge people who defend themselves – in other words, for the police to treat victims as criminals.

I mentioned the case of Virender Singh a moment ago. I could have mentioned the case of Greg Carvell, charged with shooting and wounding an intruder who was threatening him and two of his staff with a machete. Or the case of Paul McIntyre, charged with shooting and wounding one of three men who were trying to steal his property in a remote location in the dead of night. There have been far too many similar cases.

While clearly the use of force in defence of person and property must be reasonable – it would clearly be absurd to use lethal force against a teenager retrieving a ball from your front lawn – the present policy needs to change. We believe there’d be merit in enshrining the right to self-defence in the Bill of Rights Act.

In respect of youth offending, there’s a lot of evidence that to the extent young people get away with minor offending, there’s an increased chance of their engaging in further and more serious offending. We will ensure that all young people know that breaking the law has consequences, in order to ensure our young people stay on the straight and narrow. Ensuring that young people receive a decent education, and can find a job when they need one, will also help keep young people out of trouble.

This is too simplistic policy. Strikes one as behaviourism…anti-intellectual.

Only a party vote for ACT will protect your right to self defence, and make it clear to our young people that every crime has a consequence!

Push for equal legal status for all New Zealanders, irrespective of race

8) Our eighth agenda item is to give effective force to Article III of the Treaty of Waitangi – the clause which asserts that all New Zealanders have equal status at law. We reject the notion that the Treaty established a “partnership” between “the Crown” (on behalf of all New Zealanders) and a subset of New Zealanders defined by their ancestry. If Article III is taken seriously, it leaves no room for separate Maori electorates in Parliament, no room for Maori wards in local government, and no room for requiring consultation with Maori over and above the obligation to consult with any other New Zealander.

Agreed, but you are a long way from displaying empathy for Maoris. I think you need to acknowledge the failings of prior policy. There is a great deal which can be validated or acknowledged about the Maori position. Not good engagement on this issue.

We believe that, except where already in private ownership, the foreshore and seabed should belong to the Crown, on behalf of all New Zealanders. Because we are a party which believes in the rule of law, and in particular the right of all New Zealanders to have access to the courts, we also believe that those who think they have a customary right to certain parts of the foreshore should be allowed to have their claims tested in court. And we mean tested in court: we don’t regard negotiating such claims with a minister, within an intensely political environment where Parliamentary votes are at stake, as at all a substitute.

Agreed.

We favour the enactment of a simple piece of legislation providing that nothing in any statute or regulation, whether passed by Parliament or by any other regulation-making body, should confer any benefit, preferment or special status on anybody by reason of the ethnicity of that person.

Only a party vote for ACT will move New Zealand forward to a state where all New Zealanders – those of Maori ancestry, those of European ancestry, those of Asian ancestry, those of Pacific Island ancestry – all of us have equal rights under the law!

Don't you mean equal slaves? Very little mention about our system of govt; rights in this policy statement. Nothing about economic rights. What happen to libertarianism? I thought there were principles? Or are we getting direct inspiration from God these days. Ok, that's on the ACT website. You ought to refer to it, as National Party have a pretty empty framework.

Re-establish a constructive relationship with Fiji

9) Finally, we will push to rebuild our relationship with Fiji.

The ACT Party has long been in broad agreement with the thrust of New Zealand’s foreign policy: in particular, we favour the drive for building new relationships with China, India and other emerging countries in Asia, and for working hard to bring the Trans Pacific Partnership to a successful conclusion. We have supported the Government in its determination to fulfill New Zealand’s commitments in Afghanistan until next April. We continue to regard a close relationship with Australia, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada as fundamental to our security.

But we’ve come to the conclusion after extensive talks with Fijians now living in New Zealand, and New Zealanders with long experience in the Pacific, that our present policy of holding the Bainimarama regime at arm’s length is not working for New Zealand or for Fiji.

Fiji has long been family: many New Zealanders holiday there and a significant number have business interests there. Many New Zealanders were born there.

We need to rebuild a positive relationship with that country – encouraging the regime towards its professed aim of building a vibrant colour-blind democracy, based on one vote one person.

Only a party vote for ACT will lead to a re-examination of our relationship with Fiji!

So there you have a summary statement – the ACT Plan for the next Parliamentary term if you like – setting out what we will be aiming to achieve in the next Parliament.

All of our policies are motivated by a concern for those New Zealanders who, like Adrian and Jules Paalvast, want to return to their homeland, but feel that they can’t do so in fairness to their children. And for those who still live in New Zealand but feel deeply torn between what this country has to offer and the much higher living standard which, for the foreseeable future, they could enjoy abroad.

And when we look at the policy positions being adopted by other potential partners of the National Party, we’re convinced that ACT is the most logical partner for National.

The parties of the left – Labour, Mana, Maori and Green parties – are in a competition over who can come up with the most economically irrational policies. They are in a race to increase the minimum wage – in the process, destroying jobs and consigning those they claim to represent to the unemployment benefit. So much for compassion!

Their other policies would be just as destructive. The Maori Party wants to exempt the first $25,000 of income from tax; to make teaching te reo compulsory in secondary schools; to scrap the 90 day probationary period; to write Treaty of Waitangi principles (whatever they are!) into employment law; and to give iwi a veto over foreign investment.

The Green Party wants to protect the environment, as of course we in ACT do also, but has a totally unworldly view of how economies work and has no understanding what a devastating impact on our living standards the implementation of their core policy platform would have. For a party that talks up their opposition to big business, they seem intent on delivering massive subsidies to big businesses that promise to create so-called “green jobs” – despite policies of that kind leading to massive job losses in countries such as Spain which have gone down that path.

Well, they might argue that you are unrealistic because they seem strong on issues which might prevent oil spills, i.e. Renunciation of oil exploration

By contrast, ACT shares much the same basic philosophy as the National Party – a belief in freedom, in individual responsibility, in limited government, in equal citizenship, a belief that New Zealanders’ lives would be better by having less government – less government taxation, less government spending, less government borrowing, less government bureaucracy. And we actually mean it!

Since when was 'limited govt' a principle? A lot of work needed here.

Of course, we have differences of opinion with National too. We want to see much more vigorous action to deal with our problems than National has felt able to deliver over the last three years.

But we haven’t the slightest doubt that we could again work constructively with National, to the benefit of all New Zealanders – high income and low income; young and old; urban and rural; Maori, Asian, Pacifika and European.

And that’s my message to all New Zealanders. ACT is the only party with the experience and the commitment which can help a John Key-led Government deal with the challenges which our country faces.

And those challenges are huge.

In a world getting tired of countries which can’t live within their means, we’re still borrowing like there is no tomorrow.

In a world where our people are getting steadily greyer, we’re not confronting the challenges posed by the increasing cost of New Zealand Super, of care for the aged, and of healthcare.

In a world where people find it easier and easier to move countries, we’re drifting off the pace, and seeing too many of our young people deciding to make a better life for themselves somewhere else.

A party vote for ACT at this election is your best way to ensure that we meet those challenges, for the benefit of all New Zealanders.

ENDS

Hugs and kisses Don....but room for improvement.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

NZ Referendum - your choice is MMP

2011-11-06T01:56:00.001-07:00

New Zealand's two largest parties are up to no good. A significant part of this 2011 election is a referendum on NZ's voting system. History has taught me how these referendums are misused. I am reminded of the Australian referendum on becoming a republic. Most people wanted to become a republic, but the government offered a choice no one wanted, so the Republic idea was voted down. In effect, John Howard, the Conservative, sabotaged the process.

In the case of the NZ referendum, both parties are being tight-lipped about their choice. Expect this to change after the referendum is held; and perhaps sooner, if they get a sense that the wind is blowing the wrong way. The Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) system is the best system - and it ought to be kept for now. The only better approach would be a lower hurdle for getting elected, i..e Currently a party needs 5% of the national vote in order to get a list MP allocation, or a electorate seat. This is an unnecessary obstacle to representation, so I think the 5% hurdle should be lowered to 100/120=0.8%.

The MMP system is popular; and that is likely because people appreciate the appeal of having greater competition in parliament. The problem of course is that minor parties are not given the same airtime as the major candidates. There is no justifiable reason for this limitation, as it effectively means that the media defines which candidates are successful. In fact, minority candidates might have to adopt controversial positions in order to get media attention, and the implication of that is that they might be seen as 'extreme'....whatever that means? Extremely principled is a bad thing in a pragmatic political discourse based on extortion, i.e. The tyranny of the majority.

MMP is criticised for forcing the government into coalitions with minor parties, i.e. the need to negotiate with others. What a terrible outcome? Yes, the late Roger Kerr, head of the NZ Business Roundtable supported FPP; the system which sees a very popular Libertarian Party in the US lack any representation, despite strong support, which is forced to back conservatives or liberals. But Kerr is satisfied because it delivers 'decisive government'. Hitler was decisive. But business likes that; just as many churches and business executives liked Hitler until he started shooting people. But that's not extreme; because decisiveness is economically 'pragmatic'; well, except for the Jews and minority parties, whose interests are marginalised. What the other systems offer is more power to the major parties. This is bad because it means less accountability and less competition. It is true that minor parties can extort influence by holding the balance of power, however this is not the problem with MMP, but rather the folly of representative democracy which gives a moral sanction to the majority; and not to rational arguments, no matter who holds them. Yes, for centuries political parties have advanced the representative democratic system because it delivers arbitrary power to them. Perhaps that was the best they could do 500 years ago; but now we can do better...now we need a meritocratic approach to government. Now reason ought to be the standard of value; just like it 'kind of' is in our court system. The difference of course is that power should not be so centralised. Do that - and you will live through another political-economic revolution.

For more information on your voting choices see MMP system along with others indicated. My concern is that, even if you choose MMP in the referendum, the next government will have the power to 'tinker' with it. This could see you placed between a rock and a hard place, like they were in Australia, i.e. I can see how the government will try to raise the hurdle - maybe to 10%, to reduce the influence of the minor parties. Beware!

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Buying & selling property in NZ - and the currency decision

2011-10-31T00:48:00.000-07:00

What is the outlook for the AUD:NZD? A pertinent question don't you think since so many Kiwis are looking to go to Australia? The press are of course trying really hard to convince New Zealanders to stay at home. Just like the churches they are presenting a lot of SCARY!! stories about Kiwis living on the poverty line in Australia.

Just in case anyone has forgotten. Australia is taking NZ's best workers, not its worst. Those on the poverty line are clearly people who didn't have a realistic sense of their own worth. This is not surprising of course. Australia is a competitive market, and NZ's are inclined to lack a good work ethic if they are not accustomed to living in a competitive market. i.e. A person coming from a country town, accustomed to spending 20 minutes talking to others at the local post-office will have an adjustment.

No, if you have useful skills, then you will find a place in Australia. The following chart suggests however that your chance to move your wealth over to Aussieland is quickly disappearing. The NZD seems destined to fall back to 0.68AUD in the next 6 months as the Australian economy regains strength.

NZD doldrums is of course good news for Aussies looking to buy property in NZ. NZ are eager sellers, whether to move to Australia, or because of the rural drift to the cities, or simply because the 'batch' is quickly turning into an investment nightmare. What is the rationale for living in NZ, or having a house here? Well, depending on where you buy, it could be easy an investment or lifestyle property. Land rates are padded with welfare here, i.e. $1800, so its best to factor that in. Retirement probably makes the most sense. There are many motels for sale or lease. My favourite locations are Rotorua, Wanganui and Nelson, and of course Queenstown if money is no issue.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Dialogue with Don Brash over central bank accountability

2011-10-19T14:09:00.000-07:00

This is a Facebook conversation I had with Don Brash, former Governor or the Reserve Bank of NZ, and former leader of the National Party on the current economic crisis.

Andrew Sheldon talks to Don Brash

Don, do you accept (or better still, have evidence to suggest) that governments (say the US or UK) are too cozy with bankers. When you look at how the US has bailed out the banks rather than plausibly supporting the creditors, might this point to an underhanded relationship between the two...for mutual (dubious, unenlightened) self-interest. And should not have the National Party have anticipated this crisis a decade ago...I know I did with a great many others. Why did NZ, Aust, Canada central bank governors allow it to go on... Perhaps you only want to speak for yourself? But perhaps you could also speak generally.

ADDENDUM: My criticism of US government fiscal and monetary policy extends back to 2000, however I only started blogging in 2005 – and continued my criticism.

Top of Form

Like · · October 11 at 2:46pm ·

Don Brash

Andrew, no, actually I don't think the US and UK governments have had too close a relationship with the banks. The reality is that the banks are at the very heart of the financial system - both the credit system and the payments system. The governments of the US and the UK (and of course of many other countries also) realised that the collapse of their banks would have had an impact on their whole economies which would have been utterly disastrous, so they bailed them out. Should they have regulated them more tightly to avoid the banks getting into trouble? Don't get me started! I blame the collapse of the banks in PART on the policies of some of the governments, in part on the greed and stupidity of some of the banks involved, and in part on the very tight system of regulation which actually led many people to assume taht the banks were effectively government guaranteed.

You ask why did NZ, Australian, and Canadian central bank governors "allow it to go on". I'm not sure I understand your question. The banks in those three countries are among the most robust in the world.

October 11 at 8:58pm · Like

Andrew Sheldon

By the last part of the question, I meant in terms of weighing into US, EU, Japanese govt policy decisions, an independent central bank believing that the substantive financial markets which underpin their demand have a substantive interest in 'sustained growth'. The policies of these govts have undermined global growth...that affects every economy. Say for NZ, does not the central bank have a mandate to preserve growth, thus weigh into international markets which affect their outlook?

October 11 at 9:05pm · Like

Andrew Sheldon I appreciate our banks are fine...more concerned with the broader economy, and the unsustainable interest rates which lured in home buyers, causing injury....not to mention the effects in equities.

October 11 at 9:06pm · Like

Andrew Sheldon We might reasonably expect the IMF to be independent...but sadly their role seems to be compromised by their need for OECD country funding

October 11 at 9:08pm · Like

Andrew Sheldon IMF says very little whilst 9 of 24(?) OECD countries have debts over 100% of GDP.

October 11 at 9:08pm · Like

Don Brash Not really fair Andrew. I've read plenty of IMF Papers which are highly critical of the enormous debts of many OECD countries.

October 11 at 9:19pm · Like

ADDENDUM: So does this reflect on the media’s lack of interest in bad news? Why might that be the case? It was very years ago to find a journalist offering critical views on the economic outlook. One of the few was Max Walsh, Editor-in-Chief of The Bulletin (Australia). Is the editorial content of the media skewed towards good economic news…even though there was a lot of critical economic analysis around from 2005-2008 outside of the mainstream media.

Andrew Sheldon

True, sovereignty lies with national govt...so what about central bank governors...what stops them from being more critical of foreign central banks and govts? They are independent from govt supposedly, so no embarrassment...just political integrity issue. i.e. Would Simon Power get a job with Westpac if he had an unfavourable Commerce Dept policy towards the banks....well, I know the answer because bank fees are a form of extortion...the basis of a class action in Australia as we speak.

October 11 at 9:46pm · Like

Don Brash Andrew, you are certainly right that central bank governors are reluctant to criticise other central bank governors. But who would you like Alan Bollard to criticise at the moment if you had your way?

October 14 at 9:20am · Like

Andrew Sheldon Ben Bernacke, ECB gov, all govts for adopting regulation which distorts rather than protects; for sanctioning extortion or 'numbers' rather rationality as the basis of political discourse.

October 14 at 9:49am · Like

Don Brash

Not sure that I understand your argument Andrew. To the extent that central banks are preoccupied with maintaining the value (purchasing power) of their own currency, I would have thought that most developed country central banks are doing OK at the moment (as measured by inflation, which is the only basis for assessing whether purchasing power is being maintained).

I share your concern that banking regulation may have actually contributed to some of the banking system problems, but central banks are certainly not the only ones (or even the main ones) to blame for the problems in the banking sector. In the US, for example, a lot of banking system problems stem from political pressures since at least the early nineties for banks to make loans to uncreditworthy, and marginally creditworthy, borrowers.

October 15 at 7:32am · Like

ADDENDUM 1: Actually, governments have a monopoly over the initiation of force. It was the Clinton administration who deregulated the banks in the USA; thus we ought to blame there for facilitating the actions of banks, which was largely acting ‘legally’ despite a few exceptions.

ADDENDUM 2: Actually, governments should be preserving a stable or fixed amount of currency relative to growth so that purchasing power actually increases. i.e. The amount of their wealth increases whilst the value of goods remains stable. We currently have ‘flat’ or ‘non-trending’ asset prices, no income growth, and rising product prices. i.e. We have inflation, i.e. Erosion of the real value of goods. It will not readily show up because govt masks the impact of the more volatile factors, i.e. rent, fuel, food,; arguing that they are too volatile to measure. True, but in the long run, they should not be ignored.

How can you be sure of that? How do you measure economic activity efficiently?

Andrew Sheldon

If central banks were duly concerned with preserving - or better still increasing purchasing power (as we live to progress I believe) - they would take measures which achieved maximum, but sustainable growth. Notwithstanding the fact they are confined to monetary policy, as an independent agency, there is no reason they cannot have an opinion on fiscal policy, and offer another element of accountability. Rather than debase their currencies, the US central bank lowered rates to extraordinarily low levels, govts like Aust subsidised great, Fannie Mae was instructed to offer the poor loans, creating a great deal of debt, and only in the last 3 years have we seen debasement of debt with quantitative easing...but there is more to come...causing more inflation. It’s about pushing the trauma into the future. If govt would only stop distorting the economy, each would be able to achieve growth of 8-12%...not the 1-3% we are accustomed to. The idea that we can only grow at these miniscule rates is because of govt...look at the Maritime Transport Act..calls to update it in 1998...its now 2011. It will happen now immediately after the election. Meantime priority 'distractions' for govt - aside from earthquake - rugby, seabed issue. One gets the notion, govt is about putting out fires, placing defensive.

October 15 at 8:13am · Like

Andrew Sheldon

Ultimately, I blame govt for being politicians rather than statesmen. They live within the system, lacking the ideas to change it. The problem is not the central banks per se its the govt which sanctions everything they do...its the idea that people really have any influence; that we have participation, choice?? We don't. We have a pretence of choice. We have a pretense of rationality within parliamentary debate...when really its a 'numbers' extortion game legitimatised by 'participation'. Tell me what participation I had in any piece of legislation. If I make a submission, what option do I have to hear criticism of my submission? None. How am I to know if it’s been read? Can't. There is a short range agenda to stay in power which means 'slow change' rather than selling ideas because our elected MPs have not developed a coherent philosophy before entering politics. I'd actually say you are better than most. But when or if you get substantive influence, you will become inaccessible, and centralised govt and universal suffrage will ensure you are motivated by the wrong priorities. You will become like the NP and Labour - 'constrained' by the system. Banks are custodians...they are not acting in accordance with their fiduciary duties; though you are right, govt requires no compliance from them. Another problem is the unconditional expropriation of wealth by taxation. Unless a voter has the right to renounce their sanction of govt by withholding tax, they are slaves. Representative democracy is slavery; we need a meritocracy where reason is the standard of value.

October 15 at 8:24am · Like

Don Brash

Andrew, I'm afraid I don't have time (and I'm not even in Parliament yet!) to reply to all your arguments. But let me just, in defence of my fellow central bankers, say that central bankers should not be increasing the purchasing power of their currencies (that would mean steadily average falling prices, or deflation). If money is to be used as a store of value, and as a measuring rod, it is important that it neither decreases in value (as with inflation) or increases in value (as with deflation). Most central bankers acknowledge that the only way in which they can help economic growth is by keeping the value of money stable, so that consumers and producers can use the price mechanism to inform their decisions. You obviously fear that successive rounds of quantitative easing will cause inflation. Yes, it may do, but it certainly hasn't done yet, and I strongly expect those central banks which have undertaken quantitative easing to reverse that process at the first sign of inflation.

ADDENDUM: Whose fault is that Don. You joined the ACT Party just 2 months ago, and his is the only opportunity I get to talk to you, and when the questions turn a little hairy, you evade them. That is govt; you don’t need to be a parliamentarian…you think like one merely as a candidate. You are over-qualified…that is the problem.

October 15 at 2:14pm · Like

Andrew Sheldon

Don, there is nothing inherently bad about increasing purchasing power; that is wealth creation. Yes, you can match the growth in money supply to productivity to stabilise prices, but that is not what the Fed Reserve has been doing. It has been stimulating debt levels with unsustainable low rates of interest....now there is a great deal of defaults, so debasement or recapitalisation is necessary to avoid default of that debts, say in USA, EU, etc. Mass transfer of wealth (via extortion). The poor suffer the most. Measures of inflation are entirely selective and arbitrary...just look at MS growth over productivity or economic growth.....to that you say, QE 'might cause inflation'? Ask yourself why QE is necessary at all? Why did asset prices rise so high? And how inflation is avoidable? Inflation will inevitably cause debt defaults among those not propped up. You seem to think there is no causal relationship between MS and productive capacity? It is true strong wealth creation in China and the developing world is offsetting OECD antics...but the relative distribution of capacity is going to create a productivity gap.

October 15 at 4:10pm · Like

Andrew Sheldon Don, the evidence does seem to suggest inflation ahead...this at a time of subdued confidence. Read this inflation news from the UK, and I've seen similar from Australia....

ADDENDUM: Don seems to have stopped talking to me; so because he is focused on getting higher profile attention, I thought I’d bring this to the attention of the media, because they love a controversy.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

How rich people waste their money

2011-10-17T12:57:00.000-07:00

Does NZ have the spare cash to throw around? Can't its millionaires find a more practical project to advancing science or achievement.

Take this recent announcement in the NZ Herald. Some Wellington property developer wants to build the fastest vehicle in the world - faster than the one already going 1200kmph, and yet still finding no practical application. Why do we need another vehicle going even faster if we cannot buy a 1200kmph vehicle? The chalenge is not speed; its unlikely efficiency, as I'm quite sure there is a market for any such craft, even if its only a tycoon's play thing.

Winning the World Cup Rugby will likely make NZ'ers feel proud; but will it make a difference to their lives? Was it their achievement? No? Will it give them greater courage to be an achiever? Not really? They should be able to make any achiever a role model, so the All Blacks are likely only inspiration for other rugby players.

I discourage people from funding such a project. Maybe the crew ought to actually pursue greater advancements than a mere speed increase; and besides the 'cashed up' Aussies are already have a year up on us, since they have similar plans. See Australian land speed record.

What would be a real advancement would be a jet-propelled boat that is sized to ride over waves at those types of speeds without actually touching them. I have no idea if it can actually be done; but that would be a practical application because we really have no need for land-based jet craft; unless we are going to stick them in tunnels. This would actually make sense in NZ - given its elongated shape. The problem of course is that it would be a pretty low-capacity and expensive infrastructure to develop because only one craft could use a segment of it at one time, and it would have to be >500km long in order to offer benefits. No, I suspect aviation is the proper place for speed records; not the confines of tunnels, nor the 'perfect land conditions' of some salt lake in Nevada. This is just a waste of money.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Rio Tinto out - the extortionists move in

2011-10-17T12:12:00.000-07:00

“Rio Tinto puts Tiwai Pt smelter on block” by Brian Fallow, NZ Herald, website, Oct 18, 2011.

This is an interesting move – Why is Rio Tinto selling off some of its aluminium assets? Zinc alloys more popular? Alumina reserves at Gove near exhaustion? Overpriced power in NZ due to a failed privatisation policy? Inability to build a hydro plant due to a poor regulatory regime?

NZ has the lowest average electricity generating cost in the world, but the mark-up of residential over industrial electricity prices is among the highest in the world. i.e. Higher than Japan or the Philippines. For an industrial company like Rio Tinto this is not usually a problem, as they have the financial muscle to build their own capacity. This is not so easy in NZ given the communities sensitivity to thermal energy. The National Party has said it is opposed to Helen Clark's policy of prohibiting new thermal power generation. The other problem is the structure of the electricity market. There is a very large resource of lignite in Southland...but clearly the National Party has created so much bad press about coal mining that I can't see Solid Energy having an easy time developing that resource. Its a very good lignite resource in fact...but there are other uses for this fuel, i.e. A Victorian university is developing a compressed fuel briquette.

Companies sell assets which are dogs or which are not a strategic mix because of their other asset mix or price outlook. Selling 1/3 of capacity means this is a strategic jettisoning of high-cost, low or no-growth capacity. That’s why its unstrategic. And yes, its hard to compete with China because it has subsidised electricity, and offers the cheapest conversion costs in the world….and I suspect there is large resources of alumina in Mongolia or Siberia….but that needs to be confirmed.

These assets are dogs....if you are an investor...do not buy them. NZ - if you want to avoid losing an export industry...think about electricity market restructuring. This will however bite into the govts hidden tax collection from privatisation....so it looks like these assets will probably be closed in years to come unless a 'mysterious' buyer emerges. The last ($500mil) upgrade to the NZ plant was in mid-1995, so the depreciated value of this asset must be close to zero....and this is a protracted recession.

The implication of this asset sale is - NZ will in about in 3-5 years have a spare 12% capacity surplus, so this means NZ generating assets are in many respects a dog for investors given that the country has bugger all industrial activity and population growth. Thus profitability will have to come from customer extortion. Trust me....you don't know how painful government can get. Consumer extortion in a small, stagnant market like NZ is the most lucrative way to make money; particularly if you function in a 'self-regulated' market.

The implication is - it would be silly for the NZ government to sell off its power assets for the next 5 years; and it would be silly for the NZ people to allow them to do it until they compel the Commerce Commission to fix the flaws in the NZ electricity market structure. The flaw is the structure of the market. With 70% essentially free hydro generating capacity, and electricity prices charged at the marginal price (set by thermal and wind capacity), NZ is paying the highest cost of electrcity, when there is actually very little demand. i.e. Why do generators need to charge so much - they don't need to build any more new (expensive) capacity. Prices are rising because executives cannot get bonuses until they can extort profits from residential consumers. This is why NZ needs an effective regulation system. Nothing about Labour, National, ACT or the Maoris give me reason to think any of them have the intellect to anticipate these issues.

Big business will realise....because they have smart analysts like me. Ok, not as good as me, but then few of them have as much respect for facts, nor have they studied philosophy, so public policy can be a 'no go' zone for them. Too much conflict. Morality...uuuhh!

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Are the Filipinos the cause of Bay of Plenty environmental damage

2011-10-13T13:52:00.000-07:00

Once again Filipinos are under the microscope. Filipinos do not have the best reputation. When I started writing this article I was focused upon the Filipinos because that was the culture foremost in my mind. Living in NZ with my Filipino partner I long observed that NZ'ers do not share the world's negative perception of Filipinos. I assume it was because there were no young brides walking around with Western men 40 years their senior. Indeed this is the case. Most Filipinos in NZ are actually hardworking couples with children, who have no 'yen' for the old man with cash security. This type of lifestyle decision is more of an Australian, European and American activity, and of course the Filipinos do not have a monopoly on the practice.

The reputation of the Philippines is under challenge because of a number of incidents around the world. Consider these:

1. In 2010, President Aquino's soldiers conduct resulted in a bus load of Chinese tourists being assasinated by a soldier with a complaint. His indifference to the HK Chinese people caused the country to snub the Philippines.

2. In the last 10 years Filipino communities have taken advantage of mining investors in the Philippines by opposing such activity. i.e. All manner of extortion.

3. In the 1980s there was the Filipino nurse who charmed an Australian billionaire iron ore magnate, which caused a bitter feud with the daughter, the heir to the estate. The flamboyant Filipino was on TV showing Australians her wares.

4. In the 1980s there was incident with Imelda Marcos, the equally flamboyant first lady to Ferdinand Marcos, the corrupt president who stands accused of siphoning off billions from the Filipino taxpayer. She distinguished herself by claiming to have 3000 pairs of shoes; back in a time when materialism was unacceptable. i.e. When you citizens are starving, and the country languished in a power crisis.

5. About a decade ago there was the famous Bre-Ex scandal, in which a Canadian mineral explorer had claimed to have discovered an immense mineral deposit in Borneo worth many billions. The stock price of this company soared to exorbitant levels before crashing when it proved to be a fraud. The Filipino site geologist committed suicide by jumping from a helicopter into the Borneo jumgle. My guess is that he wanted God to decide his fate. Who knows how far the plane was off the ground. I suspect he was reaching for a tree.

6. Having lived in the Philippines, I can tell you that Filipinos are not the most honest, hardworking people in the world. The reality is that they tend to meet the best of them in the West because they are the aspirational ones who want to get out, and are prepared to work hard for it. In Australia, there is the 40-year age gap for some wives, but even still, many of these partners are dedicated to their husbands. Are they sham marriages? Hmm...only to the extent that they are defined by superficial or concrete values like money or security. Its actually not so different for many Westerners. i.e. Westerners place a high value on their partner's wealth.

Those seamen on the Ship 'Rena' were mostly Filipinos, and its probable that when the captain was having a birthday, they were, as utter 'collectivists' celebrating with him, with little thought to the impact of their neglect. This is what many uneducated Filipinos (employed as cheap seamen) are like in life; which is why as a matter of cultural prejudice, I would not leave a Filipino in charge of an important vessel. They are too readily influenced by their peers, as they are a friendly, affable people. They have an utter disdain for responsibility, and given the corruption in the Philippines, you can readily correlate such actions with their religious disdain for humanity (i.e. Original Sin) and thus their lack of responsibility.

In an industry with a lot of Filipino seamen...the solution is surely just to ensure that the Captain and his immediate subordinate are not from the Philippines for any ship over 10tonnes in weight. That is the cultural context in which they are raised, and their education system is not so great that we might expect otherwise from them. This job appeals to the uneducated.

I love Filipinos; my partner is one; I very much care for her family, but I have so much life experience to tell me that I would not make one the executive of a ship. This does not preclude Filipinos proving me wrong in some other area, but this is a level of safety I'd prefer so that I can preserve my love of the Filipino. You would not want an Indian attending to your needs as a call centre agent; you do not want a Filipino running a ship. Its as simple as cause and effect. Understand this, and they will realise that Filipinos ought to stay below the bridge; at least until the Philippines changes its cultural or educational context.

Reflecting further I have come to think that perhaps more problematic is the failings of the execute team in the Greek company, and its culture, which we might probably blame for the currency and economic crisis hindering those southern European countries. Indulgent Greek executives managing indulgent middle-managers. Surely a recipe for disaster.

Then we get to NZ, and we have the NZ authorities fumbling around for 4 days because there was inadequate preparations for this type of event. NZ is by no means a high-traffic maritime trade market, but basic equipment for transferring fuel did not work. Another issue is whether the Minister for Maritime Services asked the right questions or was mislead about the state of preparedness at Maritime NZ. These questions have still to be answered. Seldom does an accident arise because of the failings of one person. There is usually a number of persons who can raise questions but don't. Often this causes a 'gap in responsibility'. Sadly, the persons getting the blame seem to be the one's least able to answer back.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

John Key has peaked....ACT Party to pick up seats

2011-10-10T13:16:00.000-07:00

John Key lost a great deal of credibility over the weekend, as he was caught misleading the NZ people over a statement made by a credit ratings agency. He was wrong to have used the statement in the first place. More so, because the statement that a ratings agency would downgrade a Labour government is simply wrong. Seriously wrong. Of course it would depend on the context - most importantly the Labour government's handling of policy and the dynamics of the global market itself.

Until now John Key might well have been known as 'Honest John', much in the way of 'Honest John Howard', but as is always the way, 'Johns' are inevitably proven to be liars....or if you want to be kind, "good pragmatists". He got away with it for so long, because he is well-prepared, and he does always have the 'right' thing to say. It is fair to say though, in such times, he is probably tired...there is a lot going on, and he was destined to fall out of his honeymoon period.

His lack of candour did not help. This is unlikely to result in Labour picking up votes; but the question is, can Don Brash make a great deal of difference for NZ in the election for the ACT Party.

In defence of John Key....he cannot be considered any more dishonest than all other politicians. Its really not so much the politician, but the system that drives them. Inevitably there are going to be few if any politicians in this system who actually end the extortion, the tyranny of democracy, because it serves their practical interests, and they don't have the intellect to reform it. They are salesmen, not statesmen.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

ACT Party only hope for good government

2011-10-09T14:20:00.000-07:00

It is indeed interesting that the ACT Party is grabbing the headlines - seemingly to many for all the wrong reasons. But if you reflect on their discourse, its actually the only honest politicking in town. This party, I believe, is the foundation for the only credible political party in NZ. There are several reasons for believing so:

1. They possess the rudiments of a philosophy for a non-coercive state that recognises

a. The primacy of personal sovereignty, both in respect for rights,

b. The independence of their representatives to speak their mind.

2. The nature of the NZ political system which actually allows new parties to gain standing; at least if the media is so kind to give them some profile. The MMP is a blessing; at least for a poor 'democratic' system.

The problem remains however that those minds are poorly developed. i.e. They politicians have been too busy being pragmatic money makers or influence peddlers, that they have failed to do their homework. In fairness, it takes time. I have been writing public policy ideas for 30-odd years, and I'm still 80% complete on about 15 of a 25-book treatise....so I feel their pain. I just hope the voters have more empathy for their plight, and recognise that it is better to vote for a party that has some principles that include respect for facts and principles, as opposed to salespeople like Goof and the 'Keys to the city'. Sorry Goff and John Key. I can't recall Goff's first name. Maybe its in his policy statement. I'll wait for it because he just might be changing it to appeal to more voters.

NZ is so important to the world. NZ was one of the first countries to adopt universal suffrage for women. This was a bad policy development because it affirmed democracy; however it did highlight the power of being first, and having a political framework that can be changed. Look at the US and Australia, and you can see how far change can be to come by. This is why changing MMP would be a massive mistake. It would also help to have another competitor in politics; particularly one which will raise standards for political discourse, party membership and participation. Anyone who has joined a political party will know that there are effective gatekeepers restricting membership to the major parties.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Black gold in NZ - we just need to find it!

2011-10-03T13:12:00.000-07:00

It is good to see the NZ government promoting oil & gas exploration. My opinion is that they are not doing enough. Here is an NZ Oil & Gas Presentation for 2011, which provides a good overview of the NZ industry. There are several points I would make:

1. The effective tax rate on oil & gas production is 20-25% of profits - based upon the 20% royalty and a nominal income tax because although the tax rate is 28%, any discovery resulting in production is only going to be realised after capital has been recouped and a scaled up exploration and development program has been advanced, i.e. Don't expect much income recovery.

2. There is a significant income for NZ from local, competitive energy supply, though oil is likely to be processed in Australia. There will be a lot of jobs and engineering work.

3. The NZ government ought not to wait for these private companies to give the country attention; it ought to expedite their own exploration efforts. i.e. Spend $50mil over the next 2 years contracting geophysical surveys over the most prospective areas. This will give a better idea for future exploration, as well as attract private interest. Establish a state oil company and seek private equity so that there is a 'bidder of last resort', and this enterprise ought to be sold off when the market for risk capital arises, or the risks fall.

The motivation for this approach is:

1. NZ has yet to have a significant oil discovery. Until that happens, NZ will not be taken seriously

2. NZ should not be letting foreign nations decide its fortunes

3. NZ needs to place some faith in its oil and gas potential

4. NZ needs to recognise the huge potential of its offshore areas - they trump the offshore mineral potential, and yet the governments primary focus is on these areas. They are getting all the political focus.

5. NZ is in a global recession. Commodity prices are high, and NZ needs to invest in income generation. There is no better area to do this than oil and gas!!!

6. NZ could have a $1 trillion future fund to match Australia's in 2030 if it appreciates its offshore oil potential

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

NZ voters - between a rock and a hard place

2011-10-01T18:20:00.000-07:00

NZ is being offered compelling advice on how to vote for the forthcoming election - Nov 2011.

The problem with any such advice is that it typically entails some form of moral relativism. Notwithstanding that some voting systems are better than others, if they entail voters choosing some representative, and not having the discretion to remove them; or if their representation entails them having the legal sanction to impose some arbitrary law upon you, then you live in a tyranny of the majority. The founding fathers were concerned about it; their concerns were well-founded; their counter-measures proved inadequate. The greatest threat of tyranny comes from the systematic arbitrary actions of government; most often sanctioned by some passive, uneducated, repressed majority.

Just like the Australian referendum entailed the govt deciding what voting options you should be given; the NZ parliament will decide which system is right for you. Rest assured, all possible options it offers will retain their entrenched majority. i.e. There will be no option for any meritocracy or meritocratic democracy, whereby reason is the standard of value. Why? Because principles held in context are antithetical to the major parties desire to extort wealth and legitimacy from an adversarial framework that ensures neither side gets what they want. Its all a soap opera to keep the two main parties in power. Never mind that their centralisation of power, their arbitrary laws shackle the productive capacity of the economy and keep a great many people at a subsistence living standard.

My choice is not to participate in a system of extortion. I have only voted once in my life in Australia, and the reason was:

1. Coercion: Because an electoral officer came to my door and threatened me with an ultimatum. In Australia, there is a $50 fine for not voting; but I've never had a payment demand. I guess we have a benevolent dictatorship in Australia. Can you think of worse punishments? Yes, taxation and the programs it finances, which actually perpetrate systematic injustice.

2. Education: Accepted that I should actually vote once so that I could see the process close up. i.e. Stare a ballot paper in the face. I actually participated in the illusionary process of supporting a local libertarian in election, knowing full well that voters I attempted to convince were not accountable for their views.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Wanganui - the best property value in NZ

2011-09-27T15:15:00.000-07:00

The latest property affordability survey results place Wanganui first in NZ as the most affordable for living. I have lived in Wanganui for the last 3 years. We bought when the NZD was 0.53-0.55 to the USA, and that rate is now $0.80. We expect it will be fairly stable at these rates for the foreseeable future. NZ has healthy exposure to food exports, albeit premium product. We expect some trade off in volumes and prices, and otherwise a soft economic outlook. Not as bad as offshore, and we see monetary policy (i.e. yields) as a weak influence on exchange rates.

If you'd like to know more about Wanganui, take a look at this article in the local newspaper.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Is John Campbell smoking weed?

2011-09-26T00:17:00.000-07:00

One gets a sense that Conservative heads control NZ politics. On Campbell Live, we have John Compbell criticising the ACT Party for having two candidates with two different attitudes on a particular policy - the decriminalising of cannibis. This is a weird position to take. Surely, whatever their position, the fact that they are allowed to display an independent perspective is good in itself. Why is this so controversial? Now, we can have a debate about the merits of the issue. Oh story, John Campbell was not interested in the issue. He was far too cynical for that. Instead, he comes out with another claim....that the ACT Party purposefully caused this controversy in order to get media attention. Well, good for them!

When you consider that the media gives no air time to the minor parties, any strategy they take for getting attention strikes me as good policy. The media loves scandal, and they provided one. And then, the media (aka Joh Campbell cynically rebutts that they were looking for media attention). So why did they engage on this basis. Why don't they engage ACT on any issue, simply because exposing all significant political discourse is desirable. No, that is not the role of the media. The role of the media is:

1. Appeal to the interests and values of the two major parties because they are alligned or relevant to most people

2. Attack minor parties for scandalising issues in order that they may gain some media exposure.

Sadly, the minor parties once again get the short straw. No wonder we have no hide of a chance of getting a third force in parliament. Your choice? No choice. Just a pretense of one.

The poll conducted by Campbell Live showed that 72% of voters believe in decriminalising cannibis. Rest assured that this sample is not representative of the population. Why? Because:

1. The affirmative voters care a great deal about the issue

2. The repudiating voters care less because its just one issue, and they probably don't think it will change.

There is a symmetrical distribution of sensitivity to the issue. Remember - the issue was knocked down by ACT Party Member for Epsom - John Banks, so this issue is going nowhere.

Cannibis should be delegalised, but in a specific context:
1. In the short term 'strictly' for health reasons
2. In the long term when people display a respect for facts and rationality
There is no prospect for that under democracy, because it places perceptions above facts and evasion/repression above rationality.
Brash's rationalism and Bank's pragmatism are both wrong, but then, its not core policy, and at least as a party, they have the freedom to display their own views. Where is the personal integrity in the other parties, which are in fact governed by a form of majoritism-based extortion. Take for example, my local National MP Chester Burrows. He complains to people opposed to the closure of a local DoC's office. "My hands are tied. I've vented my views to the caucus. Its all I can do. You will have to accept my assertion on faith". Even if this were true; it does not serve the electorate he represents to have just a 'vote' for his electorate, but a voice outside the caucus as this will have influence beyond his electorate. Mind you, that would be extortion too, but at least he would be representing his electorate, if that was ever his objective. Nope, as he made clear, its his position first, electorate 2nd, and there is a huge conflict of interest in between. Compare that with the ACT Party representative. He expressed both party and non-party positions at a political meeting.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

NZ net immigration numbers

2011-09-24T17:23:00.000-07:00

Have you been wondering why Kiwis living moving abroad has come to an abrupt halt. I can think of several reasons:

1. The earthquake threat has waned. There are a few 4+ earthquakes; but after a 6+ magnitude quakes, anything less starts to look commonplace; particularly after you realise that all the weakly constructed buildings have fallen; and that anything which posed a threat to life was probably in the CBD. Why? Most houses are made of wooden construction or are single floor dwellings. The greatest threat is probably the old brick chimneys.

2. The strong commodity prices are falling back as punters take their money off the table. These falls have yet to take their toll on the NZ rural market, nor the currency. In any respect, these revenues tend to be protected by corresponding falls in commodity prices. They do however provide a window to buy new machinery offshore. The fact remains, the important agricultural business activity in NZ is going to be doing ok.

3. The World Cup - Who is going to be going overseas during the World Cup - unless you are leasing out your house for $3000/month.

4. Australian slump - The commodity price slide is likely to take the strength out of Australian markets, though it will recover. Nothing can keep them down; as lower commodities denominated in USD are offset by weakness in the AUD, which spared the local economy much impact, as long as volumes are maintained. Australia is closer to China and Asia, than Chile, Brazil and South Africa, so it tends to benefit on the volume side.

5. British visas for NZ'ers look like being severely restricted. Given the lack of business confidence in the UK, this is likely to be a bigger threat to existing UK residents than those contemplating going over. Thus we might expect a flood of Kiwis to return to NZ. This of course will mean more Kiwis going to Australia, given the relative strength of its economy.

6. Earthquake reconstruction - You might not want to live in Christchurch anymore, at least not for the lack of things to do, but consider that most of the 'earthquake threats' have been knocked over by the series of earthquakes, and anything new is going to be built to NZ standards. Japan has greater vulnerability to earthquakes, and has been living with them without much trauma. The tsunami threat was under-estimated or even ignored. A single governor in the north made provisions. In that city; they lost just one life. Praise to that critical, conceptual thinker who 'saw around corners' what others chose not to acknowledge. The reconstruction of Christchurch will become a source of employment over the next 5 years; the question is - will it attract new job hunters or result in higher home construction costs. My guess is the later.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Hostility towards Australians

2011-09-21T13:39:00.000-07:00

Kiwi hostilities towards Australians are deep-seated and they are not a recent development. The bitterness has come to the attention to Aussies here for the World Cup because the two nations are placed in a position of drinking, competitiveness, and being placed next to each other at a game for several hours is likely to result in spitting, etc. The fact that it can happen to multiple people, and because the issue is 'timely' because of the disparity in treatment of Australians, we might expect the media to comment. But my experience tells me that there is deep-seated and long-term issues with NZ's collective self-esteem. Let me give you a flash back to when I first came to NZ in the 1990s.

Experience 1: Having just landed in Auckland, I made the mistake of presenting a $A10 instead of $NZ10 to the car park attendant. Yeh, you'd think I'd realise that I was in the wrong country, but they are so similar, it did just feel like I was in Australia, most particularly perhaps because I was in a mundane looking car park and tired. The response by the attendant was less than courteous. As if I had insulted her.

Experience 2: Talking to a NZ'er in a bar he was surprised that I had pleasant things to say about NZ...as if we were only negative about the place. I must admit to joking with an American about how backward Wellington was in 1990. Why? Because there were weatherboard homes next to the airport, and so close to the city. NZ cities are far more cosmopolitan now, and there are many more choices to go. And unlike at those times, you can now go out without people being polarised by the rugby....as if that was life. The reality is that...NZ is boring, quiet and 'undeveloped'. That is a point of derision if you appreciate the excitement, fun and choices of a big city. The feeling is the same if I fly from Tokyo to Sydney, my home town. NZ is more boring, and I can't even credit it with being different.

Experience 3: In the early 1990s I bought a Korean girlfriend to NZ. We went to a bar and joked at a bar that I needed to split my Australian and NZ coinage. I expected a barb of some type, and even set her up for it. I was surprised when her 'We expect that from Australians' was far more bitter than I expected. No mistake; she was adamant when I queried her. I wondered what I'd done to offend her. Two possibilities occurred to me at the time. (i) She was a racist and disliked that I had bought a Korean into their bar, (ii) She resents tourists because her local customers resent tourists, and I was an Australian, so that was worse. (iii) I failed on both issues.

Experience 4: I was listening to the radio when I heard some radio station play an advert with the advertiser saying 'Product on sale....come and get them before the Aussies do'. This was very funny to here, but clearly suggests even the advertisers see a deep-seated disdain for Australians they can use.

In the end, you just learn to shut up. They don't even know you're an Australian unless you tell them. Clearly not all NZ'ers are too proud to love Australians. My mother's boyfriend is NZ. He's a charming guy in NZ when I met him here, but so uptight in Australia.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

NZ - we steal your thunder

2011-09-20T14:26:00.000-07:00

As an Australian living in NZ for the last 3 years, I care little about rugby, but I know that my house would be vandalised if I placed a flag up for the World Cup - or for any other reason - if anyone even differentiated the flags. When I first arrived here, a Kiwi who's be living in London warned me that Kiwi's take criticism very personally. When I came for a holiday here a few years ago, and said how great the place is, a Kiwi was surprised, arguing that we could only say bad things about the place. I think Kiwi corporate advertisers do not help because they accentuate the vitriol, i..e One advertising campaign "Come and get (their products) before the Aussies".

I thought this funny, but wondered about how deeply-entrenched this loathing for Australians, because you would never see adverts like this in Australia. We look to the world, and we see opportunity.

Kiwis look to Australia, and see their relatives enjoying higher incomes, a better, sunnier life, and they hate us for it. There is nothing unique about it. The Canadians hate the Americans; the French hate the English, etc.

Our banks rip you off (like they rip Australians off), we take your workforce (after you paid for them), we are bigger, so we tend to get more attention for 'Down Under'.

It strikes me that NZ really needs to discover oil, so it can become a commercial centre of significance. It needs an ego boost to resolve its diminished self-esteem.

It does not help when John Key says he will close the gap with Australia.

The reality is that - the wage gap - or anything is not going to be closed until John Key kickstarts oil exploration and discovers the stuff.

Australia has some natural advantages which NZ simply cannot match - resources. There is $750 billion of planned investment in Australia - the solution is that - it should not define itself on the basis of Australia.

If they did, they would have to sacrifice their lifestyle like the Japanese - just to catch up with the Americans - and look how unhappy they are.

NZ has its own personal and unique context - it needs to set its own 'reasonable' standards....and forget about Australia. Stop making them the centre of your reality. You will always be the smaller brother, unless you want to change your values and import 50million immigrants. But then, you will not be NZ.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Safety is a dirty word for ETS scheme

2011-09-14T21:19:00.000-07:00

The NZ government has found a rationalisation not to adopt the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). The reality is that aside from these pragmatic reasons, it was never committed to adopting it, and was always relying upon the rejection of Julia Gillard's ETS scheme as a justification for its belated cancellation. With Julia Gillard fighting a strong opposition in Australia, vulnerability given her weak polls, there is good reason to think the policy will be dropped.

Of course we are not supportive of the ETS because we rejected the quality of science underpinning the claims. The reality is that this is a 'snow job' by liberal-leaning scientists. We need to understand that 86% of scientists are liberals sympathetic to environmental causes. They are people lacking critical thinking skills, lacking knowledge of economics, and in many cases the education to grasp that capitalism, markets, nor selfish materialism is the problem. What they don't realise is that - their anti-intellectualism is the problem....but since an apprehensive community is inclined to accept 'better safe than sorry' arguments, we are destined to be lead into a pursue of 'appearances' as a basis for decision-making.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

NZ - high electricity costs were part of your game plan

2011-09-12T19:41:00.000-07:00

You might wonder how NZ is stacking up in the energy savings stakes. Well, I have just written this article in response to a NZ Herald article suggesting that power demand is flat in NZ. We need to remember of course that the population growth rate is also flat. But there are other factors as well. Consider the issues here.

NZ power is among the most expensive in the world. My power bills here are as much as I would pay in the Philippines or Japan; the most expensive countries for power in the world. The difference of course is the following:

1. Japan imports all its coal, uranium and gas (as LNG), and the Philippines is very similar; even worse in the sense that most of its power is purchased from independent foreign companies under very unfavourable contractual terms accepted by the Ramos administration.

2. NZ power costs of production on average are the lowest in the world thanks to the fact that 70% of electricity generation comes from 'free fuel' hydro plants, the capital cost of which was fully-written off over 40 years of operation, but recapitalised when these corporations were sold off. Was this a good divestment for NZ? I suggest not given the lack of real and effective competition because all electricity is now sold at prices to justify small increments of electricity capacity increase at the 'margin' to meet demand. In fact, with flat population growth, there is little real need for new capacity. So why the increase in prices? Well, I guess its because the operators can, and their shareholders demand, stronger profit growth that they can deliver. Its a choice between investing offshore, in which case they are a minor player, or extorting wealth from NZ. Yep, you guessed it, extortion is more profitable and safer given that you already have the relationships with business.

If memory serves me correctly, these assets were sold by a Labour government, and supported by the National Party. It was not good decision-making given that:

1. These assets were sold too cheaply to foreigners

2. High electricity prices are an obstacle to national savings and investment

I guess, if you are a greenie, high electricity prices are good for the environment, because paying exorbitant prices diminishes your capacity to afford electricity. So you can well appreciate the 'post-industrial' lifestyle of the cavemen because you will be living in a nirvana when you can't afford what they could not even conceive of.

The good news is that real wealth generation is occurring as well as the extortion. The extortion is really just a means by which business offset the cost of government, i.e. Basically business passes these costs of government on to the consumer in higher prices, because government is an 'instrument of the people, apparently for the people'. You might want to question that wisdom. hehe. Universal suffrage was not such a good game plan after all. hehe.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

The toxic New Zealand market place

2011-09-11T14:56:00.001-07:00

In previous articles, we have raised the spectre of poor infrastructure and servicing in the NZ economy. We drew attention over the last few years to train stoppages, power outages, road quality, economic regulation, the high cost of food, petrol and electricity.

It all reaches a crescendo with the Day 1 of the World Cup Rugby. The World Cup was supposed to be a boon for tourism, and to focus attention on the country. It has certainly done that, but it has not exactly been a positive. The highlights so far:

1. Train stoppages which caused 'green' patrons to miss their World Cup game

2. Binge drinking highlighting what rugby is really about - an excuse for a drink.

This is Western culture at its best. Working hard doing some job you don't enjoy, for the sake of some intoxication over a game.

This week we have witnessed further news of an ongoing stream of New Zealanders going to Australia. Our neighbours have just come back from the Gold Coast. They could not speak more highly of the place. Contrary to all the media talk, if you are employable in NZ, you will get a job in Australia. Those that can't here, can't get there.

There are several problems in NZ. Conservative politics which suggest there is too much regulation in NZ. Contrary to this 'economic rationalism', there is actually too little. The reason there is too little is because the only way business can make a profit here is by:

1. Relying on government sponsored extortion, i.e. The privatisation of electricity which locked in high electricity prices by pricing capacity at the 'high cost' margin, i.e. Never mind that 70% of capacity was free when it was a government asset. A boon for the government upon sale? No, actually the benefit went to investors as electricity prices rise endlessly in this 'non-competitive' market regime.

2. Plan old business extortion where you offer poor service, make misrepresentations, over-charge, etc. We have had so many such issues in NZ, that it truly places NZ on par with the third world.

3. Government extortion is another game played in this market, where governments attempt to extort wealth from private investors in order to conceal their failings. Take a look at this extortion by Wanganui District Council. In this case, its a foreign businessman being extorted by the government.

NZ would be a very pleasant place if government could actually orchestrate growth and deal with the embedded injustices and social problems. Don't expect any of those developments with a pragmatic PM. I recall a libertarian businessman being enthusiastic upon the appointment of John Key to the NP leadership. What was he thinking?

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Leadership of John Key, National Party, NZ

2011-09-11T12:52:00.000-07:00

In an interview with PM John Key, he has this to say about his management of the Christchurch crisis:

February 22 in Christchurch. "I didn't lightly say 'We've lost at least 65 people' on that night," says Key. The number came from the police, "but I also knew that if it was terribly, terribly wrong – if it was, say, 10 people – I thought, well, I'll have to go as prime minister."
You what? It seems after Key had announced that death toll and was heading for bed, officials came back and "they said, 'Oh, we're not quite sure exactly now'.
"I remember waking up and thinking, if it's 10 [people] in the morning, I'll resign. Just because you can't mislead the country."

I find these remarks terribly contrived. This is a campaign pitch to show his sensitivity and his caring. It fails miserably. The pitch is understandable, because having heard his campaign pledge in Wanganui in August, the PM sounds like a CEO rather than the moral leader of the country. Rather than outline the principles of his government, he made some crack about the World Cup. This was the 'populist' move; it just wasn't the right one. Whether politicians benefit from associating themselves with football is one thing, in the context of his speech, it left his point rather empty or seriously pragmatic. i.e. It conveyed that he has no capacity to achieve his plans; but neither does his opponent.

John Phillip Key, 50, has wanted to be prime minister since he was 10, around the same time he told his mother and sisters he wanted to be a millionaire.

That's interesting John, I've wanted to be PM since I was 15-16yo, and I too wanted to be a millionaire. The difference between you and I is several things:

1. Preparation: I actually had a greater many ideas on how to be PM at 15-16yo; whereas you would have had no clue at 10yo. So what was your motivation? From that age I have constantly worked feverishly on public policy; studied philosophy, psychology, history, law, economics, finance, accounting, etc. Being a forex trader actually does not entail much skill or knowledge that is applicable to leading a nation.

2. Goals: Unlike you, I stopped wanting to be a millionaire, at least as a primary objective, when I studied philosophy. Upon doing that, I realised that money was a curse without the right values. Yes, the kind of pragmatic values you embrace, which culminates in a National Party policy platform, full of rhetoric and based on incoherent pragmatic values. Its all about money. No principles, no framework for achieving those values. How are you going to reduce crime John? How are you going to raise the self-esteem of unemployed Kiwis? How are you going to boost NZ's pitiful labour productivity?

"Depending on your prejudices, you could argue either that Key has managed a series of external crises pretty well, or that catastrophic earthquakes and a mining disaster, plus a global financial crisis, have provided great excuses for a government that has achieved precious little".

Prejudices aside, I would argue that he has achieved very little. The Christchurch earthquake and Pike River neither helped or hindered him. They were operational issues, and his 'scripted' entry was brief and uninspiring. Christchurch's mayor was far more impressive, as it should have been. His 'management of the global financial crisis' was absent. Where was John for the last 10 years (2000-2010), during which time the incipient financial crisis arose; transpiring in the Asian Currency Crisis, the derivatives issue, the fiscal and monetary stimulus? John Key was silent during this period. He was not a 'man for the people', he was a man advancing his own party interests. I, in contrast, have been discussing the 2008-2014 financial crisis since 2001, and started blogging about it since 2005. One of thousands of bloggers mind you. John was too busy making money. So John, do you find public service compatible with your own personal financial interests? In contrast, my 2nd post was about the financial crisis unfolding.

"What is inarguable, though, is that Key is even more popular now than when he came to power – a recent poll gave him a 70% approval rating as prime minister".

That is because he is actually very inaccessible and 'staged'. i.e. He is not very accountable for his performance given the poor opposition. He ought to have been an actor. He might have drawn inspiration from Ronald Reagan. And these is plenty of money in acting. What John will eventually realise is that popularity is very fickle. There one second, gone the next. He has one more term left in him...by default. He was also very fortunate to have inherited a 'commodities-based economy', and food commodities at that. He was slow to promote oil exploration, and even then, his efforts have been less than impressive. Promoting household and business cost cutting has been less than impressive - it does not need to mean stop spending. This is the problem with politicians, they equate economic activity with spending as opposed to productivity based savings or advances. More output for less.

"Key described as "farcical"...that family members were releasing names of the deceased to media, yet the names were still not on the missing person list. Furious, he got on the phone. There was swearing involved. "They were forced to make a public apology the following week." What made him lose his rag was that "they did it deliberately to make me look cold and heartless. And that wasn't fair". The poll results suggest Key's efforts to avoid looking cold and heartless have, in general, worked".

This comment is rather telling. John Key had lost control of the agenda, and he was obsessed about his image....about perceptions. Surely a man who is not going to change a bad system.

He says "know it takes time. We don't have a history of one-term governments... and I think that's an indication that the public votes governments out rather than oppositions in".

This is code for 'please accept us on faith'. Why do I say that? Because there is no 'reasonable Kiwi' who could argue that John Key has done anything that really better positions the country for the future. Its been all fighting brush fires. Voters are going to wake up and realise that, in 2012 he will benefit from heightened economic activity because of Christchurch rebuilding, and that is about it..and sold off a few state assets. All he has done so far is retrench a few public servants from the tax office and other departments. Two cheers for that! Read it all at the Dominion Post.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

John Key and suicide prevention

2011-09-05T03:39:00.000-07:00

A number of youth suicides in the Wairarapa region of New Zealand has raised fears of a possible 'mass teen suicide'. The government or police have of course discounted that possibility; though of course they would say that. We might wonder if there are any reasons for people to commit suicide. The simple answer is that - 'life is a value; and there is no value in death', and no prospect of 'turning it around'. The problem of course is that if you have a generalised state of disappointment for your disposition; this is going to manifest in some pretty tragic assessments of your future. What is a person to do, given that:

1. The poor state of education - Yes, John Key says NZ has the 4th best education system in the world. Yeh right, and what are you comparing NZ to---26 OECD countries with the same poor system? Academic relativism is not a very sound basis to assess an education system. Also consider the likely disconnect between wealthy private schools in the cities and rural schools with less aspirational cultures. i.e. Consider that Masterton, the location of this suicide 'pool' or 'pact' is a rural location, and you have some reason for youth to consider the quality of their preparation for life.

2. Job prospects - Here are kids who were probably itching to get a car, get their own job, escape autocrat parents; but they can't because they have no skills or job experience to get traction in the workforce, and even less hope of going to Australia.

3. Complete political denial - Of course we have government in an absolute state of denial; looking to cut costs rather than spend more money. Not that its solely about money; its about values, and pragmatic John Key is a man who can create a corporate spreadsheet, but he is not too good when it comes to personal psychology. Why would he, 'there's no money in it'. Don't expect any better from Labor.

4. Population stagnation: If you want to retain your party control of the economy, then you can't reasonably expect to have a monopoly. You at least need a pretense of choice - a 'two party democracy'. It seems to fool everyone. The price of centralised control of course is slow-paced decision-making. Universal suffrage makes it every harder because there are a lot of scared people in the country, and its easier for politicians to just pander to their every whim, rather than educating them. This kills productivity of course; so you have to look for 'artificial stimulus'. The problem for John Key is that Helen Clark already ran the economy into the ground, driving debt to the ceiling means the country can no longer 'pay it forward'; and no one wants to immigrate to NZ, so the debt per capita just keeps growing. It's a tough gig for a PM. Everyone keeps talking about Australia.

John, I'd get those constant voices checked out mate 'Australia's growth phenomenon', "Australia's growth prospects', 'Australia's $700 billion in planning mining investments'. I swear this is going to his head because he was utterly deluded this past week. In Wanganui, I swear he said NZ's growth was stronger than Australia's in this past quarter. Of course, Australia did have state-wide floods and softer metal prices, but it did not stop him from ignoring a decade of stronger economic data from Australia, and far better productivity. Way to go John!

But John is not a fool. He does listen. For over a year I have been constantly talking up the prospect of an oil discovery saving the country. Finally he is listening, and is encouraging oil exploration. Personally, I would be throwing $50 million a year of government money at grass roots exploration, and then placing all title in a state enterprise; and I'd be encouraging wealthy people to buy stock in projects floated off. Certainly, you don't want government owning such assets, but since there is a concept of 'national sovereignty', NZ may as well retain the value of such oil potential, rather than too readily surrender it to international and local executives, who just profit at the nation's expense. I think I know why these youths are killing themselves. Maybe they just didn't learn at school how to become an overpaid oil company executive. Kids today! They have such high expectations. In my day, we had to drill for our own water supply.

The good news is that - if NZ discovers a large pool of oil....in 20 years NZ might just have a $US1 trillion investment fund to spend up big time. That's a lot of money for 4mil people. Rest assured other people will love NZ a lot more by that time. We just tend to think positive thoughts. You know, like those thoughts for 'good governance' you have been having since the 1840s that never get answered. You know; those hopes that drove people to crusade for universal suffrage, allowing every idiot to vote.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

The NZ-US alliance - convenient partners in war

2011-09-02T14:24:00.000-07:00

Reading the latest news from Afghanistan - or at least NZ's contribution to the war in Afghanistan - it is clear that the rationale for the NZ presence is simply political, i.e. Broaden the support for the war as widely as possible by involving as many countries as possible.

Is that a problem? No, not if you mind perceptions (as opposed to facts) driving decision-making. But herein is the essence of public policy making in the West. No respect for facts.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Australian refugees to NZ

2011-08-23T13:08:00.000-07:00

At face value, John Key might look like a great humanitarian for considering the intake of 800-odd refugees that Australia wants to send off to Malaysia. The problem with the move is that he might be giving people smugglers the belief that NZ is an open door. This could be bad news for both:

1. Australia - because people will come to Australia with the expectation of ending up in NZ

2. New Zealand - it will be directly targeted by people smugglers knowing that the media news can be used to 'sell NZ' to prospective refugees.

Consider this - Afghanistan is a huge source of heroin; so might we see more sophisticated vessels bringing heroin and people to NZ, which is relatively lightly patrolled for refugees. NZ should be careful to avoid this can of worms. Of course both Australia and NZ are relatively isolated, however if resources from heroin trafficking were to enter into the people trafficking market, using GPS systems, there seems little reason why NZ could not be targeted.

The risk might be low. But it appears that Key is intent on helping to embarrass the Australian Labor Party. For NZ, it is a small number of people. A token gesture. But its not a trade I would so keen to entertain.

The problem with this issue is that Western countries should be doing more to secure political freedom in these countries so refugees are not compelled to engage in trade with people smugglers. The best way of doing that is adopting coherent political systems. John Key last night proved to me he is not about that. He is dangerously anti-ideological or pragmatic.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

John Key presentation

2011-08-23T02:34:00.001-07:00

I attended a political presentation by the PM John Keys tonight in Wanganui. Was curious to hear him speak publicly. He is quite the charmer. The fact however is that he is unchallenged by competent opposition. The opposition really is bad; and the media does not help by making it a contest about National and Labour.

Some of the worrying aspects of his speech:

1. His lip service to reducing the size of government or 'limited government', and yet everything he speels out entails him being the centre of economic activity.

2. Misleading statements - He professed to creating 45,000 jobs; and yet he did not create them at all; the private sector created them. He made a favourable comparison with Australia which was not accurate. Suggestion in a 'select' period that NZ was growing when Australia was not. This is because Australia has been so hot, and then they experienced a 'non-farm' correction in commodity prices, and a flood in Qld, affecting farm commodity sales. Hardly a fair comparison.

3. Superficial policy. The concern is that his policy is very superficially based. i.e. Its a very pragmatic, results driven agenda, which will not achieve its target in many area precisely because it is so configured. He can have his targets, but he won't be around when they are realised. The problem therefore is - who does his policies benefit. i.e. Did John Key anticipate the US & European financial crisis? Did he take any steps to protect NZ'ers. No. Any yet there were thousands of bloggers on the internet advancing arguments about the risk of financial meltdown.

4. Climate change - John Key supports the argument that there is anthropogenic cause of climate change. This is indeed a pity. It probably won't matter because Australia will not adopt the scheme. (or it will be reversed)...so NZ won't as well.

This was of course a political campaign presentation.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

The Greens Party policy in NZ

2011-08-22T23:15:00.000-07:00

What is really surprising is that the Greens Party of NZ actually offers the best outline of its policy - see its website here. Presentation however is one thing; so let's look at the detail.

1. Equal tax burden - they want to adopt an ecological tax.

This strikes me as a silly idea, and its hard to fathom how they would achieve an 'equal tax', or what it would look like. They also want to have a $10,000 tax free exemption; which strikes me as realistic given the amount of rates ($2,000 per annum) that people pay, however this needs to be better spent.

2. Capital gains tax - they don't say what their tax rate would be - but it would exclude the family home and it is probably greater than Labour's 15%. John Key argues that taxing assets with a capital gains tax will result in people 'gifting' assets to their kids or sticking them in corporate structures. It is a fair criticism.

3. Monetary policy - The Greens are actually the only party I reviewed which is against asset price bubbles it seems. I laud them for that; the question is how they intend to prevent it.

Of course the problem with the Greens is that they are a party which is 'untested', so who knows what they could do in power.

4. Conservative 'green' policies - My concern about the Greens is that they strike my as another green 'Conservative' party. Why? They doubtlessly will have no intellectual framework for advancing their values. i.e. Promotion of national brands strikes one as nationalism, but maybe they have a 'local' desire for sustainability. This is of course the problem. What value is not sustainable?

5. Nationalist policies - They want to restrict land ownership and trade on silly nationalistic terms.

6. Human rights - They can be lauded along with the other parties for their support for political rights; but repudiated by their lack of protection for economic rights.

7. Climate change - The idea that 'our greenhouse gases must be cut as quickly as possible' strikes one as a policy which is intended to enslave humanity.

Interesting, despite some favourable aspects to the Greens, they contain elements of the worst aspects of the other parties, i.e. The dogmatism of Conservatism, the ignorant welfare statism of Labour, and the nationalism of the ACT Party. They offer a clearer outline of their policies than all the other parties, but then perhaps that is where it ends in terms of coherence. The greatest risk of a Green Party is not knowing what they are capable of in power. They are an untested quantity.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Labour Party policies

2011-08-22T22:33:00.000-07:00

Labour Party policies or values would have to be the weakest of the major parties and here is why. They don't even profess to represent anything. I looked around their webpage and could find no hint of principles or values. Just a lot of reactionary slogans and placards. Phil Goff is really doing a poor job. Based on Australian precedent, we might expect a late change in leaders, and this new leader might just benefit from the 'honeymoon period'. It is hard to see how that could get them the leadership though, as John Key makes the better presentation. He is very believable as a leader. All that Phil Goff can do is criticise him from being 'too pretty'. Hardly a winning argument.

What we can garner from the Labour Party website is the party's:

1. Opposition to privatisation: This strikes me as silly for several reason. Everyone is well versed with the value of privatisation in terms of resulting in better service, more vibrant corporate activity and innovation. It avoids constraints of the enterprises capital expansion. The only reasons to retain their investment is: If the asset is not fully valued. The stronger argument though is to avoid a conflict of interest, i.e. Non competitive practices, market participant and regulator. The problem is less of a problem given that the government's participation is largely passive. My concern is the structure of the privatised industry is more critical than whether the players are private or public. Basically, the argument is over the wrong issue.

2. Fairer tax system, increase jobs: There is a real difficulty creating jobs in NZ, so its hard to see how a 'fairer tax system', i.e. higher corporate and progressive income tax structures are going to increase jobs. In fact, it is likely to be an incentive for more NZ'ers to leave the country. That would mean fewer jobs. The idea of taxing $150,000 incomes at 39% would force people to adopt corporate structures again to reduce their tax. The notion that this would cover a GST exemption for food strikes me as nonsense. Unless they means test it??

3. Taxes on capital: NZ has no tax on capital gains. This is actually an appealing policy for immigrants coming to NZ, who can leave their assets offshore. Labour is looking at adopting a 15% capital gains tax. Given that much of these assets have been acquired unfairly, strikes me as a reasonable source of income, even if the expenditure is unreasonable.

What you realise with Labour is that they cannot even get their web marketing together. There is this site Our Own Future and Labour Party. Its poorly conceived, and is that all they can say about policy. How uninspiring. I swear that is the only policy I can see details on. It seems to be a global Labour Party trick to pull policy out of the hat at the last moment to avoid controversy or accountability.

I frankly think that they might be on a winner with a capital gains tax. Not because I want to see a capital gains tax, but simply because land, the principle source of asset, is a system of extortion. Land speculation does not produce anything and means working people are effectively subsidising the landowners easy lifestyle. I support property rights, but only insofar as they apply to 'improvements', not land. Land was acquired by grant or subsidy; and later-day citizens are being extorted when they buy it.

Frankly, they would drop the GST, adopt a capital gains tax, and adopt a $5,000 tax free exemption. Its currently $2500 I think. I am actually expecting Labour to do better than the polls suggest. I think I'd prefer Labour based on these policies.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Policies of National Party NZ

2011-08-22T21:28:00.000-07:00

Looking at the values of the National Party NZ, it is apparent that John Key and his party are not big on principles. Its pure pragmatism. i.e. Try anything once, and if it works, try it again. This is just as anti-intellectual as the ACT Party of course, and it offers no clues as to which direction they are going in...which might explain why John Key has achieved very little. To be fair to him, there is little you can do when you have a high level of private and public sector debt, an embedded welfare mentality thanks to a decade of Labour administration (aka Helen Clark) and a weak global economy resulting is a strong NZD. My sympathies. So what is National's policy direction:

1. The National Party seeks a safe, prosperous and successful New Zealand that creates opportunities for all New Zealanders to reach their personal goals and dreams.

Hmmm...that has the Keyesian 'utopianism' stamped all over it. Safety? I guess they are not a Conservative Party then. Prosperous. How? Well, here are a few clues. They "believe this will be achieved by building a society based on the following values":

2. Loyalty to our country, its democratic principles and our Sovereign as Head of State

Its hard to imagine how nationalism is going to advance the nation. In actual fact nationalism has done a great deal to destroy democracies, because its a form of collectivism, i.e. A repudiation of the 'personal goals' they profess to subscribe to. Sadly they are committed to democracy, which is the contemporary system of extorting wealth from taxpayers, and legitimatising it with notions of 'mandates', the 'common good' and 'majoritism', which is no better than minorities directing your life, and incompatible with their values stated earlier.

3. National and personal security

This is of course personally sensible; but then in NZ was invaded by a group of people professing values of freedom, and a desire to free us from tyranny, I would be on their side.

4. Equal citizenship and equal opportunity

What precisely does equal citizenship mean? Well, rest assured its not equal 'rights', as if that concept would mean anything under National's. Might I suggest it means 'equal slavery' or 'equal suffrage', which is perfectly compatible with their conception. It doesn't suggest freedom, but then I never believed that pretense anyway.

5. Individual freedom and choice

Don't be fooled by this conception of freedom. Its not freedom from imposition; its the freedom from starvation 'unconditionally', i.e. Your freedom to impose on others freedom. This conception is perfectly compatible with National's tyranny. Choice? Well, you have the choice of a two-party majority. i.e. You have a choice of two types of poison, and there is a competition in name only. Both of the main parties are two sides of the same tyranny.

6. Personal responsibility

This is another empty statement because what does 'responsibility' entail? Does it mean being independent, or does it mean being more broadly supportive and responsible for your community. This is deliberately ambiguous. It highlights how much these parties are really trying to avoid any hint of 'ideology', or any desire to stand for anything. Basically they are scared to be labelled because they really stand for nothing, and are not able to defend anything. Its why you will never get any respect from politicians. They stand for nothing, they cannot convince you of anything, so they will only advance a program which gives them the opportunity to extort a position in the political market for themselves. Its a shallow existence of moral relativism; and democracy makes it possible. You ignorant forefathers asked universal suffrage, and they got it; universal slavery. I guess it was not the enfranchisement they wanted.

7. Competitive enterprise and rewards for achievement

Its actually difficult to find any prospect of any of the major parties achieving this because none of them have the intellectual capacity to realise why they can't implement this objective. Basically there are 3 reasons:

a. They have no conception of the type of regulation they need. National wants to reduce or obstruct all regulation, and Labour is keen to add more. A distinction needs to be made between protective regulation and distortion. Where does that distinction arise? Well, its a matter of principle, and the major parties are against that, because they are against all 'ideology' which they could be held accountable for. Some of you might repudiate ideology as some 1950s-60s scourge. The reality is that those times were a unfair attack upon liberalism. It was really a disdain for bad ideology - Conservatism vs socialism. It was principles considered out of context.

b. Statutory imposition is not viable as a means of achieving policy objectives because statutory law is arbitrary; and thus it is out of context, so impossible to apply, i.e. Easy loopholed, requiring more amendments to actually catch offenders. Worse still, it actually gives 'offenders' a legal sanction, and causes a great expense to prosecute them through the courts, which you pay for.

c. Their 'moral ambivalence' actually encourages abuses of process which sanction the offenders and cause victimisation. Its no wonder people are cynical and begrudged by the process and want the 'necks of big business', but the reality is, the problem is caused by politicians, who function as salesmen, not moral authorities or statesmen like Thomas Jefferson. Those statesmen are long gone. Sadly, its their legacy which created this system.

8. Limited government

There is no question that National believe in limited government; the problem is they they don't limit it where it needs to be limited, and not in a way which would curtail its growth. The implication is that, by lacking principle, they will never reduce the size of government, nor offer any principled framework for constraining it, which means they pose a threat of escalating fascism, as community desperation growth.

9. Strong families and caring communities

Nice idea, but National does not actually convey a theory of values to actually enunciate what this entails. Let me guess - low crime, no divorces, good Christians who go to church and care for others. Sounds 'pretty', but it will not occur without mass or systematic repression. Japan is the clear example. You want the Japanese system. Well, in Japan people don't divorce because they are can't afford to. Its common for Japanese partners to stay together for functional reasons, not for love, and because they care too much about their reputation. They are so lacking in ambition or personal self-worth, that they live like ants, repudiating any personal sense of value. Caring in Japan? Its a pretense. They lock themselves in their houses to avoid the needy when they call. The US has far higher rates of charity. Its not part of Japanese culture at all.

10. Sustainable development of our environment

What does this mean? The devil is in the detail. There is ultimately no shortage of raw materials for humanity, or energy. We could invest in the technology now if it was a priority. Much fuss is made about resource exhaustion. Paradoxically, it is actually our political system that causes people to engage in such wanton materialism in several respects:

a. Psychological repression as a result of a political system which denies people intellectual engagement forces them to pursue material prosperity as a substitute.

b. Monetary and fiscal stimulus as a means of artificially 'sustaining growth' because they are unable to achieve real productivity gains without artificial means like stimulus and immigration.

c. Inefficient democratic government is the reason why our economy is only able to grow at 2-3% per annum, and is scarcely able to achieve any real productivity gains. The reason is that governments adopt more imposts through statutory law, that the only gains are from takeovers, economies of scale (i.e. population growth) and a little technological gain, i.e. Workers extorting the benefits in many cases, forcing business to engage in unfair market practices. You can see however how the constraints by government force workers and business into conflict, and government, the middleman is not held to account.

So, do I want a National-led government. Its probably the best possible choice of a terrible trio. I would repudiate them all and take to the streets. They are either dangerous or benign, but either way, they are a huge opportunity cost. Don't waste your life. Repudiate them all. Life is too precious. Next we review NZ's Labour Party.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

The policies of ACT Party NZ

2011-08-22T18:52:00.000-07:00

In this and the next few blogs I want to consider the values of the 4 major NZ parties at face value. Let's start with ACT Party NZ.

The nice aspect about ACT is that they convey a greater respect for principles and personal autonomy than all of the other parties. Do they personally adhere to their states values; its hard to say since they have not been in government, and much of their politicking is going to occur behind closed doors as members of the National Party Coalition. Reading from their website - they hold the following principles:

1. To promote an open, progressive and benevolent society in which individual New Zealanders are free to achieve their full potential.

This is a nice, flowery notion, but what does it mean? They don't say.

2. That individuals are the rightful owners of their own lives and therefore have inherent rights and responsibilities

This conveys the sense that the party believes people should be personally autonomous and accountable for their own lives. This is admirable, but perhaps it does not resonate with people because they don't feel they are in a position where they are ready for that type of responsibility, i.e. The global economy is weak, the nation indebted. Is there any provisioning by ACT for this context, or are they going to feel the 'full reality' of a global context that they did not create. After all, this economy has been distorted to a point where people cannot get jobs, where people are only spending on basic necessities. Does ACT consider this context, or does it delude itself, and hold its principles out of context? Its not apparent that they think in such terms from their policy positions, i.e. They strike me as religious, disengaged, self-righteous Christian Conservatives. Or are they just anti-intellectual anarchists? Probably a split between both in terms of membership, though I'm uncertain in the party executive.

3. The proper purpose of government is to protect such rights and not to assume such responsibilities.

This is also an admirable position, but again it raises several concerns for two reasons:

a. What do they consider to be the basis of rights. It is traditional not to care? But it makes all the difference. Are they speaking of divine rights, natural rights, albeit probably not social rights, but such issues should not be left arbitrary.

b. We have an answer to my previous question. They say they will effectively 'on no terms' assume responsibility for others. This is a problem because they are dispensing with 'context', i.e. They retain dogmatic 'Christian' principles, which means they are going to struggle to develop a coherent, or relevant justification for their policy. This means their beliefs will never resonate with the community because at each step to 'ground' those ideas in reality, they will fail. That's unfortunate. At face value, they have the best principles. Just its dogma.

The Party shall promote, develop and pursue policies and proposals which:

4. Encourage individual choice and responsibility and the pursuit of excellence in all fields of human endeavour

Given that implicit dogmatism in ACT Party values, we might have to wonder whether the party executive will campaign for abortion, laws limiting pornography, etc. You might not have a problem with such initiatives, but I implore you to consider why these are issues, i.e. Why teens are getting pregnant, why people have perverted sexual values. Far from being an intellectual framework for stopping these values, the philosophy roots of ACT actually advance those 'perverted' values. Recognise that there is a tendency for pastors and Catholic kids to display perverted sexual values. Their minds have been detached from their values; which are 'dogmatically' inspired, i.e. subjective since there is actually no god.

As much as I like the 'pursuit of excellence', it won't be achieved through adherence to dogmatism.

5. Enhance living standards for all New Zealanders through sustainable economic growth and international competitiveness

The problem with ACT, as with other parties, is that they care little how that growth is to be achieved and sustained. The implication is that if ACT were elected today, based on their stated policies, we would have to expect them to cut public servant jobs, cause a lot of unemployment, have faith that the business community will create them; whilst business just sits on its hands because of the global weakness. What does ACT do then to sustain growth? Might it drop the mininum wage? Fine, but there is still no global growth? It can only stimulate spending with monetary policy. i.e. Lowering interest rates. This will unlikely in a global context, even if agricultural sector remains strong because of good commodity prices. Expect them to compromise. Dogma was never going to be sustainable. They are a sinking Christian 'noah's arc'.

6. Enhance choice and diversity, and raise standards of achievement in education

This is of course desirable; though what does 'diversity' mean? The issue here is how they intend to achieve it based on their dogmatic values. This is the problem; it might even spell teaching the Bible in schools. This is seems implausible in NZ, but what Christian could oppose such a well-intentioned policy. Expect rational standards to go out the window. More plausibly, the Left would end up tightening their grip on education, so nothing would be achieved there.

7. Ensure that all New Zealanders have access to quality health care and have security in retirement

This strikes me as inconsistent with their statements about rights; so here we are getting a sense that they are not totally about 'autonomous man'. i.e. They have not even been elected, and yet they are already starting to fail on policy. Its not like this is 'context'; this is aspiration. Reason? No, faith. Interesting to know their justification. Of course, a rational argument is plausible...but do they have one?

8. Maintain social and economic support for those unable to help themselves and who are in genuine need of assistance

This is of course 'welfare statism', so is this not incompatible with their notion of personal responsibility and autonomy. So, we are already seeing some inconsistency in their stated values. Is anyone surprised?

9. Provide for the nation’s security and the protection of individual lives and property

Can't argue with that. Of course a nation has to defend itself; though I'd personally look for a framework of policy-making which did not make me a slave to excessive or expansionary defence spending; as characterised the US in the 1980s. Protection of private property? Most certainly, though I'd personally exclude land because it was initially acquired illegitimately, and its a source of extortion. Land ought to be public, and the basis of 'rational user-pays' taxes, and only property based on 'user improvements' ought to be protected. i.e. People ought not be able to extort wealth through land speculation. They don't create value; they extort it from an expanding population. Harder to do in NZ, but still possible because of lifestyle changes.

10. Explore and implement practical and innovative ways to protect the natural environment

No problem with that. Land should be set aside for public uses, and plausibly for protection of habitats, but not as a dogmatic or servile creed to the greater value of other species.

11. Maintain sound economic management, including (but not limited to) a balanced government budget, price stability and a free and open market economy

Entirely reasonable and proper objective; though they will struggle to do it unless they are prepared to accept principles need to be held in context. i.e. If they dispense with dogma and develop a philosophical foundation for their values. Sadly, this is going to be a problem.

12. Limit the involvement of central and local government to those areas where collective action is a practical necessity.

Ouch! This is such an open-ended proposition; its kind of scarier that it occurs at the end of their principles. i.e. Its kind of like the 'asterisk' directing you to the fine print. This signals to be a complete preparedness to abrogate principles (because of their anti-intellectualism) and to succumb to the mindless 'compromise'. That is the reason why Christians are so immoral. They can't intellectually defend their position, so they end up caving in. Bad news!

Oh well, I held high hopes for ACT. I might just have to establish my own party. That is a hard strategy for me to accept because I know that the political system is based on extortion. Should I sanction it by engaging in it? Or do I become a revolutionary in some sense, undermining the credibility of the major parties?

Let's move on to the next party - National Party of NZ

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

One way to Australia?

2011-08-21T16:02:00.000-07:00

Kiwis are seeing the writing on the wall, and and are looking for job opportunities in Australia. They would be advised to retain their homes in NZ, and just go to Australia for work. They have the good fortune of being able to look for jobs from NZ. All you need to do is email a few recruiters with your CV, apply for a few pertinent jobs, display some skills, and then line up some solid interviews before going over there for a week. When you touch down, get some accommodation, i.e. a room in a Sydney backpacker in the inner city area, and seek work from newspaper adverts, as well as the websites. You will then know if you have a chance. Return to NZ, and you will find many recruiters or employers will fly you over for an appointment if you make it to the interview stage.

Get the job - set up in an apartment - and save for your eventual retirement in NZ. If you like Australia, you can always sell your house later when the NZD-AUD is more favourable. There might be a chance of that in the next few years, but its looking rather dim.

The writing on the wall is that Australia is the land of opportunity at the moment, but NZ will eventually catch up! Another 10 years, and it will strike oil.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Buying a car in NZ

2011-08-18T14:25:00.000-07:00

Interesting that Turners Auction made a nice interim profit this half year. I am suspicious of this good result for two reasons:

1. They are I believe taking a position in the market trading stock

2. They are under-quoting on the price of cars

I sold a car through Turners recently. They under-quoted me grossly. They said my car was worth $4000. Interestingly, they ignored the fact that I had bought the same car from them 8 months earlier for $5500. In any respect, I eventually sold the car for $5,000. I think I could have got $5500 for it actually, because whilst we might be in recession, so more local sellers, and fewer buyers; there is a shortage of supply from Japan I think after the tsunami destroyed vehicles by the thousands. Also TradeMe prices told me I could get more.

Turners superficially give very good service. i.e. They have driven me to the bank to get the cash, dropped me off at the bus depot, etc. They were very nice to allow me to withdrawal from one sale to buy a car when the car I really wanted was passed in. Very good Christians you might say. But I sense an undercurrent there, so beware. I still deal with them. They need to make money, and its apparent that they under-quote. Not sure if they are taking equity in sales, or whether they are simply under-quoting to make their cars more attractive buys. i.e. To draw customers. It could be argued that the change in market circumstances demanded that. The reality was however - TradeMe was telling me something else. When you are looking for a sale, best to get a sense of the market at TradeMe. People do go to auctions for a bargain. It does not mean they have to get one. Don't be lured so readily into auctions either if you are not in a hurry to sell. We could have just as easily come back from our holiday and kept the car.

In fact, we only wanted to sell our car and buy a new one when we returned in 3 months. In the process of selling, we found out that you don't have to auction your car. I think its better to actually just leave your car on their lot and wait for trade inquiries through them. That is if you are in no rush. The problem I guess is that as a customer they seem not to direct you to cars in the yard, so it is dealers who are likely to get these cars.

Business in NZ is a struggle. It is a small market and very little money gets spent in the non-food market. As a trader, it can feel like a 'dog fight' sometimes. It feels rather tragic if you are not accustomed to that system of values; and yet NZ has this superficial exterior which yells 'maternalistic society'. Its really a dog fight. In comparison, I find Australia rather materialistic for different reasons, i.e. psychological repression - systematised by statutory imposition.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Kiwis - wanted - but we have standards

2011-08-17T22:26:00.000-07:00

New Zealanders are being discouraged from going to Australia - both by the New Zealand media desperate to hang on to its population of Kiwis and new immigrants, and by Australian media, eager to promote a story of wayward Kiwis. The reality is that - life is tough anywhere if you have no skills; if you have no money, or no mommy to look after you. Of course you need money to support yourself to get a job; of course you need skills. The fact that Queensland's sunshine is popular for Kiwis ought to be reason not to go there, because its also popular for Australian teens as well. Why? Well, if you like the lifestyle, its a great place to be homeless because you can sleep under a bridge without worrying about the cold. Unskilled and looking for a job? Try outback Western Australia. They need heaps of line clearers to survey grids for drilling, and other such jobs. But at the end of the day, you need life experience in order to have a life. Most people get an education from home-base...so the starting point is logically a job or skills development in NZ.

In conclusion, Australia is still the land of milk and honey; but if you are a Kiwi rest assured you will still win the World Cup, and you will feel like a blessed champion for a week, and then you will be poor for another decade, before you discover oil, then you will be rich like an Aussie! :)

There is a message here for immigrants to New Zealand as well. Do they need your skills? Are people in your industry leaving your industry to go to Australia? Has this left a local shortfall, or should you be following them as well?

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

The pricing of petrol and milk in NZ

2011-08-17T19:29:00.000-07:00

I took the opportunity today to pen my opinion on the NZ price of milk and petrol. There is currently an inquiry underway into the price of milk.

Milk strikes me as an important source of protein and calcium in the diet of many families. Toast and cereal strike me as very simple meals that given low-income parents and their children some consistency about their meals. Its not rocket science to make it.

The reason prices for milk and other agricultural commodities is high because of the inadequate provisions made by Asia to address food security issues. This might also be considered a shortcoming for low-income NZ'ers, if that was the only issue they had to contend with. If I look at one country in Asia where I spend a lot of time - the Philippines. Agriculture had little appeal because prices were low, land often divided between family members, and city jobs offer so much more appeal. If these attitudes persist, Asians will be drinking a lot more milk. This is not such a problem for high-intensity market gardening. But it spells high prices for milk, and Fonterra should of course be able to sell milk abroad at 'market price', without having to sell subsidised milk locally.

But I wonder - why does 'healthy' low-fat milk sell at such a premium when the 'animal or butter fat' content is removed for higher value cheese production. It ought to be cheaper, despite the added production cost. Why am I paying so much for mostly water.

I think there needs to be reform to market regulation. If you are going to function as an 'effective monopoly', your product ought to be priced at a 'regulated cost + fixed profit premium', but as soon as you or the industry achieve a 'distributed' production regime, the competition ought to be on.

I am curious. Why are petrol prices $2.02/litre when the NZD is at record highs (up from $1.69 a year ago), the international oil price is $0.85/barrel, well down from $1.40/bbl. I know refining costs are fixed, but this is a huge disparity.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Brash - ACT Party - needs to think more about implications

2011-06-26T17:12:00.000-07:00

This was always going to be the problem elevating Don Brash to the position of leader of the ACT Party...he was always destined to be another unthinking libertarian as opposed to the philosophical type. I agree with his sentiment when he wants to drop the minimum wage. The problem is not that there is a minimum wage, but that its too high. i.e. It exists as a form of welfare support. The positive aspect about a minimum wage is that it avoids abuse; whether of immigrants, the disabled, or even the long term unemployed, who are not worth $1/day, but maybe they are worth $6-8/day in terms of the economic surplus they can produce; as opposed to sitting on welfare. Of course there are other ways to regulate these issues, but being a 'unthinking' type libertarian, there is tendency to detach oneself from the interests of people who have been raised under this system. Just as you don't turn your back on a 'spoilt child', you don't turn your back on a 'spoilt' welfare recipient. i.e. Your system created their welfare dependence; it serves no one to cut them off without reasonable conditional education to get them back to being productive persons.

These are however the right type of statements that Brash ought to be making, and they will resonate with farmers. But unless he pulls his finger out and considers the impact of government on these welfare abusers, then he is setting himself up for a fringe group of farmers, and he will not have a big impact. Don't think because you have a unthinking libertarian and an unthinking conservative deciding the fake of NZ that you will end up with good policy - you won't. You will merely end up with a compromise between two bad policies. The implication is that the context will be dropped.

Brash is making the same mistake - or will be perceived as making the same mistake - as the Sir Roger Douglas. It would not be an unreasonable expectation given that they come from the same party. The danger is that they will engage in their economic rationalisation and dispense with context. Call it rationalism, compartmentalisation or dogmatism; NZ'ers will snub them if they keep this up. They will get 3% of the vote instead of 10-20% they could if they were deeper thinkers. Well, maybe they have run out of time.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

New Zealanders taking permanent leave

2011-06-21T16:44:00.000-07:00

As expected New Zealanders are leaving the country in droves and immigrants and tourists are tending to stay away as well. Most of those leaving are probably salary-earners rather than small business owners, who will tend to profit from the reconstruction. The following article suggests that middle income earners have been particularly hard hit by higher taxes. i.e. the tax system in most countries is so skewed against the salaryman, that people are inclined to seek out any concession, rather than doing what they should do, and stop sanctioning a terrible form of government 'democracy' and the right of government - or that blessed 'majority' - if ever there was one. Stop sanctioning the right of the minority to extort from another minority. That is not the genius of democracy; that is what makes democracy just a legitimatised form of tyranny like the ones of old. This might strike you as strange but that legitimacy comes in the form of your right to vote. Yes, voting. The right to a meaningless sanctioning of a person you have never met, to execute policies you don't know, who purportedly competes against a party who is very much the same, engaged in the same form of extortion, to stay in power. Allies I'd say more than competitors. But by all means, go to Australia, and win the right to be screwed by a different democratic franchise. You will end up becoming a repressed materialist like all the other Australians. If depressed; go shopping; and give the government more points for stimulating economic activity...as opposed to productivity..which is what really counts. That's right, we do not even measure government by the right tools....anyway they control all the data.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Artists: Its not just about the money!

2011-06-20T18:37:00.001-07:00

The last thing we need is the government picking winners....even those people who profess or appear to be worth the effort. Successful recording artists are highly lucrative. Why does government need to finance them? If you want to sanction the support of artists et al, then I suggest you invest your own money in these artists. My suggestion is - request a share of the royalties - say $5 for every dollar invested in their first album, $3 from their 2nd album, $1 from every sale from their 3rd. That seems fair! Just in case they are a one-race horse.

Is it plausible that Pip would write better music if she struggled with the need to pay her own way? No one writes lyrics about how they lived off the government. Is it possible that she did not write the lyrics she professes to 'feel'. Feel it girl...feel it! Feel the pain of taxpayers paying your way. My guess is - living overseas is part of the process of forgetting that others paid for her 'success'. That goes for all those artists who look to government for support, or sanction governments who support them and others. Its not about giving. Its about the 'taking' that makes this giving possible.

Spare a thought for those struggling to survive on the money they actually earned during this recession who cannot afford Pip's album. Even if they attended one of her free concerts, if she offers them to investors, I wonder if the message of her lyrics is...how do I got money from the government. Nope....no one sings about that. You might wonder. I reckon I could string together a swanky tune. Are you the type of cynics to request a verse?

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

John Key's speech to Australia moving but fallacious

2011-06-20T17:49:00.000-07:00

John Key, PM of NZ believed a very moving speech to the Australian Parliament. It was this first such address by a NZ prime minister, and follows the speech by George Bush, as the visiting US President. With respect to its content however I must say:

1. Having lived in NZ that the values of NZ people are quite different. Not that its a problem; but it betrays the sentiments of the speech. Everyone likes to mention what we share. This of course betrays the facts, which also include differences. We actually have quite different histories. Shared aspirations? I don't think so. The only Australians going to NZ are those trying to escape a repressive government, and tourists wanting to check out what a real mountain and earthquake looks like. Most of the 560,000 NZ'ers in Australia came over for the money, even if they learned to live there.

2. The CER represents a 'global standard in free trade agreements'. Really? What about the apples Mr Key. NZ apples were restricted for trumped up scientific reasons...you know...the type used to justify climate/carbon taxes.

There are many positives about this speech. The sentiments are warm and welcoming; but sadly they are quite a stray from the facts and from principle. Most concerning is the sentiments expressed - that both countries are committed to freedom:

"That democracy, freedom and the rule of law should be cherished and fostered".

In the policies of both the Australian and NZ, trade aside, I see no evidence of freedom, and would argue that democracy is but a legitimatised form of fascism. Great speech lest we forget the facts.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Life in the wake of the Christchurch earthquakes

2011-06-12T20:34:00.000-07:00

NZ will have to change the way it thinks about life. Most people tend to take life each day at a time. We can't afford to do that......at least not after one confronts the urgencies of the tragedy and trauma. The deaths and injuries in Christchurch to date were because we hold ideas in disdain for the 'practicalities' of the moment. People with ideas warned government officials that there were risks, and they were ignored. Never expect government officers to be champions for ideas. They are middlemen who deal in concrete matters because their lives are driven by perceptions, which tend to evolve around facts because that is all that most people consider.

We need to think conceptually, which means analytically, critically and long term. It is what distinguishes us from animals which function on the basis of mere correlation. Our capacity to appreciation or 'understand' causation is the capacity which allows us to see around corners. Japan only sparingly learned the lesson because of its far greater exposure to earthquakes. It shows that earthquakes are not particularly dangerous if we anticipate them, plan for them, and build for them. The buildings in Japan shake like trees and yet they preserve their structural integrity. Those buildings and the people who occupy them go about their lives knowing that they are safe in the knowledge of technological progress.

Japan suffered from the tsunami because of its compartmentalised thinking. It shows that people might live under the illusion that they are prepared, but its merely accepting the reassurances of 'short-range' government bureaucrats. Only one of the mayors in the NE of Honshu had made adequate provisions for tsunamis. His provisional construction efforts, which entailed building a number of concrete sea walls, spared the lives of his electorate. He is a rare thinker who challenged popular consensus. Such thinking is all too rare because it is not supported or affirmed by our political system. On the contrary, our political system advances perceptions or concrete facts as the basis for decision-making. I don't think you can fully comprehend the damage this has done to society, and what it will do to Western democracy in the future.

I will say more on this issue, but I will save it for forthcoming books.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

NZ drinking habits a problem not being solved

2011-06-09T17:55:00.000-07:00

Excessive-drinking is not a criminal matter to be punitively persecuted, or a lifestyle issue to be coerced from; its a crisis of values. Its the implication of some pretty poor social values; which are a manifestation of most people's personal values. Don't expect the two major parties to do anything constructive. Their measures will however help stop off-licensed site boozing with this law, but they will not stop people tanking up before going out with it, or simply modifying their behaviour. They are just as likely to switch drugs, maybe even go for harder drugs. Its a start, but a half measure. Its values stupid. Address the mind, not the social implications. Stop behaving like 1970s behaviourists!

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

NZ - The way to boost "innovation nation"

2011-06-08T17:37:00.000-07:00

Niche industrial player sees the opportunities to provide high value technological services to foreign markets. Laznatech is merely one type of industrial innovation to be found in NZ, and there is room for many more. This is the type of innovation culture that NZ needs to promote. So you might ask how it can go about that:

1. Provide a more encouraging culture at home to attract creative foreigners; not least all those NZ expatriates who might have left for good.

2. Reform the education system to make it more 'externally focused' like Australia's, and more critical thinking.

3. Encourage external relationships in trade and personal interests.

4. Encourage local govts to set up region or national-based hubs in major trading nations to promote trade, familiarity and cultural exchange. I look at NZ efforts at this, and its poor in execution. i.e. Wanganui, my town, has a sister city relationship with Toowoomba in Qld, and some small town in Shizuoka, Japan. The problem with this strategy is that its 'boring' sameness, not interesting 'differentiation'. Why would they come here, and why would we go there. These relationships we defined by their proponents, who as individuals, happened to like living in Wanganui. This fails as a community stretegy. Its success was subsidised by its proponent, then unthinkingly supported by the state. I would suggest Hanno should drop its relationship with Toowoomba because its a competitor, not a prospective partner, and drop its relationship in Shizuoka, and adopt one with Hanno, Saitama. Why? Hanno is likewise a small town, but its on the edge of a big city (Tokyo). There are many factories there. Another good option is Mito, north of Tokyo, close to the airport. Do the same in India, and you just might turn Wanganui into a future IT hub, developing call centres, and VOIP technologies for pertinent industries. Expect technology costs for such centres to come down in future.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

New Zealand - peace man!

2011-05-25T21:36:00.000-07:00

According to some liberals at the 'Vision of Humanity', NZ is the most peaceful nation in the world. Sorry, I don't agree. These surveys are not entirely useful because 'peace' is a frightfully bad measure of health. Why?

Peace is not an indicate of well-being. Look at the runner-up 'Japan'. Japan is a highly collectivist nation. Japanese people are often very unhappy people; and they have a propensity to jump in front of trains to remind you. They feel constrained by their culture. It is fun for foreigners to come to Japan because we think their 'entrenched values' are cute, but for Japanese people, they want to stay abroad. This escapism of course is not restricted to Japan. Westerners want to go to Japan, or the Philippines, because foreign nations seem to treat one better than the servitude one sinks into when you are a 'local'. In NZ, one gets a 4-year tax holiday on offshore passive income. This is a great deal. NZ is a friendly place...but living there for the last 2 years, I have come to see it as quite a threatening place. There are anti-social elements which mean you stand a modest chance of befalling some violent death. I think one far safer in Australia; but then you stand a higher risk of being persecuted by your government in Australia.

There are however signs of improvement in Australia. Belatedly, after 2 decades of persecuting motorists, a NSW liberal MP has asked the Attorney General to investigate the use of speed cameras. A little reflection is encouraging, but actually, I don't expect much change.

The whole world is becoming a more violent place. Tempers are shorter, anxiety is more prevalent. We are all close to snapping. I am. I'm always on edge. Anyway, I'm off to the Philippines tomorrow...so I'm just as keen on the escapism as well. I have a 4 countries and I rotate to preserve my sanity.

Back to the issue of peace. Not a good measure. It can equate with repression just as much as well-being. i.e. Saddam Hussein, a vile dictator, famously kept Iraq a peaceful place until the Americans invaded. But I suspect Iraqis would prefer American occupation to Hussein back in power. That is because in this context, peace correlated with political oppression. There is no overt opppression in the West; its more subtle. We have taxation. And because we are enslaved by arbitrary law, we are more repressed than oppressed. But the distinction is more one of rationalisation, whether by you or government, and the extent to which you challenge the system of the authorities.

I joke about the use of drugs. Drugs are very popular in NZ. More so than Australia I suggest. This escapism highlights the extent that people need to resort to various forms of 'coping' in a society which disempowers.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

The quality of NZ expertise - or its relevance

2011-05-24T18:21:00.000-07:00

Scientists study facts...from facts we derive values...but might their value judgements offer more value if they actually studied value systems, whether psychology, economics or philosophy. Perhaps we ought to stop seeking the opinions of people speaking outside of their expertise. So what does this 'scientist' do? He is a physicist. What would he know about these topics. Is NZ so bored as to care what someone of no 'moral authority' cares? The NZ Herald seems to think so.

Clearly some journalists at the NZ Herald are really impressed by scientists with PhDs. Perhaps they would be less impressed if they realised that the prequalifying characteristic for getting a PhD is a great deal of self-hate. Why would you pay huge amounts of money, waste an inordinate amount of time for a qualification to impress the same type of people as you. Oh, the pay off of this self-congratulatory system is that you win the praise of unthinking journalists.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Does NZ need a minimum wage increase?

2011-05-24T14:31:00.000-07:00

John Key has hit back at those who want to raise the minimum wage....saying 'they don't understand economics'.

That might well be the case, but his short quip is not going to change that. If the government is going to depart from public opinion, perhaps he ought to take responsibility for trying to change it with a lucid argument as to why minimum wages, if set at a high level, raise unemployment. At the end of the way, if the minimum wage remains low enough, a 'minimum wage' can mean absolutely nothing. If there are non-price reasons for a slack employment market, the 'minimum wage' will also mean absolutely nothing. If there is no global economic activity, and one must concede that there is always activity somewhere and everywhere, then there is not going to be job growth. i.e. Job growth really requires falling wages or expansion of demand. So people are not spending.

John Key might argue that he cannot respond to every criticism of the public. Well, agreed, but perhaps that repudiates his model of 'centralised' political administration. It appears Key has conceded that he is not up to the job. No, not at all, he is just going to pretend that he can solve all problems. But really all he wants to do is preside over the pretense of doing something, and get paid besides.

So, Key is partially right. NZ does not need a minimum wage increase. It would raise the spending of the wage earners, but it would likely cause a great number of businesses to close, and what damage it does there, will probably only result in more consumption, or debt repayments. If it would miraculously go into innvestment, that would be another thing....but there is little reason to expect that from any quarter. There is good reason to stop thinking arbitrary statutory laws are going to make a difference. They make things worse. We do not need more government distortion, we need less. After all, it was 'foreign' government distortion which caused the problem in the first place. Some will argue that the 'Fed' is a private organisation. Yes, but it was sanctioned by the US Congress back in the 1910s...1916 if I am not mistaken.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

ACT-National Party coalition with biz support

2011-05-19T14:31:00.000-07:00

The John Key National Party government has taken the path of least resistance by in effect targeting passive income or savings as a source of taxation. The problem with this is that:

1. It does not resolve the problem of excess national consumption

2. It undermines long term savings

3. It does not resolve the parasitism in NZ elevated by a decade of socialist government, but I suspect that it does enough to rein in recurrent budget items, by targeting student loans, and a commitment to find savings in the bureaucracy over 3 years of $1billion.

The implication is that the private sector is unlikely to snub the National Party, so I think Key has done enough to prevent John Brash's ACT Party from winning a significant share of the vote in the next election. This would have been unthinkable a few months ago. We will in all probability be looking at a National Party-ACT Party coalition, with possibility ACT having 5-10 seats. Based on this budget, I do not see any National Party MPs defecting to the ACT Party - as John Brash has already done. If its going to happen there will need to be strong support for the party from business, and this budget does entail restraint. This can only mean ACT becoming smarter, and I just don't think any of the salesmen in parliament have the intellectual vigour to achieve that. Another problem for ACT is that business is surprisingly paternalistic in NZ; and not in a good way. i.e. Christian dogmatic, duplicitous, non-contextual charity more than objective, conditional, contextual empathy. I am always surprised by the level of business support for Helen Clark. This financial crisis is her legacy...at a time of high commodity prices.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Buying property in NZ - the short and long term

2011-05-19T14:00:00.001-07:00

This is not the time to buy property in NZ for international buyers. The public deficit is at a high point, and the government is targeting conspicuous consumption or largess as the basis for future tax receipts. So its really an addendum to the GST, which has just increased; except this tax will apply to the wealthy. This is mostly going to entail luxury sales taxes, extra property taxes on holiday houses, etc. The family home I suspect will not be touched, however there many well be an attempt to target high-value homes. i.e. Tax-free sales below $250K.

The implication of these decisions of course is that anyone sitting on luxury items like houses or yachts looks like facing a tax. The implication is that '2nd properties' are going to be entering the market. You would tend to expect most of these properties to be in the rural areas, as well as places like Wanaka, Queenstown, Wanganui, Nelson, Blenheim and the various fishing and ski resort areas. The 'bach' has long been a simply of NZ's affinity with lifestyle. It just got that little bit harder to 'live the life' in a country with a stilted domestic economy.

Queenstown

The best buying opportunities is likely to be in those slower demand centres like Wanganui, and even places like Napier. Tourist locations more than residential growth zones like the cities. The best opportunity is likely to be in 1-2 years, as this will correspond to:

1. A slight rise in global interest rates - given the high levels of consumer indebtedness I don't see governments willing to allow foreclosures to blow out, and NZ will benefit from high commodity prices.

2. A short term problem of high deficit placing pressure on the AUD

3. The offloading of all these properties.

4. The population decline in some rural areas means that they are likely to feature more strongly as sales opportunities. We must remember that rural areas will benefit from strong commodity prices, so the effect will be short-lived. Already there is a lot of rural 'bachs' on the market in anticipation of such taxes. Of course not everyone will sell. Some can afford the lifestyle, some use their city home as superannuation money, and their bach is the 'retirement home'; and others might rent the bach out in the off-season as a trade off.

I would be looking for the rural residential market to fall over the next year years; I'd expect the NZD to fall to a low against the AUD in 2 years given stronger outlook for food prices rather than metals; and by then NZ will have taken some steps to resolve its deficit. In 10 years, NZ will probably have a few more oil discoveries, and it will then become the land of milk and honey.

The problem of course is that John Key is doing very little to curtail the drain on the economy by taxing those who actually earn their way in the economy. There is too much parasitism in NZ, and governments are always reluctant to target them. Why? It requires an education policy, and they cannot think. Taxation requires the creativity of squirrel which collects nuts, and the roar of a lion which threatens to steal your nuts when you do something wrong. At least I know how to talk to the parasites. But I want to also tell them that its not their fault. The rich has enabled the poor and government to perpetrate this crime against humanity by not developing their critical thinking capacities. We will be driven towards fascism - not by the collectivist looking to plunder the wealth of the rich - but by the wealthy who thinks they can escape the powers of government. They will catch up with you eventually - and they will do it by paying off consultants to track you down. That's rich the private sector is being used to undermine the private sector. So your message - either develop some intellectual integrity or OBEY!

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Labour Party leader Phil Goff - broken promises

2011-05-17T14:11:00.000-07:00

In the NZ Herald today, the Leader of the Labour Party Phil Goff asks in the parliament whether the new budget to be delivered today by Bill English will break any election promises.

I ask "Is that a good or fair question"? Or just cynical attempt to smear a politician.

I think the latter when you consider that:

1. Phil Goff is not dealing with the budget deficit

2. Phil Goff is not outlining an alternative

3. Parties ought not be tied to a political policy merely because it was advanced in the past. After all, things change, and policy has to change with it. Whether they made a mistake, or external factors changed, you celebrate responsiveness, and deal with the question of whether it is good policy 'as it stands'. Of course it would be confidence building for a party to convey some coherent fundamental ideas; but given there is little integrity in politics (given their statutory powers), you can't expect that under the current system.

This is why we have to change the system, and why Phil Goff is not good for NZ politics. John Key is little better because he is ultimately a 'centerist', unprincipled middleman with no integrity, who offers no break from the past. Keep looking NZ!

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Politics - Allan Peachey MP a gem among others

2011-05-13T21:14:00.000-07:00

I have just been reading a book called "What's Up With Our MPs" by Allan Peachey, who wrote years ago about the NZ education system. Its not often that I read, as a critical analyst, a book which provides coherent and objective ideas on a subject. This author is indeed a very precious discovery, and I wanted to share this with New Zealanders because upon searching Google to send him a letter of praise, I came to discover that he is actually a National Party MP for Tamaki, a southern electorate of Auckland.

Now, this would be great news if he was our future NP leader or had a great deal of influence in the party. Sadly, the party seems to be captivated by more pragmatic forces, and as it our destiny under democracy, we will see policy once again dictated by the lowest common denominator; that is, an appeal to fear or short term expedient interests at the expense of long-range or rational policy objectives.

I just hope the voters of Tamaki realise the gem they have representing them. As far as I'm concerned, a diamond in a haystack is still a haystack with a lost gem.....or is that a compass needle. Anyway, Peachey MP is despite imminent education qualifications lacking the required political system to actually make a positive difference. That is where I come in.

In the meantime, I will keep looking for more gems.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Competition alive and well down under

2011-05-12T12:34:00.000-07:00

According to the senior executives of Jetstar and Air NZ, the recent and 'short lived' offer of $1 and $5 flights to Auckland is a sign of real and effective competition in the aviation industry. That's right, the airlines were offering 600 tickets for just 1 hour the other day, and on just one of their hundred-odd routes, and that constitutes competition.

In fairness, there is going to be some competition in this area, and the reasons are:

1. Displacement of services from Christchurch - The new terminal is complete at Christchurch airport, and I am guessing that the airport authority will be looking to raise airport fees paid by the airlines. This I believe is why Jetstar is trying to lure people to Dunedin airport. This is particularly appealing for all those travellers coming from the South. That's right, you might have to travel as far as 8 hours from the far south because of the limited connections offered from Queenstown and the premium prices you pay for them.

2. New market entrant - Air Asia is a new discount entrant into the market. It will lure passengers, but it is only going to take market share from those flying to Asia; so Jetstar after Pacific Blue's exit is going to retain the lion's share of the Australian market.

Dunedin is a big of a hole. Its a very ugly city, and its layout is messy. But it seems, if you can both chancing 1-hour discounts, and you are lucky enough to hear about one, they are not really competition. Really they are token gestures offered by airlines, and duly reported by the media. Sounds like cheap advertising to me. Yep, there are plenty of airlines offering 'discounted tickets'; the problem however is that there are:

1. So many conditions attached to them they are not worth having, i.e. No meals, no flexibility to change the flight, substantive luggage restrictions, highly pernicious penalties complying with their restrictions.

2. The need to carry the risk of buying a ticket you cannot cancel. I suspect they have made as much on unused tickets as those used.

3. The burden of having to read their 9-page list of conditions; or carrying the risk of not reading them.

Yes, competition in the modern era is an illusion. Its all about perceptions, or 'smoke and mirrors', or 'bait and switch'. There is a law against bait advertising in Australia....this seems to breach it. But of course there are those wonderful inventions - the 'asterisk' (i.e. *). They are magic to the business community. They only need to ensure that they have one on the advertisement, and all conditions are in play....and that makes it not 'bait advertising'.

For sane people like myself, the letter of 'statutory law' denies too much, and that the spirit of the law is in breach. Statutory law offers no prospect of justice so long as:

1. It remains arbitrary - no rational, principled basis, no spirit, just 'letter of the law' loopholing. i.e. The law has no context.

2. Justice is expensive - high legal fees, and the prospect of court appeals

I recall a case of a car rental company being challenged in the court by a customer who was charged enormous legal fees for the privilege of saving $50. Seems like a false economy to me. No one it took 10 fees for the practice to be challenged. In the 'common law' case of bank fees, the banks are being sued in a class action in Australia after 20 years of duping customers.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Immigration decisions - Martin Payne

2011-05-12T00:21:00.000-07:00

The decision-making capacities of the Immigration Dept are looking a bit dodgy in NZ. In the same week that a murderer has been allowed to stay, an old businessman who moved here on a Entrepreneurs Visa, paid $700,000 for a business, employs people in one of the highest unemployed areas, has family here, has business revenues of $2million, has been rejected.

The problem of course seems to be the way the cases were assessed. The businessman was given a visa, so he should be allowed to stay. There is an expectation of continuity when you establish a business. Deporting him can only do irreparable harm to his commercial activities, having already prompted him to move half way around the world. Read the story at the NZ Herald. You can support this guy on Facebook.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Threats made against Maori Party candidates

2011-05-09T20:55:00.000-07:00

Reading the NZ Herald today it is apparent that the Maori Party and newly established Mana Party seem compelled to destroy each other, and in the process drive Maori votes towards the mainstream parties. We might expect the Labour Party to be the beneficiary of this bickering. No one wins in these types of slanging matches. The implication is that we will have further concentration of power in the major parties.

The other interpretation is that such blaster is part and parcel of Maori political discourse, and that at the end of the day, they will still vote Maori. I know few Maori people, having only lived in NZ for 2 years, but I suspect a good many of them consider themselves foremost human beings, and give secondary consideration to being Maori. So it will be interesting to see how they vote....or whether they vote at all. Does Honewira MP raise the voter participation with his new party, or does he earn their derision.

It remains to be seen.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Christchurch depopulation

2011-05-05T14:46:00.000-07:00

Depopulation is not something you'd associate with a major city; they tend to create their own buzz. In the case of Christchurch, in the wake of the earthquake, we might be seeing more of a dead cat bounce. The city will of course recover, but one is reminded that the series of earthquakes was not the only reason they left....it was just a timely excuse. Prospects are far better in Australia, and NZ'ers are voting with their feet.

In 2012 there ought to be a construction boom in Christchurch. The problem of course driving many people away is:

1. The prospect of more earthquakes

2. The cost of rebuilding

3. The unmet demand for labour, forcing up costs

4. The excuse to leave, e.g. The wage differential with Australia, stagnant growth in NZ

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Driving age in New Zealand

2011-05-04T19:52:00.000-07:00

NZ is considering whether it ought to change the driving age for youths. The clear motivation is the high number of deaths. My views are that age is not the issue. The issues are:

1. Consequences: Is a teen over the age of 15 years able to know the consequences of their actions. The answer is yes.

2. Driving experience: Does the youth have adequate knowledge of driving, driving conditions, driving safety to go on the road.

3. Values: Does the child have the intellectual maturity to deal with any vulnerabilities that might impact their ability to drive.

Clearly the intellectual maturity is not an issue solely restricted to youths. The problem is that politicians turn complex issues into simple media placards which does not properly respect the rights and interests of people.

We have a situation now where the government unconditionally grants drivers the right to drive on the basis of a limited test - both theory and practice. This test does not adequately reflect the range of driving experience of youths. In addition, the nature of our political system is destined to encourage youths to challenge the authority of police and more broadly the law. Far from achieving 'obedience', unfair law is a call to disregard it, and to treat it with contempt, making an subsequent difficult.

What we know about youths is that they are over-invested in what others are thinking. They don't have a well-developed sense of their own values, their character, their personal identity. That is a problem in a social context, in which they feel compelled to impress people. It is a problem in a context in which a youth is looking for a sense of control. i.e. They are looking for intellectual control, but if they can't get that, they will seek some sense of practical or concrete control, which inadvertedly might mean through driving, for a sense of efficacy they cannot get elsewhere. Most youths know their limits; however in a social or alcoholic-fulled context, these concerns are subdued.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Hone Harawira MP - ignorant or moral crusader

2011-05-04T17:43:00.000-07:00

What are we to make of Hone Harawira's statements that Osama bin Laden was "a man who fought for the rights, the land and the freedom of his people".

The problem with these assertions is that they offer no clarity and are misleading. They show that the MP represents is ignorant, and assuming they know his values, that they share his ignorance. This is both a problem and an opportunity, because everyone is important to someone, and if we are respectful of the rights of people, then we should take an interest in what others think, and attempt to correct their assertions. This of course is more difficult if they lack a respect for facts. Here are the problems with what Hone Harawira's said:

1. Bin Laden did not advance the rights of Arabs; he exposed them to collectivist contempt, dangers of civil war.

2. Bin Laden did not convey an intellectual defence of rights, which are sadly lacking in the Middle East; instead deciding to attack a country which has one of the 'relatively' better track records. If his argument defence was that America was the better but offered a bad example, or was inconsistent, he did not make that 'intellectual argument'. He resorted to violence instead; misdirecting resentment in his own country.

3. Bin Laden might well have had some notion of rights, but it was not an objective or conceptual framework that entailed or required any intellectual discipline. His actions suggest his rights were won at the expense of others rights. Did the US model these values? Probably, as US foreign policy stinks as an educational tool. Listen to US politicians and you only get the sense that the US is out to advance its vested interests. We don't get any sense of intellectual or moral engagement; which is a problem in a crowded globe that requires respect and cooperation from others; particularly when 70% of global oil supplies comes from the region.

It is interesting that Harawira draws upon Maori culture, which I have little knowledge of, but which I would expect would be collectivist in nature. He said the al-Qaeda founder should be "honoured" rather than "damned" in death based on Maori values. It was Maori custom to acknowledge the dead. Other Maori politicians had a different perspective. These representatives clearly embody a higher degree of Western influence; leaving Harawira sitting out in the wilderness as a Maori nationalist.

Harawira said bin Laden had "pursued independence for his people, his family and his tribe". Unfortunately, his independent entailed destroying the lives of others. He needed to make an intellectual argument; but instead he resorted to violence.

He indicated it was Maori custom... "tributes to the dead are always appropriate"...that "it was custom for Maori to "honour and mourn the deceased".

This of course suggests unsurprisingly that Maori culture is based on moral relativism.

If there is any value in Harawira's statement it is in the acknowledgement that Bin Laden did embody some hope for Arabs in the Middle East, and he did change the nature of US engagement with the region.

The notion however that he advanced or "fought for the rights, the land and the freedom of his people" is a nonsense, because he showed no respect for rights...merely his countries interests at the expense of others. Sadly, the US did not help matters. They might well argue that its not in their narrowly defined interests to educate Arabs. They paid the price for their 'narrow' defined philosophy of pragmatism.

Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples said 'utu' (revenge) was a Maori custom. "But we don't agree with the extent of the celebrations or with anyone celebrating the assassination of anyone and then the person's body being discarded into the sea."

Labour MP Shane Jones repudiates Harawira's view, arguing that: "In the old days, a great enemy - if he wasn't eaten - his bones were used to make musical instruments. So this romantic notion that in the old time, Maori spent hours of their time saluting the enemy was not the case".

This need not however be a repudiation, since Maori culture might differentiate the spirit from the body, and find some spiritual virtue in eating them.

His other argument however does repudiate his assertion; although, does all Maori beliefs have to be the same given the different tribes spread around the country. Jones argued "Enemies were turned to dust and people rejoiced, because of the suffering they had caused".

Source of quotes - "Bin Laden a freedom fighter - Harawira", NZ Herald, May 5, 2011

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

NZ - government policy detached from reality

2011-05-03T13:57:00.000-07:00

The suggestion by this consultancy International Funds Services Development Group that NZ could emerge as a future financial hub is ludicrous. There is no justification for duplication services in NZ which are offered in Australia - a market with 5-6x the size, a better climate, better pay, and a broader commodity focus. It is nonsensical. Just as importantly, there is little little investment capital or investment in NZ. It is a very small market at the 'arse-end' of the world.

Anyone investing in NZ will be doing so for only one of five reasons:

1. Domestic ties - the type of business that will always need to be local, i.e. cafes, restaurants

2. Raw material production & processing - natural resources with or without processing if competitive. i.e. Some materials are too low value or bulky without processing, i.e. iron ore, or high value commodities where transport is a low cost penalty.

3. Low cost competitiveness - The best example is consulting services or call centres. NZ has a technology and price advantage, i.e. NZ is the lowest cost OECD country in the world, so you'd have to wonder why they are not building call centres for higher value servicing than can be performed by Filipinos. It could service foreign markets when they would have to pay overtime or late night salary rates.

4. Lifestyle industries like tourism, etc.

5. High value manufacturing and servicing like niche hospital equipment designs, taxi despatching systems, GPS software. For example, consider the following example of seismic monitoring systems.

These industries are hard to create unless you know something about the world. I would encourage NZ'ers to get out in the real world, the active, industrialised countries and learn what these countries are doing. It is not enough to read newspapers and online, you need to live in these places.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Dr Don Brash in bid for ACT Party leadership

2011-04-24T15:30:00.000-07:00

The ACT Party appears to be heading for oblivion...no thanks to the media whom make every effort to disparage the party for the follies of one leader - Rodney Hide - with constant 'beat ups' over issues that are really not so significant. One is inclined to think that the media does this because it wants to protect its dominance over political discourse. A minor party is probably going to reform a media which gives it no standing.

What can we make of Dr Don Brash's move to unseat the leader of the ACT Party in the 11th hour - just 6 months out from an election. Is it possible this was a last minute effort for a National Party member (tied to the government) to discredit the party? Perhaps not, but it will serve Brash anyway by giving him extra profile. Consider the strategic benefits:

1. Brash attempts to become leader of ACT - in effect making it part of the National Party

2. Brash cannot win leadership contest - in the process implying that ACT is essentially the same as National's, but at the same time discrediting or casting dispersions upon the Hide leadership.

It is interesting that the National Party likes to retain Rodney Hide as a coalition partner. I think it has two possible reasons for doing so. Having him in the coalition gives him greater standing in ACT, but ACT less popularity in the electorate as Hide is not liked. It appears to be a strategic move to keep the ACT Party a minority party. This seems to have been confirmed by PM Key, when he said he would not support ACT if Hide was not its leader. He has since changed his mind; perhaps because outsiders might understand their party strategy.

Brash is not a stranger to strategising either. He has signalled that Auckland former mayor John Banks will stand for election in the seat of Epsom if he is appointed leader of the party. This is perceived as laughable by those outside. It is a good strategy. I suspect Hide might fold if he knows that Banks could end up running in his seat. Why? Better to be deputy leader of a more popular party than have no electorate at all. The reality is that Brash would likely win a few seats for ACT, and it might even win over some defectors from the National Party. This is improbable because Key is popular....but bankbenchers in the National Party who already have a lifetime pension might decide that its better to be a player in a small party with the balance of power than playing no role in a major party. This could therefore be interesting times for NZ.

Reading about Dr Don Brash in Wikipedia, one has to conclude that he is not a very good leadership prospect. He was a bureaucrat, who supported economic rationalism of the old, and talks in simple measures about social policy. He is the type of person who fits in the ACT Party - but then he seems like another Rodney Hide. Maybe he should be 'metaphorically' sleeping with Rodney Hide (secretly) rather than unseating him. There must be a cartoon here. Perhaps one with Brash and Hide in the same Queen-size bed, with each wanting to sleep on the right side.

Certainly the ACT Party should be looking for a new leader. Should it bother anyone that Brash has no history with the ACT Party; that he is launching a leadership challenge without being a member? No, its of no significance, though it might be hard for the membership to trust him if he has no existing relationship. The reality is that he might give the party credibility. The problem of course is that he will bring the same old politics to a struggling party. You might expect some competition, but it will just be the same dog fight under democracy. Should we expect something different from such leadership? No. Its more of the same.

I personally would support Brash in the short term...if only for the sake that I might be wrong. But I'd hope that the party would in the future be open to a better prospect. But would the ACT Party know one if they saw one? I doubt it.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Offshore oil development blessing for NZ

2011-04-21T01:45:00.000-07:00

The protest against offshore drilling does not “highlight the dangers of oil spills”, it represents complete ignorance of oil exploration and discovery, with no consideration of the benefits. Firstly, oil is an indispensible ‘global commodity’. If there is to be exploration, the best place for it is in the remotest part of the world, such as north-west of NZ. Suggests that fracking chemicals present a toxic threat is absurd given the volumes involved. Of course such campaigning is compelling news for those whose contempt for mankind extends back to biblical times.

Notwithstanding the (still uncertain) consequences of the Gulf of Mexico spill, the solution is a better legal framework, not misinformation intended to extort political appeasement under the existing system. In this respect, the protesters will be part of the problem, and will have no impact upon government policy.

I presume the protesters will ride bikes to Castlecliff Beach and plant trees to achieve offsetting carbon abatement credits for the senseless burning of trees on the beach. Most oil spills result from tanker transportation, whether collisions or groundings during storms. The worst spill was caused by the Iraqis in the Gulf War. Well blow-outs are a relatively rare event, and any comparison between development in the Gulf of Mexico (I estimate 50,000 drill holes) compared to around 300 all over NZ is stark. We would be so lucky to have a ‘gusher’. Perhaps they ought to lobby car manufacturers for more fuel-efficient engines. Why don’t they finance engine technology enthusiasts? The potential wealth flowing from a NZ oil discovery would actually allow the government to finance more tangible conservative values.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Some of the better NZ bands

2011-04-18T22:47:00.000-07:00

An Aussie living in NZ can struggle for music. Among my favourite NZ bands and I am an oldie (80s child) are:

1. Straitjacket Fits - 'She Speeds' - I think the NZ version is 'Sheep Speed' or 'Sheep & pe'. I think they would be classed as a one hit wonder.

2. The Chills - a more successful NZ band - see 'Pink Frost', 'Heavenly Pop Hit' and my favourites 'Dan Destiny & The Silver Dawn' and 'Brave Words', 'Creep'

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Discount airlines flying to New Zealand

2011-04-11T13:33:00.000-07:00

There are a number of discount airlines servicing New Zealand. I just found a new one - so I thought I would provide a list of the discount airlines now that I am aware of:

1. China Southern Airlines - See their website. They fly to Sydney, Brisbane, and soon to Auckland (NZ). Looking at their website, its a shocker. A sign that Chinese companies just have no idea about customer service. They are expensive too, but more importantly, it would be a nightmare to compare prices. I'd hate to think about the actual flight expensive. I am having flashbacks of a Garuda flight years ago...when they lost my luggage for 4 days. I went to a conference in Goa (India) in my Bali shorts.

2. Air Asia X Airlines - See website. They are based in Kuala Lumpur, so this will most likely be your transit point. The positive aspects about KL is that its a pretty attractive city, far cheaper than Singapore, just as beautiful, without being as clinical, or broadly as authoritarian...just tight on the social values, so you probably shouldn't feel your GF's legs at the dinner table. They fly to Gold Coast, Perth, Sydney I think, as well as Christchurch (NZ).

4. Jetstar - Jetstar is a Qantas subsidiary, so they fly out of all Australian cities, as well as Auckland and Christchurch. They probably represent the best value, but the service is often dodgy. I've had many issues. i.e. Like telling my family they can't fly through Sydney when they knew we could. They refused to listen until the nth hour. Yes, that's you Page in Christchurch. Problem with Australian immigration as well. They didn't know the rules.

5. Pacific Blue - see website. They fly out of most Australian cities to NZ, Asia, etc. I always find them more pricey than Jetstar. Recently they curtailed their flights inside of NZ, so they have a more limited offering now.

Air NZ is of course a more expensive service provider, and they come highly regarded. Frankly I tend to risk it on Jetstar. The flights are cheap, the planes are great, so I suffer the risk and impertinence of poorly trained staff and web sites with 9-page contracts, and a Filipino call centre which functions inefficiently.

In fact, Jetstar in an alliance with Australian Immigration are causing a lot of international travellers transitting in Australia a lot of grief. They are a real heartbreaker because people fly through Australia, and certain travellers from certain countries are not aware that their country is not covered by a certain convention. Rather than place them on a flight which would allow them to transfer in Australia, they are obliged to wait until the NZ airport immigration counter opens to get a temporary visa to stay within the confines of Australia's airports for less than 8 hours. How accommodating is my government? Fascist idiots to be sure! That rule pertains to people with checked in baggage. Don't ask me why. We were wrongly affected by this rule. On another trip we saw other people affected. It is government ruining people's lives. Some of these people don't have the money to stay in a hotel until the airline can rebook them because immigration officers work normal hours. :(

Its a problem for NZ too because its the Australian government ruining the lives of people in NZ, so the problem reflects on NZ. And guess what - Jetstar makes money from the process. These people have to rebook their flights, and Jetstar charges them a rebooking fee. They might even have to get a more expensive flight. We were different - we actually complied with the rule - its just that the Australian Immigration officer who responds to Jetstar inquiries at 6AM did not know the rules. Jetstar - not helpful - despite my partner's knowledge of the facts. We went on the website to prove it to them. Fortunately for us we had laptops. We saw this happen again. That is too frequent.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

NZ kids given false hopes for peace and security

2011-04-04T20:50:00.000-07:00

Here is an interesting story. I just wanted to apologise to the members of the United Nations General Assembly who were given the illusion of empowerment recently. They were coaxed into thinking superficially that they had some importance, that arguments mattered, and they had some influence. Most of all I wanted to apologise to them for the despicable education offered. They probably learned that democracy offered real participation; that capitalism is evil for polluting the environment; that Libya will be a better place if it was a democracy; that it’s a choice of democracy or authoritarianism. They also seem to be under the illusion they are going into space. Let me reassure them that their feet will never be allowed to leave the ground because escalating statism will sooner take them into the Dark Ages. More planes will crash, and we have yet to reach bottom before we ever achieve such feats. Your idiotic parents just don’t think. You never had a chance.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Mercedes Benz A160 for sale, Wanganui

2011-04-04T01:24:00.000-07:00

Anyone coming to NZ for a holiday looking to purchase a car. Here is an option for you. We are selling a Mercedes Benz A160. For $NZ7500 (about $A or US$5000) you can purchase a 1999 Mercedes in good condition, with 96,600kms on the odometer. The car has just completed its warranty of fitness, it has near-new tyres, has a recent oil change, and its an elegant, fuel efficient 1600cc car. It is great for travelling around NZ.

You can check out our advertisement at:

1. AA Insurance - see www.aacarfair.co.nz/Detail/Advert/728243

2. TradeMe - see www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=365307930&ed=true

My partner and I are travelling overseas, so we don't need a 2nd car in NZ. If you are interested you can reach me on my email. I can pick up anyone who wants to buy it from a local bus or train station, as I appreciate that travellers might want to look at it upon arriving in NZ. Wanganui is 6hours south of Auckland, 2hours north of Wellington, however Wanganui does have its own airport. Intercity Bus services offer the next best means of getting here for $40-60 each.

Text 0278145443 for a viewing or questions.
Email valuesourcer@gmail.com

As Advertised on Trademe

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

The cost of the next generation of NZ broadband

2011-03-22T13:13:00.000-07:00

Living in NZ is always going to be a bit of a technological 'drag'. This is a small market, and one of the poorest OECD nations. For this reason, technology is always going to be a little slow getting here. The situation is even worse for basic infrastructure like: Roads, power lines, telco fibre lines, power stations, etc. The challenge is that:

1. There is little incentive for service providers to upgrade infrastructure if their competitors are not. A small market with just a few players gives little incentive for competitive pricing.

2. There is little incentive to adopt the latest technology if there is no growth in the market. National income in NZ is based on cyclical commodity prices, so with a static population, there is little incentive for increasing capital investment unless you have some important national resource like oil & gas or iron ore. NZ has......very little.

3. There is little incentive to be competitive without a regulatory regime to ensure that result. There is a propensity to use the 'weak regulatory framework' to extort highe revenues from customers.

Businesses however have to make money, or there will be even less spending or service. The question is whether the industry is functioning efficiently, and earnings are adequate.

This article outlines the cost and pricing for the next generation of the telco network. The actual cost is uncertain because it remains to be seen whether service providers offer unlimited capacity. I suspect they will want to offer unlimited capacity where they can otherwise they will lose customers, and there will also be excessive customer churn, i.e. Excessive reconnections.

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com