Financial plan for the homeless

Share |

NZ is the arse-end of the world; neverthless within this stagnant economy there are cities which are doing relatively well, such as Hamilton, Auckland, Palmerston North, Christchurch (belatedly). But within those cities, as well as elsewhere, there are people who are struggling to make ends meet. We might well consider this to be the 'doughnut effect'.
From Hamilton, NZ comes this interesting story of a homeless man living on government job benefits but otherwise with $70K in savings. This is an interesting issue both from a personal finance perspective, as well as from a public policy perspective. In this post I want to consider 4 issues:
1. How this man is impacted by National Party policy
2. How he would be effected by Labour Party policy
3. How he would be affected by ACT Party policy
4. My public policy advice to these parties
5. My financial planning advice for this man - even though he is not asking


National Party policy impact
What I like about this guy is that he breaks the stereotype of what we have come to expect of homeless people. Anyone who has been to Japan realises how proud the Japanese homeless people are. Its as if the origin of their pride was their mistreatment by the Japanese government. Yes, another success for representative democracy. Hoorah!

The National Party is the current party and they are paying this guy $180 less $12 per week for the interest earned on his $70K savings. Firstly, the guy should be applauded for saving money, and working prior to his last decade of joblessness. It is not easy to work in a country when you are relatively unskilled, surrounded by more able-bodied persons, and amidst a labour oversupply. Its not all bad. He has a proven track record of working. 

What is shameless about the conduct of this administration, and indeed, all governments is their blatant ignorance and incompetence. Some voice should be shouting inside of them saying that "This guy is a value; not to me, but to someone. His life is not worth zero". Now you might say that the government gives him $168 per week, so they are not treating him as zero. Not right. Governments don't have money. You the taxpayer are financing this man to aimlessly drift around Hamilton in the vain hope of his getting a job. The sad issue is that he is just going to get more mentally ill, he is going to get beat up, so he will no longer be employable, or even 'useful'. Post-traumatic stress will probably ensue. So then we have a 'disability pension', with all the rights and 'obligations' upon you, the taxpayer that that entails. What is apparent is just how detached governments are for the money. If this was your money, you would have some discretion to withhold it if you did not like what the guy was doing with it. Maybe you wouldn't give it to him anyway, because 'it's not your problem'. The thing is - it is. The government is taking $168/week for this guy alone, from you & a great deal of other people. It's your problem! You don't take issue with it because you feel disempowered. It's not kindness. You're indifferent to this guy's existence; and you'd not allow yourself to consider his plight, because it's out of your control. The problem is too big! It's your problem. You have a government responsible for such things. Problem solved! 

I guess the National Party are hoping that this guy should hang on until the job market recovers. The problem is - he is 60yo - and there is going to be an excess of labour for the next 2 decades because of the liberalisation of global labour markets after collectivist (socialist) governments collapsed, and purportedly saw the error of their ways. It will take 20 years for capitalism to solve the problem caused by collectivism over centuries. It's a big backlog. So basically, the National Party is offering voters no respite. They are indifferent to this guy's happiness. It might be argued that it's his decision to stay on the street; but ultimately it's you - the taxpayer - who will pay when he gets beaten up. So there will be a hospital bill and invalid pension. The good news for indifferent taxpayers is that this guy will immobilised, and will probably die early of diabetes. Unless there is more costly intervention.

So, to you this guy is not looking good at a $168/week investment. He's what you might call a drag on the economy. He is right to feel like he deserves his money. He's playing by the rules, he's paid taxes, and so he has a sense of entitlement. Interestingly, in Australia, he could not get a jobless allowance if he had more than $10,000 in the bank or investments. But is that the issue? I know because I claimed for a time between jobs when I was young. It pissed me off too because, like him, I argued, why can't I get the 'dole' when I pay taxes. There are people with $500,000 houses who can get it because they manage to have less than $10,000 in cash. The implication for NZ is that welfare is a form of income insurance, whereas in Australia, it functions more as a form of nominal insolvency insurance. i.e. You get it if you lose your capacity to service costs of living. If you have cash, you can still service your costs. 

My interest here however is not the equity or inequity of welfare, but the waste. This guy could be doing something useful. He is not worth anything in this economy....and that ought not sit with people so well. He could function as a child carer's assistant, a trainee, carer for elderly, cleaning the streets. There are any number of things he could be doing, even if they entailed no sense of efficacy. What a waste when there are things needing consideration. Instead the government says, take the day off....just fill in these forms to say you are looking for a job, you have no chance in hell of getting for the next 2 decades - when he will be 80yo. By the way, I see no reason why he cannot be working until he is 90yo. Old people regret giving up meaningful activity.  

I'd not be surprised to see National take the Australian approach in future. This would in a way be worse because it would give him greater financial apprehension because he's dwindling away his savings, and he might be more frugal with it, to the point of diminishing his diet, resulting in the decline of his health. It would incentivise him to find work if he was capable of competing; but realistically he is not. He has not worked in a decade. 

Labour Party policy impact

Now, looking at the NZ Labour Party. They have always advocated minimum wages. That will only make him less employable...even if he had a running chance. At 60yo, he doesn't in the contemporary labour over-supply. In fact higher minimum wages will add to the unemployment queues. I suspect Labour would increase benefits to people like him, but really no substantive change, to this guy's life, since he is saving for the future. 

ACT Party policy impact

Now, one might expect the ACT Party to be the 'economic rationalists'. I would expect however their position to have the most beneficial impact on joblessness, which would ensure a great many youths would get a job, i.e. they would lower/scrap minimum wage, they would cut regulation. The problem I have with ACT, is that whilst they hold the upper leg, they fail to consider: 

1. The impact of market distortion - stripping away some distortions creates other distortions

2. The legacy of market distortion - stripping away distortions creates other distortions

My policy suggestion

The value of this guy is not zero. The value of the taxpayer is not negative $168 per week. These people are important, if only to themselves. These people have hopes and aspirations. These people have real grievances; and most of them arise systematically, and as some horrid legacy of government intervention, often stretching back 100s of years. It will not be cured overnight, it will probably take a generation....but we are not solving the problem. These people are useful. You cannot rely on the market to solve the problem if you distort the market; if you market says they are worth 'zero' or 'negative' value, when by any objective standard, we know there are valuable things which they could be doing, but don't because centralised governments can't get around to organising solutions. Why is John Key so busy? Well, he's focused on changing the term of parliament. You have got to be joking? The problem is not his job term; the problem is the decision-making process which means he is ineffectual for the first and last years; not to mention the fact that it's an unaccountable, majoritive, extortion-based system. What does his priorities tell you? It's all vanity. He wants the job because it serves his vanity. He cannot honestly say he is doing a good job, so he blames the system (which is bad), but he has no solution. 

'
Now, I have a resolution for this problem, but it's another topic. I am concerned with this guy. The 'unemployable' worker who is useful. Offer people 'conditional support'. You can't help them get jobs in the current market if the market values them at zero, so:

1. Create opportunities for them to work 'staying alive', i.e. Growing food to live. NZ is currently importing foods from abroad, supermarkets are adopting huge mark-ups for these vegetables, and so people can grow here for own stake, or for sale, and live on the proceeds. 

2. People with sufficient resources like this guy can do it themselves. They have the time if they are spared the burden of 'useless job searching'. They will never get a job in market economy that is distorted. Pay them to produce food, i.e. If they have $70K plus, they can self-sponsor. If they don't, have a government sponsored scheme using contractors who tender for these programs. These people might need basic services upfront; but they will act if they are able because its meaningful work. People coming out of prison could go straight into these programs. Once taught some of these people could use their savings to build their own 'food production' scheme.

The world is currently reliant on foreign food increasingly because of low-cost emerging market labour. What is not appreciated is that, when in 20-30 years time, those country's surplus labour is fully absorbed by global markets, then their labour rates will match ours, and food production will make more sense locally. These are valuable skills we are loosing. These people could be the foundation for a budding industry; but more importantly - they are useful! And their utility to themselves and others is being wasted.

Want to rebuild NZ? Start with people left behind. Reduce the cost of looking after them; then you'd be surprised at how well the economy can run without useless government programs, without useless govt regulation. You'd be surprised how many problems like mental illness, joblessness will disappear!

My financial planning advice for this homeless guy

This guy has $70K of cash and a benefit. My advice to him is to buy a house in a depopulating place like Wanganui. The nice thing about this solution is that you have an asset, a place to retain possessions (which if you are poor, might include things other people don't want). The bad news is that you have an expense - your rates. Given the waste of money on rates, you should question the value of government. Most of you clearly don't. $1800 per year in NZ; I pay just $300 per annum in Japan for a 18-year old house. This guy could be eating salmon & rice bento box in Japan at Hokka Hokka Tai for Y420 ($NZ5.50). Back to expensive, over-serviced NZ. I would suggest he pays $65K for a house - yes they exist. If he contracted with a tenant, he might be able to secure one ahead of time. Here is how I would do it. Probably settlement takes time, so whilst being on the street for 3 months, I would try to meet someone in a similar position. It might be easier in Auckland city. I would say to them: "Look mate...we could be dead on the streets if we stay here. I have money saved for a house. If you pay me $60/week, I can give you a home, or $80 with minimal services, leaving his friend with $100/week for other costs. That gets him and a friend off the street, gives them spare money, and if gives them land to grow vegetables. The house might not appreciate, but it gives him more cashflow than the bank. Now he is discouraged from doing that because the government will say he has rental income, so his benefit will be reduced. For this reason, he will probably not declare that income, and will instead receive cash.

Perhaps the government could save money by offering financial advice because according to this guy's plan, he is living on the streets to get cash, placing his life/health in jeopardy, and his prospects for an early death from diabetes are enhanced. Good job gov!

Asian property markets outperforming Japan Foreclosed Guide Philippines Property Guide
Profit from mining with Global Mining Investing eBook

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

John Key The Moderate - what does it mean?

Share |

John Key clearly considers himself a moderate. What does that mean?

Prime Minister John Key addressed the issue of the Waitangi Treaty at his annual Waitangi Day address, as is customary. Just as customary is to say nothing substantive, and to engage in rhetoric which contributes nothing to the issue. Now, the prospects of a settlement of Waitangi issues, some settlement of grievances, is considered extreme by Key. He sees himself in the ‘moderate’ of course, and anyone seeking resolution as ‘extreme’. After all, John Key is hardly moving the debate towards anything. I’m an Aussie…I have nothing to gain from this issue. Do I want to see Maori recognised as ‘first occupants’ and worthy of sovereignty? No, that ship has sailed. Perhaps its easier for Key to dismiss the issue if he can erect a ‘straw argument’ like that and dismiss all people who feel a sense of dismay at where the Waitangi settlement is ‘not’ going.
Key speaks of ‘public goodwill’ as if that is a meaningful conception in the context. Either a resolution achieves one of two things:
1. It achieves the interpreted objectives of the Waitangi Treaty
2. It achieves something better
I would argue that the framework and values of the Waitangi Treaty are illegitimate and irrelevant; not because the treaty was not signed by most of the tribes, nor by the British Crown, but because its values are not fixing with justice. This is an opportunity to achieve something more than the treaty sought. At the time of the Treaty, the British people were subjugated to the collective notion of ‘empire’, and that concept ought to be equally as abhorrent to Pakehe as Maori.
Key is making the same old tired claims of old, hoping that the issue will die. It will die by this method; but is that a desirable outcome. Key would sooner quash the aspirations of people, rather than contend with them.

‘People are not reasonable’ he might argue; or that ‘you will never please everyone’. 

But I see no great effort by any government since the Treaty was raised to address the issues. Instead, governments are only too pleased to outsource the task to the courts.
He talks of participation but offers no avenue for achieving it. No government does. It is a common attribute of all representative democracies to malign minorities. For his government that is an easier task than most considering:
1. He confronts a useless opposition
2. He need only offer token concessions to vote as a ‘extortion bloc’
3. He faces no Senate
4. The two major parties developed a Bill of Rights to create the illusion of protection; despite it making little meaningful difference to the nation’s people. Ask yourself – did it make a difference to your life? Did it address issues raised by the Treaty of Waitangi? No, it was not designed to solve problems. It was framed to avoid them. This was actually the original motive of the Treaty of Waitangi in the first place. The British government wanted to avoid conflict. It used the idea of a treaty to invoke a sense of purpose and goodwill with Maori. The Maori simply assumed it existed by matter of intent. They did not know that an unsigned document is useless. Of course, given that the British drafted it, it carries some significance….at least it terms of terms of reference.
John Key asserted that “the Treaty settlements process had given iwi the resources needed to run their own affairs, create jobs and care for their people”.
Really; was the treaty just about money and subsidised jobs? Well, it might well be about that for people who see no other motivation in life but to provide for family and do something constructive. But why can’t it be about more than that? Why can’t it be about things not even raised by the original agreement? For instance:
1. Why can’t it be about the inappropriateness of tribal leaders committing their people to a contract, regardless of whether it was in their interests or not
2. Why can’t it be about the illegitimacy of a contract with a party who does not have the legal efficacy to appreciate the merits of the contract
3. Why can’t it be a question of whether the state has the capacity to impose its will on anyone

All these value judgements are assumed. None of these moral imperatives have been proven. They are accepted because they serve the status quo, and keep people working towards goals subscribed by others. So what does that mean:
1. Working for the government – retaining only a minority stake in one’s efforts
2. Losing choices – because any other ‘non-conformist’ route is punished by lack of tax concessions, damaging your credit ranking, diminishing your right to travel to foreign countries, being denied access to certain services.

John Keys says “settlements largely relied on public good will and acknowledgement that the grievances were genuine”.

Unfortunately they are not so important to be a matter of priority after 140 years.
He argues that the “actions of "permanently aggrieved" protestors, including those at Waitangi, would endanger the public consensus there was over the issue of settling legitimate grievances”.
What a farcically meaningless comment to make. The entire purpose of a parliament is to countenance points of conflict. No, sorry, modern democracy or at least ‘conservatism’ entails avoiding those morally questionable issues that you cannot resolve. It therefore has to be about concrete, self-event things like money. Well, they are not self-evident, but both sides of government seem able to handle those. You might wonder how without conceptual frame of reference. But in their case, it’s all about extortion or ‘political pull’, and their capacity to make it happen.

“Public good will should not be taken for granted. It needs to be treated with respect. It is short-sighted and counter-productive of activists to use tactics and language which have the effect of eroding public support for initiatives aimed at turning around the very situation that the activists are complaining about”.

If you think about it…that is actually a nice, drawn-out way of saying, as Hitler did:

“You are nothing, your nation is everything”.

Hitler had no time to waste on fluff. The modern political party lives on fluff. Whilst they fluff around, they must be making money. Why would you want to preside over government without making money? Where is the sense of pride in being ineffectual? There must be something in it…certainly no self-respect. These issues have been kicking around for 140 years. We are about to have a court case – waste of money – as Maori question whether they have a legal claim to the water in the Mighty River Corporation privatisation. It’s a joke. Is it extreme to raise that as an issue. Well, the Supreme Court did not seem to dismiss the issue out of hand. If one wants to examine the track record of John Key, the National Party, Labour Party or indeed the entire parliament, ask yourself what effort their government took to seek peace in countries taking protection of rights…and yet in the name of liberty or democracy, they are entering Iraq. It must surely be about money/oil? Why nothing about:
1. East Timor
2. PNG
3. Solomon Islands
4. Fiji
5. Muslims of Mindanao
6. Australian aborigines

Even in this last case, long considered ‘extremists’, the Moros of Mindanao in the Philippines are finally getting some justice. No thanks to Western adherents to high standards of conduct. This is despite NZ having very little trade with the Philippines.
I’m no ‘wet-nosed’ liberal. I just think governments ought to be motivated by something more than rhetoric to keep their jobs, to lock in some mindless state of subservient harmony. I think Western governments are transfixed on Japan as a model of how to achieve a ‘compliant society’. In Japan, people don’t question government. The two major parties do as they please. Celebrities tie themselves to governments, and in the end they are seduced by it.

“Turning around the current waste of human potential would do more for Maori and for New Zealand than probably any other single change”.

This is undoubtedly the case; but first John Key has to identify the nature of the ‘waste’…why the human potential of Maori has been diminished. I can identify several reasons:
1. Catch-up: Maoris started behind – they were handicapped from a time going back 130 years.
2. Legacy: They were left with an entrenched legacy of ‘Maoridom’ which rested on the premise that they were disempowered, marginalised victims, that any rhetoric of justice was not real; it was just for show. They were not given or confronted with the values which made Pakehe successful and Maori unsuccessful. Those issues were avoided because they feel compelled to leave in place the notion of a collective Maori identity, which has greatly diminished the lives of all indigenous persons around the world. It was about ‘achieving compliance’ in the short term. The implication however has meant 140 years of unresolved contention. This government, like the others, will not resolve it.

“He spoke approvingly of a United Maori Mission boarding hostel for 50 boys within the Auckland Grammar zone, saying it gave those boys a chance for a good education”.

This is not a basis for prosperity among Maori; its an elitist argument which says:
1. These Pakehe wannabes are your custodians because they are educated and think like us ‘white folk’
2. These people are successful because they are very smart, and probably wealthier, and from a good family, so there is no reason you can’t succeed like them.

“It is one of the reasons why we have a positive and forward-looking relationship between iwi and Crown. I have no doubt that we New Zealanders are better off because of it”.

No John, you don’t have a relationship with Maori. You have a relationship with the only people your governments sanction to represent Maori. You decided by forming a coalition with the Maori Party that these people are worthy of being in a coalition. You went out of your way to strike that deal, as king maker, because it suits your agenda. Most Maori don’t subscribe to your distorted world view because you have popularised these people. No doubt your ‘Auckland Grammar boarders’ will be targeted by your party as you attempt to brand your party as the part for the people. You are only so long as you dumb people down and remain dumbfounded by execution paralysis.

Quotes from NZ Herald, 6th Feb 2013.

Asian property markets outperforming Japan Foreclosed Guide Philippines Property Guide
Profit from mining with Global Mining Investing eBook

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

NZ: Compensation for wrongful conviction

Share |

New Zealand, like every Western democracy, is paying a very high price for its system of justice. Consider this very expensive case of compensation for David Bain, the man determined to have been wrongfully convicted for the murder of family members. The government established a committee to investigate and determine a fair compensatory package for the 'innocent man'. Behind the scenes, the Minister for Justice, Judith Collins, is said to have done her own assessment and ruled out the report by an independent judicial officer.
This case strikes me as the silliness of our system. Not that David does not deserve justice, but because we all do. Justice, both in terms of an effective and efficient system, but also one which does not result in a burden upon us all for very little value. Tax payer funds wasted.
The problem here is that an 'independent commission' was never the way the system should have determined fair value for a wrongful conviction; and the capacity of a minister to rule-out such an independent value, should not have been a counter-option. The problem is that the system is a framework for extortion, replete with 'mandates' or the government's prerogative. Judith's efforts are not wrong. Our system should be 'adversarial' in the sense of entertaining options or opinions. The problem is that its extortionate in the sense that Judith has effectively imposed her will, and the system gives her that power. I don't blame her; but I blame politicians collectively for positing as custodians of a system they do not know how to fix. They thus become the problem. You and I are powerless to 'fix' them to fix the system. This is not a system open to political or any other pertinent discourse. We cannot look for answers within this system. This is an extortion system which imposes arguments. There is no reconciliation; there is no acountability; given that a disinterested, disempowered, alienated electorate is trumped by politically polarised, reactive group of legislators scared of 'boo'.

Asian property markets outperforming Japan Foreclosed Guide Philippines Property Guide
Profit from mining with Global Mining Investing eBook

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

Discounted NZ flights to attract tourists

Share |

NZ is fighting a losing battle on most fronts for the simple reason that - its isolated. It is a difficult place to fly to. I dare say a lot of people wanting to come here get on various websites for the airlines and simply give up after realising how difficult it is to fly there, and the cost of direct flights. Invariably people will end up simply going to a closer location, or Australia, since they invariably have to transfer in Australia for NZ anyway. This is a shame because NZ has a lot to offer tourists. In fact, its capacity to offer a greater cultural experience is being undermined by the lack of economic activity that tourism could surely improve. Which makes one ponder the question - is there more the government and industry could be doing?

I ask whether NZ should be aiding travel to the country. Why can't it be as easy as flying to Australia? What does this require? Surely it requires:
1. More flights - more destinations, more timetable flexibility, so that people can actually get here at reasonable times.
2. Cheaper flights - using some type of coupon scheme. The tourist organisations need to find a way to make it targeted.
3. More airlines - the reverse seems to be the case. The cheapest flights to NZ were with Air Brunei (to Auckland) and Air Asia (to Christchurch). Both companies were forced to abandon these routes.

If we recognise the economic boon that tourists are for NZ; might it actually make sense for the NZ government to actually 'subsidise' tourists to stay in NZ, recognising that they are going to be contributing far more. What type of scheme is the question? There are several impediments:
1. Lack of jobs for tourists to stay longer - Clearly cheaper tickets would allow more tourists to come, allow more student tourists to work in the country, and contribute in a way the old retiree immigrant is not doing, i.e. by spending money. Already I see NZ is the first nation to allow Filipinos to work in the country...if they have $6000 to get here. Fair hurdle. But they are not going to get jobs as easily as Chinese, Japanese or Korean speakers since Filipinos English-speaking skills are not useful.
2. Lower cost education - The existing model is to ask foreigners to pay more to study in NZ (or Australia) than the local population. This can only curtail the spending that these students do when they get here. Why you might ask, in an age of discrimination-free politics, are foreign students paying more. I fully expect more Asians to go to the Philippines to learn English in future to avoid this rip-off.
3. High cost flights - It is a hard sell to offer discounted flights. It might particularly make sense for packaged tours where the value of 'domestic spending' per travel is 3x more than the nominal flight cost to offer a significant concession to these people. Old people travelling abroad are accustomed to spending large amounts for their unique experiences.

The challenge of course for the tourist industry is how to share any such burden. Perhaps the incentive might be for travellers to Australia to be offered a $300 hotel coupon to come to NZ. Perhaps not. But this is the type of scheme that might deliver greater economic spending at a time when NZ is educating kids, only to see them leave the country. Admittedly Asian kids are replacing them; but I forecast that in coming years, the flow will go the other way, as people realise that Asia is the place to be. For instance, consider the statistics:
1. Philippines - Population growth of 2% per annum; rise in incomes 8-12% per annum, rate of urbanisation 8% per annum.
2. New Zealand - Population growth - zero, rise in incomes - only among skilled workers, who invariably take more overseas holidays rather than spend it in NZ. Rate of urbanisation is also relatively high because of the lack of opportunity in rural communities...which largely reflects the fact that land is tied up in the hands of 'old money' who live on speculative gains rather than creating value. i.e. They sell their land to retired foreigners and city executives as 'premium lifestyle blocks' to finance their overseas jaunts. A false economy because they never really 'earned' the money.

Of course no one really cares about this if your economy is growing strongly. Which brings us back to the issue of why the Philippines and other emerging markets are increasingly 'relevant' and NZ strategically set adrift, as elites in power fail to see the forest through the trees.

Asian property markets outperforming Japan Foreclosed Guide Philippines Property Guide
Profit from mining with Global Mining Investing eBook

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

NZ is a difficult and expensive travel destination

Share |

I am a frequent traveller from Asia to NZ, and the following NZ Herald article only universalises the problem for NZ - that it is an expensive place to travel. Whether you are flying there or leaving, its expensive for several reasons:
1. You have to rely on one of the expensive - non-discounting airlines to get there
2. Your alternative is to fly to Sydney, Gold Coast, Melbourne, or other ports before flying on to NZ. The Australian route at least gives you more points of entry - that is Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch or Queenstown.
3. The problem is that the choice of airports is offset by the poor travel times; so its hard to get a good connection. I often find it almost impossible to make good connections to get to or leave NZ. I invariably am left coming into the country at midnight, when there are no buses, having to stay an extra night for accommodation, and of course having to commute all the way to Auckland on slow public transport because domestic transport is so expensive.

This obstacle of course would readily be resolved if:
1. NZ migration laws were on-par with Australia
2. NZ biosecurity was beefed up
3. NZ did not have such a social welfare nightmare

Solve these problems and the dropping of barriers would see cheaper flights and greater inter-regional connections. i.e. You could well expect flights from Newcastle (NSW) to Rotorua (North Is NZ), or Melbourne to Napier (top of South Is NZ). This would of course be lovely for all concerned. Frankly, I think these developments are about 10 years off. This is how long it will take NZ to discover oil, and end its parlous state of economic irrelevance as 'Hobbitston' fame.

Aside from the need to change connections in Eastern Australia to get a good fare to Australia, the same is true flying from Asia. One is invariably forced to fly one of the Asian low-cost airlines to Sydney or the Gold Coast, before transferring to a Jetstar flight to Auckland or Christchurch. You have to pay more with Virgin Blue or Air NZ to fly to Wellington or Queenstown. I was forced to fly from Manila to Kuala Lumpur by Cebu Pacific, and then get a flight from KL to Sydney via Singapore, before transferring to a flight to Auckland with Jetstar. The poor service of Tiger Airlines (we could not reach its call centre after numerous attempts, its offices were non existent in Manila airport) and their website did not allow changes. Our problem was their misleading website - it suggests +15kg - leaving the passenger wondering if they are getting 15kg or 15kg + some nominal amount of luggage. Very annoying. Tiger is of course famous for poor service, which is why this airline is being absorbed by its sister company (under the Singapore Airlines brand) Scoot. Scoot is being well-marketed and is a very sensible operation. I have flown with them twice, and they are even better than Jetstar in service. This is their promotional stage, so that might change in 2013.

So it is clear in the Asian sector that the two main offerings are:
1. Scoot operating out of Singapore - see www.flyscoot.com
2. Jetstar operating out of Auckland, Singapore, Melbourne, Sydney, Perth - see www.jetstar.com

Clearly Jetstar has the stronger choice of destinations. Its service has been sloppy in some areas; however I suspect Scoot will give it reason to change its flight packaging. The discount airlines have really been very inflexible on their travel terms. i.e. For a cost of service charge of $3 for a flight change, they are extorting $50, or even causing travellers to forfeit discount tickets or buy new tickets on the day at premium prices. These tactics are shameful, and mirror the action of the banks in the past. It gets even worse, when in our case, the airline has unilaterally decided that there is no capacity to change a code share flight; or that you cannot change your luggage allowance...which is idiotic and frustrating when the revision arose because of their poor website disclosure. Tiger Airlines does not actually tell you on their website what your carry on baggage allowance is.

Asian property markets outperforming Japan Foreclosed Guide Philippines Property Guide
Profit from mining with Global Mining Investing eBook

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

Had a Hobbit-full of Air NZ?

Share |

NZ is going all-out with its tourist dollar - here is another successful promotion - this time from Air NZ. This one has a 'Hobbit' scheme. At the point of writing, this video had 9.5 million hits on YouTube. Even if NZ'ers account for a third of these hits, that's still a lot of promotion abroad. Nice one! I hope however they will not fall for the mistake of giving their country a single dimension. NZ is a long way to go for a 'diamond' with just a few 'facets'.


NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

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

Well done NZ!

Share |

This is probably going to sound a little patronising coming from Australian. Not to worry - its fully intended. 

I meant to write this a few months ago; but I was awaiting the result of a final undertaking in NZ, the sale of my car, and I never got around to it.

During Sept 2012 I travelled from Queenstown to Auckland in 10 days. The purpose of the trip was to move some possessions and to sell the car. During this trip, I would have to say that I met some lovely, generous people. 

Arriving in Queenstown..ok there was a little bit of suspicion when I arrived with just a small backpack. Clearly they thought I was running some drugs. Nope; just moving house. Anyway, on to Christchurch where my car was in storage. The people at A1 Storage were very generous. They helped me kickstart the car after 3 months of non-use; and they gave me flexible access until I confirmed by WOF, which had already expired. Fortunately, I only needed a new tire, and the guy who did that was wonderful as well, because he found me a prospective buyer for my car as well. No money? Fine, generous spirits all round.

I received great service from a motel in Christchurch; though fortunately I could rely on my Filipino partner in the Philippines to make the booking for me because the entire city is booked out due to the 'earthquake rebuild'. This period is a goldmine for motel owners. They were unsurprisingly generous with their service too. Perhaps that is the great news about hardships like earthquakes insofar as the turnaround is destined to be a great confidence builder...with all that spending. 

It was a rush up to Picton, and a ferry ride across to Wellington. During this part of the trip I was looking for some car repair work to cut out some rust and repaint. I found a guy in Palmerston North, and stayed in a local motel. Before I could fix the car I went to my NZ base of Wanganui. I absolutely love this town. It has a prison and some delinquent people, but there are some wonderful people there as well, and the town has a wonderful feel, and some lovely parks. Perhaps not as impressive as Taranaki, 2hours up the road, but special to me. Returning to Palmerston, these guys really worked hard to finish my car in time. It was a big ask, and I was pleased they were able to stick to their commitment. I had to board a flight on Saturday afternoon to Sydney, and I still needed to sell the car. They allowed me to drive up to Auckland to offer my car at auction. 

My original intent was to sell my car at auction with Turners. Unfortunately, I was not satisfied with the service I got from Turners in Purnell, Auckland. The service was far fairer and generous in Palmerston North, where they even drove me to the bus stop, and allowed me to set the reserve price at auction. In Auckland, I was told that there was an oversupply of cars, so they can only give me a very low price. I knew my van was worth $4500-6500 to an end-user, but clearly I was in a hurry to buy. They would not allow me to place my own price like before, so I rejected their $2500. An auto mechanic team up the road gave me $3000, and generously allowed me to sell through them. I decided to just give them any upside, since they did me a great favour, so I accepted their $3000 cash. I also just wanted to leave NZ freely; and also I worry with very generous people if its all a ploy to take advantage of your trust. I trusted him because of the positive sentiments of his staff, and because he was a business owner. It was a little hard though to trust as I felt vulnerable leaving the country. Fortunately, I was not disappointed. 

Thank you NZ. There are some tragic sentiments in the country; but I only saw the best of you on this trip. Rest assured, you will be akin to Arab oil sheikhs when the country discovers more oil & gas in coming years. Very beautiful country...lovely place to drive. 

NZ Property Guide Philippine Real Estate Guide Japan Foreclosed Guide

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