|
1st July 2010, 10:31 | #1881 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
|
1st July 2010, 10:37 | #1882 |
|
It won't be temporary though.
Once a price level has been set, it's very hard for price levels to drop away. Prices are very slippery going upwards but very sticky coming back down, the reason for this is that the market adjusts to new pricing by raising wages and other things to meet them - wages will not come back down, things like the minimum wage being such a huge percentage of our GDP for instance makes NZ a laughing stock economically. I'm talking about essentials here, food, clothing, energy. Non-essentials like technology tend to come down in price because demand drops and as you say, the cost of production drops so they can afford lower pricing structures - you'll see drops there, but those are what, 25-33% of total spend? |
1st July 2010, 10:55 | #1883 | |
|
Quote:
And there's also a real economic advantage in being able to market a 'green' product over a 'dirty' product.
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. Last edited by fixed_truth : 1st July 2010 at 10:57. |
|
1st July 2010, 11:27 | #1884 |
|
The reality is the only advantage of a green product is human conscience and stupidity, outside of that at the moment, the cost of green products on the environment are as big, if not bigger than their traditional counterparts (take the production costs and carbon footprint of a Prius in it's entire lifetime vs most V8 cars)
|
1st July 2010, 11:39 | #1885 | |
|
Quote:
How are products that absorb the same amount of carbon dioxide as they produce, or absorb more than their 'traditional counterparts' - worse for the environment?
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
|
1st July 2010, 11:53 | #1886 |
|
Something like the Prius, which has higher costs on the environment to produce, sufficiently higher than the entire lifetime (10-15 years) of the car mean it is worse for the environment isn't hard to work out.
My personal thoughts are that if people want to be environmentally sound, they need to take a hit to the lifestyle via paying more for items or having less access to things such as petrol. Until that occurs, anyone complaining about the environment makes me laugh. |
1st July 2010, 11:54 | #1887 |
|
Back to the topic at large - even Labour freaks must admit that the way National has governed is WAY better than what would have happened if Phil Goff lead his bunch of fuckwits through a term, right?
|
1st July 2010, 12:10 | #1888 |
get to da choppa
|
Correct, but I doubt Auntie would have stepped down if she had won again.
|
1st July 2010, 12:11 | #1889 | ||
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
||
1st July 2010, 12:12 | #1890 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
|
6th July 2010, 16:44 | #1891 | |
|
Quote:
As to your other question, I'm not a Labour freak but I very much doubt that they'd be doing a worse job than the current government. |
|
6th July 2010, 16:46 | #1892 | |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
Quote:
|
|
6th July 2010, 16:53 | #1893 | |
|
Quote:
It doesn't mean there's anyone there actually cleaning up the pollution.
__________________
Ξ √ Ω L U T ↑ ☼ N وكل يوم كنت تعيش في العبودية |
|
6th July 2010, 17:09 | #1894 | |
|
Quote:
That being said, the ETS we have has been watered down too much and what that amounts to is subsidising polluters, as we have been doing since the oil age began. A properly working ETS should impose the real cost of the products being sold so the market can sort out the details. |
|
6th July 2010, 19:33 | #1895 |
Mmm... Sacrilicious
|
Why are south islanders getting stung for ETS charges on their power bills?
The whole electricity market is fucked and shouldn't have to comply with ETS at this point because there's no true competition, otherwise they wouldn't be able to get away with doing the above because some other provider would just (correctly) not sting them for it and they'd get the business... |
10th July 2010, 02:03 | #1896 | |
Stunt Pants
|
In before Simon.
Quote:
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
|
10th July 2010, 02:20 | #1897 |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
Ahahahaha, under the 30% mark. That's woeful.
|
10th July 2010, 10:39 | #1898 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
|
10th July 2010, 10:53 | #1899 |
|
Winston comeback to prop up the left? heh
|
10th July 2010, 12:53 | #1900 | |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
Loved this little observation from Danyl at Dim-Post:
Quote:
|
|
10th July 2010, 13:16 | #1901 |
|
It goes to show how much Labour was really just Helen's party. The bloody woman could have at least raised up a few protégé while she was in power, so there would be some people to take the reins once she left.
Instead she leaves and the whole party turns into a bunch of whimpering morons.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook. |
10th July 2010, 13:23 | #1902 |
|
Said as much on page 3.
iirc she did give Cunliffe the nod though? or least was prepping him somewhat. Could be wrong. |
16th July 2010, 12:30 | #1903 | |
talkative lurker
|
This just in, Tony Ryall admits that the government underpays doctors.
Well... Article about doctors working as locums in Australia. Quote:
__________________
Broke my addiction! Bye bye Eve, hello Minecraft. Wait... >_< |
|
16th July 2010, 16:43 | #1904 |
|
National also want to restrict union access to workplaces. The current law means employers can't refuse unions access to their workers. Any law change will simply pander to the cunt employers who don't want unions around their workers.
It's interesting too that even with the current law the cops take the side of the employers. I've heard of many situations where unions have exercised their rights to have access to the workplace, and employers have called the cops for trespassing. The cops have then come and forcibly removed the union organizers, despite them being well within the law. It seems 'justice' likes to side with the employers regardless of what the law actually is. |
16th July 2010, 17:30 | #1905 |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
I think it's more that the police like those solutions that most instantly get people determined to have a confrontation away from each other. This might be regardless of the fact that the law may literally say that they have a right to be there and have their confrontation.
|
16th July 2010, 19:30 | #1906 |
|
There'd be no confrontation if the employers abide by the laws and just let the unions in . particularly disappointing by the police because the unions have (historically speaking) done so much for this country, including for all the (unionized) police force.
i hear some horror shit that the employers do these days (because my job entails dealing with that shit mainly). what i will say about this 90 day trial shit is it really is a shit thing to the youth. you come in your first job ever, 15 years old. after 30 days you get told not to come in anymore, no reason, no nothing. you stay home in tears and have a negative attitude about work for a long long time. in the last month i've had three separate occasions where people younger than 18 were told they no longer had a job and weren't even given a reason why. that is a complete farce. what i am not saying, however, is that employers should have NO mechanisms to get rid of shit workers. but when they are getting rid of workers who seemingly think they are doing a good job, that's not good. at least inform the workers they need to get their shit together before willy nilly firing them! |
27th July 2010, 09:54 | #1907 |
|
* A zero drink drive limit for recidivist drink drivers.
* A zero drink drive limit for drivers under 20 years of age. * Much tougher penalties for serious offences causing death and drink driving causing death. * The introduction of alcohol interlocks for repeat drink-drivers. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10661342 Liking these, apart from the under 20 years limit. If someone has a full licence and can legally purchase alcohol then I think that they should be treated the same as everyone else who has met those conditions.
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
27th July 2010, 11:10 | #1908 |
|
Yeah I was thinking that might backfire...
Yay I'm 20 and can drink and drive now! I'll figure out how much is over the limit when I get there! |
27th July 2010, 14:32 | #1909 | |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10661558
Quote:
|
|
27th July 2010, 15:05 | #1910 | |
get to da choppa
|
Quote:
|
|
27th July 2010, 15:42 | #1911 |
A mariachi ogre snorkel
|
Not just those nine years, he was in Cabinet in the Labour government before THAT one. He was in cabinet with Roger Douglas and David Lange and Geoffrey Palmer. He was part of the Labour Cabinet that approved the sale of Telecom and NZ Rail, etc etc!
|
27th July 2010, 15:50 | #1912 |
|
Yeah when you've been around as long as Goff it's hard not to contradict something you said in the 80's or the 90's or the 00's. Context means nothing to joe average.
__________________
Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong. |
27th July 2010, 18:45 | #1913 |
|
...and a real shame that its the best excuse that can be thought of for NACT to do nothing.
__________________
"Take four red capsules, in ten minutes-take two more. Help is on the way." |
28th July 2010, 10:48 | #1914 | |
get to da choppa
|
Quote:
fuxd! |
|
28th July 2010, 10:55 | #1915 |
|
Goff is such a scrotum
|
28th July 2010, 13:18 | #1916 |
|
Thank god for Goff tbh.
It means National can make some unpopular but absolutely neccessary decisions and still make it in within the next election to see the benefits of the results before Labour fuck them up. Nine years consistency with Labour and what did we get out of it? Nothing. |
29th July 2010, 16:08 | #1917 |
Nothing to See Here!
|
Oh Chris Carter, you loon!
|
29th July 2010, 19:00 | #1918 |
Stunt Pants
|
Why you posting that in this thread?
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner? |
29th July 2010, 19:24 | #1919 |
Marginal Poster
|
|
29th July 2010, 19:31 | #1920 | |
|
Quote:
|
|