He makes a better case for it than any of the politicians I've heard though
Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics
- Thread starter wizard of Tauranga
- Start date
NZWarriors.com
- Thread starter
- #11,062
Experienced this myself and it’s painful!
On the RMA, what do overseas countries do Mike? Surely they have a better more efficient system while still protecting the environment?
On the regulation spend, it’s an investment. The more spent the more you get 100x the payback in savings for the economy.
IMO, it's not that the RMA is bad, it's just parts of it aren't fit for purpose anymore. There are some parts that need to be relaxed such as consent processing but other parts, especially environmental, which need to be strengthened.
My fear is that the current government will get the first part right but remove to many safeguards for the second part.
NZWarriors.com
- Thread starter
- #11,064
Yes. We talk of left and right but they are just a product of our mindset.
Fundamentally I think the ‘right’ are more about personal responsibility, self direction and individualism. The ‘left’ are more communally and group minded. Many are in between.
When I was younger I was more inexperienced and reliant on others and I was more in touch with the left parties.
As I’ve got older and experienced I’m more drawn to control from within the individual as that is how I live now.
- Thread starter
- #11,065
We have build childcare centres where we know exactly what will be allowed and what all the conditions will be.
The process of getting a third party council to come to the same conclusion is diabolical, costly and excessively long and unpredictable time wise.
I believe the RMA adds no value on 95% of projects. Wouldn’t a prescriptive system achieve exactly the same outcome in most cases if you straight up front knew the environmental parameters you needed to abide by?
Here's something totally out of left field to consider.... at the moment, landlords are able to claim back income related expenses (rates, repairs and maintenance, insurance [don't mention interest]) but they can't claim back capital expenses such as new heat pumps, additions or providing double glazing.
At the moment, repairs and maintenance to solar systems are income related expenses but providing a new solar system isn't. Not getting into discussions about whether or not solar systems lead to higher electrical prices for others, I'd like to see the government allow the provision of a new solar system to be counted as an income related expense to provide an incentive to landlords to install them... in just the same way they did with insulation. Cap what can be claimed back to a certain amount for say the occupancy of the dwelling. Allow for a certain amount of storage capacity for each unit again based on occupancy.... if the landlord goes over that, he can't claim the excess back of his tax.
That would then provide energy cost savings to the renters while also increasing some of the renewable resources to the country.
At the moment, repairs and maintenance to solar systems are income related expenses but providing a new solar system isn't. Not getting into discussions about whether or not solar systems lead to higher electrical prices for others, I'd like to see the government allow the provision of a new solar system to be counted as an income related expense to provide an incentive to landlords to install them... in just the same way they did with insulation. Cap what can be claimed back to a certain amount for say the occupancy of the dwelling. Allow for a certain amount of storage capacity for each unit again based on occupancy.... if the landlord goes over that, he can't claim the excess back of his tax.
That would then provide energy cost savings to the renters while also increasing some of the renewable resources to the country.
NZWarriors.com
- Thread starter
- #11,068
Or the govt just provides grants like for the insulation. A grant is essentially taking your own tax and giving it back to you in a roundabout way.
But I question if there is the will to have mass household solar systems? The generators don’t even pay market rates for regeneration back fed into the system which could also help.
From a govt perspective (also owning 51% of the major generators), wouldn’t large scale mass production of power generation for everyone be superior and cheaper (per unit) than small scale individual solar?
NZWarriors.com
Quite simply, the RMA considers the impact of a development or activity on either the environment and/or other people.
In the case of childcare centres, it wouldn't be the RMA that would be so much of the issue but how town planners access the application against their District Plan (DP). And some Councils have far better DP's than others.
Case in point, Franklin and Waitakere Councils in Auckland had really strong rural sections in their DP's but their urban planning was weak. Manukau and Rodney had moderate rural sections while North Shore and Auckland had no idea. But, instead of looking at what was best in the "rural" councils areas, the planners designing the new Auckland Unitary Plan were mostly urban planners from the old ACC and they stuffed up the rural sections.... including wanting RC's for farmers to do pretty much standard farming practices throughout the rest of the country.
Same with the heavy commercial areas in South Auckland and North Shore... the planners for those areas had a far better idea of the impact of heavy industrial processes because that's where the majority of the heavy industry in the greater Auckland area is based but they didn't have the input into the AUP that they should have.
The Engineering Standards in Manukau for providing public drainage was the best, IMO, out of all the Councils but the engineers who set the Auckland Council and WaterCare standards disregarded most of the standards developed by Manukau City Council and Manukau Water.... because they thought their old ways were the best and couldn't be improved on. Fortunately, now they've adopted most of the MCC and MW standards/practices.
There was too many town planners and engineers "protecting" their old methods and reasoning without looking if other Councils may actually been doing it better.
- Thread starter
- #11,071
Pro sport is capitalist far right theory playing out in real life! Right of Act even!
No pay equity. No income equality. No 40 hour 9-5 work weeks. No cycling to work
NZWarriors.com
- Thread starter
- #11,073
Not quite.
There is no limit on wealth creation. When I earn more money it doesn’t take it from you.
You can grow the pie where a rising tide lifts all boats with everyone better off.
A static pie where your fighting over a limited share never ends well.
Would you rather half a pie with $1b dollars or a tenth of a pie worth $100b?
Pro sports and politics share one thing more than anything. TribalismPro sport is capitalist far right theory playing out in real life! Right of Act even!
No pay equity. No income equality. No 40 hour 9-5 work weeks. No cycling to work
wait till you see RTS, joseph parker and ardie savea’s property portfolios too.Pro sport is capitalist far right theory playing out in real life! Right of Act even!
No pay equity. No income equality. No 40 hour 9-5 work weeks. No cycling to work
all of them make all of us combined look like amateurs
NZWarriors.com
- Thread starter
- #11,077
Employees don’t create wealth, businesses do.
NZWarriors.com
- Thread starter
- #11,079
Businesses create wealth and employ employees to do that work.
Yes, employees HELP create the wealth.
-
Thread is read by:
