miket12
ποΈ
Has Crusher moved on from boyracers to speed cameras?
Politics π³οΈ NZ Politics
- Thread starter wizard of Tauranga
- Start date
Wind and solar have to be firmed by something and fast peaker gas plants are an energy companies dream. Fast start up and spin down and is the price setter when wind and solar fall over, leading to massive price (aka profit spikes)
Hereβs South Australia spiking to the price cap ($20,000/MWh) for 2.5rs last month.
juju
π₯
Sorry, been letting it slip. Grandad.Absolutely. How could I be anything else.
Juju must be away?
Apparently not. WCC minutes in 2021 show that there were options presented under the 10 year plan to spend several million on upgrading water infrastructure or bike lanes.
Tabatha Paul nominated bike lanes and the vote was carried
Minutes are archived
And to add, companies like Veolia, ABB etc are generally operations and maintenance organisations. Capital expenditure is still the responsibility of the owner, in this case WCC
Last edited:
Missed you, was getting concerned you were ok
The math on registrations is right, but the conclusion is missing one important piece of context: Maori seats can be contested by any party.
Theyβre not βleft seatsβ built into the system. If a partyβs policies donβt attract mΔori votes, thatβs a party policy choice.
Itβs also worth understanding the MMP system, which was brought in to better balance representation.
Electorate seats are direct representation and are treated as untouchable; list MP proportionality is adjusted around them, not through them.
Because MMP correctly prioritises electorate seats, you can get whatβs called an overhang.
An overhang happens when a party wins electorate seats but doesnβt reach the party vote threshold.
The system doesnβt remove electorate MPs, because they were directly elected. Instead, Parliament becomes slightly larger.
This has happened 4 times since MMP started in 1996, and in 3 of those cases the overhang seats supported the Govt that formed.
Twice they supported a National led Govt (2008 and 2011), and once they supported a Labour led Govt (2005).
The other time was 2023, and the party sits in opposition. So if weβre being nitpicky, the seat discrepancy so far has actually benefited the βrightβ more than the βleftβ.
Last edited:
Noitall
π€
Concerned you were ok or concerned you werenβt ok?
Yeah, isn't English wonderful lol. Grammatically should have been you weren't ok
Silence from the taxpayer's union on this disaster
www.stuff.co.nz
Stuff: Latest breaking news | New Zealand
www.stuff.co.nz
Silence from the anti tax brigade on this new tax that will send electricity bills even higher to pay for fossil fuel regression
www.stuff.co.nz
Stuff: Latest breaking news | New Zealand
www.stuff.co.nz
Rizzah as always has replied very articulately, but could you elaborate on how you think election results are always biased towards the left?
I don't come to that conclusion from what you've written Mike, there's at least one giant assumption in there.
miket12
ποΈ
Oh dearβ¦. I wonder where the $14 billion plus for Labourβs proposed Lake Onslow battery was going to from. Surely, not from Tax Payers.Silence from the anti tax brigade on this new tax that will send electricity bills even higher to pay for fossil fuel regression
View attachment 15715
Stuff: Latest breaking news | New Zealand
I wonder what would happen if the power generators instead paid a lower dividend to share holders? Or used money for planned new generation development to pay it. Of course, the money could only come from the tax payer.
Hilarious
One is a renewable energy source, the other is a regression back to the stone age. No guessing which the righties on here love.
Sure. Not sure who Tabatha Paul is, but Tamatha Paul was a councillor during that time.
You mean a democratic decision by the Wellington Council? Not the person nominating it, a council decision?
If only three waters had passed eh?
And you mention operations - that's a great call, let's look at that.
Yep, the problem has been exacerbated by decades of nimby (not in my budget year) I'm-a-boomer-so-let's-defer-the-cost inaction on all sides.
And then there's Veolia, a privatise profit and socialise cost rapacious vampire corporation.
Pretty lame to try and attribute it to a democratic council decision that doesn't consume oil or coal.
How Wellingtonβs sewage crisis exposed years of dysfunction
The Moa Point wastewater plant failure has reignited criticism over under-investment β and raised serious questions about the company that runs it.
thespinoff.co.nz
Here's an intelligent comment from a different article too
Government spending doesnβt come from taxes.
Operationally, when the NZ Govt spends, Treasury instructs the RBNZ to credit settlement accounts at commercial banks.
New money is created at the point of spending.
Taxes withdraw money from the economy after the spending.
Bonds (βGovt debtβ) manage the liquidity in the banking reserves system that spending creates. This is part of monetary policy.
Critically, neither taxes nor bonds fund spending.
The sequencing is explicit in RBNZ documentation.
Orthodox fiscal framing gets this sequencing wrong, which is why the debate keeps getting stuck on βwho paysβ instead of βwhatβs possibleβ.
The Govt issues the currency. It can always meet obligations denominated in NZD.
The constraint isnβt tax revenue, gentailer dividends, or shareholder payouts.
Itβs real resources: engineers, materials, project management capability, grid integration, and delivery capacity.
So the $14 billion Lake Onslow question isnβt βwhere does the money come from?β Itβs whether itβs a good project and whether NZ has, or is willing to build, the capacity to deliver it without creating bottlenecks.
It's a resource and capability question, not a taxpayer one.
Shit, I apologise. I didn't realise us Boomers were responsible for Wellingtons Sewage woes. I honestly meant to pay my rates when i was there.Sure. Not sure who Tabatha Paul is, but Tamatha Paul was a councillor during that time.
You mean a democratic decision by the Wellington Council? Not the person nominating it, a council decision?
If only three waters had passed eh?
And you mention operations - that's a great call, let's look at that.
Yep, the problem has been exacerbated by decades of nimby (not in my budget year) I'm-a-boomer-so-let's-defer-the-cost inaction on all sides.
And then there's Veolia, a privatise profit and socialise cost rapacious vampire corporation.
Pretty lame to try and attribute it to a democratic council decision that doesn't consume oil or coal.
How Wellingtonβs sewage crisis exposed years of dysfunction
The Moa Point wastewater plant failure has reignited criticism over under-investment β and raised serious questions about the company that runs it.thespinoff.co.nz
View attachment 15723
Here's an intelligent comment from a different article too
View attachment 15724
Perhaps a closer look at the council make up over the last 20 years might explain a lot. Not too many Boomers on there but seems to be a rather Green tinge. Slightly less now that the Mayor of the Year has shot the gap.
And I agree with the add in post above that the debacle is not the total result of a decision made in 2021 but tbf it was a decision not to spend a serious amount of coin on water infrastructure which if passed may have minimised the issues they face at the moment. 5 Years is a reasonable amount of time to carry out a project of the nature proposed. And more importantly, the money was available
Wellington has never had a lack of money problem, just a where it gets spent problem and in this case more on vanity projects than infrastructure.
But and it's a big, Wellingtonians deserve everything they voted for. ( I thought you were an Aucklander? What's with the Welly Love?)
When the WCC voted for cycleways but not for sewage protection
When Wellington Mayor Andrew Little announced he would raise the cityβs βcatastrophicβ sewage failure with the Prime Minister, he struck the solemn tone of a man confronting an unforeseeable ...
wellington.scoop.co.nz
I guess the CBA will answer the questions.
IIR, that's what killed it back in the early 2000's. Bardsley is a smart guy though
wizard of Tauranga
π
- Thread starter
- #22,479
Pretty damning article. Ironic the most basket case council in the country is the most far left and Green council long criticised for making ideological lefty decisions.Shit, I apologise. I didn't realise us Boomers were responsible for Wellingtons Sewage woes. I honestly meant to pay my rates when i was there.
Perhaps a closer look at the council make up over the last 20 years might explain a lot. Not too many Boomers on there but seems to be a rather Green tinge. Slightly less now that the Mayor of the Year has shot the gap.
And I agree with the add in post above that the debacle is not the total result of a decision made in 2021 but tbf it was a decision not to spend a serious amount of coin on water infrastructure which if passed may have minimised the issues they face at the moment. 5 Years is a reasonable amount of time to carry out a project of the nature proposed. And more importantly, the money was available
Wellington has never had a lack of money problem, just a where it gets spent problem and in this case more on vanity projects than infrastructure.
But and it's a big, Wellingtonians deserve everything they voted for. ( I thought you were an Aucklander? What's with the Welly Love?)
When the WCC voted for cycleways but not for sewage protection
When Wellington Mayor Andrew Little announced he would raise the cityβs βcatastrophicβ sewage failure with the Prime Minister, he struck the solemn tone of a man confronting an unforeseeable ...
This isnβt a govt/ 3 waters issue. This isnβt privatisation. This is poor decisions and priorities from a far left council/ group of decision makers piled up over many years.
Ironic those boring old conservative βdoing the basics rightβ councils end up with the better environmental outcomes.
miket12
ποΈ
Really..... I don't know how many times I've stated on here that solar and batteries are the way to go until fusion reactors are commercially available.Hilarious
One is a renewable energy source, the other is a regression back to the stone age. No guessing which the righties on here love.
The problem with hydro batteries is that they are parasitic in that 20-30% of the power they produce is used to power the system/pumps to put the water back into the higher reservoir (I.e. pumping water uphill). And that's before you even start to think of the environmental caused by water that heats up in a closed system and social damage.
At a cost saving of $12 billion between the two projects, I'd personally rather is the money spent on hospitals, schools, social welfare.... i.e. where it's actually needed.
Consider this... the Lake Onslow project would take 10 years to build. And, in those 10 years, NZ would have been reliant on coal generation from Huntly to back up the power generation... at over 1,000 gCO2e/kWh while burning LPG only provides 500 gCO2e/kWh.... in other words, the proposed plant could run for over 20 years before it would emit more CO2 than your so-called "green" option.
Last edited:
