- #1680661Hero42MemberMember since: July 18, 2008
Replies: 11634Hero42 May 17, 2018 at 5:00 pm
You say One billion dollars as a gift to Shane Jones so he can play the big guy is rather questionable when we still have children living in poverty.
The question one should be asking is will the spending of the $1B alleviate poverty in the regions. After all it would appear the poverty in the regions is to a large degree the result of the previous government’s policies that favoured the urban centres at the expense of the regions.
If spending money in the regions generates enterprises that employ previously unemployed people then there should be a reduction in child poverty. Surely that is better than just giving them more welfare?
Cheers 🙂#1680664mommabear70MemberMember since: February 20, 2017
Replies: 1751mommabear70 May 17, 2018 at 5:17 pm
Don021, consider rain clouds that formed from afar a month ago, shed their load on the lands, rivers, buildings and house roofs today. What sane person or persons would consider all that outpouring of nature’s life-giving liquid belongs to just a select few?
But just for arguments sake, let’s say there are some within the Halls of Power who decide that a select few do in indeed own all that outpouring of nature’s life-giving liquid. Ownership comes with responsibilities, that includes ensuring that all that you own doesn’t harm that which you don’t own.
There’s myriads of unintended consequences of decreeing that ownership.
Food for thought.#1680665arandar May 17, 2018 at 6:23 pm
Ae, which is exactly why the commons should only be used for the common good not be used for private profit.
However, if the common good has been allowed to be exploited for private profit should Māori entities, corporations, runanga, then be prevented from doing the same thing?
and yes, Shane Jones’ budget will benefit regional development which will certainly increase employment and investment opportunities, which will certainly help to raise children and their families in the regions out of poverty.
Arandar#1680673doogieMemberMember since: March 27, 2006
Replies: 6286doogie May 17, 2018 at 7:14 pm
and yes, Shane Jones’ budget will benefit regional development which will certainly increase employment and investment opportunities, which will certainly help to raise children and their families in the regions out of poverty
But first arandar, Shane has to convince industry to return to the regions to employ these people. Industry will still be confronted with the reason that caused them to leave in the first place. Money wont fix this unless he sets up government subsidised operations#1680674arandar May 17, 2018 at 7:37 pm
What are the reasons industry left the provinces, Doogie?
Lack of infrastructure?
Which came first – lack of employment opportunities, lack of employees?
Well, all that can be overcome if/when industry realises it can no longer afford to stay in overpriced metro Auckland. I mean, nurses, teachers, others can’t afford to live and work in Auckland so it stands to reason, other industries will find it more productive to move their operations back to the regions.
Shane’s $$$ could also be invested in creating job rich transport hubs, upgrading the infrastructure, growing the regional centres.
There are businesses that can only be set up in the regions Doogie.
Probably dozens more I haven’t thought of.
Arandar#1680685bsoperMemberMember since: March 29, 2013
Replies: 992bsoper May 17, 2018 at 9:30 pm
WE WERE IN HYSTERICS THIS AFTERNOON WATCHING ROBERTSON READING THE BLUDGET. HE WAS LAPPING UP THE ACCLAIMATION FROM ALL MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNMENT EXCEPT WINNIE PETERS AS NOT ONCE DID HE APPLAUD ROBERTSON. THIS APPEARED TO US THAT HE WAS NOT HAPPY WITH WHAT HE WAS HEARING. POOR WINNIE HE HAD HIS HEAD DOWN BUT WE WREN’T SURE IF HE WAS CRYING OR THINKING HE COULD HAVE DONE BETTER.
THE VOICE OF THE SOUTH.#1680686halcyonMemberMember since: May 4, 2014
Replies: 4833halcyon May 17, 2018 at 10:01 pm
Hero, my scepticism about Government funded projects in regional areas is based on nearly 40 years of observations of such schemes. They usually start off with much cheering and flag waving, but in time they seem to become bogged down and grind to a halt . The only way such schemes will survive beyond the Term in which they are created is if they develop independence and become self sustaining. From the programmes announced so far I doubt that will happen. They will need ongoing injections of taxpayer money to survive long term.
But I am always happy to be proven wrong. We will see how they fare by 2023. That will give time to evaluate whether they were sound investments or a complete waste of money.
Already disturbed, approach with caution.#1680687halcyonMemberMember since: May 4, 2014
Replies: 4833halcyon May 17, 2018 at 10:23 pm
Actually arandar, it was neither the lack of employment opportunities or the lack of employees that lead to the demise of the Provinces. It was the industrialisation of the rural sector .
When I first worked on a farm the pay was low but found was provided. (For the younger readers, found referred to the provision of food and accommodation). Single men lived on site and were provided meals with the farming family. Married staff were provided with a house, meat, a house cow, firewood, and some even got phone and power provided. Sometimes, like shearing or lambing, the hours were long. Leaving home before daybreak and not getting home till 9.pm. However, there were periods of time when we could relax and even head off to town.
With the advent of minimum wage and 40 hour week the job became just like any factory job and didn’t fit well with the work flow of the station. Therefore farmers started contracting more work out and carrying less staff. These days most shearing gangs travel home each night.
Modernisation has come and many would say not before time. But there are those who pine for the old days. Even at the end of my working career I could not adjust to the idea of working by the clock.
Already disturbed, approach with caution.#1680688doogieMemberMember since: March 27, 2006
Replies: 6286doogie May 18, 2018 at 6:45 am
The definition of a REGION to my knowledge has never be explained. What is your understand of what defines a region?#1680689arandar May 18, 2018 at 7:16 am
Really? Perhaps it’s one of those words we all use thinking we all use it in the same way?
Technically, region refers to an area of a country, often with similar characteristics, but not confined to or necessarily including a single town or city, and lacking defined boundaries or borders.
For our purposes, in NZ, We might think of the provinces as regions but exclude the largest cities within, say, leave out Auckland, Hamilton, Wellington, Christchurch and Dunedin.
Hope that helps.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.