Post RSS Feed 
Podcast Feed
Top 10 at 10: Dubai bankrupt; Russia goes loonie; Yuan devaluation?; LAQC video; Dilbert
November 26th, 2009Here are my Top 10 links from around the Internet at 10am. I welcome your additions and comments below or please email your suggestions for Friday’s Top 10 at 10 to bernard.hickey@interest.co.nz We’re fully engaged at interest.co.nz
1. Dubai bankrupt - The government of Dubai has asked its banks for a 6 month delay on its schedule of debt repayments, the New York Times reported Is this the event that will unnerve the world’s financial markets again? Dubai owes its banks US$80 billion.
The terse statement came in the midst of negotiations between creditors and Dubai World, the corporate arm of Dubai, which has led many of its most ambitious real estate projects but is now struggling under the burden of $59 billion in liabilities.
For the banks that financed the debt-fueled ascent of Dubai — analysts’ estimates put its total debt at about $80 billion — the move by Dubai to obtain a standstill highlights a truth that many in the region had been trying to make clear to bankers but that they have so far been avoiding: Namely, that Abu Dhabi, the oil-rich governing emirate of the United Arab Emirates would not unconditionally bail out its more profligate neighbor and that a genuine restructuring of Dubai’s debt, with pain being shared equally between Dubai and its bankers, would need to take place.
The news came as a shock to the markets as well as Dubai’s bankers. The bonds of Dubai World’s property developer, Nakheel, dropped sharply and the cost of insuring against a Dubai government default soared.
2. Too Big To Fail Too Big To Ignore – Even the mainstream media in the United States has now cottoned on to the idea that the ‘Too Big To Fail’ banks need to be broken up and that politicians in Washington might actually be thinking of doing something about it. We’ll see whether the lobbyists can subvert democracy again, but the momentum is definitely building. Here’s the LA Times report. HT David via IM
Angered by bailouts that have kept corporate titans such as American International Group Inc. afloat, members of a key House committee last week voted to give the government vast new power to downsize private companies, something that happens now only in the most egregious antitrust cases.
Instead of helping cushion the fall of Wall Street powerhouses through government aid or variations on traditional bankruptcy, there is growing momentum in Congress to cut those firms down to size before they start teetering to limit the damage if they do collapse.
“The era of the big bank is over,” said Simon Johnson, an MIT professor and former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund.
The dramatic idea — unthinkable before the financial crisis — carries important ramifications for the future of the economy and the ability of U.S. financial institutions to compete with giants abroad.
3. Poor Standard – Standard and Poor’s is hammered in this piece by Stephen Bartholomeuz from Business Spectator about its new analysis showing most of the world’s banks, including the Australian (our) banks, need extra capital.
Among the Australian banks – four of the relative handful of remaining banks rated AA or better by S&P – the agency placed ANZ and NAB in the third quintile of the sample of 45 major banks it assessed and Commonwealth in the fourth quintile.
The locals must have made some representations because S&P today issued a statement reaffirming their AA/stable ratings and saying that while the Australians’ RAC scores were close to or slightly higher than the global average for major banks, it considered their ratings stable and supported by very strong business and financial considerations as well as the demonstrated ability to raise capital if needed.
Pre-diversification the Australian banks’ RAC scores ranked them 22nd (ANZ), 27th (NAB) and 34th (CBA) within the 45 banks assessed. (Westpac wasn’t in the sample). That is quite clearly at odds with both their reputations as among the strongest banks in the world and, indeed, their conventional credit ratings.
Oddly, two of the US investment banks which are now technically banks (but still trading like investment banks) – Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley – were among S&P’s top-rated. ING, in the process of being broken up after being bailed out by the Dutch Government, is the third most highly-rated. There are a number of banks whose capital bases have been supported and/or rebuilt by taxpayers that have higher RAC scores than the Australians.
One thing that does stand out is that the Australian banks were penalised for their relatively low levels of geographical diversification and relatively high levels of asset concentration. In effect, they were penalised because they were predominantly exposed to the Australian economy and to Australian residential mortgages.
Had they been exposed to the US, UK, Irish and Icelandic economies, and the US and UK housing markets, no doubt they would have fared better – not necessarily in terms of their results or balance sheets but in being awarded greater diversification benefits in their RAC (Risk Adjusted Capital) scores.
4. No worries mate – The Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia, Ric Battellino, has defended Australia’s high house prices as good value for money because of Australia’s strong economy, high migration and rising incomes, the Sydney Morning Herald reported. Time to buy a one-way ticket to the lucky country? Although I wonder about Battellino’s logic. He appears to be saying that Australians spend less on health and have lower interest rates so can afford to spend much more on housing. That’s ok then…
”Census data shows at 2006 there were 8 per cent more dwellings in Australia than there were households,” Mr Battellino said. ”Presumably, most of this surplus reflects holiday houses and second houses.
”In short, a high proportion of dwelling investment is going into improving the quality of existing dwellings and building accommodation additional to primary residences.
”If as a nation we want to continue to do this, while at the same time providing enough dwellings for the growing population, the overall amount of dwelling investment undertaken will need to increase relative to GDP.”
While there was ”a common perception that house prices relative to household income in Australia are high”, the country’s population was ”more concentrated in a few large cities” than other populations and Australians had more free income with which to pay for housing.
”Australians seem to spend less of their income on non-housing consumption than is the case for US households, with a significant part of this difference explained by lower health costs in Australia,” Mr Battellino said. ”Australian households as a whole appear to have the financial capacity to sustain a relatively high ratio of housing prices to income.
”It is certainly the case that the ratio is higher now than it was 20 years ago. However, this is largely explained by the fact that lower interest rates have allowed households to take out bigger home loans without increasing housing loan repayments. In turn this has given households more buying capacity in the housing market, which has been reflected in house prices.”
5. Achtung bankfeuer - The Bundesbank has warned German banks to prepare for 90 billion euros of losses over the next year. These delayed shockwaves still pose a danger to global recovery, Ambrose Evans Pritchard at the Telegraph points out. HT Steven Jones via email.
The venerable bank said in its Stability Report that the world had narrowly averted a “virtually uncontrollable” collapse in the late summer of 2008. While the credit system has partly stabilised, the underlying problems “are still far from being overcome” and money markets are not yet functioning properly.
“It is already clear that the financial system will be severely tested going forward. Downside risks remain pre-dominant,” said the report.The danger is that a long phase of stagnation and rising job loses in the West sets off “spiralling loan losses in both industry and in the residential and commercial real estate markets. In such an unfavourable scenario, negative feedback between the real economy and the financial system could gain added momentum.”
The Bundesbank said the next wave of bank write-downs will come from loan book losses as the default rate on lower-tier companies tops 14pc in the US and 12pc in Europe. German banks alone will have to write down €50bn to €70bn of loans over the next year.Losses from sub-prime securities are mostly in the open already. Further write-down from collateralised debt obligations (CDOs) – mostly tranches of mortgage debt packaged as securities – are likely to be €10bn to €15bn.
Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the head of the International Monetary Fund, told Le Figaro on Wednesday that banks worldwide have so far admitted to just half of the US$3.5 trillion (£2.1 trillion) of likely damage.
6. New loonie tune – Russia’s central bank has announced plans to buy Canadian dollars (known as the Loonie) to diversify its holdings away from the US dollar, Reuters reported. This is just what we need. Other central banks buying our currency because its in the ‘commodity basket’ along with the Canadian dollar, the Australian dollar, the South African Rand and Brazilian Real. One of the benefits of the NZ$ being the 9th most traded currency in the world.
Russia’s central bank said on Wednesday it was preparing to invest some foreign exchange reserves in Canadian dollars to diversify its portfolio and lessen reliance on the U.S. dollar in international trade. The decision was not entirely a surprise, as a central bank official said in September that Canadian and Australian dollars could be added to reserves.
Analysts warn investors hoping for strong Canadian dollar gains on the back of central bank buying are likely to be frustrated by the Bank of Canada. Credit Suisse’s Katzive said that if reserve diversification flows send the Canadian dollar higher, the country’s central bank will be more reluctant to tighten monetary policy.
Canadian interest rates are already at a record low and the Bank of Canada has conditionally pledged to keep them there until at least the middle of next year.
Katzive said a delay in tightening would make Canada’s currency an attractive funding vehicle. Investors could borrow cheaply in Canadian dollars and sell them to buy assets denominated in more growth-sensitive currencies such as Australia’s.
7. Geithner garotted – Eliot Spitzer (remember him) has written a riveting piece in Slate.com exposing Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner as a weak liar who used gazillions of taxpayer money to help his mates on Wall St. HT Roelof.
The issue has been festering for months: Why were AIG’s counterparties—including Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and UBS—paid 100 cents on the dollar when the feds rescued the insurance giant, helping raise the cost of the bailout to nearly $200 billion? A new report issued by Special Inspector General Neil Barofsky now reveals that government officials, notably then-New York Fed President and current Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, grievously damaged the nation and capitulated to the very banks they should have been supervising.
Barofsky’s report reads like a case study in failed negotiation. The New York Fed didn’t have the backbone to stand up to Wall Street, didn’t understand its capacity to protect taxpayers, and didn’t appreciate that its responsibility was to taxpayers.
Geithner and the Fed have proffered a series of spurious reasons for their willingness to pay AIG’s counterparties—the leading Wall Street banks—in full while demanding concessions from every other entity with whom the Treasury or the Fed dealt. Geithner suggested he could not use the threat of AIG’s default in the absence of a federal bailout to get concessions from AIG’s creditors. Why not?
That is exactly what the government did with the auto industry, and rightly so. The entity providing financing to a near-bankrupt institution must always seek contributions from everyone else at risk. The fact that the Fed had a strong predisposition against letting AIG go into bankruptcy didn’t mean the Fed shouldn’t have used every opportunity to wrangle concessions from the other parties. For Geithner to say it would have been “unethical” to negotiate for concessions is sheer silliness. It is akin to saying that having decided that you are willing to pay up to $250,000 for a house, it is unethical to negotiate to buy it for $225,000.
8. Yuan devaluation? - Societe Generale’s strategist Albert Edwards has suggested something most haven’t thought of: a yuan devaluation. HT FTAlphaville. Heaven help us all.
Any synchronized end in Chinese and US recovery will undoubtedly heighten geo-political tensions and accelerate the inevitable trend towards protectionism. The trend towards competitive devaluation will also increase. And in the case of China, if its economy founders unexpectedly and unemployment soars, no lever to restore growth should be ruled out, including devaluation. With the potential for the dollar to soar, in the same way the yen did in 2008 as risk carry trades unwound, this may be all too much for a beleaguered Chinese economy.
With a Chinese trade deficit and a loss of confidence in the growth miracle, China’s reserves will in all probability be in decline. What better way of meeting the American’s call for greater flexibility than to give them what they want?The Chinese may yet respond to the new market pressures and devalue. 2010 could be a very lively year indeed
9. Credit card fees – This story in the New York Times points out some unexpected consequences of regulation in Australia to reduce credit card fees. It acutally increased the fees. Sound familiar?
When Steve Franklin bought four plane tickets on Qantas last June, he faced an unexpected expense: a surcharge of 7.70 Australian dollars on each of the 136.70 dollar ($126) tickets — just for using his Visa credit card.
Mr. Franklin, who planned to fly his parents and his 7-year-old twin daughters from Sydney to Adelaide, knew that changes to credit card rules had affected the cost of using plastic, but the extra 5.6 percent seemed excessive.
The charges were the consequence of changes in credit card rules in Australia that were aimed, in part, at reducing the cost of hidden fees for using plastic. But the law, passed six years ago, also allowed merchants to tack on new charges, and many have done just that, in some cases with fees that exceed the old ones.
10. Completely relevant and not funny video - Matthew Gilligan explains here the benefits of LAQCs. Watch it and weep (if you’re a mug PAYE salary or wage earner). Then buy a one way ticket to Australia.
Tags: Top 10 at 10
You may also like to read:
Loading ...
November 26th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Canuck dollar is a good buy.
Without doubt, the Loonie (so named because of the water-bird on the front of the coin…the 2 dollar is known as a ‘toonie’, btw) is heavily under-valued.
When the loonie hit parity with the greenback in the months leading up to the crash, the reserve bank in Ottawa viciously cut the OCR and jawboned the currency back to 97-98c.
Big country, lotsa resources, no people.
A lot in common with Russia, actually…
November 26th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
NEWS JUST IN….
” A two-day Great Storm rages throughout southern England, flooding the Thames and Severn rivers and killing at least 8000 people”
If only they’d have had an ETS like ours maybe they’d have avoided this symptom of GW?
Whad’y think?
http://news.google.co.nz/news?hl=en&source=hp&q=climate%20change%20fraud&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wn
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/23/monbiot-issues-an-unprecedented-apology/
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704888404574547730924988354.html
http://www.audacity.org/IA-22-11-09.htm
The Great Storm report is from page B5 of The Press, today, in the ‘On this day’ column.
The question really is, “If only they’d have had an ETS like ours – BEFORE 1703 – maybe they’d have avoided this symptom of GW?
November 26th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Are we being rorted by our credit card companies in NZ….anyone know???
November 26th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Jacko,
Nice one
Here’s one on Artic ice melting.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/neuralnetwriter/GlobalWarming/changing-artic_monthly_wx_review.png
from 1922
I see NIWA is under suspicion of being involved in the data manipulation.
For those in NZ it’s easy enough to check for yourself.
http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/global_warming_nz2.pdf
Click on my name
November 26th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Are we being rorted by our credit card companies in NZ….anyone know???
Wally, I’ve had a chat to my banking mates about this. I have been assured that NZ credit cards are nothing like the set-up in the US. ie. the NZ banks maintain the credit card debts on their books. They aren’t bundled together and sold off like the US.
As for the LAQCula set, Bernard; if Shakespeare wrote that we should kill all the lawyers, what fate awaits the accountants? Here’s hoping Xero nails them dead.
November 26th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
check out this and digest it:
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/global-warming-exposed-un-funding-fraud
November 26th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Steve Netwriter – I clicked on your site. Which shoulder is it on?
November 26th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
I went along to a Westpac chrissy thing yesterday to hear Brendon O’donovan speak. He was pretty positive overall. Acknowledging he could well be wrong, but that there was a lot of good news out there for New Zealanders as we were food producers and the world still needed food and plenty of it. In the midst of this he mentioned oil in three or four years time was likely to be nearer $200 a barrel rather than $60. Later a question was asked, and keep in mind this was the rural portfolio of westpac, so the question went ” So how would $200 oil affect nz agriculture?”
The answer was along the lines of, nz produces a bit of oil, buy a prius, something will come along to take oils place, walk to the dairy, take public transport.
I am still gobsmacked. Not one of those responses was worth my time listening. I am still wondering what was behind all the optimism in the speech. Because the little bit about oil kinda took the shine off. I got the feeling he didnt really know what to say. And telling a room full of farmers to walk to the dairy or take public transport was just mind boggling.
November 26th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Farmer Will.
Correct…Exactly what these confidence tricksters are doing to home buyers and taxpayers alike, never mind Farmers in NZ.
I can see a Combine Harvester being pushed to the crop and around a field.
I can see a Stock Truck being pulled with oxen….etc …etc.
I can see the wrong future, with these idiots in charge.
Lucky we produce our own food…maybe not be able to ship all that butter and milk powder.
Wakey Wakey.
November 26th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
NZ should take the opportunity of afforded by all the climate change shenanigans to plan for the risk of much higher oil prices – a lot of climate change changes also make sense in terms of peak oil concerns. Money should be spent on rail and port infrastructure, energy conservation and electricity generation. In addition we should (not so climate change friendly) encourage oil & gas exploration.
Oil at US$200 would clearly be a disaster for NZ Ag (although a higher NZD and commodity prices might compensate somewhat).
More generally world trade would start to breakdown. At oil US$200 per barrel the ability to dig stuff up in Australia ship it to China make junk and then ship it to small town america and have customers drive to the store to buy it breaks down.
November 26th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Farmer Will – start raising Clydesdales.
November 26th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Will de Cleene, thanks for the note…I am aware of a change in the law that alters the current situation whereby shops do not charge for the use of a card…that they may now start doing so????
November 26th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Farmer Will – “gobsmacked” … yep:
http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/09/24/exchange-rate-reduces-price-volatility-for-nz-commodity-exporters-westpac-says/
Having been away from agricultural engineering for a while I’m struggling a bit with my next sentence, but it sounds like, bulls, tits and as much good as on a. Or something like that?
November 26th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Wally, The day a shop or business starts charging me for using my credit card is the day they lose my business. Instead they should sort it out before hand with the greedy banks. As an aside, does anybody else think that this Key led National party would take the record for losing the most support in the 1st year in power.Every where I go I hear people saying they will not be voting for them again. I for one voted for National but after what has happened I think they have a bad stench about them. They promised so much and have delivered nothing but the ETS tax rort ,racial division, MPs housing rip offs, MPs travel rorts, Harawira spreading hatred etc and all the while the Smiling Assassin says”I am comfy with that”.I feel very disillusioned at this time with what is happening to the country I love.
November 26th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Bernard: this may qualify for your ‘throw-away #10′ slot, because you just know that when IowaHawk goes after an issue, it’s done, stick a fork in it.
So here’s his take on ClimateGate…..
November 26th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Why are high oil prices bad for NZ? The agriculture systems of most developed countries are far more oil dependant than we are so we ought to become more competitive with higher oil prices.
November 26th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
We must all keep asking – who is the person speaking representing, who is paying their wages and think hard about why they say what they say.
For example when a bank sales rep (much more accurate description than bank economist) says “exchange volatility will always be with that is why we push hedges” and another says “commodity prices tend to ameliorate exchange fluctuations” – think who wins whatever happens and then know why they talk such utter tripe.
Tits on a bull – right.
November 26th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
Bobby,
Your sure aren’t alone with that feeling! Certainly National aren’t going to get my vote again next time, and neither is Labour for having ramped up the govnt spending so badly in the last decade! It will be interesting what the options will be in a bit more than a year…
November 26th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
‘Take me out back of the woodshed and whup me silly’, ctnz, because the Maori Party is looking better every day. At least they try do do something, and appear to have some sort of moral backbone.
November 26th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
Marky – I agree except for the oil and gas thing.
Bear with me – if the object is to leave the place (planet or country) as a ‘going concern’ for next next generation, and the next, and the next, then the math beats you very quickly when relying on burning stored solar energy (which is what they are).
Best to give it the heave now – while we’re still ‘lubed’, to direct solar, so we’re set up permanently.
At a kilowatt to the square metre, it’s not un-do-able, and it just rendered ‘transmission’ to ‘equalisation’ (quick, sell the copper, Wally, the secret’s out).
Jenny Morel (not a stupid lady) mentioned this in a Nat Radio interview earlier in the year – she’s onto it. But when it came to the evening’s ‘edited highlights’, that bit had been edited out. Somewhere in Nat Radio there is an undropped cranial penny…….
The whole thing about the ‘climate debate’, is that it is not the debate we should be having. To leave the place as a going concern forever, you have to leave the chemistry as you found it. So the carbon is an unacceptable problem, and it’s extraction is a socially unacceptable action.
You therefore have to sddress it – whether the planet got warmer since ‘98 or not. Only small minds lock onto small pictures….,
An ETS won’t get there. Cap and trade might – if the ‘cap’ was handled with social responsibility, but there’s diddly-squat chance of that. The ETS founders in that the only possible reason for having one, is that it might reduce the atmospheric (and oceanic) carbon). This won’t do that, it’s just designed prima facie to soak wealth upward.
It’s open-ended, and therefore a rort.
November 26th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
CTNZ says: Certainly National aren’t going to get my vote again next time, and neither is Labour for having ramped up the government spending so badly in the last decade!
Just a small point of order CTNZ. Labour inherited around 38 -42% debt to GDP in 99 (from memory) and got it down to 17% and gave it back to National at around 20-21% of GDP.
So Government debt was well and truly within bounds as a percentage of GDP! What they do deserve a smack for is allowing National debt (The sum of all foriegn borrowing including the “decreasing” Government Debt) to rise to 100% of GDP.
If you wanted to give them a second smack it’s for allowing the property bubble to distort the economy from productive to bank fueled asset inflation. I suspect they will admit to these two now but who knows.
November 26th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
The Labour chief cul-pricks are long gone to bet-ter things. Wouldn’t give them the time of day, never mind a ‘jobs for the boys’ role to play with more of the Worlds and NZ’s money.
Bet we lose again. Almost as certain as losing on Lotto.
Must be like giving an alcoholic a liquor store to miss-manage and expecting the till and stock to tally after Xmas.
Talking of who pays the tally men after Xmas. Who pays the key money too.
November 26th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Just for WALLY.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/industry-sectors/garlic-price-soars-as-chinas-top-performing-asset/story-e6frg95o-1225804001035
They used to grow abit of this down your way , didn’t they ?
November 26th, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Sorry, powerdownkiwi, oil isn’t only ’stored solar’. It’s immense heat and presssure acting on carbon, and that heat ain’t solar – it’s left over from planet formation heat. The Russians have known about abiotic hydrocarbons since the 30’s, and find it in unusual places (unusual if you subscribe to conventional wisdom) which may assist in explaining why they are the gas’n'oil giants who have Europe over a barrel….
November 26th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
What’s wrong powerdownkiwi?
Cognitive dissonance?
If you wish to persuade others of your views, I suggest you take a more considers approach. As I said, I agree with a lot of what you say, but you will lose your audience if you don’t filter the good evidence from the bad.
You are now the denier I’m afraid. The evidence is there.
(I dislike the word denier, but in your case, you deserve it).
November 26th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
Don’t they know you have to eat your garlic with lamb for it to be any good at preventing the flu…
November 26th, 2009 at 5:22 pm
Boby says, “They promised so much and have delivered nothing but the ETS tax rort ,racial division, MPs housing rip offs, MPs travel rorts, Harawira spreading hatred etc and all the while the Smiling Assassin says “I am comfy with that”. I feel very disillusioned at this time with what is happening to the country I love”
Add the removal of adult education to save $10 Million dollars while spending 3 times that funding private schools. ACC levy’s up as a beginning of selling off ACC to foreign insurance companies, borrowing $250 million a week to sustain the unsustainable, while planning to sell of our SOE’s.
Oh did I add that they won’t capitalize Kiwi Bank for market share growth, have halved Kiwi saver while allowing tax deductibility of losses against PAYE for property speculators. Opps almost missed the R&D tax credit removal while we allow polluters to pollute on the government purse. Let’s not even go to the lack of support of the export sector.
All election winning stuff I would have thought. Why did we do the ETS under urgency?
November 26th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
The Emissions Trading is another quick money-making scheme which is going to be hijacked by the likes of Goldman Sachs, etc to indulge in speculation and trading.
John Key being an ex-forex trader knows how this scheme world-wide can give good opportunity for the speculative traders to make more money and more bonuses. New Zealand should not be rushing into this.
The whole concept of some businesses paying to pollute is reprehensible. No reduction in emissions will happen that way.
November 26th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
Selwyn. ETS
My comments exactly the day they rushed through this Act as if was an expenses claim.
Under urgency, or under emergency, cos someone has no brains or a different Agenda.
WHY?.
Also why no “Public” discussion, with all the ramifications for us all, never mind the “few”.
November 26th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
SL…the answer re the haste was that if the law was not in place by early 2010, the country would cop a bill of a few hundred million…That’s what I heard some fool say in Parliament anyway.
November 26th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Where is the contract to PAY. I did not know we were a party to the agreement, only an agreement to PARTY.
ETS….it stands for Extortion, Theft, Simplified.
November 26th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Don’t ask me…ask the fool…some git from Nelson
November 26th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
“‘Take me out back of the woodshed and whup me silly’, ctnz, because the Maori Party is looking better every day. At least they try do do something, and appear to have some sort of moral backbone.”
Yep, if they lost Hone…
Sharples strikes me as a good bloke to have in charge.
Wally – who was going to bill us? how do they enforce it? Maybe we could send Hone to have a chat with them?
November 26th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
Selwyn,
“All election winning stuff I would have thought. Why did we do the ETS under urgency?”
Because the fraud that’s called Global Warming (or climate change, take your pick) is now being exposed and will eventually filter through to ordinary un-interested kiwis, so get it through NOW! Never mind being a sovereign nation…
Reading some of today’s links makes me sick and want to get up and march to stop at least this ETS madness.
Plus, Labour just shifted the debt from one end to the other and blew it up bigger… but basically, you are right.
November 26th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
ctnz, we are being conned in so many, many ways. It’s no joke, no spin, just look around this website. Dismal. As for MSM, where the ‘kin hell are they? Good on BH and all for being the trusty town rag they are. I’d rather pay these boys, than the tossers who do charge for the incomplete, biased, untruthful reporting we see in our MSM.
November 26th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
If you guys are upset about the ETS try looking at the draft Copenhagen Treaty.
It will make wonder you whose leading who up the garden path.
November 26th, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Jacko,
I’ve been following the spread. That’s helped by me being able to see the referrals to my website.
There are so many people talking about this. And it’s going onto all the social networking sites, youtube, facebook etc.
And the questions about the MSM lack of proper reporting is also spreading.
I’ve just read/posted a (can’t put it down once you start) account of the FOIA request emails. One of the best accounts I’ve read as it’s written by someone involved.
But then yesterday I hear Radio NZ report “the hottest year…” rubbish. Sheesh.
November 26th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
Steve : NIWA & co. are correctly claiming global warming over the last 50 years . Conveniently omitting the fact that over the last 100 and 150 year periods…..there has been no warming . None . NIWA are selecting the little bits that suit their argument , and schtum on the rest . Jim Salinger got sacked for more reasons than meet the eye . You are a bloody disgrace , NIWA . And who funds you bozos ? ( there is also the little matter of altering – ” re-adjusting ” records to accord with international standards . Funnily enough , all of those ” adjustments ” skewer the figures TOWARD the global warming agenda………Funny that ! )
November 26th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Steve Netwriter- not quite sure what you mean. There are a lot of climate scientists, and I’ve met a few myself. BS artists they are not. Concerned human beings they are. Genuine they are. Explain it they can.
I find it interesting that I am apparently a ‘denier’ suddenly because somebody hacked some emails, neither party being me!
Methinks you’re a little hasty with your categorisation.
I will indeed look through them, and also through any rebuttal, filter both by (consider the source) and then relate that to the understanding I’ve gleaned over decades.
Meantime, I take it you agree that:
*The atmosphere is about as thick on the earth, as a coat of varnish is on a soccer-ball.
* We are increasing exponentially, the volume of stuff we are putting into that atmosphere. (I take it you don’t challenge the ppm counts)
* Given the volumes and the numbers, we are now in ‘we hold the future in our hands’ territory.
* If this debate is any guide, we are a doomed species. Anytime something comes up which can annihilate us, we have just proved we will equivocate until the window is well closed.
I would find it hard to imagine that the ‘human forcing’ overlays that I’ve studied at lectures, magically don’t fit.
Basically though, I’m a physics/energy person, with a philosophical interest that has widened to include exponential maths, bioligical adaption, and the sad history of human cognitive dissonance. Or is that denial. …..
I’m probably where Monbiot is, about now. I feel sad when any folk from any grouping don’t play entirely straight. That goes for that staged pre-election cup of coffee’, and if those emailers are found wanting, it will go for them too.
The sad truth, regardless, is that we can’t continue to increased the of forcings on the planet, without inducing the collapse of our own species relatively soon. That’s not statistically surprising – 99.999% of all species which have inhabited the planet aren’t around anymore. What saddens me is that we were the first to have a shot at thinking ahead, and forestalling our demise. Perhaps it needs a few more permutations.
I’ll continue doing my homework, indeed I never stop –
See you in the exams
November 26th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
@marky mark: Oil at $200 bad? 1/2 that….personally I wonder if it will ever get to that….ie by that stage we would be so impoverished from our collapsed economy caused by oil at $100~$150 that it wouldnt matter what the price was up to…
regards
November 26th, 2009 at 9:31 pm
You were right all along Bernard. Keep up the good work.
November 26th, 2009 at 9:39 pm
@waymad: abiotic oil is pretty much discredited, ive yet to see any real geologist agree with it being a possibility.
You are also mostly/significantly wrong on the pressure and temp thing being in oil, its really acting on oil. oil simply carbon and hydrogen bonded. These are chemicals, heat can be given out when a bond breaks (it can also be removed/absorbed), yes, but mostly its the combustion process where carbon and hydorgen combining with oxygen give the energy.
regards
November 26th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
Chris_J
Fabulous. We’ve finally won you over
cheers
Bernard
November 26th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
@Powerdownkiwi: Interesting indeed that species dont really survive in the long term…I wonder what say a few million years from now we be walking on the surface of this world…I’d love to see it…
November 26th, 2009 at 10:56 pm
powerdownkiwi,
That’s a better answer
To answer your questions:
Meantime, I take it you agree that:
*The atmosphere is about as thick on the earth, as a coat of varnish is on a soccer-ball. – YES
* We are increasing exponentially, the volume of stuff we are putting into that atmosphere. (I take it you don’t challenge the ppm counts) – YES
* Given the volumes and the numbers, we are now in ‘we hold the future in our hands’ territory. – A conditional yes. In terms of resources used/needed, yes. In terms of CO2, I see no credible evidence.
* If this debate is any guide, we are a doomed species. Anytime something comes up which can annihilate us, we have just proved we will equivocate until the window is well closed.
You may be right on that. But in this case I think the controversy is caused because one side of the ‘debate’ started claiming that the issue was settled, while the other side disagreed. That was compounded by the lack of transparency.
And then one side started name calling with “skeptic” and “denier”.
I think if the science had been good science, ie open, reproducible etc, with both sides evenly represented in the media etc, then most people would have seen a fair process, and would have been more willing to accept the scientific conclusions.
I lay the blame squarely at those in the centre of the current revelations, because they have been doing bad science.
Of course people will resist things which mean rising taxes, or a lower standard of living. That’s human nature.
Please do check all the emails and data files.
Let me offer you this one, which is the best I’ve seen so far re the FOIA emails:
Willis vs. The CRU: A History of (FOI) Evasion
http://omniclimate.wordpress.com/2009/11/24/willis-vs-the-cru-a-history-of-foi-evasion/
I also suggest you read through the Harry txt file, You can see exactly the quality of the data/process the reports rely upon.
As I said before, I think we agree on most things. I am yet to discus this with anyone on your side of the debate who can see my side. I remain hopeful.
November 26th, 2009 at 11:04 pm
Roger Thompson,
I’ve just done a post on NIWA.
There you go, the exact post:
http://neuralnetwriter.cylo42.com/node/2421?page=2#comment-2127
I’m trying to find time to get all the raw data myself and check it.
I suspect that examining one weather station, such as the Hotitika one in great detail will reveal whether or not the NIWA reports are reasonable. I’d prefer to check it for myself and know there is no bias in the analysis.
Steve
November 26th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
Very funny Bernard, sorry to disappoint but there seems to have been an impostor at 9.31pm – your not writing yourself self-congratulatory comments again are you?
It seems this post is full of humour – #7 Elliot Spitzer calling Geithner a liar – like a man who enjoys hookers has got any credibility.
Good luck, trying to win me over to the dark side, Bernard.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:43 am
Interesting video , Steve . Thanks . And while we’re focused on Kyoto / Copenhagen , and a myriad other bogus green endeavours , the real shit is flowing down the Manawatu River , and the Heathcote . Why the heck aren’t the Greens living up to their name , and drum beating over real issues here , in our local community , that need remedial action . Town and farm effluent discharges into water-ways / out-fall pipes in the ocean , these ought to be addressed immediately . Bugger Kyoto & Copenhagen ” protocols “. Stuff the ETS , how does that fix things here in NZ !
November 27th, 2009 at 9:58 am
Geez , Bernard : A good investigative journalist ought to have spotted ” Chris-J ” ( 9:31 p.m. ) as a fake . The snippy little terrier knawing on your ankle is still there , big guy !
November 27th, 2009 at 10:01 am
But was it ‘the real’ Bernard responding?!
November 27th, 2009 at 10:10 am
Yass , it was me , I reply good to my fiend Chris-j , having happy time . No war more for us . maybe a hotel room for too . Yass ?
November 27th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Wow ! Case proven . Hope you two will be happy . Cheers , chaps .
November 27th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Bernard
You have never answered my question as to why the government ’spending’ thousands of dollars of tax revenue on providing a house to rent at market rates (via housing NZ) is a ‘good’ thing and yet a citizen doing the same thing (via an LAQC) is a ‘bad’ thing
Do you have a dose of the ‘Helen Clarks’? ie that dogmatic view that only the government can be trusted to act in the best interest of NZers.
I also wonder at what point your parrot like repetion of “leave the county to make good ’cause its so awful here” will be matched by hordes returning because “we’re coming back because it wasn’t as good as Hickey said”?
Neven
November 27th, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Neven911
Glad to have you back.
I’m no fan of government spending money on housing. But right now it is doing it two ways. Firstly through its own spending, and secondly by subsidising landlords. I don’t think there should be a subsidy for either. Let the market get on with it.
I’m not saying people should leave the country. I’m saying people who want to stay in the country should point out to those running the country that unless something changes then those people (Generation Y especially) will leave and not come back.
I’m going for a holiday at Christmas to Melbourne to see my two brothers and their 5 children (my nephews and nieces) who have been living there for almost 10 years. I always ask them if they would like to come back.
They always say they would like to but the wages are too low and the house prices are too high.
Get my drift?
cheers
Bernard
November 27th, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Chris J
Bugger. I thought I had won you over.
Oh well.
I’ll keep trying.
cheers
Bernard
November 27th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Steve Netwriter – that looked pretty inconsequential to me???????
Just some folk burning off a pre-disposed pest/obfuscator – I do it myself if it’s clearly going to waste time.
This would be the equivalent:
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/09/14/correspondence-with-ian-plimer/
Me, I go with watching the ice. I’ve been to Lonnie Thompson’s lectures, and one by Ellen Moseley-Thompson, and a couple recently on the antarctic glaciers.
I suspect we’ll end up differing, but there is an important point to the difference: I f you are right, there is no harm done to the planet, or more importantly, my kids. If I am right, my kids don’t have a chance (probably already), and your actions will only make that worse.
That puts them on the wrong side – russian roulette with two barrels.
So far, I haven’t see enough from your ’side’, to convince me to pull the trigger.
Meantime – to seewhere I rank it, here’s a little op/ed I did a while back:
http://www.odt.co.nz/opinion/opinion/72347/biggest-crisis-facing-planet-numbers
November 27th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Bernard
I never left , I’m in Ahmedabad right now (for a week), which gives you perspective on wages! I think you also need consider that we the citizens of NZ have to take responsibility for the current structures that hold NZ back
So in that respect keep stirring
Neven
December 19th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
The Center for Media Research has released a study by Vertical Response that shows just where many of these ‘Main Street’ players are going with their online dollars. The big winners: e-mail and social media. With only 3.8% of small business folks NOT planning on using e-mail marketing and with social media carrying the perception of being free (which they so rudely discover it is far from free) this should make some in the banner and search crowd a little wary.
onlineuniversalwork