Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Don't we know? Mickey knows best!

Can't we just shut up and accept the wisdom of Michael Cullen?
Treasury has obviously had another one of its 'ideological burps' in supporting the Canadian bid to buy 40% of Auckland International Airport.
So what if Treasury reported the sale would 'breach international agreements, scare foreign investors and damage the economy.'
What do those experts in Treasury know that our history professor does not about the world economy? We cannot have grubby foreigners buying our 'strategic assets' unless they are Chinese wanting to buy our Vector power company and we Kiwis must still be able to buy foreign airports like Infratil owns in Prestwick, Scotland.
We must listen to Dear Michael, who has such a fine record of economic management, that has given kiwis burgeoning wealth and prosperity, and left government finances in such a sound, fiscally prudent state, with much better public services all round :)

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Cullen was not a history professor. He was a history tutor.

Clunking Fist said...

And soon he will be merely history.

Psycho Milt said...

As will we all. Seems likely that Cullen will be better known to history than any of us though. Must burn you guys up something terrible that he'll be remembered as presiding over a period of great prosperity, eh?

Anonymous said...

RadioSocialism, economic report, between 7.30 and 8 this morning. Commentator Cameron, working for ANZ & National bank said (my paraphrase):

The problem with interest rates is that although the real ecnonomy is tanking, interest rates will stay high. That's because employment and wage rates are through the roof. Interest rates will only come down when unemployment goes up, and wage rates come down to a level commensurate with productibity

No this isn't ACT; it's not the IER; it's radio socialism

This is all Cullen's fault: completely squandered the benefits of 1985-1990, and now we are facing worse situations than 1984 and 1993 combined

Clunking Fist said...

Known to History as Attlia the Hun was, or in the same mould (sorry, I watched stand up last night) as Louis Pasteur?
Actually, psycho, a part of me WANTS Liarbore to put together another coalition, just so the great economically-uneducated (such as yourself!) can watch as we slip further down the league tables of the world, with the gummint all the while spinning how great life is. “Comrades, the sun is shining and our bellies are fully” as the proles pack up their belongings and head to Oz. But as long as farmer jones is kept at bay, eh?

Psycho Milt said...

...the great economically-uneducated (such as yourself!)

Yeah, I get a lot of that from right-wing commenters. Which always amuses me, because after all, I do have no education in economics, and yet still have the temerity to venture opinions on the subject. What a wanker.

And yet, despite being pretty well-educated in history and sociology myself, I don't think I've ever tried to pull rank when one of the "economically-educated" commenters has the temerity to venture opinions on society or history. Go figure.

Clunking Fist said...

As a student of history, you must realise that socialism is always forced on the populace? At the barrel of a gun.

Or am I wrong? Is it Swenden with the taxpayer funded, and privately provided health care? That's because some one there "got it" and realised that purchasing can be somwhat centralised, but provision cannot? Well, it can be, but then you get the NHS and the DHB's, LOL!

(ps genuine question: who provides the health care that Aussies pay for through medithing?)

Psycho Milt said...

As a student of history, you must realise that socialism is always forced on the populace? At the barrel of a gun.

See, that's just the sort of ignorance I generally have to bite my tongue over. You sit there in a Western country, one of a whole group in which the rise of democratic socialism in the form of Labour parties (or their equivalents) not only spectacularly improved the lives of the mass of the population but also ended the threat of revolution in the West, and write about socialism - with no reference point beyond a few Bolsheviks and their totalitarian nightmare creations. Does shame at your lack of education prevent you from expressing your opinion? No, and nor should it. In similar fashion, the fact that I have a pretty rudimentary grasp of various economic concepts doesn't prevent me having an opinion on economic matters. We all get a vote, and our various ignorances cancel each other out in the long run.

Clunking Fist said...

Admittedly my edjacashun is pretty light on history.

But I can’t help looking around the world (at the western countries) and concluding that “democratic socialism in the form of Labour parties (or their equivalents)” drift toward totalitarianism. First it’s for our sake (nanny state) then little incursions into our freedoms in order to shut down debate, to maintain groupthink. Then the incursions get bigger when the populace looks like it might vote for someone who walks on two legs, self-justifying it as “they are bad, only we govern for the workers” thus the ends (to maintain power n order to continue the good work) justify the means (curtailment of freedoms).

I think a lot of people are still fighting National because they see it as a version of the UK Tory party from decades gone: a party for privilege and gentry.
Well, those days are long gone, now blue tinted parties tend to promote an ideal of society as a meritocracy. So they’ve moved on from protecting privilege.

Just like those democratic socialist parties (in the form of Labour, frinstance) seem to have moved on from protecting workers rights.