What if we spread corporate donations across all parties instead.

Ensure the target party gets the largest share of the donation (not necessarily 50%), but all the other parties get a slice of the pie based on their current number of seats.

If you don’t have any seats, you get to keep it all (because you’re either a fringe weirdo, or new and need a leg up).

My concern would be that artificially controlling prices could lead to perverse incentives elsewhere.

Ie. if. Company can’t charge just $0.05 extra for a carton of milk, across 100,000 units a day. They might be incentiveised to find that profit elsewhere. Ie, $0.50/hr less for their staff.

Nationally, everyone’s a mouse fart better off. Except for the 1000 supermarket employees who are now $4/day poorer.

But equally, if you look at the competitive markets overseas, everything is a race to the bottom. Who can provide the cheapest product with the shittiest service, by people on equally shit pay. but not shitty enough that you lose customers.

How do you codify “don’t be a cunt” into law?

Wasn’t this effectively the ComCom suggestion from just before the last election?

Given the way things are looking. This is probably going to be the best policy announcement of the entire season.

Why aren’t they pushing the numbers more? A tax cut for most, and an additional 5bn in tax take sounds like a win. Yet it’s buried at the end of a PDF.

Sounds like they’re just going to spend $7.5bn greenwashing? Green-laundering! Power.

Buy “green” power here, claim the green credits overseas, then resell the power as “dirty” power at next to no loss to them because our demand vastly outstrips our supply.

Niiiiice.

Why stop at open banking?

Why not make blocking data scraping illegal.

Why not require any company in any sector with an influential portion of the market to publicly publish their prices in a machine readable, comparable, format.

Banks, insurance, fuel, groceries, internet, appliances, booze, utilities. Force them all to show their hand. Make it incredibly easy for comparison websites to operate. Let people find the cheapest prices.

What we see: “tax the rich” What National see: “better increase those income and GST rates”

“Antelopes are safe, We’re not going to eat you” says the “crocodiles for eating antelopes” party.

So the school lunch program was just “can the existing (working) contracts managed by the government, write a contract with a single company to do what the government was doing, pat ourselves on the back”? All while expecting the new middleman to do the same job, for less, and still be profitable.

Not sure what I was expecting tbh. Just more smooth brain small government thinking.

Why didn’t they just get the prisons service provider to do it? Prisoners get a full monthly menu made by a nutritionist taking into account all dietary requirements. Like prisoners, School kids don’t go anywhere, and there’s (probably?) a prison an hour or two drive from most schools so (probably) not a massive logistical nightmare.

Are we feeding our prisoners better than our kids?

It seems like a long game, with a lot of work (and a bit of luck) to get to somewhere of note (ie, an MP position).

Running as an independent is about as likely for success as Seymour’s school lunch program.

So you need to get yourself into a party. But you can’t just rock up to your party of choices offices and have them put your name next to their logo in the next election.

And if you do slog through however many years of volunteering and lower level staff jobs, there’s still no guarantee you’ll even get a shot at a candidate opportunity.

And if you do get a shot, you’re at the whim of the party, at least until you’ve made a name for yourself.

You can get wide mouth thermoses from briscoes/m10 etc. Then you can send yesterday’s leftovers for lunch.

We send ours with curries, spagbol, chilli, dumplings etc. anything that can stay moist and warm.

I think I would rather a mechanism to allow longer term projects and policies, without needing to worry so much about the incoming government cancelling or repealing them.

Even a one-term grace period might be sufficient.

But, probably rife with problems Ive not considered.

What do you mean.

We’ve got land to put bunkers in, and citizenship for sale.

We’re a perfect place to take billionaire investment money. That’s good for all of us.

(/s)

Equipment costs might (probably?) be amortised over time, but still requires upfront expenditure.

Unless it’s a load of gloves. I always lose gloves.

My reaction to

employment 50,000 fewer people on jobseeker

Is shockedpikachu.jpg.

Who’d have thought firing half Wellington would have made that number go up.

And it’s predicted to continue get worse for the rest of their term.