|
Pipe Dreamer posted:Um you might want to compare the GDP figures for New Zealand and Japan and it might offer some insight into why one has more reconstruction ability than the other. I would think that the total population/infrastructure would have something to do with it as well >_>? I mean while there was enormous destruction in Japan/oil refineries/power plants out and stuff the entire islands has _127 million people_ and all those related resources to put into action whereas our 3rd biggest city and major centre for that kind of stuff was messed up and we have about 4 million people ?
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 06:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 09:31 |
|
|
miss_chaos posted:Yet another well thought out blog post on Red Alert with correct grammar and salient poin.... oh God, what a tool. At least some people are calling him out (politely) in the comments.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 07:17
|
|
|
ClubmanGT posted:As much as I like the idea of a 'vibrant city', it's becoming pretty transparent the longer the whole 'CBD intensification' stuff goes on. It's not about better transport, because they could just spend more money on transport across the region now if it was about that. It's about achieving population densities to justify pet projects. What is this supposed to mean?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 08:12
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:What is this supposed to mean? It means we keep getting report after report about how we need to free up more land for development, but it doesn't seem to register with any local body decision makers. quote:667_ Over the next 30 years, Auckland Hint: They're not going to get that transformational shift by actually spending money on a full functional public transport network. They could do that now. They're just expecting everyone to live in houses that are, at best, the size of the Stonefields development - infill, infill and more infill - despite the ARC acknowledging that medium sized houses on small sections was harmful to the city's 'green' feel, or apartments. If they free up more land, the Council might have to make some harsh calls about what it spends its money on, because serving those areas requires investing in new infrastructure - something our Council isn't that good at unless it's one of their pet causes. So jamming everyone in tighter means they have to spend less money on new areas and have more for those aforementioned pet projects. Unfortunately that has the added affect of completely buttfucking us in terms of house prices. I want the rail loop, and it's a good idea, but pretending it's literally the only thing that will help our transport situation is a stupid move. There's other stuff they could do while Stephen Joyce and John Key have a dick-waving contest. It's the same with intensification. It might make infrastructure cheaper, but your city won't be 'livable' if all you've got to offer are apartments and over-priced infill housing on tiny sections.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 09:34
|
|
|
What's with the hate on apartments? I live in an apartment in Wellington and it's awesome. I sold my car because I wouldn't use it for weeks and the battery would die on me when I eventually decided I wanted to do something with it, and I was spending more on the warrant/rego than petrol.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 11:12
|
|
|
Apartments are the right way to go but they completely hosed them up in Auckland by letting people who were only interested in milking overseas students build cheap, ugly poo poo all over the cbd.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2012 11:45
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:Apartments are the right way to go but they completely hosed them up in Auckland by letting people who were only interested in milking overseas students build cheap, ugly poo poo all over the cbd. The problem is that apartments aren't conducive for pets, kids or anything else you generally need a house to do. What's the point in having a 'livable city' if you're just focusing on making everyone compromise their lifestyles to fit whatever you can be bothered doing? Hell, the ARC realised this: quote:There are concerns regarding urban sprawl, its associated traffic problems and where it’s going to end. However, there are also concerns regarding more apartments, living closer to your neighbours and the lack of space. The ¼ acre section dream still lives on “my ideal is a house with a big backyard”, (A2i) If anything we need to be lowering housing densities across the board, mainly by stopping the 'large house, small section' thing. It'd help ease the whole perception of over-the-top infill housing, and it would also help bring house prices down somewhat (given our rapidly increasing house sizes). You can't just say 'take a deep breath', cram everyone in and then claim you're making Auckland somehow more 'livable'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 03:09
|
|
|
ClubmanGT posted:The problem is that apartments aren't conducive for pets, kids or anything else you generally need a house to do. There's about a billion people on this planet who'd beg to differ that houses are necessary for kids or pets dude.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 03:30
|
|
|
It depends on the pet, but I can see his point with the kid. If I was married and had a child, I'd prefer to raise him/her in a more widespread environment than what an apartment can provide.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 03:32
|
|
|
Mayor "Sideshow" Bob Parker's been at it again today, calling what are becoming overwhelming concerns 'petty'. http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/6302045/Rise-above-pettiness-mayor-urges I'm honestly flabbergasted he thinks this kind of language is an acceptable description of an elected official (MY local elected official as it happens) being totally locked out of very important decisions. After Parker and Marryatt decided on their own to launch an $80,000 review, given to a friend of theirs with no option for a fair public tender for such a big job, they dropped this bombshell on Cr Yani Johanson only 20 minutes before it was set to go to the press. This would be unacceptable treatment of any councilor but Johanson is also the councils communications representative. To Johanson this is no new issue, here's a solution he proposed last year that if implemented would have saved Christchurch all this unwanted stress: http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/5658906/Johansons-way-forward-plan-impresses-Parker Just as a final point on Johanson, is ward or district was the hardest hit in the quake by a long shot; Parker and Marryatt seem content not just to punish Johanson for his outspoken views but to punish the people in the east of the city for them as well. Today Bob dropped this clanger too, clearly the pressure is getting to him; http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/6303598/Pay-rise-looks-inept-mayor-admits Re the payrise: "I think it would be fair criticism that in hindsight it looks inept." The issue with this being, because of course he's right, there a systemic failures in the executive and mayoral roles in the governance of the city, even if we take Marryatts $68,000 back we still have a totally dysfunctional leadership in place. The only fair option at this point is a fresh election, something the $80,000 of the review would be much better spent on. TL:DR - John Keys mates take the worst affected in Chch for a ride, seemingly just to feather their own nests.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 03:32
|
|
|
Vagabundo posted:It depends on the pet, but I can see his point with the kid. If I was married and had a child, I'd prefer to raise him/her in a more widespread environment than what an apartment can provide. Apartment doesn't have to mean some kind of Soviet Bloc type concrete box you know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 03:34
|
|
|
The suburban sprawl connected by motorways because everyone has 2 cars and wants a lawn and petrol is cheap has been outdated for 50 years in urban planning. High density gives you all sorts of economies of scale for public infrastructure, environmental considerations and businesses. Like, I'm sure the property speculator class wants more land opened up for more suburbs but that just expands the current problems to a bigger magnitude when what is needed is a better, more efficient city.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 03:52
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:The suburban sprawl connected by motorways because everyone has 2 cars and wants a lawn and petrol is cheap has been outdated for 50 years in urban planning. High density gives you all sorts of economies of scale for public infrastructure, environmental considerations and businesses. That must mean more motorways, right!? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 03:55
|
|
|
Pararoid posted:The issue with this being, because of course he's right, there a systemic failures in the executive and mayoral roles in the governance of the city, even if we take Marryatts $68,000 back we still have a totally dysfunctional leadership in place. The only fair option at this point is a fresh election, something the $80,000 of the review would be much better spent on. I'm speechless when it comes to Bob. How on earth did such a dense, power-hungry, selfish piece of poo poo manage to trick so many people into voting for him? How does he manage to keep anyone on his side? I can count the people I know who say they voted for him on one hand. Thing is, there's probably countless more who did who are too embarrassed to admit they made such a monumental cock up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 04:56
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:Apartment doesn't have to mean some kind of Soviet Bloc type concrete box you know. In Wellington at least that's exactly what it does mean unless you have a lot of money or a lot of flatmates.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 05:01
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:Like, I'm sure the property speculator class wants more land opened up for more suburbs but that just expands the current problems to a bigger magnitude when what is needed is a better, more efficient city. I'm pretty sure the people who can't currently afford houses at the moment would like some more of them too. Like I said, you could improve the quality of infill housing by stopping people from filling their entire section with just the house itself. There's still also the problem of whether people actually want to live in apartments: http://www.arc.govt.nz/albany/fms/m...0Dec%202006.pdf quote:The percentage of inner city workers or visitors surveyed as to whether they would like to live in an inner city apartment remains roughly half and are mostly under 25 years of age. I get that higher densities would mean economies of scale. But if the Council and Government hadn't been butt-loving Auckland for decades, we'd already have a decent transport network. gently caress, if they actually wanted to roll out transport across the district, they could do it now. Jamming everyone together and expecting them to live in infill housing is the result of regional planners/politicians taking the easy way out for decades, and this just happens to solve all their problems without making any radical changes to the same system which has been screwing us for decades. I won't be holding my breath.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 05:04
|
|
|
I don't believe that housing prices in Auckland are primarily just down to lack of supply. Demand is artificially high due to property speculation, the family home as investment and New Zealanders arms racing each other with increasing amounts of debt that only serves to make foreign banks richer. edit: and cheap/entry level housing being 'developed' away.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 05:17
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:I don't believe that housing prices in Auckland are primarily just down to lack of supply. Demand is artificially high due to property speculation, the family home as investment and New Zealanders arms racing each other with increasing amounts of debt that only serves to make foreign banks richer. http://www.motu.org.nz/publications/detail/spatial_determinants_of_land_prices_in_auckland_metropolitan_urban_limit quote:One such regulation in Auckland is the metropolitan urban limit (MUL); we specifically examine whether the existence of this growth limit affects land prices. We do so in the context of a model of all Auckland land values over a twelve-year period, finding a strong zoning boundary effect on land prices. Yea, it has absolutely nothing to do with land supply at all... http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/nz-housing-severely-unaffordable-4698230 quote:In the introduction to the 2012 survey, Robert Bruegmann, author of Sprawl: A Compact History, said nothing affected citizens more directly than the home in which they lived.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 05:46
|
|
|
The Hamster Man posted:I'm speechless when it comes to Bob. How on earth did such a dense, power-hungry, selfish piece of poo poo manage to trick so many people into voting for him? How does he manage to keep anyone on his side? He's a TV host at heart who got a lot of TV time after the September quake, plus the fact the Prime Minister was at all his important rallies offering support was enough to sway enough people it would seem.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 05:51
|
|
|
The Hamster Man posted:I'm speechless when it comes to Bob. How on earth did such a dense, power-hungry, selfish piece of poo poo manage to trick so many people into voting for him? How does he manage to keep anyone on his side? Oh but he's just so charming! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 06:09
|
|
|
Hey I just saw there's an article on Campbell Live tonight (I know I know, he kinda sucks these days) about Parker and Marryatt. They're playing up the earns more than John Key angle, I liked the comment in this thread though that he earns more the Obama!
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 06:16
|
|
|
ClubmanGT posted:http://www.motu.org.nz/publications/detail/spatial_determinants_of_land_prices_in_auckland_metropolitan_urban_limit The land supply issue provides the initial price pressure that allows it to be turned into a bubble by investment which is why I quite specifically chose the phrase 'not primarily' rather than the 'absolutely nothing' that you have attributed to me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 06:46
|
|
|
As an American student about to study at Vic for a year I'm kind of scared after reading this thread. I now anticipate living with white supremacists in bloc housing, barely eating, and freezing my rear end off always. Really though, it's nice to have some perspective in regards to New Zealand. Everyone who's ever been only says good things, probably because they weren't there long enough to see the bad. That said, that video in the OP is mostly right, you guys don't know how lucky you are. I'd generally say that US political and social problems are far worse, and thank god I'll be in NZ in during the US election. Are Kiwi students more or less politically involved than US ones? If more, do they generally expect foreign students to know the details of their politics?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 07:13
|
|
|
Jeseuss posted:Are Kiwi students more or less politically involved than US ones? If more, do they generally expect foreign students to know the details of their politics? I would say that people are definitely more politically aware and they would definitely not expect you to know the details of their politics  .
Lemonus fucked around with this message at 07:41 on Jan 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 07:23
|
|
|
Jeseuss posted:As an American student about to study at Vic for a year I'm kind of scared after reading this thread. I now anticipate living with white supremacists in bloc housing, barely eating, and freezing my rear end off always. Vic is mostly squabbling between Young Labour and the Marxists, with cameos by the greens, ACT and Young Nats. And lots of queer politics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 07:25
|
|
|
LCQC posted:Vic is mostly squabbling between Young Labour and the Marxists, with cameos by the greens, ACT and Young Nats. And lots of queer politics. Sif there are actually that many marxists at Vic lol. Anyways, on a side note I would say that New Zealanders are very generally easy-going to talk to about politics and its actually on the level that 'politics and religion' are open-game discussion topics at bars and such (which I have to say is unlike my other background/current home in Atlanta).
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 07:44
|
|
|
Jeseuss posted:As an American student about to study at Vic for a year I'm kind of scared after reading this thread. I now anticipate living with white supremacists in bloc housing, barely eating, and freezing my rear end off always. Had a couple of Americans in my hostel first year at Vic, you'll have a great time. Above poster had it right when it comes to Vic student politics, wasn't something I ever felt the need to get involved in. Most students are apathetic to it, lucky to get 5% turnout for student elections for example. Not sure what you're into or which part of USA you're from but Welly is a great city to live/study in. Everything is in walking distance if a bit up or down, the frequent public buses you can actually take without feeling like a hobo. Courtenay/Cuba = Cafe culture during the day and nightclub culture in the eve unlike anything you'll get stateside. Aside from study, I recommend seeing a Rugby game at the Stadium, totally different to Baseball/Football atmosphere (for better or worse I'm unsure) and planning on seeing the South Island West Coast while you're down in this hemisphere for that scenery everyone raves about.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 07:44
|
|
|
Jeseuss posted:As an American student about to study at Vic for a year I'm kind of scared after reading this thread. I now anticipate living with white supremacists in bloc housing, barely eating, and freezing my rear end off always. The problems of New Zealand are pretty small fry compared to the problems in the states, we still like to complain anyway. There are lots of american students at Vic, you'll do fine. Yellow's assessment is very accurate. Also, the Wellington goons (A.K.A. The Best Friends Club) have a regular pub quiz night on Mondays where we generally kick rear end, if you have any general non-D&D questions, you can chat with us in the meet thread
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 08:08
|
|
|
Lemonus posted:Sif there are actually that many marxists at Vic lol. In my three years we had two Worker's members as president, one infamously setting alight an NZ flag in the student bar.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 08:17
|
|
|
LCQC posted:In my three years we had two Worker's members as president, one infamously setting alight an NZ flag in the student bar. Well at least that gives good cause for old bill to give him a nice whack and take him in for endangering others / reckless arson and we can avoid all the banter about freedom of expression ever coming into it heh. On a side note, despite being against VSM I have to say I have heard a consistent string of people basically say the student politics up at Vic is hosed up/lots of wasted resources and stuff. Lemonus fucked around with this message at 08:23 on Jan 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 08:20
|
|
|
Lemonus posted:Well at least that gives good cause for old bill to give him a nice whack and take him in for endangering others / reckless arson and we can avoid all the banter about freedom of expression ever coming into it heh. I was at Vic a few years back, tangentially involved in student journalism, and even then VUWSA was an unbelievable trainwreck. Part of VUWSA's problem is that it's shackled to funding a huge range of clubs, many of which are just glorified drinking clubs (cough, tramping club, cough) or ACT on Campus think tanks (cough, DebSoc, cough) and every time anybody suggests cutting that funding the club members turn out en masse to vote for anyone but. I also enjoyed Joel Cosgrove's election on the basis of promises he couldn't possibly ever fulfill. Viva la revolution!
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 09:04
|
|
|
Trouble Man posted:I was at Vic a few years back, tangentially involved in student journalism, and even then VUWSA was an unbelievable trainwreck. The Vic debating society is particularly full of libertarians it seems but despite this they do tend to produce some of our finest quality debaters heh. I mean, how much money per club are we talking about? At OUSA it seems like they have a reasonably under control system of like each club gets $1000 for purposes they have to account for at least to some passable level and the rest of the money is dependent on specific grants for specific stuff. Don't really know the specific details. The most intense thing in student politics we had at Otago was basically a sexual harassment scandal where one guy on the board groped some girls tits at a party and then pleaded diversion. Some young nat blogger particularly publicly shamed him. Dude ended up resigning out of all of it. Lemonus fucked around with this message at 09:14 on Jan 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 09:11
|
|
|
Lemonus posted:On a side note, despite being against VSM I have to say I have heard a consistent string of people basically say the student politics up at Vic is hosed up/lots of wasted resources and stuff. Chalk me up as another I guess. Given it's in the city that's the heart of NZ politics it's quite shameful.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 09:26
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:The land supply issue provides the initial price pressure that allows it to be turned into a bubble by investment which is why I quite specifically chose the phrase 'not primarily' rather than the 'absolutely nothing' that you have attributed to me. Even so, the housing affordability comments from experts have basically talked about nothing but land availability. It's more than just the 'initial pressure' - in fact as time goes by, that pressure will only increase. Eventually you run out of space for legitimate demand and speculators alike, so it makes no difference.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 09:31
|
|
|
Lemonus posted:I mean, how much money per club are we talking about? At OUSA it seems like they have a reasonably under control system of like each club gets $1000 for purposes they have to account for at least to some passable level and the rest of the money is dependent on specific grants for specific stuff. Don't really know the specific details. I seem to recall a club somewhere along the lines of "$50 club" where they got the minimum amount of people required for a club (say, ten people) to join, then split the funding cheque of $500 between them and disbanded the group.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 09:43
|
|
|
Dead Alice posted:I seem to recall a club somewhere along the lines of "$50 club" where they got the minimum amount of people required for a club (say, ten people) to join, then split the funding cheque of $500 between them and disbanded the group. Christ. I remember a few years back a group of ACToids ran as the A Team on the basis that they'd basically take over VUWSA and end the clubs rort, but they were stupid enough to announce they would do this in advance (rather than running on a generic reform platform and busting out the clubs funding cuts after they'd been elected, 1984 style), and inevitably the clubs turned out en masse, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 09:47
|
|
|
Lemonus posted:The Vic debating society is particularly full of libertarians it seems but despite this they do tend to produce some of our finest quality debaters heh. It's certainly not the leftist hotbed that is Auckland's Debating Society and the libertarian members are much much louder than the straight left-wing members but it's not that bad. Requisite 'gently caress ACT' statement because seriously gently caress ACT. Lemonus posted:I mean, how much money per club are we talking about? At OUSA it seems like they have a reasonably under control system of like each club gets $1000 for purposes they have to account for at least to some passable level and the rest of the money is dependent on specific grants for specific stuff. Don't really know the specific details. I can't speak with authority but the grant system at VUWSA is (or was) pretty lax - a relevant committee would usually just get applications and as long as the group wasn't religious or political they'd usually get their money. They probably had limits but you never hear much about them. As for the grants straight from VUWSA, it's even less clear. Student politics at Vic has always been a bit hosed, though it's long past the mind-bogglingly awful nadir of 2007-2008. It started getting better in '09 when Jasmine Freemantle broke off all ties with the Workers Party because sacre bleu she wouldn't be their puppet anymore - that destroyed the Workers Party presence on campus. Now it's just Young Labourites and the occasional libertarian who gets softened (or, in one case, who storms out in a huff). I would not be surprised if VSM got the support it did at Vic because of VUWSA. I mean, everyone either hates them or just doesn't loving care.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 09:56
|
|
|
Yeeeaaaahhhhh http://blog.labour.org.nz/2012/01/24/red/ Labour MPs really aren't doing a great job is demonstrating why Red Alert should stay (which is, of course, why it will stay).
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 13:50
|
|
|
Pigeon Shamus posted:It's certainly not the leftist hotbed that is Auckland's Debating Society and the libertarian members are much much louder than the straight left-wing members but it's not that bad. Requisite 'gently caress ACT' statement because seriously gently caress ACT. Are you a debater? We also had some young ACT'ers in Otago that are good debaters- one was the candidate for south Dunedin and another one was pres of ACT on campus (who has now left it and joined the young nats lol)
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 20:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 09:31 |
|
|
Having dealt with Uni debaters on at least a reigonal level, I can safely say their talent is only matched by their huge egos and right wing tendencies. e: i am one
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2012 22:28
|
|
