As the media bang on about the "Refugee Crisis" I decided to let my fingers do the walking, in an effort to get views from a wide range of sources, rather than just the shrilling of the liberal bubble gum media.
My first question was to try and ascertain what assistance and comfort "fellow Muslim" countries were offering displaced Syrians. Eventually the sad answer became apparent - other than Turkey (who, as a neighbour effectively over run, has little choice), no other Muslim country, NONE, have offered assistance. So much for brotherly love. Saudi Arabia has offered to build mosques in any country where Muslims choose to settle - I am sure that will be of comfort to people in Scandinavia, France, Germany and the UK. There is no doubt that this is the biggest "refugee" migration (or "economic resettlement" since WWII - bearing in mind, the vast majority of refugees at this time were moving with what was their own country, where differences in language, religion and culture were not diametrically opposed to the "host". I do wonder how a traditionally quite mono cultural and Christian country will adapt to providing for the needs of their new countrymen, particularly as they (Muslims) have a proven track record in other areas of vocally and strenuously opposing those very values. At this stage of the game, Germany have committed to taking 800,000 Syrians - an incredible number and an incredible burden on the German tax payer. As an aside the NZ Government estimates it costs NZ$80,000 per "refugee" to integrate them in to NZ society - that is up until they need housing and social welfare, which is in addition. Why do I see a train wreck on the horizon... An article from the well respected No Minister Blog
http://nominister.blogspot.co.nz/2015/09/to-new-zealand-police.html The illegal occupation of the Kaitaia Airport continues .... a regional airport has been shut down. Flights are suspended, Ngati Kahu are holding the people of the Far North to ransom, If a bunch of rag tag bunch of Pakeha nobody's were blocking SH1 over some grievance, real or imagined, the police would have dealt to them in nano seconds. The NZ Police oath requires that they serve "without favour or affection" and to "keep the peace and prevent offences against the peace". Do the job you are sworn and paid to do. Do it now. Imagine living in a nice house, a home big enough for you and your family, and being fairly comfortable as a consequence.
Imagine having a LARGE family living in a not so nice house next door - different values, different beliefs, different religion, but being a good neighbour, you tolerate the differences and life goes on. Imagine you come home one day and find that some of your neighbours have climbed over the fence and moved into your spare room - perhaps they'd had an argument between family factions and some had decided to move out - at least as far as your spare room. Being a good neighbour you figure the situation will work itself out... next thing you know you're paying for their food and clothing, and all the other costs associated with having non paying guests - and they have indicated that that as far as they are concerned, the new living arrangements are permanent. Over time, you find that their expectations have changed, and they took offence that you were still practicing your preferred religion, that you had not been catering to their specific requirements, and by the way, the car needs filling up. Eventually you find that your possessions have been either taken over, sold, and you'd been relegated to the garage out the back... You remained surprised and disappointed that various Do-Gooders (many of whom had never had a real job and didn't pay tax) were critical of you for being stingy and for being reluctant to help the neighbours on the other side... Every night the 6 o'clock news brings us pictures of desperate refugees trying to flee their respective homelands, looking for a better life without the risk of war or persecution, usually heading for liberal countries they know will provide for them.
It is unfortunate that often these desperate people come across like hordes of locusts, unstoppable in their tens of thousands. Whilst feeling sympathy, I do wonder how many of the people of Europe feel, living first hand with the legacy of previous largesse and generosity, having previously welcomed waves of refugees from Northern Africa and the Arabic states, the same people beneficiaries who hold their benefactors in contempt as they try for force Islam History has proven that no domestic airline has ever successfully managed to last the distance competing with Air NZ - remember big names like Ansett, Qantas, Ewan Wilson's "Kiwi Air" and a multitude of smaller companies eventually falling by the wayside, the race to the bottom proving just too tough....
I guess time will tell. I guess the first couple of questions I’d ask relate to Corporate Welfare, and whether User Pays.
Some may argue that Dr Michael Cullen (and perhaps fellow Cabinet Ministers) should have faced charges of Criminal Negligence by tipping what amounted to nearly a Billion dollars into the pockets of Australian based Toll Holdings, to buy back what was basically gifted to Toll several years previously. The Aussie wide boys from Toll could not believe that they’d pulled of the con of the new millennium, and one wonders whether Cullen was actually trying to hand the incoming national Government a Poison Chalice. So, inheriting this run down “National Treasure”, then having to invest hundreds of millions more (annually) to get it back to “pre Toll” condition proved to be an albatross around the neck of the New Zealand tax payer ever since. Most rate payers / taxpayers know that every bus or ferry passenger carried from Half Moon Bay into Auckland City, carries with it a subsidy. So, the NON USERS of the system subsidise those who do use it. Likewise, every tonne of freight carried by Kiwi Rail is heavily subsidised, and the few users of the service reap the rewards of this discounted service. No wonder that the Managing Director of Mainfreight, a big user of Kiwi Rail is keen to see the “subsidy” continue. Back to my opening questions – should the Public of New Zealand keep funding an entity that can’t survive without subsidy, and should the users of the service pay “market rates”? I'm a big fan of letting the market decide - and not subsidising Mainfreight.... Anyone who has been in the USA recently will be aware of the fervent and overt patriotism of most Americans – flags everywhere, discounts for servicemen, and even still a few manufactured products with stickers announcing “Proudly made in the USA”.
Likewise in Australia there is a degree of patriotism that surpasses what we see in New Zealand – there is a strong push towards “Buy Australian made”, and more wee stickers. I was intrigued when Keith, our friendly insurance broker, recently made mention that his company has been successful with several tenders recently, when the “100% NZ Owned” component was factored in, when competing with multi nationals. A couple of fairly sizable Kiwi owned companies actually made the decision to add weight to that component – something that really impressed me. As a passionate Kiwi, and the proud founder and owner of a number of several “Kiwi” companies, it is a conundrum that merits some thought. We know that companies based in the US, Japan, Germany, Australia or Europe who operate in New Zealand all employ Kiwis – and that is great. These Kiwi’s all pay tax, and the country as a whole benefits. How often do Kiwi business people, when given the choice between a local company and one who’s profits, “management fees” and the much of the tax they ultimately pay flow offshore, factor this into the equation? I suspect not quite as often as the super patriotic Americans or Australians when the roles are reversed. Whilst not wanting to belittle the contribution of foreign owned companies, I wonder whether more value should be placed on the “Kiwi Component” |
Don MalcolmA perfect day involves being on my Harley with a long ride ahead.
|