Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and
the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications
by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2025/06/guest_post_when_identity_picks_winners_and_taxpayers_pick_up_the_bill.html
Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and
the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications
by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
On Sun, 15 Jun 2025 18:26:04 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>I doubt that is correct. Cite?
wrote:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2025/06/guest_post_when_identity_picks_winners_and_taxpayers_pick_up_the_bill.html
Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and
the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications
by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
First it would not have been published if Farrar had disagreed with it
- it may however go a bit further than Farrar would have wanted to
have attributed to him.
The reality is that Treaty settlements have, on average, represented
about 2% of the value of land that was illegally taken from Maori.
Yes some have been very successful - but others, particularly thoseNonsense - it is logic.
with early settlements, were not always as successful. During the time
of the Clark government there was a concerted effort to improve both >structures and training of Trustees to ensure that settlements were >appropriately managed.
To claim however that successful management of settlements indicates >"legislative scaffolding rather than merit alone" is an appalling
slur on both those involved in management of those settlements.
There is no evidence that settlements are being levied on anyone otherIn other words you and me and everybody else in this country.
than Government
- yes the land thefts were often from individuals whoNo it is not, they simply are not provided.
benefited personally, but none of the descendents of those pakeha have
been required to pay for settlements - and in some cases even when
land of ''special interest'' has come up for sale Maori have not
always been in a position to purchase.
It is telling that no practical examples have been shown of such >''imbalances."
On the contrary, this is merely another attempt to blame a sector thatThere are no right or far right to vote for here.
tends not to vote for the Right and Far-Right
, but which is gettingTHat's life!
its act together and is at times able to compete fairly on a
market-value basis with non-Maori. That should be welcomed, not
decried. The reality is that Maori tend to be more concerned about
such things as conservation values, clean water etc than some
non-Maori enterprises. Arrangements such as that for the Wanganui and
Waikato rivers offend some "entrepreneurs" because they do not permit
the degradation of waters that is evident in for example Canterbury,
where farm run-off has required both Christchurch and a number of
smaller towns to put water treatment in place to replace previously
clean water supplied from bores that were previously clean - and the
current government is absolutely determined to shield farmers from
sharing the cost of the water pollution that farm run-off has
increasingly generated as they moved to stocking cattle . . . That
problem has nothing to do with Treaty Settlements, but is being seen
as such because it is a convenient distraction from the reality that
both the farmers as well as the town and city dwellers affected are
largely non-Maori . . .
And let us be clear about Local Authorities - they are part of ourPrabably correct nonetheless.
system of government. Central Government has decided boundaries of
local authorities - a National -led Government created the current
structure in Auckland, and forced other Council amalgamations. It may
yet decide to force water entities to accommodate a wider group of
local Councils. In Wellington, the arrangements have prompted one
local authority to seek feedback on merging potentially four local >authorities to better manage water requirements imposed by central >government. The separation of transport and water from the Auckland
Council was decided centrally - and with the current government, it is >evident that some local authorities cannot afford required work
without borrowing, but that even with a higher interest rate, such
borrowing will be more expensive than a structure that is funded by
borrowing by central government. I suspect that central government
will be required to guarantee local authority lending - but even that
will involve additional expense over the logical alternative that
central government borrow at lower rates and on-lend . . . Many local >authorities own assets that may become subject to Treaty claims
It may surprise the author of the article, but many businesses do pay
local rates - if those rates go up, they will need to pay. If the land
and building that they use comes on the market, they may be required
to first offer it to a local Tribe. That may not affect the price, but
it is still an obligation. Similarly some settlements have given Maori
some involvement in natural resources that may affect more than one
local authority area - the agreements relating to rivers has been
mentioned above. I note that the author has not been able to give an
example of shifting the Crown's fiduciary burdens onto others . . .
On Sun, 15 Jun 2025 18:26:04 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2025/06/guest_post_when_identity_picks_winners_and_taxpayers_pick_up_the_bill.html
Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and
the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications
by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
First it would not have been published if Farrar had disagreed with it
- it may however go a bit further than Farrar would have wanted to
have attributed to him.
The reality is that Treaty settlements have, on average, represented
about 2% of the value of land that was illegally taken from Maori.
Yes some have been very successful - but others, particularly those
with early settlements, were not always as successful. During the time
of the Clark government there was a concerted effort to improve both >structures and training of Trustees to ensure that settlements were >appropriately managed.
To claim however that successful management of settlements indicates >"legislative scaffolding rather than merit alone" is an appalling
slur on both those involved in management of those settlements.
There is no evidence that settlements are being levied on anyone other
than Government - yes the land thefts were often from individuals who >benefited personally, but none of the descendents of those pakeha have
been required to pay for settlements - and in some cases even when
land of ''special interest'' has come up for sale Maori have not
always been in a position to purchase.
It is telling that no practical examples have been shown of such >''imbalances."
On the contrary, this is merely another attempt to blame a sector that
tends not to vote for the Right and Far-Right, but which is getting
its act together and is at times able to compete fairly on a
market-value basis with non-Maori. That should be welcomed, not
decried. The reality is that Maori tend to be more concerned about
such things as conservation values, clean water etc than some
non-Maori enterprises. Arrangements such as that for the Wanganui and
Waikato rivers offend some "entrepreneurs" because they do not permit
the degradation of waters that is evident in for example Canterbury,
where farm run-off has required both Christchurch and a number of
smaller towns to put water treatment in place to replace previously
clean water supplied from bores that were previously clean - and the
current government is absolutely determined to shield farmers from
sharing the cost of the water pollution that farm run-off has
increasingly generated as they moved to stocking cattle . . . That
problem has nothing to do with Treaty Settlements, but is being seen
as such because it is a convenient distraction from the reality that
both the farmers as well as the town and city dwellers affected are
largely non-Maori . . .
And let us be clear about Local Authorities - they are part of our
system of government. Central Government has decided boundaries of
local authorities - a National -led Government created the current
structure in Auckland, and forced other Council amalgamations. It may
yet decide to force water entities to accommodate a wider group of
local Councils. In Wellington, the arrangements have prompted one
local authority to seek feedback on merging potentially four local >authorities to better manage water requirements imposed by central >government. The separation of transport and water from the Auckland
Council was decided centrally - and with the current government, it is >evident that some local authorities cannot afford required work
without borrowing, but that even with a higher interest rate, such
borrowing will be more expensive than a structure that is funded by
borrowing by central government. I suspect that central government
will be required to guarantee local authority lending - but even that
will involve additional expense over the logical alternative that
central government borrow at lower rates and on-lend . . . Many local >authorities own assets that may become subject to Treaty claims
It may surprise the author of the article, but many businesses do pay
local rates - if those rates go up, they will need to pay. If the land
and building that they use comes on the market, they may be required
to first offer it to a local Tribe. That may not affect the price, but
it is still an obligation. Similarly some settlements have given Maori
some involvement in natural resources that may affect more than one
local authority area - the agreements relating to rivers has been
mentioned above. I note that the author has not been able to give an
example of shifting the Crown's fiduciary burdens onto others . . .
On 2025-06-15, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2025/06/guest_post_when_identity_picks_winners_and_taxpayers_pick_up_the_bill.htmlA good article. At some point NZ must get the playing field level. Maori are >not stupid, certainly can do western style business, and if we can get the >the stage where, for example, that TMP agree that the playing field is level >on the business playing field this would be moving the right direction.
Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and
the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications
by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
Then we/NZ can start to sort out the treaty aftermath.
This article shows the need for NZ to start working through the issues >together and not on a divide and rule basis.
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 12:48:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>Fair enough. I was effectively saying that Guest Posts are not
wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jun 2025 18:26:04 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:I am reading your response and note that it includes conjecture that
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2025/06/guest_post_when_identity_picks_winners_and_taxpayers_pick_up_the_bill.html
Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and
the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications
by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
First it would not have been published if Farrar had disagreed with it
- it may however go a bit further than Farrar would have wanted to
have attributed to him.
is consistent with your political ideology. I will wait until I see
the response of others before deciding if any further response is
warranted.
The reality is that Treaty settlements have, on average, represented
about 2% of the value of land that was illegally taken from Maori.
Yes some have been very successful - but others, particularly those
with early settlements, were not always as successful. During the time
of the Clark government there was a concerted effort to improve both >>structures and training of Trustees to ensure that settlements were >>appropriately managed.
To claim however that successful management of settlements indicates >>"legislative scaffolding rather than merit alone" is an appalling
slur on both those involved in management of those settlements.
There is no evidence that settlements are being levied on anyone other
than Government - yes the land thefts were often from individuals who >>benefited personally, but none of the descendents of those pakeha have
been required to pay for settlements - and in some cases even when
land of ''special interest'' has come up for sale Maori have not
always been in a position to purchase.
It is telling that no practical examples have been shown of such >>''imbalances."
On the contrary, this is merely another attempt to blame a sector that >>tends not to vote for the Right and Far-Right, but which is getting
its act together and is at times able to compete fairly on a
market-value basis with non-Maori. That should be welcomed, not
decried. The reality is that Maori tend to be more concerned about
such things as conservation values, clean water etc than some
non-Maori enterprises. Arrangements such as that for the Wanganui and >>Waikato rivers offend some "entrepreneurs" because they do not permit
the degradation of waters that is evident in for example Canterbury,
where farm run-off has required both Christchurch and a number of
smaller towns to put water treatment in place to replace previously
clean water supplied from bores that were previously clean - and the >>current government is absolutely determined to shield farmers from
sharing the cost of the water pollution that farm run-off has
increasingly generated as they moved to stocking cattle . . . That >>problem has nothing to do with Treaty Settlements, but is being seen
as such because it is a convenient distraction from the reality that
both the farmers as well as the town and city dwellers affected are
largely non-Maori . . .
And let us be clear about Local Authorities - they are part of our
system of government. Central Government has decided boundaries of
local authorities - a National -led Government created the current >>structure in Auckland, and forced other Council amalgamations. It may
yet decide to force water entities to accommodate a wider group of
local Councils. In Wellington, the arrangements have prompted one
local authority to seek feedback on merging potentially four local >>authorities to better manage water requirements imposed by central >>government. The separation of transport and water from the Auckland >>Council was decided centrally - and with the current government, it is >>evident that some local authorities cannot afford required work
without borrowing, but that even with a higher interest rate, such >>borrowing will be more expensive than a structure that is funded by >>borrowing by central government. I suspect that central government
will be required to guarantee local authority lending - but even that
will involve additional expense over the logical alternative that
central government borrow at lower rates and on-lend . . . Many local >>authorities own assets that may become subject to Treaty claims
It may surprise the author of the article, but many businesses do pay
local rates - if those rates go up, they will need to pay. If the land
and building that they use comes on the market, they may be required
to first offer it to a local Tribe. That may not affect the price, but
it is still an obligation. Similarly some settlements have given Maori
some involvement in natural resources that may affect more than one
local authority area - the agreements relating to rivers has been
mentioned above. I note that the author has not been able to give an >>example of shifting the Crown's fiduciary burdens onto others . . .
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2025/06/guest_post_when_identity_picks_winners_and_taxpayers_pick_up_the_bill.html
Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and
the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications
by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
The reality is that Treaty settlements have, on average, represented
about 2% of the value of land that was illegally taken from Maori.
On 2025-06-15, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2025/06/guest_post_when_identity_picks_winners_and_taxpayers_pick_up_the_bill.htmlA good article. At some point NZ must get the playing field level. Maori are >not stupid, certainly can do western style business, and if we can get the >the stage where, for example, that TMP agree that the playing field is level >on the business playing field this would be moving the right direction.
Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and
the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications
by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
Then we/NZ can start to sort out the treaty aftermath.
This article shows the need for NZ to start working through the issues >together and not on a divide and rule basis.
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 12:48:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
The reality is that Treaty settlements have, on average, represented
about 2% of the value of land that was illegally taken from Maori.
Nothing was illegally taken. Nobody legally owned it in the first
place.
Bill.
On 16 Jun 2025 04:30:53 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:If you had read the article you would know that there is.
On 2025-06-15, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
A good article. At some point NZ must get the playing field level. Maori are >>not stupid, certainly can do western style business, and if we can get the >>the stage where, for example, that TMP agree that the playing field is level >>on the business playing field this would be moving the right direction.https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2025/06/guest_post_when_identity_picks_winners_and_taxpayers_pick_up_the_bill.html
Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and
the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications
by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
Then we/NZ can start to sort out the treaty aftermath.
This article shows the need for NZ to start working through the issues >>together and not on a divide and rule basis.
Is there an unlevel business playing field that you see as being
either a priority, or easiest to level, Gordon?
On 16 Jun 2025 04:30:53 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2025-06-15, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:It is unlikely that the Maori Party would ever agree to this. They
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2025/06/guest_post_when_identity_picks_winners_and_taxpayers_pick_up_the_bill.htmlA good article. At some point NZ must get the playing field level. Maori are >>not stupid, certainly can do western style business, and if we can get the >>the stage where, for example, that TMP agree that the playing field is level >>on the business playing field this would be moving the right direction.
Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and
the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications
by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
have evolved into a hard line political ideology built on Maori
grievances arising from British colonial rule.
Then we/NZ can start to sort out the treaty aftermath.
This article shows the need for NZ to start working through the issues >>together and not on a divide and rule basis.
Its too late for this now because so many have taken entrenched
positions and received compensation for it.
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 17:31:38 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 12:48:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
The reality is that Treaty settlements have, on average, represented >>>about 2% of the value of land that was illegally taken from Maori.
Nothing was illegally taken. Nobody legally owned it in the first
place.
Bill.
Good luck with that assertion, BR.
https://teara.govt.nz/en/new-zealand-wars
--
Crash McBash
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 18:03:34 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 17:31:38 +1200, BR <blah@blah.blah> wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 12:48:31 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
The reality is that Treaty settlements have, on average, represented >>>>about 2% of the value of land that was illegally taken from Maori.
Nothing was illegally taken. Nobody legally owned it in the first
place.
Bill.
Good luck with that assertion, BR.
https://teara.govt.nz/en/new-zealand-wars
--
Crash McBash
Websites can say all sorts of stuff.
In pre-European New Zealand there were no universally recognised
property rights, just a bunch of warring savages.
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 18:08:46 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On 16 Jun 2025 04:30:53 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2025-06-15, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:It is unlikely that the Maori Party would ever agree to this. They
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2025/06/guest_post_when_identity_picks_winners_and_taxpayers_pick_up_the_bill.htmlA good article. At some point NZ must get the playing field level. Maori are >>>not stupid, certainly can do western style business, and if we can get the >>>the stage where, for example, that TMP agree that the playing field is level >>>on the business playing field this would be moving the right direction.
Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and
the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications >>>> by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
have evolved into a hard line political ideology built on Maori
grievances arising from British colonial rule.
Then we/NZ can start to sort out the treaty aftermath.
This article shows the need for NZ to start working through the issues >>>together and not on a divide and rule basis.
Its too late for this now because so many have taken entrenched
positions and received compensation for it.
Can you give an example?
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 20:37:45 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 18:08:46 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On 16 Jun 2025 04:30:53 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2025-06-15, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:It is unlikely that the Maori Party would ever agree to this. They
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2025/06/guest_post_when_identity_picks_winners_and_taxpayers_pick_up_the_bill.htmlA good article. At some point NZ must get the playing field level. Maori are
Now this is a guest post on Kiwiblog, so the venue of publication and >>>>> the history of Kiwiblog's sponsor is irrelevant. I am drawing
attention to what has been said. I acknowledge that past publications >>>>> by Zoran Rakovich may be relevant.
not stupid, certainly can do western style business, and if we can get the >>>>the stage where, for example, that TMP agree that the playing field is level
on the business playing field this would be moving the right direction. >>>>
have evolved into a hard line political ideology built on Maori >>>grievances arising from British colonial rule.
Then we/NZ can start to sort out the treaty aftermath.
This article shows the need for NZ to start working through the issues >>>>together and not on a divide and rule basis.
Its too late for this now because so many have taken entrenched
positions and received compensation for it.
Can you give an example?
So obvious but if you cannot work out what Tribunal was formed in 1975
and is still going strong you don't know enough to contribute to this
thread.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 00:48:03 |
| Calls: | 10,387 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,723 |