Posts by merc
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Bring out number weight and measure in a year of dearth.
William Blake
The shocking premise that we are in a year of dearth applies in no measure to why you would sell a company that returns 19% PA, for a loss. -
Legal Beagle: Johndotbanks - the law is…, in reply to DexterX,
Intent plays a large part in law I am told - and who is to profit from the act? I don't think Helen Clark's intention was to deceive or defraud (Paintergate). Mr Teapot on the other hand knew those donations were there and who they were from - by definition, not anonymous, however.
Now let's agree that Helen wanted that money from that painting to go to charity. For what purpose was the Dotcom donation made? Who was to gain?
None of these questions is small, but we will never know because the law is weak, however it takes a very cunning person to manipulate it so and a very ambiguous PM to not recognise this as such.
While all this goes on all politicians are tarred with the same brush though they may be of an altogether different disposition.
The silence to remedy the weak law is deafening. My solution at the least - all documents you sign, you are culpable for, simple. -
Hard News: It's not funny because it's…, in reply to Matthew Poole,
I really think opportunity cost sits well with ROI, it's about evaluating alternatives. I don't think DARPA is a good example, I have seen firsthand the military measure, and that is not what we want to think it is.
Crickey, any evaluation measure would be better than what we are getting now, surely? -
Funny thing is that with all these experts involved in all these money decisions, not once has any mention been made of good old opportunity cost, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost
I guess it's... -
Legal Beagle: Johndotbanks - the law is…, in reply to Kumara Republic,
Because Key needs to be covered and Banks is ACT, all very predictable.
In Key's case, he is several steps removed from what happened during the last Auckland mayoralty campaign - and can thus at least try to distance himself to a degree from Banks.
I see what he did there,
The public have become hardened to such realities and how major party leaders have to turn a blind eye to indiscretions by their minor party support partners. If they did not, Governments would topple at regular intervals.
From Todd in comments,
2.6 The Prime Minister alone has the right to advise the Governor-General to:a)appoint, dismiss, or accept the resignation of Ministers;
b)dissolve Parliament and call a general election. -
Legal Beagle: Johndotbanks - the law is…, in reply to Tom Semmens,
Yes I know those people, and they are very vocal in their abrogation of the man, however they remain glued to agenda. Dieu et mon droit!
-
Legal Beagle: Johndotbanks - the law is…, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
The law should not allow secret donations, or anonymous donations, or donations made through trusts.
Amen to that.
-
The reason that police decided that they could not properly charge Mr Banks is that, in effect, they did not believe they could prove he had read the return before he signed it,...
Maybe they should be forced by law to read the thing they are signing, then they could not say they hadn't read it, to weasel out of responsibility. As for political cost, both you and I know, there will be none.
-
Hard News: John Banks: The volunteer did…, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
Ah, thank you, though I still see a bad law overseen by a powerless committee and subject to Police discretion for prosecution - I may have some terminology wrong here, but you get my drift.
If someone wanted to use the election petition procedure to pursue an allegation against John Banks they could have.
Based on the past, who would dare? It's enough of a head trip simply discussing it here! Why is it made so hard, when really it is quite a straight forward thing.
-
Hard News: John Banks: The volunteer did…, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
Not quite the point thanks Graeme, but nevermind.