Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
You're listening to a podcast from newstalks'd be follow this
and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:25):
Rewrap. Okoy there and welcome to the Rewrap for Wednesday,
all the best bits from the mic asking breakfast on
news doorgs.
Speaker 3 (00:31):
It'd be in a sillier package.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
I am in heart and today, how are we getting
on with the state housing? Something they've talked about a
lot during Labour's time in government. They have about this
new coalition government.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
What are they doing about it?
Speaker 2 (00:46):
It's Thanksgiving time in the States, of course, so we'll
look at it with the cost of that's gone up
or down. Okay, we've got the word of the year
for you as well. In fact, it's an alternate word
of the year if you like. And Ah, I can't
stop hating on the Wonnica McDonald's there asn't actually there
yet before any of that ocr day.
Speaker 4 (01:04):
Again, I'm afraid to say that the casualt announcement today
from our goods and visionaries at the Reserve Bank might
not be the same excitement level as the first one.
So if you remember when the prospect of a cut
first emerged, there was a palpable lift in the mood
based around the idea that cutting was good news, and
the good news was driven by the fact the worst
was over. I think at that point many assumed that
(01:24):
a lot of other stuff would follow. Sadly, it doesn't
appear to have. We will get another cut today, and
the consensus seems to be it'll be fifty points. God
bless Greg Smith at debone's with us in a moment
for a seventy five point campaign, And oh how I
wish he was right, because he is right what he sees.
He's not making up and as a result, this economy
of ours needs a good stick of dynamite under it.
But fifty it appears it will be also coming. With
(01:47):
the number is the full barrage of commentary, and this
is the bit the wonks will pour over looking for
clues about what lies ahead. The tragedy is instead of
a bounce, we seem to have a stalling. Maybe it's
a delayed reaction. Maybe the bounce will come. But increasingly
the banks see not just confirmation of the recession for
Q three, but also Q four that could be backwards
as well. That, by the way, would be seven out
(02:08):
of eight quarters from the past two years going in
the wrong direction. No other country we compare ourselves too,
has managed anything close to that. Twenty twenty five has growth,
they say, but barely. It's not until twenty twenty six
we start to see what most of us would argue
with some sort of normal in the GDP department. Other countries,
I mean, the likes of Australia, the likes of the
(02:30):
United States haven't had a single recession, far less three
and because of that, their jobs market has remained solid,
the spending has remained decent. Enough Is it possible? Is
it possible? We've had it so bad we can't shake
ourselves loose? The RB argument is inflations under control, we
can cut rates, now, get on with it. Is it
the getting on with it that we're afraid of? Have
(02:50):
we been shell shocked so badly? Not many actually want
to take the first step. And if that's the case,
what does that say about the political and fiscal management
of this country?
Speaker 2 (03:00):
So it seems like everybody's saying, come on, seventy five,
let's go seventy five, even though they know that it's
only going to be fifty. But I don't quite understand
what the reason for not going seventy five if you
already wants seventy five.
Speaker 3 (03:16):
To be honest, I don't understand anything about it. That's
why I leave Mike to explain all.
Speaker 2 (03:20):
That we wrap. So this kick ass, fast checking government
keeps kicking ass in a fast checking kind of a way.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
How they going with the old social housing though?
Speaker 4 (03:31):
Well, now if you can score, the government will as
we mark one year this week, it is in the
area I think of common sense. Just this week a
cop shop in the heart of Auckland. Simple and yet
the biggest city in the country didn't have one, and
crimes gone through the roof and the CBD was a disgrace.
And now we got housing. A question the previous government
could never answer properly is when it came to social housing,
why did the government of the government alone.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
Have to do it all?
Speaker 4 (03:53):
When there are providers with vast experience and the chance
to be a better provider. Why wouldn't you tap into that?
And so the announcement that the government will do three
things yesterday to get community housing providers more active in
the market. One work differently with them around red tape
and regulation. Two hopefully get the Reserve Bank to change
the rules around the money that has to be set
aside by the commercial banks before they landed providers three
(04:14):
maybe even help with finance by backing them up themselves.
So kaieing Aura turned out to be a debt laid mess,
of course, and that can happen when you put all
your eggs in one basket. This is another of these issues,
by the way, that no one disagrees that there is
an issue, i e. More homes are needing to be built.
But this isn't China. The state doesn't have to control
everything under labor. All that happened was that the Q
(04:35):
grew longer. Never have we seen so many people lined
up for housing, and yet never have we seen the
line grow longer because the chosen mechanism was failing. And
even then they didn't really bend to the obvious. The
bigger question, of course, is just how big should the
state's role in housing be? I mean, just how and
why is that seemingly so many tens of thousands of
people can't seem to find a roof to stick over
(04:55):
their heads. Are we really that poor, that deprived that
the line has to be that long? What this government
seems to get is the private sector are not ogres.
The state doesn't have to be the only game in town,
and sadly in rectifying problems that assumingly simple to rectify.
Common sense isn't all that common?
Speaker 3 (05:14):
That is an interesting isn't it? The common sense thing?
Speaker 2 (05:16):
It does have to be common, doesn't it? How common
does it have to be before it.
Speaker 3 (05:22):
Is common sense? And it's not just an idea?
Speaker 2 (05:26):
Like more than fifty percent, more than sixty percent, more
than forty percent. I don't know, I'm just asking questions.
Rewrap Right, Thanksgiving time in the United States, we don't
have that here. Of course, we save our turkey gobbling
until Christmas. But in the States it looks like it
(05:47):
might be cheaper than.
Speaker 4 (05:48):
Usual Thanksgiving meals, the classic Thanksgiving meal. The thing that
most fascinates me is how cheap food is in America,
the classic. First of all, the headline is that this
Thanksgiving is going to be cheaper to feed the family
of ten, So that's encouraging. So fourteen it will cost
you fifty eight bucks, which is five percent less than
it did last year. Turkey prices of what's come down
(06:08):
down five percent and then nine percent down from twenty
twenty two. Turkey cubed stuffing, sweet potato, dinner rolls, frozen peas,
fresh cranberry, salery, carrots, pumpkin pie mix, crusts, whipping cream
you know that's in a can, and some whole milk.
If you want to add ham, and some rusted potatoes
and some frozen green beans? Are you going to pay
(06:30):
seventy seven to thirty four which is down eight percent?
But the turkeys is a pile of turkeys, and the
prices through the floor. Sixteen pound bird that accounts for
forty four percent of the overall cost. Do you know
how many birds? There are? Two hundred and five million.
Speaker 2 (06:43):
Which is weird because there's a survey out that says
that thirty five percent of Americans don't even like it.
Speaker 4 (06:48):
No, but then you do what you do. That's how
it goes anyway, work it through. Fifty eight bucks for
ten is five dollars eighty. A meal five dollars eighty.
You go to McDonald's Wanaka and see what you can
get for five dollars eighty and a guarantee it's not
turkey with all the with all the trimmings.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
Better than the deal you get at the Walkworth Pub
on a Sunday. We'll come back to McDonald's.
Speaker 2 (07:14):
Want go shortly, of course, because it seems like we
must talk about this and continue to talk about this forever.
Speaker 3 (07:24):
That Yeah, these are your Turkey Turkey news with this
Thanksgiving rewrap.
Speaker 2 (07:30):
And not only is it Thanksgiving and the holiday season,
but it is that time of the year when we
do things like what's the word of the year. Now,
I'm going to wash you a strong language warning here,
but I don't know if I need to.
Speaker 4 (07:42):
Right macquarie, I gave you what was the word? We
gave demure? Wasn't it demure? Some the other mcquarie dictionary
their twenty twenty four word of the year is in shitification.
What a fantastic word. They've been doing the word of
the year since two thousand and six. Cozy Libs was
there one last year till they went for a couple
(08:03):
of years ago, So in shitification became popular last year.
It was used in a blog post by a guy
called Cory and he's the author of the Internet con
and he used it to describe how digital platforms become
worse and worse. Here is how platforms die. Firstly, they're
good to their users. Then they abuse their users to
make things better for their business customers. Finally, they abuse
(08:25):
those business customers to claw back all of the value
for themselves. Then they die. I call this in shitification
word of the year sensation.
Speaker 2 (08:35):
Yeah, so they're going back to my strong language warning.
Does that qualifies strong language? It's a made up word
which sounds like it's got a bad word that I'm
doing air quotes as I say that in the middle
of it. Are you still allowed to say that it's
seven forty five in the morning on the most popular
radio station in the country.
Speaker 3 (08:57):
Oh, we can do. What a bit of hell we want?
Speaker 1 (08:59):
The rerap.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
We're going to finish up here with more Wanica McDonald's anks, just.
Speaker 3 (09:05):
Because it's it's funny. I reckon, it's the whole thing's funny.
Speaker 4 (09:09):
So McDonald's wanacare I talked about it yesterday, and this
thing's going to go ahead because you can't just go
around stopping businesses opening because we sort of like, especially
in a beleagued country like this, we like businesses opening anyway.
So this comes to us this way. So the rama
is everything wrong with the rama? Calling to Eric Crampton,
our friend at the New Zealand Initiative. So the District
Council in Queenstown notifies the National Public Health Service, which
(09:32):
is a wing of Health New Zealand, of course, that
McDonald's wants to come into the area. So they use
our money to put together an eight page submission on
what should happen. They strongly encourage further meaningful engagement with
the community. Thanks very much for that. That's awesome. I
don't know how we would have come to that conclusion
(09:53):
all by ourselves, without your input and funded by the taxpayer.
They also remind the council of its tetidity obligations to
kay Taipu as Man of Fana. This is McDonald's and WANIC.
They're concerned about the impacts the men C and the TNC.
Now you're saying, what are they and I wouldn't have
(10:13):
the slightest idea, and you know I couldn't give the
monkeys anyway. They are concerned about the impacts of the
MNC and the TNC, such as McDonald's on planetary health.
So the fact that there's a McDonald's now opening in
Wanaka is going to make all the difference to the
planetary health. They recommend a comprehensive. Hia once again wouldn't
have a clue including cultural impact assessment to analyze the
(10:35):
cultural impact for the locals. We would like to see
such an assessment demonstrating that the outcomes for the individuals
and the community of Wanaka would mostly be positive before
granting consent for this proposed fast food. Can you believe?
And Eric's one hundred percent right, this is what's wrong
with the rama all that. All I want to do
(10:56):
is open a business, employ some people, celibate of food,
pay some tax, probably support a few charities. But ah no,
let's turn it into a circus and have every Dickhead
and Wellington involved in. I mean, how much you reckon
it cost to put together a submission like that? Apart
from tens of thousands of dollars you.
Speaker 2 (11:15):
Reckon they can get away with not considering the treaty
if they promised not to do the Kiwi burger. Of course,
I lived through the the warehouse crisis, the Cambridge Warehouse crisis.
Speaker 3 (11:31):
Of I want to give a year, I can't.
Speaker 2 (11:36):
Late nineties anyway, I can't tell you the exact year,
but yeah, people wanted to, you know, open the warehouse
and Cambridge and of course the people at Cambridge were saying, no,
can't have a red shed in Cambridge, absolutely not.
Speaker 3 (11:52):
So they opened it and it just wasn't read. They
just had a red sign instead. Get seemed to keep
them body happy.
Speaker 2 (11:59):
So maybe it'll be able to come with some kind
of arrangement like that with McDonald's. Like if ire as McDonald's,
i'd be proposing instead of the of the golden arches,
I'd keep the sign to just put it up upside
down at the double for one acre.
Speaker 3 (12:14):
It would be my solution. See Asking Questions Providing Solutions.
Speaker 2 (12:19):
What a useful podcast just turned out to be. And
we'll be back with more great tips like that tomorrow.
See then.
Speaker 1 (12:32):
For more from News Talks at b Listen live on
air or online, and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our podcasts on iHeartRadio