August 26, 2025 • 11 mins
THE BEST BITS IN A SILLIER PACKAGE (from Wednesday's Mike Hosking Breakfast) Three Years Is Nothing/Never Fiddle with Super/Cost of Cone-ageddon/Why Some Places Are the Place to Live/Dipping Out of Biggest Loser
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:09):
You're listening to a podcast from news Talk said be
follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
The Rewrap, Okay.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
Idea and welcome to the Rewrap for Wednesday or the
Best but it's from the Mic Hosking Breakfast on Newstalks.
He'd be in a sillier package. I am Glenhart and today,
don't they know the rules? Never fiddle with the super
they might be konageddon? How much it actually costs? What's
the asking price in your area? And as Mike really
(00:46):
been watching the Biggest Loser? But before any of that,
your four year term, surely it's a no brainer. Three
years just isn't enough, is it?
Speaker 2 (00:53):
The timing I would have thought could not be more orkies.
I mean, if you broadly accept that the current narrative
that this government is working awfully hard to get us
out of the massive economic hole left to it by
the previous government, and if you accept that that previous
government was one of the worst in living memory, if
not any memory, then just imagine where we would be
if that hopeless lot of twenty through twenty twenty three
(01:15):
had actually been rampaging across the countryside until last year.
Because they'd had a four year term and surely it's
that cold, present, still throbbing reality that prevents the discussion
on a four year term going much further. I mean,
a lot of politicians seem to want one, and who
can blame them. There's a logic to what they argue.
I mean, year one, you arrive at your office, introduce
yourself to everybody, put a few press releases out and
(01:36):
start the spade worth. Year two you go for break
because year three is written off in campaign mode. But
as Britain is discovering, five years is an awfully long
time and until they change the law about calling early elections,
they got into this nasty habit of calling early elections
because five years tended to exhaust them and various calamities
would present themselves, with the only exit strategy being a vote.
(01:57):
So following the logic, three isn't enough, five is too long,
so four is goldilocks or is it? I mean? David Seymour,
fan of four, argued the most countries have longer terms,
that there are very few countries with three years. Well,
there's also very few countries that balance their budgets or
pay down debts, so it doesn't make it good. What
is good is his admission that the jurymanded shambles he
(02:18):
offered up as a twist on an extended term with
committees and numbers will never see the light of day.
It's taken us twenty five years for goodness sake to
get our head around the MMP the Seymour version of
an extended term. If you ever read it, it's got
a half life of eight million years. You had a
headache by the end of it anyway, So for or not,
my gut says, will probably go there. It'll be a
thing changes coming, but small warning. Time isn't the issue.
(02:42):
Quality is. Time doesn't bring talent or skill, or insight
or dedication, professionalism or success. It just brings time. The
rest is what we should be way more concerned about.
Speaker 3 (02:53):
I mean, it is very difficult to build anything decent
in just three years, though, isn't it Take it from
the guy who drives past whatever it is they're trying
to do with the pen link motorway on or an
off ramp by pass, thing which has been going on
forever and as far as I can tell, will be.
Speaker 2 (03:11):
Going on wherever the rewrap.
Speaker 3 (03:14):
Another thing I'm not sure they should be fiddling with
but they seem to be intent on fiddling with a superannuation.
I thought that was the golden wall of politics, never miss,
never messed with super.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
The Retirement Commissioner producing those figures yesterday that shows self
employed have less key we saber than employees does nothing
but reinforce this country's great predilection of mucking about with
issues not really solving them. Seems transparently obvious to me
by now, after all these years, that those who saved
save those who don't don't. It seems transparently obvious. Also,
you can't rely on a government who changes the rules
(03:44):
that will when it comes to contributions. It also seems obvious.
Individual interpretation of wealth or fiscal comforters unique to the person.
So cajoling people to put money aside won't work if
you don't want it to. So here we are, all
these years later, with an average nest egg of about
thirty something thousand dollars is nothing. It's not going to
see you right. It won't cushion the retirement blow. It
certainly won't stop the retirement superannuation debate. What will compulsion
(04:07):
look at Australia's no, look at ours case closed. Now
that's not to say I favor that. I mean I
favor people doing their own thing. I favor not being
barked at about a dollar here, a dollar there, government contributions,
endless harping about old people and the cost of the state.
If you want to reduce the cost of the state,
make people safe, because we know they are not insufficient
numbers currently nor showing any real signs of taking their
(04:29):
habit up. If you don't make people save, you will
forever be pushing out retirement in the age, or cutting
back on payments, or hoping the super fund strikes oil
or gold or both and solves the problem another way.
The politicians are afraid to pull the g auge trigger.
There are still those who argue, in fact, there isn't
actually an issue at all. It's just all overhyped. So
short of some bold decisions, we busy ourselves with reports
(04:50):
stating the bleeding obvious. The simple truth is no one's happy,
and that's what happens when you have a leadership vacuum.
Somebody needs to own this and call it, and then
having call it, keep their head down for a while.
With all the ensuing whining. But look at Australia, look
at us, look at the bottom line. They win. It's
not hard. You just have to want to actually make
(05:11):
a decision too.
Speaker 3 (05:11):
What somebody's making some money out of people retiring. I
was at I was driving through a retirement village yesterday.
But it just so happens. Both my mother and my
mother in law live at the same village, and I'm
normally there on weekends. I'm not normally there during the
week and my god, there was a lot going on.
(05:33):
There were gardeners, there were tradees, there was a bus
coming and going. There was a lot of activity going there.
There's the whole industry. Don't you worry about that. I
met your roadworks before. Yes, yes, yes, that roadworks has
certainly involved a lot of cones from time to time.
(05:54):
The cones aren't going away, even though everybody keeps telling
us that they are going to be well.
Speaker 2 (05:59):
The first time I can reveal. Auckland Transport have had
a shocking week. They lost in court the other day.
There's some legal student we told you about yesterday took
the court over the speed bump, so they lost that
and after law changes they have to report on how
much money they spend on road cones. And we can
tell you this morning this for the rest of the country,
so you can laugh at Auckland yet again. Sixty three
point two million dollars. Sixty three point two million dollars
(06:20):
on road cones, as the mayor says this morning, it's
beyond a joke. No kidding, mind you. He hasn't fixed it,
has a he says. I've told them and no uncertain
terms not to do it, but they don't listen because
they're so far up themselves. Sixty million dollars, says Wayne Brown,
is the equivalent of a rates rise of three percent.
Three percent. That's Auckland transport for you.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
Okay, let's get rid of the cones and put back
some of my rubbish bins please. And I feel like
I can ask for that given that I pay rates
the rewrapped. What the current asking price is for a
house like nine and nine in my area won't be
anything like what it is in Long Bay, though.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
There are several areas around the country Auckland, Canterbury, Wike
out of Taranaki that are seeing some massive increases in
asking prices. Long By in Auckland, for example, twenty nine
point six percent up. This is a year on year
twenty nine point six percent up. What the hell's going
on in Long Bay, Devonport twenty one Drury, which is
South Auckland sixty one Epsom which is an inner city
(07:19):
Auckland suburb if you're outside of the country ten percent,
Ireland christ Jut blue Chip up twenty two percent, and
what's an whiter New Plymouth up twenty eight percent. A
lot of it's in Auckland, So there are pockets within
Auckland and a few areas in certain parts of christ
Church and certain parts of Taranaki that are there will
(07:40):
be individual sets of circumstances going on. I'm sure there'll
be some new development or something will be going on,
because that's certainly not reflective of the broader market.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Yeah, I can tell you exactly what it is in
Long Bay. They've got a very fancy block of shops
there and there's a Chinese restaurant there called Birds of
a Feather and they were running a promotion recently on
grab one where you could get a peking dark banquet
before for like one hundred and forty bucks. There was
so much food it was amazing. Recommend burs of better.
(08:10):
This is not an end, by the way, it's just
happen to go there and tell you what, if I
could get a house somewhere close to that restaurant, if
you're prepared to pay it, but the extra, I reckon,
it's so rewrap. You know, I'd probably have to end
up going on The Biggest Loser.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
I got here's the thing, so I got onto the
Netflix The Biggest Loser. You're watching this one, so I
don't know how many episodes there are, but it's a
documentary on The Biggest Loser. Now, obviously I didn't watch
The Biggest Loser when it was a thing, but it
was a thing. It was a monumental global thing. And
basically fat people lost weight each week, and you're lost
(08:45):
more weight and you became the Biggest Loser. And so
they talked to the producer of the show and the
guy who invented the show, and they talked to the
doctor on the show, and they talked to all of
the people who were on the show who have a
story to tell. And there's a lot of story about
what I didn't know. Katie told me this. There's two
main trainers. One of the trainers is on the documentary
and he's moderately entertaining. The other trainer is like you
(09:06):
got to see her a believe it, Like she's Arnold
Schwarzeneer in female form. She is a machine. Not particularly likable,
but a machine. Anyway. She turns out to hang with
JFK these days, so she's a big JFK fan and
she's all over. So RFK, my watch could be he
she could think it's JFK. I don't know, but RFK
that's about Yeah, they're the FK's. She's hanging with the Kennedy's. Anyway,
(09:29):
she's on social media. She hates this documentary. She's all over.
But here's the point. I'm red Flag. So I thought
Background in Sight fair enough, but I got onto the
second episode yesterday. I find it draining. I find it
a bunch of losers who went. And what you're learning
about the people is it's not about being fat and
losing weight. They all had a problem driving the weight.
(09:52):
So in other words, they it was escapism. Essentially, they
were wanting to change their life. There was something going
on in their life that they were running from, and
they saw reality television as an out and so once
you scratch below the surface. It's like so many people
in life, isn't it. You think that's your problem, though
it's not just about sixteen things going on underneath. So
it's and so by the time I got.
Speaker 3 (10:13):
That, oh man, this is I do reckon. You need
to wonder who recommended that to you? That program?
Speaker 2 (10:18):
No, no, just no, it was I know it was
Jason again, Wasn't it was Jason the boss. He came
in and he was, yeah, you watch The Biggest Loser?
And I said no, anyway, so I watched it. I
thought it's too draining. I don't have time to be
dragged down by people and their problems. You know what
I'm saying, Let's get up with people.
Speaker 3 (10:37):
So just so clear, he wasn't watching The Biggest Loser.
He's watching a documentary about the Biggest Loser. And that
is the kind of rubbish that our boss, our big boss, Jason.
I'm just saying he's our big boss because he's the
top of the chain of bosses. So that's no reference
to the size of him whatsoever. But that's the kind
(10:57):
of rubbish that he watches. He just constantly comes in
and tells us about some stupid shit that he's been
watching and tries to get us to watch it, and
then we watch it and it turns out to be
stupid shit Stasie. So enough of those recommendations. Please, That's
all I can say. I am being heart. That was
the rerap. Please recommend this as great listening to all
(11:18):
your friends.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
See you back here tomorrow the Rerap. For more from
News Talks ed B listen live on air or online,
and keep our shows with you wherever you go with
our podcasts on iHeartRadio
You're listening to a podcast from news Talk said be
follow this and our wide range of podcasts now on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
The Rewrap, Okay.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
Idea and welcome to the Rewrap for Wednesday or the
Best but it's from the Mic Hosking Breakfast on Newstalks.
He'd be in a sillier package. I am Glenhart and today,
don't they know the rules? Never fiddle with the super
they might be konageddon? How much it actually costs? What's
the asking price in your area? And as Mike really
(00:46):
been watching the Biggest Loser? But before any of that,
your four year term, surely it's a no brainer. Three
years just isn't enough, is it?
Speaker 2 (00:53):
The timing I would have thought could not be more orkies.
I mean, if you broadly accept that the current narrative
that this government is working awfully hard to get us
out of the massive economic hole left to it by
the previous government, and if you accept that that previous
government was one of the worst in living memory, if
not any memory, then just imagine where we would be
if that hopeless lot of twenty through twenty twenty three
(01:15):
had actually been rampaging across the countryside until last year.
Because they'd had a four year term and surely it's
that cold, present, still throbbing reality that prevents the discussion
on a four year term going much further. I mean,
a lot of politicians seem to want one, and who
can blame them. There's a logic to what they argue.
I mean, year one, you arrive at your office, introduce
yourself to everybody, put a few press releases out and
(01:36):
start the spade worth. Year two you go for break
because year three is written off in campaign mode. But
as Britain is discovering, five years is an awfully long
time and until they change the law about calling early elections,
they got into this nasty habit of calling early elections
because five years tended to exhaust them and various calamities
would present themselves, with the only exit strategy being a vote.
(01:57):
So following the logic, three isn't enough, five is too long,
so four is goldilocks or is it? I mean? David Seymour,
fan of four, argued the most countries have longer terms,
that there are very few countries with three years. Well,
there's also very few countries that balance their budgets or
pay down debts, so it doesn't make it good. What
is good is his admission that the jurymanded shambles he
(02:18):
offered up as a twist on an extended term with
committees and numbers will never see the light of day.
It's taken us twenty five years for goodness sake to
get our head around the MMP the Seymour version of
an extended term. If you ever read it, it's got
a half life of eight million years. You had a
headache by the end of it anyway, So for or not,
my gut says, will probably go there. It'll be a
thing changes coming, but small warning. Time isn't the issue.
(02:42):
Quality is. Time doesn't bring talent or skill, or insight
or dedication, professionalism or success. It just brings time. The
rest is what we should be way more concerned about.
Speaker 3 (02:53):
I mean, it is very difficult to build anything decent
in just three years, though, isn't it Take it from
the guy who drives past whatever it is they're trying
to do with the pen link motorway on or an
off ramp by pass, thing which has been going on
forever and as far as I can tell, will be.
Speaker 2 (03:11):
Going on wherever the rewrap.
Speaker 3 (03:14):
Another thing I'm not sure they should be fiddling with
but they seem to be intent on fiddling with a superannuation.
I thought that was the golden wall of politics, never miss,
never messed with super.
Speaker 2 (03:23):
The Retirement Commissioner producing those figures yesterday that shows self
employed have less key we saber than employees does nothing
but reinforce this country's great predilection of mucking about with
issues not really solving them. Seems transparently obvious to me
by now, after all these years, that those who saved
save those who don't don't. It seems transparently obvious. Also,
you can't rely on a government who changes the rules
(03:44):
that will when it comes to contributions. It also seems obvious.
Individual interpretation of wealth or fiscal comforters unique to the person.
So cajoling people to put money aside won't work if
you don't want it to. So here we are, all
these years later, with an average nest egg of about
thirty something thousand dollars is nothing. It's not going to
see you right. It won't cushion the retirement blow. It
certainly won't stop the retirement superannuation debate. What will compulsion
(04:07):
look at Australia's no, look at ours case closed. Now
that's not to say I favor that. I mean I
favor people doing their own thing. I favor not being
barked at about a dollar here, a dollar there, government contributions,
endless harping about old people and the cost of the state.
If you want to reduce the cost of the state,
make people safe, because we know they are not insufficient
numbers currently nor showing any real signs of taking their
(04:29):
habit up. If you don't make people save, you will
forever be pushing out retirement in the age, or cutting
back on payments, or hoping the super fund strikes oil
or gold or both and solves the problem another way.
The politicians are afraid to pull the g auge trigger.
There are still those who argue, in fact, there isn't
actually an issue at all. It's just all overhyped. So
short of some bold decisions, we busy ourselves with reports
(04:50):
stating the bleeding obvious. The simple truth is no one's happy,
and that's what happens when you have a leadership vacuum.
Somebody needs to own this and call it, and then
having call it, keep their head down for a while.
With all the ensuing whining. But look at Australia, look
at us, look at the bottom line. They win. It's
not hard. You just have to want to actually make
(05:11):
a decision too.
Speaker 3 (05:11):
What somebody's making some money out of people retiring. I
was at I was driving through a retirement village yesterday.
But it just so happens. Both my mother and my
mother in law live at the same village, and I'm
normally there on weekends. I'm not normally there during the
week and my god, there was a lot going on.
(05:33):
There were gardeners, there were tradees, there was a bus
coming and going. There was a lot of activity going there.
There's the whole industry. Don't you worry about that. I
met your roadworks before. Yes, yes, yes, that roadworks has
certainly involved a lot of cones from time to time.
(05:54):
The cones aren't going away, even though everybody keeps telling
us that they are going to be well.
Speaker 2 (05:59):
The first time I can reveal. Auckland Transport have had
a shocking week. They lost in court the other day.
There's some legal student we told you about yesterday took
the court over the speed bump, so they lost that
and after law changes they have to report on how
much money they spend on road cones. And we can
tell you this morning this for the rest of the country,
so you can laugh at Auckland yet again. Sixty three
point two million dollars. Sixty three point two million dollars
(06:20):
on road cones, as the mayor says this morning, it's
beyond a joke. No kidding, mind you. He hasn't fixed it,
has a he says. I've told them and no uncertain
terms not to do it, but they don't listen because
they're so far up themselves. Sixty million dollars, says Wayne Brown,
is the equivalent of a rates rise of three percent.
Three percent. That's Auckland transport for you.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
Okay, let's get rid of the cones and put back
some of my rubbish bins please. And I feel like
I can ask for that given that I pay rates
the rewrapped. What the current asking price is for a
house like nine and nine in my area won't be
anything like what it is in Long Bay, though.
Speaker 2 (06:56):
There are several areas around the country Auckland, Canterbury, Wike
out of Taranaki that are seeing some massive increases in
asking prices. Long By in Auckland, for example, twenty nine
point six percent up. This is a year on year
twenty nine point six percent up. What the hell's going
on in Long Bay, Devonport twenty one Drury, which is
South Auckland sixty one Epsom which is an inner city
(07:19):
Auckland suburb if you're outside of the country ten percent,
Ireland christ Jut blue Chip up twenty two percent, and
what's an whiter New Plymouth up twenty eight percent. A
lot of it's in Auckland, So there are pockets within
Auckland and a few areas in certain parts of christ
Church and certain parts of Taranaki that are there will
(07:40):
be individual sets of circumstances going on. I'm sure there'll
be some new development or something will be going on,
because that's certainly not reflective of the broader market.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Yeah, I can tell you exactly what it is in
Long Bay. They've got a very fancy block of shops
there and there's a Chinese restaurant there called Birds of
a Feather and they were running a promotion recently on
grab one where you could get a peking dark banquet
before for like one hundred and forty bucks. There was
so much food it was amazing. Recommend burs of better.
(08:10):
This is not an end, by the way, it's just
happen to go there and tell you what, if I
could get a house somewhere close to that restaurant, if
you're prepared to pay it, but the extra, I reckon,
it's so rewrap. You know, I'd probably have to end
up going on The Biggest Loser.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
I got here's the thing, so I got onto the
Netflix The Biggest Loser. You're watching this one, so I
don't know how many episodes there are, but it's a
documentary on The Biggest Loser. Now, obviously I didn't watch
The Biggest Loser when it was a thing, but it
was a thing. It was a monumental global thing. And
basically fat people lost weight each week, and you're lost
(08:45):
more weight and you became the Biggest Loser. And so
they talked to the producer of the show and the
guy who invented the show, and they talked to the
doctor on the show, and they talked to all of
the people who were on the show who have a
story to tell. And there's a lot of story about
what I didn't know. Katie told me this. There's two
main trainers. One of the trainers is on the documentary
and he's moderately entertaining. The other trainer is like you
(09:06):
got to see her a believe it, Like she's Arnold
Schwarzeneer in female form. She is a machine. Not particularly likable,
but a machine. Anyway. She turns out to hang with
JFK these days, so she's a big JFK fan and
she's all over. So RFK, my watch could be he
she could think it's JFK. I don't know, but RFK
that's about Yeah, they're the FK's. She's hanging with the Kennedy's. Anyway,
(09:29):
she's on social media. She hates this documentary. She's all over.
But here's the point. I'm red Flag. So I thought
Background in Sight fair enough, but I got onto the
second episode yesterday. I find it draining. I find it
a bunch of losers who went. And what you're learning
about the people is it's not about being fat and
losing weight. They all had a problem driving the weight.
(09:52):
So in other words, they it was escapism. Essentially, they
were wanting to change their life. There was something going
on in their life that they were running from, and
they saw reality television as an out and so once
you scratch below the surface. It's like so many people
in life, isn't it. You think that's your problem, though
it's not just about sixteen things going on underneath. So
it's and so by the time I got.
Speaker 3 (10:13):
That, oh man, this is I do reckon. You need
to wonder who recommended that to you? That program?
Speaker 2 (10:18):
No, no, just no, it was I know it was
Jason again, Wasn't it was Jason the boss. He came
in and he was, yeah, you watch The Biggest Loser?
And I said no, anyway, so I watched it. I
thought it's too draining. I don't have time to be
dragged down by people and their problems. You know what
I'm saying, Let's get up with people.
Speaker 3 (10:37):
So just so clear, he wasn't watching The Biggest Loser.
He's watching a documentary about the Biggest Loser. And that
is the kind of rubbish that our boss, our big boss, Jason.
I'm just saying he's our big boss because he's the
top of the chain of bosses. So that's no reference
to the size of him whatsoever. But that's the kind
(10:57):
of rubbish that he watches. He just constantly comes in
and tells us about some stupid shit that he's been
watching and tries to get us to watch it, and
then we watch it and it turns out to be
stupid shit Stasie. So enough of those recommendations. Please, That's
all I can say. I am being heart. That was
the rerap. Please recommend this as great listening to all
(11:18):
your friends.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
See you back here tomorrow the Rerap. For more from
News Talks ed B listen live on air or online,
and keep our shows with you wherever you go with
our podcasts on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
Law & Order: Criminal Justice System - Season 1 & Season 2
Season Two Out Now! Law & Order: Criminal Justice System tells the real stories behind the landmark cases that have shaped how the most dangerous and influential criminals in America are prosecuted. In its second season, the series tackles the threat of terrorism in the United States. From the rise of extremist political groups in the 60s to domestic lone wolves in the modern day, we explore how organizations like the FBI and Joint Terrorism Take Force have evolved to fight back against a multitude of terrorist threats.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.