August 10, 2025 • 12 mins
THE BEST BITS IN A SILLIER PACKAGE (from Monday's Mike Hosking Breakfast) Winning By Default Isn't Democracy/Mid-Term Polls Aren't Polls/Shadow Ministers Aren't Ministers/Maybe Tariffs Are Dumb/Not the Warriors' Year
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):
Rewrap There, Welcome to the Rewrap for Monday. All the
best but from the Mike Hosking Breakfast on News Talk,
sa'd be in a sillier package. I am Glenn Hart
and today if I can just bring out the right
spreadsheet here it is, Oh, we've got a pole again.
Why in the middle of an election term if we've
(00:47):
got a poll don't know, especially one that is obviously meaningless,
Will I gene prime big apps for her? From the
Mike Hosking, I think he really likes what wish she's
coming from and what she's about tariffs. When will they
stop working for the United States? It seems like they
have been working for them but might not continue to
(01:07):
And Mike gives up on the warriors. I know it's
a shocking day. But first up, the problem with local
body elections.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
I don't know Alisha Milman, but I wish her nothing
but the best. But as it turns out, she is
your new counselor in the Kahuranaki seat Hastings District Council.
So she was standing against one person. That person withdrew,
so she wins by default. She got no experience. She
put a hand up, one person standing. Congratulations, jobs yours.
(01:37):
What a stupid system. So this story is far from unique.
Of course, plenty of elections aren't even held because no
one stands. All people who may or may not be
any good don't get opponents, so they win by default.
So here's an idea. Excepting we are fantastically over governed,
and clearly there are nowhere near the number of people
interested in filling the jobs, how about we run a
system whereby you have a minimum number of candidates, like
(01:58):
a quorum. If you don't get that number of the
voters off the people if there are any, do not
contest that seat, and either the seat is left vacant
for a term, and or a commissioner or overseers appointed,
like they've done in places like Towering around that areas
when the council falls apart. In other words, you appoint
an experienced expert. Having a vacant seat might lead to
(02:20):
more interest next time, or it might lead to the
realization there are too many seats. Having an expert or
a commissioner might lead to a realization that amateur hour
is no way to run a city or a town
or a district. We don't hand out regular jobs by default.
Why on earth do we do it at the highest
level of civic leadership. The scenario is so desperate. We
literally take anyone that's not smart running a raffle far
(02:44):
less a population, and yet here we are with any
number of councils, mide and debt and handing out cost
plus accounting rate rises because they don't have a clue
how to run anything properly. If someone from Mars came
down to review the way we do this, they would
fall over laughing at our stupidity. So it's a contest.
It's a quorum, or we do some appointing of some
actual talent. Now you tell me that's not a bad idea. O.
Speaker 2 (03:08):
I don't know what system of government they run on
alien worlds might seem just as ridiculous to us. Who
could say, I understand that somebody is running for mere
in two different places under two different names, which I
actually think is it seems to be a practical way
of going about it, and just have the same people running
(03:28):
different That will certainly affect the places where nobody's standing.
Speaker 1 (03:31):
At all, rewrap.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
So yeah, you might wonder if democracy is dead basically
due to lack of interest. Could that explain these pole results?
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Some will fall for us. Suppose there'll be a headline
hung Parliament. There's a pole out the s Morning Taxpayer
Union Career poll. It makes literally no sense because it
was taken between the third and fifth of August. The
reason I say so, Top is on two point six
percent up one point four, so obviously that's not real.
The Outdoors and Freedom parties on one point one up one,
and Fission New Zealand is on zero point four up
(04:07):
zero point four, so you can dismiss all of that,
which means the rest of the numbers don't make any sense.
The headline will be Labor overtakes National. They've gained two
to thirty three. National drop two to thirty one, so
National thirty three to thirty one. Greens but hold at
about nine say ten, actually nine point eight. Act are
down a half point to eight and a half. New
Zealand first to down a couple to seven point eight.
(04:29):
The Murray Party drop zero point three to three point two.
So the point of all of that being is that
when you add the seats together. The center right of
sixty one the center left are sixty one.
Speaker 2 (04:39):
Oh well, Mike's kind of look silly, isn't he? Writing
off the outdoors and freedom parties? Wow? What have they
gone up? One thousand percent? There? Right? Yeah, we've got
from point one to one point one? Is there?
Speaker 3 (04:57):
All right?
Speaker 2 (04:57):
Is it one thousand percent?
Speaker 1 (04:59):
Yes?
Speaker 2 (04:59):
One thousand percent? So I mean you can't that's the
are the ones that the big momentum at the moment,
So write them off at your peril, Husking, are we rare?
Speaking of writing political MPs off, the one known as
Willow Jene Prime was written off by our host last week.
I think the writing off has continued this morning.
Speaker 3 (05:20):
Willow jen Prime, what a rock star? So, having been
exposed so shockingly on Friday to be a combination of
incompetent and lazy, she then goes and doubles down. So
unfortunately for Chriss Hipkins, they have a meeting over the weekend,
the Labor Party get together. So the only question anyone
asks him about that is how useless is Willow Jene Prime?
(05:42):
For words to that effect, So her defense appears to
be that she was busy far too busy engaging with
the sector to reply to an email from Erica Stanford.
She was engaging with the sector. She came away with
the impression, and this is how to be blunt, this
is how thick she is. She came away with the
(06:02):
impression that they the sector did not know what the
government was doing. Quote it was very secretive. Quote nobody
knew anything or could not speak to anything. So my
and of course no one at this point asked her this,
my question would have been given. You came away, Willow
Jean from the sector with the impression that everything was secretive.
(06:26):
Would it not be hoove you to engage with Minister Stanford?
Who oh, hang on has invited you to engage, so
you don't have to be in the dark anymore. Oh look,
I probably could have said, this is why I need
to take my time, and please assure me or assure
me that I can have the time that I need
(06:47):
to do this. Does any of that make any sense anyway?
The upshot of it all was by the time Hipkins
turned up on the station yesterday, she apparently had learnt
a lot. I don't believe a word of that.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
I think it's the completely pointless ass covering that politicians
insist on doing makes us lose faith in them. You know,
if people just say owned things, they said, ah, yeah,
that was I cocked that out completely. I should have
talked to that. I didn't because I couldn't be bothered
(07:17):
or whatever. I feel like that would be a little
bit more endearing than why so no wonder we don't
want to vote for anyone rerep right. I feel like
it's been a good minute and a half since we
mentioned tariff, so we better bring that up. Mike's got
(07:38):
some steps that show him might not actually work for
Trump after all.
Speaker 3 (07:42):
The Budget Lab at Yale University has come up with
some numbers. So the average effective teriff imposed by the
US on various countries around the world now is eighteen
point six percent. That's average, which is up from two
point four so there's been a material change. Teriff revenues
twenty eight billion, triple the monthly revenue scene in twenty
twenty four, so they're bringing the money in, there's no
(08:03):
question about that. But the Congressional Budget Office say it
would reduce cumulus government borrowing in ten years to twenty
thirty five, or two and a half trillion so far,
so good, right. However, they also judged that the tariffs
would shrink the size of the US economy relative to
how it would perform without tariffs, and that is the
(08:23):
value of free trade, of course, that we understand in
this part of the world. They also project that the
additional revenues generated from the tariff will be more than
offset by the revenue lost due to the Trump administration's
tax cuts over the next decade. So one of the
impacts of Trump's trade war so far has been to
increase the number of imports into the country. Because everyone panicked,
(08:44):
of course, and stockpiled, US exports have only increased modestly.
The net result is that the US goods trade deficit
has not fallen. In fact, it has blown out. It
has reached a level of one hundred and sixty two
billion dollars in March alone, falling back to eighty six
billion in June. So, in other words, for all the
noise about the money coming in, it is true, but
(09:07):
the full picture is only partially true. And it proves
beyond a shadow of a doubt that tariffs overall don't work.
Speaker 2 (09:16):
Yeah, because otherwise everybody w'd be doing them. Of Course,
everybody is now doing them, aren't they because they two
untas as they do to you or whatever. I'm sure
Mike's right, though, and I'm sure in the end trumped
back down and everything will be great. The rerap fear
the same cart you said for the Warrior season, which
(09:37):
seems to be going from average to below average to
quite a long way below average, and even their greatest
fan has now given up on them in.
Speaker 3 (09:49):
The old hope for one thing, expect another scenario that
makes up so much of life the Warriors, Dishop, what
you kind of knew was coming, didn't they? Is it over?
I think pretty much it is. I reckon we will
end up with thirty seven is ish points. That accounts
for one more loss and a few more wins. Is
it good enough for the four? You'd hope so, but
probably not. Is it good enough for the eight?
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (10:07):
Indeed, most as we said last week, in other seasons,
at this time of year, we're debating the eight, aren't we?
Speaker 1 (10:13):
Are we in?
Speaker 3 (10:13):
Are we not? We used to get excited about all
that we make the eight and who knows what's possible?
That was the chat. But that's the trouble with the season.
Of course, we've been so much better than that. The
eight is not the story. The four was the story
and it may may still be. But no matter what
the end number is, the simple truth, the inescapable reality
is we can't beat top sides. We haven't they beat us.
(10:35):
We don't beat them. Oh, yes, there was some more
concussion and injury the beleagued side added to the beleaguedness.
Replacements had replacements. But it is what it is. I mean,
I don't follow the wider competition closely enough to know
whether everyone carries our level of injuries or for some
reason we are battered in a way no one can comprehend.
But there is no miracle cure. Depth only takes you
so far when you're dropping like flies. Now I could
(10:59):
trouble you with some fanciful nonsense about hope and maybe's
and miracles. I could say, hey, look at Penrith. They
were bottom of the table, they were useless. We beat them.
If they can do it, so can we nine in
a row. But that's wasting everyone's time, isn't it. We
have never ever won nine in a row. My prediction
for the rest of the season, as you just heard,
doesn't actually have us winning four in a row. We're not, sadly,
aside to defy history, we know teams don't win from
(11:22):
outside the four. We aren't in a position to rewrite
that stat So was it the injuries that did us in?
Or do we need to take basically another complete step up?
In other words, yes, we are good, Yes we improved.
Yes this has been a great year, but we are
still always were just short of greatness. And if that's
the case, what's the answer. Well this, sadly, I'm here
(11:45):
to tell you after thirty one goes, it's not our.
Speaker 2 (11:50):
Yes, it's a momentum shift, that's what we seem to see.
Isn't it like they started off with a hesse and
a raw. Now they've had a slump. I mean, it's
better that they have a slump now than when they
actually get to the finals, and maybe they can put
some more hess back into that raw and get going again.
I'm just trying to stay positive. It's not like Mike
(12:11):
to be so ho hum. I don't know what's happening.
I'm the positive one and he's a cynical one. It's
like we've swapped bodies or something. I'm not quite haggard
enough I think and Kate's words to look like Mike.
I don't mean she thinks that I don't look haggard.
I probably do look ha good, but she says that
(12:33):
Michael looks hag good. Actually, now I beive it, I
definitely more haggard than Mike. What am I saying? Anyway,
I'm going to stop saying anything, and I'll start saying
it again. To Marrasi.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
For more from News Talks d B. Listen live on
air or online, and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our podcast 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):
Rewrap There, Welcome to the Rewrap for Monday. All the
best but from the Mike Hosking Breakfast on News Talk,
sa'd be in a sillier package. I am Glenn Hart
and today if I can just bring out the right
spreadsheet here it is, Oh, we've got a pole again.
Why in the middle of an election term if we've
(00:47):
got a poll don't know, especially one that is obviously meaningless,
Will I gene prime big apps for her? From the
Mike Hosking, I think he really likes what wish she's
coming from and what she's about tariffs. When will they
stop working for the United States? It seems like they
have been working for them but might not continue to
(01:07):
And Mike gives up on the warriors. I know it's
a shocking day. But first up, the problem with local
body elections.
Speaker 3 (01:16):
I don't know Alisha Milman, but I wish her nothing
but the best. But as it turns out, she is
your new counselor in the Kahuranaki seat Hastings District Council.
So she was standing against one person. That person withdrew,
so she wins by default. She got no experience. She
put a hand up, one person standing. Congratulations, jobs yours.
(01:37):
What a stupid system. So this story is far from unique.
Of course, plenty of elections aren't even held because no
one stands. All people who may or may not be
any good don't get opponents, so they win by default.
So here's an idea. Excepting we are fantastically over governed,
and clearly there are nowhere near the number of people
interested in filling the jobs, how about we run a
system whereby you have a minimum number of candidates, like
(01:58):
a quorum. If you don't get that number of the
voters off the people if there are any, do not
contest that seat, and either the seat is left vacant
for a term, and or a commissioner or overseers appointed,
like they've done in places like Towering around that areas
when the council falls apart. In other words, you appoint
an experienced expert. Having a vacant seat might lead to
(02:20):
more interest next time, or it might lead to the
realization there are too many seats. Having an expert or
a commissioner might lead to a realization that amateur hour
is no way to run a city or a town
or a district. We don't hand out regular jobs by default.
Why on earth do we do it at the highest
level of civic leadership. The scenario is so desperate. We
literally take anyone that's not smart running a raffle far
(02:44):
less a population, and yet here we are with any
number of councils, mide and debt and handing out cost
plus accounting rate rises because they don't have a clue
how to run anything properly. If someone from Mars came
down to review the way we do this, they would
fall over laughing at our stupidity. So it's a contest.
It's a quorum, or we do some appointing of some
actual talent. Now you tell me that's not a bad idea. O.
Speaker 2 (03:08):
I don't know what system of government they run on
alien worlds might seem just as ridiculous to us. Who
could say, I understand that somebody is running for mere
in two different places under two different names, which I
actually think is it seems to be a practical way
of going about it, and just have the same people running
(03:28):
different That will certainly affect the places where nobody's standing.
Speaker 1 (03:31):
At all, rewrap.
Speaker 2 (03:33):
So yeah, you might wonder if democracy is dead basically
due to lack of interest. Could that explain these pole results?
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Some will fall for us. Suppose there'll be a headline
hung Parliament. There's a pole out the s Morning Taxpayer
Union Career poll. It makes literally no sense because it
was taken between the third and fifth of August. The
reason I say so, Top is on two point six
percent up one point four, so obviously that's not real.
The Outdoors and Freedom parties on one point one up one,
and Fission New Zealand is on zero point four up
(04:07):
zero point four, so you can dismiss all of that,
which means the rest of the numbers don't make any sense.
The headline will be Labor overtakes National. They've gained two
to thirty three. National drop two to thirty one, so
National thirty three to thirty one. Greens but hold at
about nine say ten, actually nine point eight. Act are
down a half point to eight and a half. New
Zealand first to down a couple to seven point eight.
(04:29):
The Murray Party drop zero point three to three point two.
So the point of all of that being is that
when you add the seats together. The center right of
sixty one the center left are sixty one.
Speaker 2 (04:39):
Oh well, Mike's kind of look silly, isn't he? Writing
off the outdoors and freedom parties? Wow? What have they
gone up? One thousand percent? There? Right? Yeah, we've got
from point one to one point one? Is there?
Speaker 3 (04:57):
All right?
Speaker 2 (04:57):
Is it one thousand percent?
Speaker 1 (04:59):
Yes?
Speaker 2 (04:59):
One thousand percent? So I mean you can't that's the
are the ones that the big momentum at the moment,
So write them off at your peril, Husking, are we rare?
Speaking of writing political MPs off, the one known as
Willow Jene Prime was written off by our host last week.
I think the writing off has continued this morning.
Speaker 3 (05:20):
Willow jen Prime, what a rock star? So, having been
exposed so shockingly on Friday to be a combination of
incompetent and lazy, she then goes and doubles down. So
unfortunately for Chriss Hipkins, they have a meeting over the weekend,
the Labor Party get together. So the only question anyone
asks him about that is how useless is Willow Jene Prime?
(05:42):
For words to that effect, So her defense appears to
be that she was busy far too busy engaging with
the sector to reply to an email from Erica Stanford.
She was engaging with the sector. She came away with
the impression, and this is how to be blunt, this
is how thick she is. She came away with the
(06:02):
impression that they the sector did not know what the
government was doing. Quote it was very secretive. Quote nobody
knew anything or could not speak to anything. So my
and of course no one at this point asked her this,
my question would have been given. You came away, Willow
Jean from the sector with the impression that everything was secretive.
(06:26):
Would it not be hoove you to engage with Minister Stanford?
Who oh, hang on has invited you to engage, so
you don't have to be in the dark anymore. Oh look,
I probably could have said, this is why I need
to take my time, and please assure me or assure
me that I can have the time that I need
(06:47):
to do this. Does any of that make any sense anyway?
The upshot of it all was by the time Hipkins
turned up on the station yesterday, she apparently had learnt
a lot. I don't believe a word of that.
Speaker 2 (06:57):
I think it's the completely pointless ass covering that politicians
insist on doing makes us lose faith in them. You know,
if people just say owned things, they said, ah, yeah,
that was I cocked that out completely. I should have
talked to that. I didn't because I couldn't be bothered
(07:17):
or whatever. I feel like that would be a little
bit more endearing than why so no wonder we don't
want to vote for anyone rerep right. I feel like
it's been a good minute and a half since we
mentioned tariff, so we better bring that up. Mike's got
(07:38):
some steps that show him might not actually work for
Trump after all.
Speaker 3 (07:42):
The Budget Lab at Yale University has come up with
some numbers. So the average effective teriff imposed by the
US on various countries around the world now is eighteen
point six percent. That's average, which is up from two
point four so there's been a material change. Teriff revenues
twenty eight billion, triple the monthly revenue scene in twenty
twenty four, so they're bringing the money in, there's no
(08:03):
question about that. But the Congressional Budget Office say it
would reduce cumulus government borrowing in ten years to twenty
thirty five, or two and a half trillion so far,
so good, right. However, they also judged that the tariffs
would shrink the size of the US economy relative to
how it would perform without tariffs, and that is the
(08:23):
value of free trade, of course, that we understand in
this part of the world. They also project that the
additional revenues generated from the tariff will be more than
offset by the revenue lost due to the Trump administration's
tax cuts over the next decade. So one of the
impacts of Trump's trade war so far has been to
increase the number of imports into the country. Because everyone panicked,
(08:44):
of course, and stockpiled, US exports have only increased modestly.
The net result is that the US goods trade deficit
has not fallen. In fact, it has blown out. It
has reached a level of one hundred and sixty two
billion dollars in March alone, falling back to eighty six
billion in June. So, in other words, for all the
noise about the money coming in, it is true, but
(09:07):
the full picture is only partially true. And it proves
beyond a shadow of a doubt that tariffs overall don't work.
Speaker 2 (09:16):
Yeah, because otherwise everybody w'd be doing them. Of Course,
everybody is now doing them, aren't they because they two
untas as they do to you or whatever. I'm sure
Mike's right, though, and I'm sure in the end trumped
back down and everything will be great. The rerap fear
the same cart you said for the Warrior season, which
(09:37):
seems to be going from average to below average to
quite a long way below average, and even their greatest
fan has now given up on them in.
Speaker 3 (09:49):
The old hope for one thing, expect another scenario that
makes up so much of life the Warriors, Dishop, what
you kind of knew was coming, didn't they? Is it over?
I think pretty much it is. I reckon we will
end up with thirty seven is ish points. That accounts
for one more loss and a few more wins. Is
it good enough for the four? You'd hope so, but
probably not. Is it good enough for the eight?
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (10:07):
Indeed, most as we said last week, in other seasons,
at this time of year, we're debating the eight, aren't we?
Speaker 1 (10:13):
Are we in?
Speaker 3 (10:13):
Are we not? We used to get excited about all
that we make the eight and who knows what's possible?
That was the chat. But that's the trouble with the season.
Of course, we've been so much better than that. The
eight is not the story. The four was the story
and it may may still be. But no matter what
the end number is, the simple truth, the inescapable reality
is we can't beat top sides. We haven't they beat us.
(10:35):
We don't beat them. Oh, yes, there was some more
concussion and injury the beleagued side added to the beleaguedness.
Replacements had replacements. But it is what it is. I mean,
I don't follow the wider competition closely enough to know
whether everyone carries our level of injuries or for some
reason we are battered in a way no one can comprehend.
But there is no miracle cure. Depth only takes you
so far when you're dropping like flies. Now I could
(10:59):
trouble you with some fanciful nonsense about hope and maybe's
and miracles. I could say, hey, look at Penrith. They
were bottom of the table, they were useless. We beat them.
If they can do it, so can we nine in
a row. But that's wasting everyone's time, isn't it. We
have never ever won nine in a row. My prediction
for the rest of the season, as you just heard,
doesn't actually have us winning four in a row. We're not, sadly,
aside to defy history, we know teams don't win from
(11:22):
outside the four. We aren't in a position to rewrite
that stat So was it the injuries that did us in?
Or do we need to take basically another complete step up?
In other words, yes, we are good, Yes we improved.
Yes this has been a great year, but we are
still always were just short of greatness. And if that's
the case, what's the answer. Well this, sadly, I'm here
(11:45):
to tell you after thirty one goes, it's not our.
Speaker 2 (11:50):
Yes, it's a momentum shift, that's what we seem to see.
Isn't it like they started off with a hesse and
a raw. Now they've had a slump. I mean, it's
better that they have a slump now than when they
actually get to the finals, and maybe they can put
some more hess back into that raw and get going again.
I'm just trying to stay positive. It's not like Mike
(12:11):
to be so ho hum. I don't know what's happening.
I'm the positive one and he's a cynical one. It's
like we've swapped bodies or something. I'm not quite haggard
enough I think and Kate's words to look like Mike.
I don't mean she thinks that I don't look haggard.
I probably do look ha good, but she says that
(12:33):
Michael looks hag good. Actually, now I beive it, I
definitely more haggard than Mike. What am I saying? Anyway,
I'm going to stop saying anything, and I'll start saying
it again. To Marrasi.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
For more from News Talks d B. Listen live on
air or online, and keep our shows with you wherever
you go with our podcast on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
Fudd Around And Find Out
UConn basketball star Azzi Fudd brings her championship swag to iHeart Women’s Sports with Fudd Around and Find Out, a weekly podcast that takes fans along for the ride as Azzi spends her final year of college trying to reclaim the National Championship and prepare to be a first round WNBA draft pick. Ever wonder what it’s like to be a world-class athlete in the public spotlight while still managing schoolwork, friendships and family time? It’s time to Fudd Around and Find Out!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.