https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching . .
.
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching . .
.
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the
existing installed places. The details from an independent person.
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all good >maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ...
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the
existing installed places. The details from an independent person.
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all good
maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel
Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a
partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with
enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into
the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at
least five years."
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they
are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell
back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ...
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the
existing installed places. The details from an independent person.
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all good >>> maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel
Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a
partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with
enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into
the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at
least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be >hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies
simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at
best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the
home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the
power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical
solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they
are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell
back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive >amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter
(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of
course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up.
Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see
the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their
"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners
usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ... >>>>
existing installed places. The details from an independent person.
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all good >>>> maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel
Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a
partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with
enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into
the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at
least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be
hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies
simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at
best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the
home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the
power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical
solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they
are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell
back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive
amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter
(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new
contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of
course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up.
Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see
the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their
"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners
usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance /
replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by
the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than
necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National
Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to
the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the possibility of initiating generation other than through those
companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link
appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that
enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely
to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle
owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge.
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system
there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
On 2024-12-10 00:46:18 +0000, Rich80105 said:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the >>>>> existing installed places. The details from an independent person.https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ... >>>>>
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all good >>>>> maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel
Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a
partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with
enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into >>>> the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at
least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be
hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies
simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at
best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the
home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the
power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical
solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they
are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell
back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive
amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter
(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new
contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of
course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up.
Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see
the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their
"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners
usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance /
replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by
the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than
necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National
Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to
the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the
possibility of initiating generation other than through those
companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link
appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that
enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely
to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle
owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge.
Electricity is electricity. The fact that the companies charge more at
"peak times" is nothing other than pure greediness, like all the
idiotic "supply and demand" nonsense.
Electricity (and water, and waste removeal) should be government /
council run at minimal profit for infrastructure, not run by private >companies simply out to fill management and shareholder pockets.
Well said. All thinking people would agree I believe. Wind turbine blades have a limited life also and are currntly hard to repurpose.The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system
there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it
highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for
particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
Solar power isn't efficient. It is also nowhere near as good for the >environment as the blinkered Greenies like to believe - the making and >disposal of the solar panels is highly polluting, let alone the
batteries to store that energy for when it needed at night.
Similarly with all the other ill-thought-out Greenie ideas such as
silly wind turbines, wave turbines, etc. which are a huge visual
pollution issue as well.
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ... >>>>
existing installed places. The details from an independent person.
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all good >>>> maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel
Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a
partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with
enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into
the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at
least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be >>hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies >>simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at
best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the
home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the >>power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical
solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they
are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell
back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive >>amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter
(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >>contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of >>course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up. >>Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see
the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their
"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners
usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by
the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than
necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National
Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to
the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >possibility of initiating generation other than through those
companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link
appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that
enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely
to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle
owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge.
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system
there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it >highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the >>>>> existing installed places. The details from an independent person.
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ... >>>>>
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all good >>>>> maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel
Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a
partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with
enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into >>>> the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at
least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be >>>hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies >>>simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at >>>best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the >>>home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the >>>power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical
solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they
are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell
back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive >>>amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >>>contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of >>>course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up. >>>Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see
the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by
the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than
necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to
the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>possibility of initiating generation other than through those
companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link
appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that
enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely
to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle
owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge.
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system
there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it >>highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these
Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being
there.
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:45:16 +1300, Mutley <[email protected]>
wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]> >>>wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the >>>>>> existing installed places. The details from an independent person. >>>>>>
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ... >>>>>>
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all good >>>>>> maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel
Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a
partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with
enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into >>>>> the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at
least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be >>>>hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies >>>>simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at >>>>best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the >>>>home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the >>>>power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical >>>>solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they >>>>> are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell >>>>> back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive >>>>amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >>>>contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of >>>>course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up. >>>>Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see >>>>the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by
the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than
necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to
the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>>possibility of initiating generation other than through those
companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link >>>appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that
enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely
to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle
owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge.
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system
there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it >>>highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these >>Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >>leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being
there.
You make a fair point, Mutley - the structure has persisted despite >governments of both the right and left understanding that they were a
huge mistake. What would you suggest be done?
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:06:48 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:45:16 +1300, Mutley <[email protected]>
wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]> >>>>wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the >>>>>>> existing installed places. The details from an independent person. >>>>>>>
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ... >>>>>>>
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all good
maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel >>>>>> Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a
partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with >>>>>> enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into >>>>>> the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at >>>>>> least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be >>>>>hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies >>>>>simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at >>>>>best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the >>>>>home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the >>>>>power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical >>>>>solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they >>>>>> are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell >>>>>> back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive >>>>>amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >>>>>contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of >>>>>course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up. >>>>>Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see >>>>>the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by >>>>the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than >>>>necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>>>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to >>>>the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>>>possibility of initiating generation other than through those >>>>companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link >>>>appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that
enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely >>>>to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle
owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge.
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system >>>>there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it >>>>highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>>>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these >>>Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >>>leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being
there.
You make a fair point, Mutley - the structure has persisted despite >>governments of both the right and left understanding that they were a
huge mistake. What would you suggest be done?
I would start by examining the truth of the matter: Labour did not
reverse those reforms because they had other, more pressing,
priorities. This indicates those reforms were not as bad as you make
out Rich.
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 19:42:22 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d>No they were not - you have never provided evidence of that lie.
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:06:48 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]> >>wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:45:16 +1300, Mutley <[email protected]> >>>wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]> >>>>>wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ...
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the >>>>>>>> existing installed places. The details from an independent person. >>>>>>>>
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all >>>>>>>>good
maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel >>>>>>> Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a
partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with >>>>>>> enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into >>>>>>> the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at >>>>>>> least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be >>>>>>hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies >>>>>>simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at >>>>>>best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the >>>>>>home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the >>>>>>power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical >>>>>>solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they >>>>>>> are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell >>>>>>> back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive >>>>>>amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>>>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >>>>>>contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of >>>>>>course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up. >>>>>>Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see >>>>>>the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>>>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>>>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>>>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by >>>>>the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than >>>>>necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>>>>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to >>>>>the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>>>>possibility of initiating generation other than through those >>>>>companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link >>>>>appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that >>>>>enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely >>>>>to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle >>>>>owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge.
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system >>>>>there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it >>>>>highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>>>>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these >>>>Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >>>>leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being
there.
You make a fair point, Mutley - the structure has persisted despite >>>governments of both the right and left understanding that they were a >>>huge mistake. What would you suggest be done?
I would start by examining the truth of the matter: Labour did not
reverse those reforms because they had other, more pressing,
priorities. This indicates those reforms were not as bad as you make
out Rich.
Yes they were,
and that has been admitted by some National Supporters.That is quite simply a lie. Often repeated by you and never with a shred of evidence. You are desparate.
The problem of rapacious shareholders is that the structure lends
itself to them paying themselves an extremely good (and better than
normal market) returns, and half of that it going to the government,
the other half is very expensive to buy out . . .
Perhaps with ACT1stNationals attitude of abandoning the principles of >sanctity of contract
, the current government could just pass a law to
purchase them back at what was originally paid for the shares - would
you agree with such an action, Crash?
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 19:42:22 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>wrote:No they were not - you have never provided evidence of that lie.
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:06:48 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]> >>>wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:45:16 +1300, Mutley <[email protected]> >>>>wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]> >>>>>>wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ...
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the >>>>>>>>> existing installed places. The details from an independent person. >>>>>>>>>
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all >>>>>>>>>good
maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel >>>>>>>> Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a >>>>>>>> partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with >>>>>>>> enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into >>>>>>>> the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at >>>>>>>> least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be >>>>>>>hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies >>>>>>>simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at >>>>>>>best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the >>>>>>>home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the >>>>>>>power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical >>>>>>>solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they >>>>>>>> are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell >>>>>>>> back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive >>>>>>>amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>>>>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >>>>>>>contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of >>>>>>>course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up. >>>>>>>Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see >>>>>>>the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>>>>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>>>>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>>>>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by >>>>>>the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than >>>>>>necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>>>>>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to >>>>>>the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>>>>>possibility of initiating generation other than through those >>>>>>companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link >>>>>>appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that >>>>>>enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely >>>>>>to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle >>>>>>owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge.
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system >>>>>>there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it >>>>>>highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>>>>>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these >>>>>Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >>>>>leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being >>>>>there.
You make a fair point, Mutley - the structure has persisted despite >>>>governments of both the right and left understanding that they were a >>>>huge mistake. What would you suggest be done?
I would start by examining the truth of the matter: Labour did not >>>reverse those reforms because they had other, more pressing,
priorities. This indicates those reforms were not as bad as you make
out Rich.
Yes they were,
and that has been admitted by some National Supporters.That is quite simply a lie. Often repeated by you and never with a shred of >evidence. You are desparate.
The problem of rapacious shareholders is that the structure lends
itself to them paying themselves an extremely good (and better than
normal market) returns, and half of that it going to the government,
the other half is very expensive to buy out . . .
Perhaps with ACT1stNationals attitude of abandoning the principles of >>sanctity of contract
, the current government could just pass a law to
purchase them back at what was originally paid for the shares - would
you agree with such an action, Crash?
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 19:42:22 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d>
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:06:48 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]> >>wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:45:16 +1300, Mutley <[email protected]> >>>wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]> >>>>>wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ...
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the >>>>>>>> existing installed places. The details from an independent person. >>>>>>>>
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all good
maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel >>>>>>> Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a
partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with >>>>>>> enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into >>>>>>> the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at >>>>>>> least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be >>>>>>hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies >>>>>>simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at >>>>>>best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the >>>>>>home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the >>>>>>power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical >>>>>>solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they >>>>>>> are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell >>>>>>> back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive >>>>>>amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>>>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >>>>>>contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of >>>>>>course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up. >>>>>>Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see >>>>>>the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>>>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>>>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>>>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by >>>>>the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than >>>>>necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>>>>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to >>>>>the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>>>>possibility of initiating generation other than through those >>>>>companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link >>>>>appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that >>>>>enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely >>>>>to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle >>>>>owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge.
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system >>>>>there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it >>>>>highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>>>>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these >>>>Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >>>>leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being
there.
You make a fair point, Mutley - the structure has persisted despite >>>governments of both the right and left understanding that they were a >>>huge mistake. What would you suggest be done?
I would start by examining the truth of the matter: Labour did not
reverse those reforms because they had other, more pressing,
priorities. This indicates those reforms were not as bad as you make
out Rich.
Yes they were, and that has been admitted by some National Supporters.
The problem of rapacious shareholders is that the structure lends
itself to them paying themselves an extremely good (and better than
normal market) returns, and half of that it going to the government,
the other half is very expensive to buy out . . .
Perhaps with ACT1stNationals attitude of abandoning the principles of >sanctity of contract, the current government could just pass a law to >purchase them back at what was originally paid for the shares - would
you agree with such an action, Crash?
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 08:09:52 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d>You have posted political rhetoric. Nothing of substance.
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 18:36:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 19:42:22 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>>>wrote:No they were not - you have never provided evidence of that lie.
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:06:48 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]> >>>>>wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:45:16 +1300, Mutley <[email protected]> >>>>>>wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching >>>>>>>>>>>>...
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the
existing installed places. The details from an independent person. >>>>>>>>>>>
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all >>>>>>>>>>>good
maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel >>>>>>>>>> Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a >>>>>>>>>> partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with >>>>>>>>>> enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back >>>>>>>>>>into
the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at >>>>>>>>>> least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to >>>>>>>>>be
hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies >>>>>>>>>simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at >>>>>>>>>best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the >>>>>>>>>home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, >>>>>>>>>the
power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical >>>>>>>>>solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they >>>>>>>>>> are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell >>>>>>>>>> back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out >>>>>>>>>massive
amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>>>>>>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >>>>>>>>>contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of >>>>>>>>>course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up. >>>>>>>>>Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see >>>>>>>>>the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>>>>>>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>>>>>>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>>>>>>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by >>>>>>>>the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than >>>>>>>>necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>>>>>>>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to >>>>>>>>the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>>>>>>>possibility of initiating generation other than through those >>>>>>>>companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link >>>>>>>>appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that >>>>>>>>enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely >>>>>>>>to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle >>>>>>>>owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge. >>>>>>>>
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system >>>>>>>>there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it >>>>>>>>highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>>>>>>>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these >>>>>>>Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >>>>>>>leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being >>>>>>>there.
You make a fair point, Mutley - the structure has persisted despite >>>>>>governments of both the right and left understanding that they were a >>>>>>huge mistake. What would you suggest be done?
I would start by examining the truth of the matter: Labour did not >>>>>reverse those reforms because they had other, more pressing, >>>>>priorities. This indicates those reforms were not as bad as you make >>>>>out Rich.
Yes they were,
and that has been admitted by some National Supporters.That is quite simply a lie. Often repeated by you and never with a shred of >>>evidence. You are desparate.
The problem of rapacious shareholders is that the structure lends >>>>itself to them paying themselves an extremely good (and better than >>>>normal market) returns, and half of that it going to the government, >>>>the other half is very expensive to buy out . . .
Perhaps with ACT1stNationals attitude of abandoning the principles of >>>>sanctity of contract
Rich has no rational alternative to repeatedly posting >>politically-motivated accusations. When stuff like this is included
in a post from Rich this is his way of saying that he has nothing more >>rational to say.
So the Hikoi that ended with 42,000 people protesting before
Parliament were just going on a walk, were they, Crash? They were
protesting the reality that this government is, when convenient to
them, the Treaty of Waitangi - one of the earliest and important
contracts entered into in New Zealand. Now you may want to claim that
this was just the ACT party, but National agreed to not only allow the
bill to be put before the House, but they are also allowing an
extended period for select Committee, which will allow ACT to
periodically make news with their divisive and racist rhetoric to be
picked up by nutters who are ripe for provocation from racism and
bigotry. National also ignored the Treaty again in dismantling the
Maori Health Authority, which was partial settlement for a Claim under
the Waitangi Tribunal. Similarly the Fast Track Bill is designed to
directly profit particular companies and individuals and is designed
to by-pass consultation in accordance with the Treaty.
Can you even spell the word logic? You certainly don't understand what it means. That paragraph is bereft of logic, common snse and even the English is poor.
, the current government could just pass a law to
purchase them back at what was originally paid for the shares - would >>>>you agree with such an action, Crash?
While such an action by the government would be again an appalling
breach of rights under a range of Acts of Parliament, I note that you
do not dispute that this government could take just such actions or
their equivalent in effect - they put self-interest above meeting
contractual obligations . . .
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 18:36:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 19:42:22 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>>wrote:No they were not - you have never provided evidence of that lie.
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:06:48 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]> >>>>wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:45:16 +1300, Mutley <[email protected]> >>>>>wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]> >>>>>>>wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ...
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the >>>>>>>>>> existing installed places. The details from an independent person. >>>>>>>>>>
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all >>>>>>>>>>good
maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel >>>>>>>>> Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a >>>>>>>>> partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with >>>>>>>>> enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into
the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at >>>>>>>>> least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be >>>>>>>>hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies >>>>>>>>simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at >>>>>>>>best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the >>>>>>>>home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the >>>>>>>>power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical >>>>>>>>solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they >>>>>>>>> are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell >>>>>>>>> back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive >>>>>>>>amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>>>>>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >>>>>>>>contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of >>>>>>>>course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up. >>>>>>>>Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see >>>>>>>>the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>>>>>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>>>>>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>>>>>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by >>>>>>>the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than >>>>>>>necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>>>>>>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to >>>>>>>the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>>>>>>possibility of initiating generation other than through those >>>>>>>companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link >>>>>>>appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that >>>>>>>enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely >>>>>>>to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle >>>>>>>owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge.
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system >>>>>>>there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it >>>>>>>highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>>>>>>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these >>>>>>Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >>>>>>leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being >>>>>>there.
You make a fair point, Mutley - the structure has persisted despite >>>>>governments of both the right and left understanding that they were a >>>>>huge mistake. What would you suggest be done?
I would start by examining the truth of the matter: Labour did not >>>>reverse those reforms because they had other, more pressing, >>>>priorities. This indicates those reforms were not as bad as you make >>>>out Rich.
Yes they were,
and that has been admitted by some National Supporters.That is quite simply a lie. Often repeated by you and never with a shred of >>evidence. You are desparate.
The problem of rapacious shareholders is that the structure lends
itself to them paying themselves an extremely good (and better than >>>normal market) returns, and half of that it going to the government,
the other half is very expensive to buy out . . .
Perhaps with ACT1stNationals attitude of abandoning the principles of >>>sanctity of contract
Rich has no rational alternative to repeatedly posting
politically-motivated accusations. When stuff like this is included
in a post from Rich this is his way of saying that he has nothing more >rational to say.
, the current government could just pass a law to
purchase them back at what was originally paid for the shares - would
you agree with such an action, Crash?
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 08:09:52 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d>
wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 18:36:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 19:42:22 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>>>wrote:No they were not - you have never provided evidence of that lie.
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:06:48 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]> >>>>>wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:45:16 +1300, Mutley <[email protected]> >>>>>>wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ...
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the
existing installed places. The details from an independent person. >>>>>>>>>>>
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all >>>>>>>>>>>good
maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel >>>>>>>>>> Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a >>>>>>>>>> partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with >>>>>>>>>> enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into
the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at >>>>>>>>>> least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be
hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies >>>>>>>>>simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at >>>>>>>>>best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the >>>>>>>>>home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the
power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical >>>>>>>>>solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they >>>>>>>>>> are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell >>>>>>>>>> back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive
amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>>>>>>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >>>>>>>>>contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of >>>>>>>>>course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up. >>>>>>>>>Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see >>>>>>>>>the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>>>>>>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>>>>>>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>>>>>>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by >>>>>>>>the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than >>>>>>>>necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>>>>>>>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to >>>>>>>>the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>>>>>>>possibility of initiating generation other than through those >>>>>>>>companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link >>>>>>>>appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that >>>>>>>>enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely >>>>>>>>to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle >>>>>>>>owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge. >>>>>>>>
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system >>>>>>>>there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it >>>>>>>>highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>>>>>>>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these >>>>>>>Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >>>>>>>leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being >>>>>>>there.
You make a fair point, Mutley - the structure has persisted despite >>>>>>governments of both the right and left understanding that they were a >>>>>>huge mistake. What would you suggest be done?
I would start by examining the truth of the matter: Labour did not >>>>>reverse those reforms because they had other, more pressing, >>>>>priorities. This indicates those reforms were not as bad as you make >>>>>out Rich.
Yes they were,
and that has been admitted by some National Supporters.That is quite simply a lie. Often repeated by you and never with a shred of >>>evidence. You are desparate.
The problem of rapacious shareholders is that the structure lends >>>>itself to them paying themselves an extremely good (and better than >>>>normal market) returns, and half of that it going to the government, >>>>the other half is very expensive to buy out . . .
Perhaps with ACT1stNationals attitude of abandoning the principles of >>>>sanctity of contract
Rich has no rational alternative to repeatedly posting >>politically-motivated accusations. When stuff like this is included
in a post from Rich this is his way of saying that he has nothing more >>rational to say.
So the Hikoi that ended with 42,000 people protesting before
Parliament were just going on a walk, were they, Crash? They were
protesting the reality that this government is, when convenient to
them, the Treaty of Waitangi - one of the earliest and important
contracts entered into in New Zealand. Now you may want to claim that
this was just the ACT party, but National agreed to not only allow the
bill to be put before the House, but they are also allowing an
extended period for select Committee, which will allow ACT to
periodically make news with their divisive and racist rhetoric to be
picked up by nutters who are ripe for provocation from racism and
bigotry. National also ignored the Treaty again in dismantling the
Maori Health Authority, which was partial settlement for a Claim under
the Waitangi Tribunal. Similarly the Fast Track Bill is designed to
directly profit particular companies and individuals and is designed
to by-pass consultation in accordance with the Treaty.
, the current government could just pass a law to
purchase them back at what was originally paid for the shares - would >>>>you agree with such an action, Crash?
While such an action by the government would be again an appalling
breach of rights under a range of Acts of Parliament, I note that you
do not dispute that this government could take just such actions or
their equivalent in effect - they put self-interest above meeting
contractual obligations . . .
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 20:44:24 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d>The TPU is not right wing and they did not organise Groundswell - geez you are desparate.
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 15:37:08 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]> >>wrote:The Hikoi was not just the gathering in Wellington - in each town or
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 08:09:52 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>>wrote:Nonsense repeated is still nonsense. Yes the Hikoi was an impressive >>gathering, but a drop in the bucket when compared to how many voters
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 18:36:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 19:42:22 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>>>>>wrote:No they were not - you have never provided evidence of that lie.
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:06:48 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]> >>>>>>>wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:45:16 +1300, Mutley <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth >>>>>>>>>>>>>>watching ...
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in >>>>>>>>>>>>>the
existing installed places. The details from an independent person.
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe >>>>>>>>>>>>>all
good
maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel >>>>>>>>>>>> Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a >>>>>>>>>>>> partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with
enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back >>>>>>>>>>>>into
the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at
least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to >>>>>>>>>>>be
hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power >>>>>>>>>>>companies
simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and >>>>>>>>>>>at
best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth >>>>>>>>>>>the
home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, >>>>>>>>>>>the
power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical >>>>>>>>>>>solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume >>>>>>>>>>>>they
are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they >>>>>>>>>>>>sell
back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out >>>>>>>>>>>massive
amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>>>>>>>>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a >>>>>>>>>>>new
contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. >>>>>>>>>>>Of
course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone >>>>>>>>>>>up.
Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see >>>>>>>>>>>the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>>>>>>>>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>>>>>>>>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>>>>>>>>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by >>>>>>>>>>the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than >>>>>>>>>>necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>>>>>>>>>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to >>>>>>>>>>the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>>>>>>>>>possibility of initiating generation other than through those >>>>>>>>>>companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link >>>>>>>>>>appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that >>>>>>>>>>enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely
to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle >>>>>>>>>>owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge. >>>>>>>>>>
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system >>>>>>>>>>there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it
highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>>>>>>>>>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these >>>>>>>>>Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >>>>>>>>>leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being >>>>>>>>>there.
You make a fair point, Mutley - the structure has persisted despite >>>>>>>>governments of both the right and left understanding that they were a >>>>>>>>huge mistake. What would you suggest be done?
I would start by examining the truth of the matter: Labour did not >>>>>>>reverse those reforms because they had other, more pressing, >>>>>>>priorities. This indicates those reforms were not as bad as you make >>>>>>>out Rich.
Yes they were,
and that has been admitted by some National Supporters.That is quite simply a lie. Often repeated by you and never with a shred >>>>>of
The problem of rapacious shareholders is that the structure lends >>>>>>itself to them paying themselves an extremely good (and better than >>>>>>normal market) returns, and half of that it going to the government, >>>>>>the other half is very expensive to buy out . . .
Perhaps with ACT1stNationals attitude of abandoning the principles of >>>>>>sanctity of contract
evidence. You are desparate.
Rich has no rational alternative to repeatedly posting >>>>politically-motivated accusations. When stuff like this is included
in a post from Rich this is his way of saying that he has nothing more >>>>rational to say.
So the Hikoi that ended with 42,000 people protesting before
Parliament were just going on a walk, were they, Crash? They were >>>protesting the reality that this government is, when convenient to
them, the Treaty of Waitangi - one of the earliest and important >>>contracts entered into in New Zealand. Now you may want to claim that >>>this was just the ACT party, but National agreed to not only allow the >>>bill to be put before the House, but they are also allowing an
extended period for select Committee, which will allow ACT to >>>periodically make news with their divisive and racist rhetoric to be >>>picked up by nutters who are ripe for provocation from racism and >>>bigotry. National also ignored the Treaty again in dismantling the
Maori Health Authority, which was partial settlement for a Claim under >>>the Waitangi Tribunal. Similarly the Fast Track Bill is designed to >>>directly profit particular companies and individuals and is designed
to by-pass consultation in accordance with the Treaty.
we have. The rest of your tirade is aimed at party policies enshrined
in coalition agreements.
city it passed, from North and South of Wellington, many others joined
for that day - and of course many that would have liked to participate
were working or unable to get there. It certainly dwarfed the NZ
Taxpayer Union protests like Groundswell, and any other right wing
protest of the past.
So where in the coalition agreement is enshrined getting rid of theACT is not divisive (exactyly the opposite), you are divisive (racist) and so is TPM and so was the Hikoi.
Maori Health organisation? Where in the coalition agreement is a long
period before report back from the select Committee to enable Seymour
to peddle ACT's racist and divisive views? And what does it tell you
about Luxon that National is seen to be supporting the racist tactics
of ACT?
While you quibble about National agreeing to the Treaty Principles
bill, your predictions that the Select Committee process will cause
further dissent is politically-motivated rhetoric. Most bills go
through a 6-month Select Committee process which goes largely
unreported by media organisations. Submissions close January. Some >>submitters will garner some media coverage after that but so what.
The Treaty was signed 184 years ago. The Maori Health Authority was
formed by the last Labour Government so any assertion it was to do
with the ToW is irrational.
, the current government could just pass a law to
purchase them back at what was originally paid for the shares - would >>>>>>you agree with such an action, Crash?
While such an action by the government would be again an appalling
breach of rights under a range of Acts of Parliament, I note that you
do not dispute that this government could take just such actions or
their equivalent in effect - they put self-interest above meeting >>>contractual obligations . . .
Why respond to yourself Rich? I made no comment about share
repurchases.
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 15:37:08 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]>The Hikoi was not just the gathering in Wellington - in each town or
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 08:09:52 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>wrote:Nonsense repeated is still nonsense. Yes the Hikoi was an impressive >gathering, but a drop in the bucket when compared to how many voters
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 18:36:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 19:42:22 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>>>>wrote:No they were not - you have never provided evidence of that lie.
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:06:48 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]> >>>>>>wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:45:16 +1300, Mutley <[email protected]> >>>>>>>wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ...
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the
existing installed places. The details from an independent person. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all
good
maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel >>>>>>>>>>> Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a >>>>>>>>>>> partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with >>>>>>>>>>> enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into
the grid that the homeowner doesn�t have to pay a power bill for at >>>>>>>>>>> least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be
hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies
simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at
best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the
home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the
power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical >>>>>>>>>>solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they
are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell
back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive
amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>>>>>>>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new >>>>>>>>>>contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of >>>>>>>>>>course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up.
Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see >>>>>>>>>>the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>>>>>>>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>>>>>>>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>>>>>>>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by >>>>>>>>>the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than >>>>>>>>>necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>>>>>>>>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to >>>>>>>>>the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>>>>>>>>possibility of initiating generation other than through those >>>>>>>>>companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link >>>>>>>>>appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that >>>>>>>>>enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely >>>>>>>>>to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle >>>>>>>>>owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge. >>>>>>>>>
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system >>>>>>>>>there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it >>>>>>>>>highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>>>>>>>>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these >>>>>>>>Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >>>>>>>>leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being >>>>>>>>there.
You make a fair point, Mutley - the structure has persisted despite >>>>>>>governments of both the right and left understanding that they were a >>>>>>>huge mistake. What would you suggest be done?
I would start by examining the truth of the matter: Labour did not >>>>>>reverse those reforms because they had other, more pressing, >>>>>>priorities. This indicates those reforms were not as bad as you make >>>>>>out Rich.
Yes they were,
and that has been admitted by some National Supporters.That is quite simply a lie. Often repeated by you and never with a shred of >>>>evidence. You are desparate.
The problem of rapacious shareholders is that the structure lends >>>>>itself to them paying themselves an extremely good (and better than >>>>>normal market) returns, and half of that it going to the government, >>>>>the other half is very expensive to buy out . . .
Perhaps with ACT1stNationals attitude of abandoning the principles of >>>>>sanctity of contract
Rich has no rational alternative to repeatedly posting >>>politically-motivated accusations. When stuff like this is included
in a post from Rich this is his way of saying that he has nothing more >>>rational to say.
So the Hikoi that ended with 42,000 people protesting before
Parliament were just going on a walk, were they, Crash? They were >>protesting the reality that this government is, when convenient to
them, the Treaty of Waitangi - one of the earliest and important
contracts entered into in New Zealand. Now you may want to claim that
this was just the ACT party, but National agreed to not only allow the
bill to be put before the House, but they are also allowing an
extended period for select Committee, which will allow ACT to
periodically make news with their divisive and racist rhetoric to be
picked up by nutters who are ripe for provocation from racism and
bigotry. National also ignored the Treaty again in dismantling the
Maori Health Authority, which was partial settlement for a Claim under
the Waitangi Tribunal. Similarly the Fast Track Bill is designed to >>directly profit particular companies and individuals and is designed
to by-pass consultation in accordance with the Treaty.
we have. The rest of your tirade is aimed at party policies enshrined
in coalition agreements.
While you quibble about National agreeing to the Treaty Principles
bill, your predictions that the Select Committee process will cause
further dissent is politically-motivated rhetoric. Most bills go
through a 6-month Select Committee process which goes largely
unreported by media organisations. Submissions close January. Some >submitters will garner some media coverage after that but so what.
The Treaty was signed 184 years ago. The Maori Health Authority was
formed by the last Labour Government so any assertion it was to do
with the ToW is irrational.
, the current government could just pass a law to
purchase them back at what was originally paid for the shares - would >>>>>you agree with such an action, Crash?
While such an action by the government would be again an appalling
breach of rights under a range of Acts of Parliament, I note that you
do not dispute that this government could take just such actions or
their equivalent in effect - they put self-interest above meeting >>contractual obligations . . .
Why respond to yourself Rich? I made no comment about share
repurchases.
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 20:44:24 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d>
wrote:
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 15:37:08 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]> >>wrote:The Hikoi was not just the gathering in Wellington - in each town or
On Thu, 12 Dec 2024 08:09:52 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>>wrote:Nonsense repeated is still nonsense. Yes the Hikoi was an impressive >>gathering, but a drop in the bucket when compared to how many voters
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 18:36:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><[email protected]> wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 19:42:22 +1300, Crash <[email protected]d> >>>>>>wrote:No they were not - you have never provided evidence of that lie.
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 16:06:48 +1300, Rich80105 <[email protected]> >>>>>>>wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 13:45:16 +1300, Mutley <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>wrote:
Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:52:28 +1300, Your Name <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>>>wrote:
On 2024-12-09 19:06:26 +0000, Mutley said:
Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2024-12-09, Rich80105 <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://thekaka.substack.com/p/tkp-2650-solutions-a-new-home-without?utm_source=podcast-email&publication_id=102473&post_id=152644767
This may be quite limited at present, but certainly worth watching ...
This has the generalsation factor but needs more data/details in the
existing installed places. The details from an independent person.
Note the contract is only for 5 years, then what happens? Maybe all
good
maybe heck this is my/the owners problem.
",I interviewed Octopus Energy Zero Bills Technical Director Nigel >>>>>>>>>>>> Banks from the UK about this week's launch in New Zealand of a >>>>>>>>>>>> partnership with Classic Homes to build new homes in Auckland1 with
enough solar panels and batteries that can sell enough power back into
the grid that the homeowner doesnt have to pay a power bill for at
least five years."
Such scams ... err, "schemes", have already proven multiple times to be
hopelessly flawed and not work for the home owner. The power companies
simply aren't interested in buying electricity from home owners and at
best pay out a miniscule amount of money that means it's not worth the
home owner bothering. It depdnds on the website, the soalr company, the
power comapnies, and the equipment, but Mr Google says the typical >>>>>>>>>>>solar system pays for itself "within seven years".
That tells me that they have a network connection. I assume they
are paying line charges or is that covered by the power they sell
back.
Yes what happens after 5 years??
After five years the home owner is then likely to be paying out massive
amounts of money to replace the batteries (5-15 years), the inverter >>>>>>>>>>>(12-15 years), and solar panels (25-30 years) ... or paying out a new
contract with the solar company for maintenaance and replacements. Of
course, by then the prices for those components will all have gone up.
Plus, that assumes the solar company even lasts the five years - see >>>>>>>>>>>the recent news of SolarZero going into liquidation because their >>>>>>>>>>>"scheme" didn't work!
Compared to regular grid-supply electricity where most home owners >>>>>>>>>>>usually don't have to pay anything at all in on-going maintenance / >>>>>>>>>>>replacements, unless something goes badly wrong.
You raise reasonable issues, some of which may be easily answered by >>>>>>>>>>the company. Our electricity is currently more expensive than >>>>>>>>>>necessary due to the "Bradford reforms" under a previous National >>>>>>>>>>Government that has led to very high profits to the Gentailers - to >>>>>>>>>>the extent that even the current government has apparently raised the >>>>>>>>>>possibility of initiating generation other than through those >>>>>>>>>>companies. The "value added" from the company spoken to in the link >>>>>>>>>>appears to be a system of computerised direction for usage that >>>>>>>>>>enables for example charging of a vehicle when charges are most likely
to be low, but able to be over-ridden by direction of the vehicle >>>>>>>>>>owner - for example by directing a desired time for full charge. >>>>>>>>>>
The important issue is that if we had a perfectly efficient system >>>>>>>>>>there would be little need for such services on a commercial basis; it
highlights that New Zealand is well behind in use of solar power for >>>>>>>>>>particular needs. As I said, certainly worth watching.
And your darling Helen Clark got in to government right after these >>>>>>>>>Bradford reforms and did nothing about them except make lots of noise >>>>>>>>>leading up to the election. Blame yourself for them still being >>>>>>>>>there.
You make a fair point, Mutley - the structure has persisted despite >>>>>>>>governments of both the right and left understanding that they were a >>>>>>>>huge mistake. What would you suggest be done?
I would start by examining the truth of the matter: Labour did not >>>>>>>reverse those reforms because they had other, more pressing, >>>>>>>priorities. This indicates those reforms were not as bad as you make >>>>>>>out Rich.
Yes they were,
and that has been admitted by some National Supporters.That is quite simply a lie. Often repeated by you and never with a shred of
The problem of rapacious shareholders is that the structure lends >>>>>>itself to them paying themselves an extremely good (and better than >>>>>>normal market) returns, and half of that it going to the government, >>>>>>the other half is very expensive to buy out . . .
Perhaps with ACT1stNationals attitude of abandoning the principles of >>>>>>sanctity of contract
evidence. You are desparate.
Rich has no rational alternative to repeatedly posting >>>>politically-motivated accusations. When stuff like this is included
in a post from Rich this is his way of saying that he has nothing more >>>>rational to say.
So the Hikoi that ended with 42,000 people protesting before
Parliament were just going on a walk, were they, Crash? They were >>>protesting the reality that this government is, when convenient to
them, the Treaty of Waitangi - one of the earliest and important >>>contracts entered into in New Zealand. Now you may want to claim that >>>this was just the ACT party, but National agreed to not only allow the >>>bill to be put before the House, but they are also allowing an
extended period for select Committee, which will allow ACT to >>>periodically make news with their divisive and racist rhetoric to be >>>picked up by nutters who are ripe for provocation from racism and >>>bigotry. National also ignored the Treaty again in dismantling the
Maori Health Authority, which was partial settlement for a Claim under >>>the Waitangi Tribunal. Similarly the Fast Track Bill is designed to >>>directly profit particular companies and individuals and is designed
to by-pass consultation in accordance with the Treaty.
we have. The rest of your tirade is aimed at party policies enshrined
in coalition agreements.
city it passed, from North and South of Wellington, many others joined
for that day - and of course many that would have liked to participate
were working or unable to get there. It certainly dwarfed the NZ
Taxpayer Union protests like Groundswell, and any other right wing
protest of the past.
So where in the coalition agreement is enshrined getting rid of the
Maori Health organisation?
Where in the coalition agreement is a long
period before report back from the select Committee to enable Seymour
to peddle ACT's racist and divisive views?
And what does it tell you
about Luxon that National is seen to be supporting the racist tactics
of ACT?
While you quibble about National agreeing to the Treaty Principles
bill, your predictions that the Select Committee process will cause
further dissent is politically-motivated rhetoric. Most bills go
through a 6-month Select Committee process which goes largely
unreported by media organisations. Submissions close January. Some >>submitters will garner some media coverage after that but so what.
The Treaty was signed 184 years ago. The Maori Health Authority was
formed by the last Labour Government so any assertion it was to do
with the ToW is irrational.
, the current government could just pass a law to
purchase them back at what was originally paid for the shares - would >>>>>>you agree with such an action, Crash?
While such an action by the government would be again an appalling
breach of rights under a range of Acts of Parliament, I note that you
do not dispute that this government could take just such actions or
their equivalent in effect - they put self-interest above meeting >>>contractual obligations . . .
Why respond to yourself Rich? I made no comment about share
repurchases.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 33:33:45 |
| Calls: | 12,109 |
| Files: | 15,006 |
| Messages: | 6,518,321 |