NZ: Minimum wage

I feel sorry for people who are perpetually stuck in a system that disfavors them. Just because I figured out a way to make money without being employed by somebody else does not automatically make me believe everybody can. You have to be creative, not all humans are born to think laterally. Not every single person has the gumption, intellect or opportunity to evolve in the workforce. We need to at least make their lives bearable or should I say, take steps in minimizing how unbearable our employers can and do make their lives.

I've worked for New World, Woolworths, Hallensteins, Cotton On, Kiwibank, Telstraclear, and Cherry tree. Out of that list of employers I can pick out the ones who treated their workers with respect. They also happen to be the ones who make the most profit, and score consistently in customer service surveys.

Those three are woolworths because they pay well above minimum wage and used to offer all staff four weeks paid leave when the law said three hallensteins because the staff there are put under pressure but immensely rewarded for their efforts and finally kiwibank. I worked in the Kiwibank call center for one year and as well as having a very reasonable renumeration package the company being quite 'new' was excellent at keeping me informed at all times, providing me with disrection to carry out my job, and rewarding me with both money and non monetary incentives when I showed a strong will to carry on their mission (completed my KPI's).

Those other employers, well. I won't comment on for obvious legal reasons. But I will say there are one or two in there who treat their staff appallingly and I guess it might be good for them in the short term to pay shit wages and things like that but i've made a conscious decision not to do business with them from now on. I also try to deter people I know from doing so as well (through my own opinion) and word of mouth spreads.

If you want your business to do well, treat your staff well and it will show because they will tell their friends, family and anybody else they come into contact with how happy they are and how engaged and involved they are in the business they work for. Treat your staff awfully, and expect an eventual bad reputation.

NZ: Copywrong?

Oh, please, pro-copyright industry people.

Copyright infringement is not theft.

I am an author, I am about to release my eBook on iBooks through apple's iTunes. I want people to 'pirate' it and torrent it to their hearts content. One illegal download will not affect a paid download whatsoever, in fact it will actually help spread the word of my work to other people in hopes if they actually like my media -- other people they know will find this out and then buy it legally. The copyright 'industry' are just a bunch of rich wankers who have no actual moral interest in the work they are trying to protect. Ask most artists, musicians and they will tell you they do not support criminal sanctions for people merely 'sampling' work, or even flat out taking it without paying.

Notwithstanding all evidence which has been studied countless times worldwide showing copyright theft does no actual harm to sales or profits:it is common sense that the more something is downloaded for free, the more people discuss, share, and comment on it therefore increasing sales through word of mouth.

Still think i'm being too wishful of a thinker? Look at the iTunes top 50 lists. Now go and look at the top 50 lists of downloaded albums from websites such as the pirate bay. They are so closely matched, you cannot argue that more downloads illegally leads to less sales officially. It is a failed argument, rooted in 19th century thinking. 

I wanna turn to my own issue with how the "law" handles "copyright" of "media" today.

1) I cannot legally download any of my favorite TV shows from the iTunes NZ store because of licensing issues that are not my problem, or concern.

1a) This would not be an issue for anybody if our local TV stations played TV shows within a reasonable timeframe of them airing in the united states (~7 days or less)

Conclusion: I 'pirate' the television shows I watch not only for entertainment value but also because I blog for a living and one of my websites is dedicated to reviewing and commenting on television shows. Some would say this arranges me as an exception in regards to copyright (fair use, review, education) but I can't be bothered even defending myself because

1) If I could legally download my favorite TV shows from the iTunes NZ store, I would pay for them or,

1a) If television shows streamed at the same time as in the states on our local stations, I would watch them paid for by advertisements or my telstraclear cable bill.

It is unreasonable and untenable to hold me back from both watching, reviewing and commenting on television shows I like to watch in this, our globalized world.

Oh, and by the way: I pay for music I enjoy via iTunes and have kept all records for this if the copyright "lobby" ever comes knocking on my door.

Poverty.

Did you know that over two billion people don't have access to proper food or water on a regular basis? That a child dies from hunger approximately every fifteen seconds in our world? There is still ongoing conflict ravaging iraq and darfur, meanwhile tornadoes and earthquakes are causing death and destruction in places scarily close to home. Looking at life from a New Zealand perspective can only be a futile and myopic thing, ...right?

You could argue that any changes happening in our country don't warrant a compelling examination. You could say this because compared to most other human beings, we have life pretty good. Or, you could take the view that I have and realize something else. People are only able to react to situations and changes which are directly relevant to their lives on a day to day basis. I'll put some perspective on my theory using the example of Paris Hilton breaking a nail. Paris reacting angrily over something so trivial, to us; seems both ridiculous and pathetic. The reason we think this way? We don't live in a world where our image is trademarked, copied, and transmitted across oceans. It is trivial to us because we place no value and haven't been taught to place value on the overly superficial. That is how she was brought up, and therefore explains in this fake scenario her total shock. Conversely, a child dying from starvation would not be able to comprehend a person in our country complaining about how bloody long five minutes felt to make a big mac combo at MacDonalds. What that child sees is selfishness, impatience, greed and complete and utter lack of empathy towards other human life. What that child doesn't see is the outward effects of societal pressure to be on time, productive and on the move at a seconds notice.

We humans are like that. We like to think we can walk a mile in another person's shoes, but how can we really without fully being that one unique person reacting to a positive or negative situation?

Today, 'as one person', I am reacting to the proposed rise in GST as part of the May 20th budget from 12.5% to 15% effective October 2010. National released the budget not long ago. It is pretty full of intricacies including a string of changes: depreciation tax reform, working for families and family trust loopholes. That's all fine, until you notice the kicker helping to harm everyday New Zealanders at the expense of the filthy rich being able to invest another six percent of their income.

Raising GST will:

• severely impact the people who spend the majority of their disposable income on necessities
• not at all affect the higher earners, who can put their added tax breaks to big use by investing their extra cash into savings then earn up to and including 10% for every single dollar on top of the money they already own! 

There are families in New Zealand on the bread line as it stands. Not to mention that the tax on cigarettes has increased without warning and is slated to keep increasing, adding a GST hike as-well will make it impossible for the most unfortunate New Zealanders to get by. Don't tell me there aren't people worse off, otherwise there would have been no use for the "school shoes for kids" campaign that rallied for support in 2008 in an attempt to bring those in the lowest of deciles above the poverty line. 

Our country has both one of the highest suicide rates and one of the highest teen pregnancy rates. So, already we don't score very well in key areas. Surely we would be looking at trying to reduce anxiety and panic in our society by helping those who need it, instead of taking support away (i'm looking at you ACC changes). Do we really want to marginalize the most vulnerable in our society by forcing them to effectively subsidize our taxes every time they purchase goods and services that they need to, to survive? 

You know like school bags, kids shoes, power, petrol, food, water, toiletries, insurance, services and repairs -- to name a few of the kickers. "John Key has stated that the tax cuts will mean New Zealanders won't be any worse off, and there is a proposed increase in benefits and superannuation to offset these costs".

The proposed increase in benefits and superannuation is sitting at just above two percent. GST is rising by two and a half percent. ACC levies are rising. The price of tobacco and potentially also alcohol, will rise even further. Fuel keeps on expanding and contracting which makes it difficult for families to budget. The recession has ended, and it's going to be noticeable that retailers will simmer down undercutting the wholesale price of goods just to get customers through the door. 

So, what was that, national? You say: a 2.5% increase in GST verses a 2 percent 'increase' in super and benefits only. That is pathetic. Completely moronic. It is a huge slap in the face to the majority of the country that voted you into parliament. I am beginning to regret the one I gave you, even though I am not a labour supporter. They may have overblown spending but at least the heart of the party came across as caring for its citizens.