Modern societies are dependent on spending, if you ain't got it, you can't spend it. Photo / file
Modern societies are dependent on spending, if you ain't got it, you can't spend it. Photo / file
Creation of wealth
Bryan Gould in his article has attempted to explain our economy. If you were confused by what the economy is, you would be no less confused as you read the last words. An economy is a measure of wealth creation, a strong economy means you are creating alot of wealth, a weak economy means you have not created a lot. What ingredients do you need to create a lot of wealth? The number one being that we are all doing our best in to create as much as possible. Modern societies are dependent on spending, if you ain't got it, you can't spend it, which means employers have a responsibility to pay as high a wage as possible, keeping a close eye on the bottom line. You have to make a profit or you cease to exist, and that wrecks employees' lives. This is where the employees' responsibility kicks in. If they want higher wages, they have to work to grow the bottom line. This is called productivity, you are working as hard and efficiently as possible. This is where the unions come in. They have a responsibility to their members to make sure the bottom line is growing, this means they have to help the management weed out the slackers. Unions have to work with management to come to an agreement as to how much the employer can put into the wage pot increase, then decide how to divide this pot up. First you have to do a cost of living exercise, everyone gets that, then you work with management to decide if a particular employee or groups of employees are doing a job that is more essential to the employer's success so they get a bit bigger portion of what is left. GARTH SCOWN Whanganui
Until watching the second leaders debate (September 30) I did not realise that Judith Collins might actually be two different people. In her recent memoir, Pull No Punches, (pages 229-230), Collins casts herself as a champion of civil rights. When she was Police Minister she argued persuasively against changing our laws from their English origin where an individual's guilt must be proven. She argued we should not follow the Napoleonic tradition and subject the accused to inquisitorial judges. And especially not, as others argued, for singular exceptions like rape or kidnapping. She firmly endorsed the concept "better that a guilty person go free than that an innocent person be convicted". Then, on that September 30 debate stage, another Judith Collins appeared. In the case of suspected child homicide, Collins is all for eliminating the right to silence. That right and the assumption of innocence that it requires, is basic to our NZBORA. US President Madison said, when he wrote the famous analogous fifth amendment to the US Constitution, silence is the fundamental right of free citizens, the protection of dissent. We need to ask, like the folks on Seven Days, would the real Judith Collins please stand up? JAY KUTEN St Johns Hill
