Tribalism and Treaty

Bruce Sheppard, the quinessential provocateur, has wondered publicly about the relevance of Te Tiriti in 2008. I've added a little comment, but Bruce has touched on the edge of an issue that's interested me for quite some time.

Is the political support currently behind the re-tribalisation of Maori, a Good Thang?

If you look at Ngai Tahu, who want to be capitalists, why yes. Probably.

If you look at Tuhoe Nation, who want to ride their horses back into a Glorious Misty-Mountain Past and get a little cash from training camps on the side, why no. Probably.

What do finer minds than mine say?

There's the Latin American notion of "let us have our Middle Ages in peace" (from The General and his Labyrinth - Marquez). This simply draws a comparison with the long, bloody and traumatic transformations in our English Middle Ages:
- the Reformation (c 1520),
- the dissolution of the monasteries (c 1538),
- the re-Catholicisation of Bloody Mary (c 1553),
- the Shakespearian age of Elizabeth I (c1599) (Shakespeare, a secret Catholic, hankered after the old days: 'bare ruined choirs where late the sweet birds sang', referred to the monasteries),
- the chaos of the Cavaliers vs Roundheads in the English Civil War (c 1642)
- the Glorious Revolution (1688) which finally settled the principle of Parliamentary control

This 200-year saga, in retrospect, was needed to make the decisive break from a 'world lit only by fire', innocent of the germ theory of disease, and in thrall to a corrupt but totalitarian Catholic Church, to the Age of Reason.

Why, in this reading, should Maori and their (and it was ours, too) default setting of small, non-urban tribes, need any shorter time? Because one of the lessons of history is that humans need to be severely jolted to move even one millimetre away from 'traditional ways', however they are defined.

The contrary view: that tribalism is a pernicious cul-de-sac, would have it that, as the Greeks figured out early on, an essential feature of society is the deliberate lack of political power able to be held by groupings such as clans, tribes, mafias, and other self-defining sub-sets. A good read here is Roger Sandall (Culture Cult): the quote which got my attention is

"The dynastic feuding of ‘tyrants’ had brought Athens to the point of ruin. It had to be stopped. Cleisthenes’ solution was to firmly suppress a citizen’s political identification with family and neighborhood, with mafia bosses and clan chiefs. He sliced the country into 150 electoral districts called ‘demes’, and it was from these—and no longer from clans and families—that the citizens of Athenian democracy were obliged in future to take their second names. This applied to the haughtiest aristocrat and the humblest plowman alike.

... a number of historical parallels between the ancient and modern worlds and the continuing clash of East and West. But nothing is more revealing than the determination of Cleisthenes to stamp out despots and despotism by severing the connection between clan power and political representation. This was in 507 BC. Today, 2,500 years later, throughout most of the Middle East and conspicuously so in Iraq, they still haven’t got the point."

And neither, in this view, have the neo-tribalists.

Which brings us back to the muddled present. It is quite clear that Maori lore and tradition (the bits that would widely be classed as Baby, not Bathwater, at any rate) is quite inadequate to assist in most of the physical features of our modern life. Maori were non -urbanised, and this fact alone means that there is nothing that Tradition can say about the daily lives of 95% of us.

OTOH, the mental or spritual aspects of our modern life are, shall we say, somewhat arid. Part of the collateral damage of the Age of Reason was that the notion of Gods or other spiritual manifestations was comprehensively demolished.

Yet the human mind seems to have evolved to require something larger than itself to look up to. Gaia doesn't quite fit the bill, the Christian God is fairly much dead if not buried, Mohammed is a violent, woman-fearing hick - Deliverance in the Desert, so to speak - and Buddha has been killed by someone he met on the road.

So perhaps this spiritual void is a place to start from.

But not as tribes, as individuals.

Heat pumps (Shock, Horror) use Electricity!

This just has to be a No Shit, Sherlock moment for the hapless central planners of our funny little economy.

For the otherwise unenlightened, the backstory is that, due to Clean Air fixations, wherein chimneys emitting smoke are deemed to be a Bad Thang, there is a movement afoot to replace open fires and old wood fires, with 'clean' heat sources. And to encourage the masses, there are Gummint Subsidies to make a switch. (Bad puns, I've told you before. Sorry, Ed)

Heat pumps are a huge beneficiary of this move.

Oh dear, they cause a switch from sustainable, carbon based fuels (trees, unnerstan?) to electricity. Where peak load is generated from gas and coal. Nasty, dirty stuff, accordin' to some.

Which (spare generating capacity) NZ is rather short of at the minute. Double oh dear.

And heat pumps, particularly those of the reverse cycle persuasion, can also Cool. Cool pumps use power too! Damn, that wasn't in the Planners Plans! Folks were just meant to Heat with the things...And they Cool things in Summer, when electricity generation raw materials were traditionally stockpiled for Winter. Triple oh dear.

Funny, whodathunkit, them Central Planners never saw any o'this a'comin'.....

And you'd have to prise the remote controls for all them Heat Pumps from consumers' cold dead hands.....

Little Boxes

The proposal to streamline the building industry consents etc process is gathering steam. Not PC has easily the best summary of my views - planners, who needs 'em? They don't have anything to say about boats or cars. So why houses?

Solar is subject to Moore's Law

This piece (ht: Instapundit) is a useful reminder that the good ol' entrepreneurial business is the way forward. Earnest Gummint committess won't cut it. Bit like the UN in Darfur - no skin in the game, so no real incentive to step in and help.

Moore's law: explanation here - capability rises/price halves roughly every 18-24 months. Works for me.

The money quote:

"You may not like their politics, or their attitude, or their style. But if we really do have an energy revolution in this country and free ourselves from our addiction to fossil fuels, it will be because of hard-charging, take-no-prisoners entrepreneurs like T.J. Rodgers — not UN committees, environmental groups, or government officials."

I plan to fully solarise my house in 2-5 years time. Like, net grid-producer, not consumer. Bye-bye to power bills, and much more resilience. There is a host of up-and-coming firms making thin-film solar, and the grid-tie plus feed-in-tarriff contractual stuff is starting to get worked on by the more aware power companies.

I thus don't fret too much about the lakes, the need for more power stations burning whatever - plutonium, coal, natural gas - or the State of Fear pronouncements about pylons, wind power or draining Gaia of all her internal heat via geothermal take.

The Sun will do it for me. Oh wait. It seems to be cooling. Toyota!

Drugs - to ban or not - Lee Harris expostulates

This article is the best I have ever seen on the topic. It reviews Theodore Dalrymple's book 'Romancing Opiates: Pharmacological Lies and the Addiction Bureaucracy', and Richard DeGrandpre's alternative approach in 'The Cult of Pharmacology: How America Became the World’s Most Troubled Drug Culture'. Who says history is bunk, after reading Harris' skilful interlacing of the Greeks, John Stuart Mill, and the content of these two books? I must confess that Theodore Dalrymple (a pen name, real name Anthony Daniels) is a personal favourite, yet Harris gently steers away from some of TD's more uncompromising positions. A great article, by a great author.

Agriculture in NZ - the no-subsidies version

This international article is a good summary of the last 20 years' experience of unsubsidised farming in our fair land. The Social Laboratory Syndrome strikes again!

I do remember a leetle anecdote about those last glorious days of Supplementary Minimum Prices in the late '70's, way down South in a tiny self-governed town called Otautau.

Y'see, SMP's were counted on certain days. And the basis for Price Support (gawd, what a totalitarian title That was...) was per live stock unit. $/sheep: nice and simple. Oh, and some more for the wool.

Only problem was that 3 days before Count Day, a major (150 year return period - we had 3 of those in 18 months...) flood went down the Aparima, and a lot of the SMP'able stock drowned. Or so you would have thought, seeing them in fences, under willows, and in the middle of paddocks, on their backs with their legs in the air, bloated like Michael Moore.

But by strange circumstance, as far as the SMP count went, the very same stock units had held their breath underwater for 3 days, and survived just long enough to pass Go and collect their $200.

They breed 'em tough in Southland.

Whoever said economic incentives don't work?

Housing Bubble

A useful post here from another bubbular location: Southern California (SoCal, for short).

What can happen there can happen here, too. The post is quite good on the accelerated effects of information flow about housing, and the relationship between credit card debt and higher mortgage payments as fixed-rate or sweetheart deals reset to mrket levels.

In the '80's, Muldoon borrowed and hoped. We have lived through what it took to get us out of that hole: the best part of 20 years of work and better productivity.

And now, two aspects of the zeitgeist are putting us back in a similar hole:

1 - a Gummint hell-bent on buying enough votes for the next election, via various income redistribution schemes. Personal Tax cuts? Nah, Nanny knows best, you lot will simply add demand to the economy if we let you actually keep your own money. Speak for yourself, Michael bloody Cullen: I would pay down what minor debt I may have, and put the rest into Aussie shares and another super fund.

H L Mencken had it right in the '20's: an election is 'an advanced auction of stolen goods'.

And we are about to find out the hard way, yet again, that you cannot redistribute yourself rich.

2 - There is undoubtedly a local housing bubble. When it corrects, from a point where house price to income levels are around 5-7 i.e. unsustainable, to a level of say 4, look out below. 4/5 is $100,000 on a $500,000 home: a $100K loss. But 4/7 is $300,000 on a $700,000 home, and there's plenty of those just along my own street. So if you are one of the Feckless Many who have ratcheted up their debt anywhere north of 75% of current house valuation, you're gonna be hurting soon.

In effect, in the '80's, Muldoon borrowed and hoped at a public-sector level.
But in the aughties, borrowing and hoping is a private-sector pursuit.

And as the poster points out, in an environment where news and sentiment get around at the speed of light, that 'when', as in when the correction happens, might be a lot sooner than you would like.

SoCal catches the flu, we all cough.

Housing woes - oh, and they're in the UK

Dear old William Rees-Mogg has a typically pithy article in the Times. Change the context to NZ, and his comments are still apropos. Especially the ones about the four conditions for a cartel. From the article (my numbering added):

"1. license housebuilding, so that no one could build a new house without a licence, or even rebuild an old house or a redundant barn.
2. encourage developers to maintain large land banks in order to benefit from rising prices.
3. leak out new permissions only after long periods of delay.
4. combine this with an unlimited flow of mortgage credit and relatively low rates of interest.

If you restrict supply below the market clearing level and increase funding, you will inevitably create a bubble and you will lock people out of the market."

The wisdom of the old geezer: two of my go-back-to books by this guy are the rather apocalyptic "The Great Reckoning", published in 1992, which foresaw in rather exquisite detail the rise of terrorism among other things; and "The Sovereign Individual", published 1997, which foresaw the break-up of the world's larger and more unwieldy entities, and the privatisation of states, armies and other traditional nation-state apparatus, on smaller scales. Blackwater, anyone?

Prophetic stuff.

And wonderfully different to the asswipe smush (one square only, though) served up in the name of analysis in our own little deranged dominion.

Those darned House Prices

This analysis (which, funnily enough, blames investors, and this rather better one, which blames the stoopid Gummint, are both about the same research, by Dominick Stephens, of Westpac. Apart from the headline bias, the reserach confirms my own view of the casuses of the growing house price-to-earnings ratio (currently sitting at the 'severely unaffordable' in major NZ cities: at or over 6).

The article nails changes in top personal tax rates, versus company rates, as a key driver. This was pure politics-of-envy stuff, back in 2000. Westpac's analysis thinks this alone accounts for 17% of observed house price increases since 2000.

I can think of five major contributors to increases, apart from this:

1 - the dopey Govt efforts to get first-home buyers into the market, by guaranteeing the first $100k of mortgage irrespective of the purchaser's ability to pay. This had the instant effect, right here in l'il ol' Christchurch, of making every house price start at $100K, practically overnight. Properties, just before this fabulously ill-considered action, could be had in the poorer 'burbs for under $50K. After that action, prices went rapidly north of $120K, for the very same house. So much for the poor buyer.

2 - the creeping effects of regulation in building itself.

- Having every electrical tool certified, every year
- Fencing of sites
- Scaffolding erection, certifying, take-down, where in the past a long ladder used to do.
- certification of all trades

The aggregate effect is around 5-10% of pure build costs.

3 - Greedy councils and their contributions to infrastructure and reserves. The apartment saga in Auckland is indicative: up from $3-6K to $40K. Go figure.

4 - The extended consenting and RMA processes, add pure time (and as we all should know, Time=Money) to a development. This 'carry' (as the jargon has it) is probably around 5-10% of outright total costs, and in a protracted case, could easily be triple that.

5 - Good ol' supply and demand. Section prices alone in many areas are what a house price would have been in 2000. Add the build cost, at a conservative $2000/sq m, and the total starts to resemble that 6+ times multiplier. A constrained supply of land may not be by itself a major factor. But it may be the straw that breaks the camel's bank.

So there we have it. And notice the common factor.

It's not greedy developers, banks, or investors.

It's Gummint being its normal, stoopid self.

Greens lack a Defence policy (quell surprise...)

A defence policy, people, resources and equipment to do the dirty deeds, and training etc is just what I expect my hard-won and reluctantly surrendered taxes, to fund, as the very first duty of Gummint. So, you (Greens) are quite correct, not having such a policy shows a fundamental unseriousness about Governing.

And your own straw person (Lord help me, I’m using the same woolly language) is the ‘illegality’ of Iraq. You’ll need to keep a careful eye on the documents now being released: the ‘Blessed July’ aspect alone (see, for example this) would make a Londoner think twice. The point is that ‘legality’ applies only to a Westphalian nation-state weltanschauung. And we’re definitely not in that Kansas any more, Dorothy.

New Zealand is strategically irrelevant to the new Great Game - the Western Enlightenment against the Third Caliphate, but does pose a security risk to the rest of the Anglosphere: our laughably lax immigration and citizenship attitudes, mean that we are seen as a ’soft touch’.

So a useful start to a Green defence policy might be to ponder awhile on the ’sustainability’ of this stance.

And this goes far beyond the electoral considerations. When you consider that the Reggie Krays of the world can now purchase submarines, aircraft carriers and crude nuclear devices (read William Langwiesche on A.Q Khan in recent Atlantic Monthlies) as well as the usual run of weaponry, and that NZ has the longest and certainly the least defendable coastline in the Pacific, all sorts of unhealthy scenarios swim up from the depths.

And Reggie, to those who knew him, had one persona that was utterly charming, urbane, philanthropic and which took in more than one ingenuous reporter. But then he also had his Little Moments.

We, of course, don’t want to be a pawn in someone else’s game. Fair enough, the quiet life and all. But then, as Trotsky noted, ‘You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you’.

Better to heed and prepare.

First Duty of Gummint - Security

This was my substantive comment on the Campbell and Fisk thread.....

The first duty of Gummint is the physical security of its citoyens.

Fisk is essentially saying, if you’ve seen what I’ve seen, you’d never go to war again.

But history is replete with cases of citizenries being trapped in what amounts to our modern eyes, as slaveries of some sort.

Tyrannies of all stripes are in fact extremely sustainable, particularly if they rely on fear engendered by letting 14-30 year old males (in ’security forces’ or the like), indulge their hard-wired tendencies to slaughter, rapine and general hell-raising.

So shooting your way into such self-sustaining loops, to release the lives of all involved for Better Fings, is literally the only way sometimes.

Fisk may well have seen a lot, and be prepared to spread a message of ‘let’s not keep doing this’. But he’s preaching to the choir. Anyone truly concerned with the sustainability of a way of life, will in a political sense, ensure that there are police, security and other specialists in violence, on hand to keep people safe. And answerable to that citizenry. So saying ‘ don’t keep doing this’ is at best mischievious, and at worst a recipe for takeover by folks with fewer scruples about employing violence.

And Campbell didn’t ask the most obvious question:

‘Mr Fisk, you have lived safely for 30 years in Lebanon, which for all of that time was a police state, client of Syria, funded by Iran. Who has ensured your own freedom over that time, and has that affected your judgement?’

That Census

Which seems to be causing a good deal of angst as folk try to figure out ethnicity, religion and other stuff that eludes, say, DNA analysis or a blood test. But the work questions are the most annoying: the good bureaucrats at Statistics NZ clearly haven't cottoned on to the Road Warrior pattern. They seriously expect a single workplace! So it's 'No Fixed Abode' for me, and (in a classic example of questionnaires influencing behaviour) I'm just about to take my new 4x4 for a run, so I can answer 'Private Motor Vehicle' to the 'how did you travel' question. Which does generally describe my work pattern quite well, really: whereever the client wants, travel by car, taxi or plane.

Housing Hi-jinks

Not pc has a good note about affordability and its inverse relationship to planning and land-use regulation. But when you look at the actual cost of new building , you start to see a significant Nanny State impost in quite a few areas.

• Fencing of sites. Never used to happen, and not too many gory tales of kiddies' hands being lost to Tools Left Lying Aboot.
• Certified scaffolding for jobs needing e.g. roof work. Ask a roofing contractor about how much per job this adds. On a say $20K job, this will be around 30%.
  
• Leaky Building levy, even though your design follows a thousands-of-years tradition, and so includes actual eaves, and has no internal gutters.

And let's not ferget what's down the track:

• Full certification needed for all tradies, on pretty much all work, maintenance, new or other. I've heard that only around 30% can possibly qualify within any reasonable grace period allowed. Think what that will do to rates, resource availability as education takes priority over chargeable time, general supply as tradies piss off to less stupid countries, and overall costs.
• Earthquake proofing of older multistorey buildings. Billions in cost, for how many lives saved, again?
• Other wonders yet to be dreamt up by our Glorious Leaders in their third go at the Great Socialist Hexperiment on us all.

So, a little prediction about the likely unintended consequences of all of this:

There will arise a thriving, and mainly underground (black economy) market segment which specialises in supplying honest maintenance and repair, made to look as though it's always been there. Some characteristics of the activity:

• performed indoors, to shut out unwanted eyes. It's quite possible to do even major structural stuff without disturbing visible outer shells of buildings.
  
• If outer shell, visible from the street has to be touched, expect the street frontage to be minimal, screened off or trompe l'oeil'ed in some fashion to ward off casual drive-by glances, and inspectors of any breed.
• use of second-hand covering materials to disguise the new bones underneath. Demolition yards will be quite busy supplying this market.
• use of antiquing, aging and patination on visible surfaces. Distressed paint finishes, coatings of old kitchen grease, scratches, nicks and obvious signs of long use will be de rigeur. See, I've watched far too many 'Antiques Roadshows', already.
  
• payoffs to neighbours and certifiers (assuming the latter are even invited in) to guarantee silence (after all, they will need to return the favour at some point in their futures)
  
• cash is king

As Stewart Brand notes, in his sublime book 'How Buildings Learn', people just never stop fiddling with the spaces they live in. And if they cannot be arsed doing it legally, then done it will be, anyway.

But, predictions aside, the unaffordability of housing is due at least in part to the cost impacts of layers of petty and mostly un-necessary (to a traditional designer) specification, levies, requirements and inspections. My bet is, around 10-15% of pure house costs are eaten up in all of this. Add that to land costs (which is what the linked article is really about) and the sum isn't pretty.

And the solution?

Wind back some of the Nanny State requirements.

And educate yourself about what to look for in building design. It's not hard, and it's fun.

Listening to

As little TV and radio as possible. The shallowness of what passes for dear little NZ's public political commentary is just too much. The blogs, of course, rule as always. I tend to read financial papers' analyses (Australian Financial Review, Independent, Financial Times) to get a nuanced and intelligent picture.

Which is not looking too pretty, frankly; we are in for another three years of a redistributionist, lame-duck gummint about to encounter a perfect storm:

- Labour and its coalition partners (whoever they turn out to be, and for how long) are effectively shorn of a political mandate by the near-enough 50/50 split between social engineers of any breed and those interested in individual rights, freedoms and responsibilities. There will be considerable social resistance to further meddling, nanny-state-ing, and tribalism.

- And at the end of three long years (or maybe much sooner) Labour will lose office, for certain. Why?

- There is an economic storm brewing, composed of about equal parts external shocks (commodity prices, oil, energy) and internal mismanagement (energy and transport infrastructure provision, industrial relations expectations, welfare entitlement expectations), all considerably highlighted during the election campaign. These are not well managed by even conventional centre-right gummints, let alone leftish ones.

- The Minister of Finance is comprehensively discredited. Hid a bag of goodies under a Budget carpet, claimed they weren't there (oh, no room for Tax Cuts!) then flourished them with glee at key points during election campaigning. Financiers take a dim view of such obfustication. The MoF will have a long, torrid three years.

- Election bribes will cost dearly - Student Loans at 0% interest (you heard that right - and so has practically every arbitrageur in the First World) is costed by Treasury at close to $NZD1 billion.

- Existing financial cock-ups will cost more too: Kyoto was costed at roughly $USD15-20 per carbon tonne, but current world trading prices are close to twice that. So a $NZD 600m credit has turned into close to $NZD 2 billion debit. Funded by You Know Who.

- Turning working families into welfare beneficiaries is not going to do wonders for entrepreneurship or wealth generation generally. The signals are confused, and the deadweight inherent in getting, counting, redistributing taxes is considerable. And think of the stigma in waiting to apply for some of your own money back, in WINZ queues with hoodies, druggies, buskers and assorted rent-a-scum!

- There will be a vigourous, vocal and high-business-IQ Opposition snapping at the heels of every Gummint initiative, action, perk, slip-up, and SNAFU. The election campaign for the Centre-Right has effectively started now.

- The public at large has heard (if not acted on) a key message about tax - "Hey, that was My money first!" This will continue to grumble away in tax-payers' gizzards, and may have some surprising and unpleasant results during the term.

So after three inglorious years, during which time a fragile, electorally barely-sanctioned gummint muddles its lonely way through this swamp, all it will have to show for it is exhaustion, a more completely demonstrated lack of competence, an ecomony several clicks further down the OECD scale, and a greatly deepened resentment amongst voters. Who will then vote for? Anyone But Labour......

For a working example of what this looks like, read almost anything about Germany.

So even though I'm tempted to break out the 2005 Schadenfreude, I do have to remind myself that this is My country I'd be toasting.

So back to the title of this rant: I'm listening to Marta Topferova - Czech, gorgeous contralto voice, best harp playing I've heard in my life. And soon to be experienced with a replacement speaker set-up: budget price but decent sounds - KEF Q1's bookshelfs, and a little KEF PSW1000 subwoofer in the corner to round out the bass a bit. The great big ol' Infinity RS4001's move to the B speaker wires - they are sounding quite flat now.

A Czech, singing South American genres, in flawless Spanish. A telling line from one of the reviews: She is living proof that gaining a deep spiritual connection with a country and its music does not require hereditary ties .

Tell that to the new tribalists.