Wednesday, 3 May 2006

Annette Presley: The face of theft

Everyone wonders why people keep voting for thieving governments, but at the same time everyone wants a piece of someone else.

Moochers put their hands out for Welfare for Families, and justify it with a chuckle; students put their hands out for grants and interest-free loans, and justify their mooching by invoking 'the public good'; nosy neighbours claim the right to dictate what can and can't go on over their fence, and give impetus to envy-ridden laws like the RMA; and moochers and petty chisellers like Annette Bloody Presley (left) celebrate the just-announced nationalisation of a portion of NZ's largest company, and justify the theft by calling it 'unbundling.'

Let's call it what it is. It's theft. It's nationalisation -- just as I said right here back in February:
What "local loop unbundling" really means is this: nationalising Telecom's telephone lines because other telecommunications companies can't be arsed building their own, and the RMA makes it all but impossible to do so if the will were there in any case -- which it isn't. In a word, it is theft.
As Rodney Hide said today following Cunliffe's announcement of Telecom's 'unbundling':
This decision is not about allowing competition, it's about government forcing a private company to open their network to competitors. Labour has absolutely no respect for private property rights. Instead of creating an alternative network, a group of companies have pressured Ministers to let them leech off Telecom's lines... This sends a chilling message to any company wishing to invest in infrastructure - Government will regulate and control you, unless you do what politicians say.
The nationalisation of Telecom's lines has been long-signalled, and will no doubt be widely celebrated by all those who want to get their hands on something that isn't theirs, and don't care about the power they give government by granting their support. All government wants is cheerleaders for its meddling. All the cheearleaders want is their own chance at someone else wealth. The moochers and the looters need each other to survive. 'The goverment that robs Peter to pay Paul will always get the enthusiastic support of Paul' is a truism that is too frequently forgotten; it is entirely appropriate to invoke it here this evening.

Take Presley for instance. Instead of building up her own network or investing in Telecom shares in order to have a legitimate say in theirs, Annette Presley and others like her have been given the chance at something they haven't earned by a Government that doesn't care whose property they steal to do it.

You may disagree with how the assets that becameTelecom were originally sold, but sold they were, and today's Telecom bears only the slightest resemblance to the small, frail, flightless former SOE that first came blinking into the light with the sale of parts of the government's creaking Post and Telegraph department. That sale created a number of property rights that this present Government -- with the enthusiastic support of moochers like Presley -- has now declared it intends to strip.

Larry Williams put to her tonight on his Drivetime show Rodney Hide's perfectly correct point that this represents a violation of Telecom's property rights. Presley's response: "Bullshit." Turns out she wouldn't know a property right from a prostitute, and apparently wouldn't care who acts as her pimp.

What opinion have I formed of Annette Presley then? A publicity-seeker and a receiver of stolen goods. A cheerleader for nationalisation; a poster tart for theft. How might she feel if someone broke into her home some day and 'unbundled' everything she's worked for? Shame on her.

UPDATE 1: LibertyScott has an earlier post on Annette Presley, the entrepreneurial second-hander. I should stress, she's being picked on here because she's representative of so many New Zealanders who complain about government on the one hand but are happy to mooch when it suits them; who complain about growth in government, but who want to get the government's gun out on their behalf when it suits them. DPF is another example, and I'm very heartened to see commenters taking him to task for his typical Tory inconsistency. As one commenter puts it:
When is a Socialist government not a Socialist government? When David Farrar gets cheaper broadband out of them. I agree wholeheartedly with the comments above, this is confiscation of privately owned property no matter how you look at it.
It sure is. Trust a National Socialist to embrace it.

UPDATE 2: Telecom shares drop 7% in Australia, following unbundling ... - TCM.Net:
Although the New Zealand Exchange closed before the media conference took place, trading continued in Telecom shares on the Australian exchange. Tony Connolly from First NZ Capital says Telecom took quite a hit, closing down 33 cents, about seven percent, at A$4.43.

He expects Telecom shares to be sharply weaker tomorrow...
No kidding.

UPDATE 3: "Unbundling is theft," agree Business Roundtable chief executive Roger Kerr, Federated Farmers telecommunications spokesman Hugh Ritchie, National Party communications and IT spokesman Maurice Williamson (who would have thunk it!), and around the blogs LibertyScott, the Whig, Michael Ellis and Lindsay Mitchell. Cheerleaders for theft abound: this Herald article summarises the celebrations of those whose hands the preceeds of this theft will fall into. I'll let you hunt out all the other disgraceful apologists yourself. And Computer World has a summary of the package, and what happens next.

LINKS: Government to unbundle Telecom's local loop - NBR
Rodney Slates Labour's Disgraceful Destruction of Telecom's Property Rights - New Zeal
Stealing Telecom's property with weasel words - Peter Cresswell
The entrepreneurial second-hander - LibertyScott
Getting out the smoking gun - Peter Cresswell
Telecom decision 'bad for business, bad for farmers' - NZ Herald
Rocky time for Telecom's shares says National - Newstalk ZB
Theft of property rights to benefit overseas multinational - LibertyScott
Unbundling is theft - The Whig
Don't steal - the Government hates competitors - Michael Ellis
It's the means you've got to watch - Lindsay Mitchell
Internet rivals break out champagne - NZ Herald
Unbundle - Computer World
Unbundling timeline: what happens next - Computer World

TAGS: Property_Rights, Politics, History, New Zealand, Politics-NZ, Politics-National

22 comments:

  1. Bloody well said - thieving bitch indeed. She has a record of moaning about not getting something for free as I posted here:

    http://libertyscott.blogspot.com/2006/03/entrepreneurial-second-hander.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well if it's good enough for Bolivia....
    Does this mean we're officialy a Banana Republic now?

    ReplyDelete
  3. This isn't theft. A thief leaves, and your insurance company compensates for theft. This is enslavement.
    It's like carjacking someone and then forcing them to stay and drive you around... and pay for all gas & maintenance.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Not on topic PC. I'm in London. It is 6.20pm London time. 5.20am NZ time. Just heard that a tsunami warning has been issued following a massive earthquake near Tonga. No confirmation that there has been an actual tsunami, but, if so, it is expected to strike NZ in the next few hours.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Still no confirmation. ETA in Auckland would be 7.21am

    ReplyDelete
  6. Excellent analogy from Joy!

    Sums up the situation very neatly...

    ReplyDelete
  7. Whew! Warning has been cancelled!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Neatly put, PC. Thank you. Have forwarded this post.

    Ditto Oswald re Joy.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I wonder who is buying TEL though? Wouldn't be the Cullen Fund would it. Could be an opportunity for those who are not risk averse. One shouldn't let philosophy get in the way of one's investment decisions ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  10. They've outdone themselves this time. It usually takes the Government a week to waste a billion dollars. This act of vandalism against Telecom has destroyed a billion dollars of value in just a few minutes.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Glad you mentioned the caveat about how the assets were sold originally.

    Is it time to cancell the "kiwi share" since the government is content with outright nationisation of the balance sheet anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Who needs the kiwi share when all of the great and glorious altruists like Annette Presley will be able to provide cheap high quality service to the boondocks in competition with Telecom?

    Yes, that's very likely isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Spot the pro-Monopoly wanker. Get real - if we were stuck with Telecom you'd be better off living in Mexico.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Spot the wanker. Anonymous. No surprise. Too bereft of everything to have a name.

    ReplyDelete
  15. If we end up with an overgrazed commons we'd be better off in Somalia.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Telecom I think knew this was coming for a long time and sat on there hands, or was it stuck there heads into the sand over this issue.

    If there was decent management at Telecom they would of headed regulation off at the pass by offering better and cheaper services.

    While I do agree with you with it will in the short-term wipe maybe a couple of billion of dollars off the capitalization of the company, if they had a smart management team they should over time improve the value of the company.

    But if you look at their holding in Oz I don't expect them to.

    ReplyDelete
  17. If you don't like their management, sell any of their shares you own, and don't buy more. Bad management is no excuse to steal from them.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Telecom represent the exact kind of monopoly all true capitalists should stand against.

    When Telecom was sold to private interests, those who financed the company (the taxpayer) were given no say as to who the SOE was sold to and for how much. The public were thus denied an opportunity to establish competitors through the market thanks to an act of state/big business collusion (again, something a true capitalist would stand against). Had this opportunity been presented to the public, the loop would potentially not have been purchased in its entirety by one private group, and other private interests could have secured their share of it and opened up real competition and alternatives as a result.

    Normally, I'd never side with an act of state interference in making a right of two wrongs, but I think in this case the government has merely reversed the effects of one act of state nannying with another. I don't dispute that Presley et al should've made steps to develop their own networks LONG before this, but surely now New Zealanders will stand to reap the benefits of the competition that was denied to them by Telecom's sale in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  19. you sonund like a typical weirdo

    ReplyDelete
  20. Interesting article in the New Zealand Herald of today (12th, June, 2005) from "The Business" section page 10. This smaller section of the paper is bounded differently from the other main (larger) sections. The title of the article:

    "Property Rights? We've moved on ,..."

    It stated that the US FCC (Federal Communications Commission) in September , 2005 signalled they are moving away from unbundling where they concluded that regulations forcing the owners of the copper network to share access will "constrain technological advances and deter broadband infrastructure investment". It also quoted Telstra Astralia CEO (Sol Trujillo) in his interview with the 'Economist' magazine which he slammed proposals over there (Australia) to let rivals use their (Telstra) fibre network at a set price. His comment was , "Those who risk capital to earn returns shouldn't have to subsidise those that don't."

    ReplyDelete
  21. Interesting how 2 months later I am still getting google searches linking to that wonderful item on my page.
    :)

    ReplyDelete
  22. Obviously a few commenters here have not been ripped off by Telecom for their over-priced, rubbish "data services".

    Yes: That's correct you far right capitalists - you pay (Telecom) for a service, you don't receive what you paid (Telecom) for - and the company (Telecom) doesn't give a toss and you have no other option then to buy from the company (Telecom) because they have a stranglehold in the marketplace.

    Whether unbundling is theft or not, the irony is clear.

    In a perfect world, Telecom's network would be rendered worthless through competition by other network owners - granted - but we don't live in a perfect world so I'll happily take the next best thing which is to put the interests of 100's, or even 1000's of NZ SME companies, who rely on data services to operate our businesses - put the interests of this crowd of mainly RIGHT WINGER CAPITALISTS ahead of the interest of one greedy, screw the customer monopoly.

    ReplyDelete