• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
Barnyb

AC36 Auckland NZ

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, hoom said:

:lol::huh:

During this period NZ has become the mecca for rich libertarians to build their bolt-holes & we get quoted as the libertarian example in other countries.

We're literally one of the most libertarian countries on the planet, in a bunch of things almost certainly the most libertarian other than Somalia & the newly created libertarian paradise Libya.

 

Light rail is absolutely necessary & was already coming soon to a Dominion Rd near you simply because its already saturated with buses & because Symonds St at the CBD end will be literally all buses all the time in a couple of years. (but should never have been pitched as 'we need it for the Airport', its mostly about getting rapid transit into the central Isthmus & Mangere with the Airport as a desirable end-point)

Consider every 3-4 people on a bus is a net reduction in the amount of road space used as shown by the North Shore busway which increased people crossing the Bridge but reduced the number of vehicles.

 

Don't even bother with your autonomous vehicles magical thinking crap, they are basically the same arguments that were used to destroy Aucklands original Tram network.

Just who do you think will be paying to buy the massive fleet of autonomous vehicles necessary to make that work anyway? The small government with small tax for small minded fools? :wacko:

You know, I was half way through a well reasoned argument for why almost everything you say is wrong when I realised there is no point.

Your religion makes you utterly immune to critical thinking.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jaysper said:

Your religion makes you utterly immune to critical thinking.

Says the hardcore libertarian fanatic fantasist :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jaysper said:

You know, I was half way through a well reasoned argument for why almost everything you say is wrong when I realised there is no point.

Your religion makes you utterly immune to critical thinking.

 

 

You have never been half way through a well reasoned argument! Why start now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barnyb said:

You have never been half way through a well reasoned argument! Why start now.

Ha ha ha. Too true, Barny. What ya got, Jays? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jaysper said:

You know, I was half way through a well reasoned argument for why almost everything you say is wrong when I realised there is no point.

Your religion makes you utterly immune to critical thinking.

 

 

He probably rides a bike too...and voted for Labour.

Enough said

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2017 at 6:48 PM, Count Drac said:

Looks good, BUT....

Where do the fishing boats that currently use Halsey go to?

Where does the steam tug "William C Daldy" go to?

Where do the boats that current berth inside Hobson wharf go to?

Where does the Waiheke and GBI car ferry go to?

Do Ports of Auckland have room to move these vessels to other berths that have similar facilities and truck access?

Somewhere else is where they go - who really cares

Cheers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, damagesmith said:

He probably rides a bike too...and voted for Labour.

Enough said

He does ride a bike. But you can't hold that against him.

I very much doubt he voted Labour, Greens or NZ First though. He has more sense. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sailbydate said:

He does ride a bike. But you can't hold that against him.

I very much doubt he voted Labour, Greens or NZ First though. He has more sense. ;)

He has 'some sense'!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sailbydate said:

Ha ha ha. Too true, Barny. What ya got, Jays? ;)

I believe the term "don't teach a pig to fly" comes to mind SBD :)

No point in arguing with someone for whom the realm of possibilities is limited to that which currently resides in their physical realm. Oooh look, a train! That's something that exists now so it must be the future! LOL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jaysper said:

 Oooh look, a train!

In the 1960s and 70s everyone believed trains were a quaint Victorian relic. In the UK however passengers carried has doubled over the last 2 decades and millennials aren't learning to drive.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dogwatch said:

....and millennials aren't learning to drive.

Neither are fucking Asians judging by playing dodg'ems with them on Auckland roads!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dogwatch said:

In the 1960s and 70s everyone believed trains were a quaint Victorian relic. In the UK however passengers carried has doubled over the last 2 decades and millennials aren't learning to drive.

Turns out they are worth 1.5 billion dollars a year to the New Zealand economy as well, but most people seem to hate them because *gasp* people have to share them, which every good capitalist knows is an inherently evil concept that must be stamped out in case it spreads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roads being the ultimate example of how The Market Will Provide could never work.

Imagine if Roads were planned, built & run as an unregulated, competitive, profit making, market...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, hoom said:

Roads being the ultimate example of how The Market Will Provide could never work.

Imagine if Roads were planned, built & run as an unregulated, competitive, profit making, market...

Judging by most peoples choice of vehicle these days, everyone already seems to be preparing for that inevitable day where the roads just become unmaintained seas of mud provided by free market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, dogwatch said:

In the 1960s and 70s everyone believed trains were a quaint Victorian relic. In the UK however passengers carried has doubled over the last 2 decades and millennials aren't learning to drive.

One small problem is that most train services are subsidized. Certainly most if not all in NZ are heavily subsidized. 

When you hear people talk about how wonderful some places trains are, you will generally find heavy subsidies in place.

Even in Singapore where the population density and dispersal is pretty much ideal for trains there is a heavy program of subsidisation.

It is therefore dishonest to proclaim the efficacy of trains when the playing field is so definitively tilted in their favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you actually believe roads are of course fully Market funded on a profit-making basis or something :wacko:

Munster1991BusBicycleCar

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jaysper said:

When you hear people talk about how wonderful some places trains are, you will generally find heavy subsidies in place.

 

Actually the train service in my region, which is one of the larger operators, pays net cash into the government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about other countries but in New Zealand the roading system outside community areas is provided by the NBA (National Road Board) funded by the taxpayer .. railways should also be provided by the same NBA so that balanced decisions can be made about the most economic method of transport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hoom said:

Roads being the ultimate example of how The Market Will Provide could never work.

Imagine if Roads were planned, built & run as an unregulated, competitive, profit making, market...

Circles come to mind. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jaysper said:

One small problem is that most train services are subsidized. Certainly most if not all in NZ are heavily subsidized. 

When you hear people talk about how wonderful some places trains are, you will generally find heavy subsidies in place.

Even in Singapore where the population density and dispersal is pretty much ideal for trains there is a heavy program of subsidisation.

It is therefore dishonest to proclaim the efficacy of trains when the playing field is so definitively tilted in their favour.

Yeah. But most people manage ignore this. Just like E-vehicles, solar and wind electricity generation.

All supposedly the way of the future, provided they continue to be heavily subsidised by the masses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dogwatch said:

Actually the train service in my region, which is one of the larger operators, pays net cash into the government.

And that's great, but it is also not the norm and is most definitely not the norm in NZ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Sailbydate said:

Yeah. But most people manage ignore this. Just like E-vehicles, solar and wind electricity generation.

All supposedly the way of the future, provided they continue to be heavily subsidised by the masses. 

Sssssssssh! Don't spook the horses!

Actually I think electric vehicles are the future also, just not the pieces of garbage they currently manufacture.

There needs to be a VERY significant advancement in electrical storage that will allow us to build EVs cheaply in an environmentally friendly manner plus allow us to store massive amounts of electricity generated by erratic generation sources such as solar and wind.

When that happens, EVs will become the financially and ecologically obvious choice. But not before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dogwatch said:

Actually the train service in my region, which is one of the larger operators, pays net cash into the government.

Citizen. Please. Remember where you are, think of the narrative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DayTripper said:

Citizen. Please. Remember where you are, think of the narrative.

It's your compatriots who seem keen on talking about trains. Now that pretty much all that can be said about the AC75 at this point has already been said, we are back into a slow news period. However I can reassure you that personally as far as this discussion is concerned, I am trained-out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it gets Emission Trading exemption or something but thats relatively recent, most of the NZ windfarms were built without it & are profit making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DayTripper said:

Wot? New Zealand wind generation is subsidised? Got a link for that?

So who are you going to believe? The WEA's or the sceptics, deniers and legacy generators and grid operators?

Try this one for starters: https://www.climateconversation.org.nz/2010/12/nz-wind-farm-subsidies/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, jaysper said:

Sssssssssh! Don't spook the horses!

Actually I think electric vehicles are the future also, just not the pieces of garbage they currently manufacture.

There needs to be a VERY significant advancement in electrical storage that will allow us to build EVs cheaply in an environmentally friendly manner plus allow us to store massive amounts of electricity generated by erratic generation sources such as solar and wind.

When that happens, EVs will become the financially and ecologically obvious choice. But not before.

I seriously looked at a VW E-Golf recently. RANGE - 200km! I don't think so.

Wake me up when they get to 500km and I might have another look - but I'll still be balking at a $73,000 price tag. I could still get the top-of-the-line gas-guzzler 'R' rocket ship for that!

On the other hand, I 'could' plug an E-Golf into any number of FREE (aka, heavily subsidised) charging stations around the country and ignore NZL's apparently rapacious petrol industry. Tough call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jaysper said:

One small problem is that most train services are subsidized. Certainly most if not all in NZ are heavily subsidized. 

When you hear people talk about how wonderful some places trains are, you will generally find heavy subsidies in place.

Even in Singapore where the population density and dispersal is pretty much ideal for trains there is a heavy program of subsidisation.

It is therefore dishonest to proclaim the efficacy of trains when the playing field is so definitively tilted in their favour.

Given $1.5 billion in annual economic benefit that just makes good economic sense.

That and the fact that anyone who thinks roads aren't a subsidised service is pretty bonkers! Everytime you hear the words "road of national significance" your talking some serious public money!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Boybland said:

Given $1.5 billion in annual economic benefit that just makes good economic sense.

That and the fact that anyone who thinks roads aren't a subsidised service is pretty bonkers! Everytime you hear the words "road of national significance" your talking some serious public money!

So, you need to sort some facts out sparky.

Where do you think the fuel taxes, etc go? Precisely why do you think a new regional fuel tax is being introduced in Auckland?

In fact up until about 10 years ago, the Government skimmed some of the transport related taxes off the top and used them to fund other initiatives.

The only taxes collected on bus and trains usage are GST AFAIK and they are heavily subsidised.

Here in Wellington approximately 60% of our Regional Council taxes are spent on public transport subsidies. If these services are so excellent, why do they need subsidies?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sailbydate said:

I seriously looked at a VW E-Golf recently. RANGE - 200km! I don't think so.

Wake me up when they get to 500km and I might have another look - but I'll still be balking at a $73,000 price tag. I could still get the top-of-the-line gas-guzzler 'R' rocket ship for that!

On the other hand, I 'could' plug an E-Golf into any number of FREE (aka, heavily subsidised) charging stations around the country and ignore NZL's apparently rapacious petrol industry. Tough call.

For me, the range is not the problem because once EVs reach critical mass you will be able to charge your car up in LOTs of places within about 5 or 10 minutes.

Additionally, maintenance on EVs is much lower than ICE based vehicles (with the exception of the battery) and EVs will out accelerate an ICE vehicle any old day of the week.

The problems at the moment are:

 

1. The batteries are too costly and aren't exactly environmentally friendly.

2. We have insufficient generation and grid capacity to charge a fleet that is made up mostly of EVs.

If we get a breakthrough in battery technology, it will resolve these issues and EVs will be a no brainer. I am reasonably optimistic that this will happen within the next decade or so.

Once it does, I will switch to EV once my gas guzzler is ready to be replaced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sailbydate said:

I seriously looked at a VW E-Golf recently. RANGE - 200km! I don't think so.

Wake me up when they get to 500km and I might have another look - but I'll still be balking at a $73,000 price tag. I could still get the top-of-the-line gas-guzzler 'R' rocket ship for that!

On the other hand, I 'could' plug an E-Golf into any number of FREE (aka, heavily subsidised) charging stations around the country and ignore NZL's apparently rapacious petrol industry. Tough call.

More and more EV's on our roads will inevitably lead to higher electricity costs for all consumers..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sailbydate said:

I seriously looked at a VW E-Golf recently. RANGE - 200km! I don't think so.

Wake me up when they get to 500km and I might have another look - but I'll still be balking at a $73,000 price tag. I could still get the top-of-the-line gas-guzzler 'R' rocket ship for that!

On the other hand, I 'could' plug an E-Golf into any number of FREE (aka, heavily subsidised) charging stations around the country and ignore NZL's apparently rapacious petrol industry. Tough call.

Sounds like the new Tesla Roadster will be right for you..

900+ km range, 0-100km in 1.9secs.

They're not cheap, but I hear there will be a good used one available soon. The downside is it will be as is, where is and location = Mars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, waterboy42 said:

Sounds like the new Tesla Roadster will be right for you..

900+ km range, 0-100km in 1.9secs.

They're not cheap, but I hear there will be a good used one available soon. The downside is it will be as is, where is and location = Mars.

I know people through friends who both have Tesla's on order, deposits paid. The question is, will they devalue quicker than an Audi - or will they actually appreciate like the first ever Honda Civics when released. (I missed out on one of those too - suggesting they were a bit expensive at the time!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, jaysper said:

For me, the range is not the problem because once EVs reach critical mass you will be able to charge your car up in LOTs of places within about 5 or 10 minutes.

Additionally, maintenance on EVs is much lower than ICE based vehicles (with the exception of the battery) and EVs will out accelerate an ICE vehicle any old day of the week.

The problems at the moment are:

 

1. The batteries are too costly and aren't exactly environmentally friendly.

2. We have insufficient generation and grid capacity to charge a fleet that is made up mostly of EVs.

If we get a breakthrough in battery technology, it will resolve these issues and EVs will be a no brainer. I am reasonably optimistic that this will happen within the next decade or so.

Once it does, I will switch to EV once my gas guzzler is ready to be replaced.

The best thing about EV's is the fact that women haven't yet cottoned-on to the fact that they are incredibly quick off the mark. My wife said a pretty definite 'NO' to VW's turbo rocket ship but a luke-warm 'yeah, maybe' to the E-Golf. Plus there's always the 'environmental card' to play.

Check this baby out...

Screen Shot 2017-11-19 at 7.48.03 AM.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jaysper said:

So, you need to sort some facts out sparky.

Where do you think the fuel taxes, etc go? Precisely why do you think a new regional fuel tax is being introduced in Auckland?

In fact up until about 10 years ago, the Government skimmed some of the transport related taxes off the top and used them to fund other initiatives.

The only taxes collected on bus and trains usage are GST AFAIK and they are heavily subsidised.

Here in Wellington approximately 60% of our Regional Council taxes are spent on public transport subsidies. If these services are so excellent, why do they need subsidies?

 

As per the Ministry of Transport website:

Revenue for land transport comes mostly from motorists through fuel excise duty (petrol tax), road user charges on diesel vehicles (RUC), and vehicle licensing charges. The Land Transport Management Act 2003 ring-fences this revenue for investment in land transport, including building and maintaining State highways and local roads.

State highways are funded entirely by central government, with maintenance responsibilities and expenses falling on the NZ Transport Agency(external link).

The costs of building and maintaining local roads are shared between central government (through the NZ Transport Agency) and local councils. Councils contribute to the cost of their land transport activities from rates and borrowing, in what is known as the ‘local share’.

The government’s priorities for land transport funding are set out through the Government Policy Statement on Land Transport, which allocates ranges within which road improvements and maintenance can be funded.  Each local council then prepares a Regional Land Transport Plan, which the NZ Transport Agency considers when preparing the National Land Transport Programme (NLTP). The NLTP allocates funding to individual roading projects. This separation of the Minister from individual funding decisions is designed to help avoid perceptions of conflict of interest.

From time to time the government may wish to fund projects which are unable or unsuitable to be funded by charges on motorists alone, or might want to exercise more control over investment than is permitted through this process. In these cases the Crown is able to direct additional funds through the usual Budget processes. Recent examples of this are funding for the Accelerated Regional Roads Package, Urban Cycleways and the SuperGold Card public transport scheme.

 

Both the bolded parts pretty much look like subsidies (or at least public money) to me... Yes a fair whack of it comes from fuel tax and road user charges, but there is clearly a significant public investment on occassion as well.

The other issue not addressed is the fact that road charges are not actually spent in the same regions as the contributions.  So there are drivers in some parts of New Zealand pretty heavily subsidising drivers in other parts.

Pretty sure the main reason the regional fuel tax is being introduced in Auckland is due to about 30 years of under investment...

As for why you should subsidise public transport? Well pretty much every study shows the economic benefits outweigh the costs.  It's cheaper and more efficient than building roads, the costs of moving the same number of people using roads would be astronomical and to do it without subsidy (as in purely using a fuel tax for example) would require something far more than 10 cents a litre being added to fuel in Auckland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sailbydate said:

Thats not really subsidies.

You build a Windfarm and the Grid operator will upgrade the Grid to link in the generation, big whoopie :huh:

Subsidies that most windfarms get is several cents per kW/hr & we have nothing like that.

Great advantage for NZ is we have a heap of Geothermal resource &

 

1 hour ago, jaysper said:

Here in Wellington approximately 60% of our Regional Council taxes are spent on public transport subsidies. If these services are so excellent, why do they need subsidies?

Because to fit that many people on roads in cars would cost fucktons more & leave an incredibly shitty city.

 

1 hour ago, jaysper said:

Where do you think the fuel taxes, etc go?

Land Transport Fund goes nearly exclusively to motorways & other major arterial routes.

Who do you think pays for all the endless kilometers of suburban & country roads?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, hoom said:

Great advantage for NZ is we have a heap of Geothermal resource &

Oops failed to end sentence :o

Geothermal is base-load, runs same rate 24/7 except for occasional maintenance, produces far more electricity than Wind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hoom said:

Oops failed to end sentence :o

Geothermal is base-load, runs same rate 24/7 except for occasional maintenance, produces far more electricity than Wind.

Ok, so you need to check facts on geothermal also. Not that cheap (hydro is cheapest by far), is not an infinite resource (they have to keep extending the pipes to new areas where the pressure hasn't died) and does have some admittedly low end environmental impacts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, jaysper said:

Ok, so you need to check facts on geothermal also. Not that cheap (hydro is cheapest by far), is not an infinite resource (they have to keep extending the pipes to new areas where the pressure hasn't died) and does have some admittedly low end environmental impacts.

No current electricity generation format comes without some environmental impact. But as a country NZL is luckier than most.

Take Aussie for example. The more EV's they encourage, the MORE pollution they generate - because 60% (IIRC) of their electricity is generated from burning low-grade brown coal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sailbydate said:

No current electricity generation format comes without some environmental impact. But as a country NZL is luckier than most.

Take Aussie for example. The more EV's they encourage, the MORE pollution they generate - because 60% (IIRC) of their electricity is generated from burning low-grade brown coal.

This is actually a tough one SBD. You are probably right, but burning coal in a power station allows you to deal with the pollution MUCH mor effectively than burning it at home because you can install scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators, etc which do mitigate a lot of the effects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, jaysper said:

This is actually a tough one SBD. You are probably right, but burning coal in a power station allows you to deal with the pollution MUCH mor effectively than burning it at home because you can install scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators, etc which do mitigate a lot of the effects.

Yeah, it is more efficient to burn the coal in a power station compared to burning it at home, and the scrubbers do trap fly ash and some of the sulpher products. But that's not the point because they don't burn a lot of coal at home in Australia anyway, and they certainly don't burn it at home to produce electricity. 

The main pollutant from burning any fossil fuel is CO2, and there is no way to mitigate it apart from not burning the stuff in the first place. If you are going to burn fossil fuels then it's far better to burn something that has a lot more Hydrogen atoms in relation to Carbon atoms, because it's the hydrogen bonds that give up the most energy when they are oxidised (ie, burned and turned into water).

Methane and other components of natural gas are relatively clean fossil fuels because their molecules have a lot of hydrogen atoms in relation to the number of carbon atoms, but brown coal (lignite) is probably the worst because it's the other way around.

What the fuck any of this has to do with the next AC in Auckland is anybodies guess, unless they plan of burning coal (steam power, anyone?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jaysper said:

Ok, so you need to check facts on geothermal also. Not that cheap (hydro is cheapest by far), is not an infinite resource (they have to keep extending the pipes to new areas where the pressure hasn't died) and does have some admittedly low end environmental impacts.

Much less environmental effects than burning dinosaurs.

And they (allegedly) learned lessons from over-using the early plants, my understanding is the newer ones are more carefully specced to use less heat than the rocks are putting out & with re-injecting water, less of it is lost -> expected to last much much better.

 

Hydro is also neat, built by big tax, big Government though so you should hate it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Count Drac said:

(Snip)

What the fuck any of this has to do with the next AC in Auckland is anybodies guess, unless they plan of burning coal (steam power, anyone?)

With regards to AC75's the size of the boilers and the coal bunkers were always going to be a problem. ;)

Maybe there is a strong case for a turbo diesel after all? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jaysper said:

This is actually a tough one SBD. You are probably right, but burning coal in a power station allows you to deal with the pollution MUCH mor effectively than burning it at home because you can install scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators, etc which do mitigate a lot of the effects.

Apart from the carbon.

edit...Oh, done I see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ~Stingray~ said:

Check out the Battery powered Tesla Transformer, charging stations back at the dock. 0-50 in a flash!

Maybe. 

Quote

The Model S and Model X vehicles updated Saturday were all built with a 75-kilowatt-hour battery. At full capacity, that’s enough for a Model S to travel about 250 miles. When those cars were first sold, Tesla gave customers the option of a lower-capacity battery at a more affordable price, and some decided to take the savings rather than purchase the full 75-kWh battery.

But downsizing didn’t mean replacing the big battery with a physically smaller one; it just meant using a bit of computer code to restrict how much of the battery the car could access. If the customers wanted, they could later have Tesla lift the software lock by paying an additional fee, which can run into the thousands of dollars.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2017/09/11/as-hurricane-irma-bore-down-tesla-gave-some-florida-drivers-more-battery-juice-heres-why-thats-a-big-deal/?utm_term=.59f34c686899

I guess it will depend what level of service teams purchase from Tesla.  :lol:

WetHog  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/12/2017 at 2:09 PM, Indio said:

Why would there be no GST on local purchases of materials (marine suppliers, engineering & machining sub-contractors,etc) and energy used in the SY servicing?? And PAYE on the wages & salaries of the workers doing the servicing? Any imported gear used in the manufacture or servicing of the SY incurs GST when it lands in country, with GST draw-back ONLY if re-exported in the original condition they arrived in the country - i.e. unmodified nor added to a manufactured item.

Why would there be no GST on local purchases of materials...?

Because GST is not paid on zero-rated exports like this.

And PAYE on the wages &...?

Because NZ is pretty much at the natural full employment rate. This also means the 'more jobs for New Zealanders' argument is bunk.

Any imported gear used in the manufacture or servicing of the SY incurs GST when it lands in country...?

Yes but if used in a zero-rated export, the supplier would expect a refund from the GST collected by Customs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now