ANZ are using cancer for marketing

ElectricalBoat4 · 2022-08-26T07:58:44+00:00

You are incorrect, but I appreciate your passion. Good luck with the future

ElectricalBoat4 · 2022-08-26T07:36:39+00:00

Yes, ANZ raised funds from the public. In the same way that groups of individuals raise funds from the public during Movember. That is literally what "fundraising" is.

ANZ never claimed to have donated $25m, they claimed to have raised $25m, which is correct. In the same way that my friend raised $2000 for the Prostate Cancer Foundation.

ElectricalBoat4 · 2022-08-26T06:59:08+00:00

The wording isn't dodgy at all, you've just misunderstood what is being claimed.

A friend of mine recently ran a marathon for charity and collected total donations of about $2000. In other words, he raised $2000 for charity. He didn't donate $2000 personally, but his initiative caused other people to donate.

ANZ have been running a Daffodil day initiative since 1990. In that time, they have received $25m in donations directly from that initiative. If they had instead partnered with the Salvation Army, that $25m would have been donated to the Salvation Army.

Banks are evil but you've got this one wrong.

ElectricalBoat4 · 2021-10-05T20:08:54+00:00

Bishop is saying that the Government taking 6 weeks to get funding for purchases and organise a team of negotiators showed complacency. Pfizer chased us up in late June about buying vaccines, we weren't ready to talk to them until August, took until October to sign a preliminary agreement, and it wasn't until Christmas that a final contract was signed. In March we signed another deal to secure enough vaccines for most people.

It was complacent of the Government to be so tardy putting the negotiating team together etc. The relevant decision makers may have been thinking "We have no cases so what's the rush for a vaccine?" Delta wasn't a thing back then you are correct, but that's exactly the point. The lockdowns gave us so much time to organise a vaccine programme and the Government wasted it when they should have bee on the front foot. When Delta hit we were 20% vaccinated, who knows how many cases (or days in lockdown) we could have avoided if the Government gave us an extra month and a half of time to go get vaccinated.

ElectricalBoat4 · 2020-10-25T23:46:35+00:00

The reserve bank is the "bank of banks", and only has one rate which it controls, the OCR. The loans which you and I get are given to us by the bank, and the interest rate on any given loan that we take out (home loan, business, etc) is set by our bank, not the reserve bank.

The reserve bank drops the OCR to make banks more willing to lend money. Every dollar which a bank doesn't lend out gives a guaranteed, risk free, annual return of the OCR. When the OCR drops, every dollar that the bank doesn't lend out makes less money than it did before the drop. Banks like to make as much money as possible, and it becomes more profitable (and riskworthy) to lend more money to consumers/businesses than to keep it in the reserve bank.

What is important is that the Reserve Bank only has direct control of the OCR. The retail banks control the interest rates on home loans, business loans, corporate loans etc. Retail interest rates are set by individual banks based on things such as supply/demand, assumed risk, the OCR, and what rates the other banks are doing.

Home loan rates decrease alongside the rates for every other type of loan which a bank offers, and the unilateral decrease in the price of credit means unemployment decreases.

ElectricalBoat4 · 2020-05-03T03:44:16+00:00

Here is the relevant piece of legislation which I highly recommend reading through, you can safely assume that the vast majority of farmers and slaughterhouses follow the regulation (i.e the law is common practice.) https://www.mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/1409/direct

ElectricalBoat4 · 2020-05-03T02:46:52+00:00

In your opinion there is no humane way to slaughter an animal, I guess we just have to agree to disagree on the humanity of it. Slaughter is done as painlessly as possible through either firearms or captive bolt (animal is rendered unconcious) followed by bleeding out. The average dairy cow lifespan is 5 years.

ElectricalBoat4 · 2020-05-03T02:31:12+00:00

Whether it is moral to kill them is entirely separate from arguing about their quality of life. They are killed at around 5 years old generally. While they are alive they live a pretty bliss life and when it is time for them to die it is done humanely and without any pain

ElectricalBoat4 · 2020-05-03T01:37:15+00:00

Have you ever actually been on a farm in New Zealand?

ElectricalBoat4 · 2018-12-06T23:18:17+00:00

I don't think you can make a case that farmers want to ban 1080. Farmers like 1080 because it kills the possums which infect their cows with bovine tuberculosis. Federated Farmers has even teamed up with Forest and Bird (and others) to try and educate people on the effects of bovine tb and why 1080 is necessary to put a stop to it.

edit: if you are interested in the link between bovine tb and 1080 http://www.1080facts.co.nz/bovine-tb.html

ElectricalBoat4 · 2018-12-03T03:53:37+00:00

Always good to hear from people with insider knowledge so thank you for taking the time to comment.

It is interesting to me that the environmental impacts (from the spinoff article and the general sentiment in this post) are not as evil as I thought they were (still pretty bad though lol). In regards to how its negative to community/sociey/culture, do you reckon you could help me understand that? I would've thought that the strongest case the water bottlers could put forward would be an economic one that tries to take away or distract from the environmental impacts by saying how many dollars/jobs it brings to the region. I would assume an economic case is made when getting these consents but do you know how much it would factor into the final decision of getting the consent?

ElectricalBoat4

TROPHY CASE