Exactly

I think it applies mostly to the second hand car market in New Zealand where there is abundance of cheap imports from Japan.

That's all set to change though as prices rise due to the problems in Japan.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10712688

^^ Thanks, that makes sense.

He finally got it, well done.

Yes wages are incredibly low, especially for unskilled jobs. That's why it is best to start your own business, plenty of cheap labour at hand.

As for the Kiwis wrecking there environment you cannot seriously be saying that Victoria is better can you? Burning brown coal for power, Desal plant, Virtually the entire state cleared of it's native forest, 4 football pitches of native forest still being logged per day.

I can understand you choosing to live in Melbourne over New Zealand but i do not think you are comparing like for like.

Yes but you make it sound like if you start your own business you will earn a westernised wage which is just not the case as there isn't the work to go round. A self employed tradie can earn more than twice as much here for instance.

You're right. I didn't say Victoria was better.

I'm not comparing like for like. New Zealand is a totally different prospect to Australia. Totally different. I am constantly amazed at the number of people who think they are remotely similar because they both speak English and are in a similar corner of the globe. Myself included up to the age of about 23.

BB

Papilon. They burn lignite, both as a primary fuel and for power generation in the South Island of New Zealand. Across the country around two thirds of the natural forest cover has been removed.

That's interesting to know. In school we were taught that the Maoris had big burn offs in the SI when they arrived and then the settlers cleared heaps for farming when they arrived but that's going back 150 years. Is there still lots going on then? Do you have a link you could post? Thanks,

You might this interesting Sam

http://www.maf.govt.nz/news-resource...sting/forestry

Our family are "Supporters of Tiritiri Matangi" an island in the Hauraki Gulf. It is an open sanctuary and one of New Zealand’s most successful community-led conservation projects. Since 1984, tens of thousands of volunteers have planted pohutukawa and other native trees, transforming the island’s barren pasture into dense forest. The island now boasts healthy populations of some our rarest birds and animals.

http://haurakigulf.aucklandnz.com/is...i-matangi.html

Victoria is 33% forest as of today. OK, some of it was devastated in the Black Saturday fires and there has been major damage over the past 10 years mainly as a symptom of recent climate change, but it has been hit hard before and it comes back.

New Zealand is around 30% forest, so actually a lesser ratio than in Victoria. Both places had 80% forest cover prior to white settlement so deforestation has been similar in both places.

What really gets me worked up is when people cockily make strident comments assuming them to be factual when they are actually not factual, i.e. that person hasn't even looked for the statistics or done any research.

Victoria is full of bloody forest. I wonder if the poster has even toured through rural Victoria to make such inaccurate assertions. Maybe you have been to Melbourne and traveled on a few highways through farming districts but have you actually been on the mountain roads and through the remoter areas, particularly in the central and east of the state where the majority of the forest is?

One country where there isn't a lot of forest is the UK with just 12% forest cover and the same size as Victoria, which is where you all came from in the first place I assume.

http://www.mongabay.com/deforestation_pcover.htm
http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/CA256F310024B628/0/D6D3425A8ACF69CECA257195000972E1/$File/Victoria%27s+Forests.pdf
(PDF file)

The British (and Scottish/Irish etc.) are responsible for most of the clearing of the forest in Australia and New Zealand. They had to in order to establish residential, industrial, commercial and agricultural areas which are the fundamentals of a civilised society.

If no one had cleared vast tracts of forest we would all be living with the aborigines in a hunter/gatherer society.

Most of the forests here, and no doubt in NZ, are protected, either as part of the parks system or as reserved forest. In some of these reserved forests there are plantations and some forestry activities. Most countries in the world have some sort of a forestry industry.

Difference is over 60 million people live in the UK and has been farmed for nearly 1000 years. I do not believe that 30% of Victoria is native forest. The fact that only a few million people could destroy even by your estimate 70% of the native forest in just over 100 years is incredible.

Very funny. They did not have to clear 80% just to make a civilized society, which until recently was only a very small population. They did it because they could and they got very rich doing it. Farming made Australia and NZ. If it wasn't for the High Country there would only be a few pockets of native forest left in Vic. Drive west from Melbourne and there is virtually no native forest left all the way to the S. Australian border. Drive east into south Gippsland and the only tract of decent native forest left is in Wilsons Prom.

Which one of the OPs questions are you trying to answer here?

BB

Not everybody in New Zealand only earns $9.50 per hour. My point was you painted a very bleak picture of New Zealand based on your experience, but many have a completely different view and experience and i just wanted to balance your incredibly negative opinion.