$38,000,000 in treaty settlements for...

$38,000,000 in treaty settlements for another Maori tribe!

Posted in the New Zealand Forum

First Prev
of 9
Next Last
Fed Up

New Zealand

#1 Jun 21, 2012
tax payers are folking out $38,000,000 in compensation to a Maori tribe for an event that happened over 150 years ago! can someone please explain the logic behind this?

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/... -$38m-treaty-settlement

“Educating Utus”

Since: Aug 10

Wanganui, New Zealand

#2 Jun 21, 2012
I think I can explain. Today's part Maoris feel the pain of their ancestor's [Tipuna] loss of thier land and that emotion can only be appeased with vast sums of taxpayer's cash and assets. This is however a very selective emotion and they feel nothing of the euphoria their European ancestors got from acquiring that same land. Part Maoris also have selective memories and don't for a minute imagine these payouts are 'full and final. Full and final settlements usually last on average about 30 years [Tainui have been paid out 5 times since 1860] but the aggrieved mentality is inter-generational and look's like it will endure for many generations to come.

“Tino Rangatiratanga”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#3 Jun 22, 2012
Yawn...
Cumb Dunt

Auckland, New Zealand

#4 Jun 22, 2012
Fed Up wrote:
tax payers are folking out $38,000,000 in compensation to a Maori tribe for an event that happened over 150 years ago! can someone please explain the logic behind this?
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/... -$38m-treaty-settlement
Are you that stupid that you can type but not read? Its pretty self explanatory in that link.

Since: Nov 08

Auckland

#5 Jun 22, 2012
That Maori Guy wrote:
Yawn...
Wow, that's a surprise comment from you, Maori Guy.

Since: Nov 08

Auckland

#6 Jun 22, 2012
Cumb Dunt wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you that stupid that you can type but not read? Its pretty self explanatory in that link.
That's a bit harsh. It's not a case of stupidity. For many of us non-Maori on here, there is no real logic behind any of the settlement process. And, in that regard, I reckon Torqueing Heads summed it up BEAUTIFULLY.

“Educating Utus”

Since: Aug 10

Wanganui, New Zealand

#7 Jun 22, 2012
Gutsfull wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow, that's a surprise comment from you, Maori Guy.
Actually I prefer a one word response to the usual thousand word essay.

“Tino Rangatiratanga”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#8 Jun 23, 2012
Gutsfull wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a bit harsh. It's not a case of stupidity. For many of us non-Maori on here, there is no real logic behind any of the settlement process. And, in that regard, I reckon Torqueing Heads summed it up BEAUTIFULLY.
Head’s posts don’t stand up to examination once you actually start to deconstruct his arguments, as this exchange between he and I shows quite nicely:

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/new-zealand/...

His understanding of events is clearly one sided (which is why I often have to provide a background to the point I want to make, making them, in his words, an ‘essay’) and the way in which he routinely denies or even at the very least consider that there is another side to this story is enough to tell me that his views are prejudicial.

At its most basic level, a tax is simply a financial (or equivalent) charge that is levied against the payer by some duly authorized entity. In this sense, the taking of land and other natural assets from Maori was a type of tax levied against generations of Maori families in order to subsidize the emergence of a Pakeha farming class in the early to mid colonial period.

Since then, Pakeha families have been able to build wealth and prosper by a mixture of hard work, luck and opportunity. But these same opportunities were denied first to the original owners of the land, and subsequently, to their descendents. This arrangement has resulted in Pakeha having an unfair head start that they would otherwise have not had on the same scale if the Te Tiriti had been honored and had not Maori been pushed off the land.

For Head’s to smugly claim that the emotion that comes with such a rapid and near complete loss of land, and the subsequent loss of an economic base, and the loss of social influence and development can only be “appeased” with a monetary settlement is simply ignorant of that fact that Maori do not have a say in the process.

I and many other Maori activists do not agree that reconciliation can or should be expressed in exclusively monetary terms. But the fact is that the Crown is reluctant to return land assets, and so Maori are forced to either accept a settlement that is a mix of land assets and cash.

The point that is always missed by you, Heads and others here, is that the settlements themselves represent only a fraction of the actual value of the assets themselves. The Waikato Raupatu Claim in 1995 for instance resulted in the Waikato people giving up all future claims to confiscated land pursuant to the 1863 NZ Settlements Act in exchange for $170M when the estimated value of the land itself was $12B measured in 1995 dollars.

Instead of constantly berating Maori, Pakeha should be grateful that Maori can show such generosity in settling for so little, because there is no way that any of that land could be purchased at such low rates on the open market today.

The bigger irony is that Heads can routinely come here and agitate against Maori when we were not the aggressors. The Crown didn’t have to deny the Treaty or Te Tiriti, it didn’t have to routinely break its promises.
Cumb Dunt

Auckland, New Zealand

#9 Jun 23, 2012
Gutsfull wrote:
<quoted text>
That's a bit harsh. It's not a case of stupidity. For many of us non-Maori on here, there is no real logic behind any of the settlement process. And, in that regard, I reckon Torqueing Heads summed it up BEAUTIFULLY.
Do non Maori understand that for every action there is an equal an opposite reaction? If i killed your partner to steal her wallet what length of time does it take to make it a non issue with you and yours? Be specific, i'd like to know how long it would take to get off scot free with committing atrocities and thievery.

“Tino Rangatiratanga”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#10 Jun 23, 2012
***But the fact is that the Crown is reluctant to return land assets, and so Maori are forced to eithe accept a settlement of land assets and cash at below cost, or nothing, which of course means that Pakeha get the same for free.

“Tino Rangatiratanga”

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#11 Jun 23, 2012
Cumb Dunt wrote:
<quoted text>
Do non Maori understand that for every action there is an equal an opposite reaction? If i killed your partner to steal her wallet what length of time does it take to make it a non issue with you and yours? Be specific, i'd like to know how long it would take to get off scot free with committing atrocities and thievery.
Exactly! And the 2004 F&S is the most recent act of theivery in our lifetime.

We’re supposed to quietly accept the benevolence of Pakeha in exchange for land loss, lost economic opportunity and social underdevelopment, and a loss of identity and culture.

It’s all about knowing our place, and that place is off the land so that Pakeha can farm it, or build their towns and communities on it, and extract the natural resources from it, to perform menial tasks in Pakeha factories instead.

If we forget out place, then we are ‘radicals’ and ‘trouble makers’.

“Deciphering Rangi Speak”

Since: May 12

Hamilton, New Zealand

#12 Jun 23, 2012
That Maori Guy wrote:
***But the fact is that the Crown is reluctant to return land assets, and so Maori are forced to eithe accept a settlement of land assets and cash at below cost, or nothing, which of course means that Pakeha get the same for free.
Excuse me? This is as much my land as it is yours, buddy, what the fk am I getting?

“Deciphering Rangi Speak”

Since: May 12

Hamilton, New Zealand

#13 Jun 23, 2012
That Maori Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly! And the 2004 F&S is the most recent act of theivery in our lifetime.
We’re supposed to quietly accept the benevolence of Pakeha in exchange for land loss, lost economic opportunity and social underdevelopment, and a loss of identity and culture.
It’s all about knowing our place, and that place is off the land so that Pakeha can farm it, or build their towns and communities on it, and extract the natural resources from it, to perform menial tasks in Pakeha factories instead.
If we forget out place, then we are ‘radicals’ and ‘trouble makers’.
Listen to you, where do you live?

Oh that's right, A M E R I C A, the spotlight of the world, the centre of all things white.

Your such a bigot. You remind me of Two Face from Batman.

“Deciphering Rangi Speak”

Since: May 12

Hamilton, New Zealand

#14 Jun 23, 2012
Cumb Dunt wrote:
<quoted text>
Do non Maori understand that for every action there is an equal an opposite reaction? If i killed your partner to steal her wallet what length of time does it take to make it a non issue with you and yours? Be specific, i'd like to know how long it would take to get off scot free with committing atrocities and thievery.
Yea, and those "reactions" as you call it, should have been and should be priced at the THEN price, not modern day, stripping our country of everyone who work's tax money.

Get the f out of the gutter, you damned rat.

“Deciphering Rangi Speak”

Since: May 12

Hamilton, New Zealand

#15 Jun 23, 2012
That Maori Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
The point that is always missed by you, Heads and others here, is that the settlements themselves represent only a fraction of the actual value of the assets themselves. The Waikato Raupatu Claim in 1995 for instance resulted in the Waikato people giving up all future claims to confiscated land pursuant to the 1863 NZ Settlements Act in exchange for $170M when the estimated value of the land itself was $12B measured in 1995 dollars.
Instead of constantly berating Maori, Pakeha should be grateful that Maori can show such generosity in settling for so little, because there is no way that any of that land could be purchased at such low rates on the open market today.
You, Ma Gay are the one missing the point.

Part Maori are not purchasing anything, their bludging, as always.

And you say the land today is worth $12 billion? What was it worth back in 1850, 2 blankets and some musket balls? Well, that's what you wanted, that's what you f'ing got! Greedy hoardy bastards!

“Moumou Tangata ki te Po”

Since: Oct 11

Earth

#16 Jun 23, 2012
Defend the Land wrote:
<quoted text>
Yea, and those "reactions" as you call it, should have been and should be priced at the THEN price, not modern day, stripping our country of everyone who work's tax money.
Get the f out of the gutter, you damned rat.
see how dumb you are?

the price for a stolen acre of land, i another ache of land.....durrrrr!!!!!!!

an 1865 acre of land is EXACTLY the same size as a 2012 acre!!!!!!

geeezzzzz idiot!!!!!!.... just how dumb do you get? u fcukin idiot

“Moumou Tangata ki te Po”

Since: Oct 11

Earth

#17 Jun 23, 2012
Defend the Land wrote:
<quoted text>

.......What was it worth back in 1850, 2 blankets and some musket balls? Well, that's what you wanted, that's what you f'ing got! Greedy hoardy bastards!
you dumb idiot,......after 1840 NOBODY could buy land off the maori but the queen of england....it was law!!!!!!

fark man think about it fool!!!!!!

anyone not the crown, in 1850's nz, trying to buy land off naive maori were doing and illegal activity.......!!!they were being devious, underhanded, criminal, dirty, greedy,....

the crown had crown agents, crown offices and crown land courts for the selling of land, at set price per acre......no fcukin blankets or guns you fcukin think prick!!!! fcuk you are dumb about maori things....and the history of nz.....real fcukin dumb....
Another Cumb Dunt

Auckland, New Zealand

#18 Jun 23, 2012
Defend the Land wrote:
<quoted text>
Yea, and those "reactions" as you call it, should have been and should be priced at the THEN price, not modern day, stripping our country of everyone who work's tax money.
Get the f out of the gutter, you damned rat.
So armed with your logic you should have no problem haggling a purchase price for property in Herne Bay or Ponsonby today with your grannys bag of antique shillings right? DIPSHTICK.

“Educating Utus”

Since: Aug 10

Wanganui, New Zealand

#19 Jun 23, 2012
Part Maori Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Pakeha having an unfair head start that they would otherwise have not had on the same scale if the Te Tiriti had been honored and had not Maori been pushed off the land.
, Pakeha should be grateful that Maori can show such generosity in settling for so little,
So these 'pakeha' that have benefited so greatly from acquiring Maori land are your ancestors too, am I right? You have us at a great disadvantage part Maori guy, us 'pakeha' dont enjoy the luxury of being able to change our spots to suit the occasion, to conveniently lop off half our family tree to suit our argument. To claim you are a 'Maori' is intellectual dishonesty that's fooling no one. You are not a Maori and you are not the victim of any injustice and to claim your ancestors were you must acknowledge that you are also at least half European.
Johniboy

Khandallah, New Zealand

#20 Jun 23, 2012
The nz company had sold land before they had even got the land so they were ripping off there own just as much as maori.european maori of today shouldnt be held accountable for the past unless they want to be loud mouth rasist bastards of course.its the british empire that used trickery and fooled the maori they done it to alot of indeginous people they are scum and should be dealt with it wasnt a fair deal at all an everyone knows it its ridiculous that they just cant admit they were wrong

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 9
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

New Zealand Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why are white women so disgusting ? (Apr '11) 4 hr ngatangiia 185
News New Zealand Will Vote on Flag Next Year (Oct '14) May 28 The Real Deal 100
why are Polynesian/Maori women disgusting and a... (Jan '11) May 27 whinetoa 1,182
News Ban Suppression (Jun '10) May 22 Trews 64
News Man charged over shooting of Hell's Angels gang... (Mar '07) May 19 ftp auks 4,167
Kiwis - who's tougher, Maori/Islanders or US Bl... (Jul '11) May 13 jusheretoreadandc... 156
News Russian Veterans Celebrate Victory in Far-off N... May 12 sara 2
More from around the web