The Tauranga City Council should leave the number of slot machines alone, a reader says.
The Tauranga City Council should leave the number of slot machines alone, a reader says.
Slot machines
The Tauranga City Council should leave the number of slot machines alone. Many of us are capable of spending a few dollars and having fun playing them without being addicted. Why doesn't Tauranga council start closing down outlets that serve alcohol as many people become alcoholics? Other people are compulsive shoppers and run up massive credit card debt, so let's close retail outlets. Other people are overweight; all fast food outlets must go! I am not my brother's keeper. New Zealand is where fun comes to die. RIP.
Susan Gibson Te Puke
SH2
Regarding the "green light" for highway (News, October 25) What a joke - the Omokoroa end of the Tauranga to Omokoroa is apparently canned, the "green light" is for an already obsolete SH2A. Four lanes is the only satisfactory way to transport vehicles into the city.
This two-lane option is a disaster - getting a four-lane expressway will be pushed way out. A new Wairoa River bridge will be two lanes, and the congestion will quickly overtake any gains made.
Transport Minister Phil Twyford doesn't experience the frustrations and dangers that our community does on this outdated mess. There have been no serious efforts to upgrade it since the one-lane bridges were replaced in the late 1970s. The road toll climbs faster than the travel times on this bit of road, and neither these factors nor the economic importance elevates this road ahead of major highway upgrades in other regions like Hawkes Bay.
The New Zealand Government is celebrating one year in office.
However, what does that mean for its "consumers"?
The National Party celebrates its one year in opposition by issuing a press release stating it would have achieved benefits for New Zealanders with tax cuts, and berates the Labour Coalition Government for making direct benefits available to those who are least appropriate to receive them - i.e. lower-income families, who should be sharpening their pencils about the number of children they are creating (and thereby increasing their respective costs of living).
This variant "celebration" between the two highlights the fundamental difference between the two political concepts.
For my money, the National slant is the more appropriate, as none of us needs the incentive to have more children, and thereby take families further into the negative "money trap" of "cost of living".
I couldn't think of a more compelling reason for electors at the next general election to see sense, and vote, to correct the problem for the majority.
