Open mike 05/01/2011

49 comments on “Open mike 05/01/2011 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. jcuknz 1

   5 January 2011 at 8:56 am

   The anti-union sentiment gathers momentum in the States with Republican controls
   http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/04/business/04labor.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2
   • Olwyn 1.1

     5 January 2011 at 9:37 am

     The article reminded me of NZ in the nineties, with justice being presented as tracking downwards: deprive one group and then point to another group who are not so deprived, crying “That’s not fair!” This turns the “Why am I suffering?” question into a “Why is he not suffering like I am?” question. And while we are all preoccupied with dragging each other down, the rich get richer while the rest of us get poorer.
     • Draco T Bastard 1.1.1

       5 January 2011 at 1:21 pm

       Just more anti-worker rights actions from the right of the political spectrum.
2. Logie97 2

   5 January 2011 at 9:23 am

   The Herald and its photo count of Goff vs Key.
   Well, bless them, that is one more for Phil’s count.
   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10697731

   I wonder if they could do a breakdown for us of photos showing each in a positive light. Today’s one has to be the least flattering of Goff and will probably be the one they will continue to use in election year – in the same way they used the iwi/kiwi ones of Clark
3. mickysavage 3

   5 January 2011 at 9:42 am

   OOPS SYSOP can you delete the above …

   Frack

   I just had an edited letter published in the Herald. They printed this:

   I see that if National is not reelected to power then John Key may resign from Parliament.

   He should give serious consideration to becoming a list only MP. This way if National is not returned a costly by election will be avoided.

   He should consider this in any event. I suspect that the inhabitants of Hellensville rarely see him personally. And the job of being Prime Minister is that important that he should be focused on national rather than electorate issues.

   If freed of his electorate duties he could then focus on the many vital issues facing our country, the looming economic recession, the need to create jobs and the oncoming rush of peak oil.

   Sounds like a bit of supportive advice doesn’t it.

   They cut out the last sentence which said this:

   His one and only trumpeted policy, the creation of a national cycleway, will have a beneficial effect on each of these problems but only an exceedingly small one.

   I was well within the 200 word limit. Why did they do this?
   • felix 3.1

     5 January 2011 at 9:50 am

     ooh ooh I know this one
   • burt 3.2

     5 January 2011 at 10:41 am

     Perhaps they are doing some digging around to find out if we have recently increased our aid donations to the bicycle producing organisation Key has aspirations to work in.
     • Mickysavage 3.2.1

       5 January 2011 at 11:03 am

       Someone should investigate Key’s possible interests in the bicycle manufacturing industry …
       • the pink postman 3.2.1.1

         5 January 2011 at 2:45 pm

         To be quite honest it would be most interesting to find out just what he has shares and partnerships in . It would also be interesting to compare his parliamentary voting record to the way it affects his personal monentary interests . Im sorry but as someone who worked hard for over 52 years I am most suspicious of a man his age having 50 million plus dollars. Am I the only one ?
         PS before some Right-Wing nut comments ,I do not drink gamble or smoke.
         • jcuknz 3.2.1.1.1

           5 January 2011 at 11:15 pm

           But you were like most of us in the wrong job 🙂
           Though I have not many regrets with mine and absolutely no problem with him using his brain to make 50 million, except for the damage he and his ilk have done to spoil the moderately even country that New Zealand was back in the fifties.
           I can think of Kiwis who made their millions without the collateral damage.
       • Sailor Sam 3.2.1.2

         6 January 2011 at 7:59 am

         And with peak oil, we will all be riding bicycles, so shouldn’t you be applauding John Key for his foresight?
   • Draco T Bastard 3.3

     5 January 2011 at 1:35 pm

     hmmmm, thought police anyone?
   • the pink postman 3.4

     5 January 2011 at 2:37 pm

     You are lucky to have even got that far Frack . I have never managed to have the Herald publish one of my letters. Over 30 years we contibuted to that rag until my wife said enough “That Tory rag is not coming to our house anymore. ” However it would be interesting to have a count up of Left versus Right in the letter column.
4. Colonial Viper 4

   5 January 2011 at 10:17 am

   Elections (2005) too Close to Call: Wikileaks

   A fascinating read of what the US was being told about our local political race at the time. And how they thought the people were responding to Labour and National reacting to each other.

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10695152
   • Kevin Welsh 4.1

     5 January 2011 at 7:11 pm

     I shudder to think the shit we would be in now if National had won in 2005 and pushed through its tax cuts for the wealthy.
5. Colonial Viper 5

   5 January 2011 at 10:29 am

   Shane Jones moving back up in the world

   According to the NZ Herald.

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10697761
6. felix 6

   5 January 2011 at 12:03 pm

   Did you see the backbenches end-of-year special with Farrar and Bradbury and a couple of others?

   One of the others was this complete cocksnot of a man, a lobbyist or PR goon who just spoke in Kiwiblog slogans all night. It was as if Farrar had brought his own little troll with him.

   Anyone know his name?
   • Sanctuary 6.1

     5 January 2011 at 12:18 pm

     “…One of the others was this complete cocksnot of a man, a lobbyist or PR goon who just spoke in Kiwiblog slogans all night… …Anyone know his name?”

     Matthew Hooten by the sound of it.
   • Lanthanide 6.2

     5 January 2011 at 12:25 pm

     From the description, the first person that springs to mind is Whale Oil, but of course it isn’t him.
   • felix 6.3

     5 January 2011 at 12:45 pm

     Na just found it, Mark Unsworth.

     Cocksnot might be a bit harsh actually I apologise for that but he sure made me wonder what his Kiwiblog handle is.

     [lprent: It is a line of questioning that you can’t do here. ]
     • felix 6.3.1

       5 January 2011 at 1:30 pm

       Sorry.
     • higherstandard 6.3.2

       5 January 2011 at 2:42 pm

       Mark’s actually a decent bloke and comes across completely differently from the “cocksnot” that you saw on TV when you meet him over a beer at the pub.
       • felix 6.3.2.1

         5 January 2011 at 3:01 pm

         Yeah on rewatching I realised he’s not really a cocksnot.
         • higherstandard 6.3.2.1.1

           5 January 2011 at 3:09 pm

           I can’t fathom why anyone would watch that shite one let alone twice.
           • felix 6.3.2.1.1.1

             5 January 2011 at 4:28 pm

             Because I liked watching the bit at the start where Farrar totally degrades his female co-panelist by slobbering over her and announcing how hot he thinks she is. And upon seeing her cringe with embarrassment, he IMMEDIATELY DOES IT AGAIN!

             Why isn’t he married yet? He’s such a catch.
             • M …

               5 January 2011 at 9:13 pm

               She could have just floored him by saying, “Yeah, but you’re not” And probably pole axed him there and then.
         • Tigger 6.3.2.1.2

           5 January 2011 at 3:50 pm

           But thanks for helping me add ‘cocksnot’ to my lexicon. Fantastic word. I will use it in sentences such as ‘Tony Ryall is a cocksnot.’
           • felix 6.3.2.1.2.1

             5 January 2011 at 4:22 pm

             Yep, that’s perfect usage in a sentence. Tony Ryall is definitely a cocksnot.
7. felix 7

   5 January 2011 at 1:33 pm

   Gee that Cactus Kate writes some really nasty racist stuff.

   But whenever she does it, she always takes the time to state that she’s NOT racist, so it’s totes cool.
   • pollywog 7.1

     5 January 2011 at 1:56 pm

     word felix.. Maybe if she had kids and lived in NZ i’d give her opinion more creedence, but as is she’s just all shit and wind.
     • Lindsey 7.1.1

       5 January 2011 at 4:16 pm

       What’s having kids got to do with it?
       • pollywog 7.1.1.1

         5 January 2011 at 4:37 pm

         empathy…never judging till you’ve walked a mile in someone elses shoes.

         It’s all very well for Ms Prickly to say sterilise the underclass but how about some handy stress relieving tips or ways to stretch a dollar in the grocery bill for hard up parents instead ?

         rather than educate and resource Maori parents, she’d rather just opt for a ‘final solution’.

         Maybe next she’ll be developing policy and lobbying to solve the middle east crisis considering she doesn’t live there either and is bound to have a well formed opinion based on her being an empathetic palestinian jew and all 🙂
         • Cactus Kate 7.1.1.1.1

           8 January 2011 at 6:53 am

           Pollywog

           Muriel Newman wrote a whole book on frugal living. Guess you didn’t read it as it wasn’t in the “kill-a-whitey” section of the library. Reading isn’t your strongest suit either is it? Given I never mentioned sterilising anyone in that post. People are free to have as many children as they like. Just don’t expect endless welfare cheques to have more children you cannot afford.

           I am not from the Middle East, didn’t live there for some 26 years of my life and Middle Eastern people tend not to be the problem in NZ’s welfare system. Do they?

           A political system that I am eligible to vote in and still as a non-resident pay more net tax than many New Zealand resident voters.

           That’s why I have an opinion and why you continue to obsessively visit my blog trolling it and why I don’t censor your obsessive trolling.
           • millsy 7.1.1.1.1.1

             8 January 2011 at 10:05 am

             Kate, do you want the poor to live on the streets.
   • the pink postman 7.2

     5 January 2011 at 4:17 pm

     Excuse my ignorance but just who is Cactus Kate??
     • felix 7.2.1

       5 January 2011 at 4:19 pm

       A racist old lady who drinks a lot.
       • prism 7.2.1.1

         5 January 2011 at 8:30 pm

         What’s that cactus brew that has a worm in it? Sounds like that’s her tipple.
   • Cactus Kate 7.3

     8 January 2011 at 6:47 am

     No I take the time to explain that I don’t care about what you might think.
   • Cactus Kate 7.4

     8 January 2011 at 7:03 am

     No Felix I take the time to explain that I don’t care about an anonymous name caller like yourself might think. Racist? Wahhhhh. Old? Wahhhhh. Drunk? And I’m sure you are a young teetotalling virgin?

     Prior to this it was random abuse of Mark Unsworth, David Farrar and Tony Ryall.

     Where’s your real argument about any ideas on this post or anything on this blog? I’m yet to find any from you. Got any policy ideas of your own? No. Got any commentary that is insightful? Nope.
8. randal 8

   5 January 2011 at 1:34 pm

   dear felix so you jolly well should be.
   the shrinking violets in the gnats cant take too much exposure.
   they wither and die in the sunlight.
9. Draco T Bastard 9

   5 January 2011 at 4:31 pm

   I just started readi Predator State by James Galbraith and a couple of parts of the preface stood out:

   It seemed clear that Katrina had been the Chernobyl of the American system. That is,… it was … a disaster that exposed and laid bare the fallacies of an entire governing creed.

   But where the Soviet creed was of central planning, ours was its polar opposite, a cult of the free market. As I charted my way through this book, I came to realise that the relationship between actual policy in the United States and the doctrines of policy is not simple. In uncanny ways, this relationship has come to resemble its counterpart in the old Soviet Union: actual policies were (and are) in no principled way governed by official doctrine. rather, the doctrine serves as a kind of legitimating myth – something to be repeated to schoolchildren but hardly taken seriously by those on the inside.

   (emphasis mine)
   As far as this government is concerned, we are the schoolchildren. To be told nice comforting lies while they go about shifting our wealth and power to themselves and their rich mates.
   • prism 9.1

     5 January 2011 at 8:35 pm

     I remember a European political commentator on Tito’s time in Yugoslavia. In the governing army there was a mantra that everyone repeated about the wonderful communism they had, but those who weren’t privately cynical about it were regarded as fools. The slogan becomes the message too often, and true believers end up trying to stop any reasoned discussion. They consider themselves loyal but to a false ideology.
10. the pink postman 10

    5 January 2011 at 4:32 pm

    I can’t help wondering and worrying just what Textor /Crosby and the Pacific Democratic Union will come up with for the next election?
    National will be desperate to return so as to carry out their privatization plans. Over the next few months we should expect the attacks to get very nasty. They will cerainly be trying to match the Wong affair .watch for the sleaze and inuendo and lets try to be ready. And I wonder what the Textor?Crosby “catch phrase” will be. ? I bet the dirty tricks brigade is working overtime.
11. M 11

    5 January 2011 at 9:18 pm

    Fasten your seatbelts – The Day the Dollar Died – gold for fuel?
12. aj 12

    5 January 2011 at 9:19 pm

    A Laffer Curve for inequality

    http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Issues/The-Economy/2011/01/04/Income-Redistribution-The-Key-To-Economic-Growth.aspx
    • Draco T Bastard 12.1

      5 January 2011 at 9:54 pm

      Quoting article:

      We know that a society with perfect equality does not grow at the fastest possible rate (1). When everyone gets an equal share of income, people lose the incentive to try and get ahead of others. We also know that a society where one person has almost everything while everyone else struggles to survive – the most unequal distribution of income imaginable – will not grow at the fastest possible rate either (2). Thus, the growth-maximizing level of inequality must lie somewhere between these two extremes (3).

      That has got to be one of the most failed piece of logic ever.

      1.) No, actually, we don’t know that as it’s never been tried. It’s been theorised but, considering that the hypothesis that it’s based upon doesn’t work as it’s not based in reality, it’s likely that bit is just hot air as well.
      2.) This is the end result of capitalism within a fixed/stable economy. More wealth in fewer hands allows those with wealth to buy up more of the remaining assets which garners them more wealth. As the economy has limits due to the environment it must, eventually, become fixed, ergo, this is the point that we are heading for and we’ve already gone far past the environmental limits. The point here is that, as capitalism reaches any sort of limits growth falls and more of the worlds wealth ends up in fewer hands. This can be seen in the present GFC as record corporate profits are posted while more and more people fall into poverty.
      3.) A false conclusion with a call for more growth to continue to hide the fact that we’ve already reached, or are very close to their worst case scenario due to hard physical limits.

      Growth isn’t falling due to the economic situation but because there’s no resources left to continue to grow the economy. Trying to go further down the capitalist road will continue to make inequality, and therefore society, worse.
      • jcuknz 12.1.1

        5 January 2011 at 11:32 pm

        >>>Thus, the growth-maximizing level of inequality must lie somewhere between these two extremes <<<
        That sounds like common sense to me .. extremes are destructive, moderation is creative.
        • Draco T Bastard 12.1.1.1

          6 January 2011 at 2:14 am

          Or, due to the fact that the economy can’t grow any more, perhaps we should look at another system altogether.

Links to post

1. The Standard: posted on 4 January 2011 at 5:06 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS