Open mike 07/08/2015

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, August 7th, 2015 - 126 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

126 comments on “Open mike 07/08/2015 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Morrissey 1
    7 August 2015 at 7:19 am

    ACT’s mad, bad LOUIS CRIMP: the epitome of the John Key supporter

    Prominent ACT supporter and Invercargill “businessman” Louis Crimp passed away recently, but his legacy lingers on…..

    Seedy Christchurch casino industry exposed
    TravelMole, Thursday 6 August 2015

    ….. Recounting another sordid incident, Lyttelton said he had also been required to write to Invercargill businessman Louis Crimp, who owns 8 per cent of the casino, over an occasion which occurred in a toilet in the casino’s VIP club in 2005. Crimp had been heard in a cubicle with a woman making noises which disturbed other guests.

    He had written to Crimp saying he was no longer welcome in the premier gaming room.  In his reply, Crimp had explained he had been helping a young woman who was having an asthma attack. They were fully clothed at all times, he said.

    Although he had initially been barred as a result of that incident he had been allowed back to the casino by Lyttelton.

    Read the whole thing here…..

    http://www.travelmole.com/news_feature.php?news_id=1119577&region=4

  2. Penny Bright 2
    7 August 2015 at 7:48 am

    The Green Party have given a strong lead to their members to participate in the upcoming national DAY OF ACTION on Saturday 15 August 2015 to WALK AWAY FROM THE TPPA!

    Good on them.

    Looking forward to seeing HUGE numbers of concerned New Zealanders standing up to be counted on Saturday 15 August 2015!

    (More information about TPPA – WALK AWAY! actions and activities can be found on http://www.itsourfuture.org.nz )

    Penny Bright

  3. Sabine 3
    7 August 2015 at 8:09 am

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/280317/police-defend-fatal-auckland-shooting

    At a news conference this morning, Auckland City District Commander Superintendent Richard Chambers said staff did everything they could given the information they had.
    He said more than one shot was fired by police.
    Mr Chambers could not confirm whether Mr Cerven was actually armed.
    “That will be part of a very thorough scene investigation this morning,” he said.

    “But what is important to note there is that people who threaten to use firearms and whose actions indicate that’s what they’re about to do take a big risk and my staff will act appropriately.

    ————————————————————————————————————————

    my staff will shoot you mutliple times and i will do my best to prevent ANY information from coming to light. So you better all be good submissive obedient little fucks or we gonna shoot ya, or tase ya.
    Now pay my wages and buy me donughts.

    Feel safer yet NZ?

    • gsays 3.1
      7 August 2015 at 8:20 am

      hi sabine, i missed the memo but it seems the punishment for robbery is now death by firing squad, sans trial.

      • Puckish Rogue 3.1.1
        7 August 2015 at 8:26 am

        So he said he had a firearm which means he was either trying to threaten and intimidate the police or wanted to suicide by cop

        I feel for the cop that fired the fatal shot

        • Weepus beard 3.1.1.1
          7 August 2015 at 8:29 am

          He said he had a gun did he? Better wait until the investigation.

          • Puckish Rogue 3.1.1.1.1
            7 August 2015 at 8:33 am

            Fair call, I did get that from the link and journalists arn’t the most reliable so yeah probably best to wait for the investigation

            But I still feel for the cops that shot the guy, I’m sure they didn’t wake up in the morning and say “gee I hope I shoot someone today”

            • Weepus beard 3.1.1.1.1.1
              7 August 2015 at 8:50 am

              No, the article shows journalists are reporting on what the cops said which is that he indicated he was about to use a gun.

              From that you have deduced he said he had a firearm, which is neat.

              • Puckish Rogue …
                7 August 2015 at 8:55 am

                Just like others on here have deduced that the police are going around executing people without waiting for proof, evidence or an investigation but hey police bad right

            • aidan 3.1.1.1.1.2
              7 August 2015 at 9:44 am

              gee, i sure hope you’re right. but sometimes i’m just not so sure.

              • Puckish Rogue …
                7 August 2015 at 10:42 am

                This is out of date but i’m at work so its the best i can do:

                http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/687104/22-people-shot-by-police-on-record

                Its only up to 2008 but 22 people since 1941 doesn’t suggest to me that theres cops out there that just want to “plug’ someone

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_Zealand_police_officers_killed_in_the_line_of_duty

                As of 2009, 29 police officers have been killed by criminal act

                So more cops have been killed by people then cops have killed people

                • joe90 …
                  7 August 2015 at 10:57 am

                  FYI.

                  * Vaughan William John Te Moananui, 33, was shot in May 2015 at a Campbell Street property in Thames after police said he refused to surrender and pulled a firearm on them.

                  *Caleb Henry, 20, died in hospital in July 2013 after being shot after a police chase.

                  *Adam Te Rata Charles Morehu, 33, was shot dead in June 2013 by police returning fire after a break-in at the New Plymouth Golf Club

                  * Anthony Ratahi, 46, of Stratford was shot dead by police in 2011 after a stand-off in the coastal township of Opunake.

                  *Lachan Kelly-Tumarae’s car was chased for 18km before he stopped next to an urupa and pointed his gun at police in Omahu, near Hastings, in 2011.
                  An officer then fired 14 shots at the 19 year old, hitting him four times and fatally wounding him

                  *Paraplegic gunman Shayne Richard Sime, 42, was shot dead in June 2009 after challenging members of the AOS to show themselves during a stand-off.

                  *Halatau Naitoko Northwestern Motorway on January 23 last year.Halatau Naitoko Northwestern Motorway on January 23 2009.

                  * Lee Jane Mettam 37, October 23, 2008. A woman armed with a gun entered the First Mobile Vodafone Shop in Reyburn St, Whangarei, shortly after 9am. About an hour later she opened the shop door and was shot by a member of the police armed offenders squad, crouched behind a car across the road;

                  * September 26, 2007. Stephen Bellingham, 37, shot dead by a policeman in Christchurch about 8.30pm after smashing cars/car windows with a claw hammer. Said to have been on a party-pill binge. Advanced on the police officer with the hammer. Warned but kept advancing. Hit in chest (fatally) and one leg. Policeman said to have fired four shots;

                  * August 14, 2004. Haidar Ebbadi Mahdi 37, died from a bullet to the head as he stabbed his wife being held in a headlock in a South Auckland house on Saturday afternoon;

                  * April 30, 2000. Steven Wallace, 23, of Waitara, shot after a window smashing spree in the town;

                  * July 1, 1999. Edwin Leo, 31, shot near Helensville, Northland, following a car chase;

                  * September 21, 1996. James Raharuhi killed by a single police bullet at a service station in Greenlane, Auckland;

                  * June 24, 1996. Terence Thompson shot in a Havelock North orchard. Thompson was the prime suspect in the slaying of Constable Glenn McKibbin;

                  * November 20, 1995. Barry Radcliffe shot after taking a rifle from a sporting goods store in Whangarei;

                  * September 28, 1995. Eric Gellatly shot in Invercargill, after he took over a sports shop in the central city and began firing indiscriminately;

                  * July 29, 1993. Larry Hammond died after being shot three times in the Morrinsville police station;

                  * November 14, 1990. Members of the anti-terrorist squad shot David Malcolm Gray after he killed 13 people at Aramoana, Otago;

                  * October 27, 1990. Paul Melvin Stowers died after being shot in the forehead by a detective whom he threatened with a shotgun in Newmarket, Auckland;

                  * March 14, 1986. Benjamin Wharerau shot as he took a hostage in a robbery of a Dargaville bank;

                  * June 6, 1985. Kevin David Fox was shot after he killed his wife in a car in Gore;

                  * April 18, 1983. Paul Chase shot by the armed offenders squad in a raid on a Petone, Wellington, flat;

                  * December 24, 1982. John Edward Morgan shot near Wainuiomata, Wellington, after throwing an axe at police;

                  * May 20, 1979. Nicholas Panayi shot by the armed offenders squad outside his Henderson, Auckland, home after a domestic dispute;

                  * October 4, 1976. The armed offenders squad shot Daniel Houpapa after he fires at an officer in Taumarunui;

                  * 1975. Edward Ross shot by the armed offenders squad as he stabbed his daughter after escaping from a Christchurch psychiatric hospital;

                  * April 16, 1970. Bruce John Glensor, holding two hostages in a Wellington house shot by the armed offenders squad when he threatened to shoot an officer;

                  * December 14, 1949. Waata Haremia Momo shot in Weedon, Canterbury, after exchanging shots with police.

                  * October 20, 1941. West Coast farmer Eric Stanley Graham killed after shooting three policemen and three civilians;

                  • Puckish Rogue …
                    7 August 2015 at 11:08 am

                    Cheers for that

                  • Molly …
                    7 August 2015 at 11:53 am

                    So, 29 since 1941, if PR is correct about police fatalities – an eye for an eye number.

                    Viewed by decade:

                    1940s – 2
                    1950s – 0
                    1960s – 0
                    1970s – 4
                    1980s – 4
                    1990s – 8
                    2000s – 6
                    2010 – present – 5

                    • tinfoilhat …
                      7 August 2015 at 12:29 pm

                      Not sure is applicable with you using the eye for an eye analogy Molly.

                      Even one shooting is too many in my opinion.

                    • Molly …
                      7 August 2015 at 12:42 pm

                      tinfoilhat, making a badly phrased rebuttal to PR’s comment above:

                      As of 2009, 29 police officers have been killed by criminal act

                      So more cops have been killed by people then cops have killed people

                      But you are right, that could have been stated more clearly.

                    • The lost sheep …
                      7 August 2015 at 12:43 pm

                      Sounds like Molly is implying that the Police deaths are justified on an Old testament ‘revenge’ basis?

                    • Molly …
                      7 August 2015 at 12:58 pm

                      Reply to The lost sheep:

                      No. Any death to me is a sorrow.

                      As mentioned to tinfoilhat was a badly phrased response to PR’s statement above that struck me in the same way.

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      7 August 2015 at 1:30 pm

                      I didn’t come up with the figures, the media did (so probably isn’t all that accurate)

                    • tinfoilhat …
                      7 August 2015 at 1:31 pm

                      No problem Molly – I do know you’re one of the gentler souls on this forum.

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      7 August 2015 at 1:33 pm

                      My point was that cops arn’t going out and blowing away criminals in mass numbers (like some on here are suggesting) and that cops are in danger

                    • Molly …
                      7 August 2015 at 2:45 pm

                      “My point was that cops arn’t going out and blowing away criminals in mass numbers (like some on here are suggesting) and that cops are in danger”

                      Agreed. But you also have to give this perspective to any victim of a police shooting.

                      They also have to be given the benefit of the doubt, and some kind of considered protocol has to be worked out that considers that agitated and/or vulnerable people will not be responding rationally or thoughtfully in such a tense situation as a police standoff. Police cannot assume that every statement by the disturbance creator(?) is truthful and/or accurate. In fact, it is more likely to be distorted. So further confirmation needs to be sought – in this type of scenario, a strong spotlight, would not only reduce the chances of reasonable aiming by the supposed gunholder, but would also clarify for other police officers whether he has a firearm. That information may have resulted in a less tragic outcome.

                      As you mentioned earlier, “police by suicide” is devastating not only for the family of the deceased, but also for the police officer involved.

                      It is of benefit to both the public and the police for these protocols to be created, shared and transparently upheld.

      • Charles 3.1.2
        7 August 2015 at 9:08 am

        The story so far:

        The guy enters NZ six months ago on a 12mth working holiday visa, 6 months in, and after being linked to a couple of aggravated robberies on Auckland’s Nth Shore, he calls 111, tells them he has a gun, and 23 mins later Police shoot him dead. Police say they negotiated with him to end the incident in ways other than him dying – although that’s my words. Police just say we “negotitated”. For less than 23 minutes including travel time?

        Good grief, the whole thing is bizarre. Short of floating above the scene as it happened for a bird’s eye view, why is it that every time the Police shoot someone it looks like a cover-up of haste and incompetence? Not that I want people to be “shot carefully and consciously”, but the stories are always so flawed.

        I predict no answers, no constructive change, and that people will go to malls this weekend for shopping and movies. But anyway, how is your day? Weather looks ok here.

        • Puckish Rogue 3.1.2.1
          7 August 2015 at 9:12 am

          Drizzly where i am

        • jh 3.1.2.2
          7 August 2015 at 10:15 am

          We dont know the facts. Dimly lit park. If it only took three minutes of negotiation for the guy to aim something at the police when they were told it was a gun then three minutes could be all it would take for the situation to come to an end as it did.

          The police may have been prepared to negotiate for hours but it is not entirely in their control, is it?

    • infused 3.2
      7 August 2015 at 9:11 am

      You come out saying you got a gun its tough shit really.

      • Charles 3.2.1
        7 August 2015 at 9:17 am

        Is it that simple? I mean other than in your head. Why the hell would a 21 year old come here for a working holiday and immediately get into robberies and then call police to say he has a gun? Sounds like a call for help, like things were seriously out of control, but not in a one-man-band of chaos, way. The Police love to take reasoned, critical, pre-judical, discretionary action on everything, except those regular moments they have an obvious choice to make a positive difference. I can just imagine detectives studying the scene today, but last night not one of them thinks, “Hey, wait a second, this doesn’t sound right…”

        • Puckish Rogue 3.2.1.1
          7 August 2015 at 9:26 am

          Ok thats all well and good for us sitting back here and second guessing what happened but I’d imagine its a lot different in real time and the police on the ground can only go on the information they have and in this instance it sounds like they were dealing with someone who said they had a gun and was prepared to use it

          • Charles 3.2.1.1.1
            7 August 2015 at 9:43 am

            That’s what I said. Both the claims of “had gun and ready to use it” and the “Real Time” estimations don’t add up or ring true.

            CCTV observations meets 111 call.

            Time from Pitt Street Station to Myers Park, even if you immediately dropped everything, grabbed a glock and ran the 300m or so to the scene. Which you wouldn’t.

            No strategic approach possible inside 23 minutes. So the 23 mins claim is wrong or out of context.

            That story means already armed cops (pre-prepared?) ran to a darkened underpass, into a basin-like park situation, poor vis, no CCTV comms support, to face a possibly armed man, and screaming “Freeze or we’ll shoot!” as a form of negotiation, and then shot? Nah, try again NZ Police.

            • infused 3.2.1.1.1.1
              7 August 2015 at 9:51 am

              He called the police and told them he had a gun. Of course they came prepared.

              And you’re right, it was dark with low vis. So I doubt the cops are going to take a chance.

          • aidan 3.2.1.1.2
            7 August 2015 at 9:47 am

            second guessing is really all we have since information is so thin on the ground and the more cynical among us won’t necessarily take the polices word as gospel

            • Charles 3.2.1.1.2.1
              7 August 2015 at 9:58 am

              True. Here’s a more “flattering” scenario for the pro-cop crowd:

              Police were already armed and following the guy, they had finally “trapped” him in the park (no way out of that park, once you’re in the basin situation). He knows he’s trapped, then he calls 111 to try to scare off the cops, buy time, or just generally be irrational. “Negotiation” begins. He moves in a way not friendly, and is shot.

              There’s obvious problems with this story too. Least of all, how can it be in the much-vaunted public interest for Police PR to want to invent a “immediate and deadly force” reputation among law-abiding citizens? They’re all nuts… NZders. The cops, me, and you too, probably.

        • infused 3.2.1.2
          7 August 2015 at 9:50 am

          It’s tough really… I don’t care what his issues were. You threaten anyone with a gun and the outcome is your own making.

          Need to stop being so PC with this shit.

          If he had killed a cop, what would you be writing here today?

          • Charles 3.2.1.2.1
            7 August 2015 at 10:06 am

            Probably would’ve ignored it. The Police as the more powerful resourced party knew the risks and got paid to do the job. I don’t cry over dead soldiers. You see I can turn my sociopathic side on and off at will. I’m more interested in the potential “threat to public freedoms” side than the “We must support control of everyone by armed Police intimidation” side. I’ve known cops, they seem like nice people, when they aren’t being cops. Once apon a time, the Police were the Public, there was a common interest in a peaceful conclusion to all matters – but not anymore, not for a long time. Push comes to shove, a guy has to choose which side. It isnt PC. As you point out, it’s just a ruthless “them or us” decision.

            • Puckish Rogue 3.2.1.2.1.1
              7 August 2015 at 10:35 am

              Thats right they know the risks and are paid to do the job therefore they should be armed so as to minimise the risks they face in their jobs

              You wouldn’t have a problem with that would you?

              • Charles …
                7 August 2015 at 10:50 am

                Nah, you’ve constructed a logical fallacy based on who you think visits the site you’re currently visiting. I do not represent the nebulous “Left” of NZ politics. I do have a problem with Police (“beat cops”) being armed in NZ – it isn’t necessary, except to intimidate citizens into government policy conformity. It will be justified as necessary as soon as the Police are armed (with guns), because truly dangerous (to the public) types will likely respond in kind… without dialing 111 first!

                It’s the basis for my political outlook: Government (and by association, enforcers such as The Police) has to utilise the de-personalisation feature of organisations to apply a balancing force against the destructive tendencies of individuals. I’m an individual with tendencies, so are you: either of our tendencies, left to roam free, would make a poor government. By that I mean that a “good” government seeks a generally harmonised (not unified, standardised, or as a result – prejudiced) society. Ideally, it would be far more “unseen” than NZders are historically comfortable with. Right now, the government supports destructive individuals, and promotes further imbalances, and this is reflected in the actions of the Police as they support the values of the people in government.

              • DoublePlusGood …
                7 August 2015 at 10:53 am

                By that flimsy logic, I should be able to use a fully armed tank for my morning commute.

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  7 August 2015 at 11:03 am

                  If you can afford one and its fully legal with NZ laws then good on you

                  • dukeofurl …
                    7 August 2015 at 11:05 am

                    I thought you were sin binned ?

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      7 August 2015 at 11:11 am

                      I thought my banning was over yesterday but going back it was for Friday so here I am

                      [lprent: It was. I actually removed it late wednesday night because there was a ban finished on the 6th and I tend to batch remove a couple of days worth at once, and you hadn’t been leaving comments in auto-spam. ]

          • John Shears 3.2.1.2.2
            7 August 2015 at 12:48 pm

            Thanks Infused , some sense at last.
            How many of the antipolice
            commentators have a gun licence or have faced someone who has a gun and could fire at you I wonder, that was what he said he would do.

            • Skinny 3.2.1.2.2.1
              7 August 2015 at 1:56 pm

              You can say that again lol. 🙂

            • Macro 3.2.1.2.2.2
              7 August 2015 at 3:17 pm

              I held a gun license, and was trained in the military to use weapons, and as the officer of the day when the US Knox was in Auckland Harbour we were issued with weapons should any protester break onto the base.
              I sold my weapons some years back because I was uncomfortable having them in the house, even though they were secure and the bolts were removed and locked elsewhere. I abhor the decision to further arm our Police Force, and it appears that there is a trend towards violent action rather than negotiation in some confrontational instances.

            • Colonial Rawshark 3.2.1.2.2.3
              7 August 2015 at 3:35 pm

              John Shears

              You only need to look at the USA to see how police have become a force against the citizens, not protecting the citizens.

              Good policing requires no firearms, except in very exceptional circumstances for which the NZ police can already bring firearms to bear extremely quickly.

        • Blue Horseshoe 3.2.1.3
          7 August 2015 at 10:47 am

          Another case of police ‘murder’ for which the story is already a lie addled botch up

          It’s as if they are too thick or are simple pulling a brown eye at the public

          Police and detectives lie. That’s the first lesson of ‘cop school’

    • Sabine 3.3
      7 August 2015 at 11:27 am

      Not sure if ya actually read the link so i leave this here.

      He said more than one shot was fired by police.
      Mr Chambers could not confirm whether Mr Cerven was actually armed.

      and they refuse to make the CCTV available.

      ———————————————————————————————————

      Question 1. Was the guy armed?
      Question 2. How many shots were fired
      Question 3. How many cops shot their firearm.
      Question 4. How many times was the guy hit?

      Question 5. Was this shooting needed, or could the offender have been apprehended differently?

      Question 6. Are the police that shot still on duty? Will they stay on duty? If found negligent, will they loose their jobs?

      • Puckish Rogue 3.3.1
        7 August 2015 at 1:44 pm

        Question 1. Was the guy armed?
        – The police claim he said he was armed so it’ll probably come out in the investigation

        Question 2. How many shots were fired
        – What is the amount of shots fired you feel is justified which I’m guessing is what you’re leading on to

        Question 3. How many cops shot their firearm.
        – As above but enough to drop the guy

        Question 4. How many times was the guy hit?
        – As above but hopefully all shots fired hit the target but thats unlikely

        Question 5. Was this shooting needed, or could the offender have been apprehended differently?
        – Possibly but maybe the guy was looking for suicide by cop

        Question 6. Are the police that shot still on duty? Will they stay on duty? If found negligent, will they loose their jobs?
        – Hopefully not and probably should

  4. DH 4
    7 August 2015 at 8:27 am

    With our Prime Minister publicly stating he supports rising house prices it’s hard to imagine a clearer one fingered salute to people who are yet to buy a house. I’m curious to know how non property owners feel about their earnings being so brazenly looted from them.

    Lets be clear about this; asset price increases are a transfer of wealth. There’s no new wealth being created here so it must be coming out of other people’s pockets. At its simplest the increasing rent or mortgage payments reduce the amount you can save for your retirement. (People have already been dipping into their Kiwisaver to fund a deposit, which kind of defeats the purpose of Kiwisaver somewhat doesn’t it)

    I’ve never seen an NZ Govt be so divisive and cynical and I’m still struggling to come to grips with what it portends. Food clothing & shelter are the basic necessities of life and here’s the leader of our country effectively saying that shelter is just income for the wealthy.

    • J'Accuse 4.1
      7 August 2015 at 9:00 am

      DH, I don’t like it any more than you do but it is the logical outcome of trends including removal of constitutional checks and balances in 1951, GST on basics, and the the move to the FIRE economy Prof. Kelsey talks about – finance, insurance, and real estate.

      How a person who was head of global trading for Merril Lynch in London and later a member of the privately owned (by Merril, among others) Board of the New York Federal Reserve can claim to have no knowledge of the widespread manipulation of Libor simply beggars belief.

      Google it .

      “The lead prosecutor, Mukul Chawla, dismissed Mr. Hayes’s explanations as a convenient subterfuge for the real issue: He was a greedy liar, hell-bent on manipulating Libor to make more money for his bank and, as a result, himself. A further trial of individuals charged with the manipulation of US Dollar LIBOR begins on 11 January 2016. He added that there were “others above him who were aware of the activity”.”

      http://dispatchtimes.com/uk-trader-jailed-for-libor-scandal/32290/

      It tells you a lot about where the “National” party is today.

      • aidan 4.1.1
        7 August 2015 at 9:49 am

        thinkin bout fire economy, saw countdown now offers insurance?

        • Colonial Rawshark 4.1.1.1
          7 August 2015 at 3:27 pm

          More money to be made in financialisation than in food

          This is why the USA is breaking down and falling apart. Banks make money not infrastructure.

  5. Rodel 5
    7 August 2015 at 8:31 am

    Kelvin Davis speaks clearly and assertively on RNZ this morning. Straight talking, to the point and will I think appeal to the ‘average voter’ No fancy words like ‘facilitation payments’. Mr Parker take note. Spades are spades and vision technicians are window cleaners.

    Whereas Mr Sam Lotto said….. Oh that’s right. He said nothing. Declined to appear….yet again. Guyon Espiner says..hmmm He’s declined a lot.

    • tc 5.1
      7 August 2015 at 9:10 am

      yup short simple sharp and everyone in labour needs to repeat the slogans ad nauseum….not holding my breath with rouges like curran/nash/mallard etc

      That’s the only way you’ll counter the MSM bias as they can’t twist a short snappy slogan whereas the verbose nature of goff, parker etc is a cure for insomnia.

      Think Key on FM and radio rant land and that’s the audience you need to cut through to.

  6. ianmac 6
    7 August 2015 at 9:28 am

    RedLogix posted this very very important link last night. I think it is an answer to why Key survives and what people vote for.
    “Required Late Night Reading:

    http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/aug/06/tony-abbott-can-brush-off-crises-like-cameron-did-says-lynton-crosby ”
    A deliberate policy of brushing off crisis (remember Dirty Politics) because the voters really just care about calm confident leadership.

    • Blue Horseshoe 6.1
      7 August 2015 at 10:57 am

      Rubbing the marketing campaign turds directly into the face of the public…

      Use of the work ‘competence’ in the headliner. Sick Joke

      These are the faces who represent the ‘power’ which operates largely unseen.

      I suppose rock bottom has yet to hit the majority of the the western world. Once the housing markets crash, as they surely must. Then we will see how the people respond.

    • whateva next? 6.2
      7 August 2015 at 12:19 pm

      “Business as usual” really seems to work….for National, now they are in power.

      The masses are so afraid of slipping off the ladder( no society=no safety nets, survival of the fittest only) they vote for status quo, and are full of fear when Labour announce changes of policies, believing that “strong, stable government” will keep them where they are.
      Another link to Guardian’s on going sunlight on the masters of manipulation, have to give it to them they are quite brilliant, just wish they had a conscience and cared for the previous generation, and the next. (as opposed to current government who only think of their own people.)
      http://t.co/hIK5rihgkN

  7. Jones 7
    7 August 2015 at 9:30 am

    Blog entry from Yves Smith of Naked Capitalism on an article in The Economist on the TPPA:

    http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2015/08/the-economist-the-tpp-is-dead.html

    “What is intriguing and heartening about the Economist verdict isn’t merely that the TPP is dead. It’s that it’s so dead that for it to be revived, it would have to be in radically different form, with a much smaller group of countries.”

    I hope they’re right.

    • aidan 7.1
      7 August 2015 at 9:57 am

      i don’t think it will be allowed to die. the people involved will “brush off” any and all critism. i think back to among other things the stadium debacle in dunedin were the major players who plundered our public coffers simply replied to any dissent that they didn’t know what they were talking about. end of story., also think of all the inane comments from grosser etc about how after everything is signed we”ll all see what a great deal it is

    • Draco T Bastard 7.2
      7 August 2015 at 10:54 am

      An interesting point about all these FTAs is that the whole point of the World Trade Organisation was to eliminate the need for bi-lateral trade agreements. That failed and now even the bi-lateral trade agreements are starting to fail.

      We don’t need trade agreements at all. All we need to do is to set standards that other countries have to meet before we will trade with them. Once all countries had done that then we’d have free-trade rather than the forced trade that the bi-lateral trade agreements represent.

  8. Morrissey 8
    7 August 2015 at 10:25 am

    America’s version of Mike Hosking unwisely interviews a comedian

    When that rancid tower of pomposity Bill O’Reilly interviewed comedian Tom Green, it was an epic mismatch, not only of intelligence but of sensibility.

    Perhaps the funniest—unintentionally funniest—moment in the interview comes when O’Reilly intones: “We now have ten year old boys calling ten year old girls bitches and hos. Now, is this the kind of society that you wanna live in?”

    His guest humorously points out that there might be children listening to him say “bitches and hos”, which leads O’Reilly to gravely set him straight: “Listen, this is a news program and it’s in context of what’s happening. Okay?”

    Tom Green on the Bill O’Reilly Show

    More humiliations for Bill O’Hosking….

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_uBWxdZqpI

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUK8yaxHbj4

  9. travellerev 9
    7 August 2015 at 10:30 am

    Assad Is To Blame For ISIS! REALLY? The war on Syria has begun!

    • Draco T Bastard 9.1
      7 August 2015 at 11:02 am

      The root of all evil appears to be the US. It is they that have been causing wars and destruction so as to enrich their corporations and robber barons at the expense of other peoples for centuries now.

  10. Gosman 10
    7 August 2015 at 11:18 am

    The unintended consequences of the living wage campaign.

    http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials-on-the-right/080515-765217-well-meaning-executive-discovers-economic-law-of-unintended-consequences.htm?p=2

    This is something lefties aren’t very good at predicting or even countering.

    • Colonial Rawshark 10.1
      7 August 2015 at 11:56 am

      In some ways, he was a bad manager. He didn’t plan for the likely consequences of making a major HR policy change in his organisation and he acted autocratically without consulting his senior staff on the decision. Also he made a whole lot of his millionaire mates feel bad. Boo hoo.

      This is something lefties aren’t very good at predicting or even countering.

      That’s a non-sense non-conclusion. We have to do better at helping the bottom 50% of society and at the moment we are failing.

    • Molly 10.2
      7 August 2015 at 12:00 pm

      Yes, saw that Gosman. Interesting read.

      Apparently, businesses “offended” by his remuneration scheme, pulled their business from him. A similar reaction would be expected from a religious fundamentalist lobby moving their business elsewhere.

      Consider – the reallocation of salaries did not have a detrimental effect on services offered or anything else to do with the business.

      Just goes to show how hard it will be to change entrenched views on what value people contribute to a business, when for the most part they are considered the first place to cut expenses.

      I would suggest that other models are possible, but they will only come with trial and error. Innovative ideas are not going to be successful first time around, or even the second.

      But that reality might be too much for you to consider.

      • infused 10.2.1
        7 August 2015 at 2:17 pm

        No, he lost his two best people.

        Why was that? Because floor sweepers were now earning almost the same wage as them.

        The business is fucked anyway, he had other issues.

        • Molly 10.2.1.1
          7 August 2015 at 2:51 pm

          Interesting. Those two people did not actually lose any income, and yet were so upset by others doing better in comparison they left the company?

          I can see how you would identify with those employees. I’ll direct you to another perspective that was recently posted on Facebook: Jens Rushing

          As CR mentioned, he could have managed such a fundamentally big change better.

          There are other ways of increasing staff remuneration, that also increases staff engagement and ownership of a company. But these are not straightforward models, and they would take a lot of time, review and tinkering to get right.

          What were the other issues?

        • McFlock 10.2.1.2
          7 August 2015 at 2:54 pm

          No, he lost his two highest paid people.

          Hell, that can happen at any time, from being headhunted by other businesses to being hit by a bus.

          But the business has a wider pool of more loyal staff now. It just needs to survive the hype around the transition.

          • Draco T Bastard 10.2.1.2.1
            7 August 2015 at 3:48 pm

            +1

            Losing two staff, oh noes, I’ll have to find some people who are willing to work for $70k and have the necessary skills out of the thousands presently unemployed.

            Yeah, I think he’ll find that he’s better off in the long run.

    • joe90 10.3
      7 August 2015 at 12:02 pm

      Owner runs his own business his own way, wingnuts gloat.
      //

    • Tricledrown 10.4
      7 August 2015 at 2:25 pm

      Gooseman read the right wing propaganda article .
      Pure bullying Bullshit backed up by no evidence.
      The OECD did a survey on every state in the US,and found those states with the highest minimum wage had the lowest unemployment and the highest growth.
      Your article mentioned said the minimum wage being raised to $15 an hr would destroy their Economy.
      Just pure Bullying BS.

    • McFlock 10.5
      7 August 2015 at 2:36 pm

      Two staff leave.
      The rest are much happier.

      Media shitstorm results in some customers leaving.
      Increased advertising resulted in new customers.

      Slight period of difficulty as new customers income stream takes time to mature, but the business is apparently likely to survive the transition period. And the business will be stronger once the transition is complete.

    • lprent 11.1
      7 August 2015 at 2:27 pm

      I so find it rather quaint that Farrar still does party to party comparisons like he was a idiot political journalist reporting on a two horse race. It is so 20th century or some retarded political system like the American institutionalized two horse that is designed to allow the country to be dominated by small percentages of voters.

      Does anyone doubt that the next election will form from a coalition government, just like every one since 1996 – 19 years ago? But I guess that reporting just National to Labour comparisions makes that dropping away of National’s support and support parties somewhat less obvious.

      I noticed it when I was reading his newsletter the other day, and started thinking about how completely idiotic it was. It made him sound as politically ignorant as Mike Hoskings does.

      • Puckish Rogue 11.1.1
        7 August 2015 at 2:31 pm

        and yet his polling was pretty accurate when it came to the election but what does that matter eh

    • freedom 11.2
      7 August 2015 at 3:21 pm

      clicked through to the poll newsletter registration link to see this:

      You can subscribe here to receive Curia Market Research’s monthly newsletter summarising the public polls in New Zealand, Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada.

      By co-incidence, those are also the Five Eyes partners

      take it away boys

  13. marty mars 13
    7 August 2015 at 12:08 pm

    Agree with this 1000%

    New Zealand’s most outspoken economist has renewed his call for Auckland Council to sell its golf courses for housing, saying the “rich” are getting a massive subsidy.

    Shamubeel Eaqub, the former NZIER principal economist who last month announced he was leaving to take on a portfolio of new activities, this morning tweeted his opposition to the council holding such a huge land bank.

    In June, Eaqub said he wanted the golf courses sold and this was published in a book he had written.

    Asked for a more detailed explanation, he said he thought it was wrong to have so many hectares of land tied up in public ownership across the city when that very same city was suffering a desperate shortage of land for residential development.

    That situation had resulted in rich people effectively getting a subsidy from the publicly owned organisation by locking that land away from development options, he indicated.</blockquote

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11493479

    • Charles 13.1
      7 August 2015 at 12:39 pm

      Isn’t he just saying one bunch of subsidised rich guys should give a resource to another bunch of about-to-be-subsidised rich private developers? Might turn out to be the same bored-with-golf people. Or does he say the council start a new division of public housing by and for the people?

    • Molly 13.2
      7 August 2015 at 12:53 pm

      I’ve been to a couple of housing presentations with Shameel Eaqub, and he has always struck me as a bit of an idiot.
      Phrases like “Who cares about rising house prices in Auckland (he lived in Wellington then) – people can rent!” and the other pearler “Rising house prices is a good thing and something we should not be worried about.”

      And note, he is only talking about council owned reserves that happen to have golf on them. A very singular way to identify possible housing locations – or transfer of public amenities to private development.

      Watch out for any reserves where people are not even doing that, only walking, socialising or just enjoying the fresh air.

      As for the golf courses and housing – George Carlin said that so well and so long ago.

      • hoom 13.2.1
        7 August 2015 at 1:40 pm

        Its very important for the Council to keep owning Reserves for the people of Auckland.
        If you sell them off & make private houses there are no Reserves to go do recreation at.

        Also having played on them, the Auckland Council owned Golf clubs are a cheap & very inclusive way to have a bit of fun.
        They let me clomp around with my normal boots on, club hire is cheap & you get a bunch of exercise, people rock up in costumes etc.

        But on the topic of housing:
        Universal Benefits are cheaper with better outcomes than Policing & Prisons
        http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11493128

        Instead of being required to undertake prior drug or alcohol rehabilitation programmes and/or mental health counselling, the homeless were given apartments, no questions asked.

        They could drink, take drugs, have mental breakdowns without repercussions, as long as they didn’t hurt anyone or disturb their neighbours.

        Far from being the disaster many predicted, the experiment proved a remarkable success. Once settled in secure housing, the “homeless” proved much more likely to address their other issues.

        For the community, the cost of providing assisted housing has proved considerably less than the court, police and medical emergency costs these people had been incurring previously.

        • Molly 13.2.1.1
          7 August 2015 at 1:52 pm

          Agree, with you on preserving community spaces. Better consideration needs to be given to local needs and encouraging use of public spaces for all residents and users.

        • Charles 13.2.1.2
          7 August 2015 at 3:46 pm

          There was a big-wig from the Auckland council saying last year that homeless people ought to get a job and stop cluttering the streets or he’d ban them… that retailers down Queen Street couldn’t get employees so what’s their excuse? What a dick. I fear he’d be outside the scope of “empathy training” since he can’t even manage to get a realistic fix on his current reality. I can just imagine a host of homeless being eagerly hired for MAX, Glassons and Lippy… just while they get back on their feet.

    • Draco T Bastard 13.3
      7 August 2015 at 1:25 pm

      Actually, that’s a really bad idea as those gold courses are islands of life within an otherwise dead environment. Much better to increase density of living both through encouragement of terraced housing and high-rise apartments.

      • Molly 13.3.1
        7 August 2015 at 1:58 pm

        I enjoyed his humour and related it to privately owned golf courses – rather than open public spaces. We seem to have developed a habit of tapping into public assets to solve problems caused by private development and it is wearying… For me, a look at the ridiculous helps offset the ennui.

        I have spent a bit of time in the last few years advocating for improved community involvement into the design and acquisition of public spaces in conjunction with increased density.

        … don’t ask how that’s been going…. I’m in a fairly good mood at the moment.

      • miravox 13.3.2
        7 August 2015 at 8:00 pm

        +1 Draco

        And good luck with that Molly. It’s always a worry with private-led development and cash-strapped councils that a bit of open space is seen as $$ not as value in environmental or public space terms.

    • maui 13.4
      7 August 2015 at 7:43 pm

      I agree with getting rid of the golf courses. They’re a symbol of eliteness, and a gross waste of space in our cities. Particularly when you have such a large area of land that is restricted to the public, where the purpose is for rich kiwis to play one of the most boring sports available in my opinion. Maybe one day they’ll be used for something useful in society like for growing food, recreation for all, housing as already suggested.

  15. adam 15
    7 August 2015 at 1:51 pm

    Thank goodness I’m not the only one who has noticed the lack of staff at the warehouse as of late – leaving aside the free child labour they get. (You need to have a wee look at the dailyblog for that reference if you have not already)

    Well done to these workers who walked off the work site. Pay decent wages. The current rate is a sick joke

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/regional/280684/workers-walk-off-job-at-the-warehouse

    • b waghorn 16.1
      7 August 2015 at 3:45 pm

      Why the smiling face??

      • freedom 16.1.1
        7 August 2015 at 4:06 pm

        It’s actually a wink – these new emojis are not very clear – in hindsight, probably should have been a frown
        Sometimes there’s no satisfaction in making the correct call.

        • b waghorn 16.1.1.1
          7 August 2015 at 4:15 pm

          Fair enough , I’m expecting a few of the left lefties to to crow and I’m in the mood for slapping someone down.
          This could be the biggest driver of kiwis becoming tenants in there own country we’ve ever seen.

          • freedom 16.1.1.1.1
            7 August 2015 at 4:22 pm

            A farm ownership registry created today, and another in four years time, would make interesting if not harrowing reading

            • miravox 16.1.1.1.1.1
              7 August 2015 at 8:11 pm

              If farms are bought up by foreign investors, and Fonterra is a farmers’ co-operative, does that mean the overseas investment in Fonterra shares will increase?

              • freedom …
                7 August 2015 at 8:40 pm

                Overseas investment in Fonterra can already occur through the The Fonterra Shareholders’ Fund

                https://www.fonterra.com/nz/en/Financial/Fonterra+Shareholders+Fund (have to scroll down)

                Units are listed on the NZX Main Board and on ASX and will be able to be freely bought and sold, in the same way as any other listed security.

                Outside investors who are not allowed to hold shares in Fonterra, are able to invest in Units in the Fonterra Shareholders’ Fund that gives them access to the Economic Rights that they would have received if they were allowed to own a Share.

                • miravox …
                  7 August 2015 at 8:59 pm

                  Ok – but that is a limited investment fund, with limited voting rights isn’t it?

                  Sorry, I don’t know quite how it works, but I do remember that when Fonterra was set up there were reassurances about limiting overseas investors. e.g:
                  http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/24/fonterra-fund-idUSL3E8HI2VM20120624

                  If it is the case that overseas shareholdings are limited, what happens when overseas investors own the farms that are part of the Fonterra co-operative – do they have voting rights, take profits, and if so, would the increase overseas investors in farms affect the company decision-making, retention of profit etc?

                  • freedom …
                    7 August 2015 at 11:24 pm

                    Unit Holder voting rights
                    Unit Holders are entitled to attend and vote at Unit Holder meetings, and to elect three directors of the Manager of the Fund.

                    Unit Holders do not have any right to attend or vote, or request the Fonterra Farmer Custodian to attend or vote, at any meeting of Farmer Shareholders. The Fonterra Farmer Custodian will also not have any voting rights at meetings of Farmer Shareholders, except on certain interest group resolutions. Situations where interest group resolutions are required are expected to be rare.

                    https://www.fonterra.com/nz/en/Financial/Fonterra+Shareholders+Fund/Fund+Details

                    Issues of units in the fund grow when/as new farmer shares are issued but at this time the fund can’t exceed a controlled ratio. Of course all companies can alter such arrangements when/if properly motivated to do so and the regulatory bodies that oversee such things are encouraged it is in [insert preferred beneficiary ]’s interest.

                    If a growing number of farms begin to shift into foreign ownership and those new owners also have units in the fund then it would appear the farmer share votes could influence decisions that benefit fund unit holders.

                    From the structure that the documentation provides, it seems pretty easy for both the fund and the farmer shares to end up being controlled by external interests. The interest group resolutions look like being ripe environments for gradual adjustments of the company’s motivational focus. Just takes time patience and deep pockets.

                    https://www.fonterra.com/wps/wcm/connect/2d93981b-93c8-4336-a01d-66bb66c5c0b0/Offer+doc+-+final.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

                    I have no professional knowledge of how these things are deftly manipulated through their fine print wriggle rooms but maybe there is a friendly broker or fund manager reading who can properly answer your questions.

            • b waghorn 16.1.1.1.1.2
              7 August 2015 at 8:12 pm

              Apparently the law as it stands at the mo is a receiver is legally bound to find the highest bidder they can and with this government s rubber stamp offshore investment rules its not looking to good .

          • adam 16.1.1.1.2
            7 August 2015 at 11:13 pm

            Not crowing , just saying capitalism is a vicious nasty beast which eats everything.

            “And then they came for the farmers”

        • Ergo Robertina 16.1.1.2
          7 August 2015 at 4:32 pm

          It’s been blindingly obvious to lots of us that the dairy bubble would pop – so don’t get too smug.
          I feel nothing but contempt for National and the farming establishment who have seen this all before and should have acted.
          In the 80s farmers’ lives were ruled by Government, now they’re ruled by banks, but the underlying issue is the same – debt (there’s too much focus on the removal of subsidies in the 80s in my opinion – it was interest hikes that did the damage).
          National had ample opportunity to sound warnings and increase regulatory hurdles (rather than dismantling them) and did nothing.

          • freedom 16.1.1.2.1
            7 August 2015 at 4:43 pm

            Smug ? I think you are reading too much into a single emoji.
            Did you miss the bit where I say I have no satisfaction in making the correct call .
            The dairy bubble hasn’t popped by the way, it’s been in a steady state of deflation for a long time.

            • Ergo Robertina 16.1.1.2.1.1
              7 August 2015 at 4:53 pm

              I don’t think you quite get it. It’s about confidence. And that disappeared quickly, not in a ”steady state of deflation”. That’s how a bubble works, regardless of the fact that those of us not caught up in it, but paying attention, saw it coming.

              • freedom …
                7 August 2015 at 5:17 pm

                So we were discussing two different bubbles then.
                As bubbles are spheres, we can always slam them into the 2D world, build a Venn diagram
                and both be depressed as they overlap with alarming uniformity 🙂

    • freedom 16.2
      7 August 2015 at 4:20 pm

      Fonterra announce advances and dividend payments to cushion impact of auction disasters
      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11493616

      At least they planned ahead, sort of
      http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/timely-fonterra-sale-6-year-bonds-draws-oversubscriptions-bd-171527
      ” The funds raised are to be used for general corporate purposes, it said.”

      Purposes like trying to keep a collapsing market from destroying the lives of all their suppliers perhaps?

  17. GMan 17
    7 August 2015 at 4:31 pm

    Just discovered this blog today. some good articles – are you a lawyer?

  18. North 18
    7 August 2015 at 4:32 pm

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=11493465

    Rachel Smalley’s opinion piece – well written and a solid point – especially timely since apparently Mary Wilson’s got the heave-ho to accommodate.

    All fucked up when she contrives (or allows) Campbell’s picture to appear between those of E-Channel-Geckos-Ponce-Key-Arse-Suckers-Hosking-Henry. (Henry a bit of a wild card but always ultimately ‘reliable’, Hosking spoofingly so always).

    Come to think of it Rachel herself’s not always been immaculate in terms of the suck-arse disease epidemic in the ranks of New Zealand so-called journalists. Correct me but no……Our Rachel never a patch on Campbell.

  19. Morrissey 19
    7 August 2015 at 5:23 pm

    Lavina Good claims S.S. Obergruppenführer is “concerned about violent offenders.”
    Where have the interesting and informed commentators gone?
    The Panel, Radio NZ National, Friday 7 August 2015
    Jesse Mulligan, Lavina Good, Rob Salmond

    Lavina Good has drawn much negative comment in the past for her crass and ignorant utterances. Her most infamous moment came at the 2008 Olympics, when she conducted what has gone down in history as one of the worst interviews ever—-almost as bad as Ian Smith’s foolish and insulting performance after the 2011 Rugby World Cup final—when she (perhaps unwittingly) reeled off a list of offensive racial stereotypes in a hapless attempt to explain why a black athlete had won an event.

    Here are a few of the typical assessments of Good’s performance: “ignorant questions” … “worst post-race interview ever. Absolutely shocking” …. “Fuck me, that’s embarrassing. It would be quite the surprise if she ever gets to interview people again”….”They were going around the presenters for their favourite moments of the games – as soon as the VT featuring Lavina Good and Toni Street came on, I switched channels.”

    http://www.daimenhutchison.com/rugby/index.php/topic/25883-nzs-most-embarrassing-olympic-moment/

    In the ensuing seven years, she appears to have not improved one whit. In the opening discussion of today’s edition of The Panel, a typically Moraesque once-over-lightly exchange of views about the topic of prisoner monitoring, Lavina Good actually had the hide to quote one “Garth McVicar of the Sensible Sentencing Trust” who is, she claimed, “concerned about violent offenders.” After she name-checked the vicious old knife enthusiast, there was a moment of palpable tension as Jesse Mulligan and Rob Salmond fell silent for a moment, forcing themselves to refrain from responding to her comment.

    Apart from that, her comments for the rest of the show were uncontroversial. What happened to the interesting, thoughtful guests who actually something to say, like Anna Chinn, Gordon Campbell, and Dita Di Boni? The real culprit here is not so much Lavina Good as the producer who decided to invite her on to the program. Sadly, The Panel continues to get worse.

    More on Lavina Good…..
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-15092014/#comment-888127

    More on Garth “The Knife” McVicar…..
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-09032011/#comment-306178
    http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-12082013/#comment-678579