Written By: notices and features - Date published: 6:00 am, June 19th, 2013 - 207 comments
Categories: open mike -
Open mike is your post. For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).
Step right up to the mike…
I understand the next Roy Morgan poll results are out today. I suspect that with even more interest than usual the results will be poured over and conclusions will be offered.
Has National’s continuous assault on our rights and our constitutional norms persuaded enough people that they should be tossed out of office? Is David Shearer appealing to enough people as a leader in waiting? Has Phil Goff, Annette King, Kris Faafoi and Clayton Cosgrove’s frankly embarrassing decision to enjoy Sky City’s Eden Park hospitality had an effect on Labour’s support? Has Winston Peters’ theatrics improved his party’s standing? Is the Green Party’s disciplined and principled approach to policy resulting in gains? Is everyone getting too excited by a poll over 12 months away from the next election or should we be caring about the results now?
Labour will be looking for a good result. If they do not get one and if Key and his minions still look like they will win the next election then Labour needs to have a cup of tea and a rethink.
And pigs might fly, Mickey. Labour’s senior MPs have “gone rogue” – it happens in corporates, and it obviously can happen in politics if there is not a strong leader in place. If Labour doesn’t get a good result in the poll, they’ll just shrug it off and continue as before. The Greens are looking more and more attractive as the alternative to vote for.
Much as I’d like to announce its National all the way I’m not even going to hazard a guess on what the polls will say
The last Morgan poll was probably an outlier (National 41%) so even if the result is bad for National (e.g. 42%) the headline will be “National up in latest poll”. The details will be more interesting, therefore ignored.
“Has Phil Goff, Annette King, Kris Faafoi and Clayton Cosgrove’s frankly embarrassing decision to enjoy Sky City’s Eden Park hospitality had an effect on Labour’s support?”
I don’t think so.
Can Labour’s support get any worse?
I suggest the 32-35% of people who still support Labour will always support Labour no matter how useless they are. We have a hard core tribal Labour core who just vote red every time. Unconditional support in an organisation that losts its compass in 1984 and has never really refound it.
Labour’s fucked – lost its way and full of 1%ers in Parliament or on boards of businesses or NGOs creaming it, using all the tools of the wealthy to retain and hide their wealth and influence, doing fuck all for ordinary citizens but making sure their MPs and party hierarchy get plenty of gravy. Core support is low for good reason. Somewhere along the way soon the Greens should rebrand to exorcise the “crazy hippy anti business tree hugger” propaganda effect, which I think has been pedalled out to the public for so long now by the right in both Labour and National/Act it’s well embedded in the subconscious of enough voters to be effective in preventing many from looking into exactly how this party is becoming what Labour used to be – a party that is actively planning and testing and refining how it might actually be able to govern for the interests and betterment of the whole electorate, including the business sector. Labour could well end up becoming a minor support party before fading into history.
“Somewhere along the way soon the Greens should rebrand to exorcise the “crazy hippy anti business tree hugger” propaganda effect,”
How do you propose they do that (more than they already have) without alienating their membership and core voters?
Slowly, thoughtfully, and carefully, the way they are doing it now. They don’t need to convince their existing support base they have changed. They only need to convince swinging or lost voters they have a better alternative to Labour’s lost direction and audience. Labour has to convince those same voters they can be trusted. Their MPs keep showing the electorate they can’t. Every departure of one of their MPs elsewhere looks like rats leaving the sinking ship.
A name change would be essential. Green is the source of the tree-hugger myths, and a word with a common meaning of inexperienced or naive. They are now none of these things. They have principles. They have articulate leaders and MPs and they understand better how to use media than Labour leaders do. IMO anyway. They are setting the few good parts of Labour’s agenda.
A name change would be essential. Green is the source of the tree-hugger myths, and a word with a common meaning of inexperienced or naive.
What utter nonsense. This spurious obsession with branding reminds me of the call by some Roger Douglas-type nitwits in the early 1980s to change the name of the Labour Party to the Social Democrati Party.
At the time, party chairman Jim Anderton scotched the foolish talk, saying that unlike the Lange-Douglas loons, he did not feel ashamed of his connections with workers, and there was nothing shameful about the idea of work.
Don’t be so green
Ok, maybe its not essential. But I think it might be a good idea. Time will tell. Labour didn’t come from nothing and it initially represented labour. Its name makes it easy to demonise as a party for blue collar workers. Which is what happens. But which is laughable because it went through a period of representing the top end of town. Now it has no idea who it represents, nor do I.
“Somewhere along the way soon the Greens should rebrand…”
Yes, its an interesting point you make regarding branding. Branding is that intangible thing that is holding Labour up and holding the Greens back I suspect. The Greens are considerably more cohesive and principled than Labour (the current Labour that is), and Labour’s leadership doesn’t come close and yet the Greens continue to only attract 11% while Labour attract mid 30%.
I suspect that Labour can only milk its brand equity for so long before we see some big drops in their support. And conversely some big improvements in Greens support.
Silver perhaps? with maybe a fern. And a Labour Green alliance could brand itself with a flowering Pohutukawa.
Its a sad state of affairs when it all comes down to branding, but I accept that these days – it does.
Screw the branding Labour has a brand that had stood the test of time.
It’s the policies and what the current crop of politicians believe in and stand for that is the problem.
It’s the disconnect between prostituting the 8 hour working day, 40 hour working week, state housing for life, etc on their website and the current neo-Labour beliefs that is the problem.
Still calling themselves neo-Labour solves the problem and would distinguish themselves from anyone who actually has left Labour values.
Russell Brand has a bit to say on the image type of bullshit that those in power want us to buy into:
In an episode of Brain Games it’s also interesting to see how people picked the winner of electoral campaigns by how the people looked. Let us not sink that low.
It was worse at the 2011 election… (27.5%)
“Labour will be looking for a good result. If they do not get one and if Key and his minions still look like they will win the next election then Labour needs to have a cup of tea and a rethink.”
Agree 100% Micky.
The creation of a backup imaging of the database appears to have stopped the database accepting connection from the server last night at about 0300. I missed the alarm because my cellphone was powerless.
Now I have to figure out how to either stop that happening or to make sure that it restarts itself. And how to ensure that I get the alarms
Well, I guess at 3am there wouldn’t be many trying to read TS. And you didn’t get your sleep interrupted (unless you were working through the night on something else).
I’d just headed off to bed just prior to that, and Lyn got me this backlit keyboard so I could work on the computer without putting a light on (and waking her up).
Weren’t CV and McFlock up all night arguing?
went to bed around 2
I went a bit earlier
Greens Ditch Quantitative Easing Policy:
Labour/David Parker refused to back the policy. Too radical. They dont think the NZ public is smart enough to see that the world is already printing like mad.
But like the Green’s CGT, Labour will run with it later. In 4-6 years time. It is, as they say, an inevitability.
All hail the cheap flat-screen tv and i-phone, i can understand the Green Party position on ‘printing money’, being the ‘junior party’ in the future coalition Government means that some policy is put aside as not worth dying in a ditch over,
Is printing money radical or the cause of massive inflation, such can only be described as radical if we are to believe that the Governments of Europe,Japan and the US are such radical organizations,
Massive inflation from ‘printing money’???, where is such inflation, the US has been ‘printing’ massive amounts of dollars for 5 years now along with Europe and the Japanese, can any of those opposed to ‘money printing’ on the grounds of massive inflation explain to us where and when this massive inflation is to occur???
Had we as a country at the outset of the Global financial crisis ‘printed’ instead of ‘borrowed’ the 100-300 million dollars a week shortfall in Government revenue there would not at this moment be a debt ‘mountain’ of some 60-80 billion dollars,
The efficacy of ‘printing money’ at such times of unforeseen shortfalls in Government revenue have now been well proven by those countries that have taken such measures,
The Government need only have ‘printed’ it’s shortfall in revenue along with X amount of dollars which would have covered lowering the taxation on fuel as the nett lowering of the NZ$ caused by the 100-300 million dollar weekly printing pushed up the price of imported fuels,
Instead we now have a Government debt best described in mountainous terms,and, cheap i-pads and flat-screens, you all can now feel an extreme amount of guilt every time you use such appliances…
Its not so simple. Given the full policy platform of the Greens QE would be stablizing, but presently it arguable that it would set off a housing collapse. Look I’m no economist but the way I could see the economy is as an organism, fattened and lazy from cheap oil and cheap credit but bleed by countless cuts to the rule of law, regulations, rights, social cohesion (aka neo-liberalism). While the cheap juice from oil and the even more spectacular leverage of cheap credit, the body could take the cutting, but now energy and resource, aging and climate change, have turned the invincible ninnies into shit scared dopes. QE without re-regulation, higher taxes, without rebuilding the organism of the economy (or building a new economy broadband – not happening at present prices and the promise of market rigidity and rigging that is so come place in NZ) then any QE printing goes straight out the open wounds. That’s why the US has been joined by Japan, EU in printing and its still going on, their inertia politics that set in once their revolution had gotten its wish list is very hard to remove.
Bring in capital gains, raise taxation on the riches, close loopholes, get state house building ramping up, then QE becomes very stablizing as it re-balances the money held by the wealthy back to middle NZ.
The Greens weren’t wrong to highlight QE because it needed highlighting, aka US. And its a good policy to have around, just emphasis a bit better when it would be used and how, investors don’t mine a hit as long as its necessary, good in the medium to long term and isn’t going to be ongoing.
Why is the NZZ dollar so high, because investors hate QE in the US, and why would it cause a housing bubble burst because paying the interest on the private nz debt without foriegn investment…
anyway that’s my guess estimate.
Not a bad analogy – add a little hypertension in the housing market, and the fat, unfit economy might pop a vein if it tries to do vigorous exercise without everything else being taken into account, too.
Great news. That was one of the few Green Party policies I didn’t like.
Care to explain why you didn’t like that particular policy???…
The large majority of NZ economists I’ve read on the issue claim that our economy is not in the right context to be considering QE yet. I.e. we’ve got other conventional monetary policy tools to use first, our Official Cash Rate while historically low still has room to move and our economy isn’t in crisis.
Have you got any links to such an assertion ”the large majority of NZ economists etc”, you don’t see an economy carrying 60-80 billion dollars of Government debt as a crisis???,
There were 2 paths this Government could have taken vis a vis addressing the effects of the Global Financial Crisis, borrow or print, i would say that given the choice made we not only face a Government with a debt crisis we also face a government with a crisis of intelligence, lack of it that is…
OTOH Gareth Morgan, Bollard, Noland, John McDermott David Mayes vs Nana.
I think comparatively NZ’s not in crisis. Though we could have been in a lot better position now had it not been for Key and National. Also I think short-term borrowing is a good choice given the amount of debt Cullen paid off though it should have went along with a CGT, extending the pension age without income tax cuts.
Also I think short-term borrowing is a good choice…
It’s not as all it does is unnecessarily add to the cost to run our government. The reality is that if our government printed our money (with adequate controls of course) it would never have to borrow at all, our money would stabilise in the forex markets and we’d be less in debt than we are.
Yeah that’s the theory. Though it’s not as uncontroversial as you’re suggesting and would be unusual to bring in with our OCR where it is and also not without big financial risks.
I guess it’s all a bit moot now because not even our innovative Greens are willing to pursue it.
The OCR would be dropped as there would be no need of it – the private banks would no longer be creating the money.
The large majority of NZ economists…
The large majority of economists that completely failed to predict the GFC? Yeah, I wouldn’t listen to them as they wouldn’t know what an economy was if they tripped over one.
we’ve got other conventional monetary policy tools to use first,
Actually, no we don’t. We have the OCR and that’s it.
The government printing money wouldn’t destabilise the economy at all and our economy is in crisis – that’s what that high unemployment and degrading industrialisation means.
Yeah. Raise the OCR. Bring in another lot of hot money to raise house prices, raise interest rates to kill our few remaining manufacturers and push the dollar higher.
QE is a much better option.
Seems like not even the Greens agree this policy is worth dying in a ditch over. Perhaps you could get Hone to take up the idea. I would like that very much.
Fluoridation???, according to the Wikipedia only 5.7% of the worlds population use fluoridated water, (that’s the stuff that’s added by government/councils as opposed to what occurs naturally in water),
Approximately 1/2 the New Zealand population use regularly fluoridated water, (where’s the studies showing that those who do not have added fluoride in their water have grossly worse rates of tooth decay than those that do),
From all that i have read any beneficial effects of fluoride added to water would only occur while such water is held in the mouth, so drinking fluoridated water would have minimal beneficial effects,
The supposed beneficial effects of fluoride have of course occurred during the same period as the uptake and use of fluoridated toothpastes have occurred and in my opinion claims of better dental out-comes occurring because of fluoridation are at best dubious,
Interesting report here. Check out pp305–7, comparing oral health in kids between schools in fluoridated and non-fluoridated areas.
Some good information over at SciBlogs:
fluoridation (where did science communication go wrong?) – http://sciblogs.co.nz/bioblog/2013/06/06/fluoridation-where-did-science-communication-go-wrong/
Water Fluoridation – the emotional tail wags the dog in Hamilton – http://sciblogs.co.nz/diplomaticimmunity/2013/06/05/water-fluoridation-the-emotional-tail-wags-the-dog-in-hamilton/
Tactics and common arguments of the anti-fluoridationists- http://sciblogs.co.nz/open-parachute/2013/06/07/tactics-and-common-arguments-of-the-anti-fluoridationists/
Fluoridation – Mass Medication or a Societal Benefit? – http://sciblogs.co.nz/molecular-matters/2013/06/08/fluoridation-mass-medication-or-a-societal-benefit/
Fluoridation – are we dumping toxic metals into our water supplies? – http://sciblogs.co.nz/open-parachute/2013/06/11/fluoridation-are-we-dumping-toxic-metals-into-our-water-supplies/
fluoridation: those pesky facts – http://sciblogs.co.nz/bioblog/2013/06/12/fluoridation-those-pesky-facts/
from the first link
Right now I’m beginning to think that those of us who are science educators & communicators have done something very wrong, because in the summary of ‘views against’ I see things like this (emphasis in the original):
A key sub-theme that emerged within this topic was the view that fluoride is a chemical or poison.
Yes, fluoride is a chemical. So are table salt & dihydrogen monoxide**. So often we see the term ‘chemical’ used in a pejorative sense, ignoring the fact that everything on the planet, ourselves included, is at some level a concatenation of chemicals. Incidentally, in the right – or should that be wrong? – quantities all are toxic: drinking too much water can be fatal.
I haven’t read the rest of the article yet, and will be interested to see where they go with the idea that scientists have a communication problem, because it’s right there in those paragraphs. Scientists use the word ‘chemical’ to mean one thing, lay people use it in a different way. In the paragraphs above is the classic problem – some scientists want everyone to use words the way they use them, rather than understanding that good communication is about how people negotiate meaning. Really dumb and unhelpful.
It’s an interesting approach to say that this is the result of a “science communication problem”. Maybe it’s the result of a science credibility problem.
If it’s one and not the other, then its a whole other thing going on.
Could just be a case of casting pearls before swine, or seeds onto stony ground, etc.
lolz. That’s right, if you’re not a scientist you are a stupid ingrate. As we all know, scientists are better than everyone else and should be in charge of everything ;-p
I recall reading an article in Times Higher Education Supplement about the communication gap between “spoon feeding” and “mind reading”, i.e. lecturers thinking they’ve given more than enough information while many students are still completely lost.
While it was a valid point and interesting article,the cynic in me thinks that there’s not enough time in the universe to adequately explain some issues to some folk, however loud or adept at creating websites they might be.
True enough, but the problem is that those people at the extreme end of the spectrum get sympathy from those closer to the middle specifically because too many scientists have been arrogant and disconnected from every day reality. So sure, write off the tinfoil hat brigade. But you’re still also losing a huge chunk of the population who are capable of rational thought and critical thinking (and lay science education) who are really sick of being told that they are stupid by scientists.
Could be both, in varying proportions. I tend to think it is both, but I do have some sympathy for scientists who have to deal with a largely scientifically illiterate population. That is a both a communication issue and an education one. On the other hand, science as it is practiced is deeply flawed and people are right to be suspicious and untrusting in many cases, esp when they are being told to trust on the basis of faith.
The pro side of fluoridation is that appears to be of some benefit for primary school aged children. There is no benefit to people once their secondary teeth are formed. I say it “appears” – because the oral health of children in developed countries has been improving at a steady rate since the 1930’s. Whether or not the countries have fluoridated water supplies. Good oral health is more a factor of of good nutrition, regular brushing and, and regular dental hygiene. As the average number of caries per child drops, the percentage differences between one group and another increases. For example the percentage difference between no caries and 1 filling is 100%, the percentage difference between 2 caries and 3 is 50% and so forth. The average number of filled teeth for children aged between 6 to 13 is around 3. A a 30 % increase over normal would mean 4 fillings rather than 3. So what we are talking about is the mass medication of the entire population to prevent one or two fillings in a small proportion of the population who may or may not benefit. Maybe they prefer to drink soft drinks rather than water when they get home from school.
The negative side of fluoridation is dismissed out of hand by those who support it. However there are certain issues that are not addressed by either the Ministry of Health or those medical professionals that champion the cause of fluoridation. Note that there is an increasing number of medical and scientific opinion that challenges the conventional wisdom that fluoridation at current levels is safe.
Firstly town supplies in NZ that are fluoridated add Hydrofluorosilicic Acid at the rate of 0.01 g/l. The recommended maximum dosage for H2F6Si is 0.02g/kg. A young infant bottle fed on infant formula mixed with fluoridated water will exceed the maximum dosage daily. The EPA in the USA has recently recommended that fluoridation be dropped from 0.01 g/l to 0.007 g/l.
Secondly there are 36 studies that show a correlation between fluoridation and reduced scores on standard IQ tests.
It should come as no surprise that fluorine is to be found in soft tissue as well as bone tissue. It is know to accumulate in the thyroid, replacing iodine, and the pituitary gland.
The ability of the body to excrete fluoride ions is impaired in persons with chronic kidney disorders, up to 1/7 of the population.
Finally fluorosilicates are not the same as fluoride. They are supposed to disassociate at pH of 7 but the human gut has a pH of around 2-3. And at that level of acidity few Fluoride ions are available.
This was the information presented to the Hamilton Council. The Ministry of Health and the pro fluoride lobby had ample opportunity to refute these concerns, but were unable to do so.
The simple fact remains that for a large proportion of the population fluoridation is unnecessary and the target population is comparatively small. It is to take a sledge hammer to crack a nut. There are better ways to achieve the same outcome.
My one wisdom tooth grew in while I was in a city with inadequate fluoride. It rotted out less than a decade later. Needless to say that is the only one I have lost like that.
You may need to extend your ages and population sizes somewhat. Or do mandatory extraction of all wisdom teeth?
The EU study into Fluoridation conducted in 2011 by the Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Risks of the European Commission states in summary “There is no clear advantage of water fluoridation over direct application for prevention, and systemic exposure via drinking water is unlikely to benefit people whose teeth have already grown. Europe-wide trends show a reduction in tooth decay in 12 year-olds regardless of whether water is fluoridated or not.”
And this is the key. If you are going to compulsorily mass medicate a large population, all issues of importance sure better be beyond reasonable doubt. And there is no way that threshold is reached on the issue of fluoridation.
The World Health Organisation, the World Dental Federation, the International Association for Dental Research and the overwhelming majority (if not all) of health and health promotion agencies promote the fluoridation of water. Over in Victoria Australia they’re spending Au$3.6 million to build more fluoridation plants across rural parts of their State. It’s fine to have a healthy skepticism for science but to claim you are right and the near consensus of scientists are wrong is a conspiracy theory.
94.3% of the world does not fluoridate it’s water over and above what is naturally found in water,
The 5.3% of the world that does knows better right???…
That comment is intellectually dishonest at best.
For starters, wouldn’t the amount of regions that can fluoridate water but haven’t, and also the areas that have stopped fluoridating; have been more pertinent? And secondly, (as you very well know) the percentage of people not drinking fluoridated water isn’t some sort of public peer review system for the mountain of studies supporting the safety and benefits of fluoridation.
Seriously, people thinking that they know better than the majority of scientists is silly.
It’s fine to have a healthy skepticism for science but to claim you are right and the near consensus of scientists are wrong is a conspiracy theory.
Any educated people in Germany or Austria? Scientists too? Are Austria and Germany advanced western economies? Do they have their own dental schools and train their own dentists?
Well newsflash: these countries do not fluoridate their water, but they do make available some fluoridated toothpastes and salt.
Further, on German unification, the new government ordered the East German authorities which were fluoridating water to cease doing so. And that’s the way it has been ever since.
And just 50% of NZers don’t drink fluoridated water so the ‘consensus amongst scientists’ apparently only carries so much weight.
I thought this [.pdf] was a reasonable summary of the reasons behind the decline in dental caries in Western Europe.
– Preventative dentistry (even NZ gets a mention with free school-based dental care for kids – note – report is dated 2004)
– Fluoridation – whether topical, tablets or in water, salt etc
– Better brushing
– Cost of toothbrushes/fluoridated toothpaste is reasonable (compared to the cost in Eastern Europe where this is one of the reasons for poorer dental health)
– Socio-economic differences – poor people and migrants from outside Western Europe have worse dental health. Also noted were the geographic disparities in UK, with the south-east (more affluent) having better dental health.
My view is that most people don’t need fluoridated water for dental health in NZ (I have no problem with the safety aspects), but if it’s going to be removed then other preventative measures must be ensured for kids who would otherwise not get the fluoride their teeth need.
Very reasonable position.
Isn’t it that fluoride occurs naturally in the water in most countries.
NZ water and soils are markedly deficient in trace elements.
Including many we need for better health.
Too pure. If you like!
Yes, but only in very specific waterways or bodies of water. Which usually means that 5% or fewer people in that country will benefit.
“but to claim you are right and the near consensus of scientists are wrong is a conspiracy theory.”
No, it’s not. It’s disagreeing with the consensus. Conspiracy theories require the idea that the WHO, WDF, etc conspired in secret to fluoridate the water in certain populations for nefarious ends. Now, it is true that there are people who believe this (that fluoridation is used intentionally to dumb down the population). But it’s not true to say that everyone who opposes fluoridation believes that, or is a conspiracy theorist.
There is nothing in macro’s comment that even hints at conspiracy. I know that this is hard for some people to hear, but sometimes organisations relying on science get it wrong. Sometimes massively. In this case I don’t believe that the MoH, dental/medical associations etc are evil or manipulative. I think that they work from a specific world view about what health is, what risk is, and engage in confirmation bias as a result.
The easiest way to understand this is to look at another big example that doesn’t have the associations with the tinfoil hat brigade. Look at the history of the fat hypothesis. Here’s the best introduction. In it award winning science journalist Gary Taubes examines how the fat hypothesis (that saturated fat causes heart disease) came into being due to factors other than good science.
I know that this is hard for some people to hear, but sometimes organisations relying on science get it wrong.
It’s like a mass socialised amnesia, actually. And ignoring that the operation of science in our society is highly entrenched in personalities, politics, profits, and power bases.
Consider everything from the original “food pyramid” to thalidomide to vioxx to superbugs to the early version of the MMR vaccine which caused fatal/near fatal fevers amongst infants.
But now in this modern age, THIS TIME we have it RIGHT…you can trust us on that!!!
Oh to be able to send you to Dunedin to do a history and philosophy course…
History and philosophy of Science course that is /d’oh
Shall I keep going?
FDA approved breast implants full of industrial silicon, meningitis vaccines which only protect infants for months (if that) not the school years parents were promised, 20 to 30 747’s full of patients dying daily in USA hospitals due to problems directly caused by the medical care given, huge swathes of medical literature absolutely untrustworthy because it turns out they were ghostwritten, and the medical researchers named on the papers simply paid to put their names there.
Shall we keep going?
For over a century, standard procedure with any medical patient was to bleed them, automatically tripling the risk of death, medical doctors of the day saw their patients dying day after day everyday, but kept doing it because all their peers were doing it and refused to upset accepted practice.
But now you’re saying just TRUST US we have our facts and figures right THIS TIME?!
I wonder what your PHILOSOPHY course going to say about this?
*rubs hands together*
I <3 people like you, so full of certainty and almost getting the subject they're talking, but yet so blind.
Mind you, I've also had this discussion with you before, so to save some time, go read what I've said every other fucking time, keywords being "science" "certainty" "peer review" iirc.
Using “andrei” and “climate change” should bring up other relevant philosophy of science material.
Yeah run away mate.
Or you could use some initiative and do some reading 😎
Or you could use some initiative and do some reading
Or you could actually quote something that supports your argument.
But then you couldn’t shift the burden of proof, and the truth might come out.
btw – I’ve already addressed various issues with fluoridation in this thread, so yeah, how about bothering to do some reading? Not that I expect much you, given the (rather low) time-cube crank value of the site linked to in your name.
Well, this is new. You’ve progressed from eye-roll emoticons to an ad hominem.
Next you’ll be saying that I wear a tin-foil hat because I talk about the connection between fluoridation and the eugenics movement, right?
*googles “fluoridation” and “eugenics”*
Beer time I think.
Great comment macro.
“Finally fluorosilicates are not the same as fluoride. They are supposed to disassociate at pH of 7 but the human gut has a pH of around 2-3. And at that level of acidity few Fluoride ions are available.”
Can you please explain what that means in lay terms?
Not really, the lack of links backing him up is the give away, as per usual…
As for the disassociation stuff, hydrogen atoms attached to an acidic functional molecule or group have given pH thresholds before they disassociate from it to form a H+ ion. Same thing happens with bases.
I asked for an explanation a lay person could understand.
Sometimes, you have to google/wiki a term if you don’t know what it means 😛
If you aren’t able to explain in lay terms that’s fine, but please don’t complain about lay people not having enough understanding of science.
It basically means that the fluorosilicates need a neutral pH level to split up from the silicon based part of the chemical, and therefore make free fluoride ion parts available to the body.
But the state of the stomach is highly acidic, so fuck all of the fluorosilicates actually split up, so in reality only a tiny amount of the fluoride ions are freed up and available to the body.
Hey weka, you know you mentioned that thing about ‘scientific arrogance’?
In action, right here on The Standard, by certain know it all types.
However, pH in the intestine is actually slightly basic, about a pH of 8, and through the intestinal lining quite a few minerals are absorbed.
ty for doing that too.
No probs mate all good. Gotta share the wealth.
Yet more evidence that scientific literacy in this country is woefully poor. No wonder crackpots (anti-caccination, anti-flouridation, anti iodised salt, chemtrails, homeopaths etc) get traction.
Stop whinging mate. You might want genetic material and proteins sourced from aborted fetuses or animal organs injected into your blood, but not everyone feels the same way.
You might want genetic material and proteins sourced from aborted fetuses or animal organs injected into your blood
Also – random bits of DNA/RNA floating unprotected by certain proteins, tend to get digested up parts of the innate immune system (DICER is one) and cell membranes typically have to be treated to become permeable to DNA/RNA. Which is why viruses are often used to do genetic transforms
Knowledge decays if you don’t have cause to use it and so strengthen the neural connections that allow you to recall and remember it. And most people don’t need to understand pH disassociation or basic toxicology stuff.
Probably the only way around it in the longterm is decent documentaries being easily available that provide straight forward, easy to get and interesting science education. Which TVNZ seems to have abandoned making use, instead going for reality TV doco’s.
More aiming for you to try and do some research 😛
This is part of the presentation I gave References are appended:
“It is simply assumed that all fluoride compounds dissociate entirely into fluoride ions, and harmless hydration compounds of silicon. Pure fluoride solutions do behave relatively predictably, both over the permissible pH range of municipal water supplies and in the extremely acidic environment of the human stomach. However, fluorosilicates dissociate in highly complex fashion in water, with an amazing range of complex derivatives forming at different pH values, none of whose toxicological properties has been adequately investigated. When fluorosilicates are added to water they dissociate to form fluorosilicate ions with two negative electrical charges, accompanied by either two individual ions of hydrogen H+ (from fluorosilicic acid) or of sodium (Na+) (from sodium fluorosilicate). The individual elements, silicon (Si) and fluorine (F) in the fluorosilicate ion cannot move independently – at neutral pH they act as the complex substance fluorosilicate.
Fluorosilicates are therefore emphatically not identical to ‘fluorides’. In fact, fluorosilicates should not be referred to as ‘silicofluoride’, because this improperly implies that they are fluorides and have similar properties. This argument is often used to mislead audiences into believing that fluorosilicates are chemically interchangeable with true fluorides, and that adding fluorosilicate to drinking water is merely a ‘topping up’ process to augment fluoride concentrations below the ‘optimal’ level for preventing tooth decay.
When simple fluorides are dissolved in water, they are in the ionic form, F+, they remain so at all relevant pH levels, whether in pure water or in the acidity of the stomach.
At around pH of 7, approximately 97% of the fluorine in fluorosilicate added to the water is present in the form of ionised fluoride, F+ . At the very slightly acidic pH of 6, only 27% of the fluorine in fluorosilicate is present as fluoride – the rest is associated with other ions, and forms a number of complex and unstable compounds and ions that change over variable periods of time and at different pH values. At the acidity of the human stomach – pH2 to 3 – the proportion of fluorine atoms that are present as fluoride ions changes dramatically, and effectively no fluorine atoms are present in the ionic state.
In other words, the ingestion of water fluoridated, with hydro fluorosilicic acid has unknown consequences for dental health, because the chemistry is not known.
7. Crosby NT; “Equilibria of Fluosilicate Solutions with Special Reference to The Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies”; J Appl Chem; v19; pp 100-102, 1969
8. Busey RH et al; “Fluorosilicicte Equilibria in Sodium Chloride Solutions from 0 to 60 o C”; Inorg. Chem V 19; pp 758-761, 1980.↵
9. Urbansky, E.T., and Schock, M.R.. Can fluoridation affect water lead levels and lead neurotoxicity? In: American Water Works Association Annual Conference Proceedings, Denver, CO, June 11-15, 2000↵
10. Westendorf J. Die Kinetik der Acetylcholinesterasehemmung und die Beeinflussung der Permeabilitat von Erythrozxytenmembranen durch Fluroid und Fluorokomplex-Jonen. Doctoral Dissertation, Hamburg Universitat Hamburg Fachbereich Chemie, 1975.↵
11. Thomsen, Milton S, High-silica fluosilicic acids : specific reactions and the equilibrium with silica, Am, Chem, Soc. 74 : 1690-1692
Learn2link already. Instead of copying and pasting + the lack of basic research is frankly sad, as the lead-fluoride link hath been look at in greater detail, in actual journals
In other words, the ingestion of water fluoridated, with hydro fluorosilicic acid has unknown consequences for dental health, because the chemistry is not known.
Is bullshit due to the increase in pH once food passes to the small intestine, where the pH raises to 8, thus allowing for fluoride ions to disassociate.
It like you don’t even know there’s a bloody intestine or something T_T
And that chemistry is “lolwat?” Fluoride is highly electronegative, it does not give up any electrons easily and can rip them from other atoms with ease, hence it’s high reactivity in the elemental state, or when forced in an F+ oxidation state in stuff like dioxygen difluoride, aka FOOF, which burns even water. In SiF6 then, result will be obviously F- ion when fluoride disassociates, not fucking F+, which would react with _everything_
Science, basic stuff you know not how to do it seems…
And I stuffed up that link…
Also, here’s the more humorous discription for FOOF:
The other thing where sand will not save ye:
Chlorine tri-fluoride, yes, it has three fluorine atoms and a chlorine atom in the 3+ oxidation state O_O
What you fail to mention is that claim only holds up with concentrations of fluoride much higher than what is found with water fluoridate for health reasons, where either fluoride is leaching from surrounding rocks or is contamination from mining/industry. So yeah, ci-fucking-tation please.
See this for the basics: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3491930/
One more paper:
There are some effects with lower concentrations though, but for therapeutic purposes, an effective concentration of 0.5mg/L appears to have no harm associated with it. Though Ding et al tie harm to levels of visible dental fluorosis, so I don’t have exact concentration thresholds to cite, and indicate that at moderate and above levels of fluorosis there are statistically significant decreases in average IQ scores. Small, but detectable ones.
Quite a nice bit of work actually, as the study faced numerous statistical issues due to the environmental and genetic factors that lead to large variation in IQ, plus none even sample sizes.
just get the fluoride you need for your teeth from brushing ffs.
Oh you already do that every day? Well, you get as much fluoride as your body can possibly find useful already.
Wouldn’t it be nice if that was the case in all homes in NZ, but nah.
So, maybe only 90% of households use fluoridated toothpastes regularly. What’s your point?
Basically from what I can remember (me need sleep) tooth paste + fluoridated water = a lot less cavities than either alone.
Probably because the fluoride ions have better availability to be incorporated via drinking, than from the brief encounter that tooth paste provides. Although using tooth paste does allow for more direct contact with surface enamel, in particular, erosions forming in the enamel.
Moar hunting for papers methinks…
Well, you get as much fluoride as your body can possibly find useful already.
Are your teeth still being formed Nick?
Actually if you read the toothpaste tube it says – “do not swallow”. Which I guess is a let out for Colgate et el
By the way the active ingredient in fluoridated tooth paste is NaF which as I have referred to above, does provide fluoride ions.
But if you are older than 12, your secondary teeth have largely formed. Topical application is the most effective treatment from here on in.
Oh how cute, instead citing recent research/review, let alone papers that aren’t stuck behind paywalls, thus meaning readers can actually read the frakking paper, instead you pick two abstracts out.
Why is that a problem? Abstracts only provide the conclusion(s), leaving people without sufficient information to understand how and why the conclusion(s) were reached, along with lacking vital background information.
Better stuff to read:
– page 8 has the info relevant to this thread, otherwise the paper deals with CaF formation and it’s role in fluoride incorporation into the enamel, providing extremely key info on the role of fluoride therapy and it’s mechanisms. Importantly, it concludes that the anti-microbial properties of the F- when disassociated from the enamel plays a major role in caries prevent. However, it doesn’t discuss fluoridation of water, but a synthesis can be drawn from the paper that in place of topical treatment, water fluoridation probably would have significant effects on caries prevention. Albeit not as significant is tooth brushing is not involved, as this action helps to break up bacterial plaques.
Very interesting paper imho, took sweet fuck all time to find as well, so why the fuck didn’t you use this one? Oh right – you probably just pulled the papers from a online list, instead of bothering to read teh fucking literature and actually look for key papers T_T
There’s also this one:
From the abstract:
The aim of this paper was to critically review the current role of community water fluoridation in preventing dental caries. Original articles and reviews published in English language from January 2001 to June 2006 were selected through MEDLINE database. Other sources were taken from the references of the selected papers. For the past 50 years community water fluoridation has been considered the milestone of caries prevention and as one of the major public health measures of the 20th century. However, it is now accepted that the primary cariostatic action of fluoride occurs after tooth eruption. Moreover, the caries reduction directly attributable to water fluoridation have declined in the last decades as the use of topical fluoride had become more widespread, whereas enamel fluorosis has been reported as an emerging problem in fluoridated areas. Several studies conducted in fluoridated and nonfluoridated communities suggested that this method of delivering fluoride may be unnecessary for caries prevention, particularly in the industrialized countries where the caries level has became low. Although water fluoridation may still be a relevant public health measure in poor and disadvantaged populations, the use of topical fluoride offers an optimal opportunity to prevent caries among people living in both industrialized and developing countries.
Time to find – less than 10 minutes.
Relevance? Smoking fucking high per the bolded piece.
Did you find it? Nope.
Back to undergrad science courses for you methinks so you can learn how to use teh literature, hopefully. Instead of picking the odd paper up in hope of relevance in a scattershot, slipshod fashion
’tis a freaking goldmine of information, use the “all (number) versions” link to hunt down pdfs. For which the synthesis for the lazy is as follows:
1) Fluoridation safety is strongly linked to dosage level, with dosage of below around 1.5mg/L having mainly light dental fluorosis associated with it. Higher concentrations of fluoride are however linked to decreases in IQ and other health concerns, highlighting the need to deal with highly fluoridated public water sources. Cancer-fluoride linkage only holds at very high dosage levels, otherwise no statistical linkage in environmental studies at theraputic dosage levels.
2) Fluoridation of public water supplies does have a high efficacy in dealing with dental decay in populations where topical treatment with tooth paste is low or absent. Thus in much of the developed world it’s not entirely needed unless there is a high rate in dental caries within the population. Note however, that even in the developed world some population segments are at high risk due to socio-economic policies, although these could be dealt with via public education and free health care and thus a cost/benefit analysis is needed in each population case*.
3) Ethically – if going with the actual science, rather than pseudo-science for basis, the main issue comes down to the ethics of mass-medication, which for the cost/benefit frame I use comes out rather simply e.g. For low dosing of fluoride in the water supply leads in high dental decay populations looks rather good per reducing pain and suffering from tooth decay. Low decay populations don’t needed it, in fact, it would probably be more beneficial to educate the public on dental health further, targeting high-risk population segments.
Other frameworks however have obviously different views, depending on how they way emotional/ideological views, as libertarian systems will usually see it as a no, no matter the cost/benefits due to holding the individuals choice high. Nature-based systems will usually focus on the perceived toxicity of fluoride, irrespective of the actual toxicity data. Utilitarian views will range from yes to no, depending on perceived benefits vs social costs and lastly, political frameworks will take into account vox pop, in order to avoid loosing votes, unless swayed by other systems… This however is just a brief, back of the napkin sketch, as ethics and in this case bioethics is extremely rich in terms of arguments around mass medication. So go forth and google it 😛
*e.g. Personally, fluoridation would have probably saved me a lot of pain, as my episode of insomnia a 5 years back cost me two very painful wisdom teeth + subsequent extraction due to difficulties in carrying for self. Still some issues, but will generally brush teeth more often that in previous years due to effects of anti-depressants.
And link-dumping, here’s the papers I’ve been skimming through that are relevant and are available to the public.
A systematic review of the efficacy and safety of fluoridation, Nature, 2007
Systematic Review of Controlled Trials on the Effectiveness of Fluoride Gels… Marinho et al, 2003
No calcium-fluoride-like deposits detected in plaque shortly after a sodium fluoride mouthrinse. Vogel et al 2010
And as per usual, read teh freaking papers, then comment.
Note – this is not a review, merely me hunting and finding relevant info, above review based off current readings + prior readings through the literature and the odd science-blog over the years.
And I so totes <3 how you haven't responded to the bit on fluoride toxicity, which puts your IQ-fluoride claims in fucking context as false for standard therapeutic fluoridation fluoride concentrations.
For some fluoride-IQ context, a friend related how to me how her son was noticeably quiet and withdrawn after he was given fluoride treatment at school. He had no previous exposure to fluoride from water or fluoridated toothpaste.
Somehow I don’t think that’s enough to settle the argument though. It amounts to a survey of one without knowing what other factors need to be taken into account, and it’s not clear what becoming quiet and withdrawn tells us about IQ.
Note – UglyTruth is a complete crank, see the site linked to in their name for the whys/lulz.
And frankly that anecdote only has one use, to show beautifully how you don’t understand how to science, let alone basic statistical methodology. i.e. the child could be withdrawn because of a variety of reasons, but instead of bothering with such a basic empirical start, you instead assume that the fluoride treatment did it and somehow think withdrawn behaviour is linked to IQ
“you don’t understand how to science”
Misrepresentation fail, NickS. I didn’t suggest that a single anecdote is science.
“the child could be withdrawn because of a variety of reasons”
Given his sudden exposure to fluoride and the documentation of Nazis using it to make people docile, it is the simplest explanation for his change in behaviour.
“somehow think withdrawn behaviour is linked to IQ”
Misrepresentation fail #2, NickS. I didn’t imply that.
Except you said this:
For some fluoride-IQ context,
Lulz. For when put in the context of your post, it’s pretty clear you’re suggesting there was a link, heck, you all but shout it out with the last sentence :chuckle:
If you read the context it’s reasonable to interpret my posts as implying that there is a link between fluoride, withdrawn behaviour and IQ.
But fluoride was a separate point when you said that I thought that the was a link between withdrawn behaviour and IQ, thus your misrepresentation.
“you instead assume that the fluoride treatment did it” — this is about fluoride
“and somehow think withdrawn behaviour is linked to IQ” — this isn’t about fluoride.
The point is that the use of fluoride by the Nazis to induce docile behaviour is documented from two sources (Major George Racey Jordan, and Charles Eliot Perkins), and begin withdrawn and being docile can look the same.
The anecdote is consistent with the historical use of fluoride by the Nazis.
At around 8pm in Istanbul, one man stood in Taksim Square…and continued to stand. Within hours, #duranadam, or #standingman, was trending worldwide on Twitter. Police broke up the protest at 2am. Watch the progression..
Its repeating history. Depression economics and banning alcohol. Turkey stupid leader can’t understand that bring civil strife to his nation when so many of his neighbors are unstable, or positively imploding… …shakes head… …how is that strong leadership. The whole point of moderate alcohol drinking is about relaxing, sitting down, letting your guard down, letting your fears out and meeting minds, so finding the bridge between what looks like a chasm.
Religion dogma is not a way to run a country, Turkey is doomed while this instability remains in power, what a moron.
And lets get involved in the Syrian War on the side of Sunni Muslims while we’re at it
Another disgusting slur from CV to justify his continued support for dictatorship and mass murder.
Divide and rule the oldest trick in the book.
Colonial Viper said in a previous thread that using gas weapons against the insurgents wouldn’t be a war crime in his opinion. People like Colonial Viper are a partner to murder. And I had thought that comment was low.
Now CV has reached a new low expounding sectarian divide and rule tactics to support of the Syrian dictatorship.
And lets get involved in the Syrian War on the side of Sunni Muslims while we’re at it
We all know which side Colonial Viper is on. He has stated it several times.
Colonial Viper has come out openly on the side of the regime. Even going as far as to malign the reputation of eyewitness reporters like Anita McNaught.
What is it with you CV?
You have never been to Syria. You have never met the Syrian people. But you support their oppressor. You are either profoundly ignorant, or deeply racist in your dismissal of the roots of the Syrian revolt and the whole Arab Spring as a Western plot.
Either way CV you have no credibility.
The revolt against the tyrant arose from all sectors of society secular, religious, Christian and Moslem. The first protests got their impetus from the Arab spring and from a deep resentment of the extreme neo liberal reforms and government privatisations implemented by Assad that impoverished the population while rewarding those in Assad’s closest circle, many who gained personal ownership of state assets.
The original demand of the protesters were demands for mild democratic reforms toward more democracy. Instead of granting the relatively minor demands, Assad responded with massive state violence to suppress the protests. A decision he probably has cause to regret now.
Aside from the massive military support from the neo-Stalinist Putin. It is Assad’s ability to exploit religious differences, to divide the population against each other that has preserved his regime.
In the past Assad presented a secular and progressive face and was toasted by the West. One of only a few foreigners and only Arab leader to have stayed as a guest in Buckingham Palace. But faced with a mass peaceful revolt, almost overnight Assad performed an amazing transformation from secular to Shiite. Posing as saviour of the Alawite minority he armed and incited the notorious Shabiha death squads to attack the protests and murder the protesters, backed up by police and military. The crimes committed by the Shabiha in the name of the dictator have ensured the Alawite community are now in death lock with the regime. Which has made this dispute so intractable and sectarian.
Through the two years of this revolt,Colonial Viper’s support for this dictatorship has been unwavering. Though his justifications for supporting mass murder have changed.
First off Assad was fighting a just war against US and Western Imperialists.
After that CV tried to depict Assad’s war against his people as a war against foreign Islamist terrorists linked to Al Qaeda
Following the dictators script, CV is now depicting the civil war in Syria as a religious dispute between Sunni and Shia. This is just CV’s latest excuse for supporting autocracy and dictatorship and belittling the Arab Spring the greatest mass people’s movement in recent (if not all) history.
This apologist for what amounts to fascism, should be ashamed for his continued support of a mass murderer and war criminal.
Oh fuck off Jenny.
You’re supporting a proxy war of foreign powers and foreign Islamist fighters inside Syria and still trying to frame it as a popular revolt by the citizens.
What did you come down in the last shower? Or do you just parrot lines from CNN?
Do you honestly really think life in Egypt and Libya is actually better for the citizens, after their (phoney) “Arab Spring” “revolts”? After Al Qaeda has set up base in Libya and the Muslim Brotherhood has gained massive political power in Egypt?
The USA has wanted to take down Syria for over a decade as part of the list of nations it wanted done away with – General Wesley Clark said that explicitly – and here you are shit swallowingly stupid and gullible enough to support it.
German authorities fear return of battle hardened Islamist extremists from Syria to Germany
I guess now you think the German mainstream media are also running propaganda for Assad?
You really are fucking thick.
Hey Jenny, do you support the arming of foreign Islamist fighters in Syria with American supplied heavy weapons and training?
Yet to happen. Your abuse is getting more hysterical and extreme.
I wonder why. Maybe you would like to tell us.
Do you support Assad because it is Labour Party policy?
Did you also support our involvement in Afghanistan for the same reason?
Your support for the mass murder of the Syrian people from the air can have no moral justification.
Over 30 thousand disappeared even before the hostilities began.
Syria a safe haven for CIA rendition for the purposes of torture.
While at the same time Assad is celebrated in the West as a moderate and put up for a night in Buckingham Palace by the Queen.
What fine company you keep.
Some other questions for you CV.
And aren’t you worried that your open support for massive blood shed unleashed by the Assad regime, might put your Labour Party membership in Jeopardy?
Now that the Turkish Spring has broken out, do you also support Prime Minister Erdogan’s harsh crackdown on the right to peaceful protest?
Noting that Erdogan has claimed that his crackdown is based on the West’s similar crackdown on the Occupy Wall Street movement?
If such a protest movement broke out here. Against let’s say, the Labour led government’s determination to proceed with Deep Sea Oil drilling. (A quite possible occurrance). Would you support the same sort of massive state violence against the protesters as unleashed in Turkey?
Edrogan is one of the main supporters for expanding NATOs military intervention in Syria, as well as acting as a logistics and advisory base for the foreign rebels fighting in Syria.
He is supporter of Armed regime change in a neighbouring country while suppressing protestors in his own.
You basically have no fucking clue, and stop trying to be my spokesperson on issues when you have no fucking clue.
Why CV can’t you answer the questions?
Why CV do you support mass murder?
Why CV do you support a psychopath who murders his own people from the air?
Why CV do you support a torture state that provided a safe haven for CIA renditions?
There has been no Nato intervention in Syria.
Why CV do you keep telling such obvious lies?
Why CV do you think it wouldn’t be a war crime if Assad gassed his opponents to death?
Why CV do you denigrate the Arab Spring?
Are you CV of the opinion that only white predominantly Christian people are prepared to struggle and die for democracy and freedom?
Considering your open support for the Assad regime, I think these are fair questions, why CV can’t you answer them?
Why CV do you reply with profanity and abuse?
Do you think this is fit and rational behaviour?
And finally why CV do you refuse to tell us whether you would or would not support the same sort of suppression of protest in this country?
When, not if, large protests are mounted against the Labour led coalition government’s determination to proceed with deep sea oil drilling. CV will your party in government be setting the police and the naval forces against them?
Why CV are you so sure that your party backs your support for bloody suppression of popular protest?
Is this CV what we can expect here from your government?
Or are you CV just one lone isolated extremist with no support at all within the Labour Party, and are in fact bringing your party into disrepute with your support for mass murder and torture?
“Is the science on fluoridation really settled?”
(Note where this article has been published………….. )
Compare this with the statement from Professor Sir Peter Gluckman:
2013 Auckland Mayoral candidate who OPPOSES the fluoridation of public drinking water supplies
Quite. Also note where and how they published it, and who it was actually written by –
Un-edited statements from the health sector and beyond
Is the science on fluoridation really settled?
Queenslanders for Safe Water Air and Food Inc
Tuesday 18 June 2013, 3:02PM
Media release from Queenslanders for Safe Water Air and Food Inc
Remember, the science was supposedly settled on asbestos, leaded petrol and Vioxx, before it was shown that the science was wrong.
Also the “settled science” of global warming.. sorry, I mean climate change.
Strange that the science has generally been “settled” in favour of those who promote stuff that kills people.
Carnegie-Mellon university was the leading defender of the asbestos industry. Andrew Mellon was involved in the introduction of fluoridated water.
Dr. Robert Kehoe, defender of industry in fluoride pollution lawsuits, and proponent of water fluoridation also spent much of his career defending leaded petrol.
Here’s a really fucking neat idea, how about you bother to actually read the fucking science literature?
It’s as easy as going to http://scholar.google.co.nz/ and using search terms + looking at citations, made even easier with tabbed browsing. And usually, papers that are available to the public (look at “versions” to see if a pdf etc is available) usually discuss and review prior research.
Reading, hard it is not.
And your point is?
Reading comprehension – beyond it for you it is…
So you don’t actually have a point to make, you were just pretending that there is some science somewhere which supports the eugencists’ fluoridation agenda, right?
Facial expression, argue by do you.
Balls of steel, you have.
This is an interesting article in the Herald. David Cunliffe says Labour will be watching “like a hawk” to see if there is any dubious government involvement in the tax dispute related to Mediaworks collapse.
Also interesting is the image that the NZH has used to accompany the article – of Parker, Cunliffe & Hipkins.
What does Parker, Cunliffe and Hipkins have in common?
They did not accept Sky City Rugby Hospitality Box invites while the party were attacking the Nats for doing a stupod deal with Sky City.
The three of them have a great future together if they rise above the game being orchestrated by Grant Robertson.
It’s alright, It’s Ok
Oooh La La
Interesting observation indeed, but Boadicea needs to at least supply a modicum of an explanation as to why she has made such a statement. It is presumably based on something he/she knows about or perhaps has witnessed.
It was a response to Karol’s remarks in 7. She remarked on the Herald story on Cunliffe’s comments on Mediaworks. And on the use of a photo of the three non-boxers. It got me thinking about how those who supported Shearer in January now feel about Shearer and the games that Grant Robertson is playing.
That photo was taken at the 2011 Ellerslie Conference at which Mallard and Grant Roberton used Paddy Gower to frame Cunliffe.
Would just be a good start if they put Cunliffe on the front bench, wouldn’t it?! That photo was interesting – and did highlight the higher performing MPs at the moment – only one of them is being left languishing. What a flamin’ waste of talent.
Correction, the 2012 conference last November.
And I’m a Celtic Queen who kicks Tory/Roman asses.
May the light of your soul guide you.
May the light of your soul bless the work that you do
with the secret love and warmth of your heart.
May you see in what you do the beauty of your own soul.
May the sacredness of your work bring healing, light
and renewal to those who work with you
and to those who see and receive your work.
May your work never weary you.
May it release within you wellsprings of
refreshment, inspiration and excitement.
May you be present in what you do.
May you never become lost in bland absences.
May the day never burden.
May dawn find you awake and alert,
approaching your new day with dreams, possibilities and promises.
May evening find you gracious and fulfilled.
May you go into the night blessed, sheltered and protected.
May your soul calm, console and renew you.
Who wrote that, CV?
Edit: just did my own research, and my suspicion was right. John O’Donohue. Funnily enough, my godmother was an O’Donohue.
Thanks Boadicea. As you seem to have recognised, it was a genuine question. The reason I asked is because Robertson is coming to our local electorate meeting next month and I’m going to be very interested in what he says or maybe… what he doesn’t say.
“the game being orchestrated by Grant Robertson”
Grant was ok during the Clark Administration. The H3 thing kinda was highly complimentary. Without H1 and H2, he is more like CO2.
Having said that, he will make an effective cabinet minister but there are others more ready than him for a higher position on the front bench.
On Property Investment:
9% live overseas.
“9% live overseas”
That is not a small number, that is a very large number that distorts the market. Cut that lot of bludgers out and watch the prices ease back. Then do it to rural land and all other land and watch capital values drop waaay back…
… then watch the amount of work we all have to do to pay the banks interest shrink back and we wont know what to do with the extra moola in our pockets.
High capital values of anything assist nobody but money lenders.
This is a truth.
I suspect it’s not just the overseas resident buyers that are likely to distort the market. New residents, who acquired their money overseas in places like Aussie, the UK and China, are likely to be able to spend more than those who have resided long term in NZ.
PS. I thought UK buyers were up there with the Aussies and Chinese? OK not quite as high a %age.
A BNZ-Real Estate Institute survey suggests 8% to 9% of houses are being sold to people living abroad.
Real estate agents report that about 22% of overseas buyers, and vendors, are Australian, 20% of are Chinese and 13% are from Britain.
BNZ chief economist Tony Alexander said more data is needed on ways to cool housing demand, such as whether to impose a tax on overseas buyers.
He estimates half the overseas buyers are either immigrants buying before they move here, or New Zealanders returning home – especially from Australia and the United Kingdom.
A BNZ-Real Estate Institute survey suggests 8% to 9% of houses are being sold to people living abroad.
Real estate agents report that about 22% of overseas buyers, and vendors, are Australian, 20% of are Chinese and 13% are from Britain.
BNZ chief economist Tony Alexander said more data is needed on ways to cool housing demand, such as whether to impose a tax on overseas buyers.
He estimates half the overseas buyers are either immigrants buying before they move here, or New Zealanders returning home – especially from Australia and the United Kingdom.
There is no benefit to having foreign landlords. None. Nada. Zip.
It is all bullshit.
Or foreign owned banks. Etc.
There is no benefit to having foreign ownership. None. Nada. Zip.
Are the Australians and Chinese investors NZ residents? Can’t quite make sense of that.
Somewhere, over the rainbow…
-affectionately yours, Fire and Forget.
Just Remember, that Death is not the end! (although…)
Thanks for that Rogue Trooper. Just lovely, as darkness falls and the street lights come on.
After framing Arthur Allan Thomas,
senior cops joked about it in the Mangere Hotel
by Nicholas Jones, New Zealand Herald, 1 May 2013
Senior police officers joked about framing Arthur Allan Thomas for the Crewe murders while drinking at a bar, says a woman who worked there.
Queenie Edmonds said she overheard the talk while working at the Mangere Hotel 43 years ago at the time of the investigation. She heard police officers, including Bruce Hutton, who led the investigation, call Thomas a “half-wit”….
Most of us read this six weeks go unless I’ve missed something new within ?
Since when has this been a breaking news channel? I’ve posted up stuff about things that have happened much longer ago than six weeks ago—e.g. the Surafend massacre of 1918—and until now nobody has caviled about the time lag.
Fair play to you, though, dumrse, I do appreciate your point. This article did appear a while ago now, but I had not seen it before. I wanted to share it with others, who probably feel exactly the same as you do.
[lprent: we don’t care about old stuff. There is a post up at present that *ends* in the recent date of 1915. What we care about is boring drones – trolls in particular. ]
PRENT: [dyspeptic cough] What we care about is boring drones – trolls in particular. Cough, cough, snarl….
BREEN: [looks around in bewilderment] W-w-w-w-what? You talking to ME?
Nah. I tolerate you just as I do with most people commenting here. I tolerate differing views because I seldom *agree* with anyone. But I expect that most people are probably correct to one degree or another because almost every argument is in an area of grey. It is usually so easy to pick holes in any argument. All you have to do is to look for the areas where the data is weak or subject to differing interpretations.
In the end everything is a question of probability and careful definition about the bounds of asserted rules. In other words, I was trained in science, and it colours everything else.
But anyone can tell pretty easily when I target a drone. Have you ever known an actual troll to last more than a week before I start needling them? I just watch until I see them going repetitive, showing an inability to deal intelligently with others interacting with them, and acting like every half arsed troll that I have seen since 1980 when I first started playing around on computer nets at Waikato Uni. I get interested in their ability to adapt to the environmental shifts – like a moderator or sysop taking an interest in them. The ones unable to adapt usually aren’t useful to anyone else without a sharp lesson in manners.
Admittedly there have been a few that are in the intermediate zone that I watch for longer. They can argue and oft-times pretty well. Then I’m interested in a different trait – the type of tactics they are using. If the tactics chosen disrupt the discussions or the tactic becomes too narcissistic so the discussion is all about them, then it isn’t good for the comments part of the site.
But you’re well past that. I’d just anticipate having to warn you on the odd occasion as your enthusiasm wanders over the bounds and possibly the rare ban when you don’t pay heed to the warnings.
Cracking up at TV3’s lame arse concerted attack on the Greens and their policy idea of devaluing the dollar somewhat by creating sovereign currency and spending it into the economy, and Jonkeys dead faced lying broken record ” The greens want to print money, and other wacko ideas…” comments, the private banks PRINT MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR EVERY DAY, you fk*n idiot, every time someone takes out a loan; it’s called double entry book keeping, and the FRACTIONAL RESERVE SYSTEM. of course he must know that, but the retarded political reporter obviously didn’t or he might have mentioned it as a point of balance. What a wank and another complete fail from mainstream media. The world economy is awash in over inflated, leveraged debt based fiat currency, hence ever increasing debt, housing bubbles and recurrent crises. It’s pretty basic, if 96 odd percent of world currency in circulation is based on debt, what are you going to pay it off with numb nuts? more debt? How are going to pay the interest on the old debt? CREATE MORE MONEY, oh but only the banks are allowed to do that at interest ! …. it’s frkn obvious. At least the Greens currency would be debt free and help our trade deficit. Good enough for every major economy in the world in recent times, but for Key …. WHOA THAT’S WACKO MAN!!! What a god forsaken tosser. At least the greens have got some vision you gormless corporate bum boy nonce.! Anyway that’s my rant for the day.
“gormless corporate bum boy nonce”. Beautiful !
“It’s a dark day for New Zealand – and strangely, no one has noticed. No one.
New Zealand has established a horrible new precedent: We have now said to the world we don’t have to honour the international laws we have pledged to uphold. Countries around the world who have asylum numbers in the tens of thousands annually look at us, confounded.
I’m not sure what is more frightening: Now that this precedent has fallen, how easily others will crumble too. Or, in our innocence, that we keep telling ourselves it will never happen here.
Wake up. It has just begun.”
Can’t delete the duplicates!
Premature perhaps, because The Vote has only just started, but I’m compelled to my keyboard by the spectacle of the well off, junk-blinged Rankin (down to lack of taste, not lack of money) making nought of the impact of multi-generational poverty. While having a side bet with a throwaway acknowledgment that “Oh Yes, poverty’s a terrible thing.”
Fuck’n wannabee bitch ! Wear the mocassins of poverty in 2013 you right wing, thirsty for power baggage !
Celia Lashley amazing on Child Poverty on the Vote.
Oooh, forgot about that, and QoT’s tweeting…
(Lashlie is awesome everytime I’ve heard her speak).
Love how #voteWTF is busier than #thevotenz
Paul – Yes there are still some “real people” out there, and she is one of them.
Too many follow the misguided commercial and self centred agenda, faces full of make up, dressing up to please, trying to flirt with the boss, to get a pay-rise and what else goes on. There is much mental, emotional and spiritual prostitution out there now, and the commercial advertising drives it further by the day, many know no other values, but that.
And then the religious nutters, brainwashed to death, not dissimilar to radical fascists like the Nazis and Hitler Youth were, not for the same cause of course, but to “serve” to whosover chooses to “lead” and exploit them.
What the hell has become of this society, what has become of the people on this planet???
Celia Lashlie…….you bring tears to my eyes.
And you Hannah Tamaki make me want to puke you outrageous bitch ! Yeah, you know all the bad stuff, just like Bling Girl Christine……you’re as rich as fuck by virtue of being married to the Charlatan Supreme Bishop. And complicit in the fraud he engages to pay for your bling and your bullshit hair. How much did your hairdresser cost at the last coiff’ Baby ? $280…….$350 ? How much work you had done on the face Darling ? How much did that cost ?
Know wonder this country’s fucked !
No Hannah, YOU don’t buy your whanau gifts. The tithers in the Destiny Church buy your whanau the gifts you give. Maggot !
“Get my husband on the show if you wanna ask those questions……” You mean the tithing don’t pay for your hairdos……the tithing don’t pay for your facejobs, the gifts you give to your whanau ?
Complicit cow looking down your paid for nose at the very people you sneer at. Fuck Off !
Hannah Tamaki….the hairstyle, the clothes, the utter hypocrisy of these rich out of touch …
Yeah, money makes no difference.
The result of “The Vote” is proof enough to me, that New Zealand has a gigantic problem. That problem is a self serving, self righteous, moralistic, unsocial, betraying and divisive “middle class”!
That is also why I have been so damned outspoken on matters, that is why I have been so critical of much of NZ society, that is why I have repeatedly been thinking that I wished I should never have come back “home”.
It is a disgrace, it is a shame for this society, it is also partly the reason “the left” is not getting traction, because too many in the supposed “middle class” are desperately trying all to align themselves with the “coping lot”, the managing “Kiwi battlers”, more so the successful makers, the top percentages really running the show, they want to grease up and feel they will in return get protection and favours, so they do themselves not drop into hopeless poverty!
In fact, especially in the more urban areas, the larger centres, there is a fair number of society doing OK, maybe not well, but they struggle and still manage, others do very well indeed, and they rather have a dodgy John Key run the show, than share the cake with others. Their house values go up, and they think of making a good sale and earn a tax free profit, rather than think of the wellbeing of the whole country and society. That is too many out there.
We are facing a very divided and divisive society, that probably never existed in this country before. The bottom 20 or 25 percent have nobody, but some on the left, stand up for them. I take my hat off to Hone Harawire, who performed excellently, who said what had to be said, but still, the vote was not in his favour, and not in that cause for abolishing poverty in New Zealand.
It is so disgraceful what New Zealand has become like. Seeing the studio filled with religious and biased Destiny Church supporters would well have tilted the rest of the public sentiment, initially 68 per cent saying it is parenting, that is the main issue for child neglect and poverty.
People like Tamaki should be locked up for extorting 10 per cent in tithing from poor people, who will follow him and his hypocritical wife to whatever they want. Same the other churches that manipulate people, and still have too much power in this country, and moralise and participate in stigmatisation.
Forget not the church that owns and runs Sanitarium, earning hundreds of millions tax free, and paying NO tax. So “humane” of them to donate some weet bix for low quality breakfast in schools. In Europe, especially more socially aware Scandinavia, they would not beg for corporates and churches to offer food for kids at school.
Shame on those self righteous New Zealanders there are too many of, that is those frowning on the poor and lecturing about parenting. You are not worth to live in your own land. Go and learn poverty in Africa for a change, to understand how some too many in numbers live in parts of your YOUR own country!
Yes the result of the vote was predictable and depressing.
As Celia Lashley, blaming poor parenting gets middle New Zealand off the hook and so they can forget the problem.
It also gets the 1% off the hook because the destruction they have wrought to society since the advent of neo-liberalism is ignored
Members of the 63% are now sufficiently self-centred that the issue will only become a problem when it personally and directly affects them.
The sheeple follow the dog whistle call……
64% say poverty ain’t got stuff all to do with it. Jesus Christ ! From their bloody armchairs.
Yeah but you have to remember that there are whole lot of people like myself who weren’t watching because we believe it betrays kids and poor people to even ask such a stupid fucking question as they did on the programme.
Yeah because policy should be made for pure emotive reasons and not involve any debate whatsoever.
To generate useful knowledge from inquiry, you have to ask a sensible question. The question asked tonight was designed to create controversy not knowledge. It was idiotic. Poverty and parenting issues should be dealt with separately, rather than being juxtaposed as either/or.
In your opinion.
Obviously. But are you suggesting that one can generate useful knowledge by asking a stupid question?
Whether a question is stupid or not is subjective. Obviously the person asking is unlikely to think it is stupid otherwise they wouldn’t have asked it. All questions have the ability to elicit information that was unknown. In that regard no question is stupid in my mind.
Policy should be made for the well being of ALL, at least the vast majority of society, and the latter is a compromise some make, but I do NOT stand for. You are middle class self-serving traitor, as I guess, and you only “care” about “your kind of country”, not all that live in it.
Your comments here and on other blogs betray your self serving betrayal and lies, are you really feeling “good” in the skin you were born in?
Hone Harawira lost it for his side when he admitted he and his wife were better parents and had less stresses when the lived with virtually nothing in Northland than when they had some in Auckland. Stupid guy didn’t realise what he said until too late.
They combined the issues of poverty and parenting into a game show. And people treat it like it was reality and it was all the evidence and discussion that was needed. After they had heard from the people actually working on the ground with it. Jesus.
No, they treated it like a good old fashioned political debate. Of course we could do away with debating topics and just accept the views of a few select people as gospel truth on the matter. Would you prefer that?
No. You are right. I just would’ve preferred a higher vote of the don’t knows. Because I feel hopelessly under-informed. And I think combining the two issues in that way is too simplistic. But it is what I expected.
Gosman, it was an hour of television (minus ads).
What did you/we learn from it? What are you now better informed about? Examples?
There was lots to learn.
I learnt that Hone Harawira actually believes that having money can make raising children more difficult rather than easier.
I learnt that the poverty line is $30,000 income for a family of four after housing costs have been taken in to account.
I learnt that many of the proposed solutions to Child poverty are essentially turning back the clock to some perceived golden age in NZ pre 1984.
I learnt that many New Zealanders don’t buy into the overly emotive arguments that people use in this area.
“Hone Harawira lost it for his side when he admitted he and his wife were better parents and had less stresses when the lived with virtually nothing in Northland than when they had some in Auckland. Stupid guy didn’t realise what he said until too late.”
Poverty takes many forms. It’s not the lack of money that’s the point, it’s the lack of resources that enable one to live beyond constant survival stress. I can well imagine that someone might do better on less money if they had other things supporting them (eg family and community support, lower stress, better environment etc). But the fact that someone in that situation does better doesn’t mean that everyone on a low income can do better. You’ve really missed the point if that’s what you think.
Hone did also imply he and his wife were making extra efforts, and it was out of the extraordinary, as far as I can recall. Stop your disrespecful hate campaign against one of the very few politicians in this country, who even cares. Get your Dunne Done Job to the surface, hey, what a self righteous prick is he, and also Banks, the dodger, liar and criminal.
Dunne dared to claim on Radio Live tonight, he was being persecuted, no other party was expected to deliver the kind of evidence of membership as UF, but on Checkpoint, RNZ, it was made clear, that all parties have the same rules, only Dunne tried to get away with presenting a simple spread sheet for membership proof.
They want more proof, and the electoral commission is right. We get people like you, part of the promoters of lying private commercial media, that tell lies and misrepresent, and tell people crap.
Get fucking honest man, and face the music. Your media and favoured people are ALL corrupt!
I only saw the last half of The Vote, that was enough. Celia Lashlie was outstanding. It’s amazing what impact you can make on telly if you a) know about stuff b) care about stuff c) can communicate. It’s not about better media training – she just had something to say and said it (politicians -*cough* Labour caucus – please take note).
The result is meaningless: “Do you not think that poverty isn’t a bigger issue or is it parenting or isn’t it? Text Yes and No now!” Plus, any team with Garner the bombastic bouffhead is losing from the start.
“It’s amazing what impact you can make on telly if you a) know about stuff b) care about stuff c) can communicate.”
d) have deep emotional and social intelligence.
Imagine if we had politicians with that.
Celia Lashley for Prime Minister
The Vote? What a circus. X-factor on poverty. Depressing.
Imagine if we had politicians with that.
Hmmmm people with those characteristics tend to run a mile.
It wasn’t you that said recently that politics is for hard people was it? 😉
(someone said it when I was pointing out that parliament is a horrible place that inherently excludes people who would bring in useful skills were it a kinder place).
In response to some pollie being made fun of or insulted? Ahhhhh…probably
Stick a fork in him, he’s Dunne:
I think the sad reality is that he’ll cobble together the nutters, sympathizers and sycophants sometime between now and the next election. And thanks to the new precedent set by the Speaker we’ll just keep paying him like he’s leader of a party until he’s registered a new one (cheers, Dave!)
So which side was Hone on? I actually like the way he is passionate that there are things wrong with his people but at first he started off grizzling about poverty but ended up arguing for the yes vote??
I think he would like to turn the clock back to the 70’s when many Maori were employed in out of date freezing works and other lower skilled work places (such as car and clothing factories) which lost money hand over fist.
I actually sympathize with his view point coz for many of that generation who had worked in the same place for 20-30 years retraining into something new was just too hard.
The question has to be how do you retrain a lost generation into a new society where stable jobs that last for 40 years don’t exist?
“I think he would like to turn the clock back to the 70′s when many Maori were employed in out of date freezing works and other lower skilled work places (such as car and clothing factories) which lost money hand over fist.”
Jimmie – what was all that retraining about?
Some was construction work, others was a lot of a waste of time. The construction skills came in handy for building under the credit financed property boom until 2007, but after that Maori had to go to Australia to get jobs in the area.
Other skills were often low and even lower skilled jobs they were offered. If you only offer low-low training courses, what do you bloody expect them to perform?
I am sure many Maori can do better than what WINZ, MSD and other agencies expect them to do.
But would any body ever bother to engage more constructively, to work closely, to also ask the harder questions, to come as a partner and deliver? I have seen what goes on in NZ, even if it is under PC type agendas, there is always either big nanny or daddy behind it, knowing best, and stifling all incentives and initiatives.
NZ society is like a mentally and spiritually manipulated or even “castrated” country, where few have true rights and freedoms. I know some countries never perceived as “free” which offer more true freedom than NZ offers it’s citizens.
Time to get fair and real on matters, and face the music.
A group of whistleblowers, including a number of aviation experts, have come forward in a new documentary to claim that the official explanation for the crash of TWA Flight 800 was wrong and a gas tank explosion did not bring down the flight off the coast of Long Island 17 years ago.
However, the six whistleblowers, all part of the original investigation team, stopped short of saying the plane was shot down.
Richard Russel’s affadavit describes a radar tape which showed a non-beacon target travelling at a speed of 600 knots before the explosion. Many witnesses reported something like a missile colliding with the airliner.
Just a cut and paste, on Brasil, maybe to be examined, but really, generally there is an element of truth!
Brazilians are NOT known to protest, this is SERIOUS!
They protest quite a lot, especially students, but it normally turns into a party. When the people from the favelas protest, it turns into police shootings. It’s been a long time since anything on this scale has happened.
I’m not sure what to make of it yet, but the right wing are certainly getting involved, trying to exclude the smaller left parties and pretend this is something patriotic, above parties. There are also many reported incidents of agent provocateurs.
Protesta Brasil –
So NZ is all happy go lucky and the rest of the world is not important, right?! Maybe for some.
Hey get a fucking life, get a fucking wake up call, while you sleep, things are happening, all over the place even in Brazil!!!
I am furious about the indifference, the slackness, the wannabe shit going on in some other places, this is REAL, it is the next best thing to what happened in 1973 Chile, maybe a game changer.
Well, perhaps I am over courageous, but Brazilians are NOT know to go on the streets for things, this may be something they really care about. Take note, take care, take sides, and perhaps learn about Latin America and take a bloody stand!
It was not meant to say “..the best thing to what happened in 1973 in Chile”. What I meant was not that year, but the year that Allende became president of Chile, which was of course a fair bit earlier.
Milan court sentences Dolce and Gabbana to 20 months prison for tax fraud
Yes, that D&G.
The Standard is proudly powered by
WordPress. Theme by Mummybot.
62 queries. 1.124 seconds.