Open mike 21/07/2012

96 comments on “Open mike 21/07/2012 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Carol 1

   21 July 2012 at 7:26 am

   I am increasingly thinking that cities like Auckland are on the wrong track in moving towards a more centralised organisation. I want to link together comments from a couple of threads yesterday.

   On the lost in suburbia thread, a couple of us argued for decentralisation:

   I commented on the way the shift to Auckland supercity has meant more people traveling across and into Auckland, and more cultural establishments/buildings etc being situated in the centre of Auckland:

   http://thestandard.org.nz/stranded-in-suburbia/comment-page-1/#comment-495847

   Weka referred to “Australian sustainability expert David Holmgren” who argues for decentralising CBDs and creating more localised and accessible hubs.

   http://thestandard.org.nz/stranded-in-suburbia/comment-page-1/#comment-495932

   Penny Bright, on open mike last night, provides evidence of a conflict of interest involved in the buying of the ASB building by the Auckland Council, in order to make it a bigger HQ for the council:

   http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-20072012/comment-page-1/#comment-495949

   It seems Peter George Wall is both one of 2 directors of the business, Brookfield Multiplex, that currently owns the building. He is also on the executive team of Auckland Council Property Ltd.

   All this Auckland Council centralisation seems to be in the interests of the cultural and business elite in central Auckland. This is what those of us in west and South Auckland didn’t want when we voted Brown for mayor, rather than Banks. But it seems the crony capitalists of central Auckland are still getting their way, while a large proportion of the less wealthy and powerful languish in the suburbs.

   I should temper this argument with acknowledgement that some local boards have significant plans to upgrade their areas as important living and working hubs (e.g. in New Lynn and Massey), but those boards have been created to have less power than the top of the Auckland Council pyramid.
   • Ad 1.1

     21 July 2012 at 8:12 am

     It is the most spectacular legislated monopoly, and those characteristics get really evident within the CCOs.

     In terms of supporting elites, my principle concern is that there is a helluvalot being spent on transport capex, but very little on social housing, directed toward softening the massive housing crisis.

     Are there any structural changes proposed for this CCO setup from either the Greens or Labour?

     Pretty unfortunate the way Brownlee squashed the Mayor’s ideas for alternative funding. The alternative funding package is the gap between business as usual and the Auckland Plan targets i.e. no alternative funding, probably no rail tunnel, probably no Avondale-Southdown line, probably no Harbour tunnel, etc etc. AucklandTransportBlog have been the best at holding Tranport CCO to account.

     Could probably do with a property-focussed blog to scrutinize as well.
     • Carol 1.1.1

       21 July 2012 at 8:21 am

       Yes, the whole CCO set-up, and central government veto are at the heart of the problem. I see that bomber also blogged about it yesterday:

       http://www.tumeke.blogspot.co.nz/2012/07/lens-12-2day-monthly-11million-dinner.html

       Here’s the problem for Len. He won. National had Rodney Hide ram through the Super City annexation through Parliament under urgency for one purpose and one purpose only, to ease and speed the sale of Auckland’s Assets.

       The ridiculously named ‘Council Controlled Organizations’ were stacked with right wing appointees to quietly work on ‘asset rationalization’ far from public and SuperCity Council scrutiny.
       [..]
       Len is very good at bringing people to the table, but this is a fight, not a meeting of minds. Len has got to stop being the weak nice guy and actually throw some punches at the Government or else come election time he’ll be perceived to have stood for nothing more than siding with the Ports over their disgusting bullyboy tactics against the union.
     • aerobubble 1.1.2

       23 July 2012 at 1:54 pm

       Auckland is an isthmus. Cities like London grew out of villages that then grew and connected up, making rail much more efficient since they just place the stations under.

       Auckland is an isthmus. Long ago Auckland should have been creating a line of town centers leading south, and have by now connected them with stations in the town centers, not a km off to the side.

       NZ will be forever be shackled in its growth due to the Aucklands nature limitations.
       • Carol 1.1.2.1

         23 July 2012 at 2:07 pm

         Ah, but there lies some of Auckland’s potential future transport…. just like Maori did way back then – water transport – sail etc.
       • Colonial Viper 1.1.2.2

         23 July 2012 at 3:33 pm

         NZ will be forever be shackled in its growth due to the Aucklands nature limitations.

         Now was that a good thing or a bad thing 🙂
   • OneTrack 1.2

     21 July 2012 at 9:53 pm

     Well talk to Len and sort it out. what’s the problem? Just as well John Banks didn’t get in, isn’t it?
2. Solidarnosc 2

   21 July 2012 at 8:05 am

   Pro-democracy Labour Branches, LECs and Sector groups must have their Amendments to the NZ Councils proposed rules lodged by the end of August. They need to watch the four month rule.
   Read the full Constitution carefully and look at where the rule changes remove or shrink many components of democracy. There is some erroneous guidance in emails from the Gen Sec as to what the NZ Council and the Conference can and cannot decide. Get stuck onto the nuts and bolts of how our party works. Much of the findings of the advisory group that visited all the regions (Rick Barker et al) has had the eyes picked out of it. The time has come for those who see the big picture to roll up their sleeves and to get stuck in. Otherwise the democracy of the Labour Party will be pulled from under your feet. BE ALERT.
3. Stephen Doyle 3

   21 July 2012 at 8:34 am

   It’s interesting isn’t it. We all have our barrows to push. Living where I do, I cannot understand why the park and ride at Silverdale was stopped, and Penlink put on the back burner.
   Looking at the broader picture, the secrecy that can veil the CCOs is a real worry. In most jobs transparency is crucial, why is politics the exception?
   • Kotahi Tane Huna 3.1

     21 July 2012 at 8:50 am

     Well you can hardly claim to be an anonymous donor if everything’s done in public, can you?
     • fnjckg 3.1.1

       21 July 2012 at 9:02 am

       laaarf.
   • Ad 3.2

     21 July 2012 at 9:51 am

     Silverdale Park and Ride is waiting for the private developer to get their shit together.

     Penlink just didn’t have the benefits to go in front of things like AMETI or Tiverton-Wolverton or such. It’s still in the RLTP, just a few years back.
4. fnjckg 4

   21 July 2012 at 9:33 am

   Interestingly, upon CNN this am, discussion of wealthy Americans fleeing (my choice of action word) North America.
   Fleeing to settle some place else. possibly the new frontier of the antipodean “wild, wild, west”
   Well, theres a “new sherriff in town” and “this town aint big enough for the both of US”
   (long memories and short, slow, boat to China)

   But they sure do have some big guns on those battle-ships, settling further across the Pacific.
5. Stephen Doyle 5

   21 July 2012 at 10:15 am

   What happened to the investigation into The Living Wage? All gone quiet on that front. The more I read about the struggle to put food on the table and a roof over heads, the living wage seems a better and better idea.
   • aerobubble 5.1

     21 July 2012 at 12:14 pm

     Its okay to discriminate, as long as you don’t tell anyone why you are, and its not obvious.
     You are bleeding kidding me, NZ is not about fairness, fairness only happens when the
     politicians fear upsetting you. And that means only the rich at the moment gets them stressed.
     You much remember that hopelessly stupid statement must be ridiculed if they come from
     a poor person, but if Glen says wifes turn to seeking status, you cannot point out that his whole
     purpose in working is to create status for himself. As we know, work is essential part of
     a person identity, that’s the whole basis for the work testing, that the state has the right
     to tell poor people to get work since work is good for them. Living wage, not going to happen
     until we have mass movements that government shits itself rather than awaken from their apathy.
   • OneTrack 5.2

     21 July 2012 at 9:55 pm

     Who was doing an “investigation” into the living wage?
6. Ed 6

   21 July 2012 at 10:25 am

   The title of this website:
   https://www.myopinioncounts.co.nz/home.php
   purports to encourage people to express opinions, but it is possible that by signing in all that would happen would be to add to the number of people they would claim support smoking. Has anyone signed in and fund out whether it is possible to then express an opinion? Or see the opinions of others? Are any of those opinions against the Philip Morris views, or does my opinion not count?
   • rosy 6.1

     21 July 2012 at 10:36 am

     It also enables the company to get hold of addresses so they can send out ‘newsletters’ – branded and colour-coded. Stealth marketing at it’s most cynical, I reckon.

     The “information we share” section in the privacy policy gives a pretty open indication that their ‘affiliates’ will contact the subscriber.
     • bad12 6.1.1

       21 July 2012 at 11:23 am

       Will those ‘newsletters’ breach any law, in fact it’s a perfectly legal product, tobacco that is, so what actual right have you or anyone else got to interfere in my or anyone else’s legal use of a legal product…
       • mike e 6.1.1.1

         21 July 2012 at 11:36 am

         Kronic BS no body has died from that rubbish yet so it should be legalized according to your analogy.
         If tobacco was a new product to the market it would immediately be made illegal and those pushing it would be locked up for a very long time.
         All other illegal drugs used in NZ since have caused less than deaths in a 100 years less than 500 than tobacco does in one year. That’s less than 0.1%yet the laws against these illegal drugs are draconian by comparison.
         • bad12 6.1.1.1.1

           21 July 2012 at 11:50 am

           Tobacco= legal product….
       • OneTrack 6.1.1.2

         21 July 2012 at 9:57 pm

         Bad12, We know what is best for you.
         • bad12 6.1.1.2.1

           21 July 2012 at 10:14 pm

           Laugh, Yes if i read all the comments in the debate on ‘tobacco’ in today’s Open Mike it appears that there are more than a few that know what’s best for me,

           So much so that when i ask a logical question like, IF as the produced stats say, tobacco use has declined by 6% since 1999, where in the health stats is the equivalent decline in the deaths from heart disease, there is no answer,

           Heart disease is a biggy for the ASH fanatics to have included in the statistics of tobacco use caused deaths and as the ASH fanatics didn’t really get called on the Bullshit of ”tobacco use MIGHT cause heart disease”, on cigarette packets that has now graduated to the even bigger Bullshit of ”tobacco use CAUSES heart disease”,

           In today’s debate i have been ”playing with a straight bat”,but, can anyone imagine the ‘Bizniss’ Government of National really going after the tobacco industry???,

           Hardly, National have just seized upon a perfect means of revenue raising through tobacco excise tax which directly attacks the income of those mostly on low incomes who are the majority by far of tobacco users knowing that ‘the left’ wont object because the justification for such tax is coming directly from ‘professional lefty’s in the health system’…
           • Vicky32 6.1.1.2.1.1

             22 July 2012 at 7:21 pm

             who are the majority by far of tobacco users knowing that ‘the left’ wont object because the justification for such tax is coming directly from ‘professional lefty’s in the health system’…

             Yes, I have always seen it as a class thing! The uppers drink fine wine, and the lowers smoke.
     • rosy 6.1.2

       21 July 2012 at 11:27 am

       I’m not interfering in your use of the product. However I’d prefer you didn’t use it in spaces we may share. I’m interested in whether the people who profit from that product continue to market it. Surely marketing has no effect on smokers – so there is no reason for you to be concerned if that is restricted.
       • bad12 6.1.2.1

         21 July 2012 at 11:36 am

         When the stated aim of Government is to have ‘NZ smoke-free by 2020’ then everything Government does after making such a pronouncement is an attempt to curtail the legal rights of a certain section of society,

         I have the legal right to use tobacco products as does a tobacco company wishing to sell the product to me,

         I agree with your right to not have me use those tobacco products in a public space that you at any time might occupy…
         • rosy 6.1.2.1.1

           21 July 2012 at 11:52 am

           Yes, you have a legal right to use a product that they legally sell. My comment above is not about that – it was about whether this site will be used as a marketing tool.

           And yes, it may breach the law if marketed in NZ – hence my interest in the privacy policy affiliates. Who are they? where are they based will that get around legal restrictions?

           How do you feel about the tobacco companies’ right to market their product given that established smokers (like established drinkers and alcohol) say it has no impact on their use of the product? – because they are marketing, just look at the publicity since they launched the site – Who are they marketing it to? And if it is young non-smokers is that ethical, in your opinion?
           • bad12 6.1.2.1.1.1

             21 July 2012 at 12:12 pm

             Firstly, as a smoker of some 43 years i have yet to see the health profession put a time line on the ‘smoking kills’ inflamation, (as opposed to information),

             Second,and i have posted this a number of times on this web-site and others, IF any Government were serious about having people QUIT smoking and NOT allowing those under 18 to use and become addicted to tobacco products that Government only need declare Tobacco to be in the same category as ‘party pills’, make it’s continuing use a matter of doctors prescription to manage those presently addicted and disallow anyone presently under the age of 18 from being able to register as an addict,

             The fact is that it is YOU, the likes of ASH, and various others who do not smoke who in fact are the TOOLS being used by Government to allow my legal rights to use a legal product to be continually infringed upon,

             How do i feel about tobacco company’s being able to advertize, on one level i don’t give a toss,plain packaging will only restrict smokers with a taste,habit,addiction to a particular brand, the young when they smoke, mostly unable to afford whole packet purchases, will smoke any old tobacco that is available,

             Having said the above, i come full circle, as tobacco is a legal product Government does not in my opinion have the legal right to restrict the products advertising anymore than it does any other legal product available to be sold…
             • rosy …

               21 July 2012 at 12:20 pm

               So after an irrelevant 3 paragraph rant (I’ve not said anything that infringes your right to smoke, except that I’d prefer you didn’t smoke in places we might share), you finally [sort of] address the questions by basically saying you couldn’t give a toss if giant corporates market their addictive product to young people. Good-oh.
               • bad12 …

                 21 July 2012 at 12:41 pm

                 Being a tool of politicians and ASH loony’s seems to have it’s health side-effects like tobacco use, seems to have made you go both blind and lose any sense of comprehension at the same time,

                 In spite of all the current restrictions, in spite of the rack raising of excise tax on tobacco products, in spite of the only advertizing on TV concerning tobacco products being the anti- attempt at brainwashing, the young (and by that i mean under the age of 18), continue to take up tobacco use at the same rates they did prior to the concerted efforts to stop them,

                 In the young,and here i address college aged kids there is now a definite ‘black-market’ in tobacco products, it is not as yet confined in a ‘young criminal element’ it is a floating market in the nature of whomever can get their hands upon the product on any given day sells to their mates at the rate of 2 bucks a ciggy,

                 Such a growing black-market does not differentiate over product brands and tends to suggest that those under the age of 18, supposedly those who the plain packaging is aimed at, will not be effected one iota by such plain packaging as a deterrent…
                 • rosy …

                   21 July 2012 at 12:56 pm

                   Smoking in young people is declining

                   Daily smoking rates for 14–15 year olds have declined considerably since 1999. Between 1999 and 2009, the prevalence of daily smoking declined by 65 percent for boys in this age group (from 14 percent to 5 percent) and by 63 percent for girls (from 17 percent to 6 percent).

                   I reckon it’s worth continuing to restrict advertising to until there is a clear picture on this – because the later people start smoking, the less likely addiction is to take hold. And seeing as advertising doesn’t affect your right to smoke one iota, I can’t for the life of me see why you have a problem with this. I mean if I had my way I’d restrict all advertising – consumer culture of whatever type does nobody, nor the environment, any good.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     21 July 2012 at 1:30 pm

                     I mean if I had my way I’d restrict all advertising – consumer culture of whatever type does nobody, nor the environment, any good.

                     Advertising needs to be banned. Once it is we’ll have a hell of a lot more wealth with which to work.
                   • bad12 …

                     21 July 2012 at 1:42 pm

                     Or, because of the demonization of ‘smoking’ the number of young people willing to admit that they use tobacco products is declining,

                     My view= a bit of both…

                     Heres another for the statistically minded, if in 20 years the use of tobacco products has fallen by 6% where in the health statistics is the corresponding fall in the New Zealand rate of those who die of Heart Disease,(the use of tobacco products supposedly now a major cause of such)…
                   • Vicky32 …

                     22 July 2012 at 7:28 pm

                     I reckon it’s worth continuing to restrict advertising to until there is a clear picture on this – because the later people start smoking, the less likely addiction is to take hold.

                     Utter nonsense! I started when I was 27, having spent all of my childhood and teens very a self-righteous anti-smoking prat. I quit a few years later, then started again when I was 37!
                     The snobbery element is very strong. The upper class kids I meet are all ‘Oh get that cigarette away from me, you scruffy old biddy’. The lower class kids smoke. If I were in any trouble, I’d far  rather ask a smoker for help – a non-smoker would want to spend hours, days or weeks telling me why whatever problem I had was my own fault for being (a) old (b) a beneficiary (c) a smoker (d) poor and/or (e) unmarried. 
                     This even if all I wanted them to do was help me change a lightbulb as I’m 1.5 metres tall and the ceiling is 2.5 metres! 😀
                   • rosy …

                     23 July 2012 at 4:30 am

                     Bad12 – I’m quite happy to leave extrapolating Japanese non-smokers’ heart disease with New Zealand smokers’ heart disease to you. Similarly the effects of increasingly poor diets and increasing rates of inactivity leading to rises in heart disease compared with reduced heart disease from reduced smoking rates.

                     Vicky32 – yeah, I had my first cigarette when I was about 12, gave up when I was 15 because it was no good for the baby 😉 But I do realise that individual experiences, while important, are not necessarily significant in terms of the overall population.
                   • locus …

                     23 July 2012 at 4:32 am

                     Vicky32 – it would appear that you are indeed no longer “anti-smoking”, but i for one would question whether you have moved on from being “a self-righteous prat”. Maybe you could add “classist” to this self-assessment?
             • weka …

               21 July 2012 at 2:02 pm

               make it’s continuing use a matter of doctors prescription to manage those presently addicted and disallow anyone presently under the age of 18 from being able to register as an addict,
                

               I quite agree bad, and I’d guess that when the govt gets to the point of banning smoking that that is exactly what it will do (as opposed to just making tobacco illegal).
                
               I don’t really see what the problem is. If you don’t mind sales being restricted in this way, and you are happy to not smoke around other people, then what’s wrong?
                
               Also, you use the term legal right as if you have free access to smoking. You don’t. Tobacco is already subject to a number of laws, including around sale, who can grow it, and where it can be used. Even when I smoked 30 years ago there were laws regulating tobacco. It’s been a long time since there was any degree of freedom around tobacco.
                
                
               • bad12 …

                 21 July 2012 at 3:17 pm

                 Do you not tho see the arse about face nature of the present situation, we have a Government saying that in an effort to FORCE me to not use a product that is legally for sale across the nation i will be forced to pay more and more for that product through the addition of excise taxes,

                 IF tobacco products are able to be legally sold which they are where then does any Government have the legal right to try and force me not to use the product???…
                 • weka …

                   21 July 2012 at 3:39 pm

                   Ok, that probably got lost in the ranting 😉
                    
                   Yes, the first point makes completes sense. I would be highly annoyed if my drug of choice had increasing taxes put on it. And I also agree that there are social justice issues here.
                    
                   The second point I disagree with. Tobacco already has many restrictions on its legality, and the govt definitely has the right to increase restrictions where there is a public health risk (which there patently is).
                    
                   Instead of increasing taxes they should just go straight to prescription only. And people should be allowed to grow their own. But which govt is going to do that? 
                    
                   btw, alcohol has a massive tax on it. Are you in favour of that being taken off?
                    
                   How about petrol?
                    
                   Road user charges?
                    
                    
                    
                    
                   • bad12 …

                     21 July 2012 at 4:35 pm

                     My point being that the Government is trying to force me to STOP using a legal product,

                     The intention as stated by Government is ‘for a smoke-free New Zealand by such and such a date’

                     Therein lies the difference between taxes on other products that you list, the stated intention for those taxes is to cover the additional cost to the community of those using those products,

                     No,no,no,tobacco has restrictions upon where and to who it can be sold to and from, these are not restrictions on tobacco’s overall legality as a product sold…
                   • weka …

                     21 July 2012 at 7:55 pm

                     OK, so maybe it’s more akin to not allowing people to use woodburners in Chch anymore, or bringing in legislation to reduce car emissions. From a public health perspective, it makes sense and I don’t have a problem with the govt’s intention. I do have an ethical problem with taxing the poor though.

                     Do you have a link to the govts plant to enforce smoke free by 2020?
                   • McFlock …

                     21 July 2012 at 8:00 pm

                     It’s been pushed to 2025.
   • weka 6.2

     21 July 2012 at 10:53 am

     No idea, but they’re using some fairly manipulative copy on that site. For instance the visual saying Outdoor Smoking Bans? (read more), then slides across to show Behind Closed Doors? (read more). My immediate thought was it would be about plans to ban people smoking at home, but it’s merely that shops will no longer be allowed to display brands to customers.
      
     The only thing I can see that shows what joining does is this. It doesn’t really make sense though.
      

     From time to time, membership of this website will help you:

     Stay informed about current and pending proposals
     Share your views with politicians and other key decision makers

      
     • Vicky32 6.2.1

       22 July 2012 at 7:32 pm

       The only thing I can see that shows what joining does is this. It doesn’t really make sense though.

       I joined, but more to piss off the self-righteous than for any other reason! 😀
   • bad12 6.3

     21 July 2012 at 11:18 am

     Yes to the first 2 questions,No to the 3rd, don’t know to the 4th, and on the 5th as it’s a web-site specifically set up by a tobacco company to gauge the opinion of those who use tobacco products i would guess it’s a big YES your opinion on that particular web-site don’t count,

     The fact that from the Government on down to the ‘average wowzing wanker in the street’ want to prohibit me from using what is a perfectly legal product points to a serious case of the asylum of Western democracy definitely being taken over by the loony’s,

     Tobacco company’s do not need to inflate the numbers of those who ‘support smoking’, there are approximately 600,000 of us and as the site is in it’s infancy, (the ASH fanatics having had a 20 year head start), it will be interesting to see what, if anything, comes from a ‘smokers web-site’,

     Should this ”smokers web-site’ be able to bring together a large proportion of those who use tobacco products their will obviously be political ramifications and i would hope at least 1 high Court case testing the Government’s legality in it’s stated attempts to stop people from using what is a perfectly legal product…
7. KJT 7

   21 July 2012 at 10:30 am

   Anyone else who posts to NZ Herald online comments noticed their annoying habit of removing links and references from posts.

   It gives an entirely false impression of your posts.
   It makes the post look like made up unsupported opinion instead of something based on research and study.
   It makes quotes in the original appear as the writers own writing.

   Anyway, it misrepresents the contributors actual posting.

   Maybe it is because, so called, “reporters” do not like to give references in their own articles. I suspect so that it is harder to catch them out in their lack of research, knowledge and objectivity. To often I have managed to find the research or paper the News article is based on, to find the newspaper article oversimplifies or totally misrepresents the original.
8. Colonial Viper 8

   21 July 2012 at 10:44 am

   Neoliberalism: the weaponisation of economic theory

   This is a very very good synopsis of what is going on.

   http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-07-20/weaponization-economic-theory
   • joe90 8.1

     21 July 2012 at 1:03 pm

     Following another mass shooting in the US this 2005 interview with Mark Ames joins a few dots.

     A Brief History of Rage, Murder and Rebellion.

     Ames takes a systematic look at the scores of rage killings in our public schools and workplaces that have taken place over the past 25 years. He claims that instead of being the work of psychopaths, they were carried out by ordinary people who had suffered repeated humiliation, bullying and inhumane conditions that find their origins in the “Reagan Revolution.” Looking through a carefully researched historical lens, Ames recasts these rage killings as failed slave rebellions.
     • RedLogix 8.1.1

       21 July 2012 at 1:42 pm

       joe…

       I always read your links and I’m rarely disappointed.

       Why do you think we have all of these “wage slave” and “temp slave” T-shirts and e-jokes around? Americans like to turn everything painfully true into a little quip, as if by quippifying the painful truth, as if by becoming self-aware of one’s shameful and intolerable existence, one partially nullifies one’s pain. This is what you’d call “slave humor.” Slaves did the same thing, turning their pain into quips.

       Oh yes. I’ve worked in the past subcontracting into a US company working on several large projects. At first it’s like living in a 24hr sitcom. You really can’t keep up with their non-stop wisecrack, one-liners and put-downs… I recall my sides hurting from it.

       Yet after a month or so it started to turn sour. While at one level they were good people and a lot of fun to be with, at another more personal, intimate level I found them very guarded and brittle. You could only get to know them so far… and that was it.

       Under all the fun was a lot of hard-arsed bitterness.
       • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1

         21 July 2012 at 3:57 pm

         Its a mistake to think that rats don’t realise that they have been caged and put on the wheel.
     • marty mars 8.1.2

       21 July 2012 at 2:04 pm

       thanks joe

       Our culture today is completely insane, the disconnect between how our propaganda says our lives are, and how our lives actually are.

       So true.
       • Colonial Viper 8.1.2.1

         21 July 2012 at 3:59 pm

         And when people are put into an insane, inhuman culture and simply expected to try and cope, increases in mental illness and addictive behaviours can be fully expected.
     • Bill 8.1.3

       21 July 2012 at 6:54 pm

       I don’t intend to dimiss Ames’s analysis. But I think it’s only a contributory part of the problem. The increased sense of dislocation and stress etc, imposed on individuals in a neo liberal market environment doesn’t lead to random killings. It leads to psychotropic drug prescriptions. And those drugs often cause mayhem if they are stopped abruptly or not taken in a regular enough fashion.

       Having put this line of argument out before, I know that some people will want to respond that the drugs are helpful and so on. But to be honest, I’ve had that discussion and don’t see much point in having it again.

       Suffice to say, there is a body of thought within US psychiatric circles that claims all instances of random killings for no apparent reason (ie, killings like this Batman one) have psychotropic meds as a common underlying factor. From scanning some previous incidents, it appears to be true….at least so far and in relation to the incidents I’ve found and read press reports for. But I haven’t seen any mention of medication in this case.

       So, what I would appreciate is if anyone comes across a news article that states James Holmes had recently been on psychotropic meds and had either stopped taking them or wasn’t taking them as prescribed, that they’d throw a quick link up here. Cheers.
       • Carol 8.1.3.1

         21 July 2012 at 7:06 pm

         There are so many shootings in the US that we hear nothing about. I don’t know how many can be put down to rage, meds or anything else:

         http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/pdf/major-shootings.pdf
     • Carol 8.1.4

       21 July 2012 at 7:47 pm

       It seems to me that Ames consistently ignores one thing most of these mass shooters have in common – that they are usually men. I can’t actually remember any such mass shooting by a woman.

       Ames talks about the perps in non-gendered terms as “people”, “slaves” etc.

       Why is it mainly men who respond this way? It doesn’t require a male’s superior strength to pull a trigger.
       • Colonial Viper 8.1.4.1

         21 July 2012 at 10:23 pm

         I expect that women tend to turn their anger and frustration against themselves, as compared to men.
       • Vicky32 8.1.4.2

         22 July 2012 at 7:36 pm

         It seems to me that Ames consistently ignores one thing most of these mass shooters have in common – that they are usually men. I can’t actually remember any such mass shooting by a woman

         Absolutely right Carol!
9. Canute 9

   21 July 2012 at 11:55 am

   This is true – and unbelievable:

   http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/07/departing-imf-economist-blasts-fund.html
10. muzza 10

    21 July 2012 at 12:31 pm

    
    The treaty seems unlikely to ever receive the two-thirds majority necessary to be ratified by the US Senate,

    I wonder how the Senate might react after this latest “incident”, involving a white guy and guns…

    Colorado shooting suspect James Holmes was in the process of withdrawing from a doctorate program in neuroscience at the University of Colorado Denver,

    Gee sure looks like the timing will really put pressure on the Senate…I guess the next few days will tell us how much. Of course the Senate would not be swayed by the prepared MSM machine…
11. Morrissey 11

    21 July 2012 at 1:12 pm

    http://www.womenagainstrape.net/content/correction-women-against-rape-did-not-criticise-ju

    Correction: Women Against Rape did not criticise Julian Assange’s legal team

    On 16-17 January 2011, Women Against Rape was quoted in a number of papers as “criticising” Julian Assange’s legal team for including the names of the women making allegations against Mr Assange in their skeleton argument.

    The articles gave a misleading impression of our views. We never criticised or even mentioned Mr Assange’s legal defence in our comment to the Press Association. Following our complaint, the PA apologised for their mistake by circulating the advisory below with our full quote. Can you please publish and/or circulate this correction.

    Press Association wire 19 January at 1635:
    ADVISORY: In 1 POLITICS WikiLeaks (ASSANGE LEGAL TEAM UNDER FIRE AFTER ACCUSERS NAMED), sent at about 0245, on January 16, we reported that legal representatives of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange had come under fire for inadvertently publicly naming two women who claim he raped them. Women Against Rape, which was quoted in the story, has asked us to make it clear that it did not criticise or even mention Mr Assange’s legal team in their comment. The Press Association regrets that the story and its headline gave a misleading impression of the views expressed by Women Against Rape.

    
For reference, the following is the full quote from Women Against Rape on the issue: “The rape allegations against Julian Assange have become entangled with the politics centred on WikiLeaks. In the last few months this has led to the publication on the internet of the names of the women involved, and to a call for women who report rape to lose their anonymity. Rape victims’ right to anonymity and defendants’ right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, are both crucial. We oppose the use of rape for political agendas which undermine protection and justice for both rape victim and accused. We are appalled that rape allegations may be manipulated to facilitate Mr Assange’s extradition or even rendition to the US where elected officials have called for his execution for his Wikileaks activities. Women Against Rape cannot ignore this threat. We oppose the death penalty for any crime, let alone when no charges have been brought.
end

    http://www.womenagainstrape.net/content/correction-women-against-rape-did-not-criticise-ju
    • McFlock 11.1

      21 July 2012 at 6:23 pm

      Yeah, Whatever dude. Some women think it’s a CIA plot, and they’re practically lesbians what with being anti rape and all, so the criminal complaints don’t need to be investigated.
      • Morrissey 11.1.1

        21 July 2012 at 7:07 pm

        Yeah, Whatever dude.

        Another brilliant rejoinder. You obviously win a lot of debates with such tactics.

        I like the way you suddenly start fantasizing about lesbians.

        Love your routine, my friend.
    • OneTrack 11.2

      21 July 2012 at 10:03 pm

      ” “The rape allegations against Julian Assange have become entangled with the politics centred on WikiLeaks.” – Yes they have, primarily by Julian Assange, who is worried about a rape conviction.
      • Colonial Viper 11.2.1

        21 July 2012 at 10:06 pm

        And more worried about serving time for a Swedish rape conviction at Guantanamo Bay.
        • McFlock 11.2.1.1

          21 July 2012 at 10:11 pm

          or is using that as a nice, if far fetched, excuse to avoid a rape investigation.
          • Colonial Viper 11.2.1.1.1

            21 July 2012 at 10:20 pm

            Now I wish I’d bought that bag of burger rings from the supermarket today. It’s going to be a long night.
      • Morrissey 11.2.2

        22 July 2012 at 11:57 am

        “The rape allegations against Julian Assange have become entangled with the politics centred on WikiLeaks.” – Yes they have, primarily by Julian Assange, who is worried about a rape conviction.

        You need to do some serious reading on this topic. At the moment, you are ignorant.
12. vto 12

    21 July 2012 at 2:11 pm

    Well now its our turn to have EQC and insurers smack us in the head. Thought we were tootling through the queue for repairs only to get a copy of a report which is blatantly dishonest and incomplete. So much so that the main broken parts of the house were not even referenced in the report.

    EQC’s approach is complete and utter bullshit. Our experience is that they are totally dishonest – for the purpose of avoiding their due liability. Which is in fact fraud – misrepresentation for the purpose of pecuniary gain.

    Some words of advice: Never ever trust EQC or an insurance company. Do everything to your house to avoid ever having to make a claim.
    • Draco T Bastard 12.1

      21 July 2012 at 3:09 pm

      The simple fact is that the insurance companies don’t have the money to pay out to have everything that’s covered fixed. That goes for EQC as well. There’s no way that they could have as: a) they planned around the normal earthquake risk which doesn’t include entire cities collapsing, b) they misestimated the actual costs involved for the rebuild and thus c) they then thought that they could set prices well below costs (See Fletcher’s dropping painting down from $25/m to $19/m).

      C) is the direct result of capitalists thinking that workers don’t actually have costs to cover and thus can be paid as little as the capitalists want to pay
      • Ed 12.1.1

        21 July 2012 at 11:54 pm

        EQC (and ACC) have the money to pay all valid claims – they have an unlimited guarantee by government. Also, neither are insurance companies.

        It does however appear that our current government has a desire to reduce claim payments – despite payments being set out in legislation.
13. AnnaLiviaPlurabella 13

    21 July 2012 at 2:56 pm

    Any Red Alert monitors on-line? The Constitutional debate should be there. The last post is 18th July!
    Labour should have a members only space.
14. AnnaLiviaPlurabella 14

    21 July 2012 at 3:02 pm

    Oops the Place for Labour feedback is on Labour.org.nz/yoursay
    • Ad 14.1

      21 July 2012 at 5:09 pm

      Do they harvest your emails from that site?
      • Colonial Viper 14.1.1

        21 July 2012 at 5:27 pm

        Certainly not impossible. Do they have a privacy policy statement which might shed some light?
15. Colonial Viper 15

    21 July 2012 at 3:53 pm

    Ethos of Co-operative Bank being screwed with

    I hear that branch staff are being pressured to become sales people, being asked to literally go out door knocking to recruit new customers. If they don’t meet their targets they are being told that their jobs will be at risk.

    And where is this high pressure sales drive coming from? Surprise surprise, we have a former Westpac senior banker now in charge of the former PSIS.

    http://www.interest.co.nz/news/59879/co-operative-bank-appoints-former-westpac-nz-acting-ceo-bruce-mclachlan-ceo-and-reports-f

    And behind every CEO, we also have to remember the Board who appointed him and is giving him strategic direction.
16. Pascal's bookie 16

    21 July 2012 at 3:53 pm

    oh well.

    I was just going to post a link to the Truthers favourite newsman reacting to the denver shootings. But I see muzza beat me to the skinny on it.

    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/page/280878_Alex_Jones_Says_Aurora_Shootin
    • freedom 16.1

      21 July 2012 at 4:10 pm

      Alex Jones is not as enamoured by the Truth movement as you might think. He gets a certain level of respect for the years of exposing the media lies we all swallow and has tirelessy fought a good fight. He is also widely reagrded as a loud and often unstable voice with a tendancy to jump into rivers before checking their depth. His manner of attack and his willingness to throw baseless accusations into serious discussion and his ever growing ‘God is the way to truth!’ message costs him as many listeners as it wins him. There are also some great rumours that he is a deep cover co-intel operative….ooooh! For many who use InfoWars it is the excellent library of resources they offer and the very well researched articles by some of the staffers that have kept the place alive. It only took a few minutes for the first ‘it’s all a gov op’ stories to hit the wires. Then again Alex is not the only one throwing spurious accusations around on this story.

      The media have as usual decided what they want you to believe. Early this a.m. NZ time, I watched a talking head breathlessly announce that an affiliate had spoken to the Mother of the shooter. It was reported at the time that the affiliate asked the woman if her son lived in Aurora Colorado? That was how it was reported. An inquiry to confirm the familial relationship. The Mother is reported to have said, “yes you have the right person”.

      At the time this was reported as the mother simply confirming that her son lived in Aurora. This [most likely innocent] statement is now being reported twisted and corrupted by all networks as if the Mother was asked if she was aware that her son was the shooter and that her affirmation is stating she was aware her son was a sociopathic nutter. This thread of the story has already been so twisted and misrepresented that it has destroyed any possibility of the original broadcast ever being seen or heard of again.
    • muzza 16.2

      21 July 2012 at 5:40 pm

      PB, anyone who reads, thinks and forms opinions relying too much on any source, really is not in a good position to form opinions with any foundational basis, let alone cast them out in public.

      If one is able to suspend bias and emotional attachments to reading matter, and reads enough variation over a period of time, it becomes very easy to spot BS at a distance.
      The critical factor is being able to dethatch from bias, also known as pre conceived ideas, which explicitly requires the individual to know themself well.. Read from as many media sources as possible, left, right and centre from as many different angles as you can get. Speak with people you have some faith in, and check for people thoughts etc from decent blogs such as this site. Over time, if open enough, and free from bias, the words really will just reek of shit when you read them, or hear them,, its called using your intuition, which humans have had dulled/removed over the past decades, where they mostly believe what they are told, and that’s enough for them!

      For mine, I am calling BS on this shooting spree, massive false flag, just like Norway, with too much else going on around the second amendment for years. See fast and furious, Eric Holder if you don’t know what I am talking about. This is all about attempting to disarm the American people, using the worst type of scare tactics you could imagine, and then bestowing to the UN even more sovereignty as the empowered authority in the global structure, once the treaty I linked to previously is signed!
      Whatever the solution wanted by those in control actually is, could be varied from my thoughts around this event, but I still call false flag.
      We have seen the “problem”, we are getting, and will get the “reaction” over the near term, as shaped by the MSM, which will lead to the “solution” being provided. Its really only once the solution is being offered forward that the agenda become clearer, but there is more than enough history around the second amendment to see where this event fits in.

      Its tragic to see yet more innocent people used to create a desired outcome, but its standard MO, so its not in any way a surprise. The new “enemy” is being clearly defined, and was called some time back, its gone from “brown faces abroad” (even though they are still getting fucked), to “white faces” at home.
      Just follow along the media narrative, as that will tell you much of the underlying intentions.

      At the end of the day, we all get the society, and the puppet masters which we allow to create our environment for us, that society as a whole deserves!

      Doesn’t look like the west deserves too much these days!
      • Pascal's bookie 16.2.1

        21 July 2012 at 6:59 pm

        Quite clearly analysing events without resorting to any pre-concieved ideas about what’s going on there muzza. Yep.
        • muzza 16.2.1.1

          22 July 2012 at 11:39 am

          “Quite clearly analysing events without resorting to any pre-concieved ideas about what’s going on there muzza. Yep.”

          –Not at all, I read the early headlines, and some articles from this “shooting spree”, and drew my own conclusion, that it stinks.
          Other statements above are my own conjecture on where this could tie in elsewhere, because little happens in silo. That does not mean one can’t evaluate something in silo, or not and still keep bias out. Just means you have to be prepared to factor various possibilities in as well.
      • Pascal's bookie 16.2.2

        21 July 2012 at 7:59 pm

        “The new “enemy” is being clearly defined, and was called some time back, its gone from “brown faces abroad” (even though they are still getting fucked), to “white faces” at home.”

        Yeah, they are clearly being oppressed. Here’s a list of them that have been disappeared by ZOG on obvioulsy trumped up charges following one of them there judicial activism rulings taking away their shootin irons. They’re probably all in FEMA camps.

        http://www.csgv.org/issues-and-campaigns/guns-democracy-and-freedom/insurrection-timeline/

        Or maybe there are a bunch of right wing nutters with guns using their intuition too much and going a bit loco.

        50/50 call I guess.
        • marty mars 16.2.2.1

          21 July 2012 at 8:36 pm

          That list is mindblowing – thanks Pb
          • Pascal's bookie 16.2.2.1.1

            21 July 2012 at 8:56 pm

            Yeah, it’s quite a trend eh?

            The most shocking one to me was this one:

            http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/12/white-supremacist-sentenced-to-32-years-for-mlk-day-bomb/1

            Didn’t recieve much coverage at all compared to islamic plots that were, well nothing really.

            The bomb was discovered by pure luck
    • joe90 16.3

      21 July 2012 at 5:56 pm

      A wee google search >> july 27 obama < http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2012/07/19/conspiracists-adopt-nra-talking-points-on-un-arms-treaty/
      • muzza 16.3.1

        21 July 2012 at 6:17 pm

        SPLC, sponsored by “Hatewatch”…either way it illustrates nicely how the charade works in “media”.

        Whatever this event, does or does not equal, is always going to be drowned in information of all, and every type imaginable, which of course is designed for no other reason than to misinform, and confuse.

        Getting to opinion state is a matter of individual preferences, and a myriad of other factors, assuming people are putting a degree of effort into forming them!

        Otherwise its likely just follow along as usual!
      • joe90 16.3.2

        21 July 2012 at 6:24 pm

        False flag muzza or an unwell mans actions co-opted?.
        • muzza 16.3.2.1

          22 July 2012 at 11:42 am

          Same thing are they not jo?
        • joe90 16.3.2.2

          22 July 2012 at 12:05 pm

          sigh…one a damning indictment and the other crackpot cynicism and dishonesty, I’d certainly hope not muzza.

          Anyhoo, some on topic linky stuff.

          http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/21/1112292/-Adult-Conversation

          And like I said, when the argument is made that guns protect your freedoms and liberties, ask why one or two incidents of voter fraud can be used to justify taking away the freedom and liberty to vote, yet graveyards full of dead fathers, mothers, sons and daughters are not justification to take away the liberty of gun nuts to stockpile weapons of mass murder and why Joe The Plumber gets to own a rack of bigger better guns than Paul The Policeman sent to stop him shooting his neighbours.

          http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jan/10/gun-crime-us-state
          • muzza 16.3.2.2.1

            22 July 2012 at 4:49 pm

            “sigh…one a damning indictment and the other crackpot cynicism and dishonesty, I’d certainly hope not muzza.”

            –Thats a big sigh jo too much net time eh…. For mine an “unwell man” could be used as a false flag, quite easily in fact!

            While not a big gun person myself, I will say that guns are not the problem. Simplistically its as bad as the article saying the Brits are capable of “adult conversation”, I almost snorted when I read that nonsense!

            Lets just make sure that the “authorities and other assorted crooked officialdom” are the only tooled up people, I reckon society will be just peachy if that is achieved. / Gee, can you tell me another story papa!
17. Carol 17

    21 July 2012 at 6:20 pm

    Why do the Nats project so much of their own failings on to the opposition?

    Paula Bennett – “social obligations”…. on parents on DBP? What about social obligations of the government to enable jobs that pay a living wage? To provide a livable society and environment?

    Bill English – “planet Labour”…. as though NAct aren’t in their own neoliberal parallel universe that denies the reality of peak everything?

    Steven Joyce – on Labour’s “fairytales” – and Joyce’s own little crony capitalist “reality” that denies the reality of the large numbers of people with low incomes and little power? And who believes in RONs as the road to prosperity?
    • Draco T Bastard 17.1

      21 July 2012 at 6:50 pm

      Why do the Nats project so much of their own failings on to the opposition?

      So that they can hide those failings from themselves and thus blame everyone else for things going wrong.
    • Jim Nald 17.2

      21 July 2012 at 8:47 pm

      And the latest from Steven “Intellectual Dishonesty” Joyce is about wanting “to do a few things that make us uncomfortable” …..

      ….. o … O …..
18. Pete 18

    21 July 2012 at 6:30 pm

    Bill English 2008: “”No country can afford ongoing migration losses of this size relative to its total workforce. The problems are showing up most visibly in the professional workforce”.

    Bill English 2012 : “What’s the point of standing in the airport crying about it?”
    • Carol 18.1

      21 July 2012 at 6:45 pm

      National Party campaigned on building a brighter future in 2008:

      http://www.national.org.nz/Article.aspx?articleId=28817

      “In the immediate future, National’s infrastructure plan will create jobs and growth opportunities for businesses, while, in the medium-term, providing the conditions and assets needed to put our economy on to a strong growth path.

      Bill English, 2012:

      http://www.3news.co.nz/National-outline-welfare-reforms/tabid/1607/articleID/262127/Default.aspx

      Away from the welfare changes, the economy dominated the day, with Finance Minister Bill English explaining the current economic downturn could last “a generation”.

      “The global economy is the dark cloud on the horizon and it’s not going away for a generation, certainly 15 or 20 years anyway,” says Mr English.

      “We’ve certainly had huge change,” says John Key. “It will take some time to bounce back.”
19. millsy 19

    21 July 2012 at 9:29 pm

    You know what would be awesome?

    If the 49% that the government plans to sell in MRP, GEN, MERI, end up in the hands of the community trusts that own the local network companies.

    Then the companies can be run in the *genuine* interest of power consumbers, not private shareholders.

    Solid Energy is one of the biggest employers on the West Coast. Imagine if the holding companies of Westland and Buller councils each purchased shareholdings?

    The governments plan to dilute public ownership would be well and truly sunk.
20. Vicky32 20

    23 July 2012 at 1:53 pm

    Maybe you could add “classist” to this self-assessment?
     
     

    Locus, could you please explain what it is you mean by the above remark? Oh, by the whole posting? I am not a self-righteous prat, because I am not the one telling other people where they fail my high standards, and where they fall down…

     

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS