Daily review 04/03/2025

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, March 4th, 2025 - 34 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

34 comments on “Daily review 04/03/2025 ”

  1. observer 1

    Obviously "marmite sandwich" will lead the news tonight (see 6 pm, shortly).

    But a bigger point is being missed. It's not what kids should have for lunch, but what Luxon promised they would have. (You could argue for a right-wing, small government approach, with no school lunches at all. Some would. But he didn't).

    Just one of many examples of the Luxon lie:

    https://otakitoday.com/luxon%20assures%20heniti%20%C5%8Ctaki%20school%20lunches%20safe

    Classic forked tongue.

    • Kat 1.1

      Unlike the past two Prime Ministers this current one appears to say only what he is told people want to hear…..we can do much much better New Zealand…..surely we can…..

      • Belladonna 1.1.1

        That seems to me to be the absolute definition of Hipkins as well.

        • Kat 1.1.1.1

          Really….are we not discussing what is reality……. not what just seems to you…..

          • Belladonna 1.1.1.1.1

            Opinion is opinion. Regardless of the source.

            • Kat 1.1.1.1.1.1

              Yes, but we are not talking opinions……

              • Belladonna

                You are:

                "this current one appears to say only what he is told"

                The word "appears' tells us the rest of the sentence is your opinion.

                • Kat

                  Grammatically ("appears") as used in my original comment is stating an observation as a fact…….however it is no surprise you would interpret that differently……..

                  • Belladonna

                    Nope. Still your opinion.

                    Are there other interpretations of Luxon's behaviour possible? Yes there are.

                    Your opinion is that he "appears to say only what he is told people want to hear…"
                    You have no direct knowledge of this (or at least you've claimed none) – nor linked to anything which supports your belief that his statements originate elsewhere.

                    It is entirely your opinion.
                    Not a problem, we're all entitled to opinions. But when you claim them as fact, you get called on it.

                    Note the word "appears" – unless you are referring only and entirely to visual appearance, does denote opinion.

                    Therefore: "Donald Trump's skin appears orange in this photo" is a statement of fact (or at least very strongly supported opinion). There are shades of possibility in interpretation (someone else might regard the colour as more tangerine) – but it's fairly likely to be regarded as a 'fact' by most people (whether they like or dislike Trump).

                    However, "Donald Trump appears to be a puppet of Putin" is an opinion. You can support your opinion with evidence of what he's actually said/done; but other people may hold a different opinion using the same evidence.

                    "Appears" is also used as a get-out-of-jail-free card in commentary. Even if unambiguous evidence is later provided contradicting your statement – you can fall back on 'that's the way it appeared at the time – I never said that it was the truth' argument.

                    You seem strangely reluctant to admit to having opinions. Really, it’s OK, political debate is full of them.

                    • Phillip ure

                      Saying that trump is doing a really good job of appearing to be an agent for Russia…a puppet for Putin…

                      ..is hardly…going on his present/recent actions…a radical p.o.v….

                      ..eh..?

                      (I still think the trump/Putin game plan is to divide the mineral assets of Ukraine between them…)

    • thinker 1.2

      [image resized – Incognito]

    • Janice 1.3

      Debbie Ngarewa-Packer called him out in QT today. She quoted the price of marmite and a loaf of bread and he went into a rant about at least they were paying for the lunches unlike the past government who hadn't made provision for payment. She said very audibly 'that's not true'. The withdrawing of breath was audible, and when she realised that she had spoken her thoughts out loud, she immediately withdrew and apologised. It could be a good thing to do whenever a minister claims an untruth to do the same, then they might be encouraged to tell the truth.

      • Belladonna 1.3.1

        Should Ngarewa-Packer have evidence that a minister has made a … mis-statement .. to the House – there are well-known avenues to address this.

        I suspect that she's unlikely to avail herself of them, because the last Labour government did *not* fully fund the whole year of the school lunch programme. Usually such programmes have funding from one budget to the next – at a minimum.
        However, Robertson's final budget only provided for school lunches to be funded up to December 2023. I don't know if he envisaged losing power (and therefore passing the hot potato onto the next government), or that he planned on finding the money from somewhere, if re-elected (it would have been a very difficult programme for a re-elected Labour/Greens/TPM to have dropped).

        In the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update in December, the Treasury warned that the lunches are funded only until the end of the calendar year 2023, and therefore constitute a risk to the Government’s economic and fiscal forecast.

        “If the Government confirms an extension or expansion of the programme, additional ongoing funding beyond that currently provided for will be required,” the Treasury advised.

        https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/cost-of-free-school-lunches-a-hungry-hole-in-budget-2023/NYPIWIIGGJBWNEIJM2XXT3MLG4/

        https://archive.ph/ObYpr

        So, Luxon was right – the Labour Government did not fully fund the programme.

        The current government has made provision for funding the school lunch programme up until 2026 (that is for two years, from the 2024 budget)

        Not debating quality here, just the budgetary provision.

  2. joe90 2

    Trump Taj Mahal (1991)

    Trump Plaza Hotel (1992)

    Trump Castle (1992)

    Trump Hotels and Casino Resorts (2004)

    Trump Entertainment Resorts (2009)

    Trump Entertainment Resorts (2014)

    Trump America (202?)

    /

    Latest estimate: -2.8 percent — March 03, 2025

    The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the first quarter of 2025 is -2.8 percent on March 3, down from -1.5 percent on February 28. After this morning’s releases from the US Census Bureau and the Institute for Supply Management, the nowcast of first-quarter real personal consumption expenditures growth and real private fixed investment growth fell from 1.3 percent and 3.5 percent, respectively, to 0.0 percent and 0.1 percent.

    https://www.atlantafed.org/cqer/research/gdpnow

  3. Anne 3

    So, this is why Trump is so hostile towards Zelensky?

    “The moment comes some five years after Trump held up congressionally authorised assistance to Ukraine in 2019 as he sought to pressure Zelenskyy to launch investigations into Joe Biden, then a Democratic presidential candidate. The moment led to Trump’s first impeachment.”

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360601504/trump-hits-pause-us-aid-ukraine-after-oval-office-dustup-pressuring-zelenskyy-russia-talks

    https://www.britannica.com/event/Ukraine-scandal

    • alwyn 3.1

      I think you are right Anne.

      I had forgotten just how much Trump had pressed for Ukraine to do this.

    • Morrissey 3.2

      And how did that impeachment work out Anne?

      • SPC 3.2.1

        A left winger shilling for Trump over and over.

        • Morrissey 3.2.1.1

          Pointing out the foolishness and the political bankruptcy of the Democratic Party and its media mouthpieces is not "shilling for Trump."

          Which of Trump's rotten policies have I ever "shilled" for even once, leave alone "over and over"?

          • SPC 3.2.1.1.1

            Are you not partnering Trump in opposing the continuance of the 1945 international order?

            He does this to return the world to the rule of the few over the many in domestic policy and return to the era of the strong nation as hegemon in the wider world. Some sort of broligarchy class across borders (and seeing US tech monopolies, including AI, as making them supreme).

            You seem to support this change.

            You are not unique in noting the flawed American leadership in the 1945 order.

            Many note, such as Jeff Sachs does, the perfidy of the USA in their leadership of it (unfit to be leader of the free world and Europe should leave NATO etc).

            But this does not discredit there being a 1945 UN Charter based international peace.

            Any support for the annexation of territory by war is problematic. Any expectation that nations should bow down to a regional hegemon to be safe, is not left wing, it is of an authoritarian order regime.

  4. joe90 5

    A ridgy didge super hero without a cape.

    .

    Australia's most prolific blood and plasma donor, James Harrison, has died at age 88. Known as the "Man with the Golden Arm," Harrison is credited with saving the lives of 2.4 million babies over the course of more than half a century

    Harrison died "peacefully in his sleep" at a nursing home on Feb. 17, Lifeblood — the Australian Red Cross branch responsible for blood donations — announced on Saturday.

    Harrison donated blood and plasma a whopping 1,173 times, according to Lifeblood, every two weeks between 1954 and 2018. All but 10 were from his right arm, the Sydney Morning Herald reported.

    https://www.npr.org/2025/03/03/nx-s1-5316163/james-harrison-blood-donor

  5. SPC 6

    Part of the problem for the centre left is that their partners are either

    1.centrists who think they are their natural leaders, because they are more electable (Blair/Starmer) than the "real" left.

    2the real left who think they are the only true manifestation of the cause.

    Orwell saw this in both Spain and also in the BBC conformity to narrative room.

  6. Anne 7

    Picked up confirmation this evening. Surprised the media have not run with it:

    4 mins.in.