Daily review 09/07/2019

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, July 9th, 2019 - 74 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 …

74 comments on “Daily review 09/07/2019 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. mickysavage 1
    9 July 2019 at 5:41 pm

    Photo chosen because it will really upset some right wingers for some strange reason.

  2. Ad 2
    9 July 2019 at 6:09 pm

    Kill the Titirangi chickens.

    And ducks.

  4. McFlock 4
    9 July 2019 at 6:17 pm

    Someone else might have already posted it, but it's still good for a laugh: Tommy Robinson wants asylum in the USA. Yup, right-wing anti-immigrant thug says he's seeking asylum from another right-wing anti-immigrant thug.

  5. Ad 5
    9 July 2019 at 6:22 pm

    Is someone going to do a list of all the campaign promises that Labour have found too hard?

    They seem to be racking up.

    • McFlock 5.1
      9 July 2019 at 6:29 pm

      I reckon some folk are still in shock that so many are being followed through on, even in a 3-way coalition.

    • Sacha 5.2
      9 July 2019 at 6:29 pm

      You mean promises in their negotiated agreements with NZ First and the Greens, I presume. Isn't compiling such a list what we have an Opposition for?

    • Andre 5.3
      9 July 2019 at 6:31 pm

      Surely The Chairman already has one?

    • marty mars 5.4
      9 July 2019 at 7:06 pm

      "They seem to be racking up"

      lol you seem to be racking off – why don't you do your wee list and we'll have a look at it – shouldn't take long lol

    • Gabby 5.5
      10 July 2019 at 12:54 pm

      Now might be a good time to put in an order for 100 000 prefabricated houses from China adders, what with the timber price plummet.

    • Chris 5.6
      10 July 2019 at 5:46 pm

      Quicker to do a list of the promises kept.

    • Pat 6.1
      9 July 2019 at 7:33 pm

      Having heard Tamihere on RNZ this morning Im guessing that any case will be dismissed due to a lack of clarity

  7. WeTheBleeple 7
    9 July 2019 at 7:28 pm

    Flowers for Vonnegut.

    All the stories were the same

    Who loved then fought then loved again

    But all the stories that I saw

    Were love beset by endless war

    Everybody wants to be

    The champion who makes act three

    Yet rarely but those born up high

    Will make it past act two in time

    For of the lowly sets the scene

    To aid the rich man's lofty dreams

    Who contrast brightly as the sun

    Till all the world is come undone.

    • Drowsy M. Kram 7.1
      9 July 2019 at 8:14 pm

      Vonnegut quote which belongs on the ‘POTUS post’, but that's popular enough already.

      "The two real political parties in America are the Winners and the Losers. The people don't acknowledge this. They claim membership in two imaginary parties, the Republicans and the Democrats, instead."

  8. greywarshark 8
    9 July 2019 at 7:40 pm

    Thoughts about murder and violent assaults and stalking and the right to not live in fear.

    A jealous man and a wife who wanted to break up the marriage. She asked him to shift out. He took a machete and killed the other man.

    He has pleaded guilty and been sentenced for 17 years without parole. He isn't going to be a better person just because he has been in jail for that long. The idea should be a term in jail and intensive work on self-management and self-understanding. The Court should be able to look at his past history and how he was at school and his employers. Friends and family may say anything. If this is a one-off the country isn't doing itself any favours, or the family of the murdered person, keeping him in jail longer. When he leaves he will leave with a skill he can use, and a job to go to – that should be arranged along with housing.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/114069682/machete-church-murder-you-have-broken-this-family–judge

    Men and women who have killed, assaulted, and mauled others more than once should not be released at all. Let's keep these violent reoffenders in, and habilitate the one-off people; how to hold themselves in check, know what their trigger points are, what are there secret fears that people can knowingly or unknowingly mock. Some will be able to manage for the rest of their lives out of trouble if they aren't in so long that their lives and ways are munted.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/112137375/thirty-prisoners-sexually-assaulted-at-auckland-jail-report-found

    https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/news/2018/07/13/nz-judges-three-strike-straightjacket.html

    Unfair punishment and fallacious reasoning for excessive jail term punishment:

    Deterrence: Offenders who are punished are less likely to reoffend, and their punishment will deter others.

    Incapacitation: Punishment can make it difficult or impossible for offenders to reoffend.

    Rehabilitation: If crime occurs because of a defect (psychological, moral, social, etc.), it can be corrected to prevent future crime.

    Retribution: Criminals should be punished because they deserve it, regardless of prospective consequences.

    Should be kept inside:

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2018/03/man-who-tried-to-kill-his-three-kids-will-soon-be-released.html

    • Sacha 8.1
      9 July 2019 at 10:02 pm

      "If this is a one-off the country isn't doing itself any favours, or the family of the murdered person, keeping him in jail longer."

      Enough hand-wringing. Read the story you linked to:

      Vea also had 11 previous convictions, that included assaulting his wife and breaching a protection order.

      Fuck him.

      • greywarshark 8.1.1
        9 July 2019 at 10:19 pm

        I said 'If this is a one-off',,, Also I said ' The Court should be able to look at his past history'.

        I don't have to read the story I am linked to. I put this up as a thinkpiece with this man's sentence as a starting point. As he had 11 previous convictions, obviously it wasn't going to apply to him.

        I am not hand-wringing – you are. I am trying to apply reason and thought to necessary changes in the justice system.

        • Sacha 8.1.1.1
          9 July 2019 at 10:42 pm

          People can judge your argument for themselves. Bad example to cite, perhaps.

          • greywarshark 8.1.1.1.1
            10 July 2019 at 10:44 am

            It was to spark thinking Sacha. For thinking about using the present case as a starting point. And containing 'if' situations. It doesn't need judging, it needs thinking about – possible changes.

            The fact that the recent murder case is a serious case of recidivism is part of the variations that show that the idea suggested shouldn't apply to all, as I pointed out. I suggest that violent recidivists, should never be released into the community again, and some attacks and behaviour are so egregious they indicate that the perpetrator is mentally damaged to an extent that also indicates a lifetime of incarceration.

            We can no longer just administer failing legislation, and need to look at what it is achieving and whether it is serving us well in its present form, then amend it after much consideration to serve whatever is regarded as a worthy outcome. People's lives and happiness are presently at risk from the callous, formulaic attitude of the justice system to the likelihood of re-offending and the fear that victims, and wider society feel for their safety and ability to live freely in the community. (Fear being felt over gun deaths in Manukau is an example of violence being more prevalent in a community.)

  9. Dennis Frank 9
    9 July 2019 at 8:24 pm

    A book review for Daily Review: "Greenland: a remote, mysterious island five times the size of California but with a population of just 56,000. The ice sheet that covers it is 700 miles wide and 1,500 miles long, and is composed of nearly three quadrillion tons of ice."

    "In The Ice at the End of the World, Jon Gertner explains how Greenland has evolved from one of earth’s last frontiers to its largest scientific laboratory." He describes its history of exploration then moves on to "scientists who built lonely encampments out on the ice and began drilling—one mile, two miles down. Their aim was to pull up ice cores that could reveal the deepest mysteries of earth’s past, going back hundreds of thousands of years. Today, scientists from all over the world are deploying every technological tool available to uncover the secrets of this frozen island before it’s too late."

    Initially sceptical, this reviewer explains why he gave it five stars: "I confess I wasn’t sure just how enthralling a book all about the Greenland ice sheet would be. Interesting, yes (well, to those of us who are the type to pick up a book about the Greenland ice sheet in the first place). But enough to carry an entire book rather than a long-form article? Interesting enough to move into “compelling” or, yes, “enthralling” territory? Hmmm. Turns out though, in the more than capable hands of Jon Gertner, the answer is assuredly yes and yes. The Ice at the End of the World: An Epic Journey into Greenland’s Buried Past and Our Perilous Future (2019) is indeed compelling and even, as the subtitle says, epic. Also informative, entertaining, thorough, well-organized, clearly … well, you get the idea."

    A woman on Amazon also gave it five stars: "This is a great, gripping, smart book not just about how we see Greenland, but about how people come to understand the world around us. The stories of the explorers are beautifully written and deeply engaging, the discussion of science is penetrating, lucid, and compelling. The characters come alive, and a strange world is made vivid. The Ice at the End of the World is a work about history and ecology and it will broaden any reader's understanding of the world–exactly what I want from a work of narrative nonfiction."

    The book has one obvious flaw. "408 pages, but not one word on why this sub-continent covered with miles-deep ice is called "Greenland", and what implications that fact may have for the current man-made global warming theory. Hint: Within the last 1000 years Greenland was NOT covered in ice and in fact was a place warm enough for wine grape vineyards onto grow plentifully. Ignorance of the true temperature record of the Earth in service of global warming hysteria is not science. It is religion."

    So the denier gave it one star. I read about the vikings establishing farms there decades ago. During the medieval warm period that lifestyle continued for three centuries. Let's not allow the omission to defeat the overview, here's a couple more 5-star reviewers explaining their take: "This is a beautifully written book by one of the best science writers out there today – if you have read his work in The New York Times as well as his previous book on Bell Lab (a classic) you already know the depths to which this reporter goes to unwinding complicated and important subjects to make them comprehensible for a general audience."

    "I heard about this book, and initially wondered if I really wanted to read an entire book on the ice in Greenland – I mean, how much can you say about a giant sheet of ice? Upon starting the book, however, I couldn't put it down. The history of the exploration and scientific measurement of Greenland was fascinating. I concur that you can't really understand the future until you have travelled in the footsteps of the scientists who have brought us to our current understanding. Jon Gertner crafts a story that is both personal and insightful. It is beautifully written, and I believe it will stand the test of time".

    • Pat 9.1
      9 July 2019 at 9:18 pm

      "Hint: Within the last 1000 years Greenland was NOT covered in ice and in fact was a place warm enough for wine grape vineyards onto grow plentifully. Ignorance of the true temperature record of the Earth in service of global warming hysteria is not science. It is religion."

      Pardon?

      • Sacha 9.1.1
        9 July 2019 at 9:53 pm

        A denial sandwich. Interesting tactic.

        • Pat 9.1.1.1
          9 July 2019 at 10:00 pm

          Dennis appears to be conflating on a grand scale….to what purpose. who knows

      • Dennis Frank 9.1.2
        9 July 2019 at 10:07 pm

        Usual story. Deniers who do their homework usually cite the medieval warm period as anomaly. Because most scientists are brainwashed with reductionism by universities, holism only enters into the thought of the smartest. So deniers struggle with the notion that regional climate variations can run counter to global trends.

        If he hadn't made his valid point I would have ignored his rating. But his valid point is actually vital to the accuracy of the whole picture – so as a holist I had to include it. Don't misconstrue the warming: contrary to what his brief put-down suggests, the ice-cap receded northward during the three centuries of warming – it only melted partially.

        Note that his ideology prevented him from acknowledging the overall merit of the book. Bias & prejudice are ultra-powerful. They destroy rationality. They totally shred it. Yet those afflicted return to full rationality as soon as they shift focus from what triggered the irrational behaviour. I have several books by climate scientists who are deniers. They are very good in some respects, when the authors discuss findings from the sound basis of their expertise. They lose the plot when they extrapolate beyond…

        • Pat 9.1.2.1
          9 July 2019 at 10:17 pm

          His 'valid point' has been discredited time and time again…as has the growing of corn there, a plant unknown in europe for at least a further 500 years consequently I fail to see what purpose there can be in implying the reviewers comments are in any way related to the content of the book which is the (erroneous) impression provided

          • Dennis Frank 9.1.2.1.1
            9 July 2019 at 10:27 pm

            His valid point was that the author did not explain why Greenland got its name, or include the three centuries of populace and economy there during the medieval warm period. Are you attempting to deny that history?? I've read about it on & off in various books throughout my long life, and never encountered a single writer in denial of it.

            • Pat 9.1.2.1.1.1
              9 July 2019 at 10:51 pm

              no one is denying european settlement of a small southern enclave of Greenland (even if the Inuit population is ignored)…it is the portrayal of that settlement as some form of evidence that Greenland was substantially different climatically than it is currently or has been for the proceeding thousands of years

                • Drowsy M. Kram …
                  9 July 2019 at 11:30 pm

                  Thanks Pat, good science via improved data gathering and analysis, although Dennis' usual concerns may trump his better judgement.

                  "Because most scientists are brainwashed with reductionism by universities…"

                  Where are those holistic scientists when we need them? Well, some of them are here.

                  http://www.beyondwilber.ca/Quotes_from_holistic.scientists.html

                  For all the beauty, wonder and 'insight' of holistic approaches, reductionism remains a valid, and in some cases the only way forward (for now.)

                  Given the brainwashing Prof. Vinther and colleagues must have endured, not to mention dished out, their scientific achievements are nothing short of miraculous. Maybe, someday, they'll even conform to Dennis' ideals!

              • Wayne …
                10 July 2019 at 7:26 am

                Indeed. I understand that the current Greenland temperatures are comparable to those of 1000 years ago. Yes, some hardy agriculture back then as is the case now. But not an ice free Greenland for may millions of years!

              • Dennis Frank …
                10 July 2019 at 9:20 am

                Okay, I agree that deniers extrapolate in the manner you are complaining about. I already made that point in 9.1.2 – perhaps you didn't read it properly.

                The point he was making was re apparent falsification of history by the author. You seem to keep missing it. All sorts of red herrings introduced here by yourself & other commentators can't change the fact. Greenland did actually go green for three centuries (at least) to acquire its name. That greening was caused by regional climate variation.

                None of the books that discuss it prove any link to global warming – the authors do not attempt to do so. Dunno why anyone else seeks to go that far off topic! Regional climate trends often seem at variance with the global trend.

        • marty mars 9.1.2.2
          9 July 2019 at 10:49 pm

          "I have several books by climate scientists who are deniers. They are very good in some respects, when the authors discuss findings from the sound basis of their expertise."

          That is just silly and dangerous. They aren't climate scientists if they are deniers – they are thick no matter what their qualifications are that have so enamoured you – that is NOT critical thinking dennis imo

          • Dennis Frank 9.1.2.2.1
            10 July 2019 at 8:59 am

            Think of it as analogous to a jury, deciding cases on the basis of circumstantial evidence. You often get minority bodies of opinion. That's because opinions differ on the balance of probabilities. Subjective factors come into play because some people give more weight to evidence on the pro side of the prosecution whereas others give more weight to evidence on the con side.

            Weighing the pros & cons to reach a balanced judgment is the praxis required by the justice system. Human nature rules, and scientists are equally human.

            So the disputes about evidence in the practice of science have always been endemic. They are a natural part of the culture of science due to human nature. To claim that climate scientists aren't real due to your personal dislike of their views is just silly. Anyone can look up their professional credentials. Most of the deniers who write books about climate science are tenured professors. I've written here before that my own view is around 80:20 in terms of the good points on both sides of the divide, so I remain an alarmist…

            • marty mars 9.1.2.2.1.1
              10 July 2019 at 9:28 am

              good for you – you aren't a jury or a scientist though so your personal differenciation tools are the only thing being used. They are coloured by your social and personal conditioning that puts scientists or men in white coats on some pedestal it seems, even if they talk rubbish. I suppose you're still debating the pros and cons of the moon landing or existence of bigfoot – your way leads to the mind maze – this is common with western thought but is really an example of thinking paralysis imo

              • Dennis Frank …
                10 July 2019 at 10:19 am

                Hey, if you don't get it why not be honest and say so? Since I've often mentioned in prior comments here that I graduated with a BSc in physics, you ought to be able to figure out that I can read books by scientists and follow the reasoning, read the graphs, assess the evidence, etc.

                No I don't put them on that pedestal. The people do. In the court of public opinion they get used as authorities as a result. Minority bodies of public opinion form naturally on the pros & cons of any topic. Science is not excluded from that natural process. Get used to it.

                • marty mars …
                  10 July 2019 at 10:20 am

                  you're too up yourself mate – have a good day

                  • Dennis Frank …
                    10 July 2019 at 10:29 am

                    Why do you believe it's all about me? It's actually about the interface between science and the public, and the ethics of misrepresenting history, as I explained. Duh!!

  11. marty mars 11
    9 July 2019 at 8:46 pm

    nice one billy

    Billy Bragg has condemned Morrissey for sharing a video from a YouTube channel that argued that the British establishment is using Stormzy to promote multiculturalism at the expense of white culture. The video, which has since been removed, contrasted the positive critical response to Stormzy’s headline set at Glastonbury with headlines detailing Morrissey’s support for far-right groups. Morrissey posted it on his de facto website, Morrissey Central, under the title: “Nothing But Blue Skies For Stormzy … the gallows for Morrissey”…

    … Morrissey has claimed that the media who report on his views are pursuing a vendetta against him. In an interview posted on Morrissey Central, he said that “as a so-called entertainer, I have no human rights”.

    Bragg described this as a “ridiculous position made all the more troubling by the fact that it is a common trope among rightwing reactionaries. The notion that certain individuals are not allowed to say certain things is spurious, not least because it is most often invoked after they’ve made their offensive comments. Look closely at their claims and you’ll find that what they are actually complaining about is the fact that they have been challenged.”

    Bragg drew attention to a new report by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a UK-based anti-extremist organisation, that said the nationalist “great replacement” theory that the white Christian European population is being replaced by non-European people is entering mainstream public discourse.

    Bragg claimed that Morrissey was helping to spread right-wing ideas. He continued: “Those who claim that this has no relevance to his stature as an artist should ask themselves if, by demanding that we separate the singer from the song, they too are helping to propagate this racist creed.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/jul/08/billy-bragg-morrissey-rightwing-youtube-video-stormzy-brandon-flowers

      • marty mars 11.1.1
        9 July 2019 at 9:27 pm

        worth 1000 of you though

        • Morrissey 11.1.1.1
          10 July 2019 at 10:07 am

          Ha! Priceless. You've (unwittingly of course) echoed the Grauniad hack who, in a 2012 attempt at a hit on the Media Lens site, produced this comedy classic:

          If Channel 4's Jon Snow can't be recognised for the national treasure he is – an unabashed leftie who has beaten the system (but also has to compromise, as we all do) – what hope is there? I'd say he does more good for progressive attitudes than half a dozen Pilgers, wouldn't you?

          https://www.theguardian.com/global/2012/jan/27/media-lens-picture-michael-white

          From now on, fellas, that hapless and clearly insincere singer of “worthy” dirges, Billy Dragg, is to be known as "Billy One Thousand Breens Bragg".

          • marty mars 11.1.1.1.1
            10 July 2019 at 10:29 am

            he's still fighting for justice, equality and fairness even today – you're still wanking on about rugby – he is a hero, you are a fart. People care what he says and noone gives a fuck what you say. breen = who?

            • Morrissey 11.1.1.1.1.1
              10 July 2019 at 10:42 am

              he's still fighting for justice, equality and fairness even today

              That's good. He's obviously pulled himself together. Because the last time I checked, he was peddling vicious extreme right fantasies against the most popular democratic politician in all of Europe.

              you're still wanking on about rugby –

              Steady on Marty! What the HELL?

              he is a hero

              ???? In the late nineties, this "hero" hung out with the war criminal "Tony" and his cronies, and was one of the more naïve spouters of the "Cool Britannia" nonsense; as we've seen in his moronic and bloodyminded Twitter rant the other day, he's gotten much darker since then.

              I recommend you read the letter to the Grauniad written by Jewish supporters of the man that Dragg and other zombies are telling lies about. It's right below this message.

              … and noone gives a fuck what you say. breen = who?

              Ooooh, I think you need to have a look at some of the reactions to my writing—-mostly positive, but some of it angry and hilariously splenetic— by a very large number of people in the media and in politics. I’ll post up a few of the more unhinged reactions to remind you if you like. (Think Kerre Woodham, Michael Laws, Leighton Smith, Wayne Mapp, Stephen Franks….)

              • marty mars …
                10 July 2019 at 11:36 am

                Legend

                The milkman of human kindness is angry. Not just generally, but specifically now, as he arrives at a BBC building in central London. On the train up from Dorset, where he lives, Billy Bragg has read about British soldiers in Kabul firing shots at a poster of Jeremy Corbyn.

                He is angry because it is, he says, symptomatic of the demonisation of politicians, particularly on the left, particularly Corbyn, and because of what it says about the rising threat and reach of the far right. He is also angry because of the timing of it: the news comes the day Corbyn is going to sit down with the prime minister, the day after headlines about a plot by a neo-Nazi to murder a Labour MP.

                … We are supposed to be talking about Bragg’s new skiffle documentary, which we will get to, but it is hard to think about anything except the state of the country at the moment. Clearly the Labour leader shouldn’t be used as target practice, but isn’t Bragg disappointed in him?

                No, he says. He broadly supports what Corbyn and the Labour party are currently doing. “There are things I don’t agree with, but he represents something really important, which is the rejection of the neoliberal agenda,” he says.

                https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/apr/08/billy-bragg-brexit-corbyn-skiffle-documentary-interview

                and you, breen, disrespect him? lol you are no tigerworm.

                • Morrissey …
                  10 July 2019 at 1:21 pm

                  He is angry because it is, he says, symptomatic of the demonisation of politicians, particularly on the left, particularly Corbyn…

                  He said that in April this year. Yet less than three months later, he's demonizing Corbyn in a far more ruthless way than those ignorant squaddies did in Afghanistan. Bragg has chosen to tag along with this ridiculous campaign led by the opportunistic and cynical Tom Watson, along with dreadful old Yenta Hodge and the most rabidly right wing Israeli apologists in the country.

                  There are many smart, intelligent, serious, thoughtful musicians in Britain—Richard Thompson, P.J. Harvey, Roger Waters and Captain SKA to name just a few—but there are also the likes of Tony Hadley, Phil Collins, Geri Halliwell, Eric Clapton, and Billy "One Thousand Breens" Bragg,

                  and you, breen, disrespect him?
                  I despise him, as I despise other foolish and shallow musicians, like this twit…..

                  • marty mars …
                    10 July 2019 at 1:39 pm

                    he is a star and you are a twinkler

                    he is the sea and you are a thimble of urine

                    he is staunch and left and you are fickle and clickbait driven

                    no wonder you despise him – he shows you up for the flake you are – lol slink off dimwit.

                    • Incognito …
                      10 July 2019 at 1:50 pm

                      broken heart

                    • Morrissey …
                      10 July 2019 at 2:14 pm

                      He's "staunch and left", but he sings at a concert for a war criminal and hounder of journalists. What are you smoking, marty? And, no, I do NOT want any of it.

                      But at least Springsteen has not joined in on any anti-Bernie lynch mob, to my knowledge.

  12. Morrissey 12
    9 July 2019 at 9:09 pm

    The wrong sort of jews…

    https://www.dumptheguardian.com/news/2019/jul/08/jewish-support-for-chris-williamson

    "We the undersigned, all Jews, are writing in support of Chris Williamson and to register our dismay at the recent letter organised by Tom Watson, and signed by parliamentary Labour party and House of Lords members, calling for his suspension (Anger over return of MP who said Labour was ‘too apologetic’ over antisemitism, 28 June).

    Chris Williamson did not say that the party had been “too apologetic about antisemitism”, as has been widely misreported. He correctly stated that the Labour party has done more than any other party to combat the scourge of antisemitism and that, therefore, its stance should be less apologetic. Such attacks on Jeremy Corbyn’s supporters aim to undermine not only the Labour party’s leadership but also all pro-Palestinian members.

    The mass media have ignored the huge support for Chris both within and beyond the Labour party. Support that includes many Jews. The party needs people like him, with the energy and determination to fight for social justice. As anti-racist Jews, we regard Chris as our ally: he stands as we do with the oppressed rather than the oppressor. It should also be noted that he has a longer record of campaigning against racism and fascism than most of his detractors.

    The Chakrabarti report recommended that the party’s disciplinary procedures respect due process, favour education over expulsion and promote a culture of free speech, yet this has been abandoned in practice. We ask the Labour party to reinstate Chris Williamson and cease persecuting such members on false allegations of antisemitism.

    Noam Chomsky MIT,
    Norman Finkelstein Lecturer and writer,
    Ed Asner Actor,
    Prof Richard Falk Princeton University,
    Leah Lavene
    and Jenny Manson Jewish Voice for Labour
    and more than 100 others. "
    Full list at tinyurl.com/y4mr4lwb

  13. greywarshark 13
    10 July 2019 at 12:05 pm

    Edit:
    We are up against government v privatised entities every day so will stick this informative report about the path to privatisation here. It has lots of what seem to be facts, good stuff.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=14695

    Brian Gaynor on How asset sales went wrong 30 Jun, 2000 3:24pm

    He does a bit of calculating, thinking of the opprobrium thrown at the Think Big Projects which were figured at a loss to NZ of $7.4 billion.

    In recent years Sir William Birch has spearheaded the privatisation programme. He was also the driving force behind the Government-funded Think Big energy projects in the early 1980s. The total loss from these projects was $7.4 billion.

    He shows the figures for the various ways we lost out on our selling of government assets, which is a mind-boggling list. (Telecom reflects the overall sales programme – most of the profits have gone offshore.) Then he looks at the figures concerning the way the government sold Telecom as a comparison to the Think Big project losses, and finds they were less than the losses taken on Telecom through poor government decision-making.

    A partial sale of Telecom, similar to the Telstra sale, would have reduced the wealth transferred to overseas shareholders by more than $8 billion and increased the wealth of New Zealand taxpayers and investors by the same amount.