web analytics

Daily review 09/12/2021

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, December 9th, 2021 - 153 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 …

153 comments on “Daily review 09/12/2021 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Dennis Frank 1
    9 December 2021 at 6:23 pm

    So the govt's credibility is being tested by the Waitangi Tribunal:

    The government has long insisted it has not failed Māori in the Covid-19 response, and that Māori leaders, iwi and other organisations have been regularly consulted. But one of those iwi leaders, Mike Smith, described the level of engagement as insulting, calling it patsy consultation with pre-made decisions. The application for the hearing was brought by the Māori Council, arguing that the Crown had breached its obligations of partnership and protection under Te Tiriti o Waitangi. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/457343/covid-19-response-waitangi-tribunal-hearing-into-whether-te-tiriti-breached-begins

    Today, Bloomfield's testimony seriously threatened the viability of the Maori cabal controlling Ardern thesis that got some traction the other day.

    The Director-General of Health has told the Waitangi Tribunal he advised the Government to prioritise Māori 50 years and over early in the Covid-19 vaccine rollout, but Cabinet preferred to take a different approach. https://www.1news.co.nz/2021/12/09/bloomfield-advised-govt-to-prioritise-maori-over-50-in-rollout/

    So cabinet over-ruled the Maori cabal?? Or did they fail to support Bloomfield? Will any political journalist in Aotearoa prove themselves on the ball by asking the right people these questions? Watch this space.

    • Sacha 1.1
      9 December 2021 at 6:25 pm

      Cabinet over-ruled every piece of expert advice they were given in the last year or two about Covid equity for Māori. Pandering to racists.

      • Anne 1.1.1
        9 December 2021 at 6:50 pm

        "Pandering to racists."

        Not so much pandering to racists but scared of them.

        When the issue was being explored in the media several months ago, I recall thinking… they (the Govt.) are scared to prioritise Maori because the middle classes (who in 2020 came over to Labour in droves) won't like it. And they were right. My middle class relatives have been banging on about Maori taking precedence over the rest of us ever since. I argue the toss but get drowned out.

        Sometimes being cautious does not pay off. They should have prioritised Maoriand to hell with what the the middle classes think.

        • Sacha 1.1.1.1
          9 December 2021 at 6:54 pm

          Scared is a feeling. Pandering is an action.

          Cabinet have actively put Māori citizens in harm's way.

    • Ad 1.2
      9 December 2021 at 7:12 pm

      Only the true beltway troughers give a damn.

  2. Byd0nz 2
    9 December 2021 at 6:23 pm

    I notice since the great new reset that TV news has become even more ‘ Labour Phobic’ almost on a par with the Western Russia phobic retric. Lots of arm twisting going on in our ‘free Press.

    • Gezza 2.1
      9 December 2021 at 8:30 pm

      Maybe. Something unusual happened. 1ewes at 6 did a hit piece on Ardern tonite.

      In an item about claims by, among others, The Greens – that Menendez March character – that benefit sanctions are harming children (something 1ewes covered previously a week or two ago, that made Sepuloni look impotent & captured by her Department which has done nothing to address the problem) they showed a senior MSD staffer at a Select Committee having absolutely no idea whether checks were made whether beneficiaries had children before sanctions were applied.

      Then they showed clips of Ardern answering a tv reporter’s questions saying that she believed people with children were not sanctioned, & (IIRC) that she believed that this was checked. After her answers, 1ewes contradicted her with the actual facts, including that, in some cases, sanctions are in fact automatically imposed.

      There will be serious grumpiness with TVNZ on the Beehive 9th floor tonite, methinks.

      • Treetop 2.1.1
        9 December 2021 at 10:22 pm

        It is a bad week for Sepuloni.

        Have you caught up with the petition by Jan Logie on how ACC treats sexual abuse claims?

        I would like an inquiry to be held into the process of psychologist and psychiatric assessments which are used to establish if a mental injury has occurred. Historical cases are hard to settle due to many being minimised when high level offending occurred.

  3. weka 3
    9 December 2021 at 6:33 pm

    Interesting thread on matauranga Maori, after Peterson stuck his oar in

    https://twitter.com/reasther/status/1468695933974040578?s=21

    • Sacha 3.1
      9 December 2021 at 7:03 pm

      A line being pushed by foreign righties like Peterson should be enough warning.

      https://twitter.com/KyleDChurch/status/1468821420482330624

      • weka 3.1.1
        9 December 2021 at 7:36 pm

        would be nice if we got ahead of the curve on this one and explained to the people who don't yet know what mātauranga Māori actually is. The hard core racists will racist, it's the ones who currently don't get it that are going to be swayed by Peterson or Dawkin.

        • RedLogix 3.1.1.1
          10 December 2021 at 2:22 am

          would be nice if we got ahead of the curve on this one and explained to the people who don't yet know what mātauranga Māori actually is.

          I tell you what – I might pay attention when you can show me the Maori version of Maxwell's equations of electromagnetism. The exact direct equivalent.

          After that we can move say the biological differences between male and female.

          • weka 3.1.1.1.1
            10 December 2021 at 10:59 am

            you seem to think that mātauranga Māori is science. It's not. It's the body of knowledge that arises out of Te Ao Māori, and that includes but is not limited to empirical processes of developing and testing knowledge of the physical world.

            • RedLogix 3.1.1.1.1.1
              10 December 2021 at 11:16 am

              you seem to think that mātauranga Māori is science.

              Nope. I'm vociferously arguing that it is not. It would seem we agree on that.

              But then the persecution by the Royal Society of outstanding science experts like Prof Garth Cooper or the marginalising of world class figures such as Dr Michael Corballis tells us a quite different story.

              Another 'no debate' smash down by the woke racists who have determined that because the scientific revolution first originates within a European setting – therefore it's irredeemable 'whiteness' must be eradicated. And because the STEM disciplines are now the last powerful bastion of reason standing against their insanities (such as 'sex doesn't exist) – it must be subverted to their cause.

              • weka …
                10 December 2021 at 11:36 am

                Nope. I'm vociferously arguing that it is not. It would seem we agree on that.

                Nope. Whether you argue for or against, if your starting point is that mātauranga Māori is/isn't science, you've missed the point. Which you patently have. Which leaves a bunch of strawmen blowing in the wind.

                • RedLogix …
                  10 December 2021 at 11:39 am

                  you seem to think that mātauranga Māori is science. It's not.

                  Whether you argue for or against, if your starting point is that mātauranga Māori is/isn't science, you've missed the point.

                  Now I'm just confused.

                  • weka …
                    10 December 2021 at 11:40 am

                    I know, lots of people are. The mainstream debate is really confused. I've put the definitions of words below.

                • weka …
                  10 December 2021 at 11:39 am

                  Pūtaiao is the Māori kupu for science.

                  https://maoridictionary.co.nz/search?idiom=&phrase=&proverb=&loan=&histLoanWords=&keywords=science

                  Mātauranga Māori means something else.

                  mātauranga

                  1. (noun) knowledge, wisdom, understanding, skill – sometimes used in the plural.

                  Ko ngā kaumātua e kaiponu ana i ngā kōrero e tika ana kia hāmenetia e mātou, e ngā tamariki, nō te mea he kōhuru tēnei i a mātou. Homai ngā kōrero me ngā mātauranga o mua hei taiaha mā mātou ki te patu i ngā Pākehā e kī nei he iwi kūare te Māori. Kaua e waiho mā ngā Pākehā e kōrero ngā tikanga Māori i roto i ngā nūpepa Pākehā, engari mā tātou, mā ngā Māori, e kōrero i roto i tā tātou nūpepa Māori, i 'Te Pipiwharauroa' (TP 10/1907:9). / It is right that the elders who are withholding information be censured by us, the children, because this is a treacherous abuse of custom against us. Provide us with the stories and the knowledge of the past as a weapon for us to combat the Pākehā who say that the Māori are an ignorant people. Don't leave it for the Pākehā to talk about Māori customs in English newspapers, but it's for us, the Māori, to talk about them in our Māori newspaper, 'Te Pipiwharauroa'. (From an article in Māori by Te Rangi Hīroa.)

                  2. (noun) education – an extension of the original meaning and commonly used in modern Māori with this meaning.

                  I te wā e tamariki ana koinā te mahurutanga o te tangata. Ko tēnā te wā hei whāwhātanga ki te mātauranga (TTT 1/2/1925:179). / During the time of childhood a person is untroubled. That's the time to tackle education.

                  3. (noun) knowledgeable person, sage, scholar, intellectual, academic.

                  E ngā mātauranga katoa, tēnā koutou (TP 10/1905:6). / All knowledgeable people, greetings.

                  Synonyms: ngaio

                  https://maoridictionary.co.nz/search?idiom=&phrase=&proverb=&loan=&histLoanWords=&keywords=matauranga

                  • RedLogix …
                    10 December 2021 at 12:03 pm

                    That definition completely aligns with my description of humanity's common heritage of observational knowledge as I described above at 9:33am below.

                    But it's not science.

                    Felix brought up the example of Polynesian navigation. One can absolutely admire and respect the techniques they evolved, as did numerous peoples throughout history.

                    But at the dawn of the scientific era we suddenly get this:

                    The Portuguese campaign of Atlantic navigation is one of the earliest examples of a systematic scientific large project, sustained over many decades. This program of study recruited several men of exceptional ability, had a well-defined set of objectives, and was open to experimental confirmation through the success or otherwise of subsequent navigations.

                    Yes they were solving the same problem, but the method was qualitatively different – producing over time technologies such as sextants, celestial tables, accurate maps, precision clocks and ultimately the modern GPS. This was not a foreseeable outcome of the Polynesian navigation model.

                    By the mid-1500's the Portuguese were reliably finding tiny remote and isolated islands like Reunion in the vast emptiness of the Indian ocean, by the late1700's European navigators could pretty much sail anywhere in the world. They had taken an ancient heritage of context specific navigational skills, and transformed them into a generalised formal method that solved the problem in a universal manner. One accessible to and repeatable by anyone.

                    That is science.

                    • weka …
                      10 December 2021 at 12:29 pm

                      But it's not science.

                      You are still not getting it. The science that Māori were doing pre contact is a subset of Mātauranga Māori (in my limited Pākehā understanding).

                      You are still comparing science with mātauranga Māori, but it doesn't make sense to do that.

                      You are also arguing Western science, rather than science. As Felix explained, all peoples use the basic methods of empiricism to observe and understand the physical world.

                      Western science took that in a certain direction, you are right about that. You can argue that you want this body of knowledge and practice siloed off from other ways of doing and understanding science. But this is where the problems of racism come in. WS is so dominant, that to keep it segregated in this way while specifically excluding other ways of knowing from for instance the education system, will impact badly on Māori (and the rest of us also lose out imo).

                      You can also argue that you want it siloed off from culture, but that would be odd given that Western science is steeped in its own culture. Again, hugely problematic in terms of how not to be racist while doing that.

                      The other aspect here is that WS has made these incredible gains but hasn't been tempered by wisdom or a sane culture. Hence climate change, environmental destruction, harms via medical science and so on. Putting science within a larger body of knowledge (ways of knowing) would change that.

                    • RedLogix …
                      10 December 2021 at 12:38 pm

                      You can also argue that you want it siloed off from culture, but that would be odd given that Western science is steeped in its own culture. Again, hugely problematic in terms of how not to be racist while doing that.

                      The Chinese who train more STEM people on actual merit than anyone else in world would laugh themselves silly to read that. The scientific method is a universal – it transcends culture more thoroughly than almost anything else we've created as a species.

                      Quit telling me “I don’t get it”. You of all people should understand how important it is that the meaning of words is not hijacked for rotten purposes. And if you want to play the 'racist' card on this – I suggest you take it up with Prof Garth Cooper – who is Maori.

                    • weka …
                      10 December 2021 at 1:50 pm

                      The Chinese who train more STEM people on actual merit than anyone else in world would laugh themselves silly to read that. The scientific method is a universal – it transcends culture more thoroughly than almost anything else we've created as a species.

                      Western science has a specific lineage that isn't universal (WS didn't arise spontaneously all over the world, it arrived in a specific time and place). That the Chinese knew how to integrate it and retain their traditional knowledge, and development them together, puts them far ahead of the West.

                      Scientists who cannot, or will not, acknowledge their cultural bias are part of the problem.

                    • weka …
                      10 December 2021 at 1:53 pm

                      Quit telling me “I don’t get it”. You of all people should understand how important it is that the meaning of words is not hijacked for rotten purposes. And if you want to play the 'racist' card on this – I suggest you take it up with Prof Garth Cooper – who is Maori.

                      You are literally misinterpreting what mātauranga Māori is despite it having been explained to you. If the argument is over semantics, I have no problem with coining different language, hence my usage of Western science instead of science.

                      Did you make an argument re what the societies outside of the West were doing, pre the arrival of Western science, and why it wasn't science? Or did it just come down to it wasn't as good a science as what the West was doing?

                    • RedLogix …
                      10 December 2021 at 2:02 pm

                      That the Chinese knew how to integrate it and retain their traditional knowledge, and development them together, puts them far ahead of the West.

                      Such a generalisation is not justified. All the Chinese engineers I worked with this past year are thoroughly modern and paradoxically enough quite dismissive of cultural knowledge such as TCM.

                      And going the other way – it's not true that the West abandoned all of it's traditional bodies of knowledge either. There are plenty of people who sustain it in many domains.

                      Scientists who cannot, or will not, acknowledge their cultural bias are part of the problem.

                      Everyone has a cultural bias. It would be impossible for them not to have. This however reads as 'woke hatred for whiteness'.

                      You are literally misinterpreting what mātauranga Māori is despite it having been explained to you.

                      Your definition completely aligns with my description of humanity’s common heritage of observational knowledge as I described above at 9:33am below. I am not misinterpreting anything.

                      Knowledge is a very broad term, and it certainly forms a part of the scientific method you’re calling WS. Humans relied on this kind of knowledge for millennia just to survive – but it completely fails to explain the qualitative leap we call the scientific revolution and has led to you and I typing on the internet.

                    • Poission …
                      10 December 2021 at 2:09 pm

                      Western science has a specific lineage that isn't universal (WS didn't arise spontaneously all over the world, it arrived in a specific time and place)

                      The lineage is Greek,for example Newton took Pythagorus and extended space to three dimensions,and Einstein extended it to four dimensions.The equations being universal as the mathematics are an absolute truth.

                    • RedLogix …
                      10 December 2021 at 2:29 pm

                      Or did it just come down to it wasn't as good a science as what the West was doing?

                      Put bluntly yes.

                      If you persist in stretching the definition of 'science' to include 'all knowledge' the discussion is derailed because we're simply not talking about the same thing.

                      I have explicitly and repeatedly acknowledged that vast heritage of cultural and observational knowledge that millennia of human struggle has bequeathed us. It should be respected for two reasons, one is that it was what enabled any of us to be alive today, the other is that in many places it retains signposts to information that in our rush to a scientific modernity we have overlooked or forgotten.

                      But modern science as it evolved and first came to a recognisable form in the 1500's has taken humanity to a qualitatively different level. A better level that delivered better outcomes on the whole – and will continue to do so.

                      But those who would seek to demolish this astonishing legacy will first seek to define away the meaning of words. Also what Poission said.

                    • weka …
                      10 December 2021 at 2:57 pm

                      Or did it just come down to it wasn't as good a science as what the West was doing?

                      Put bluntly yes.

                      Good, something concrete. So in your mind, Western science is better at observing and understanding the physical world than other forms of empiricism developed in other places/times.

                      If you persist in stretching the definition of 'science' to include 'all knowledge' the discussion is derailed because we're simply not talking about the same thing.

                      Red, I've just spent half a day saying 'science' doesn't include all knowledge. How are you missing that?

                      I have explicitly and repeatedly acknowledged that vast heritage of cultural and observational knowledge that millennia of human struggle has bequeathed us.

                      Here it is you that is conflating cultural and empiricism. If I understand you, you want it to look like this:

                      Western science is discrete and separate from other forms of knowing, including other forms of empiricism that use basic scientific method.

                      vs

                      All other knowledge, including non-WS empiricism, but also including religion, mythology, and social and cultural knowledge bases, tech and processes.

                      And that those two sets of things are both useful.

                      But modern science as it evolved and first came to a recognisable form in the 1500's has taken humanity to a qualitatively different level.

                      Yes, Western Science.

                      But those who would seek to demolish this astonishing legacy will first seek to define away the meaning of words.

                      What would be some examples of 'seek to demolish' so I can understand what you are referring to.

                      Also what Poission said.

                      Yes, the lineage of Western Science (part of it).

                    • RedLogix …
                      10 December 2021 at 3:20 pm

                      So in your mind, Western science is better at observing and understanding the physical world than other forms of empiricism developed in other places/times.

                      Yes. The proof I offer is this graph. The reason for this is Modern Science is founded in empiricism but evolved into a new and formal set of methods that have proven remarkably powerful and successful.

                      This is not a utopian claim, or that everything it has delivered is perfect. Quite the opposite, if anything the perpetual and necessary skepticism of the scientific method guarantees we will always be seeking better and improved pathways.

                      I'm aware that I'm struggling to convey properly what I mean by Modern Science; and I offer this really neat Veritassium video that starts in an arcane corner of mathematics – and arrives at the miracle machines you and I are typing on. You don't have to get all the details to appreciate the story – and it moves me beyond all reason:

                      That Modern Science has it's origins within Europe, and it's heroes are almost all 'dead white men' seems to be the real problem here. Well frankly I reject that as blatant woke racism.

                    • weka …
                      10 December 2021 at 3:38 pm

                      I think your explanation is fine. Let's call it Modern Science (I'll still refer to it as Western as well). MS developed in a particular way and brings specific benefit. I don't think there is anything controversial in that.

                      We would differ in that I see ways of knowing in a circle and you probably see them in a hierarchy. And I would still use the word science to describe non-MS methodologies (and would reference the dictionary definitions at this point). But I think we are clear now.

                      Afaik, Māori are saying we can add to this body of knowledge (MS) from our own experience. They may also be saying that it should change to some degree.

                      If you have specific examples of how this damages MS, I'd be interested to hear them.

                    • RedLogix …
                      10 December 2021 at 4:20 pm

                      At this point I usually see the motte and bailey fallacy get trotted out. The motte – the easily defended position is:

                      Māori are saying we can add to this body of knowledge (MS) from our own experience. They may also be saying that it should change to some degree.

                      Well almost no reasonable person is going to disagree with this, and especially not put their career and reputation at risk over. Indeed:

                      The authors of the letter, ‘In Defence of Science’, were careful to say that indigenous knowledge was ‘critical for the preservation and perpetuation of culture and local practices, and plays key roles in management and policy’ and should be taught in New Zealand’s schools.

                      But then the bailey which triggered the Royal Society witch hunt is this:

                      But they drew the line at treating it as on a par with physics, chemistry and biology: ‘In the discovery of empirical, universal truths, it falls far short of what we can define as science itself.’

                      It's evident there is an increasing disquiet among experienced and in some cases prominent people in seeing mātauranga Māori being placed in the driving seat, setting policy and funding priorities.

        • felix 3.1.1.2
          10 December 2021 at 7:52 am

          Or how about we get ahead of the curve and explain to those opposed to science what science actually is.

          FFS the idea that Polynesian explorers were using something other than scientific techniques to navigate the pacific is not only scientifically and linguistically ignorant it's also blatantly racist and culturally ignorant too.

          • RedLogix 3.1.1.2.1
            10 December 2021 at 9:33 am

            Humans everywhere were doing smart tough things to survive and thrive. Virtually all agriculture, animal husbandry, the building of things like pyramids, astronomy, mining and metal working, number systems, writing, political and military systems, medical models and so on – were notable features of societies everywhere. Consider the complexity and sophistication of traditional Chinese medicine as an example.

            Or astonishing artifacts like the Antikythera Mechanism that pushed calendar and astronomical methods right up to the verge of fully modern ideas. The Ancient Greeks got to within a few conceptual steps of a full blown industrial revolution as did a number of civilisations. Maori were no different, nor especially unique. Their development of deep water navigation being a both obvious and necessary adaptation to their environment.

            All of these pre-industrial observational knowledge systems were essential, valuable and can still inform us. But calling them science is yet another example of the deplorable woke trick of taking powerful words and stretching them into uselessness.

            • felix 3.1.1.2.1.1
              10 December 2021 at 9:52 am

              Perhaps I was too ambiguous. What I was trying to say is that there isn't another reliable repeatable way to discover what's true except by the scientific method. To the extent that ancient people discovered things that worked, they were practicing science. There isn't another repeatable way to do it. No doubt they also practiced lots of other non-scientific methods that didn't reliably or repeatably find out anything.

              What I'm seeing people say is that they were actually practicing some other equally efficacious – or perhaps even superior sort of truth-finding that isn't scientific and that strikes me as a complete non-sequitur.

              • RedLogix …
                10 December 2021 at 10:18 am

                To the extent that ancient people discovered things that worked, they were practicing science.

                That hijacks the word and blurs over a crucial historic distinction. In my view the word science is the explanation for this graph.

                Economic growth is a very recent phenomenon – we already saw this in the data that we discussed earlier in this entry. It is true that in the pre-growth era some people were very well off – but this was the tiny elite of the tribal leaders, pharaohs, kings and religious leaders. Whilst global inequalities were lower in a world where sustained economic growth had yet to occur anywhere, economic inequality within pre-modern societies was extremely high and the average person was living in conditions that we would call extreme poverty today.

                The destitution of the common man only changed with the onset of economic growth. The time when this change happened in various countries can be seen in these two charts. Economic prosperity was only achieved over the last couple of hundred years. In fact, it was mostly achieved over the second half of the last hundred years. The rise of global average incomes – global GDP per capita – shows that the world economy has moved from a zero-sum game to a positive-sum game.

                This universal transformation happened for a reason – science. Airbrushing that away to appease woke racists intent on eradicating 'whiteness' is bullshit.

                • Blazer …
                  10 December 2021 at 10:26 am

                  'Economic growth is a very recent phenomenon'-really -Portugal,Spain,England,France all had huge economic growth…with Empire.

                  '– but this was the tiny elite of the tribal leaders, pharaohs, kings and religious leaders.'-like the 1% today you mean.

                  -'and the average person was living in conditions that we would call extreme poverty today.-nothing much has changed except maybe locations,25,000 a day dying of starvation.

                  ' global GDP per capita – shows that the world economy has moved from a zero-sum game to a positive-sum game.'-delusional,meaningless drivel'(imo)

                  • RedLogix …
                    10 December 2021 at 10:35 am

                    The data given with that article simply proves you wrong.

                    The reality is that by 2021 around 85% of humanity had escaped absolute poverty – something utterly unimaginable in 1821. In most respects you live a much better life than even the 1% elites of that era.

                    nothing much has changed except maybe locations,25,000 a day dying of starvation.

                    Due almost entirely to political incompetence and ethnic conflicts.

                    • Blazer …
                      10 December 2021 at 10:41 am

                      Does not matter what starvation is due to.

                      As you know re data…lies,damn lies and statistics'.

                      If there are 100,000 billionaires in the world and 100,000 people with .50c …if we add the totals and ascertain the average of 200,000 people it comes out as quite…meaningless.

                      Can you define this 'much better life'?

                    • RedLogix …
                      10 December 2021 at 10:49 am

                      Does not matter what starvation is due to.

                      If you are not interested in the root causes, you probably are not interested in fixing the problem.

                      Nor does it seem to me you even bothered to read the article you're so airily dismissing.

                    • Blazer …
                      10 December 2021 at 11:08 am

                      Flawed analysis…stopped reading at this…

                      ' it is a time in which the income of the average person grew immensely – from an average of £1051 incomes per person per year increased to over £30,000 a 29-fold increase in prosperity. This means an average person in the UK today has a higher income in two weeks than an average person in the past had in an entire year. Since the total sum of incomes is the total sum of production this also means that the production of the average person in two weeks today is equivalent to the production of the average person in an entire year in the past'

                      As I've mentioned before…what does this 29 fold increase buy ,adjusted for inflation!-line it up with house prices as an example.

                      This guy seems to be your go to…his analysis is so selective,to be ..useless-imo.

                    • RedLogix …
                      10 December 2021 at 11:22 am

                      We've had this discussion before on correcting for inflation in monetary time series data. If you will not understand that then really you have no place in this discussion.

                      And how often have I seen this phrase “I stopped watching/reading at …”. It’s the hallmark signal of the cognitive dissonance that happens when data conflicts with fixed thinking.

                      This guy seems to be your go to…his analysis is so selective,to be ..useless-imo.

                      Attacking the messenger without bothering to find out anything about them.

                    • Blazer …
                      10 December 2021 at 11:36 am

                      I don't accept your criticism at all.

                      I have already pointed out specific flaws in his analysis.

                      Love to see what someone like Piketty would have to say.

                      I certainly understand he is taking inflation into account.That does not alter my query…food and shelter are vital to survival.

                      Alot of assumptions are relied on…define a 'much better life'!

                      29x increase….relate that to a comparative house price in London or a major city relevant to the time…frame he relies on.

                    • RedLogix …
                      10 December 2021 at 11:45 am

                      I have already pointed out specific flaws in his analysis.

                      No you haven't. All you have done is claim that a comparison was not time corrected for inflation, without producing any evidence.

                    • roblogic …
                      10 December 2021 at 12:08 pm

                      RL i think the problem here is your focus on global outcomes, while ignoring the experience of the western working class.

                      The Actuality of Marx’s Immiseration Thesis in the 21st Century – Regeneration Magazine

                    • Blazer …
                      10 December 2021 at 12:13 pm

                      Let's play 'have/haven't' then.

                      1-'Economic growth is a very recent phenomenon'-really -Portugal,Spain,England,France all had huge economic growth…with Empire.'

                      Is 'recent' the get out clause?

                    • RedLogix …
                      10 December 2021 at 12:22 pm

                      @roblogic

                      That's a genuine objection. I agree that incomes in the developed West started to fall behind productivity sometime in the 70's.

                      My response is that this coincides with the final major expansion of the post WW2 global trade order to fully embrace Asia, India and Latin America – which inevitably brought workers in Europe and the Anglosphere into direct competition with the developing world.

                      It also coincided with the early 80's overshadowing of Keynsian policy settings with the idiotic neo-liberal idea that because capitalist markets were good at solving some economic problems – they must therefore be good at solving all problems.

                      And finally the absence of a global governance system that might moderate and regulate these affairs has meant we lacked the tools to address the concerns you raise.

                    • Blazer …
                      10 December 2021 at 12:31 pm

                      Roblogic said the same thing I alluded to….with graphs!surprise

                • felix …
                  10 December 2021 at 6:25 pm

                  "to appease woke racists intent on eradicating 'whiteness' is bullshit."

                  Well that's interesting. We both disagree with the woke racists but from different angles. You think they're wrong for saying ancients did science, and I think they're wrong for saying the ancients' magic was just as good as science.

                  "That hijacks the word "

                  People are either using the scientific method or they're not. If they're reliably and repeatably discovering anything about reality then they must be using it, because there was never any other way that worked. The hijack is in reserving the word just for science that leads to your specific set of outcomes. That is starting from the conclusion and working backwards, and is not very scientific.

                  • weka …
                    10 December 2021 at 6:58 pm

                    👍

                    I also think that context matters here. If I were stuck in the Australian outback with no help coming, would I want to be with a group of local Aboriginal people who knew how to live on the land, or would I want to be with a hydrologist, botanist and zoologist?

                    • RedLogix …
                      10 December 2021 at 7:11 pm

                      I would actually want a PLB (Personal Locator Beacon). devil

                      But to answer your question in good faith – if I was in the outback yes the local people would have better knowledge of the outback. And if I was in the Arctic tundra I would definitely pick the local Inuit.

                      But if I did not know in advance where I might land up – in other words I had to deal with the general case – I would pick the group of scientists as far more likely to be able to discover what we needed to know to survive regardless of the setting. (I accept a few cans of baked beans to get us through while they worked it out would be a bonus.)

                      I'm not trying to be smart here – this is an important qualitative difference.

                  • RedLogix …
                    10 December 2021 at 7:04 pm

                    You think they're wrong for saying ancients did science, and I think they're wrong for saying the ancients' magic was just as good as science.

                    That works for me both ways. Happy to accept this point.

                    People are either using the scientific method or they're not. If they're reliably and repeatably discovering anything about reality then they must be using it, because there was never any other way that worked.

                    The crux of this is 'reliably and repeatedly'. Look back at the comparison I made above between Polynesian and Portuguese deep water navigation. One led to the GPS chart plotter, the other did not. One method was amenable to deeper levels of abstraction and generalisation, the other was not. One has become a universal tool, the other a cultural curiosity that's of niche appeal only.

  4. Dennis Frank 4
    9 December 2021 at 7:01 pm

    So, parliament recognised the right to self-determination.

    Green Party MP Dr Elizabeth Kerekere, a longtime advocate in the rainbow community, was in tears and had to pause to gather her emotions as she spoke in support of the Bill in the House.

    "This bill recognises that those who need to amend their birth certificate can do so, that the courts do not have the right to make that choice for them, that parents do not have that right, that cis-gender people who don't even know them or care about them do not have that right. As a takatāpui, cis-lesbian fem ally to our takatāpui, trans and intersex non-binary whānau, I am very proud to commend this bill to the house," she said. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/parliament-passes-self-id-bill-at-third-reading-making-it-easier-for-trans-people-to-update-birth-certificates/M24MBI57SURETEJB5CEVJLEPH4/

    I do empathise with victims of traditional social categorising, having experienced such victimhood myself in the distant past (longhaired male, cannabis etc). We all ought to have the legal right to express our identity in our own terms.

    However, inasmuch as the new law may permit infringement of the civil rights of others, we could be exchanging one evil for another, eh?

    If guys pretending to be women are empowered to invade women's spaces by this law, there could be harm done. Enabling any serious mysogynist to target women easily!

    • Sacha 4.1
      9 December 2021 at 7:07 pm

      You can stop recycling the strawperson arguments now. Men already harm women without needing to change anything. This has been talked to death all year.

      • Ad 4.1.1
        9 December 2021 at 7:09 pm

        Give a shout when the bill causes harm in New Zealand.

        • Sacha 4.1.1.1
          9 December 2021 at 7:11 pm

          Wake us all up.

          • Dennis Frank 4.1.1.1.1
            9 December 2021 at 7:23 pm

            Clearly the parliamentarians are taking an evidence-based approach to the thing. We just need to wait for the opportunists to spot the opportunity, get in there & do their usual thing. Human nature always produces predators as offenders. Shouldn't take long for the reports to come in…

            • Molly 4.1.1.1.1.1
              9 December 2021 at 9:06 pm

              "Clearly the parliamentarians are taking an evidence-based approach to the thing."

              How did you come to that conclusion? What evidence? What 'thing'?

              • Dennis Frank …
                9 December 2021 at 9:26 pm

                It's my take from the (unanimous?) decision. Evidence of harm. Potential abuse & consequent harm. In other words, the precautionary principle never entered into their thinking…

                • Molly …
                  9 December 2021 at 9:32 pm

                  Thanks, Dennis. Reading through the Regulatory Impact statement gives some weight to your perspective.

                  Harm cannot be seen, measured or avoided when you are deliberately not looking for it.

                • weka …
                  9 December 2021 at 9:37 pm

                  hard to assess evidence when you refuse to look at it and you are part of the movement to silence dissent.

                  And yes, why be cautious when you know there are no problems.

                  It doesn't make sense of course. International experts gave evidence via submissions, and that's all backed up by copious amounts of information and discussion online going back years now. So either one believes that NZ is somehow immune to the problems we should be cautious about compared to other countries, or one believes that women and kids are ok as collateral damage, or one is so immersed in the ideology that it's not possible to see outside of it anymore.

                  And let's not forget that there is immense pressure on people, women especially, to not speak out. I actually can't imagine any women in the Greens or Labour being able to speak out as a gender critical feminist and not put their career at risk. Ad and co can assert that all women MPs wanted this but this speaks to what I assume is his large ignorance or denialism about the impact that No Debate has and is still having.

                  But hey, we're supposed to just shut the fuck up now. Women, talking about women's business, are supposed to not talk or go away somewhere else. As if men get to tell women what to do. Lol, how do progressive men even rationalise that in their own heads?

                  • Dennis Frank …
                    9 December 2021 at 9:41 pm

                    Seems to me that the situation calls for a new phase of feminist politics. However I'm too remote from the experiential side of the issue & will have to await reaction from female activists in their twenties & thirties to get a sense of the potential for that.

                    • weka …
                      9 December 2021 at 9:49 pm

                      one of the things that gives me the greatest hope at the moment is the rise of the gender critical feminist movement in the UK (aka Terf Island). This is largely older left wing or centre left feminists with long histories of political, social justice, activist and academic work. They are organising at the grassroots level and have been successful in changing government policy. Lots of battles being fought on many fronts, and not all wins, but the solidarity and sisterhood is something to behold. They also hold a lot of power in various ways.

                      And yes, there are plenty of young GCFs. From what I can tell Gen Z are more sceptical of the ideology than Millenials have been.

                      The detrans women's community is also growing in strength and producing its own body of knowledge that is important to the debate.

          • Molly 4.1.1.1.2
            9 December 2021 at 8:58 pm

            We tried, Sacha. But it was obviously past your bedtime.

        • weka 4.1.1.2
          9 December 2021 at 7:34 pm

          Sure, we should wait until women are harmed, then there will be a long string of excuses by left wing men about collateral damage.

          As Sacha points out, it's all been discussed, so we know that some left wing men take the position that women already get sexually assaulted and harassed, so what's a few more women being raped, eh?

          We know from international experience that housing trans women and other males via self-ID into women's prisons results in sexual assault of women prisoners, but who cares about them, trans women get raped too so women will just have to suck it up.

          https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/112432880/transgender-prisoner-investigated-for-sexual-assault-behind-bars

          We know that the rate of men recording women in changing rooms and toilets is on the rise.

          We know that the dignity and privacy and safety of women who are rape and sexual assault survivors, or who have religious restrictions on how they interact with men, is being surrendered for not just trans women, but other males for whom self-IDing as women gives them psychological and sexual satisfaction.

          But sure, let's wait until self-ID in NZ is causing widespread harm and then I expect the left wing men currently supporting to do exactly nothing. Because NZ is special and can't possibly be like those other terrible places, or maybe it's just that we don't actually care that much about women's right to their own politics unless it aligns with what the men want.

          • SPC 4.1.1.2.1
            9 December 2021 at 7:37 pm

            The left wing men thing is getting tiresome.

            • weka 4.1.1.2.1.1
              9 December 2021 at 7:39 pm

              tell me about it.

              • Ad …
                9 December 2021 at 7:47 pm

                All feminists in Parliament vote for it.

                All women.

                All Greens.

                So you can tell them.

                • weka …
                  9 December 2021 at 7:52 pm

                  They're not listening Ad, and apparently you're not either.

                  Left wing blokes telling women their politics aren't the correct women's politics is nothing new.

                  • Ad …
                    9 December 2021 at 7:58 pm

                    The whole of Parliament is telling you that they listened, and that your opinion has had no bearing at all.

                    Your cause is lost.

                    • weka …
                      9 December 2021 at 8:02 pm

                      Oh right, so you think that parliament gets to be the sole arbiter of society and women's politics. Just women's politics presumably, we are still allowed to challenge parliament on other things they get wrong.

                    • Ad …
                      9 December 2021 at 8:07 pm

                      Parliament gets to evaluate bills that become Acts, and that is their prerogative entirely. Not only was any evidence proposed against it unpersuasive, it was unpersuasive right across the entire political spectrum, every party, every woman, every man, and across every Member of Parliament.

                      It doesn't get more comprehensive than that.

                    • roblogic …
                      9 December 2021 at 8:10 pm

                      And the new gender religion is still false.

                    • weka …
                      9 December 2021 at 8:17 pm

                      Parliament gets to evaluate bills that become Acts, and that is their prerogative entirely.

                      Thanks Patronising Man. But we have a long, very important history of protest against government when it gets it wrong.

                      Not only was any evidence proposed against it unpersuasive, it was unpersuasive right across the entire political spectrum, every party, every woman, every man, and across every Member of Parliament.

                      It doesn't get more comprehensive than that.

                      Except for two things,

                      1. No Debate means that women are afraid to speak up for fear of losing their jobs, friends, social networks
                      2. The issues have yet to go to women generally in NZ for discussion and debate.

                      There's a term on social media called Peak Trans. It's problematic because it unfairly places emphasis on trans people rather than gender identity ideologists/activists, but it's essentially the process liberal and progressives go through when they realise that their young teen age girls will have to share changing rooms with intact males, or they learn what AGP is, or they read about the feminist academics in the UK losing their jobs for saying that biological sex is important, or that women prisoners are being raped by males who self-ID into women's prisons, or that lesbians are being sexually assaulted by trans identified males because lesbians are supposed to now like girl dick and are transphobes if they don't. Not a comprehensive list by any means.

                      Comprehensive was however also when men in parliament were refusing women the right to vote, or not be raped in marriage, or to own property. Like I said, none of what you are doing is new. It's old and tedious. We get it. Women’s rights and politics gets supported by men when it suits the men, not because women deserve their own political sovereignty.

                    • Molly …
                      9 December 2021 at 9:09 pm

                      Submissions to parliament were 73% against the proposed bill in its current form. That's not listening, Ad.

                      That does not mean that submitters were against the proposal for transgender recognition. In fact, many submissions supported that concept, just not in this particular form that has resulted in many issues in countries that have passed it.

                    • CAnker the pig fucker …
                      9 December 2021 at 9:15 pm

                      With all due respect Ad I really think we are the ones who need to decide whether our cause is lost, not you.

                      If the women on this blogsite are anything to go by, we are only just beginning.

                      Once women start putting it together that the male in their change room is allowed to be there, because of this law, and the De-transitioners start to get more of a voice (yes that's right the 22,000 and counting young people whose bodies and fertitlity and ability to have an organism are compromised, then some of these politicians may regret their votes.

                      Personally I don't know how people can be taken in by this ideology.

                    • Stuart Munro …
                      10 December 2021 at 6:05 am

                      The whole of parliament is telling us that they don't, and never have, had any respect whatsoever for the people they ostensibly represent.

                      Another stupid step down the road to Trumpism.

                  • SPC …
                    9 December 2021 at 8:00 pm

                    Left wing men do not have a majority in parliament or on any select committee or in society.

                    • weka …
                      9 December 2021 at 8:05 pm

                      what's your point SPC? If you are trying to tell me that there is no issue with left wing men's support for gender identity ideology against women's rights when I'm pointing right at it, I'd have to ask what you are on about.

                      Yes, yes, #notallleftwingmen

                    • weka …
                      9 December 2021 at 8:28 pm

                      Since when have left wing men (in democracy at least) been at the centre of opposition to womens rights?

                      In the 1960s and 70s left wing men told women to shut the fuck up about women's issues, so women went off and organised themselves into second wave feminism.

                      A more recent example would be two left wing male authors on TS blocked and basically did a hatchet job on the women's project that was trying to get more women authors and commenters on TS.

                      I still don't know what your point is. Maybe instead of asking questions and speaking obliquely you could just spell it out? Are you objecting to me talking about left wing men as being opposed to women's politics?

                      And one historic movement for (equal) gender rights ideology was the NOW. Which sort of neutralised them on the birth sex identity front.

                      Sorry, what? National Organisation of Women? What's their role in gender identity ideology and how does this relate to the discussion today?

            • swordfish 4.1.1.2.1.2
              10 December 2021 at 5:47 pm

              The left wing men thing is getting tiresome.

              Yep … looks very much like women from the Trans-Gender ID Feminist faction … eg Stephanie Rodgers / Jan Logie & so on … are the core supporters & promoters … & certainly the major propagndists on social media … sadly their adversaries (who I generally have some sympathy for) – the Gender Critical Feminists – are still stuck in the obsessive It's all down to Men dogma. An underlying misandry prevents them seeing the Wood for the Trees.

              • RedLogix …
                10 December 2021 at 5:53 pm

                sadly the Gender Critical Feminists are still stuck in the It's all down to Men dogma. Can't see the Wood for the Trees.

                tut tut – you really were not supposed to say that out loud.

              • weka …
                10 December 2021 at 5:56 pm

                sadly the Gender Critical Feminists are still stuck in the It's all down to Men dogma

                That's stupid. I was talking about men on TS, because it's an obvious pattern and a specific dynamic that causes issues for women. Nothing I have said implies that only lw men are responsible.

                Many of the GCF women on TS have been criticising NZ women, just read the comments about the self-ID select committee process. I haven't seen NZ women offsite saying it's all on lw men either. But perhaps you haven't been reading what GCFs actually say.

                You basically just made a bunch of stuff up.

                • weka …
                  10 December 2021 at 5:58 pm

                  as for misandry, it's not hateful to hold men to account for their behaviour. You of all people know about that.

                  • SPC …
                    10 December 2021 at 6:22 pm

                    I was/am not aware of TS's left wing author background issues (and do not need to …).

                    PS Above while editing a post in reply to one of yours I decided to delete it and start again (not knowing you had made a reply). I'll reboot that on today's DR.

                    • weka …
                      10 December 2021 at 6:57 pm

                      👍

                      Yes, it's not necessary to know the details of what's happened back end on TS (and there are limits on what I can say), but I wanted to give two examples from quite different times but including a contemporary example, that demonstrate that left wing male antipathy towards women's politics has form and outside of the gender identity fight.

        • Molly 4.1.1.3
          9 December 2021 at 8:57 pm

          You don't think it may already have due to the #NoDebate stance, the disdain shown to questions by the MPs, and the farcical submission process?

        • CAnker the pig fucker 4.1.1.4
          9 December 2021 at 9:04 pm

          will do Ad <img alt=”wink”
          I’lllbe letting you know loud and clear.src=”https://thestandard.org.nz/wp-content/plugins/ark-wysiwyg-comment-editor/ckeditor/plugins/smiley/images/wink_smile.png” title=”wink” />

    • SPC 4.2
      9 December 2021 at 7:48 pm

      For me this one was more difficult to make a determination on than the civil unions, PR and same sex marriages.

      The claims made then by opponents that there would be harm resulting was not something to take seriously – and democracy is not about conformity to a world view imposed on society by some inter-generational order of God (whatever the faith of some/many of its citizens).

      Both the transgender and women have a right to be safe and then there is the next level confusion when issues of identity, puberty and social and physical development inter-act with the role of the parent in the life of the child.

      • Molly 4.2.1
        9 December 2021 at 9:13 pm

        Both the transgender and women have a right to be safe and then there is the next level confusion when issues of identity, puberty and social and physical development inter-act with the role of the parent in the life of the child.

        I don't understand what you are trying to say here.

      • roblogic 4.2.2
        10 December 2021 at 11:31 am

        Safeguarding of women and children is "not something to take seriously"

        OK then.

        "Next level confusion"

        You got that right. Lies about fundamental aspects of human nature are at the centre of this ideology. Confusion is useful camouflage when you're trying to demolish biological reality in service of an abhorrent political project.

        • RedLogix 4.2.2.1
          10 December 2021 at 2:40 pm

          From your link (yes I do read many of them):

          Firestone made a stunning prediction. She jubilantly declared that when biology was subdued and “transsexuality” became the legal and cultural norm, “the blood tie of the mother to the child would eventually be severed” and the triumphal “disappearance of motherhood” would follow.

          Well given that over the past 3 – 4 generations fatherhood has been marginalised into virtual irrelevancy then we should not be surprised at this next level extension. And given this was always one of the open goals of marxism the dots start connecting in bold neon highlighter.

          • arkie 4.2.2.1.1
            10 December 2021 at 5:00 pm

            this was always one of the open goals of marxism

            The marginalisation of fatherhood is a open goal of Marxism? I assume you can back this assertion with a citation.

          • SPC 4.2.2.1.2
            10 December 2021 at 5:18 pm

            For those who think the man as head of the family is a cornerstone of society order and that atheistic socialism wants the state (of equal vote to male and female) to have power instead of the traditional patriarchy

            (see the Frankfort School and The Rocky Horror Picture Show send up of it)

            1. allowing women careers and ownership of property
            2. equal pay for equal work
            3. allowing contraception to women
            4. allowing divorce
            5. providing support to the solo mother

            were just the beginning, next the Goddess will be an equal to God and priests will wear frilly undergarments.

        • SPC 4.2.2.2
          10 December 2021 at 4:37 pm

          For me this one was more difficult to make a determination on than the civil unions, PR and same sex marriages.

          The claims made then by opponents that there would be harm resulting was not something to take seriously

          To help your comprehension emphasis added. But it should have been obvious what the meaning was – it spoke to then – those past issues.

          Your claim that this means not taking safety of women and children seriously is worse than the average strawman but a deliberate and calculated insult.

          I can presume that because you were able to determine the meaning of the last paragraph – it is going to be even more difficult to parent children through those years than before. A child centred approach is fine but interaction between the state and parent is going to get complicated.

  5. Ad 5
    9 December 2021 at 7:06 pm

    Great to hear Minister Allen is clear of cancer.

    She's a good unit.

    • higherstandard 5.1
      9 December 2021 at 8:29 pm

      That is good news that she's in remission.

    • Patricia Bremner 5.2
      9 December 2021 at 9:14 pm

      You have made my day . She is gold.

    • Molly 5.3
      9 December 2021 at 9:19 pm

      Was pleased to read that. Glad she's come through, and scans show NED.

      (Might be of interest to note that breast cancer patients do not have scans after treatment. They are advised that they will become aware if the cancer returns, usually by the bone-deep pain they will experience. Although 1 in 9 women in NZ will get breast cancer, and I have friends and family that had gone through it, I wasn't aware this was the case.)

  6. Ad 6
    9 December 2021 at 7:08 pm

    And the Births Deaths and Marriages Bill sails through Parliament's final vote, unanimously.

    Self-identification A New Milestone In New Zealand’s History | Scoop News

    Green Party celebrates wholeheartedly:

    Green Party Celebrates Gender Self-ID Legislation Becoming Law | Scoop News

    • weka 6.1
      9 December 2021 at 8:21 pm

      The Green Party shut down debate, within the party, about gender identity ideology and how it and self-ID impact on women. That's the Green Party with some of most democratic processes of any political party in NZ, and they refused to let it be discussed. Just so we are clear that the Greens have been part of No Debate, and that this is reflected in their position on the Bill.

      • pat 6.1.1
        9 December 2021 at 8:35 pm

        Amidst a political reshufflling the Greens remain unable to break double figures…that should be shouting volumes.

        • weka 6.1.1.1
          9 December 2021 at 8:41 pm

          I think it may impact on them in the long run, I'm not convinced it is happening yet. Most people don't know about debate being shut down in the party, and most people don't know what the gender critical/feminist arguments about self-ID are. We will see in time. It's possible people won't care. And there is the problem of who else would one vote for? It's not like Labour are any better.

        • Dennis Frank 6.1.1.2
          9 December 2021 at 8:53 pm

          Yeah but the shout is only audible to anyone listening. I've said it here many times before but repetition is often necessary in the comms process: the Green Party remains on the same level of popular support it had the year it was formed (7%). Any upward fluctuations are reciprocal to ebbing support for Labour.

          The interesting question is why the Greens aren't ever trying to recruit centrists. Given that centrists always create election outcomes, you'd think the logic would be persuasive. My explanation has always been leftist political positioning – but I'm open to other views.

          • weka 6.1.1.2.1
            9 December 2021 at 9:12 pm

            because the Greens want change not power, and being left of Labour is a better way to get change than trying to compete with Labour in the centre. They pulled Labour left on climate for instance.

            • weka 6.1.1.2.1.1
              9 December 2021 at 9:15 pm

              the irony of course is that lots of lefties criticise them for not being left enough, but won't actually vote for them and pull them left 🤡

              Mostly I just think the Greens know better than most about what works for them. I am disappointed in them not going hard on climate especially in terms of making waves about Labour's slow action, but we can't have it both ways. We either want them in government (kind of) and making change in the system, or we want them out and able to rabble rouse. If I saw NZers actually willing to make changes for climate I'd be more believing that the latter would work. I just don't see the evidence.

            • Anne 6.1.1.2.1.2
              9 December 2021 at 9:45 pm

              There were plenty of people in the Labour Party who understood the seriousness of CC back in the late 1970s and 80s weka. But I do agree with you that the parliamentary wing were well behind the ball game – not all of them but most of them.

              I sometimes wonder if Norman Kirk had lived to complete two full terms at the helm whether Labour would have been higher on the CC awareness scale sooner.

        • pat 6.1.1.3
          9 December 2021 at 8:59 pm

          It seems to me that they remain incapable of making themselves relevant to the majority….they appear obsessed with fringe issues to their own detriment.

          If it continues it will ultimately cost them some of the support they currently enjoy.

          • weka 6.1.1.3.1
            9 December 2021 at 9:11 pm

            I see them doing solid work in a number of areas, and making gains that fit with GP principles and values. I would guess that at this point in the election cycle, making those gains is a high priority. This will including stuff we don't see much about like how government departments are run.

            Imo it's still impossible to tell how much of the GP's stuck vote is due to Ardern, and Labour's handling of the pandemic.

            Recent polls have shown the GP trending upwards.

            But I agree that they appear to be focused on issues that won't give them the heft to become a big player. We know that they got badly burned with the backlash against Turei's speech, so I'm not sure that the perpetual call from some on the left to do something radical is that useful.

            • pat 6.1.1.3.1.1
              9 December 2021 at 9:18 pm

              Do something radical or do something relevant?

              • weka …
                9 December 2021 at 9:21 pm

                such as?

                • pat …
                  9 December 2021 at 9:32 pm

                  devote their energies to issues of concern to the wider public…..if they gain support then they have the power to address anything they desire.

                  • arkie …
                    9 December 2021 at 9:34 pm

                    Here's something:

                    Green Party MP for central Auckland Chlöe Swarbrick said it was clear the government did not have any intention of meaningfully fixing this.

                    "With the effective political guarantee of what the prime minister and minister of finance call 'sustained moderation' – that is continual growth in the price of these assets – we are not going to deal with this problem."

                    While there was no silver bullet, Swarbrick said New Zealand needed a "seismic shift" in how we see housing, including actually taxing wealth and capital gains.

                    "It's looking at things that are completely uncontroversial in other democracies and jurisdictions: the likes of rental warrant of fitness, landlord registers, property manager regulations and rent controls. That is a suite of tools that could really do something here."

                    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/457597/auckland-housing-crisis-monumental-task-for-first-home-buyers-as-prices-continue-to-rise

                    • weka …
                      9 December 2021 at 9:39 pm

                      Swarbrick is one of the few bright lights on the political horizon.

                    • felix …
                      10 December 2021 at 10:17 am

                      "Swarbrick is one of the few bright lights on the political horizon."

                      I wonder what she thinks about gender self-id. We already know how she votes.

                    • weka …
                      10 December 2021 at 10:51 am

                      I think it would be impossible for any Green MP to differ from the policy line they have taken.

                  • weka …
                    9 December 2021 at 9:38 pm

                    devote their energies to issues of concern to the wider public…..if they gain support then they have the power to address anything they desire.

                    Issues of concern to the wider public, such as?

                    • pat …
                      9 December 2021 at 9:43 pm

                      Obviously not the issues they are focusing on

                    • Sabine …
                      9 December 2021 at 9:49 pm

                      Identity Politics and Self ID?

                    • arkie …
                      9 December 2021 at 9:49 pm

                      When did Jan Tinetti join the Greens?

                    • weka …
                      9 December 2021 at 9:50 pm

                      ok Pat, you either won't say or you're just hand waving in a general direction of something vague. Yes, the Greens should do better. No-one is prepared to say how exactly.

                    • Blazer …
                      10 December 2021 at 10:03 am

                      such as-

                      'Swarbrick said New Zealand needed a "seismic shift" in how we see housing, including actually taxing wealth and capital gains.'

                    • pat …
                      10 December 2021 at 10:38 am

                      https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2021-11/15th%20Ipsos%20New%20Zealand%20Issues%20Monitor_Report%20V2.pdf

                      With a Gov that’s losing support it shouldnt be too difficult for those seeking support to discover where their energies should be directed.

                    • weka …
                      10 December 2021 at 10:50 am

                      Swarbrick and Menendez are doing awesome work, including putting out actual left wing ideas. But remember what happened when Turei did this as co-leader? It ended her parliamentary career.

                      So anyone saying the Greens should be bolder and do more needs to say how. We know what we want to happen, but the Greens still exist within NZ's conservative political culture.

                    • weka …
                      10 December 2021 at 10:52 am

                      @Pat, so you want the GP to be Labour, good to know.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      10 December 2021 at 10:53 am

                      When she met me 🙂

                    • pat …
                      10 December 2021 at 10:53 am

                      Who actually ended Turei's career?…..Id suggest it was the Greens themselves.

                      I wonder how it would have played out had she been supported?

                    • weka …
                      10 December 2021 at 10:57 am

                      I wonder how it would have played out had she been supported?

                      Supported by who? She was unequivocally supported by Shaw and the caucus apart from the two MPs who monkey wrenched GP process. But the MSM went viciously hard, including lefties like John Campbell. Nothing tells me more than this that the political classes in NZ are classist af. If someone like Campbell doesn't get it then there's no hope of the wider electorate either. NZ doesn't want a left wing govt, it's doesn't want to solve poverty or end the housing crisis. And that includes the larger proportion of the left. But sure, blame the Greens, who are actually left of Labour and have solid left wing policies.

                    • pat …
                      10 December 2021 at 11:18 am

                      "@Pat, so you want the GP to be Labour, good to know."

                      Meh….I want someone to be what Labour should be (and are obviously incapable of being, since Douglas)…if its the Greens then all good, and if they are as 'solid left wing' as you claim then it shouldnt be so difficult for them.

          • arkie 6.1.1.3.2
            9 December 2021 at 9:24 pm

            If we want more action on inequality, housing or the environment the evidence is in that the Labour party will not do it without a pull from the left. The Greens remain committed to actually trying to solve these issues and it’s clear Labour is only happy to work with them on their own terms. That the Greens are the ones to blame for this has always baffled me.

            I want more action on inequality, housing and the environment and so to make sure this happens I support the Greens. That isn’t to say I agree with everything they do but this is MMP and I am hopeful that new and first-time voters understand this too.

            • weka 6.1.1.3.2.1
              9 December 2021 at 9:40 pm

              same.

              On my cynical days I conclude that most NZ liberals in fact don't want action on those things. Hard core Labourites I can understand, but the people that want action but won't vote for the party that has the actual policies, this is beyond me.

              • arkie …
                9 December 2021 at 9:48 pm

                It is hard not to feel cynical about it, I agree.

                • weka …
                  9 December 2021 at 9:50 pm

                  then there's the fact that so many Labour voters own property /cynicism

                  Someone should do some research on that to see if it’s actually a thing. People won’t vote for the Greens because when it comes down to their personal wealth they’re protectionist, damn the poor.

            • Corey Humm 6.1.1.3.2.2
              9 December 2021 at 11:51 pm

              The Greens don't talk about poverty much though, all we ever hear from them is gender identity, sexuality, hate speech, how everything and everyone is racist and occasionally they'll talk about weed or climate change.

              The Greens have become a stand in for a left wing party like an alliance or a European socialist minor party because despite the poverty and wealth and housing inequality we don't seem to have the talent to create party focused soley on class. Mana was a decent attempt but it was a Maori nationalist party not specifically a class based party, the internet party was… A disaster. Since the alliance fell the greens have kind of been a stand in for that kind of party.

              But The Greens are absolutely not the party or vehicle to achieve action on poverty or class issues because they are mostly an upper middle class outfit. The amount of Green voting NIMBYs is insane. The weird upper middle class identity politics and micro aggressions obsessions.

              The greens are a party of the left but they can never be a party of the class left nor should they have to be, there is plenty of space for a die linke or an alliance style party and instead of demanding a party of mostly upper middle class to wealthy but nice and compassionate people represent poor people activists should work to create a party over many election cycles that can be a class party.

              However failing that of the greens want to be an actual player they can learn how to do politics. If labour ever needs their votes and won't give them what they have the power to put labour in a minority govt and say they'll vote with them on a case by case basis. Give us what we want or we walk.

              And in hindsight the greens shouldn't have done a deal with labour, it only benefits labour not having anyone to the left of them attacking them in the house. It makes the greens invisible they could potentially be polling on par with act right now as rabble rousers then again they might be polling the same but they could run in the next election as a change party where as now they are a party of the status quo with nothing to really show for the agreement other than some ministerial limos

              • Blazer …
                10 December 2021 at 10:46 am

                This is very insightful commentary Corey.

                'The amount of Green voting NIMBYs is insane'

              • roblogic …
                10 December 2021 at 11:53 am

                Sue Bradford was a great loss from the Greens and Parliament. Metiria Turei would have filled the "class left" void.

                But now, our “representatives” are all coiffurred neoliberals voting by focus group. Only the Maori Party offers a dim hope of something different.

            • gsays 6.1.1.3.2.3
              10 December 2021 at 8:28 am

              As WMBAD pointed out, we need to organize, loose ourselves to a group, a cause. Then the Arderns, the Davidsons, Shaws, Robertsons will follow.

              The first, obvious group is a union relating to work. I have been scratching my head as to the next type of group.

              I have just recently joined a Biochar group. Already, I can see I am being a bit of a pain in the arse.

              If, by making Biochar, you allow the smoke to escape the process, you are releasing CO, methane and other CC nasties. However, catching and condensing the smoke, you are left with awesome resources and a 'carbon negative' process.

  7. Dennis Frank 7
    9 December 2021 at 7:16 pm

    Associate Professor Jennifer Lees-Marshment is from Politics and International Relations at the University of Auckland and is an expert in political marketing:

    Most people think advertising, big data or spin determines election results. But as Phillip Gould, a key advisor to former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, told me back in 2007, political marketing strategy is the most important factor in winning elections.

    Not disagreeing with her, but how do they validate political marketing claims?? Marketing pros in the economy can validate with purchasing stats, due to buying & selling going on record. Does the analogy with voting patterns suffice?

    Our recently published book Political marketing and management in the New Zealand 2020 election highlights how turbulent those political waters have been since the arrival of the Covid-19 crisis. Featuring perspectives of political practitioners including pollsters for both Labour and National, it makes clear how a crisis changes the political market and makes it more volatile. As Labour pollster David Talbot remarks: “Covid-19… represented a tectonic shift in the political landscape.” It made defunct any political product or policies created in response to market research before 2020, a major challenge to effective strategy in an election year.

    The book also analyses survey data from the TVNZ 2020 Vote Compass which had 182,399 unique respondents during the campaign and a post-election survey with more than 24,000 respondents.

    Interesting that she sees a downside for both major parties:

    research on the 2020 election suggested hidden lessons behind the otherwise simple result. Despite Labour’s clear victory, and Ardern’s stellar likeability, it was built on shifting sands. The party’s brand communication was boosted by government communication over Covid management which is now backfiring with instructions to the public about levels, steps and lights no longer clear and the crisis growing in terms of time and impact. Ardern’s brand was tied to Covid-management by her own branding of the election as the “Covid election” and is therefore subject to damage as Covid is no longer banished from our shores.

    Failures in delivery were masked by crisis management and polite populism, but this mask is slipping while members of the public have to wear theirs to go to work, school and the mall. We’ve seen the impact of this in recent polls showing a downward trend for Labour.

    More obvious was that National trashed its own brand, but less well-known is how post-election Vote Compass data showing a complete reversal of previous strengths on perceived ability to govern, and the dissatisfaction came from their own supporters. Only 24 percent of National’s own supporters thought the party was capable of governing, with 55 percent saying it was not.

    Check out her graph showing the switch from 2017 to 2020 – spectacular! Then her advice to National…

    National can only win through reform and responsiveness. It needs to offer entrepreneurial policies to suit the new post-Covid environment and completely redesign its leadership and party brand.

    https://www.newsroom.co.nz/navigating-unknown-waters-political-marketing-and-the-2023-nz-election

  8. Robert Guyton 8
    9 December 2021 at 8:42 pm

    Sharon Weiss – just sayin'

  10. Byd0nz 10
    9 December 2021 at 11:06 pm

    I have been a cigarette smoker many years ago and tried to give up many times until I gave up giving up and strangely shortly after I gave up.

    what I always thought would be best advice regarding cigarettes is for people who do smoke be registered through a GP who would distribute a weekly amount along with quitting advice to these registered smokers.

    Cigarettes could then be banned from sale, that would put an end to future victims and eventually the registered would either successfully be helped to give it up or will die from it.

    Case solved.

    • Blazer 12.1
      10 December 2021 at 11:00 am

      Doubt that many under 13's have ever been buying…houses.

      • weka 12.1.1
        10 December 2021 at 11:01 am

        the new smoking ban is that anyone who was born after 2008 won't be able to buy cigarettes. Ever.

        The tweet about housing was a joke, but the same principle applies. People who are 13 years old now will never be able to buy a house, ever.

        • Blazer 12.1.1.1
          10 December 2021 at 11:12 am

          Be interesting to see if the smoking ban will work.

          Seems like Prohibition=black,criminal market.

          Liked the Dr's prescription idea better.

          As for housing ,the damage to society from not addressing the crisis will be immense,its a disgrace.

          Ardern has indeed become 'Tony Blair in high heels'!blush

          • weka 12.1.1.1.1
            10 December 2021 at 11:45 am

            NZ is a good place to trial the ban, because of our large sea border. But I haven't read the detail of the policy to see what they are planning.