- Date published:
5:30 pm, May 11th, 2021 - 16 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 …
So, did Pete, Delmar and Ulysses not listen to the lyrics when the Sirens sang???
Is that code? Has The Revolution begun? Nobody tells me nuttin.
Yes ..!…go with plan B…!
Ya gotta read between the lines 🙂
Song fades-in about the 55s mark.
The problem with professional (career) politicians
Public sector unions give govt a talking to. https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/442326/public-sector-unions-say-pay-freeze-talks-with-ministers-frank-and-constructive
Poor Chippie and Grant can't even manage a smile between them. Who knew austere was such a hurtful phrase. More than a facy way of saying stingy.
From the NZEI today
Today’s meeting was constructive. As public sector unions, we discussed with the Minister how we want to move forward. At the meeting, together we all agreed:
Probably others here are up with this but –
Retirement Commissioner Jane Wrightson is worried that changes to a bill which governs NZ Superannuation requirements could be implemented too fast.
She tells Afternoons host Jesse Mulligan why she's calling for changes to the New Zealand Superannuation and Retirement Income (Fair Residency) Amendment Bill which is before Parliament.
The bill concerns eligibility for superannuation and has been before a select committee. The orginal target was migrants, but it affects a wider group than that, Wrightson says. People living or working overseas need to be back in the country five years before super payments start at the age of 65.
"This bill is proposing to raise that [to 10 years] and my main concern is that the timeframe is very quick, and the thing about pension policy is that any changes should be implemented very slowly indeed because people can't plan properly."
Aggression Watch No. 1: What on earth is the U.S. "coast guard" doing in the Strait of Hormuz?
Aggression Watch is compiled and presented by Hector Stoop, for Daisycutter Sports Inc.
Their compass is way off or who were they trying to save?
They're trying to save Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the U.A.E., Israel, and several other nasty autocracies from a fate worse than death, viz., democracy.
Link says they were providing security for a USN submarine that was transiting the strait. Bit too tight to "run silent, run deep", and submarines haven't had deck guns for self defense since the… 1940s?
US military strategy has emphasised protecting the country's access to the sea lanes since Mahan in the 19th century. Hormuz is a classic choke point.
Why USCG instead of USN? It's a military arm. Part of it's mission involves protecting US maritime interests domestically and abroad. Especially in littoral zones. Doesn't say which coast they guard, does it? Just who owns it and what it does lol
Coastguard – makes me feel all warm and safe thinking of brave sea-farers committed to saving life on the wild sea – not to turn it into a USA backyard shipping canal.
All nations try to preserve their access to the seaways.
For example, the number of nations who deployed vessels to the Horn of Africa when Somalis started screwing with international trade at an appreciable level.