- Date published:
6:09 pm, June 19th, 2017 - 32 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 …
Pye’s latest. The words apply to New Zealand just as much as the UK.
“What a shithole. Welcome to Britain. We spend millions papering over poverty…… If that isn’t a metaphor for what this government’s ideology has done for our country, I don’t know what is.”
New Zealand’s Grenfell.
“Once again it boils down to the divide between the haves and the have nots.”
Hillsborough victims’ families’ 27-year struggle for truth vindicated.
Does Cédric Villani’s victory mean Peter Dunne and his ties are off the hook?.
CEDRIC VILLANI, MATHEMATICIAN
With his shoulder-length hair, colorful ascot ties and spider brooches, Cedric Villani, a prize-winning mathematician is among the most recognizable faces on the campaign trail.
In 2010 he won the maths equivalent to the Nobel prize, the Fields Medal, for what the award called “proofs of nonlinear Landau damping and convergence to equilibrium of the Boltzmann equation”.
His more digestible work ‘Birth of a Theorem: a mathematical adventure’, is a journey through his unproductive lulls and late-night breakthroughs on the path to discovery. He entitled an online lecture ‘Why is maths so sexy’.
Villani won 47.46 percent in the first round, falling just short of the threshold to win his constituency without a run-off. In the second round, he trounced his conservative opponent with nearly 70 percent of the vote.
Peters positioning himself as a Corbyn? 🙄 (plus, lol being trolled by the Gormless Fool).
The man is a fucking tool.
Fuck Labour for jacking up the seat of Northland for the old windbag.
The old arse hole had pretty much faded into oblivion but instead of letting the old prick die those short sighted fuckwits in Labour decide to throw him a life rope because they were so desperate to get some sort of win over John Key.
What did Labour do in Northland?
Wasn’t labour that did that but National as they ignored Northland yet again.
Labour basically stood aside and said vote, Peters, turning the whole thing into a two horse race.
The media then ran with it promoting Peters at every opportunity while trashing the National candidate.
Look at the by-election results
and compare them to the election in 2014
Labour was and still are idiots, they have the tactical nous of General Haig.
Really? Is that why National lost 7,000 votes in Northland in six months? And the nat still got more in the byelection than Labour did in 2014.
Maybe the cockies just found NZ1 more palatable than Labour.
Really BM, you are starting to sound worse than ‘Angry Andy’. Try to remember that the normal right wing troll is a happy man with his glass half full, not half empty, and that things are getting better all the time; failed targets were only aspirational, and that we still are on the cusp of something special which will herald a brighter future. It worries me to hear you starting to sound depressed..
It’s all Labour’s fault!
You do remember that National was responsible for Peters entering politics?
their bullshit also killed him in 08 and revived him in 2011 ,
It was a secret plan to ensure they had the third coalition partner that they needed.
Labour are more cunning
2014 GE/party vote, 35,707 votes
2014 GE/seat vote, 35,707 votes
2015 BE/seat vote, 29,590 votes
Variables are the difference in number of voters, that NZF didn’t stand a candidate in 2014, and that in 2015 they stood a very high profile already in parliament MP. You can probably add in the GP votes to those variables if you really want to get into it.
IIRC, it was the National candidate that trashed himself along with help from the rest of the National caucus.
The outright bribe that National promised probably didn’t help.
BTW, how are those bridges going?
Weren’t they all supposed to be built in a few months?
“The outright bribe that National promised probably didn’t help.”
Absolutely on the nail here.
Remind me what NACT have been doing in Epsom for years now.
But the change it made was before the by-election the Nats could pass legislation with any one of Poodle Dunne, Rimmer, or the Maori Party. After they needed Poodle Dunne and Rimmer, or the Maori Party. That’s an important difference and I’m confident it made a change to how the Nats governed. So from Labour’s perspective it would have been worth it even if it causes a headache now.
Mike Sabin inherited a 10,000 vote majority from John Carter, until he resigned for reasons no one’s allowed to ask questions about. This might be the weakest troll argument you’ve ever made, B. Movement.
so National failing to retain the seat, or put up someone who could have won the seat instead of the dude they set up to fail, is Labours fault.
National can’t fail, National can only be failed. Sure.
Yeah – but Gormless’s points are mostly of the trivial (the coffee was terrible then) variety. And the ones that aren’t trivial (life expectancy) would have happened anyway and may even have improved more without the neoliberal revolution.
So good on Winston for using the right language, even if I’m not convinced he really understands the implications of what he’s saying.
And double good on Winston for annoying BM to the point of incoherence (above)!
I think it’s the most opportunistic thing I’ve heard Peters say.
agreed, BM’s reaction was surprising and funny.
It’s not the first time Winnie’s taken a swipe at Neoliberalism – he’s well aware that the swing to NZF over the last couple of Elections has disproportionately come courtesy of former Labour voters … and he’s no doubt keen on that trend continuing.
Moody’s just cut the credit rating on Australia’s four biggest banks:
“…surging home prices, rising household debt and sluggish wage growth pose a threat to the lenders.”
About 85% of our lending comes from those four banks.
With credit rating goes the price of money, and hence the price of money in the form of interest.
Hold on to your hats folks.
NZ banks have been in that territory for some time now:
Locally we have been considerably more exposed to “saying surging home prices, rising household debt and sluggish wage growth” and the banks have kept hold of their hats.
It’s the tail risk that is the concern here … ie “in the unlikely event of an accident”.
The same Aussie banks who hold the bulk of the house loans in little NZ?
79 reported dead now at Grenfell.
42 bodies in one room