Daily Review 25/01/2017

Written By: - Date published: 5:51 pm, January 25th, 2017 - 50 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 …

50 comments on “Daily Review 25/01/2017 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    25 January 2017 at 6:15 pm

    Gary Yourofsky – The Most Important Speech You Will Ever Hear

    • weka 1.1
      25 January 2017 at 7:32 pm

      Paul, please respond to this moderation request,

      https://thestandard.org.nz/rip-tpp/#comment-1290900

      • Paul 1.1.1
        25 January 2017 at 7:35 pm

        Thought this was ‘Open Mike.’

        Therefore I was hoping to stimulate discussion and encourage people to think about our need to move from eating meat to eating plant based food for the sake of our planet, our ethics and our health.

        • Carolyn_nth 1.1.1.1
          25 January 2017 at 7:42 pm

          Actually, I prefer printed comments. I rarely watch linked or embedded videos.

          I find reading quicker, and enables more reflection.

          • Paul 1.1.1.1.1
            25 January 2017 at 8:01 pm

            I found this guy quite inspirational.

            You probably love animals or at the very least, you’re against animal cruelty. Yet, on the other hand, you probably pay to have animals mutilated, tortured and killed. You probably think you need meat for protein and cow’s milk for calcium. You probably think animals are treated “humanely” before they become a neatly wrapped package on the supermarket shelf. You’ve probably never wondered what is cruel about eating eggs or dairy. You probably think vegans are extreme.

            I was the same.

            I want to talk to you about what we are doing to this planet, ourselves and our fellow Earthlings. I want to ask you some questions that might make you feel defensive but will also make you question things you’ve always considered to be ‘normal’. I want to ask you to listen to this speech and hear a new perspective. Perhaps it will change your life, perhaps it won’t, but I believe you deserve to know the truth. I know I’m very grateful to have learned it and now I want to share it with you. I think you’ll be grateful, too.

            -James Aspey

            • Carolyn_nth 1.1.1.1.1.1
              25 January 2017 at 8:15 pm

              I do understand where meat, milk, eggs, fish etc comes from.

              I don’t eat a lot of meat. Never liked milk though do have some yogurt and eggs.

              Mostly eat fruit and veges. I think processed food can be as damaging to people and environment – and food chain, as anything else. Can’t get very excited about meat, vegan, vegetarian or not. The biggest issue is environmental sustainability, and health of the whole community located within it.

            • Andre 1.1.1.1.1.2
              25 January 2017 at 8:28 pm

              Paul, you really think the best way to reply to someone that’s just said “I prefer printed comments. I rarely watch linked or embedded videos. I find reading quicker, and enables more reflection.” is to link a 41 minute video?

              • Carolyn_nth …
                25 January 2017 at 8:37 pm

                Um. Well spotted, Andre. My response was based on the selected quote.

                I also think propaganda is more effective using images, and sound plus images in video. They tend to impact more on the emotions, and often don’t encourage critical reflection the way print and discussion can.

                That is one of the issues of the image-saturated digital age.

                Of course, we can spend time critiquing the way videos impact on emotions, but that takes way more time than reading an explanation.

                • Andre …
                  25 January 2017 at 8:43 pm

                  I’ve read several articles that say the way the brain processes video is very different to written material. Supposedly we become more suggestible when watching video (or live performance), but more analytical and skeptical when reading.

                  The paper below is what I found with a quick search, and doesn’t look the most reliable to me, but it has pretty much the same message as the papers I’d read previously.

                  http://www.cognitiveliberty.org/5jcl/5JCL59.htm

                  • Carolyn_nth …
                    25 January 2017 at 9:37 pm

                    Yes. I’ve studied, researched and taught film and media quite a lot – done quite a lot of analysis of visual media. I do like watching videos, movies, and TV dramas.

                    But when it comes to arguments and political discussions, I prefer print. I prefer print to documentaries. People tend to think documentaries show us reality, but they actually present reality from a perspective, and also, often work on the same level as screen fiction – can be misleading.

        • weka 1.1.1.2
          25 January 2017 at 7:47 pm

          [No doubt there are some interesting things in what you are posting. But your comments, because of how you do them, are like Facebook spam. This is an issue of quantity, of frequency, and of the fact that you often don’t do anything other than drop a link or drop a link with virtually no information about what it is.

          The link above is a good example of such a comment. It take up a large amount of space (think about people reading on a phone, and there is nothing to say what it is about. You know it’s about veganism, no-one else does. It’s spam.

          It also concerns me that you’ve had moderators asking you to stop and you appear to not realise that, which makes me think you are just link dropping and not taking part in the debate because you don’t appear to go back to that conversation again. Again, this is like spam.

          There is a certain degree of tolerance for link dropping, but if you look at what other people are doing, then you will see they usually make some attempt to let the readers know what the link is about. It’s good if some of that person’s comments are commentary as well. My suggestion is you post less links and take more time in explaining what they are. But please still pay attention to frequency and whether you are engaging discussion

          edit, I need to see you acknowledge that you have read this moderator comment, thanks – weka]

          • Paul 1.1.1.2.1
            25 January 2017 at 7:52 pm

            I have read your moderator comment and will add comments at the top of thought provoking videos in future.
            Sometimes I don’t go back because I am busy and unable to go back.

            • weka 1.1.1.2.1.1
              25 January 2017 at 8:09 pm

              Thanks Paul.

            • Carolyn_nth 1.1.1.2.1.2
              25 January 2017 at 8:18 pm

              Sometimes it’s better to just post fewer comments, but spend more time on each one. I do.

              And try to convey what it is that caught my interest about something and why I think it’s important. I spend time working out the key points at a linked site/article, and selecting representative quotes. And it does often mean going back to the article a few times, and checking/re-reading significant bits.

              • Paul …
                25 January 2017 at 8:21 pm

                I am increasingly convinced that the biggest thing we can do to lower our carbon footprint is to stop eating meat.

                • red-blooded …
                  26 January 2017 at 8:39 am

                  Well, Paul, for once you and I are on the same page. I’ve been vegan for more than 30 years and can assure people that there’s still plenty of variety and enjoyment in food, plus I feel good about environmental and animal welfare issues.

                  • Paul …
                    26 January 2017 at 8:48 am

                    Hi red-blooded it is good to see we share some ideas!

                    What was the main reason you became vegan?
                    Was it.?
                    a. health
                    b. animal cruelty
                    c. the environment
                    d. other?

  2. mpledger 2
    25 January 2017 at 6:29 pm

    When I heard on the news that Peter Theil had got NZ citizenship, if left me wondering about how did he managed it. It seems like other people have got their before me
    http://thespinoff.co.nz/society/25-01-2017/new-zealand-citizen-peter-thiel-5-awkward-questions-and-10-peculiar-facts/

    Even if he is a nice guy (and there is some degree of doubt), it sounds a very dodgy granting of citizenship.

    • Anne 2.1
      25 January 2017 at 7:17 pm

      How did Peter Thiel manage to get NZ citizenship? I expect something like the following happened:

      He had a little téte a téte with John Key. Word went down the line and reached Peter Dunne’s ears and hey presto, he’s granted citizenship. Unfortunately Peter Dunne has no recollection of it but he’s going to have a look at his files. Either he is also afflicted with a bad case of Amnesia like his former boss, or the system bypassed him. If it proves to be the latter then there should be an investigation.

      No nice guy mpledger. Listen to this crap of a speech. He claims Donald Trump understands reality…

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11788452

      • Carolyn_nth 2.1.1
        25 January 2017 at 7:39 pm

        Matt Nippert (author of above linked NZH article) tweeted this arvo that:

        DIA confirms Thiel made citizen on 30 June 2011: refuses to answer any further questions except under OIA. #OpenGovernment

        Out of curiosity I did a google search to see when Kim Dotcom got residency – it was November 2010.

        A lot happening around 2010 & 2011.

        • Anne 2.1.1.1
          25 January 2017 at 7:56 pm

          Hmmm… and remember Key’s amnesia over Kim Dotcom? Reckoned he’d never heard of him until after the raid. Always suspected there was something a bit odd about his demeanour at that time. It was as if he was trying to hide something.

          I suspect there were quite a few filthy rich individuals during his term as PM who were quietly granted NZ citizenship by virtue of the fact they were filthy rich. In other words, the 1% PM looking after his fellow 1%ers.

          • marty mars 2.1.1.1.1
            25 January 2017 at 9:07 pm

            yep – smelly and stinky these applications. It is easy to understand them letting in thiel – he is what they aspire to – what an ugly thinker that dude is.

          • Anne 2.1.1.2.1
            25 January 2017 at 8:18 pm

            Yep. There’s a pattern here…

            When he announced he was resigning as PM my immediate thought was… there’s some shit about to hit the fan and he knows it. I wonder if this is the start of the shit?

            • Andre 2.1.1.2.1.1
              25 January 2017 at 8:24 pm

              Doesn’t look like enough to stir him out of a relaxed state. He’s brazened out far worse.

          • Carolyn_nth 2.1.1.2.2
            25 January 2017 at 8:24 pm

            So he was given NZ citizenship in 2010. DIA recommended the application be declined, but Nathan Guy ignored that.

            The official recommendation of whether citizenship should be granted was ignored in 61 of the 1011 cases between 2009 and 2011.

            • Anne 2.1.1.2.2.1
              25 January 2017 at 8:27 pm

              I think we will find all 61 were filthy rich… being the dominant criteria for citizenship by the Key government.

  3. bwaghorn 3
    25 January 2017 at 6:30 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/88540744/water-cutting-out-the-middle-cow

    55 billion to be made and cut back the number of cows, win win

    • ianmac 3.1
      25 January 2017 at 7:16 pm

      Interesting idea.
      Watching tonight that the Govt has told Wellington building owners to strengthen some buildings within 12 months or else!
      The dairy farmers have been told to fix their polluting habits but have plenty of time to do so. Maybe next year or sometime in 10 years or so. None have been prosecuted so far. Don’t want to bother them.

    • Paul 3.2
      25 January 2017 at 7:22 pm

      The meat and dairy industry are protected.

      • bwaghorn 3.2.1
        25 January 2017 at 8:13 pm

        probably because the bring in dollars and provide jobs

        • James Thrace 3.2.1.1
          25 January 2017 at 9:44 pm

          The buildings that need strengthening provide the much needed floorspace for business to operate from to provide jobs.

          Rivers and streams provide the water needed to drink.

          Agriculture is a minnow on the backside of the tourism whale. The fallacy that agriculture is the backbone of NZ economy has continued to be peddaled despite its status as an alternative fact when convenient.

          Streams and rivers should be protected and cleaned up. Right. Now. Failure to push any action on this front on the part of the government is nothing more than cowardice.

          If NZ were able to get its act together and start focusing on wine tourism (high end tourists buying our shit wine to send over there) then the low value freedom campers that barely spend enough to pay for 0.5FTE will soon get the message, which is;

          NZ is an expensive place. To live. To visit. To survive.

          No wonder the stinking rich buy their residency here.

          Easier to flash the cash and wow the masses on their diet of soma and talkies.

    • weka 3.3
      25 January 2017 at 8:17 pm

      So stop polluting NZ and pollute somewhere else instead, and still steal water? Yeah nah.

  4. Paul 4
    25 January 2017 at 7:19 pm

    UN urges global move to meat and dairy-free diet

    A global shift towards a vegan diet is vital to save the world from hunger, fuel poverty and the worst impacts of climate change, a UN report said today.

    As the global population surges towards a predicted 9.1 billion people by 2050, western tastes for diets rich in meat and dairy products are unsustainable, says the report from United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) international panel of sustainable resource management.

    It says: “Impacts from agriculture are expected to increase substantially due to population growth increasing consumption of animal products. Unlike fossil fuels, it is difficult to look for alternatives: people have to eat. A substantial reduction of impacts would only be possible with a substantial worldwide diet change, away from animal products.”

    Professor Edgar Hertwich, the lead author of the report, said: “ Animal products cause more damage than [producing] construction minerals such as sand or cement, plastics or metals. Biomass and crops for animals are as damaging as [burning] fossil fuels.”

    The recommendation follows advice last year that a vegetarian diet was better for the planet from Lord Nicholas Stern, former adviser to the Labour government on the economics of climate change. Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chair of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), has also urged people to observe one meat-free day a week to curb carbon emissions.

    The panel of experts ranked products, resources, economic activities and transport according to their environmental impacts. Agriculture was on a par with fossil fuel consumption because both rise rapidly with increased economic growth, they said.

  5. Tamati Tautuhi 5
    25 January 2017 at 7:33 pm

    New Zealand least corrupt country in the world-New Zealand Herald?

    So our Foreign Trust Industry and the allegations in the Panama Papers were all humbug?

  6. weka 6
    25 January 2017 at 8:14 pm

    Linda Tirado on twitter,

    So remember like three weeks ago when people were losing their damn minds about authoritarian regimes and whatnot and people called it crazy

    Trump’s been in office for three working days and so far:
    shut down public comments
    new gag rules
    private security
    restricted immigration

    We are now calling scientists who work for the government “brave” for saying science facts “despite pressure from the Administration.”

    We are calling journalists “brave” for *printing* facts because we live in “post-reality” or with “alternate facts” in our high offices.

    One of the things authoritarian regimes depend on is that most people will be far too confused to make decisions or act.

    https://twitter.com/KillerMartinis/status/824151665712463872

    • WILD KATIPO 6.1
      25 January 2017 at 10:38 pm

      Hey… its peculiar when you come to think of it … they are calling Trump a sexist – and holding demonstrations over it …

      But what about ” I did not have sexual relations with THAT woman ” Big Billy Boy Clinton ?!!? ( in reference to his being caught out with Monica Lewinsky ? )

      http://fmshooter.com/hypocrisy-weekends-protests-stunning-not-surprising/

      And the original footage of denial ?

      Funny old world we live in , in’nit ….

      • Glenn 6.1.1
        25 January 2017 at 10:58 pm

        Never went round talking about grabbin’ pussy though. Not like some arse hole I keep seeing lately in the news.

      • weka 6.1.2
        25 January 2017 at 11:08 pm

        There are obvious differences between sexual assault and sexual harassment, and consensual sex and rape. Clinton wasn’t a threat to Roe vs Wade either. Nor was he intent on bringing in an authoritarian state. For all the bad things that Clinton did, there are very real differences here that can’t be glossed over.

        • WILD KATIPO 6.1.2.1
          25 January 2017 at 11:55 pm

          Like this interview between John Pilger and Julian Assange , for instance?…

          You know… the one where the Clinton Foundation was being used as a channel for funding to procure arms from American arms manufacturers ,… which the govt’s of Saudi Arabia , Morocco and Qatar ,… then distributed those arms back to ISIS while telling us all how evil ISIS was and they must be stamped out?

          Ever wonder why the USA was accused of dragging its feet over the ISIS issue while pointing the finger at Russia for lifting the heavy weight in fighting ISIS ?…

          It might just have had something to do with the fat profits the American arms manufacturers were making and enjoying out of keeping ISIS going , perhaps?….

          No wonder they all loved Hillary …

          • weka 6.1.2.1.1
            26 January 2017 at 12:46 am

            Bill Clinton does bad shit, it’s not news, but I have zero interest in talking about it. There doesn’t appear to be anything in your comment that relates to what I said about your previous comment, or my original comment about the incoming administration. There are important differences between sexual assault and sexual harassment, or consented sex and rape, please educate yourself. This isn’t about who the goodies and the baddies are, it’s very basic humans rights we are talking about.

  7. Tamati Tautuhi 7
    25 January 2017 at 8:40 pm

    We have had “alternative facts” from NZ Governments and MSM for the past 30-40 years according to Roger Douglas neoliberalism was meant to be the best thing since sliced bread?

  8. Anne 8
    25 January 2017 at 10:01 pm

    mickysavage is among six nominations received to replace Cunliffe in New Lynn. If he wins he will have to stand down from The Standard because he’s regarded by some in Labour (read hierarchy) as “too outspoken”. What tripe! They actually don’t read TS do they. Instead they listen to his detractors who have an irrational disregard for members who dare to make comments on those awful things called blogs.

    To me, micky’s posts are strong but diplomatic and often understated.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11788733

    There is also concern in Labour about Presland’s outspoken – and sometimes critical – contributions to The Standard blog under the pseudonym Mickey Savage.

    Mind you this is coming from Claire Trevett.

    • weka 8.1
      25 January 2017 at 11:04 pm

      Very interesting. I don’t suppose you or someone could explain that selection process a bit better?

    • Jenny Kirk 8.2
      26 January 2017 at 5:15 am

      Who the heck has Trevett been talking to ? That’s just a nonsense statement about Presland’s “outspoken – sometimes critical- contributions to The Standard”.

      I agree with you, Anne, Micky’s posts are good, interesting and “understated” and I don’t think I’ve ever read one that has been critical of Labour.

      and for Weka (8.1) the selection process consists of a meeting where all the candidates speak, a “straw” vote is taken from the floor, and this is considered along with other criteria by the panellists. Depending on the number of members, the LEC can have anything from one person on the panel to a considerable number, and the NZ Council of NZLP (HO) has three. I see from the Trevett story, that the New Lynn LEC has three people on the panel, NZ Council will have three, plus they need to take account of the “straw” vote from the floor. By the way, there is a Q & A session with the candidates and members before the selection meeting.

  10. Freekpower 10
    26 January 2017 at 10:18 am

    The raising of the minimum wage debate gave me a moment to pause and recall the whole related issue of secondary tax. During the 2014 election Labour came out with a manifesto commitment to abolish secondary tax. A great policy announcement that I was pleased to hear. Secondary tax seems to just be a draconian measure to punish those the lowest incomes.

    The national party response at the time (see link below) was to state they were already going ahead with the policy anyway and that the IRD Business Transformation plan will “address the PAYE system, including secondary tax and end-of-year square-ups.”

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/policies/10416636/Labour-to-axe-secondary-tax

    And here we are, three years on and nothing has changed. Secondary tax is still in place and causing as much trouble as ever for hard-working low income earners. Labour need to point out things like this next time National respond to their policy announcements with such blatant untruths