Open mike 01/11/2010

91 comments on “Open mike 01/11/2010 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. The Chairman 1

   1 November 2010 at 6:27 am

   The Government’s $1.5 billion ultra-fast broadband scheme

   The key for successfully capitalising off the Government’s $1.5 billion ultra-fast broadband scheme is its end consumer cost.

   The more the service costs the slower the uptake.

   Moreover, high broadband costs will add to overall inflationary pressure as businesses pass those costs on, in the end, hurting our international competitiveness.

   What is the Government doing to ensure a low cost service?
2. The Chairman 2

   1 November 2010 at 6:58 am

   $720 million owed in unpaid fines
   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/4292329/720-owed-in-unpaid-fines
   • Bored 2.1

     1 November 2010 at 8:40 am

     The tip of the iceberg Chairman, have a look at the 900,000 NZers with student loans, a very large proportion of which will never be repaid. Its very much like the fines, if we load the costs for participation in society (and the economy that underpins it) on those least able to pay, we cant expect payment. For example if you have to pay to be educated merely to participate in the economy then get rat shit wages despite the outlay how would you ever be able to pay it back? If you live in a sprawling suburb, you are in the dole, all the shops have gone so to buy your needs you have to drive to a mall in an unwarranted car…and get a fine, how again would you pay?

     What you are mentioning is the fruit of 25 years of the stupidity that is users pays, the price of shifting the costs from the wealthy (who get tax breaks) onto the citizens. We have created our own Catch 22 debt system, you have to become indebted but you cant pay…my logical conclusion is WHY would you pay? If the society you have requires you to “buy” in to participate, logically you dont automatically belong to that society. A large chunk of the populace now thinks it best to tell that society to “go forth”, hence upaid fines.
     • Zorr 2.1.1

       1 November 2010 at 9:25 am

       Minimum repayments on student loans through taxes… that’s the way to go.

       If I ever got $50k, why would I pay off my student loan with it? Then that money does absolutely nothing for me and I will never get out of my own financial trap. If they put up interest on the loans to force me to ‘want’ to pay it back faster, it will just mean I am even more unable to pay it back. Would love to see some kind of deal floated whereby I get to stay in NZ and support the economy and, in return for doing this, get to have my loan slowly written off – even if it was only $1000pa.
       • Vicky32 2.1.1.1

         1 November 2010 at 5:22 pm

         Nurses do have such a deal! (Or so I am told by my son, who hasn’t taken it up, because he is paying his loan off from his wages every fortnight, because he wants to go overseas for social reasons.)
         Deb
     • Lanthanide 2.1.2

       1 November 2010 at 9:52 am

       Actually there are only 587k people with student loans in total (including overseas), and 253k (43%) of them owe $10,000 or less. Total # of borrowers dropped by 9k between March and June this year.

       Granted, some of those in the < $10k category are going to be people who are studying and therefore increasing their loan, but within 2-3 years there should be a significant drop in the number of people with student loans. Seems that Labour's interest free policy is finally bearing fruit. It’s possible this may even make a small blip in the economic forecasts, as the repayment rate is effectively a 10% tax on all of your income over $19k. National’s taxcuts were nice, but this cut will be going directly to all of those people earning towards the bottom end of the scale (likely to be in their 20s and 30s), while National’s tax cuts went to those at the top end (likely to be in their 40s, 50s and 60s).

       http://www.ird.govt.nz/aboutir/reports/sl-scheme/sl-quarterly-report-jun10.html
     • The Chairman 2.1.3

       1 November 2010 at 9:55 am

       Bored

       Although a problem, student loans are a slightly different kettle of fish.

       Unpaid fines should be atomically withdrawn (at a reasonable rate of payment) directly from an offender’s source of income.

       It’s a lot harder to attain payment from students that have shot the gap.

       On a side note: The cost of fines have increased dramatically compared to wage increases and the time given to pay.
     • prism 2.1.4

       1 November 2010 at 10:27 am

       Dah dah ‘Sixteen tons – I owe my soul to the company store’. That was about the trap of being a poor worker with only one store supplying needed goods and charging high rates. You are beholden, trapped and can never work your way out.

       Today the value of education to the individual is not assured to result in a job using your carefully acquired skills and well-paid. The song Sixteen Tons is about manual work, about being a miner being paid barely a living wage. But I read years ago that economics of supply and demand with waning ‘prices’ would result as numbers of graduates increased. What does the individual do though?
       • Bored 2.1.4.1

         1 November 2010 at 10:46 am

         As a reply to yourself (and also Lanth and Chairman) I think you asked the question I was driving at..What does the individual do though?
         
         The Chairman mentioned that fines have increased far more than wages, you mentioned that you pay for a qualification to get a job that may not happen…, Lanth mentions that tax cuts wont enable those at the bottom of the scale to repay. Which comes back to my original assertion, I think that if we need to pay to be included in our “user pays” society then those who cannot pay will regard that society as illegitimate. If that concept gains a critical mass (as it must as more are excluded) we face social disintegration. That is the true fruit of 25 years of neo lib madness.
         • Colonial Viper 2.1.4.1.1

           1 November 2010 at 10:53 am

           I think that if we need to pay to be included in our “user pays” society then those who cannot pay will regard that society as illegitimate.

           Time to start planning for structures of civil society outside of the current mainstream then.
           • pollywog 2.1.4.1.1.1

             1 November 2010 at 11:06 am

             yeah lets start a commune…

             might hit Bert Potter up for a few hints eh ?

             http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/4287289/Bert-Potters-Centrepoint-land-cleansed-of-the-past

             anyone know the words to kumbaya ?
             • Bored …

               1 November 2010 at 12:23 pm

               Fekk Polly, I hate that song, can you imagine the excruciating sound of it sung by the followers of Bert Potter in teo reo…does not bear thinking about.

               Actually CV has a point except that large sections of society have done their planning already by walking away and considering the parallel societies rules as either an inconvenient distraction, or an opportunity to “liberate” some benefits.
               • pollywog …

                 1 November 2010 at 12:44 pm

                 whats that saying ?

                 ‘it’s easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism’
                 • Bored …

                   1 November 2010 at 1:54 pm

                   I think Prism (below) is onto it. Capitalism isnt going to go away overnight but its definitely burning. For a better of picute of future events it might be to informative to look at no go zones in US cities and contrast them to “secure” gated communities of frightened rich capitalists. Or perhaps a look at “criminal’ no go (if you are the Police) zones in Brazil or Jamaica where the legitimate authority is the local gang lord (sort of political power comes out of the barrel of a gun gone extreme). Its a different world in these communities but life goes on, no end in sight.
         • prism 2.1.4.1.2

           1 November 2010 at 11:26 am

           Bored “we face social disintegration. That is the true fruit of 25 years of neo lib madness.”
           I reckon that it is this very situation that is now playing out in the USA. They are unravelling – looking to retreat to relying for their guidelines on both their religious bible and their constitutional bible at the same time. Both of them unable to be relied on 100% because they were written for a different society.

           They are casting around for a viable stable political system, voting in Obama who has found it too difficult and admitted that recently apparently. Now ready to go for another latest thing The Tea Party, which apparently is Republicanism with extra ingredients. Their feelings are akin to the poor people of Naples where Thomas Belamonte did a study. He said that they adopted multiple connections at the same time as they tried vainly to find a coherent way to cope with their world – Catholic, occult, fascism – very confused.

           And we wallow in the USA wash as the cruise ship passes. Their wealthy can create their own isolated lifestyle on a cruise ship away from the problems of those coping with everyday wages or without those then rubbish picking.
     • Vicky32 2.1.5

       1 November 2010 at 5:15 pm

       “A large chunk of the populace now thinks it best to tell that society to “go forth”, hence upaid fines.”
       Given I don’t drive, I don’t have any fines, but if I did, “go forth” would be my answer! (Simply because being on the dole, I have not got the money to pay!)
       Likewise, I have a student loan for a course that was supposed to get me a job. Graduation was a year ago today. I still don’t have a job. My student loan will get paid when I have a job, and not one day before then, even if I win Lotto – and I won’t cos I don’t buy tickets! 😀
       Deb
       • prism 2.1.5.1

         2 November 2010 at 11:09 am

         I don’t buy tickets often in Lotto but once a month about $4 might buy a dream. It’s an interest anyway, and most of the money goes to community use. If you participate you won’t go to perdition, you will have just taken a reasoned small limited risk. You can’t lose as much as those poor souls who mistakenly ‘invested’ in finance companies and crappy property speculation.
         • Vicky32 2.1.5.1.1

           2 November 2010 at 5:58 pm

           Those are good points! (I just never remember to do it…) 🙂
           Deb
3. The Chairman 3

   1 November 2010 at 7:50 am

   Meanwhile, the Auckland Council is being urged to consider right-wing economic measures along the lines of spending cuts in Britain and public sector reforms adopted during the Rogernomics era.

   A report on securing efficiencies from the Super City has suggested the council look at freezing spending for three years, be prepared to abolish programmes and be wary of costly risks, such as Manukau’s policy of free swimming pools, across the region.

   Private sector people should lead reviews of big areas of expenditure, says the report by the financial and economic advisory company Taylor Duignan Barry.

   The report was commissioned by the agency designing the Super City to “assist the new Auckland Council in the process of securing efficiencies arising from the reorganisation”.

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10684488
   • Draco T Bastard 3.1

     1 November 2010 at 12:46 pm

     About the only efficiency they seem to be after is how fast the assets can be sold off after creating a massive financial crisis in Auckland.
4. Pascal's bookie 4

   1 November 2010 at 8:15 am

   About them there scary bombs what got put in the post,
   and how we are going to

   i) spend heaps to combat something that is strategically inneffective and probably won’t be tried again in any case,
   and
   ii)in all probability start blowing shit up in Yemen,

   to no good effect:

   “We are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy…All that we have to do is to send two mujahedeen to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al Qaeda, in order to make generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses without their achieving anything of note other than some benefits for their private corporations…Every dollar of al Qaeda defeated a million dollars, by the permission of Allah.”

   That got said in 2004. 6 years ago. It’s still working for him.

   This got said in 2006…

   http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2006/08/wait-arent-you-scared.html

   Osama Bin Laden got everything on his Christmas list after 9/11 — US out of Saudi Arabia; the greatest military in the world over-extended, pinned down and distracted; the greatest proponent of democracy suddenly alienated from its allies; a US culture verily eager to destroy freedoms that little scumfuck could never even dream to touch himself — I would like to deny him the last little check on the clipboard, i.e. constant terror. I panic, they win. To coin a phrase, Osama Bin Laden can suck my insouciance.

   I am absolutely buffaloed by the people who insist I man up and take it in the teeth for the great Clash of Civilizations — “Come ON, people, this is the EPIC LAST WAR!! You just don’t have the stones to face that fact head-on!” — who at the whiff of an actual terror plot will, with no apparent sense of irony, transform and run around shrieking, eyes rolling and Hello Kitty panties flashing like Japanese schoolgirls who have just realized that the call is coming from inside the house!
   • ianmac 4.1

     1 November 2010 at 9:51 am

     I think that increased military is good for the economy and especially good for the suppliers and manufacturers of weapons of mass distress, but in USA at least, no man who is the son of the rich shall be put in harms way. Or it is the impression that I get as an amatuer.
     • Colonial Viper 4.1.1

       1 November 2010 at 10:55 am

       The moment they have both a draft and war taxes (to make every war waged financially neutral to the US Federal budget) targeted solely at the top 10% of US wealthy society: the US will not wage any single unnecessary war ever again.
   • prism 4.2

     1 November 2010 at 10:29 am

     PB What can be said about that? Doh! I wish it was clever satire. Please say it is.
5. The Chairman 5

   1 November 2010 at 8:20 am

   Take back your country

   Winston Peters has closed the New Zealand First conference in Christchurch with a call to New Zealanders to take back their own country.

   http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=121781&fm=psp,tst

   NZ First Policy On Anti-Smacking Welcomed

   http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1010/S00303/nz-first-policy-on-anti-smacking-welcomed.htm
6. The Chairman 6

   1 November 2010 at 8:33 am

   Referring to criticism of the iwi leadership group by Annette Sykes, Mrs Turia said, “I won’t have anyone in this room, and I’ll only say this once, I will never allow you to speak against our iwi leadership.”

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10684449
   • Tigger 6.1

     1 November 2010 at 9:13 am

     For some reason this calls to mind the final scene in Animal Farm…iwi leaders and National sitting around the table…can’t tell one from the other…
     • prism 6.1.1

       1 November 2010 at 10:43 am

       Gee Tigger life is so easy from your swivel seat. If you try to think through the problems facing MP you can’t be so flip and cynical. They have been faced by Labour and didn’t like the resulting law. They have been faced by NACT and have been offered a repeal with a slim door to Court.

       They said they would try to repeal Labour’s Act. So they will get something for Maori from agreeing with this present one. It is a matter of working with what you have and living with reality. Hone can shout and cuss for better – he has an ideal that will not be achieved.

       Maori have achieved reparation and status by being dogged and determined. They know that right is on their side and will continue to achieve reparations and judgements that assist them, though they also know these will only be a portion of their estimated loss. They have more staying power than you have Tigger in your little toenail.
   • Draco T Bastard 6.2

     1 November 2010 at 1:15 pm

     Well, now we can see why the Maori Party went with the authoritarian NACT in government. I also suspect such sentiment means that the MP will not, in fact cannot, strike a coalition agreement with left leaning parties as they’re just too right wing. It’s also proved that they no longer work for the good of the average Maori.
7. felix 7

   1 November 2010 at 8:59 am

   The q+a Mana candidates debate is online here: http://tvnz.co.nz/q-and-a-news/q-mana-election-candidates-battle-21-33-video-3869065

   My impressions:

   1) Hekia Parata is a nasty piece of work who gets angry when challenged. Her entire platform is “I ♥ John Key. Don’t you ♥ John Key too?”

   2) Kris Faafoi is well meaning but a bit of a flake. His entire platform is “I’m from Labour, just like Winnie Laban”

   3) Jan Logie is pleasant enough. Standard Green philosophies but nothing of special local relevance (even though she lives in Mana). Possibly effective but a bit soft for my liking.

   4) Colin Du Plessis is a joke candidate doing a parody of an inbred aristocrat.

   5) Matt McCarten is not from the area but seems to have a better grasp of the issues than any of the others.

   6) Paul Holmes is National Party candidate.
   • Anne 7.1

     1 November 2010 at 9:22 am

     @ Felix
     A good description 😀
     To be fair to Kris Fafoi, everytime he was asked a question and started to answer the Parata bitch shouted over the top of him. In fact it was noticeable that she began the shouting strategy the moment the debate began… before anyone else had a chance to draw breath.

     C/T instruction. Never let your opponents answer questions. It doesn’t matter much what you say, just make sure they can’t be heard saying anything.
     • felix 7.1.1

       1 November 2010 at 9:32 am

       Yeah it was definitely a deliberate strategy on her part. I also thought Kris did a pretty good job of winding her up to expose her nasty nature.
       • ianmac 7.1.1.1

         1 November 2010 at 10:06 am

         An item last night on “Sunday” showed how the deliberate scientology strategy was to keep interrupting the other person until they got so fed up they lost it. Therefore is Paul Holmes a scientologist or just a bit past it?
       • pollywog 7.1.1.2

         1 November 2010 at 10:21 am

         …dunno ’bout deliberate strategy or nasty nature, but my experience of strong Maori women is, it pays not to challenge them ‘cos they often do get angry and yeah, they can get quite raucous over the top of ones own raucousness
   • mickysavage 7.2

     1 November 2010 at 9:30 am

     Paul Holmes is National Party candidate

     Aint that the truth.

     I stopped buying the Herald on Sunday recently and came across the following writing by Paul which vindicated my decision.

     Man, I’m angry. Angry that a group of gullible actors have allowed themselves to be used by some bolshy, left-wing filth from Australia who may or may not simply want to get The Hobbit filmed over there.

     His prejudices and his lack of understanding of reality are scary …
     • prism 7.2.1

       1 November 2010 at 10:58 am

       Paul Holmes – ‘His prejudices and his lack of understanding of reality are scary …’ could be added – ‘and legendary’. We all know about him now. Why is he still around? Is it that there is such a large rabble out there who think his primitive schoolyard spiel is better than considered comment? And are these the people that NZs msm is interested in and written for to the exclusion of content for people who want to see well-considered, rounded as well as witty comment.
     • Lazy Susan 7.2.2

       1 November 2010 at 12:44 pm

       Holmes is a shock jock – he never has and never will be a serious journalist. He has clearly displayed his partisan support for the right and loathing of the left. His interviews are poor and consist more of his own opinions than probing the thoughts of the interviewee.

       All of the above beggars the question “What the f… is he doing presenting TVNZ’s only forum for serious political debate?”
   • pollywog 7.3

     1 November 2010 at 9:31 am

     1) Hekia Parata is a nasty piece of work who gets angry when challenged…

     she reminds me of my kids nan

     2) Kris Fa’afoi is well meaning but a bit of a FAKE.

     he reminds me of my kids jehovahs witness grand dad

     Matt McCarten…FTW !!!
8. Pascal's bookie 8

   1 November 2010 at 9:16 am

   Colin Du Plessis deigns to answer some questions from some lady folk…

   http://thehandmirror.blogspot.com/2008/10/election-survey-colin-du-plessis-act.html

   ACT just oozes liberal. Why, it oozes so much liberal they should take care lest they run out of it.
   • Pascal's bookie 8.1

     1 November 2010 at 9:24 am

     And check out the way he rolls in comments to that post.
     • felix 8.1.1

       1 November 2010 at 9:36 am

       Abortion jokes ftw! Go ACT!

       (Ladies, form an orderly line please, this one’s quite a catch)
       • Bored 8.1.1.1

         1 November 2010 at 3:11 pm

         FTW? Whats it an acronym for?
         • Carol 8.1.1.1.1

           1 November 2010 at 3:15 pm

           FTW, is IMO a neo-liberal-influenced acronymn based on the notion that all of life is a competition. = “For the win”. ie a cheerleading mantra identifying the winners or potential winners.
         • Pascal's bookie 8.1.1.1.2

           1 November 2010 at 3:17 pm

           Everyone pretends it’s For The Win.

           But really, it is always, and always has been, Fuck The World.
9. The Chairman 9

   1 November 2010 at 9:37 am

   The Right to Food: Corporate, Foreign Gov’t Land Grab Causing Hunger in Poor Countries

   A new study suggesting that many of the land deals in Africa and South Asia lack transparency and could threaten local communities with eviction, undermine their livelihoods, and endanger their access to food.

   AMY GOODMAN: Wall Street banks. Can you talk about the Wall Street banks that are doing this?

   OLIVIER DE SCHUTTER: Well, absolutely. I think we have to realize that although much of the media attention has gone to countries purchasing land of broad, in fact the main actors here are private investors, and mostly investment funds, who use land as an asset, as a speculative asset, and they know that the price of farmland will continue to rise in the future. And so, they buy this without necessarily having a very clearly defined project, but they buy this because they know that the price of land will continue to rise. And it is, for them, a means to basically hedge the risk from other investments they make. They know that it’s a relatively safe way to invest their money. And it is, indeed, increasing the pressure on many populations.

   AMY GOODMAN: Can you name names?

   More here: http://www.democracynow.org/2010/10/28/un_special_rapporteur_on_the_right
   • Colonial Viper 9.1

     1 November 2010 at 11:04 am

     Not to mention the likes of Goldman Sachs having previously used staple foods as the underlying asset for dumb-ass derivatives trading, risking extreme price spikes (and resulting mass hunger) on commodity markets as a result.

     They can basically price people around the world out of food without ever stepping out of their high rise buildings in NY, London or Shanghai.
10. Pascal's bookie 10

    1 November 2010 at 9:39 am

    Some good news from Afghanistan.

    http://www.newshoggers.com/blog/2010/10/uss-make-shit-up-goes-to-afghanistan.html

    Latest inteligence reports show conclusively that we have killed around 130% of the Taliban leadership. Woohoo. Obviously we can come home now. Job well done.
    • joe90 10.1

      1 November 2010 at 10:11 am

      Some good news from Afghanistan.

      You can get the news from the horses mouth.
    • Draco T Bastard 10.2

      1 November 2010 at 1:48 pm

      Or is it proof that you just don’t need leaders?
11. prism 11

    1 November 2010 at 11:16 am

    The latest kill from a drunken uncaring lout – a 69 year old woman sitting in a car at the side of a North Island road run into by a 27 year old man taken into custody. He has killed that woman and his alcohol level was high.

    There are new RTDs with caffeine mixed with 9% alcohol. The effect is that you still get drunk, but the caffeine keeps you on your feet – a wide-awake drunk. And alcohol sellers are given so much ‘license’. Dunedin research shows the results of a liquor outlet increases use in the area, so each extra one means more problem drinking. Hours for bars are still late. They should only be able to serve with food after certain hours. The Sunday Herald is running a campaign for law change. I think that is excellent use of media leadership.

    And hospital A&E should charge for attention and the people be followed through the law if they don’t pay. People who can afford to spend on booze to their and others detriment can bloody well pay for the respectful care that they get from our health services. They have no respect for their own bodies and lives and endanger others and abuse those helping them. We need to have accident insurance to cover these costs and then we all will have personal reasons to be concerned about the disgraceful way that we allow our young people are being seduced by drug sellers, and start their lives on a ruinous path from which many don’t recover. And their morals and integrity are shallow because they can always excuse their own bad behaviour on alcohol use.
    • Colonial Viper 11.1

      1 November 2010 at 11:52 am

      Not that this addresses many of the tragic societal issues you raise, but for starters every vehicle on the road needs to be covered by compulsory 3rd party insurance, minimum.

      And this country has a laissez faire fascination with industries which incur massive societal/socialised costs. Alcohol, pokies/gambling/casinos, …

      Oh yeah, I think I read that the driver you referred to was 3x over the legal limit.
      • Lanthanide 11.1.1

        1 November 2010 at 12:16 pm

        “but for starters every vehicle on the road needs to be covered by compulsory 3rd party insurance, minimum.”

        Yes. Labour and/or Greens and/or NZ First should campaign on this. National clearly won’t.

        I have read that some states in the US require it, and one of them has a state system that tracks the insurance policies everyone has. If you let yours lapse, you get a fine in the mail that very day for being uninsured, which is waived if you take up insurance again with 28 days or sell the car etc.
        • Carol 11.1.1.1

          1 November 2010 at 12:22 pm

          I always had to have at least 3rd party insurance for my vehicles when I lived in the UK and also ( I think?) in Aussie. It always seemed a good scheme to me. So I also got one when I came back to NZ. I didn’t even realise it wasn’t compulsory. I don’t understand why it isn’t.
      • NickS 11.1.2

        1 November 2010 at 12:24 pm

        but for starters every vehicle on the road needs to be covered by compulsory 3rd party insurance, minimum.

        Part of the problem with that though is it has a much greater economic impact on the young and those on low incomes or unemployed. Which in turn for cities and towns without extensive public transport networks limits their ability to get to a job. Particularly when it comes to night shift positions or 6-7am starts when public transport is usually not available. It’s a nice idea, but I can only see it as something that potentially penalises the poorer parts of society as it stands.
        • Lanthanide 11.1.2.1

          1 November 2010 at 1:32 pm

          Better to have 3rd party insurance, than to cause a crash into someone’s Bently and be hounded to pay up, right?
        • Carol 11.1.2.2

          1 November 2010 at 2:04 pm

          I don’t think this is a reason for not having compulsory 3rd party insurance. It does not affect the majority of people who live in urban areas and work 9-5 weekdays. Some jobs pay extra for weekend and night work. This should be the norm.

          Also, for rural areas lacking in public transport, maybe they should do something like “London Weighting”. When I was teaching in London, I got an extra amount included in my pay labelled “London Weighting” that teachers elsewhere didn’t get. This was to make up for the higher cost of living in London. There was also a smaller amount of “Outer London Weighting” for those working int he outer suburbs. Maybe rural people should have a “rural weighting” included in their wages and benefits?
          • Lanthanide 11.1.2.2.1

            1 November 2010 at 4:15 pm

            If all rural people were employed by a single company that also employed people in the cities (like a government employing teachers), then you “rural weighting” idea might make sense.

            I think if 3rd party insurance was required to drive a car on the road and be registered, and insurance companies charged through the nose for boy-racer cars and people with bad histories, we would ultimately see fewer accidents and deaths on the roads, which in turn would lower ACC costs and trickle through to cheaper car registration. So while the insurance would add an extra cost to driving a car, I think at least a little of that would be recouped from reduced ACC levies.
          • prism 11.1.2.2.2

            2 November 2010 at 11:19 am

            In one of the Scandinavian countries at least, the cost of government imposed fees is lightened for low paid people, including fines. Of course our authoritarian punitive tendencies have not brought that thought to the mind of anyone in charge yet, their thoughts come out as ‘Throw the book at the bu..ers and if they don’t pay up kick them into jail”.
      • The Chairman 11.1.3

        1 November 2010 at 12:30 pm

        Compulsory insurance with cover provided by a nonprofit publicly owned company – or compulsory cover to grow private, mainly offshore profits?
      • Draco T Bastard 11.1.4

        1 November 2010 at 1:55 pm

        …but for starters every vehicle on the road needs to be covered by compulsory 3rd party insurance, minimum.

        Only if it’s through a state owned administrative system designed to keep costs down else you’ll find insurance premiums going up.

        Actually, I think all insurance should be through a state system to get rid of the expense of competition and profit.
        • Colonial Viper 11.1.4.1

          1 November 2010 at 2:02 pm

          If we consider insurance as a basic utility then yeah it probably should be run through (or in accordance with) a public system.
          • freedom 11.1.4.1.1

            1 November 2010 at 2:09 pm

            what like power and telephony perhaps?
            still the best examples how privitisation completely shafts the country that sells its tools instead of leases the rights to develop them
            • Draco T Bastard 11.1.4.1.1.1

              1 November 2010 at 3:06 pm

              Yeah, insurance is one of those things which is far more efficient (cost effective) if you have everyone in it making it a natural monopoly. Competition just adds to the bureaucracy and the profit motive means that the insurance companies will try anything not to pay out (which adds even more costs).
12. The Chairman 12

    1 November 2010 at 11:29 am

    Ads spell out details of coastal privatisation
    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1010/S00301/ads-spell-out-details-of-coastal-privatisation.htm
    • NickS 12.1

      1 November 2010 at 12:04 pm

      /groan

      Not this anti-Maori bullshit again.

      Newsflash, 2000Km of coastline is fucking tiny compared to the amount of coastline we have, not only that, the RMA will still apply to any and all commercial activities carried out on the shore and seabed. Which will cause issues for any mining activities, and possibly intensive marine aquaculture (namely salmon, which intensive rearing leads to nitrogen pollution…) and coastal property developments.

      As for issues regarding tapu, that generally applies to burial sites, Pa’s, battle sites and the odd spiritual site, all of which are going to be an even tinier percentage of land. To which treating them like nothing important is just a vestige tired old NZ european racist cultural imperialism, that in the past tried to wipe out Maori culture in the name of “progress”. And now is more or less about trying to ignore Te Treati O Waitangi and the Maori property rights guaranteed within. Which the colonial government of early NZ merrily ignored, and a lot of present day NZ’ers seem hell bent on avoiding and painting Maori as “greedy” and “un-kiwi”. When the reality is more likely to be business as usual in terms of beach etc access.

      Basically, if they had prior ownership of the land, and it was taken from them illegally, then legal rulings on Te Treati make it clear it should go back to them. So personally, the Coastal Coalition are a bunch of racist hicks.

      Also, is it just me, or does anyone else see the CC framing Iwi as “jewish” per the greedy iwi bullshit?
      • The Chairman 12.1.1

        1 November 2010 at 1:15 pm

        The RMA will still apply ?

        While the general comment in relation to the Bill has been that the RMA will apply, in terms of enforcement, the decision whether to enforce lies with the Minister of Conservation where an activity is having an adverse effect on the environment. The trigger here is a potential adverse effect rather than non-compliance with the RMA per se. While either the Minister or a regional council may investigate activities having an adverse effect on the environment, the level of enforcement is modest compared than that provided under the RMA. Any procedures may be confidential to the Minister and the local authority, resulting in a lack of transparency. The Environment Court does not have jurisdiction to issue an enforcement order, and there is no provision for prosecution in the event of failure to comply with a Minister’s directions. The Minister may impose controls to mitigate effects but there is no ability to review or revoke the grant of the customary right itself as a result of such effects.

        More here: http://www.bellgully.com/resources/resource.02668.asp
        • NickS 12.1.1.1

          1 November 2010 at 3:29 pm

          Brain too sugar deprived to slog through RMA stuff, would be more interest if you provided a more impartial source than a law firm due to possible conflicts of interest. Me comment latter after food /ug
    • NickS 12.2

      1 November 2010 at 12:15 pm

      Also, it’s not like the carbon copy replacement bill set to pass will actually give Maori any real property rights, so yeah, much whinging over nothing from the likes of the Coastal Coalition, but then again, that’s pretty much business as usual for racist twits.
13. Sean Brooks 13

    1 November 2010 at 12:53 pm

    Hats off to Mayor Bob Parker, 600 jobs created for Christchurch, finally a politicans trip overseas that is actually worth while.
    • Colonial Viper 13.1

      1 November 2010 at 1:08 pm

      Does having Parker in the photo op now count as him having ‘created’ the jobs? Quick, someone give the tip to Jonkey.
    • The Voice of Reason 13.2

      1 November 2010 at 1:22 pm

      To save us all googling, can you put a link Sean? The only thing I can find that might be what you’re referring to is the proposal for an asian airline to fly into Chch, but that won’t create any jobs immediately and very few in the long run so it’s probably not that. Especially as the report I read refers to the airline owner as Asia’s Richard Branson, which suggests it’s going be, er, a fly by night outfit anyway.
14. Pascal's bookie 14

    1 November 2010 at 1:12 pm

    Should a doctor,
    who accepts public money for their work,
    and is a Jehovah’s Witness
    be required to let his/her patients know about blood transfusions where appropriate?
    • freedom 14.1

      1 November 2010 at 1:20 pm

      Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes, Yes etc
      an example of the issue ,
      Catholic doctors must do abortions or refer the patient to another physician,

      it is my understanding the religous faith of an individual physician is not permitted to interfere with the professional responsibility of the position and that there are clear guidelines in the medical ethics’ codes that cover this very circumstance

      but as ethics seems to be a social structure this world no longer has use for
      maybe it no longer applies
      • Pascal's bookie 14.1.1

        1 November 2010 at 1:27 pm

        As it stands, yep, however….

        http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/60873/drs-go-to-high-court-over-abortion-guidelines
        • freedom 14.1.1.1

          1 November 2010 at 2:01 pm

          so all they have to do is state to the patient
          “as my beliefs restrict the discussion of all available treatment options i am refering you to another doctor’ simple and all rights of both parties are respected

          the physician has no right whatsoever to deny the individual’s right to full informed treatment
      • joe90 14.1.2

        1 November 2010 at 1:37 pm

        Should a person convicted of sexual offences against a child be exempted from inclusion on a national police DNA database because he says it would condemn him to eternal damnation?.
        • NickS 14.1.2.1

          1 November 2010 at 3:25 pm

          No. Besides, he’s already doomed due to raping a child, so yeah, methinks this is only a attempt to keep him off there for reasons other than his religious beliefs.
    • Vicky32 14.2

      1 November 2010 at 5:34 pm

      “and is a Jehovah’s Witness
      be required to let his/her patients know about blood transfusions where appropriate?”
      AFAIK, they already are, and so are Catholic doctors and nurses required to inform patients where they can get abortions.
      Deb
15. Sean Brooks 15

    1 November 2010 at 1:20 pm

    Sorry if this has been posted.
    • ianmac 15.1

      1 November 2010 at 2:28 pm

      Not seen that part so thanks.
16. freedom 16

    1 November 2010 at 1:57 pm

    Forgive me if I am out of line but I am a little concerned about the growing endorsement of The Pundit by The Standard. The addition of a full banner ad that now completely domineers the page header has caused some concerned debate between myself and some other admirers of The Standard. The issue is a simple one, their ‘World News Brief’. This is an in-plain-sight press vehicle for the Council on Foreign Relations, a machine of Globalist propoganda par-excellence.

    These are the people who pretty much wrote the gamebook for the last seventy years of Globalist economic and social policy. They are an organisation that is so secretive many of its ‘thinktank’ programmes are not known by other members. Most of its funding is from private foundations with more skeletons than Skull and Bones and its agenda is full of more secrets than a thousand politicians’ spouses.

    remember this CFR endorsed address by David Rockefeller
    “We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected the promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National autodetermination practiced in past centuries.”
    — David Rockefeller , 1991

    to be clear i find much of the Pundit to be a worthwhile enterprise with some exceptionally well qualified and informative commentary, but i am flummoxed by the relationship to the CFR. Especially odd when Hager and Bradford for example are there.
    But hey, this is just my humble opinion . . .
    the world is so screwed who really knows what anyone is actually doing anymore, or why!

    [lprent: It isn’t an endorsement – it is simple advertising. They pay us to display their banner. The money for this pays for the server to run. The only ‘endorsed’ ads are those far down on the right under the heading of ‘Public Service Ads’.

    We can exclude ads from the provider if we want to (but I can’t see the need to in this case). Sometimes we’re asked if we’d let particular unpaid ads through like the Greenpeace one on Fonterra a few weeks ago. Otherwise there is a default set that advertise scoop/werewolf that show up when there isn’t anything paid or unpaid and approved available.

    Incidentally, I read quite a lot of the Pundit authors in my occasional bursts around the blogs, and I can’t remember ever seeing their World News Brief. ]
    • freedom 16.1

      1 November 2010 at 3:30 pm

      in the date line on the Pundit home page, center left. the world news brief goes to the news page and there on the top left is the CFR logo sitting atop the list of Pundits, (which is an ownership by association in design 101)

      i realise it is simply commercial practicality and I am only a tiniest bit concerned about the choice of advertiser, the concern is tagged more to ‘guilt by association’ than ‘collusion in the shadows’.
      I have asked a couple of people i know who read the Pundit and they said the same “never really noticed it’ which really only goes towards validating my concern of incrementalism by the CFR propoganda.

      there is no longer any denying the influence of the CFR, the IMF, the Trilateral Commission and others in the day to day manipulation and extortion of the world’s governments, which is why a free and independant media is ever more crucial to keep on life support.

      this is not to say that these organisations are not involved in good works but even the devil is said to tell a good joke, i mean he made george w president, twice, how much funnier can a dude get?
    • anarcho 16.2

      1 November 2010 at 6:51 pm

      At first I was like huh? I looked at the banner space…. nothing about Pundit there…. oh the little tag that says ‘advertisment’ …. similar ones on the side. Of course… Ad Blocker software so good I’d forgotten about it 🙂
      • Carol 16.2.1

        1 November 2010 at 6:58 pm

        Yes, the ad-blockers work for me too. Also, I never look at Pundit’s world news, only the individual blogs.
17. Draco T Bastard 17

    1 November 2010 at 3:02 pm

    Greenland ice mass loss after the 2010 summer

    The ice sheet has been steadily losing ice and the rate of ice loss has doubled over the 8 year period since gravity measurements began.

    Wasn’t there some climate denier a while back that was claiming that the gravity measurement would show that the ice loss was less than what the scientists said?
    • Lanthanide 17.1

      1 November 2010 at 4:19 pm

      I remember a few months back there were reports saying that the rate of ice loss has been exaggerated by about double in Greenland.

      Frankly I just ignore most climate change stuff these days as it’s too hard to keep track of what is or isn’t happening – that’s not to say I don’t think it’s happening, I just don’t try and stay informed on it.
18. Pascal's bookie 18

    1 November 2010 at 3:44 pm

    “As for the Republicans—how can one regard seriously a frightened, greedy, nostalgic huddle of tradesmen and lucky idlers who shut their eyes to history and science, steel their emotions against decent human sympathy, cling to sordid and provincial ideals exalting sheer acquisitiveness and condoning artificial hardship for the non-materially-shrewd, dwell smugly and sentimentally in a distorted dream-cosmos of outmoded phrases and principles and attitudes based on the bygone agricultural-handicraft world, and revel in (consciously or unconsciously) mendacious assumptions (such as the notion that real liberty is synonymous with the single detail of unrestricted economic license or that a rational planning of resource-distribution would contravene some vague and mystical ‘American heritage’…) utterly contrary to fact and without the slightest foundation in human experience? Intellectually, the Republican idea deserves the tolerance and respect one gives to the dead.”

    H.P. fucking Lovecraft FTFW in 1936.
19. Draco T Bastard 19

    1 November 2010 at 5:10 pm

    Issues in Privatisation – Costs & Benefits

    To give just two examples of the effect on New Zealand’s liabilities: the Ameritech/Bell Atlantic/Fay, Richwhite, Gibbs,Farmer syndicate bought Telecom for $4.25 billion in July 1990, when the company had shareholder funds of $2.5 billion. Shareholder funds declined over the next several years despite cost-cutting because of large capital payments to its shareholders who walked out of the company from 1997 with a realised capital profit of $7.2billion, in addition to a share of over $4.2 billion in dividends[i]– adding approximately $10 billion to New Zealand’s international liabilities.

    Damn, seems I was out by a few billion in how much would have been put back into the network if we’d retained Telecom as state owned.
20. Draco T Bastard 20

    1 November 2010 at 6:22 pm

    http://fixmystreet.org.nz/

    Looks like an interesting means of getting people more engaged with their local community. Kinda feel pity for he councils though, not much, but some. They’re going to get absolutely hammered 😀
21. Pascal's bookie 21

    1 November 2010 at 9:35 pm

    GOPers leaking like fury ahead of elections.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/44449.html

    “There is a determined, focused establishment effort … to find a candidate we can coalesce around who can beat Sarah Palin,” said one prominent and longtime Washington Republican. “We believe she could get the nomination, but Barack Obama would crush her.”

    This sentiment was a nearly constant refrain in POLITICO interviews with top advisers to the candidates most frequently mentioned as running in 2012 and a diverse assortment of other top GOP officials.

    Nearly all of these interviewees insisted on keeping their views on background, fearing the wrath of conservative grass-roots activists who are enthralled with the former Alaska governor and who have made plain that the establishment’s disdain for Palin and her devotees is mutually reciprocated.

    Top Republicans, from presidential hopefuls Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty to highly influential advisers such as Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie, are said to be concerned she will run, and could win, according to the officials.

    They created a monster, and now fear they can’t control it.

Links to post

1. The Standard: posted on 31 October 2010 at 5:03 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS