Open mike 04/10/2014

Written By: - Date published: 7:00 am, October 4th, 2014 - 173 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

173 comments on “Open mike 04/10/2014 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. phillip ure 1
    4 October 2014 at 7:12 am

    “..Has Neoliberalism Turned Us All Into Psychopaths?..

    ..Our me-first economic system –

    – has changed our ethics and our personalities..”

    (cont..)

    http://www.alternet.org/economy/has-neoliberalism-turned-us-all-psychopaths

    • Tom Jackson 1.1
      4 October 2014 at 8:36 am

      No.

      Narcissism is a more likely candidate (Jean Twenge argues for this). The worst narcissists, however, are those awful vegan people. 😉

      • phillip ure 1.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 8:47 am

        you reckon..?

        ..i reckon it’d be those who get ‘something’..(?)

        ..from strutting around clad/wrapped in the skins of dead-animals..

        ..quite bizarre/prehistoric….

        ..and who insist on killing animals..

        ..and on stuffing their flesh/fat into their mouths..

        ..once again..bizarre/prehistoric..

        ..and of course..narcissistic..

        ..in their belief these animals are for them to do whatever they like to them…

        • Richard 1.1.1.1
          4 October 2014 at 9:55 am

          Yep you and me think alike. I have three dogs, love all animals can’t even squat flies. MY opinion is we share this planet and every animal feels that is alive, feels pain has emotions and personality who the fuck are we to kill another living creature.

          The old “god gave us the animals to do as we please” lines, wearing rather fucking thin.

          Humans wrecking the planet in the name of god. We really are a virus on this planet.

          • Paul 1.1.1.1.1
            4 October 2014 at 9:58 am

            Earthlings

            • Richard 1.1.1.1.1.1
              4 October 2014 at 10:09 am

              Please paul I clicked that and clicked off at the disclaimer. I cannot watch bad things happen to animals it makes me seriously suicidal mate. Stick a warning in their next time, I thought it was about aliens or a study on humans not animal farming and it’s horrific practices.

    • lurgee 1.2
      4 October 2014 at 8:50 am

      If we accept that people are formed by their environment, then we probably have to accept that people have been changed by the relentless individualism, narcissism and consumerism which has been the (hem) predominant discourse in western societies for the last 30 years.

      This is why I’m against the ‘turn left’ crowd hereabouts. The people voting National are not going to suddenly vote Labour when they are offered a more left wing alternative. They’re going to be even more repelled. The most we can do, in the short term, is pry off the centre vote, and then when people realise the Sky Has Not Fallen, persuade them it will still not fall if we move a little bit further, then a little bit further …

      The neo-liberals had the advantage of circumstance when they moved the country the other way in the 80s … But I think a crisis generally favours the right (and they deceived as to how far they were going to go) as witnessed by the right wing retrenchment after 2008. Unless there is some system busting crisis (which we’ve been waiting for for over 150 years now!) Fabianism is probably the only way for the left to return to power. Bolsheviks might dream of seizing control and imposing (their version of) the dictatorship of the proletariat, and then persuading people they were right all along, but most historical examples warn against that route.

      enyways, themz iz mi branes thiz mornung.

      • Paul 1.2.1
        4 October 2014 at 8:55 am

        To prevent catastrophic climate change, radical reforms are required within the decade.

      • Chooky 1.2.2
        4 October 2014 at 8:56 am

        for a purported Greenie that is a weird argument….the Right are f..king the planet

        • lurgee 1.2.2.1
          4 October 2014 at 8:58 am

          It’s an argument born of practicality. The Greens, you’ll note, get about 10% of the vote. They need another 40% before they can do anything.

          The planet, unfortunately, is a big place and it is hard to take in the impact of human activity. And people – tutored in consumerism and selfishness for three decades – are more receptive to iphones than environmentalism. Hence the needs for small steps.

        • phillip ure 1.2.2.2
          4 October 2014 at 9:10 am

          there are lots of righties in the greens..

          ..and of course lurgee ignores those who labour needs to represent..

          ..the disenfranchised one million who don’t vote…

          ..lutgee just wants to continue to squabble over that ‘centre’..

          ..and it is not a matter of ‘bolsheviks’ seizing power..

          ..’turning left’ in this local context is more labour turning away from the neo-liberalism that has so blighted our country..

          ..and towards the progressive policies successfully used by countries less riven with the inequality we are..

          ..but lurgee wouldn’t care about that..

          ..rightie greens care even less about the poor than nattys do…

          ..and dream of coalitions with the right parties..

          ..eh lurgee..?

          ..you’d be up for that…eh..?

          • lurgee 1.2.2.2.1
            4 October 2014 at 9:59 am

            The missing million have sat out three elections now. It is unlikely they will be tempted back in significant numbers. They are the flip side of the neo-liberal-narcissistic-consumerists; the permanently disenfranchised and alienated. If they couldn’t be bothered voting AGAINST John Key, what sort of inducements can we offer them that will get them to vote FOR the left? It’s a pleasant fantasy that they will roll up to the polling station in 2017, if only we offer a sufficiently leftwing program … And even if we entertain that fantasy for a few moments, what do you think will happen to centrist voters if Labour lurches left? They’ll leave, probably in greater numbers than the ‘missing million’ are being won back.

            (The great thing about the ‘missing milliong’ delusion is that it can be recycled, of course. It’ll work just as well prior to the 2020, 2023, 2027 and 2030 elections as it does now.)

            As for my reference to Bolsheviks, I meant (nearly) literally that – a small group of extremists seizing power by non-democratic means. This happened in the 80s, when the neo-liberal Bolsheviks won power through deception. Do you want to go down that road? Democracy requires winning the argument before taking power.

            • phillip ure 1.2.2.2.1.1
              4 October 2014 at 10:10 am

              lurgee..

              ..due to its’ clinging to the dead/rotten carcass that is neo-liberalism..

              ..labour..for the last thirty years has just screwed over those people..

              ..and because the neo-libs/abc’ers in labour controlled policy-formulation..

              ..they ensured that cunliffe..once again..had nothing to offer them..

              ..voting against national isn’t enough..

              ..you have to give those million something to vote for..

              ..and when cunliffe was promising them to ‘end poverty’ and the like..

              ..that is when labour support surged to 35%-37%..

              ..so if those rightwing bastards in labour had not sent cunliffe out with that empty policy-satchel..

              ..with nothing for those missing-million..

              ..if they had not succeeded in nobbling him that way..

              ..cunliffe wd now be prime minister..

              ..and they wd be ministers in that govt..

              ..aren’t they fucken stupid in their short-sightedness..eh..?

              ..when you boil it all down..

              • lurgee …
                4 October 2014 at 4:23 pm

                They won’t vote because they don’t care. It’s alienation. Like I said, the flip side of the neo-liberal-narcissistic-consumerists. You can dream about them all you like. You can devise a fabulous platform of policies. They won’t listen in significant numbers. And for every one you win, you’ll lose two at the other end. You might not care, too much, but you won’t win. Savour your ideological purity because it is all you’ll have to enjoy until 2026. And in the mean time, another generation will have had their lives blighted by the right.

            • Chooky 1.2.2.2.1.2
              4 October 2014 at 4:46 pm

              @ lurgee

              reasons why young people dont vote is because they dont like the middle and they see all parties as the same ie Labour have sold out to the middle !

              … and some of the non-voters, lets face it, are very sophisticated and well educated ….eg the cynical well educated 20 somethings that follow the anarchist Russell Brand who makes a very good case that voting is ineffective in advanced capitalism…and all parties tend to be the same

              http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/feb/20/is-russell-brand-right-are-we-disenchanted-by-politics

              http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/05/russell-brand-democratic-system-newsnight

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YR4CseY9pk

              It has to become COOL to vote…and VOTE LEFT !…once more

              ….A Left run radio and tv are the only ways to do this imo…because they can mine music culture and the arts…and counter the predominantly right wing main stream media and right wing black ops PR merchants

              • lurgee …
                4 October 2014 at 4:48 pm

                And for every one of these missing voters you win, you’ll lose two at the other end.

                • phillip ure …
                  4 October 2014 at 5:51 pm

                  bullshit..!

                  ..when cunliffe was talking poverty-busting labour were at 35%-37%..

                  ..when the policy didn’t deliver..

                  ..that support shrugged their shoulders and walked away again..

                  ..yr centrist/right arguments just don’t add up..

                  ..had cunliffe/labour delivered on those 35% promises..

                  ..cunliffe wd now be prime minister..

                  ..i know the right/robertson-boosters don’t like to mention that policy fail..

                  …they wd rather just go ‘ew..!..cunliffe..!’..

                  ..putting the simple i simplistic-thinking..that one..

                  ..with that dishrag armstrong today being the latest example of that ‘don’t mention the policy!’ evaluation of what happened..

                  ..it doesn’t fit with the story they are trying to construct..

                  • lurgee …
                    5 October 2014 at 8:16 am

                    When Labour were on 35-37% it was because Cunliffe was shiny and new, and the party had received a lot of positive media coverage. Once the shine wore off him, the numbers fell again.

                    • phillip ure …
                      5 October 2014 at 8:45 am

                      no..it was when he was wrapping himself in the workers’ flag that is deepest red..

                      ..talking about the evils of poverty..

                      ..and how ‘we can fix that’..

                      ..and walking thru the streets of new lynn..

                      ..whistling the internationale..

                      (and i understand..that at home.he had taken to carving images of karl mark into pumpkins..)

                      ..unfortunately the policy-package he was handed by the right in labour…

                      ..said/did none of those things..

                      ..we had slumped back to ‘increases in benefit rates at that of inflation..

                      ..a financial surplus is more important to labour’…said cunliffe in the last wk of the campaign..

                      .and by then..those karl marx pumpkins had been long in the compost..

                      ..and he had taken to whistling ‘i’m a yankee doodle dandy!’..

                  • Chooky …
                    5 October 2014 at 9:13 am

                    +100 phillip ure

                    …and what do you think of Nanaia Mahuta as Deputy to Cunliffe?…do you think she would keep him a flaxroots Labour man?

                  • Chooky …
                    5 October 2014 at 11:26 am

                    ok could go with that…. dont know them except by report…needs to be a female imo….and Jacinda does NOT cut the mustard imo

  2. phillip ure 2
    4 October 2014 at 7:36 am

    “..Jesus Was a Marxist..

    ..Jesus was clearly a Marxist –

    – not by name – but by ideology.

    He sought tirelessly to end poverty –

    – to feed and house the needy –

    – and to heal those in need..”

    (cont..)

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-arel/sorry-republicans-but-jes_b_5916564.html

    • lurgee 2.1
      4 October 2014 at 8:39 am

      He might have kinda believed in God, which rather undermines the whole Materialism thing.

      • Vaughan Little 2.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 9:22 am

        Christianity has a tradition of materialism.

        The guy who turned me onto it was Terry Eagleton. He most likely sets it out in a talk you can find online called “Marxism as a theodicy.” It’s on iTunes and probably youtube.

        I’m probably butchering him, but he has a line roughly amounting to “If we had a sufficiently rich language of materiality, we wouldn’t need a separate language of mind.”

        There’s a lot of surprising stuff in Christianity that has been obscured from the Enlightenment, in the way of ontology, politics and socialism. But it all starts with ontology.

        Eagleton also unpacks this stuff in a brilliant talk at Yale called “Christianity fair or foul.”

        Elsewhere he’s truly handy on Marx, though his book “Why Marx was Right” should probably be called “What Marx Didn’t Say”.

      • mikesh 2.1.2
        4 October 2014 at 2:02 pm

        But though I believe Marx was an atheist, his “materialism” had nothing to do with any arguments for or against the existence of God.

        • lurgee 2.1.2.1
          4 October 2014 at 4:52 pm

          I was think more about philosophical Material, rather than specifically Marxist Materialism, though I’d argue it makes no odds. I don’t think y can really have a divine entity (in the traditional Christian sense at least) in a materialist conception of the universe. Once you allow a God to be behind it all, you’re basically arguing bastard-Hegelianism.

          • Vaughan Little 2.1.2.1.1
            4 October 2014 at 6:07 pm

            You can only argue taht it makes no difference from a non-neutral, deicidal position. And, I’m sure you’re aware that Aquinas predates Hegel… as does Aristotle

  3. Richard 3
    4 October 2014 at 7:42 am

    On your first post P. U yes.

    On your second only Jesus knows, a long time ago that happened. Personally I think Jesus was a Labourite of the times, who got a John Armstrong of the day on his case and the prevailing Nats(Romans) did what Armstrong wanted and crucified him.

    • phillip ure 3.1
      4 October 2014 at 8:09 am

      then there is this interesting p.o.v…

      “..5 Reasons to Suspect Jesus Never Existed..

      .A growing number of scholars are openly questioning or actively arguing against whether Jesus lived.

      Most antiquities scholars think that the New Testament gospels are ‘mythologized history’.

      In other words they think that around the start of the first century a controversial Jewish rabbi named Yeshua ben Yosef gathered a following –

      – and his life and teachings provided the seed that grew into Christianity.

      At the same time these scholars acknowledge that many Bible stories like the virgin birth – miracles – resurrection – and women at the tomb –

      – borrow and rework mythic themes that were common in the Ancient Near East-

      – much the way that screenwriters base new movies on old familiar tropes or plot elements.

      In this view a ‘historical Jesus’ became mythologized..”

      (cont..)

      http://www.alternet.org/belief/5-reasons-suspect-jesus-never-existed

      • Vaughan Little 3.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 9:46 am

        The concept of historicised myth has been around for at least a century. Popularized in the 20th century by guys like Bultmann and Tillich if memory serves. It gets interesting play in a weird, almost satisfying movie called Jesus of Montreal.

        When dealing with terms like myth and history you have to be careful that you’re not practicing anachronism.

        I’d encourage you to read the first paragraphs of each of the gospels. They set out their agendas right at the start in a way that speaks to how they’re going to incorporate different genres of material.

        The veracity of Scripture and interpretations of what veracity means in that context are a predictably ugly rabbit hole to dive down online. There’s a good scholar on this stuff whose name I’ll dredge up and post on here later.

      • Richard 3.1.2
        4 October 2014 at 10:06 am

        Their is no God. It’s just total BS.

        When a five year old gets swept away by a wave it’s gods will.
        Tui billboard.

        If their is really a God he couldn’t give a fly F, and probably created the universe for beings on another planet who actually care about life in all it’s forms.

        We are just flotsam floating on a rock slowly killing it off to please ourselves at the expense of everything else. If their is a god he’s probably really fucking pissed off with us all right now.

      • Foreign waka 3.1.3
        4 October 2014 at 11:05 am

        Nature and the world does not accept a vacuum. What would be put in place of Christianity, a belief system that has formed and shaped 2000 years of western civilization? Are we going to see the rise of other religious beliefs that brings a new dimension to the words inequality? There is no such thing as a pragmatic society.

    • Vaughan Little 3.2
      4 October 2014 at 10:03 am

      He was a uniting figure in the sense that he deliberately set out to attract followers from diverse, including violently opposed, parts of society. ‘Zealots’ were originally insurgents who practiced political assassination and acts of terror. Jesus drew from their group and put them together with erstwhile establishment figures, most famously a tax collector. People who disgusted each other, ritually pure religious leaders and hookers, 等等.

      Which religious figure would not severely criticize Armstrong? Duplicity is deeply wrong everywhere.

      • Richard 3.2.1
        4 October 2014 at 1:54 pm

        No a simple belief system, treat others as you would like to be treated yourself.

        A very good saying that needs reiterating more often to those that need to hear it.

  4. Richard 4
    4 October 2014 at 7:54 am

    Sturdaaaaaaay, finally a rest from work. Crikey what a week our two majorly big lathes went down Friday one a gear shaft unscrewed what a noise. the other just started switching off, thermal overload. 3 API, weld necks from order completed. I was pissed off been doing them for 3 weeks bloody hard graft, bloody heavy. I’m bloody tired. all for 16.75 PH in this day and age I’m just happy to be working. I should be greatful after ten years + on invalids, I’m so happy he took a chance and hired me on.

    Petrol went up this week, funny when things go well they never lower the petrol price but any shift in the dollar and it comes up immediately. We’re being fucked over by big oil here what happened to our reserves purchased at a lower price? Fucking rip offs.

    oh and Armstrong comes out with another stunning insight into labours woes and why Cunliffe should go.

    I think Armstrong should be sued. Preferably very publically by the labour party, greens and IM parties for bias and making shit up about stuff he know fuck all about.

    Right damn it back to the house work.

    • phillip ure 4.1
      4 October 2014 at 8:20 am

      that armstrong piece is a shocker..

      ..i left a comment asking how he cd possibly pretend to present a picture of what is going on..

      ..without even mentioning the neo-lib vs. progressive struggle at the heart of it..

      ..(he’s a fucken joke..!..)

      ..the comment has not been published..

      ..maybe because i also noted that one thing this election has taught us..

      ..is how any credibility he may have had has been flushed down the loo..

      • Richard 4.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 9:47 am

        I read it Phil I used to post as ifixit but they fucking banned me for losing it on Armstrong and O’Sullivan one day. I have grown to want to harm them and had to stop reading their shit.

        Was a brilliant post and had a lot of what I wanted to say. I think a concerted effort to demand HIS resignation should be on the cards. If we all start posting resign Armstrong and enough say, it maybe it will happen or perhaps we should hold a non binding, referendum .

        Or start a protest outside the herald if we can get enough people not working who read the papers to give a flying fuck.

        But anyways mate keep saying what I cannot anymore. You are my Herald voice from now on.

      • greywarbler 4.1.2
        4 October 2014 at 11:50 am

        @ phillip u
        I think your opinions re Armweakly might be emerging to the sea from a pipeline now.

        • phillip ure 4.1.2.1
          4 October 2014 at 12:01 pm

          i see that others have also not held back in their contempt of/at the mewlings of armstrong..

        • Richard 4.1.2.2
          4 October 2014 at 12:46 pm

          No Phillips is the first comment in Armstinks piece of hatred today.

          His last four opinion pieces were crap about labour as usual. Seriously wish him a bad ending. That freaking annoys me that I actually wish another human harm on this planet. He’s pressing my buttons with his power of hatred and platform of political meddling.

    • Olwyn 4.2
      4 October 2014 at 8:29 am

      Not content with owning just the media and the public service, Key and his friends now want influence over all the other political parties as well. While we have Hooton, Armstrong, etc, pitching in to “help” sort the Labour leadership out, we have two recent articles inviting the Greens to move more to the centre:
      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11336457
      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11335852

      And we should not forget National’s helping Kelvin Davies to unseat Mana – a party that is unfitted for their so-called “centre.” The endgame is effectively a one-party state, where party brands have replaced actual political positions. To oppose this we need engaged people and leaders who are willing to challenge their narrative.

      • Draco T Bastard 4.2.1
        4 October 2014 at 8:57 am

        The endgame is effectively a one-party state, where party brands have replaced actual political positions.

        Yep, we’re given the illusion of choice in the supermarkets while self-governance and and having a say in our democracy is being removed from us. Unfortunately, a majority of people seem willing to accept this.

      • Chooky 4.2.2
        4 October 2014 at 11:08 am

        +100 OLywn…interesting comments and interesting links!…and imo if the Greens move centre they are killing off their own support base…in fact this is what they did in the last week before the Election

        …potential Green voters who perceived them rightly or wrongly heading for coalition or accommodation with John Key and Nactional took their vote elsewhere (eg to Labour or NZF or Int/MANA )

        eg. “Mclauchlan elaborates with anedoctoral evidence: ‘I was dropping my daughter off at creche and a very upset teacher ran up to me and demanded to know why the Greens were supporting National. Multiply her out thousands of times across the country and you’re looking at serious damage’.”

        http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11336457

        Hooton has long made overtures and wanted to bag the Greens as a trophy for the right wing and Nactional …because the Greens are trendy and give them creds and some of the more intelligent are increasingly voting Green

        ….unfortunately for this proposed detente between Greens and Nacts it is inherently contradictory

        …..it is the values and ethos of the capitalist corporate right wing “progress at the expense of the environment” that is destroying the planet ( fracking, pollution and exploitation of waterways, overpopulation, markets, profits above all else and before the environment)

        • Olwyn 4.2.2.1
          4 October 2014 at 2:03 pm

          I don’t think the people pushing for a “centrist” Green Party understand that these values go deep with some people. Hence they think that the brand can be maintained alongside corporate capitalism – “blue for the share portfolio and Green for the dolphins.”

          It is utterly important that there is push-back against this kind of takeover. I do not think we have yet reached the stage where pushing back is futile, though that is what we are inviting if we remain complacent. For now, people forget when they go on about Labour’s 24.7% and the Greens’ drop in the election vote, that the vote for change, if you include NZ1st and IMP, was around 44%. I include NZ1st, since a vote for them was essentially a vote against the National bloc, whether that opposition took the form of opposing from without or constraining from within.
          Edit: I just added it up after the special votes had been counted – and the anti-vote is 45.91%. We are far from dead on our side of the divide, and we should not accept the story that we have been routed.

    • Kiwiri 4.3
      4 October 2014 at 12:37 pm

      Petrol went up this week

      Power going up also.
      I am putting together a spreadsheet of usage the past five years (five because of the data that I have access) to see what has been happening – whether seasonal, weather, usage and also comparing against annual inflation.

      • Richard 4.3.1
        4 October 2014 at 12:52 pm

        Interested am I. noticing high electricity costs myself and I’m a freak who switches everything off at the wall. Usually my bill comes in at around 80 been 130 lately.

        • Kiwiri 4.3.1.1
          4 October 2014 at 1:17 pm

          Found this reported three days ago:

          http://www.odt.co.nz/news/business/317668/electricity-prices-outstrip-inflation

          The millions of ‘profits’ should be kept in the public sector and ploughed back into public services. But the millions are now being funnelled into the hands of private individual and corporate shareholders!

          Better future for them. Bitter future for many Kiwi households.

          • Richard 4.3.1.1.1
            4 October 2014 at 1:43 pm

            Yep read that lately what was it electricity had risen 48% when inflation was about 3%. What I notice is they make all these promises that privatising will see us all better off , yet when it doesn’t nothing happens.

            Laws need making so promises have consequences for governments and political parties seeking power or making massively wrong outcomes to justify their actions..

            The person who privatised power companies should be bought before the courts as far as I’m concerned.

  5. boldsirbrian 5
    4 October 2014 at 8:38 am

    From the NZ Herald
    A “survey”, for what that is worth.
    A lot of votes, but unscientific; possibility of vote stacking etc, I suggest

    Who should be Labour Leader?
    7050-7100 “votes”

    31% Jacinda Ardern
    24% David Shearer
    13% David Cunliffe
    13% Grant Robertson
    08% Stuart Nash
    11% Other

    • Paul 5.1
      4 October 2014 at 8:48 am

      Who cares?
      Anything the Herald prints isn’t worth the paper it’s been put on.

      • Richard 5.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 10:23 am

        I care because dumb arses hang onto and believe every bullshit bias he spouts and cause me to have a miserable life , struggle and barely pay the bills, all because this shit hole rag is the most read paper in NZ.

        Influence like that needs control, morals, and integrity but it ain’t, and don’t.

        I care very much what the people read as informative news..

        ..because when it goes wrong the likes of dictators appear.

        • Paul 5.1.1.1
          4 October 2014 at 10:27 am

          So we need people to see the media lies and misrepresents the truth.

          • Richard 5.1.1.1.1
            4 October 2014 at 10:53 am

            Well I am out of idea’s I even tried a complaint to press council and they didn’t even bother replying at all. Even once, to acknowledge receiving the complaint. this was pre Dirty politics.

            Barring running around rich Auckland suburbs with a large stick bashing sense into people I have no further avenues of protest.

            • Paul 5.1.1.1.1.1
              4 October 2014 at 10:56 am

              Talk to your friends.
              Persuade them.

              • Colonial Viper …
                4 October 2014 at 11:11 am

                What is actually required are left wing media channels and media infrastructure.

                • Ron …
                  4 October 2014 at 12:32 pm

                  Yes and Labour needs to have proper media policies especially relating to radio and TV. Our policy in this area for latest election was ill thought out.

                  What is actually required are left wing media channels and media infrastructure.

              • Richard …
                4 October 2014 at 8:57 pm

                Um I don’t have any really, long story, was sick and shut off for many years self imposed exile for a blood disease I did not want to infect anyone else with.

                Starting to meet people again, but only at work. Since I got better. Finding company hard to deal with still. I will improve in time.

            • CAnker the pig fucker 5.1.1.1.1.2
              4 October 2014 at 12:28 pm

              Richard @ 5.1.1. This is what I fear from our election result/National Govt.

              People in despair, for good reason.

              I hope you have some support Richard. I would encourage you to stay on the STandard. And it is people like me (I consider myself lucky) who have to keep up the fight.

              Kia Kaha Richard.

              • Richard …
                4 October 2014 at 1:20 pm

                Thanks Anker, another stay in mental health for depression is not what I need. I took a job, the professionals said it would help me out. Now I’m just a slightly better off poor person. Things in society have not changed so how was it supposed to help?.

                IDNK

                I was relying on National getting kicked out to bring a little sanity back to NZ but alas the election didn’t go my way now I’m distraught.

                Thanks for the kind words.

                Kia Kaha Anker.

    • bearded git 5.2
      4 October 2014 at 9:11 am

      the top 2 are non starters which means cunliffe

    • Rodel 5.3
      4 October 2014 at 11:55 am

      boldsirbrian-
      NZ Herald survey , ‘for what it’s worth’. We know it’s worth absolutely nothing and we should make sure those susceptible to this kind of media rubbish are told in no uncertain terms what nonsense it is.

      These kinds of surveys are fraudulent, and in any profession other than media/journalism would be seen as unethical and deliberate attempts at deception.

      The trouble is as usual with the ethics of the media.

      • karol 5.3.1
        4 October 2014 at 11:58 am

        The infotainment media just focuses on a reality TV-like battle of personalities, likeability and presentability on camera.

        They should be encouraging discussion about which of those people are capable of managing a caucus debating critically with the government, leading policies, and the policies they favour, etc.

        • boldsirbrian 5.3.1.1
          4 October 2014 at 12:20 pm

          @ karol (5.3.1)

          Yes all of the things you say. Absolutely.

          But just as important is a person who will carry the country with their vision. Able to reach out to the public, and unify the country with those policies. Make everybody proud. Think Lange “I can smell the uranium on your breath”

          It’s not “infotainment” but it is something more than an intelligent policy boffin.
          X-factor.

          Instead of totally ignoring the top two on the Herald list (Ardern and Shearer), consideration should be given to what qualities these two people have that enable them to be there (assuming the survey has any credibility at all, which is a very serious issue)

  6. Barfly 6
    4 October 2014 at 8:44 am

    “We’re on the cusp of something special”

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11336725

    is this it?

    • Paul 6.1
      4 October 2014 at 8:53 am

      The brighter future.
      What a joke.

      State housing
      “Despite an economic upturn, priority A applicants on the social housing waiting list, described as “at risk and including households with a severe and persistent housing need that must be addressed immediately”, have ballooned nationally from 425 in mid-2012 to 3188 this June. More than half (1707) are in Auckland.”

      The working poor
      “Mr Tuuu works fulltime at the Zeagold chicken farm in Takanini, but is classed as a casual labourer so his net pay fluctuates between $800 and just $500 a fortnight.
      Even with $512 a week in family tax credits and accommodation supplement, that is not enough to pay for a private rental. Average rents in Manurewa have risen in the past year from $382 to $408 a week for a three-bedroom house, and from $436 to $457 for four bedrooms.”

      • Vaughan Little 6.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 9:50 am

        “Despite an economic upturn”. ! . It’s BECAUSE of the economic upturn.

        As David Harvey said, “I defy you to deal with the problem of global poverty without dealing with the problem of global wealth.”

    • BM 6.2
      4 October 2014 at 9:02 am

      Too many kids, 6 kids on casual wages is the height of stupidity.

      What’s wrong with these people, do they not have any common sense?

      • Vaughan Little 6.2.1
        4 October 2014 at 9:24 am

        “Too many kids”.

        Culture of death right there…

      • Paul 6.2.2
        4 October 2014 at 9:39 am

        What’s wrong with BM?
        Does he not have any compassion?

        • Vaughan Little 6.2.2.1
          4 October 2014 at 9:51 am

          He’s a genial tory. Likes to stir.

        • phillip ure 6.2.2.2
          4 October 2014 at 9:57 am

          he’s a rightwinger..

          ..along with their sense of humour byepass at birth..

          rightwingers also have a c.b…a compassion-byepass..

          ..they just don’t fucken care.

          ..it’s as simple as that..

          • Paul 6.2.2.2.1
            4 October 2014 at 9:59 am

            How do you make people care?
            Society can’t afford these egotists.

            • Vaughan Little 6.2.2.2.1.1
              4 October 2014 at 10:11 am

              My take is the callousness is bred by the poverty gap. So if you adopt policies that bring the richest and the poorest closer together economically, they’ll be closer together socially (e.g., kids going to the same schools as poor people) and that naturally engenders greater empathy.

              • Karen …
                4 October 2014 at 1:37 pm

                Yep, and that’s why the policy of pepper-potting state houses in all suburbs was a good one. It means, for instance, poor kids get to go to school with middle-class kids who have aspirations of university. I know this because I lived it. My parents only had a couple of years at secondary school before having to find a job so they could help support their siblings, but my friends had professional parents with completely different expectations. So it goes both ways as far as seeing how other people live.

                Of course for this to work you need a lot more state houses than we have at present.

          • greywarbler 6.2.2.2.2
            4 October 2014 at 2:16 pm

            @ phillip ure
            I don’t think it happens at birth. It comes on a bit later than that. I think nurture not nature starts the mean-spirited stuff when they are too small to know they should be encouraged to think something different. I blame it all on poor potty training and not sharing toys actually.

      • vto 6.2.3
        4 October 2014 at 9:44 am

        It is a well known fact that the minimum wage is not enough to live on i.e. wage earners are subsidising business owners.

        This is what is not only the height of stupidity but also the height of human ugly.

        Own it BM. Own the ugly.

        • Paul 6.2.3.1
          4 October 2014 at 9:49 am

          Yes BM looks at this….

          “Mr Tuuu works fulltime at the Zeagold chicken farm in Takanini, but is classed as a casual labourer so his net pay fluctuates between $800 and just $500 a fortnight.
          Even with $512 a week in family tax credits and accommodation supplement, that is not enough to pay for a private rental. Average rents in Manurewa have risen in the past year from $382 to $408 a week for a three-bedroom house, and from $436 to $457 for four bedrooms.”

          and types ‘no common sense’.
          He does not question the atrocious wages
          He does not question the exorbitant rentals.
          He does not question how people can work hard and not be able to make ends meet.

          Heartless.
          Mean spirited.
          Ugly.

      • Richard 6.2.4
        4 October 2014 at 10:14 am

        Whats wrong with YOU. Perhaps he once had a good job, paid well, thought he could afford them.

        Fuck off BM. Your a knob. Who the fuck are you to judge others ? Typical fucking dickhead statement that.

        There you go judgement returned arsehole.

      • CAnker the pig fucker 6.2.5
        4 October 2014 at 10:30 am

        Look at this man’s income. He is living in a car. It seems he can’t even afford a small house for his kids…

  7. les 7
    4 October 2014 at 8:57 am

    what is the censorship criteria here at The Standard?.A number of most benign posts are never published.

    • greywarbler 7.1
      4 October 2014 at 2:12 pm

      @ les
      You mean your own? Censorship isn’t usual for people who have thoughts that add to the discussion. If you are thinking of Richard and his excessive use of fuck – well he will get taken to task if he has nothing else to say. But some benign posters are just so boring and repetitive that they end up getting banned. And sometimes they are basically advertising their own blogs, in which they should stay, and talk to themselves which is often what they seem to want.

      • Richard 7.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 2:58 pm

        I saw others using the F word, thought it wasn’t a banable offence, usually I don’t use coarse language unless it’s suitable to the feedback i write or appropriate for the comment I reply to. I used it when appropriate, I had thought, but since you raised my use of it as to often, consider my future language to be without them.

        However please excuse my last post to CV who it seemed to me rounded on me for no good apparent reason. Or totally misread what I had written and decided to get ugly with me.

        As for BM..yeah well I read a few of his stirring posts i think that was very appropriate, very bias and prejudiced and judgemental.

        • greywarbler 7.1.1.1
          4 October 2014 at 4:14 pm

          @ Richard 2.58
          The f word is fine with me like hot chili pepper though, I think sprinkled finely. And CV is worth listening to – he has done a lot of thinking and learning. His ideas are sound and most of them I agree with, not because I think I’m so smart, but because all the thinking and learning I have done fits to what he says usually.

          So don’t get mad, get equal with him and you won’t go far wrong. If you can get him to give you a summary of what he is thinking. He works as well as so many of the informed people that write here do. So you get the good stuff here usually and even the bad is good really. If it isn’t good enough bad, it gets banned. Understand that? Sounds a bit mixed up to me but I know what I mean!

          And just a thought. If you are getting very riled up go outside for a walk or have a glass of water. Otherwise the poisons build up in your body!! Otherwise you might put up a hate piece and that doesn’t sound well thought through or look good on the blog. I look up something on youtube when I feel brassed off. Try the flashmobs, they’re good for a start. And Pharrell Williams what do you think of his own video of Happy? It’s got so much work in it – all that camera work and editing it must have taken for ever.

          • Richard 7.1.1.1.1
            4 October 2014 at 9:05 pm

            I totally agree. I read quite a few of CV’s posts even commented supporting his point of view a couple of times from memory yesterday or the day before.

            He’s quite onto it. That’s probably why I was so shocked at his reply to one of my posts. I actually thought to myself, does he think I’m a slater, or some nat party stooge. I was shocked at his abruptness I felt it was definitely rude so I gave him a little jandle back. 🙂 One must stick up for ones self.

            I don’t expect people to agree with me but telling me to fuck off was a rude to far rude even for me to ignore mate.

            • greywarbler 7.1.1.1.1.1
              4 October 2014 at 11:01 pm

              @ Richard
              I pointed out that Colonial Viper is working. He may have his own business. He is regularly on the blog discussing the economy, what’s happening here in politics, and a lot of what is written has been discussed before. People have been explaining the same stuff again and again and sometimes they get tired of hearing the same old tired statements. And sometimes they say FFS can you get a better idea to commenters.

              Possibly all of us have been given a flea in our ear sometime. I have. Annoying too. Because I was right I am sure but I had to leave it. I can’t win that argument. But it was not something as important as thinking how we can get the country out of penury and disgrace. And some of us feel we are disgraced, disgusted and destroyed by how things are. And get anxious as to how deep NZ can go, what we will lose while we wait for the country as a whole to wake up from its big snooze. And we say things like FFS can’t you see ….. or some such words. But we don’t go round threatening to do in people, as a rule. And better not to have exceptions to the rule.

              • Richard …
                5 October 2014 at 8:39 am

                I have those thoughts every day GW. Every day. why are the people sucked in, what’s going to happen to those in hard times when Bennets committed to reducing welfare 25%, why did the people vote for this Key conman.

                anyways I don’t hold grudges. It’s forgotten. Todays a new day move forward. It was just a misunderstanding and I have absolutely no ill feeling to CV after all frankly we are all on the same wavelength pretty much politically.

                Just Healthy Robust debates

  8. Tautoko Viper 8
    4 October 2014 at 9:14 am

    I am sick of those who call themselves journalists exhibiting the fact that they believe that values and principles of a political party are readily tradable. John Armstrong’s column today is an absolute disgrace. He needs to read Dita de Boni’s column and do some serious thinking about the real situation. The real issue is a party direction issue. Does Labour chase more of the 30% of eligible votes (which was all that elected National in this election) or does it chase the remaining 70% of eligible votes by having policies that provided a better and fairer life for all NZers? The secondary issue is the fact that many Labour MPs are aligned with the first option while the membership (those who do the work in the community and are fully aware of the real problems facing those who are suffering from the current Government’s policies) largely favour the second. Removing policies that deal with social justice and compassion to leave a National-lite skeleton is the quickest way to commit Labour to the political graveyard.
    John Armstrong, Claire Trevett, and the rest of the Parliamentary press gallery, plus Duncan Garner, Paul Henry, Sean Plunkett and Mike Hoskings need to be taken on a bus tour around some of our struggling communities and given accommodation in a garage for several nights, sharing with several other people including young children. I hope that one day these “journalists” will reflect on their lack of insight with acute embarrassment.

    • tc 8.1
      4 October 2014 at 9:51 am

      They aren’t journalists they are paid shills with ‘personalities’ providing infotainment whilst they stroke each others egos.

      Henry was a Nat party candidate and Hoskings openly admitted his bias towards key, all you will ever get from them is Nat= good, left=evil and neolib slogans like ‘poor choices’ etc.

      Sure they’d sleep in the garage, but only as long as it took to cobble a show or piece about it together, wrap some themes around it then move on as beyond that they couldn’t give a F about poverty as they see themselves superior to ‘those people’.

    • karol 8.2
      4 October 2014 at 10:23 am

      Stephanie’s post on an interview with Brent Edwards is a must read on MSM issues – highlights the problem of using leaks from political insiders, that are referred to as anonymous.

      The full interview is also a must read.

  9. Draco T Bastard 9
    4 October 2014 at 9:46 am

    Cycling overtaking law panned

    NZ Trucking Association chief executive David Boyce said it would be hard adhering to the rules on Christchurch’s “narrow carriageways” and around post-earthquake road works, creating further hazards.

    “Carriageways are not designed on freight and arterial routes for this – they are not wide enough.”

    If the roads aren’t wide enough then why are the trucks on them?

    And why are truckies making excuses to endanger cyclists lives anyway?

    • vto 9.1
      4 October 2014 at 9:57 am

      They clearly need to use smaller trucks then.

      I thought truckies liked to think of themselves as common sense types…

      • NickS 9.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 1:10 pm

        The vast majority of truckies are actually pretty good when it comes to cyclists, at least in Christchurch on city and rural roads. I’ve had more issues with non-truck drivers coming too damn close, even when there’s a bike lane.

        Main issue with road works here in Christchurch I’ve found is the contractors sticking signage right in the fucking bike lane, even when there’s a grass verge or plenty of footpath space, along with not leaving enough space with cones or footpath access. Forcing cyclists into the traffic stream, or into the roadworks to try and avoid the traffic.

    • weka 9.2
      4 October 2014 at 10:14 am

      “If the roads aren’t wide enough then why are the trucks on them?”

      Where do you propose they go?

      Sorry, but there is daftness on all sides of this equation and nothing is simple. Roads designed 50 or 80 years ago aren’t designed for contemporary traffic (trucks or cars or bikes or pedestrians). Town planners have failed to adequately take these things into account – by now cycle ways should be a consideration in all new and upgrade roading (and if we were in any way intelligent, cycling over cars would aready be high on the agenda with AGW/PO). Governance has retarded rail and pushed too much freight onto the roads. Not the fault of truck drivers.

      “And why are truckies making excuses to endanger cyclists lives anyway?”

      Probably because there are few remedies available to them personally. This is a state and local body issue to be solved.

      IMO there are large gulfs between truck drivers, car crivers and cyclists in terms of understanding how each operates. All are relatively ignorant to the realities of the others except for those that do all three.

    • weka 9.3
      4 October 2014 at 11:30 am

      I had a comment not appear earlier this morning. Any chance one of the mods could look and see if it’s being held in moderation?

  10. phillip ure 10
    4 October 2014 at 10:01 am

    andrew little confirmed the raising the pension age policy helped screw labour..

    ..he said he was asked about it all the time during the campaign..

    • boldsirbrian 10.1
      4 October 2014 at 11:57 am

      @ phillip ure (9)

      Changing demographics will mean that it must happen. And while people over 40 might get annoyed with the idea, those who are younger can see into the future, and understand the unfairness of it not happening now.

      But it cannot be a political football. It needs consensus from both major parties. Labour could say, that they favour raising the age, but only if and when National and the Greens support the idea as well.

      And the other crucial thing that Labour missed out, was spelling out that that there could be (and should be) liberal exceptions, or support, especially for those with health issues.

      Nobody wants extra taxes, or reduced benefits. But they may want Government spending prioritised differently. For example if increased spending on health care for the elderly corresponded to the reduced expenditure on superannuation for the elderly, then it may be more accepted, or even desired.

      The Greens approached the issue of funding their election promises extremely well. They concentrated on the benefits of what they were trying to achieve, rather than what they were taking away. But were honest, and unafraid to say that some inequality is obscene. Much more political capital could have been made of the comments of Dotcom, if Labour hadn’t joined National in condemning him, when Dotcom said that the rich, including himself, should be paying more tax.

      If the left parties are sincere in wanting to achieve a living wage for those working; provide required benefits that maintain people out of poverty, increased health coverage for an older population; Expanding ACC to include health issues; Providing better education etc, then there are only a few ways of achieving this.

      Firstly doing all that can be done to encourage social and economic growth.

      Secondly to make structural changes to purge our country of obscene inequality, leaving incentives for innovation

      Thirdly to prioritise government spending so that everyone has the opportunity for a “fair go”

      • phillip ure 10.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 7:16 pm

        of course what made this policy so braindead..

        ..was that all of those votes were burnt off for naught..

        ..’cos even if labour had got over the line..

        ..the greens and nz first wouldn’t have worn that policy..

        ..brain-fucken-dead..on every level..

        ..and make no mistake..

        ..this was parkers’ baby..

        ..he needs to carry the can for that one..

  11. b waghorn 11
    4 October 2014 at 10:08 am

    Most truck drivers I’ve meet are good hard workers its not there fault that roads are not big enough for bikes.

    • Draco T Bastard 11.1
      4 October 2014 at 11:37 am

      Actually, it’s that the road isn’t big enough for the trucks which means that the trucks shouldn’t be on them.

  12. dv 12
    4 October 2014 at 10:21 am

    Current debt

    NZ$ 91,880,181,023

    Does this mean if the currency drops to 65c (Keys goldilocks rate) the debt will be?

    113,083,299,720

    • Colonial Viper 12.1
      4 October 2014 at 10:56 am

      Nope.

      AFAIK (and thank the finance gods for this small mercy) most NZ govt debt is denominated in NZD, not in some foreign currency that we cannot control. The risk of a weaker valued NZD falls on to the holders of the debt.

      • dv 12.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 11:13 am

        Thanks CV
        ‘The risk of a weaker valued NZD falls on to the holders of the debt.

        That will please the holders!!!

        • Colonial Viper 12.1.1.1
          4 October 2014 at 11:16 am

          The institutions who buy sovereign debt are serious professionals – they will be well hedged against forex risk…

  13. greywarbler 13
    4 October 2014 at 10:39 am

    Tania Turia this morning on Radionz was saying that Maori should be self-motivated. There is too much of a handout mentality still. People talk of te rangatira but then want free food, education.

    Is the idea of Maori turning away from free education a good idea? Maori are entitled to have a public free quality education and they should be as vocal about it as any other citizen. If Maori had not been included in NZ public education system all NZ would not have as much knowledge and acceptance and understanding of Maori and pakeha principles and language as we have.

    For sure Maori can develop extra education systems but dividing the country by teaching different things to different groups without consideration of the whole would diminish our understanding of our country and the two important cultures. Further there are the other cultures we need to exchange mutual information and education with. Charter schools could be divisive in their methods, and it is inevitable that some will be narrow in their teaching and shape thinking that will lead to a silo mentality and disharmony.

  14. greywarbler 14
    4 October 2014 at 11:08 am

    An interview on Kim Hill’s show this morning with an author writing about her Polish background left me with lots to think about. The author when talking about her mother who had also travelled from Europe was drawn to her Polish husbandpartly by his determination and ambition, which wasn’t as pronounced in the Kiwi men she met. Her mother was part Jewish and the daughter felt that there was a Jewish desire and respect for education which affected their lives and underpinned their achievements.

    And I remembered how anti-intellectual we are said to have been in the mid 20th century, and still are I think. Whether we are impregnated with a she’ll be right, make do approach to so many things think a lack of important safety regulations, getting something done quickly rather than efficiently plus correctly. Perhaps we lack that strong determination and self-control to achieve, and also to get a wide, advanced education enabling us to conceive and follow through on big ideas and plans. And perhaps we do not have an admiration of such people who strive to achieve – who do they think they are? And we find sitting back dissing people and their ideas – wacky, it will never work, why bother – perhaps we are lazy thinkers and set low targets. So easy to be overturned like a row of dominoes, by sharp-edged neo libs with Rogermonics?

    And we lack ambition. Give a businessman a nice home, a holiday house, a boat, a BMW and a gas barbie with an electric rotating spit and his ambition is filled. His dreams are satisfied, his vision limited. Do something clever, find out a new thing or approach, and sell it to someone, don’t expect NZ to come forward and fund that innovation and develop it in this country with NZs.

    The larrikin man from colonial times has found his prime outlet in rugby, treating himself and others as if they were male animals competing in the fields. The women who were mostly obedient servants in colonial times, wrestling with their fertility, and getting just as much education as they needed to enable them to work and hopefully, get married and be supported by their husband, has that broadly changed?

    • Colonial Viper 14.1
      4 October 2014 at 11:20 am

      Quite true.

      Just remember that it is those who are the most ambitious and the hungriest for big success and wealth who are destroying our global ecosystem and the civilisation which relies upon it.

      • Draco T Bastard 14.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 1:35 pm

        Ambition shouldn’t be measured in how much money you have but how much you’ve achieved that makes society and the world better. The reason for this is because when you measure it through money people look for the easiest way to become rich – winning lotto, using exploitative employment practices and ripping people off. John Key is a multi-millionaire and yet he hasn’t done anything that has made society and the world better off. In fact, he’s been working very hard to make most of the world worse off so that a few, including himself, are richer.

        When we seek to measure achievement through what people have done then people seek to do things. To make the better mouse trap and unsure that everyone, including the natural environment, is well looked after.

        • Colonial Viper 14.1.1.1
          4 October 2014 at 1:43 pm

          Yep – a society which takes pride in and extolls destructive values and priorities is a society which is counting down the days to its own fragmentation.

      • Richard 14.1.2
        4 October 2014 at 2:48 pm

        Your statement (14.1)is nothing but the reverse of all welfare recipients are wasters and losers. Have a little respect. Not all people who amass large wealth are like that. Lets take Bill Gates as one example, Richard Branson, The Sultan of Brunei as a very good example.

        Your just as bad as those you belittle.

        Grow some empathy don’t do what you loathe.

    • Foreign waka 14.2
      4 October 2014 at 11:21 am

      On your last question: No. Like what you have written, it fits exactly with my experience, 100%. Is this not sad?

      • greywarbler 14.2.1
        4 October 2014 at 11:38 am

        colonial viper
        Being ambitious does not necessarily mean for wealth. I just make that point. The Greens are ambitious for a well run country for all that can provide a good living for people and businesses and manage that within parameters that restrict stripping the soil, the land the rivers of their natural, biological health.

        Ambition means to go beyond the simple and the accepted I think, and implies to something better. Though a devilly-inspired person could have an ambition to foment trouble and then step in as a leader to lead the people through. We don’t want that approach.

        Success means something achieved after some effort. Wealth in a materialistic society means money, advantage, the things that society prizes, but if people screw their heads on again, it can just mean having a lot of good people doing good things with a good living, one could feel wealthy and lucky then. (if one had their values and head sorted as to what was important.)
        edited

      • greywarbler 14.2.2
        4 October 2014 at 3:38 pm

        @ Foreign Waka
        I have been thinking on your feeling about the last para I wrote about whether we have changed. And I was also thinking that we obviously expected something better and that somehow we, or others, hadn’t been able to improve things, even feel guilty that we of our generation hadn’t been able to do so. So I thought a dose of Zizek would act as an antidote. He manages to scramble any idea if you wade for long through his quotes! This of his speeches was about the environment, but could be applied elsewhere.

        ― Slavoj Žižek
        [T]his readiness to assume the guilt for the threats to our environment is deceptively reassuring: We like to be guilty since, if we are guilty, it all depends on us. We pull the strings of the catastrophe, so we can also save ourselves simply by changing our lives.

        What is really hard for us (at least in the West) to accept is that we are reduced to the role of a passive observer who sits and watches what our fate will be. To avoid this impotence, we engage in frantic, obsessive activities.

        We recycle old paper, we buy organic food, we install long-lasting light bulbs—whatever—just so we can be sure that we are doing something. We make our individual contribution like the soccer fan who supports his team in front of a TV screen at home, shouting and jumping from his seat, in the belief that this will somehow influence the game’s outcome.”
        https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/2340358.Slavoj_i_ek

  15. b waghorn 15
    4 October 2014 at 11:08 am

    @Phillip ure I’ve worked hard manual jobs for 25 years and if my plan to get into management doesn’t work I’ve got another 23 years of it to go so going to 67 or 70 will be tuff on people like me

    • dv 15.1
      4 October 2014 at 11:17 am

      BUT there needs to be enough lead time to phase (what ever the change) in slowly to give some certainty.

      Head in the sand will not really work.

      You don’t want to get to 64 and have a future govt say ‘sorry can’t afford super costs, we will cut by 50%’

      • Colonial Viper 15.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 11:52 am

        Please excuse my language here. And with all due respect.

        But this is FUKCING BS. It is based on a total misconception of how money, the Reserve Bank and government budgets work.

        The NZ govt never ever need run out of NZ dollars to pay NZ Super, because it issues NZ dollars. These NZ dollars are keyboard entries in a spreadsheet. How can you “run out” of keyboard entries on a spreadsheet? The government can ALWAYS afford to spend on NZ super, but it is a POLITICAL decision whether it wishes to or not.

        And even if you don’t believe in the above, around 3/4 billion dollars worth of Auckland houses get sold every month. And that’s just residential property. In one city. Does it seem to you like the system is running out of money?

        • Richard 15.1.1.1
          4 October 2014 at 12:41 pm

          If they devalue or print money, inflation rises and the dollar dips etc etc. You can’t do one thing without effecting the other. One thing Key is right about,(trust me when I say I loathe to admit it) if printing money was that easy, just print off a few trillion give a share to everyone and hey presto society is cured.

          But then again Obama printed a shit load to keep his country happy. Perhaps it is possible.

          48 years of listening to pollies tell me how their economic ideas are the saviour of NZ , none of which has eventuated.

          Seriously though it’s time for new thinking and idea’s. But don’t ask me I can barely comprehend our budgets.

          Perhaps your right and lets just print a truckload and drop it off in poor area’s. maybe they will stimulate our economy, people will spend business will hire and everything in kiwiland will be green and growing again.

          • Draco T Bastard 15.1.1.1.1
            4 October 2014 at 1:25 pm

            The elephant in the room in conversations like these is resources. Everyone talks about money but no one talks about the resources we have available, the resources that money is supposed to move to maintain our society.

            Money isn’t a problem because we have the resources. In NZ we can feed, house and cloth everyone to a high standard. We can even get everyone FttH, a decent computer and a holiday every year.

            We can do this because we have the resources available so why aren’t we?

            • Kiwiri 15.1.1.1.1.1
              4 October 2014 at 1:35 pm

              In addition, money can be “created” without having to devalue or “print” 😉

          • Colonial Viper 15.1.1.1.2
            4 October 2014 at 1:48 pm

            If they devalue or print money, inflation rises and the dollar dips etc etc. You can’t do one thing without effecting the other.

            That is NOT how it works. AT ALL. For starters – inflation due to money creation will only occur IF an economy is already running close to capacity and markets are not competitive.

            Is NZ anywhere close to such a state? When there are perhaps 1/4M people who are unemployed or under employed? When manufacturers are only running 1 shift a day? When retailers and retail service providers are more often than not relatively quiet?

            And even if some mild financial markets consequences occur, so fucking what? It’s still a purely political decision to make older people worse off rather than to accept other consequences.

            Perhaps your right and lets just print a truckload and drop it off in poor area’s. maybe they will stimulate our economy, people will spend business will hire and everything in kiwiland will be green and growing again.

            If you don’t want to take the topic seriously, fuck off.

            • Richard 15.1.1.1.2.1
              4 October 2014 at 2:33 pm

              Fuck CV I was being serious! If we print money then why not give it to the poor so they will spend. Do you take trickle down seriously? National seem to?

              Fucking read between the lines dude.

              As for your first part too. Bull fucking shit printing money willy nilly causes inflation and devalues the dollar, thus costing more to buy shit. Inflation rises things cost more. on and on. Fucking hell if it was that fucking simple don’t you think another country would do it.

              Get a grip. Don’t shoot the messenger show me the error of my way with facts and intellect or fuck off yourself.

            • Richard 15.1.1.1.2.2
              4 October 2014 at 9:21 pm

              Ok i’ll revisit this since I have calmed down. You are very clever and I’m not being sarcastic nor do I think I am so arrogantly right.

              However as I understand it, and I look forward to learning the truth if I have it wrong.

              If you devalue the dollar, imports cost more, which effects inflation. as we import oil at present this flows onto transport costs and inflation again.

              This is how I simply understand it.

              Printing money, is the one I really don’t know the effects of. Obama used it to stimulate his economy through the GFC to stop wholesale unemployment from businesses closing,. The US dollar fell due to this but I am lost as to cause and effect on that.

              that’s why I wrote what I wrote CV.

              my last paragraph where you told me to fuck off was not unserious it was based on how Obama distributed money in the USA. he didn’t literally throw a truck load it was a figure of speech and as I figured you for a bright spark I thought you could read into that what I meant.

              therefore I thought your harshness was out of order or that you had misread what I was saying Sir/Madam.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                4 October 2014 at 9:53 pm

                If you devalue the dollar,

                That presupposes that the government creating money will devalue the dollar but there’s no evidence that it will. Well, nothing more than what the the private banks do through their creation of a huge amount of money. Some 98% of the money in our system has been created by the private banks and they create billions more every year.

                The US dollar fell due to this but I am lost as to cause and effect on that.

                The US$ didn’t fall due to the printing – it fell due to the near 0 interest rates. No one was willing to hold it as they didn’t get a return. There was no observed inflationary effect from the Quantitative Easing carried out by the US but that probably has more to do with it going to the banks rather than the populace. And they still jumped to around 10% unemployment but, again, that probably had something to do with the money going to the banks.

        • Richard 15.1.1.2
          4 October 2014 at 2:43 pm

          I notice in your posts you like to round on people to almost bullying them if you disagree.

          Your statement 15.1.1 is the biggest load of complete and utter bollocks I have ever read here. Please round on me, however be aware you may get back in triple what you dish out if you take me for some dumb fuck you can bully with nothing but stupid to back up your argument.

  17. weka 17
    4 October 2014 at 11:39 am

    test safari

  18. Draco T Bastard 18
    4 October 2014 at 1:17 pm

    Put the Kettle On

    The left has three years to get our act together (no pun intended). To take control of the narrative and put together a coherent and convincing case for our policies. To convince people that it is possible to have a liveable income for everyone, free healthcare and education, and a decent home. That implementing any or all of these will not bankrupt the economy and we will all end up better off, not jobless and broke.

    Of course it’s possible to have all those things for everyone. The only reason why we don’t is because of a few greedy people sitting at the top taking it all from us so that they can have more.

    • Richard 18.1
      4 October 2014 at 1:32 pm

      Fark me, draco, My two dads (one dies one stepdad) and granddad grew up thinking that statement was normal society.

      Have the right changed perceptions so much over time kiwi’s don’t believe in this utopia anymore.

      I saw emerging democracy in Albania first hand, you know it was beautiful to see. After Enver Hoxha the country was embracing democracy and it had not been tainted by years of swings left, right. Stupid laws and nanny state. Seriously one could learn a lot from that place. It ain’t perfect by any means but enjoyable to see THEIR politicians learning what it means to earn the people votes.

      I have a couple of family members in parliament over there, had lunch with Sali Barisha the then PM. He was so honest and cared an down to earth. The right there are our Centre/left, the left are our communist sympathisers.

      It was so fresh and unspoilt a democracy it was like being able to breathe again, I tell you.

  19. lprent 19
    4 October 2014 at 1:48 pm

    Just fixed a problem with the spam filter. !7 messages went in there by error.

  20. ianmac 20
    4 October 2014 at 1:56 pm

    If there are 3 or more candidates standing for Leadership will it be winner takes all or will there be a second round dropping off the one with the lowest number?

  21. ianmac 21
    4 October 2014 at 5:40 pm

    In the Herald:
    “Newly elected Labour MP Stuart Nash says he has been taking advice from “dirty politics” operative Simon Lusk and has always been happy talking to people across the political spectrum.”……………

    Well so you would if it gives you an advantage one would think.

    ……….””I have mates right across the political spectrum and I make no apology for that. But having said that, I don’t consider Cameron Slater or Simon Lusk friends. Matthew Hooton certainly is a very good friend of mine, and I bang into him socially every now and then, and he’s quite enjoyable company, but that doesn’t change my politics or how I view things, believe me,” he said.”

    When waters merge eh?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/hawkes-bay-today/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503462&objectid=11337024

    • Paul 21.1
      4 October 2014 at 5:58 pm

      “Believe me.”
      I don’t believe Nash.
      He is the rights creature.
      He was allowed to win Napier because they need useful ambitious fools to break apart the opposition to neoliberalism.

      • phillip ure 21.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 6:58 pm

        even his bloody fire-engine was bought/paid for by a rightie..

        ..he did his election fundraiser at the northern club in auckland..(a bastion of the right/establishment..)

        ..now why would the northern club allow a wannabe labour mp from napier do a funraiser in their establishment..?

        ..and who lined up to give him money..and why..?

        ..i dunno about you..but i wouldn’t mind an answer to all that..

        ..an ideological equivalent wd be key holding a fundraiser in unite hq..

        ..w.t.f. is up with that..?

        • Paul 21.1.1.1
          4 October 2014 at 7:04 pm

          People like Lusk can see his naked ambition and use his hubris and egotism to create an appropriate leader of the Labour Party for the neoliberals.
          It’s called insurance in case the Nats gets voted out.

  22. Bill 22
    4 October 2014 at 6:14 pm

    Dunno if you’re already aware of this Lynn, but ‘ts’ has ‘image missing’ graphic plastered over every post and comment if viewed when not signed in. Problem disappears when signed in.

    • lprent 22.1
      4 October 2014 at 6:24 pm

      Yeah, a weird problem with the minify. It worked fine on the test system ??? 🙁

      Should be fixed now.

      Incidentally could people try the SSL version of the site https://thestandard.org.nz . I think I have fixed the issues that it was having with CDN images. Just need to stress it a bit.

      Be warned that
      1. It causes issues with logins as you jump back and forth to https and http
      2. That it still has the triangle because some of the links are still not https (I’ll be working on that over this week.

    • weka 22.2
      4 October 2014 at 6:24 pm

      arrrg, a plague of sausages!!

      Seems to have disappeared now (am not signed in).

    • karol 22.3
      4 October 2014 at 6:42 pm

      I had that problem when signed in.

  23. weka 23
    4 October 2014 at 6:44 pm

    One reason why so called identity politics are important,

    Richard Hills ‏@richardhills777 4 hrs4 hours ago

    Women in parliament DROPPED under 30%

    Nat 23% Women 77% Men. Lab 38% Women, 62% Men. Green/MP 50/50. NZFirst 18/82. This is terrible news.

    • karol 23.1
      4 October 2014 at 6:50 pm

      The whole public culture seems to have become more masculine, especially in broadcast media… Paul Henry, Hoskings, Garner, etc, etc.

      • weka 23.1.1
        4 October 2014 at 6:59 pm

        yep and it’s useful for us to remember that most feminist gains were allowed not built in. Until the domination system is gone, all gains can be taken away again. In the meantime, women in NZ will be allowed space up to a certain point but no further. Ditto other ‘identities’.

        • karol 23.1.1.1
          4 October 2014 at 7:07 pm

          I seem to recall there’s fewer women among top earning CEOs, too.

          I think the big wealth/income inequality gap probably hits a lot of women and manyy from other fairly marginalised groups hardest.

          The culture of ruthless competition has a long masculine dominated legacy.

        • Murray Olsen 23.1.1.2
          4 October 2014 at 9:12 pm

          In Aunty Helen’s time, we had women as PM, chief justice, governor general, and heaps of other high state positions (can’t be bothered looking up the details right now). I think the knuckle draggers in both NAct and the Rogerparty objected strongly to this “taking over by the front bums” and now what we’re seeing is those guys taking it back. The heights of the state apparatus had been conquered, but essentially by fiat rather than a movement from below. Thus it was easily overturned.

  24. greywarbler 24
    4 October 2014 at 7:47 pm

    Let’s have a Chang/e in economics.
    http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/oct/24/students-post-crash-economics

    Economics undergraduates at the University of Manchester have formed the Post-Crash Economics Society, which they hope will be copied by universities across the country…..
    A growing number of top economists, such as Ha-Joon Chang, who teaches economics at Cambridge University, are backing the students.

    Ha-Joon Chang

  25. greywarbler 25
    4 October 2014 at 8:08 pm

    In the youtube economic lecture by Ha-Joon Chang he has quoted the ‘false consciousness’ (I think it was called) when people are hostile to things that are to their advantage.
    Such as the elderly protesting against Obamacare with placards saying Government keep their hands off our Medicare. The Medicare program is actually a government program@

  26. greywarbler 26
    4 October 2014 at 8:12 pm

    How can we get riod of this poison of our present economic system? NZ has been known for the way it follows bad processes and then clings on to them years after the change in the initiating country?