Open mike 07/09/2020

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, September 7th, 2020 - 123 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open 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 …

123 comments on “Open mike 07/09/2020 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. PsyclingLeft.Always 1
    7 September 2020 at 7:02 am

    NZ "First" still wanting to help the Fishing Industry screw our ever diminishing Marine species…

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/rural/425397/new-zealand-first-cautious-about-plan-to-install-hundreds-more-cameras-on-fishing-boats

    Shane …Jones. Fark I hope he's kicked to touch. Cmon Willow Jean : ) !!

  2. Dennis Frank 2
    7 September 2020 at 7:44 am

    I heard Paul Goldsmith struggling (not manfully) on Morning Report, trying to differentiate Nat economic policy from the govt's. We need more private investment in businesses, seemed to be the gist.

    He didn't say he's got a magic wand which he would wave if National defeats Labour, to make that happen. Prudent. Investors are sitting on their money. Too scared to invest.

    Our Reserve Bank has printed $32.2 billion to buy bonds since Covid-19 struck, but 90 percent of that cash is still parked in bank accounts. Bernard Hickey looks at why it isn't being invested or spent to revive the economy. https://www.newsroom.co.nz/8things/printed-money-being-parked-not-invested-or-spent

    It has been a problem ever since central banks in America, Japan and Europe began Quantitative Easing (QE) or money printing over a decade ago during the Global Financial Crisis: the new money didn't circulate and generate much new investment or spending or economic growth. It was just parked in bank accounts or piles of actual cash, or other unproductive stores of value such as gold, art, property and yachts.

    Here, it's going into real estate, to create another housing boom. Oh what fun!

    The banks have been much more active in the housing market, including $5.2b in July to existing home owners and rental property investors, up 24 percent from June and back above its pre-lockdown levels in March.

    That has helped perk up housing activity and lifted house values in areas with housing shortages and that are less reliant on overseas tourists, students and investors. Values in places such as Rotorua, Wellington, Whanganui and Palmerston North are up by double digit amounts from a year ago

    The Reserve Bank is beginning to agitate with the banks about the lack of lending to businesses and may yet try to force them to direct lending to businesses.

    Asking delinquent capitalists nicely to help businesses hasn't worked. Will the RB get tough? Orr may not be sufficiently macho…

    • Pat 2.1
      7 September 2020 at 8:39 am

      Has little to do with being macho…Orr has two jobs, ensure the banks dont fall over and the dollar dosnt tank…..and thats one hell of a tightrope to walk.

      With no good options more real estate inflation is the least of evils…. hes succeeding to date but for how much longer?

      • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1
        7 September 2020 at 11:44 am

        There are good options though, the government just aren't taking them because it would destroy capitalism.

    • Wayne 2.2
      7 September 2020 at 11:15 am

      Do either of two major parties have a credible economic plan?

      From what I can see both are acting pretty short term. They seem to be in a race of how much money they can spend. And in fact there doesn't seem to be very much difference of how they will spend the money. Basically a road or two here or there. Is that what our choices have been reduced to?

      We are just over 5 weeks to the election. I would certainly expect to see the two major parties set out their plans (as opposed to shopping lists) in the next two weeks.

      While it is obvious how I will vote, we are all effected by whoever wins. Given that there are only two parties who can basically be the government, they both have a democratic responsibility to tell us their plan. So far neither party has really done that.

      • bruce 2.2.1
        7 September 2020 at 11:24 am

        Interesting. so no matter how rotten your team have shown themselves to be you will still support them.

      • SPC 2.2.2
        7 September 2020 at 11:25 am

        Usually parties relate their 3 year plan based on Treasury's latest update/forecast. And any debt has a cost to be accounted for.

        But what if money is printed and there is hardly any debt cost?

        The economic impact of the pandemic is not yet known – which is why the parties in government have a $14B contingency reserve and the so called stongest oppostion in our history has already spent it.

      • bwaghorn 2.2.3
        7 September 2020 at 11:34 am

        Oh common Wayne we know nationals plan. Cuts and privatization by stealth/neglect.

        If in 2008 and I had hired the national government to run my farm for me they would have sold a couple of my best paddocks ,stopped putting fertilizer on and doing fence maintenance ,built a shiny new shed and few new tracks so things looked good from the road.

        Of course they'll tell us they a good economic managers but really they are just middle management elevated above their level .

      • Pat 2.2.4
        7 September 2020 at 11:39 am

        "Do either of two major parties have a credible economic plan?"

        Not one they are brave enough to present to the voting public….and with that absence its credibility cannot be judged.

        Or worse, the only plan is the continuation of the growth via migration model.

      • Grafton Gully 2.2.5
        7 September 2020 at 8:48 pm

        They are both too gutless or ignorant to offer plans to the electorate. Makes room for radicals though. Personally I hate change so that prospect scares the shit out of me, what’s left of it.

    • Draco T Bastard 2.3
      7 September 2020 at 11:43 am

      Asking delinquent capitalists nicely to help businesses hasn't worked.

      And it never has.

      The regulations making sure that capitalists do is actually good for society is what the capitalists mostly complain about when they talk about red tape.

      The government could do it directly and even do it at 0% interest but that would remove capitalists ability to bludge off of the work of others.

      The government could even do it for mortgages.

      • Pat 2.3.1
        7 September 2020 at 12:52 pm

        The Government could, but what would the reaction be if they did it in one fell swoop?

        There needs to be a pathway that unwinds the asset bubbles and redistributes the resources that dosnt create complete mayhem….and addresses CC.

        NZ is perfectly placed to be the first to decarbonise its economy and reap the benefit of the knowledge/ processes and industries gained from doing so…and we can provide guaranteed employment in the process.

        • Draco T Bastard 2.3.1.1
          7 September 2020 at 1:52 pm

          The Government could, but what would the reaction be if they did it in one fell swoop?

          The capitalists will whinge, of course, but who cares? Its just the risk that they've been taking and speaking loudly about for the last few centuries calling due.

          What's the consequences if we don't?

          More poverty? More climate change? More destruction of our environment?

          There needs to be a pathway that unwinds the asset bubbles and redistributes the resources that dosnt create complete mayhem….and addresses CC.

          That pathway already exists – the government starts making 0% interest loans and pushes R&D into what we need:

          • Better manufacturing
          • Extraction and processing of our resources
          • Better schooling up to and including doctorate level

          We know that capitalism is just going to make a few people richer while leaving the country vulnerable.

          • Pat 2.3.1.1.1
            7 September 2020 at 5:27 pm

            They will do more than whinge..you may relish the resulting capital flight and import implications but I very much doubt you will have much supportive company.

            • Draco T Bastard 2.3.1.1.1.1
              7 September 2020 at 6:55 pm

              Well, apparently, the only place that they can spend NZ money is in NZ.

              Although, that does raise the question as to why the NZ$ is one of the most traded in the world.

              And, with the government giving businesses and private entrepreneurs 0% interest loans, the capital flight is meaningless.

              We may see the NZ$ decrease in exchange value but that's just going raise demand for our products. And a raise in demand for our products will increase employment.

              Of course, we don't have a lot of products to export due to our focus upon agriculture and failing to develop our manufacturing capability.

  3. Descendant Of Smith 3
    7 September 2020 at 8:27 am

    The wealthy want sure bets – but the world has changed and those opportunities are few. Roger Douglas gave them sure bets when he stripped the New Zealand people of their businesses and handed them over to those sitting on the round table. After that there was property and taking the leased land down south and selling it for massive profits, putting money into South Canterbury finance in the four weeks before the government announced the bailout WITH interest (to pinch a quote from Turk182 "who knew?" and putting dairy on non-dairy land.

    The next phase was going back to the poorhouse/charity model of the past which we are seeing now – private sector providing social services, housing for homeless people (charging summer motel rates to the government all year round and not content with that rorting through substandard housing) and so on.

    • greywarshark 3.1
      7 September 2020 at 1:29 pm

      That's about it DoS, 100%. Now what? Where do brilliant minds with sufficient expertise and maturity to craft clever policies that fit the problems like a hand in a glove, go to for action? Could it be that nobody cares about the public vehicle providing service for the citizens until a wheel actually falls off, or it goes off a bank killing and injuring all but with cause unknown until a Royal Commission 8 years later confirms what we knew from the start. A very effective way of not doing bloody anything until the crisis is past, then people are dead, and the circumstances have changed, so no probs.

      • Grafton Gully 3.1.1
        7 September 2020 at 9:36 pm

        "Where do brilliant minds with sufficient expertise and maturity to craft clever policies that fit the problems like a hand in a glove, go to for action? "

        They remember others in Aoatearoa who have led the people from conflict to peace.

        https://ojs.aut.ac.nz/te-kaharoa/index.php/tekaharoa/article/view/96/90

        • greywarshark 3.1.1.1
          7 September 2020 at 9:56 pm

          Conflict/peace – it is a big change to go from one to another. So peace is established, then what – what is the clear path ahead. If you know it is time to plant out the kumara, you have the land, the tools, the seed then all can work together for the common good.

          What can we do that follows this path. Every group eventually develops a turncoat that will get advantage and then use it to advance themselves against the group. Douglas and his ilk did that and now we have competing groups interrupting our national conversation.

          Can we adjust the way we do things. It won't be solved by Maori citing grievance at every turn. It could be helped by a hapu deciding on a project that would have common good that would teach skills to their young people, funded through a social development grant.

          What about young white men who aren't sure they want to be pakeha? Could they learn something worthwhile, build something for the common good, and enjoy doing so? That would be a good change because their grievance machine is too often heard.

  4. Dennis Frank 4
    7 September 2020 at 8:34 am

    Max Rashbrooke is the editor of Inequality: A New Zealand Crisis, published in 2013. Writing in the Guardian, he illuminates how practical consensus politics can solve endemic social problems via intelligent design:

    Communities earmarked for greater density were given $10,000 each to develop their plans. That done, they got further funding for the next stage – but only if they could prove they had reached out to every part of the community and hadn’t let the usual suspects dominate.

    Officials supported these “citizen planners” with neighbourhood design toolkits and software that mapped demographics, land use and transport flows. The community plans were then tested at “alternatives fairs”, sent to residents for approval, reviewed by officials, and subjected to neighbourhood hearings. Displaying remarkable engagement, some 20,000-30,000 residents took part in a city of 560,000.

    After years of conflict, the process brought together politicians, neighbourhood leaders, and even local groups that had formerly been at loggerheads. Best of all, it delivered densification: added together, the neighbourhood plans provided all the housing the council had sought.

    Along the way, a pro-development, anti-Nimby constituency was born. Seattle today remains – for various reasons – one of the few American cities to be densifying effectively. Citizen planning hadn’t been quick or cheap but, as Sirianni puts it: “The city council’s investment of money and time … had clearly paid off.” All this might seem counterintuitive, given Seattle’s previous animus towards densification. Two factors made the difference: control and environment.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/want-to-build-high-rise-homes-for-74000-more-people-in-wellington-build-consensus-first/ar-BB18Kq2A

    This is a superb example of paradigm shifting. Mass consciousness transformed via community-driven social engineering. Prevalent ideology defeated. Densification of cities can work if you democratise decision-making at the grass roots level. Do Wellingtonians have what it takes? Watch this space!

    [link added – weka]

    • Dennis Frank 4.1
      7 September 2020 at 1:05 pm

      Thanks Weka. Must've had a senior moment. 😳

      • greywarshark 4.1.1
        7 September 2020 at 1:32 pm

        DF Quote from Back to the Future – "You are my density". With you at the helm we might get the destiny that is possible if we get OAIG.

    • Draco T Bastard 4.2
      7 September 2020 at 1:27 pm

      Citizen planning hadn’t been quick or cheap but, as Sirianni puts it: “The city council’s investment of money and time … had clearly paid off.”

      I've said for years that good democracy takes time. I even said it before I started commenting here. This is the proof.

      But most people still seem to prefer the quick, dirty and dictatorial method of government that we have where the people in power dictate to the masses and excuse it with but we had a choice when we voted. No, we really didn't have a choice. Having a choice means being involved in the planning and we simply don't get that.

  5. tc 5
    7 September 2020 at 8:36 am

    Sick of these 'plan b/just a flu' folk getting airtime without being taken to task when it's obviously politically motivated bs.

    Msm are part of the problem allowing thorley and others a soapbox. If you bring them on, fine, as long as you kick out their box and bring them down to earth.

  6. KJT 6
    7 September 2020 at 8:43 am

    @tc.

    "Journalists" are actively seeking these people out.

    Like the desperate hunt Garner's programe conducted to find the one "economic expert" in Australasia prepared to be critical of New Zealands Covid stimulus. An Australian "economic journalist" no less.

    Taking "Journalists" interviewing them selves, their typewriters and each other to a new low.

    • Peter 6.1
      7 September 2020 at 11:04 am

      'Journalists' have been out for a few months trying to find someone who broke a fingernail while in quarantine to make a story to win a Pulitzer journalism prize.

      Finding an Australian 'economic journalist' an 'expert' to boot is manna. Or Thornley.

      • bwaghorn 6.1.1
        7 September 2020 at 11:38 am

        Did you see the moaning sheila they found yesterday going on about getting promotional materials from the hotel she was quarantined in.

        Fuck you would think she had been forced to sleep in the broom closet with a bucket to piss in .

    • greywarshark 6.2
      7 September 2020 at 1:33 pm

      John Clarke come back, you are missed terribly.

      • karol121 6.2.1
        8 September 2020 at 4:39 pm

        Both of 'em.

        The NZ comedian as Fred Dagg (et al), and later as the Australian actor/comedian, John Clarke who wont ever perform on the stage of life as we know it again, and

        Dr John Cooper Clark, another realistic comedian and social scientist who last toured in New Zealand, I believe, in 2018.

  7. Just Is 7
    7 September 2020 at 8:48 am

    Winston Peters interview with Jack Tane on Q&A was interesting, he asked Peters some unexepected curly questions that Peters really did not handle well.

    Jack spoke of "Trust" around the NZF parties recent statements and the SFOs inquiry into NZF.

    It was a train wreck interview, Peters was so combative, refused to answer the questions and continually overtalked the interviewer, kept referring to Tane that his questions wouldn't stand up in a court of law.

    It was a television interview, and Peters really did show his true colors, a lot of people will be wondering if NZF can climb back into contention or just disappear into oblivion.

  8. Sabine 8
    7 September 2020 at 9:18 am

    so nothing really has changed there then? NZ Prisons in NZ, no change between the red or blue team, they all don’t care.
    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12362662

    Amnesty International executive director Meg de Ronde said she was appalled by the report's findings.

    "What this report paints is the possibility of a tinderbox situation," she said. "If force is not being used as a last resort, and the culture is being called punitive, this could have real flow-on effects for interactions between prison guards and people who are locked up."

    Alan Whitley, president of CANZ, the union representing corrections officers, said the use of force was increasing because assaults on corrections officers were increasing.

    As a result of an assault there is an action and the action is generally trying to shut the prisoner down. It can be done in a number of ways. It can be hands on, trying to get them to calm down, bringing them down to the floor. It could also be deploying and using pepper spray."

    The review also says the medical needs of prisoners are not being met because of poor leadership and health staffing levels being at about half what is needed.

    "ARWCF has a large demand for health services but doesn't seem to have the health staff to match or custodial staff to get prisoners to and from health appointments," the review says.

    hmm, maybe staffing the prisons correctly and hiring some nurses and doctors would be a good plan, but that would cost money, right? Right? But here fill out a complaint form. (ffs, its funny where it not so sad)

    Staff at the prison's health unit complained to the reviewer that rather than respond to requests for medical assistance, guards were telling inmates to fill out complaint forms.

    but then hey, they are just prisoners and being locked up for a drug charge or something similar warrants this behaviour. Well maybe next year or so kinder and gentler is arriving in our prisons too……..in the form of a new complaint box, this one with a red ribbon.

    .

  9. KJT 9
    7 September 2020 at 9:46 am

    @ Redlogix.

    Freedom of speech is still a core principle as far as I'm concerned. Which is why you were given space on my post, despite my feeling you had missed all but one point of a more nuanced post. I was still going to moderate anyone who tried to take it into verbiose irrelevancy

    It was a "gun totin Texan",who insisted I keep my job after my involvement in NZ politics was looked at somewhat askance by some in management. I doubt if he agreed with me, but he supported my right to a political view. We are still friends btw.

    However it is not absolute. calling fire in a crowded theatre, or on an oil rig, would not have been tolerated.

    On the whole I believe idiots should be allowed to out themselves. But what do you do about the loons who are trying to undermine the countries Covid responce, because getting more votes is more important to them, than peoples lives? To take just one example.

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

    • RedLogix 9.1
      7 September 2020 at 10:08 am

      However it is not absolute. calling fire in a crowded theatre, or on an oil rig, would not have been tolerated.

      Maybe you missed where I said "Of course speech that is out of bounds does exist,". And the idiots who are yelling that COVID is a scam, are directly equivalent to 'calling fire in a crowded theatre'.

      What many people overlook is that intent and context really do matter. Yelling 'fire' on say a boat where is necessary to evacuate and get emergency procedures going is quite different to maliciously yelling the same word in a crowed theatre. The same with lockdowns and mask wearing, normally imposing these things would be draconian and protesting them legitimate, but a pandemic changes the context completely.

      And when you throw in an undertone of political agenda the intent becomes illegitimate as well.

      • Draco T Bastard 9.1.1
        7 September 2020 at 7:55 pm

        Maybe you missed where I said "Of course speech that is out of bounds does exist,". And the idiots who are yelling that COVID is a scam, are directly equivalent to 'calling fire in a crowded theatre'.

        Comes down to putting in place a general definition of that out of bounds. I certainly consider lies and misinformation to be out of bounds. Everything said should be backed by facts and research in as far as is possible.

        This would put the yelling about covid being a scam out of bounds as well as National's politicking on it. Both are provably wrong when looking at the facts.

        Now, what should we do about it?

        • Throw them in jail? How long?
        • Fine them? How much?
        • Both?

        It's an interesting point that we have very little that could be considered a proportional response to people who are purposefully lying to the public so as to get a public decision in their favour.

        Yelling 'fire' on say a boat where is necessary to evacuate and get emergency procedures going is quite different to maliciously yelling the same word in a crowed theatre.

        Actually, I don't think it is. In both cases yelling 'fire' could cause panic that could lead to death. The yelling itself is part of the problem in that it has emotional overtones that could help induce panic.

        • woodart 9.1.1.1
          7 September 2020 at 10:31 pm

          hypothetical existential question. would yelling FIRE in a crowded act party meeting be (a) impossible,(b)dangerous(c)taking act at their word, and practising free speech, or(d) none of the above?

  10. RedLogix 10
    7 September 2020 at 10:32 am

    Which is why you were given space on my post, despite my feeling you had missed all but one point of a more nuanced post.

    Given that you had signaled a strong moderation on the thread I thought to confine myself to the headline issue of the post, and avoid delving into the nuances. That would have definitely stepped over your 'verbiose' line. cheeky

    That a few people were running the line ‘there are no marxists’, while simultaneously defending marxist thought only added to the confusion I thought.

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

  11. SPC 11
    7 September 2020 at 10:47 am

    The two faces of Duncan Garner

    I think the ban is a total and unnecessary overreaction

    These yachts are their homes and insurers don't cover battered yachts

    The compassion shown – where is the hospitality for these foreign property owners, is it based on greater class respect for those who own property than for fellow Kiwis? Remember he was once the champion of the keep the borders closed movement.

    Also there is no ban, but that's his don't let facts get in the way style of whatever it is he does. He'll later claim credit for ending the ban anyhow

    A pertinent detail is that French Polynesia now has a serious coronavirus outbreak.

    And three weeks travel does not mean anyone on board is post infection – as infection can occur during the journey (person to person). And allowing multiple boat entry – could allow others to slip in amongst them.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2020/09/duncan-garner-we-ve-told-yachties-stranded-in-the-pacific-they-re-not-welcome-how-bloody-miserable-and-mean-spirited-can-we-be.html

    Close the border, ditch the Auckland CBD hotels and use the recently refurbished Mangere refugee resettlement centre – it's not like that is being used

    The intake that could be catered to at the facility would be quite restrictive – and would involve greater risk of mass outbreaks of infection.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2020/07/duncan-garner-new-zealand-must-temporarily-close-its-borders-to-new-arrivals-from-today.html

    Earlier.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2020/06/duncan-garner-it-s-time-to-completely-shut-new-zealand-s-border-returning-kiwis-included.html

    Earlier still he was a chamipoon of a bubble with Oz. Oz tourists have money.

    French Polynesia took that line – and tried to safely take in tourists. Not successfully – and now there is community spread.

    • Chris T 11.1
      7 September 2020 at 10:53 am

      Apologies

      But what do you mean by this?

      "And three weeks travel does not mean anyone on board is post infection – as infection can occur during the journey (person to person). And allowing multiple boat entry – could allow others to slip in amongst them."

      • SPC 11.1.1
        7 September 2020 at 10:58 am

        Read the link. Garner claims those on board cannot arrive still infectious because it takes three weeks to travel here.

    • SPC 11.2
      7 September 2020 at 10:55 am

      The two faces of David Seymour

      1. There cannot be an election unless we are at level 1.

      2. We should let coronavirus spread.

      There is no chance of being at Level 1 if there is spread.

    • RedBaronCV 11.3
      7 September 2020 at 7:58 pm

      We had this beat up a couple of weeks ago

      French Polynesia has had about 13 hurricanes in the last 60 years

      They have only hit the top two of the 5 island groups making up the territory.

      The hurricanes happen when there is a certain variant of the La Nina current – so pretty predictable.

      Somebody on here who had sailed said a 21 day open water passage is likely more dangerous than staying put.

      Duncan should check a few facts.

      Then there are the idiots from here who sailed up to Fiji and who I now assume want to come back.

      • Anne 11.3.1
        7 September 2020 at 8:59 pm

        Yes. Hurricanes are more prevalent in our neck of the Pacific during La Nina weather patterns. When we have an El Nino they tend to form closer to the West Coast of South America sometimes affecting Tahiti and the Cook Islands.

        I believe we have a La Nina forming so that will be why some are desperate to get back to NZ. I guess they thought the pandemic would be over by now.

        Garner mentioned Tahiti but they are far less likely to be hit by a cyclone this season. Those in the vicinity of Vanuatu, New Caledonia and Fiji/Tonga are more at risk.

        To be fair, I can't see why they can't return provided they go into a Covid hotel for two weeks and have the 3 and 12 day tests.

        https://niwa.co.nz/climate/information-and-resources/elnino

  12. KJT 12
    7 September 2020 at 10:50 am

    Acknowledging Marx's contribution to Western thought, is a long way from "defending it" or "being Marxist".

    I very much doubt if "Marxists" as you want to define it. As a scare word, even exist in New Zealand.

    But that you can be Marxist without a bloody revolution, as I showed also, that like the Portuguese communist party, BLM, and you could even say, the first Labour Government.

    I think you have still totally missed the point..

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

  13. RedLogix 13
    7 September 2020 at 11:03 am

    Acknowledging Marx's contribution to Western thought, is a long way from "defending it" or "being Marxist".

    In my view Marx has indeed made a substantial contribution to political thinking everywhere, not just in the West. The outcomes have proven pernicious everywhere communists have gained total power, and the left needs to fully repudiate and distance itself from this catastrophically failed ideology.

    It's just plain weird to say "I'm not a Marxist", when at the same time you acknowledge and condone the ongoing influence of his ideology. It's directly equivalent to a right wing extremist saying that "Hitler went a bit too far , but his ideas on why the Aryans are genetically superior have some merit."

    PS. I fear we’re dragging this thread OT. We should leave it here I think.

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

    • KJT 13.1
      7 September 2020 at 2:35 pm

      "Pernicious lines of thought that have caused mass deaths".

      Well that includes Christianity, How many in the Crusades, alone, never mind the dark ages block on progress, Western US capitalism, which has exceeded Hitler's death toll and is nudging Stalin's, Neo-liberal economics especially in South America. Need I go on?

      Or can you even call it "Marxism" and not oppressive regimes trying to use Marx as a justification. If you read Marx it is a bunch of fairly accurate analysis of Capitalist society of his time combined with some rather wishful utopian conclusions. His analysis of capitalism's faults and how oppression works is useful. Just as the Nazis called themselves "National Socialist" most of the regimes that called themselves Communist or Marxist, are anything but.

      Just as the US oligarchy is not a Democracy.

      • Ad 13.1.1
        7 September 2020 at 4:23 pm

        The welfare state was formed well before Marx wrote Das Kapital. Plenty of redistributive governments before Marx, and after Marx, had nothing to do with him and owed nothing to him.

        In New Zealand in particular the Marxists and other radicals like Holland were quickly sidelined for being pains in the ass. Particularly when they got close to being in government.

        New Zealand's own formation of the welfare state began without Marxist influence. Reforms included the Old Age Pensions Act of 1989 under Seddon, the state subsidised workers housing from 1905, pensions granted to widows in 1911 and to the blind in 1924, and of course a small family allowance in 1926 – all are more outreaches of the modern European state, which had been developing these well before Marx got cracking. You can check that lot out in "A Civilised Community: A History of Social Welfare In New Zealand", by Margaret McLure.

        Christianity's challenges to the late Roman state enabled a much greater expansion of state benefits, once Christianity took its state instruments over. There's plenty written on the evolution of the modern redistributive state and the influence of Christianity and Christian institutions such as tax, hospitals, universities, medicine, research, etc. Marx wrote his stuff about 1800 years later to that co-evolution of Christianity and the modern state from the Roman Empire..

        Our modern welfare state has evolved to stand in direct opposition to Marxist thought that evolved from WW1, and continues because democracy, welfare, and capitalism have evolved to the arrangements they have now.

        • RedLogix 13.1.1.1
          7 September 2020 at 9:05 pm

          And as a complement to this I can add that the Islamic cultures during their peak period also had their own welfare systems, albeit quite different to the ones we are familiar with.

          After Friday prayers there was an obligation to stand on the steps of the mosque and distribute alms to the poor. It was very much a face to face, localised form of redistribution, and in the context of the era it was particularly effective. The whole notion of that the poor and vulnerable should be sheltered and protected arose in various religious faiths long before Marx.

          The entire marxist debacle has been a terrible dead end for the socialist left; it's diagnosis is neither especially original and it's revolutionary framework desperately prone to catastrophe. There were so many alternative ways the left could have approached the inequality problem.

          • Ad 13.1.1.1.1
            7 September 2020 at 9:19 pm

            Christianity, even at its most grassroots form, never got hospitality as well as Islam did and still does.

  14. KJT 14
    7 September 2020 at 11:07 am

    @Redlogix.

    You are joining the rabid right, in deliberately trying to associate movements, and people, trying to relieve oppression and increase social justice, with violent, totalitarian, oppressive and authoritarian regimes.

    A false and dishonest political tactic.

    The intent of calling them, "Marxist", is to try and discredit them.

    It is doubtful if Marx, where he alive today would fit your definition of "Marxist".

    O FFS. Marx was not Hitler, or Stalin, and many of Marx’s ideas have been repeated by thinkers since. His ideas such as the “rate of profit tend towards zero” are useful today. And repeated by right wing economists as well. Such as Hayek.

    Our first Labour Government, and their supporters were influenced by much of Marx’s ideals. As was Atlees Government. Are you telling me they were a failure?

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

    • In Vino 14.1
      7 September 2020 at 8:20 pm

      RedLogix seems so adamant about this. I am at a loss to understand what I see as his obtuseness. To my mind, Marx was one of many brainy people trying to understand societies' evolution, while adding his own moral strictures to his analysis, as we all tend to do.

      Marx never tried to promote tyrannical totalitarianism. That is a quality he ascribed to the Monarchies and the Bourgeoisie he saw as ruling the countries of his time.

      Yet Redlogix portrays him as doing so.. Why? Is there a religious motive? I have noticed Redlogix fiercely fight off any attacks on religion at times.

      Is Marxism pure evil because it sees religion as the opium of the masses, and an instrument of social control manipulated by the Monarchies, the Bourgeoisie, etc?

      • RedLogix 14.1.1
        7 September 2020 at 10:09 pm

        Marx never tried to promote tyrannical totalitarianism.

        Both Marx and Engels clearly anticipated the necessity for a violent social reconstruction. In reality this produces the conditions in which the most ruthless and cruel individuals quickly obtain total power because all the usual checks and balances have been swept away.

        Given that Marx had the highly proximate example of the French Revolution to consider, it's difficult to argue that he didn't understand this.

        • Drowsy M. Kram 14.1.1.1
          7 September 2020 at 10:43 pm

          The French Revolution: A dream to some… a nightmare to others.

          The causes of the French Revolution are complex and are still debated among historians. The American Revolution helped set the stage for the events of the French Revolution, having shown France that a rebellion based on Enlightenment principles, including natural rights and equality for all citizens, against an authoritarian regime could succeed.

          "Thousands of men and even many women gained firsthand experience in the political arena: they talked, read, and listened in new ways; they voted; they joined new organisations; and they marched for their political goals. Revolution became a tradition, and republicanism an enduring option."

          "Some historians argue that the French people underwent a fundamental transformation in self-identity, evidenced by the elimination of privileges and their replacement by rights as well as the growing decline in social deference that highlighted the principle of equality throughout the Revolution. The Revolution represented the most significant and dramatic challenge to political absolutism up to that point in history and spread democratic ideals throughout Europe and ultimately the world. Throughout the 19th century, the revolution was heavily analysed by economists and political scientists, who saw the class nature of the revolution as a fundamental aspect in understanding human social evolution itself. This, combined with the egalitarian values introduced by the revolution, gave rise to a classless and co-operative model for society called "socialism" which profoundly influenced future revolutions in France and around the world."

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution

          With luck the global Covid revolution will be less bloody, and then humanity can roll out the hyper-energisation initiatives necessary (apparently) to save (some of) us from the impacts of global warming and maybe even the pandemics to come.

          • RedLogix 14.1.1.1.1
            8 September 2020 at 5:33 am

            With luck the global Covid revolution will be less bloody,

            Well then you'll have to make it so. Discard the ideological relics of Marx's blood-soaked era and actively demand we find new paths to change that are not rooted in the idea of 'violent revolutionary reconstruction'.

            • Drowsy M. Kram 14.1.1.1.1.1
              8 September 2020 at 1:31 pm

              We'll have to make it so RL, but I lack your confidence that 'all' we need do is

              "Discard the ideological relics of Marx's blood-soaked era and actively demand we find new paths to change that are not rooted in the idea of 'violent revolutionary reconstruction'".

              Nevertheless, if you can sell your "new paths to change" to enough people you may yet achieve 'change' that has little impact on the lifestyles of the 'golden billion', at least in your own mind.

              • RedLogix …
                8 September 2020 at 1:36 pm

                may yet achieve a 'change' that has little impact on the lifestyles of the 'golden billion', at least in your own mind.

                If we could extend the same, or better, quality of life that the 'golden billion' currently enjoy to the entire human race, while simultaneously progressing technically past the environmental and resource trap we face at present … why would you object to this?

                And if so, do you imagine a 'violent reconstruction of the social order' would help or hinder this progression?

                • Drowsy M. Kram …
                  8 September 2020 at 2:05 pm

                  I certainly wouldn't object to it RL, however your first word in the comment @1:36 pm is key. One reason not to aim for your vision of utopia is its timeline – personally I think it’s dangerous ‘snake oil‘.

                  As to whether a(nother) “violent reconstruction of the social order” would help or hinder the progression you envision, recall that past 'violent reconstructions' have contributed to the relatively comfortable existence the ‘golden billion‘ enjoys today. In any event I wouldn't worry about it – the ‘golden billion‘ are “too big to fail” smiley

                  • RedLogix …
                    8 September 2020 at 2:18 pm

                    recall that past 'violent reconstructions' have contributed to the relatively comfortable existence the golden billion enjoys today

                    And there is the marxist devil in the details; that the 'ends justify the means'. To repeat this doesn't make you necessarily a marxist, but this is an idea that Marx promoted that I see creeping into conversations here all too often.

                    My thesis here is that humanity is on the cusp of a terrible global failure if we do not earnestly start considering evolutionary paths to progress that do not necessarily involve tearing everything down first.

                    To this end I've proposed a simple triplet model, that humanity expresses three primary political modes, the conservative, the liberal and the socialist. Each has a particular sphere of value, and each brings something to the table, and from this dialog we might build stable, prosperous and viable societies. But this only works if each mode is able to recognise the legitimacy of the other two parties it is negotiating with.

                    In particular each mode has it's own extreme expressions that history informs us are really bad ideas, and it's time we stopped recycling them in various forms in the vain hope that if we keep doing the same thing over and over that we will get to a different outcome.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      8 September 2020 at 2:43 pm

                      "My thesis here is that humanity is on the cusp of a terrible failure if we do not earnestly start considering evolutionary paths to progress that do not necessarily involve tearing everything down first."

                      Regarding your thesis, I agree with the first bit ("humanity is on the cusp of a terrible failure") – the sudden impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the slow-buring fuse of anthropogenic global warming, are frightening realities.

                      Focusing in on what’s achievable for the ‘golden billion‘, and more narrowly for NZ, I'm all for strengthening human rights, and I certainly don't want our wonderful society to be torn down. But it's important to realise that our society is not wonderful for everyone. A wealth tax, or some method of redistributing (a larger but still small percentage of) the wealth of the 'top' 10% for the betterment of the least wealthy 50% would be a good thing, IMHO.

                      Some might regard such redistribution as "tearing everything down"; theft even(!) – I see it as a way of building societal resilience and sustainability. https://thestandard.org.nz/nurses-ask-us-to-vote-for-our-health/#comment-1317498

                    • RedLogix …
                      8 September 2020 at 3:45 pm

                      A wealth tax, or some method of redistributing (a larger but still small percentage of) the wealth of the 'top' 10% for the betterment of the least wealthy 50% would be a good thing, IMHO.

                      Absolutely; if there is one single topic I've posted on more than any other over the years, it is the moral and social question posed by extremes of wealth and poverty. Addressing inequality in all of it's forms is the primary driving motivation of the socialist left; it's our reason to exist, it's our legitimate space. There is never any need to apologise for or justify this.

                      But we should be honest and admit that we've not done a terribly good job of understanding the root causes of inequality and thus failed to derive truly convincing solutions. In particular we should have understood by now that imposing direct state driven solutions that aim toward creating equal outcomes at the individual level always come at a cost to individual sovereignty and freedom of action, that societies as a whole are unwilling to pay.

                      Instead the modern mixed economy states like NZ employ a range of indirect measures such as investing in physical and social infrastructure (education, health, security etc), progressive taxation, equalising opportunity, and the welfare state to mitigate the worst excesses of inequality. We should pause to reflect that we've made a lot of progress, and for the most part this cobbled together collection of measures works way better than anything which came before.

                      But as you say, it doesn't feel like NZ is wonderful for everyone; it's not. Could we do better?

                      we might build stable, prosperous and viable societies.

                      This reflects the three domains of outcome that each political mode values most, in particular the socialist is fundamentally most concerned about our social and environmental viability over time. In particular any society that allows the inequality problem to runaway over time, inevitably invites instability and breakdown. (In this we should recognise that we have common ground with the conservative mode of thinking, we just frame this continuity issue differently.)

                      So while yes I've no particular objection to writing better and smarter tax systems (and there are many ways we could attempt this), the destination I have in mind is a fair bit further down the road. wink

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      8 September 2020 at 4:26 pm

                      'Tis indeed a long and winding road we're all on, although some of us are closer to the end of the road, and thankfully in my case.

                      If only individuals now could shift even a small part of their focus from planning one year/month/day/hour/minute ahead to planning one century ahead, then there might be some hope. Thanks to natural selection, most successful natural species (which are currently being driven to extinction faster than we can count) do this literally without thinking, but ‘we‘ had to go one better.

                      Still, can't say it hasn't been fun.

        • In Vino 14.1.1.2
          7 September 2020 at 11:10 pm

          Hindsight wisdom, but over-simplified.

          Orwell's 'Animal Farm' nailed both French and Russian revolutions for producing régimes like the one they overthrew, but you are wrong to limit the French revolution in that way It did eventually result in emperor Napoleon, but Napoleon was far better than Stalin. Throughout a stagnant Europe saddled with tired old monarchies, Napoleon installed new rulers of more progressive vision. Goethe (Germany's Shakespeare) was a willing participant in the Republic of Weimar that Napoleon installed.

          France's modern legal system (in some ways superior to our adversrial one) was installed by Napoleon. So was its respected education system which lasted well into the 20th century before modern reforms.

          You seem to have limited appreciations of the effects of the French revolution (only the negative ones) and then want to think that Marx would have taken your view into account.

          Marx wrote at the time he was alive, long before what happened in Russia and China – he knew how Europe's social and intellectual advancement had been helped by Napoleon, who stemmed from the French Revolution. Marx was NOT promoting what you claim, and your knowledge of history seems to be plucked from what suits you.. with selective hindsight.

          • RedLogix 14.1.1.2.1
            8 September 2020 at 5:28 am

            A lot of words to condone and justify the The Terror.

            There are many accounts online, but most gloss over the vile, sadistic bloodlust that seized the French Revolutionaries. It truly consumed itself in an orgy of destruction.

            As with most people who defend Marx, but pretend not to be actual Marxists, you're in deep denial that the shedding of oceans of blood causes far more harm than any good it may bring. If the French revolution was the end of monarchy and aristocratic privilege and the emergence of the common man and democratic rights, it was also the beginnings of modern totalitarian government and large-scale executions of “enemies of the People” by impersonal government entities (Robespierre’s “Committee of Public Safety”). This legacy would not reach its fullest bloom until the tragic arrival of the German Nazis and Soviet and Chinese communists of the 20th century.

            And the assumption that violent revolution is the only path to progress is a deeply flawed one, that overlooks contemporaneous examples of nations that equally progressed without a mile high stack of corpses to show for it.

            Marxist thought is an obsolete outgrowth of a deeply unsettled era in which power relationships where all that mattered. We should have learned some hard lessons from these humiliating catastrophes.

            • In Vino 14.1.1.2.1.1
              8 September 2020 at 8:03 pm

              What?? Are you so indoctrinated?? I never mentioned the Terror (let alone justify it – your wishful thinking..) because the Terror was a strange phenomenon. You pick the usual little details of history to justify your angle, but you rarely seem to know much about it. True historians struggle to explain why the Terror came about, lasted only about 2 years, then equally inexplicably disappeared. The French Terror did not become a permanent feature like Stalin's Terror. It was NOT the lasting inheritance we got from the French Revolution, and you should not be so ignorant of that.

              Linking the French Terror to the Nazis, Stalin, and Mao is mere wishful thinking, to suit your wishful attitude. Laughable. You could also link it to the persecution of the Huguenots, and the St Bartolomew's day Massacre, or even the Bolton Massacre in England. Or the inquisition. Feel free!

              I continue to wonder if you have some religious basis for all the standard. right-wing view of history you seem to cleave to.

              • RedLogix …
                8 September 2020 at 9:15 pm

                I never mentioned the Terror … because the Terror was a strange phenomenon.

                Well no-one wanting to present the French Revolution as the glorious prototype of noble peasants rising up to overthrow a corrupt elite will usually dwell on it.

                But once again it's interesting to see defenders of Marx wishing to minimise and distance themselves from mass murder when it doesn't suit their narrative.

                • In Vino …
                  8 September 2020 at 11:47 pm

                  Minimise? You are a wishful thinker, blinkered by your own attitudes.

                  I fully understand the horror of the Terror following the French Revolution, and believe I know more about the history of it than you do.

                  I deny nothing like what you suggest. I dispute your perspective.

                  Mass murder? That means something like what the Nazis and Stalin did.

                  I think you will find that even though the Terror was nasty, would you like to compare the estimated total deaths compared to Hitler and Stalin?

                  I doubt if you have thought about it, because it is convenient for you to equate them all.

                  Let me give you a simple hint: The guillotine was a new, refined way of killing people far more quickly and painlessly than the executioner's axe.

                  But it took time..

                  The numbers killed in the terror following the French Revolution are simply unrelated to the numbers slaughtered by Hitler and Stalin

                  Now if you want to accuse me of minimisation (because I have now said something about it) show me the stats that equate the number of deaths following the French Revolution ( a temporary phase of about 2 years) with the deaths caused by Hitler and Stalin.

                  Nor did I present the French Revolution as you describe. Your silly idea.

                  I am tired of arguing with you. I do not respect you.

                  • RedLogix …
                    9 September 2020 at 7:53 am

                    The numbers killed in the terror following the French Revolution are simply unrelated to the numbers slaughtered by Hitler and Stalin

                    However I suggest you dig a little deeper into the matter; the guillotine executions represented only a small fraction of those killed in the Reign of Terror. Most sources seem to agree on around 17 – 18,000.

                    However if you expand the scope to include the mass uprisings in Vendee (where the estimated death toll is 300,000) and the Napoleonic Wars that were the direct consequence of the Revolution, the total numbers rapidly rise to over a million … but become a lot harder to pin down. Napoleon I himself claimed over 3m Frenchmen gave their lives for him. Then of course in the breakdown and disorder disease took another dreadful toll in those times.

                    Not quite up there with Hitler or Stalin, but then in those guys had more raw material to work with so to speak.

                    This isn't a sports contest where the Revolution with the biggest death toll wins, I reckon however you cut it once you're past the first 10,000 or so deaths to pursue a political goal, you've made your point.

                    Of course people who quite like the idea of mass revolution, disruption and chaos in order to impose their political ideology will always argue to minimise and deflect from these catastrophic consequences. You may find it tiresome, but I'm not apologising for refusing to airbrush them from our history.

                  • Incognito …
                    9 September 2020 at 8:15 am

                    Good morning.

                    I deny nothing like what you suggest. I dispute your perspective.

                    …

                    I am tired of arguing with you. I do not respect you.

                    So far, this thread has been in-depth, on-topic, and respectful, but it can be hard work to have a robust debate and maintain this standard. In a situation like this, it might be best to agree to disagree before all respect is lost, which would avoid a deterioration of the debate that often tends to linger and spill over into future threads.

            • solkta 14.1.1.2.1.2
              8 September 2020 at 8:33 pm

              Would it be OK to agree with something Jesus said but not be a Christian? Or the Buddha and not be a Buddhist? You sound more idiotic with every new post.

  15. KJT 15
    7 September 2020 at 11:26 am

    @Wayne.

    I agree.

    However I though National's policy, and many in Parliamentary Labours, was to "leave it to the market". Making Government future planning obsolete.

    In this case, to throw lots of money at business and hope a viable economy results.

    Policies building for a sustainable future seem to have been left to the Greens.

    • Draco T Bastard 15.1
      7 September 2020 at 1:57 pm

      In this case, to throw lots of money at business and hope a viable economy results.

      I do wonder why they keep doing this. It's never worked before which is why we had that socialist revolution back in the 1930s. Capitalism had failed big time and socialism had to ride to the rescue.

      And we're seeing the same thing again.

      You'd think that, after thousands of years of capitalism failing, we'd finally wake up to the fact that it simply doesn't work.

  16. Incognito 16
    7 September 2020 at 11:28 am

    @ KJT and RedLogix, if you wish, maybe you could continue your conversation in OM, yes?

    Unfortunately, because of the dysfunctional reply functionality on the site I cannot move the thread from Mike’s Post to OM.

    I very much doubt if "Marxists" as you want to define it. As a scare word, even exist in New Zealand.

    There is a NZ blogsite that pops up regularly in the Feeds section that you may have missed 😉

  17. lprent 17
    7 September 2020 at 1:58 pm

    Had another power outage from Vector. Exactly the same as the last two outages. We call in. They send someone to investigate. About an hour after the call, we are back up and running. Feels like exactly the same problem each time. I wish they’d just fix the damn thing properly.

    Unfortunately the UPS batteries are nearing the end of their lifetime. So the server doesn’t stay up long enough – roughly 35 minutes. The comms stay up for hours – I need to put a raspberry pi on to provide ‘Maintenance’ screen.

    Fortunately there is now a box of new batteries down in the foyer after being delivered. Sufficient to give a clean update to all three UPS systems.

    Unfortunately there is a box of them three long flights of stairs downstairs – and they're lead-acid. groan.

    I keep looking for a moderately priced and safe lithium UPS. So far the only thing I see are ones designed for server rooms and priced accordingly.

    • weka 17.1
      7 September 2020 at 5:34 pm

      isn't that what fit young nephews and nieces are for, lead acid batteries up three flights of stairs.

      • lprent 17.1.1
        9 September 2020 at 9:06 am

        Ah good point – and a multitude of great nieces and nephews. However mine have moved out of range for routine chores. But my partner's nieces are growing just a few blocks up the road – soon will be old enough to do some trades of skills for labour.

  18. greywarshark 18
    7 September 2020 at 3:23 pm

    Who is this Tim Davie? How did he get put in a position of ultimate responsibility of the BBC? Why is he trying to eviscerate it, apparently down to skeleton crew manning?

    Timothy Douglas Davie CBE (born 25 April 1967) is the current and seventeenth Director-General of the BBC. He succeeded Tony Hall in the role on 1 September 2020. Davie was formerly the chief executive officer of BBC Studios (formerly known as BBC Worldwide).

    Davie won a scholarship to attend Whitgift School in Croydon, and studied English at Selwyn College, Cambridge, being the first in his family to attend University. He joined Procter & Gamble as a trainee in 1991.

    Appointed UK Marketing Manager for PepsiCo in 1993, Davie was subsequently promoted to Vice-President, Marketing, Europe and Sub-Sahara Africa, holding several similar appointments, including in the United States, before taking up the Vice-President for Marketing and Franchise post.

    Davie stood as a councillor for the Conservative Party in Hammersmith in 1993 and 1994 and was deputy chairman of the Hammersmith and Fulham Conservative party in the 1990s.
    BBC
    Davie joined the BBC as Director of Marketing, Communications and Audiences in April 2005, succeeding Andy Duncan. He was Director-General Mark Thompson's first senior external appointment.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Davie

    (So an upwardly mobile middle class boy with business, marketing and management experience being entrusted with the nation’s broadcasting might and threatening it with tightening of opinion, satire and micro-managing it for any display of ‘ism’ or sensitive opinion that might take his fancy! The BBC that gave its gifted creatives the right to produce Monty Python etc etc and was the trusted truth during WW2 and pretty well for ever!)

    https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-54014210
    New BBC director general Tim Davie against switch to subscription…
    But he told staff there must be "a radical shift in our focus" so everyone gets value from the licence fee.
    He warned that the BBC currently faces a "significant risk" and has "no inalienable right to exist".

    (Everyone getting value from the licence fee – I feel I have heard those sentiments before. I think it means that old valued programs and practices will be stripped away so as to catch the attention of the young and reflect back to them whatever their present interests and sentiments happen to be.)

    (This from Variety – sounds like something to do with the arts. Why would they have it in for the BBC?)
    The BBC Has a New Boss. Will He Enforce the Radical Change it Needs to Survive?
    https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/tim-davie-bbc-director-general-first-week-1234758553/

    (This from the Financial Times.)
    Tim Davie, the new no-nonsense BBC boss
    https://www.ft.com/content/a27e9f84-009d-46e2-9495-a5c4973591fa

    • In Vino 18.1
      7 September 2020 at 8:30 pm

      Oh Great, how encouraging. I gather that TVNZ's current CEO is a man from the bloody marketing industry – if you can call it that.

      I would have preferred Andrew Davies – that great guy who wrote "A Very Peculiar Practice", and many other worthwhile TV productions.

      We have the wrong idiots in charge of things!

      • greywarshark 18.1.1
        7 September 2020 at 8:41 pm

        edit
        How about starting a Human Resources Agency called 'C-US For the Right Idiots'. We would get just a few takers I think, as it requires a sense of humour. And as the words went on a song I recently put up 'Sit Down Next to Me', it would require the ability to feel ridiculous now and then.

        And the agency would look for people who had a real interest in, and experience in, the sector in which they would be working. It’s no use employing people who have developed themselves as machine-like thinkers, with generic suitability, fitting any slot, crevice or niche; having a robot would probably work out cheaper in the long run. Expensive up front but no large golden handshake. Whereas the human with the cunning and creative brain must be a contender for imaginative and smart stuff, and should be nurtured to bring that side out in whatever job is being done.

  19. Chris T 19
    7 September 2020 at 3:33 pm

    Don't suppose anyone could explain to me how the answer to the massive debt we are getting from Covid will be answered by an election bribe of an extra public holiday?

    • McFlock 19.1
      7 September 2020 at 3:53 pm

      Do you often look for a connection between apparently unrelated things?

      I don't see "paying down public debt" anywhere in the stuff article.

      • Chris T 19.1.1
        7 September 2020 at 4:27 pm

        Fair point

        At least now we can kind of guess the priorities.

        • McFlock 19.1.1.1
          7 September 2020 at 4:36 pm

          Well, yeah, given that a new public holiday isn't the only policy Labour's announced so far.

          Even national has managed to announce something other than a road recently.

          • Andre 19.1.1.1.1
            7 September 2020 at 4:41 pm

            Even national has managed to announce something other than a road recently.

            Shit, I missed it. What was it? Lemme guess, it was tax cuts or a bonfire of regulations, right?

            • McFlock 19.1.1.1.1.1
              7 September 2020 at 4:50 pm

              Schools! So many schools! Beautiful schools! And infrastructure thingummies! In ten to thirty years!

              • In Vino …
                7 September 2020 at 8:37 pm

                If they are a bit slow on the school thingies, National could well have us Predator-Free and with Beautiful schools by 2050..

                I bet our schoolkids can hardly wait! The kiwi birds will probably be extinct by 2050, so it won't matter to them.

                But as John Key explained when one of his deadlines slipped by, the target was just 'aspirational' anyway.

                • McFlock …
                  7 September 2020 at 9:02 pm

                  But fail on building enough houses (when the previous government did fuckall) and you never hear the end of it.

              • mac1 …
                7 September 2020 at 8:44 pm

                " in the first 10 years of a three-decade school growth plan – a plan that is yet to be developed." So says the article McFlock directs us to.

                When does a wish or an idea become a plan?

    • Nordy 19.2
      7 September 2020 at 4:14 pm

      Well said McFlock. It seems it is an excuse to not arguments the merits of policy proposal.

      In addition, why Chris T is it an 'election bribe'? Is an election policy a bribe by definition, or do you see a distinction between different types of policies, and if so what is the distinction?

      For my part a policy that both recognises the Tangata Whenua, and addresses the need for public holiday at that time of the year must be a good thing.

      • woodart 19.2.1
        7 September 2020 at 5:16 pm

        and ,it will be a kickstart to another good weekend for local tourism and the general NZ economy. as an economic policy, its a winner. so , the opposers are going to have to go down the 'giving in to maori" lot. expect to see and hear don brash. he will probably need a bigger soapbox for this one.

        • Chris T 19.2.1.1
          7 September 2020 at 5:31 pm

          "the opposers are going to have to go down the 'giving in to maori" lot"

          ???

          I was thinking the more why are we talking about businesses having to pay for another public holiday while we are going to be into a recession.

          If you are going to do it at least lose one of the others like Queens birthday.

          It is just odd timing for this sort of policy.

          Edit: Should add Kelvin Davis was just on Ryan Bridges show on the radio saying it is going to cost 230 odd million dollars a year….I mean wtf?

          • woodart 19.2.1.1.1
            7 September 2020 at 6:00 pm

            find me ANY public holiday which doesnt supercharge the NZ economy. they all turn into long weekends , rd trips, trips to the beach, fairs etc. in the big scheme of things, public holidays HELP the general economy.

            • Chris T 19.2.1.1.1.1
              7 September 2020 at 6:03 pm

              I never said there wasn't.

              If you read my post I said lose one of the others if you are going to do it.

              Believe me. I would love a public holiday in the massive gap we don't have one.

              But just slapping in a new one during a recession is silly to me.

              Edit: And did you even read my post. Kelvin Davis has said it would cost non tourist business up to 230 million dollars a year

    • millsy 19.3
      7 September 2020 at 7:52 pm

      I dont suppose you could come out and say that you want to impose austerity to pay off the covid debt would you?

  20. Ad 20
    7 September 2020 at 4:03 pm

    Prime Minister Ardern wanks to make Matariki a public holiday.

    I say that's an excellent idea.

    https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/winston-peters-again-veers-coalition-partners-says-now-isnt-time-matariki-public-holiday

    (the Greens like it as well).

    It's a sure-fire way to keep all those Maori seats in Labour's hands in 2020 and beyond.

    • Andre 20.1
      7 September 2020 at 4:11 pm

      That's either one helluva typo or an awesome freudian slip.

      The proposal itself is excellent and way overdue, tho.

    • Graeme 20.2
      7 September 2020 at 6:22 pm

      Since Matariki marks the start of the Maori agricultural year, I'd expect Maori farmers would be putting a lot of pressure on Federated Farmers to also come out in support as a celebration of how agriculture, and New Zealand is so tied into the progression of the seasons.

      • Robert Guyton 20.2.1
        7 September 2020 at 6:29 pm

        Ha!

        • Graeme 20.2.1.1
          8 September 2020 at 7:39 am

          Can see you having a lot of fun with your fellow grower councillors along those lines…

          But seriously, it's a rural celebration, for those in touch with the land and environment. Matariki should be huge in rural parts of New Zealand. Lots of potential with this, both social and commercial.

      • weka 20.2.2
        7 September 2020 at 6:41 pm

        Give up Christmas lamb? Sacrilege.

    • RedLogix 20.3
      7 September 2020 at 9:22 pm

      Yup. I recall years back suggesting this in the context of moving away from Guy Fawkes and promoting Matariki as a more authentic kiwi celebration. It would be a very strong symbolic recognition of Maori culture and it's central place in New Zealand society.

  21. Reality 21
    7 September 2020 at 4:35 pm

    Brilliant policy to have a Matariki public holiday. It is the only uniquely New Zealand holiday. And to allay the squealing of "what about the cost to business" it would not be brought in till 2022 when hopefully New Zealand is on a more even keel and many businesses would actually benefit from people getting around the country. Great move Jacinda and Kelvin.

  22. greywarshark 22
    7 September 2020 at 5:35 pm

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/425427/keep-new-zealand-beautiful-misses-out-on-government-funding

    I am not convinced Eugenie Sage is a good person in her government role. It's an upper-class attitude to the problems of the masses to put up tip fees as a way of reducing trash, for instance. Now the entity Keep NZ Beautiful which has a statutory role for the government in promoting motivation to reduce litter has had no funding at all this year because the priorities have changed. I get an impression of Lady Bountiful deciding on who is going to receive charity and who not.

    I see this as an example of government not supporting the public when particular groups provide suitable ways to assist the country to change matters or support needed causes. Their work must be useful and they need to show that they are succeeding at achievable goals of course. If they are suddenly refused funding then they often have to close down and useful work doesn't get done, skilled, informed people are lost, and so though there may be cutbacks in some years there should be continuity of support. Otherwise it looks as if the whole sector is being treated like beggars in a grace-and-favour distribution. And encouraging competition can actually splinter and diminish outcomes.

  23. Christine 23
    7 September 2020 at 6:03 pm

    Isn’t Waitangi Day a uniquely New Zealand holiday? And also the various provincial anniversaries?

    [I have deleted your surname from your user handle in case this was a mistake, as you previously had not included it – Incognito]

  24. greywarshark 24
    7 September 2020 at 6:26 pm

    edit
    What is known about hospital backlogs in the NZ Lockdown 2 areas? I am hearing about people in pain who were at the top of waiting lists receiving no information about when they can get help yet there are few Covid-19 cases.

    Is Covid-19 giving an excuse for hospitals not to get back to their normal work? What is happening about this? Is government aware of the way that their private/public mode is ineffective, and their funding is not elastic enough to cope with the added stresses that the pandemic is making. Hoping all will be well, praying even if they are that religiously inclined, is not going to help those whose conditions are worsening.

    The Upper Hutt hospital is one I have heard about. I would think that all outside Auckland's Lockdown 3 situation, would be under difficulties, and of course Canterbury District Health Board where there seems to have been an approach akin to that of a family tiff, with sides being taken about who is to be believed and supported.

    Anybody with info about any of the Health Boards' situation?

  25. KJT 25
    7 September 2020 at 10:06 pm

    @Ad. 20. Of course the Greens like it. It has been a Green policy forever.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.