Open mike 07/11/2021

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, November 7th, 2021 - 250 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 …

250 comments on “Open mike 07/11/2021 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Blazer 1
    7 November 2021 at 9:22 am

    I read in todays NZ Herald that a zoo in Denver has detected a number of their animals have contracted covid.Hyenas,Lions,Tigers.

    Wonder what the wider implications could be with this revelation.

    We have a huge number of domestic cats here in NZ.

  2. left for dead 2
    7 November 2021 at 9:43 am

    I think the last nail is in RNZ coffin,Media watch going near total bias on trans genderism. Sorry no link,but i'm sure some are still reeling and others can find.

    • Anker 2.1
      7 November 2021 at 11:06 am

      I would be interested to hear more left for dead.

      did have a quick look on RNZ but couldn’t see anything

      • Joa 2.1.1
        7 November 2021 at 11:18 am

        It was the 2nd to last story on Media Watch, but personally I felt it was a good article, I guess left for dead didn't like it because it was not anti trans. Given the atmosphere around us trans folk today I felt the item was fairly reasonable, again perhaps because for a change it wasn't overtly anti trans

        • weka 2.1.1.1
          7 November 2021 at 11:43 am

          please fix your username on next comment (there’s a bug with where the cursor goes)

        • left for dead 2.1.1.2
          7 November 2021 at 11:48 am

          Far from the truth,but it seems you happy to make it up as you go,ho hum.
          Edited: if we stick to the facts,we should be able to move forward on what is a very simple matter,women’s rights.

          • weka 2.1.1.2.1
            7 November 2021 at 11:56 am

            women's rights and trans people's rights, and how to resolve any conflicts.

            • left for dead 2.1.1.2.1.1
              7 November 2021 at 12:32 pm

              Their you go again,and you wonder why men on this site don't comment.I have no problem with the trans community.That comment above from Joa about this site being anti-trans and the MSM being against said community is factually wrong,hence my two cents worth,but I will go back into my box.thanks!

              • weka …
                7 November 2021 at 12:40 pm

                I thought you just said the matter was about women's rights. I said it's about two sets of rights that are sometimes in conflict. What's the problem.

                Trans people are out numbered and outgunned on TS. Joanne's comment is challenging, but it doesn't hurt for it to be here. You said her views about you are wrong, so it's all good I would have thought.

                • left for dead …
                  7 November 2021 at 5:20 pm

                  For all the help you have been,not.You just through me under the proverbial bus.And by the way have a read of Selina Todd (The people)the rise and fall of the working class 1910-2010,

                  • left for dead …
                    7 November 2021 at 5:54 pm

                    Oh and too finish off,you were helping Joanna with her hypocrisy.Her being out numbered an all,they are a very small % of the pop, you know that would apply here @TS no.

                  • weka …
                    7 November 2021 at 8:21 pm

                    Sorry, I have not idea what you mean. I didn't throw you under a bus, I disagreed that women's rights are the only issue.

                    • left for dead …
                      8 November 2021 at 7:06 am

                      their you go again,I never said that"women's rights are the only issue" show me where or retract.And maybe you are conflating middle class with working class,re another flame you started.This "Sorry,I have not idea what you mean"What do you mean to say,maybe copy and paste that bit you don't understand and I can only try and explain.

                    • weka …
                      8 November 2021 at 9:04 am

                      You said upthread,

                      if we stick to the facts,we should be able to move forward on what is a very simple matter,women’s rights.

                      In the context of the thread this read to me like: Mediawatch did a terrible job by framing it as trans rights vs transphobia, and you were saying it should have been about women's rights instead.

                      Maybe what you really meant was that in addition to the issues for trans people, women's rights should be considered too.

                      Please clarify.

                • left for dead …
                  8 November 2021 at 7:21 am

                  Oh I see your problem,at that stage you hadn't listen to broadcast.which was about Trans rights,It should be clear I was countering that narrative.I see you are bussy,It would help if you didn't jump in half cocked,If I could share your gun analogy back up this thread "outgunned I think it was.

                  • weka …
                    8 November 2021 at 9:01 am

                    do you realise that I've written actual posts about the issue from a gender critical perspective?

                    I haven't listened to the Mediawatch piece, but it's clear that it took an anti-feminist approach. And my opinion is that it should be looking at the conflict of rights, not trans' rights or women's rights alone.

                  • left for dead …
                    8 November 2021 at 9:42 am

                    Yes,if only you had listen first before commenting. I know your got a lot on,so wadding in to defend Joanna,were she's is quite capable to do that herself,instead of making me out to be some sort of problem.

                    Too be clear,I've read what Joanne has said here over the last few week's,and mostly agree,but upending other peoples rights ie:biological women is wrong.

              • Anker …
                7 November 2021 at 12:59 pm

                I appreciated listening to it. But the reality is (and this is why I comment so much on these issues on TS) is that there has been a virtual shut down in the media of GC voices.

                You see for me this issue isn't. about people. Its about ideology. So Gender ideology is about how gender identity trumps biological sex. I don't believe that is true.

                And for those of you who about to tell me sex is on a spectrum or there are more that two sexes, yah. Great. Iwill post a link for a scienctific competition, the prize money for which is $10,0000.00. If you can prove this is the case, you are going to win an awlful lot of money. Thing is no one has claimed the prize as of yet. Funny that.
                I don't mind at all people identifying as the opposite sex. You are allowed to do that. But legislating for that, pushing your way into women's private spaces and sporting competitions. No Thank You.

                Nor will I repeat back the phrase "trans women are real women'. I don't believe that to be the case……. And the science backs me up. I am also entitled to my GC views.

                The mysogonists vile narrative by some trans gender activists against women e.g JK Rowling, Kathleen Stock is disgusting.

                Re the media watch piece. the person with the Scottish accent said that in 30 years time their will be apologies from politicians who didn't support gender ideology. But I think it is just as likely that the 22,000 and counting de-transitioners who have irreverisble damage to their bodies will be asking and receiving the apology.

                BTW congratulations to the Listener who are covering this issue in a balanced way

                • left for dead …
                  7 November 2021 at 1:09 pm

                  Thanks Anker, totally agree.

                • francesca …
                  7 November 2021 at 1:48 pm

                  "Transwomen are real women "

                  Is that said out of a sense of kindness and politeness do you think , or is it intended as a statement of fact. If that’s a statement of fact, I just can’t go along with it, and I couldn’t say it myself with any sincerity.Now I realise that’s because biological reality carries the most weight with me, the reason for that is, that the cultural baggage that makes up gender is so diverse and changeable, over time and culture.For another, gender might be the most important.Do we both have the right to feel the way we do?

                  I could say without feeling jarred by it, that "to all intents and purposes that person is a woman " ie, looks like one , behaves like one.Like Fa'afafine",in the manner of "

                  It's very unfair, but "passing "matters .Women are much more likely to welcome into their spaces someone who looks more like them, smaller, feminine, relatively hairless, feminine voice ,and of course, those transwomen who successfully "pass" have been using female spaces for a while now.

                  This feels like narcissistic rambling so I’ll stop now.

                  • Sabine …
                    7 November 2021 at 7:35 pm

                    "to all intents and purposes that person is a woman"

                    "to all intents and purposes that person is a transwomen".

                    intents and purposes – what is a women?

                    and if you can't define it, can you discriminate against it?

                • Cinder …
                  7 November 2021 at 6:32 pm

                  Well I will claim that $10,000 as a few weeks ago I directed you to a peer reviewed study on pregnancies in intersex individuals which you accepted as fact (and extrapolated into thinking it was a study of every intersex person in the world 🙄)

                  So, when can I expect my winnings?

                  Unless of course you're a liar…

                  After all, you are now saying the opposite of what you said at the time.

                  So, where's my money?

              • Joanne Perkins …
                7 November 2021 at 1:59 pm

                There's no shortage of men commenting on this site and my comment was not about this site being anti trans, it was about you bringing up this RNZ report and implying that it wasn't anti trans enough for you. You, Anker and others consistently say you have nothing against us trans folk yet in the last few weeks virtually every Open Mike has been taken over by your little group bemoaning the fact that I want my rights to be recognised as much as anyones. If you have issues with Gender ideology then fine, tell us and let it be, but no, that's not good enough you have to tell us day after day after day. I'm quite sure that if I stated my understanding of who I am in the same fashion I would very quickly be shown the door. It may be true that some people have been ill served by those who subscribe to the kind of gender ideology that gets talked about on here but you know what? Us Transpeople, particularly Transwomen don't get verbally abused, we get beaten up and murdered at a rate higher than any other group you would care to name. Not, I would say in absolute numbers but in terms of percentages. So if you, as you say, support Trans people then let us get on with our lives which are real, and often boring.

                • Molly …
                  7 November 2021 at 2:09 pm

                  These discussions are being had now, Joanne, because of the legislation proposals and the impacts they may/and have had on women and girls.

                  It is not in any way intended to give you discomfort, or any other transgender people in the community.

                  However, the current gender ideology pushed by very aggressive activists (which I will not assume that you share) requires compliance from women and girls, in fact demands it. So, the discussion is occurring because those demands are taking place. And we are sharing information here, on TS, because the impacts on women's rights are not being actively investigated or discussed in many other places.

                  Just like anyone else, you are welcome to participate, or just scroll past. There is no intention to make you feel uncomfortable or require you to contribute unless you want to.

                • weka …
                  7 November 2021 at 2:16 pm

                  it's a tricky balance on TS, because there have been lots of problems with women being here historically so I am loathe to accept a line of telling women to not talk about their politics freely.

                  There is also the issue of legislative and social changes that affect women, and this is one of the better places to discuss that. That's a live issue, which is why we keep talking about it.

                  But I also see an obvious imbalance.

                  I'm quite sure that if I stated my understanding of who I am in the same fashion I would very quickly be shown the door.

                  Not sure I understand what you mean, would you mind clarifying?

                • solkta …
                  7 November 2021 at 2:22 pm

                  There are a number of men here like myself who have stopped commenting on this topic because no point.

                • Anker …
                  7 November 2021 at 4:54 pm

                  I don't think that is correct Joanne, that virtually every Open Mike is "taken over". Open Mike is for everybody to share whatever they are concerned or interested. in. That's how it works.

                  My impression is that Open Mike has become dominated with info on Covid 19. I completely understand that even if I don't follow it.

                  Do you have a problem with women saying "I want my rights recognised as much as anyone's?"

                  I think gender identity is a relatively new term that has come out of gender ideology, postulated by Judith Butler and some others. I disagree with her theory and think biological realty trumps gender identity, not the other way around as many gender activists believe.

                  I am not sure about your assertion that trans women are murdered more than anyone (other than in South America

                  • Anker …
                    7 November 2021 at 4:59 pm

                    Sorry, last comment posted before I finished writing and for some reason, I can't edit it.

                    I think in South America more trans women are murdered per % but not in NZ. Interested to see if anyone has different stats on this.

                    Unfortunately rapes and assaults are often hard to quantify as often not reported to the police.

                    But women as a sex class are very vulnerable to sexual assault because they are smaller and not as physically strong and overwhelmingly the people who commit rape and violent assault are biological males

                    • Sabine …
                      7 November 2021 at 7:43 pm

                      the last transwomen in NZ to be murdered was in 2018.

                      per the trans rememberance day 350 transpeople were killed in 2020, and so far in 2021 some 49 were killed

                      https://pflag.org/blog/transgender-day-remembrance-2021

                      women however are dying like flies

                      The latest UN figures show that 137 women across the world are killed every day by a partner or member of their own family – a total of 50,000 women a year murdered by people they know and should be able to trust.

                      https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/11/violence-against-women-femicide-census/

                      In saying that, no one should be killed for what they are and on grounds of their sex or gender id. And yet, in the 2021 in the UK every third day on average a women gets killed. By partners, strangers in the parks and cops and everyone is meh.

                    • weka …
                      7 November 2021 at 8:09 pm

                      Here's what Joanne said,

                      Us Transpeople, particularly Transwomen don't get verbally abused, we get beaten up and murdered at a rate higher than any other group you would care to name. Not, I would say in absolute numbers but in terms of percentages.

                      Lots of women get murdered, it's true, but Joanne said %. Think about that.

                      It's not a competition.

                      When gender critical women minimalise the violence and abuse that trans women get directed at them, it's not too dissimilar when men minimalise violence against women.

                    • Sabine …
                      7 November 2021 at 8:35 pm

                      I am not trying to diminish the death of anyone.

                      But even in % no transwomen has been killed since 2018 in NZ while every other week a women is found dead, somewhere. Every year.

                      Women get beaten, kids get beaten every other month to death in NZ.

                      Most of that violence is from men. So again, we are asking women to make space for a group of people that is being victimised by men. Why are we – women – responsible for the safe keeping of Trans identified people from men, when no one is even pretending to care about safe keeping women and children. Why do we have to give up safe spaces to men who may victimise us? And why are pepole like Joanne so concerned to not talk about the real violence that women live daily and the reasons why women have created many of he safe spaces that trans want access to in the first place and often without any assistance from the state.

                      The fact that annoys me is that this distinction of the % gets thrown out all he time, because otherwise, many trans people would need to admit that they too live in countries were it is as safe for them as anyone else who are considered 'minorities', like NZ , or the UK, or Germany, and where their human rights are granted and people to try to their best ability to accommodate them.

                    • weka …
                      7 November 2021 at 9:13 pm

                      I am not trying to diminish the death of anyone.

                      But I think you are despite it not being your intention. How does it hurt women to acknowledge that trans women get abused as well?

                      But even in % no transwomen has been killed since 2018 in NZ while every other week a women is found dead, somewhere. Every year.

                      Women get beaten, kids get beaten every other month to death in NZ.

                      That's you making it a competition again.

                      I oppose self-ID in its current form, and I strongly believe in single sex spaces. But I don't see why the needs of trans women need to be negated as part of retaining women's rights.

                • left for dead …
                  7 November 2021 at 5:02 pm

                  This is hopeless,were have I implied it wasn't anti-trans enough.You have mis-understand or are being a troll.which is it ?

                • Anker …
                  7 November 2021 at 6:21 pm

                  Geniune apology Joanne. I missed understodd when you said bemoanig the fact that I want my rights. I thought you were referring to women, rather than yourself.

              • Puckish Rogue …
                8 November 2021 at 8:59 am

                'and you wonder why men on this site don't comment'

                Well thats not quite accurate

      • weka 2.1.2
        7 November 2021 at 11:35 am

        https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/mediawatch/audio/2018819466/avoiding-the-mistakes-of-the-past-in-trans-rights-coverage

        I haven't listened yet. They apparently missed that the issue is about the conflict of rights.

        • left for dead 2.1.2.1
          7 November 2021 at 11:46 am

          That's right,down played issues women have about current bill before the house,and even mis-represented the sporting issue,and as we now know those rules are about to be changed by the Olympic committee.

        • Sabine 2.1.2.2
          7 November 2021 at 1:10 pm

          There is no 'conflict of rights'.

          There is one, incredibly vocal, monied, government supported group that demands access to any and all spaces that Non Males have fougth for since the 1900, who pretty much show the attitude of the above poster to anything that is not total submission to that ideology. And as per the attitude of the lawmakers involved in the submissions hearings, it is already all decided. But then Non Males, are they even human, and why would we consider them human, and do they have rights if we can't even define who they are?

          Fwiw, one could be mistaken and consider this a new mens rights activisim, as men are the primary benefector of these new rules and laws that are created. In the mean time, Non Males of all colors, creeds, and identifications are simply self selecting to resign, not compete, and not drink to much fluids lest they have to go to some public toilet that they rather not go too for all the obvious reasons.

          Who will suffer the most if this legislation will be pushed through?

          • weka 2.1.2.2.1
            7 November 2021 at 2:08 pm

            and yet trans women still exist and they are different from men.

            If trans women want and need things to enable them to take part in society eg a gender recognition certificate in the UK, then how is this any different than wheelchair users needing ramps?

            As Joanne says, the problem is with gender indentity ideology, which is pushing a sociopolitical agenda far beyond human rights issues. I don't think it helps women to deny that, or that there is in fact a conflict of rights (women want no self-ID, many trans people want self-ID). At some point we have to sort this out in ways that are good for women and trans women.

            • Sabine 2.1.2.2.1.1
              7 November 2021 at 2:32 pm

              The conflict you speak of is there because we have a government who'd rather colonize women spaces and wholesale cancel women so to speak – then actually create something for the Trans community, and not just for the trans identified males btw. Goverment that demand to the point of threatening of prison and fines – that women give up their spaces, their awards, their sports, their meeting spaces to the point where a court ruled that trans women must be included in lesbian spaces even if they hold a date night.

              That is not a conflict, that is colonisation. Taking over spaces, places and language that used to be used by a particular group of people to be themselves, speak of themselves and congregate.

              The government could create these spaces. Men, Women, Unisex (Trans). It could, and we would not be having this discussion in the first place. But the government does not. So Transpeople – non binary people – and any other identification is now allowed to be where previously they could not be, and women will have to submit, or else deal with the fall out of job loss, loss of income, legal threats, questioning by the police, online harasment without recourse etc.

              And yet, 'women' – aka 'non males ' exist. But then what are women, Weka? And are they even human.

              the government is taking rights – hard won rights – away from Women, to give these rights over to men. And there are no other words for it. And the only one who has no longer rights, are women. The government has made Men the definer of women, and they will put this into law. Welcome back to the 1500.

              Transwomen are Trans identified males and it should not be the duty of Women to accomodate these men into their spaces. Men should be taking care of their gender non conforming brethren. And government should be creating spaces for these men. Be they toilets, changing rooms, or shelters and refuges and prisons. As for housing and job discrimination, take that to the relevant courts and fix it there. And if they don't have the money to do so, bring back legal aid.

              So We – women have to do nothing, as WE – women have not created this problem. Lesbians don't have to fix anything, as they did nothing. Mothers don't have to fix anything, as they did nothing.

              It is a lazy government that has work to do, and that is to create spaces for trans people, non binary and other gender fluid people and leave Women for those who are women. It is government that on behalf of a few men is throwing away its female population wholesale into a ditch of 'can't be defined, gets called body with vagina, and gets beat up by trans identified male in boxing matches for funsies'.

              • Molly …
                7 November 2021 at 2:44 pm

                It is a lazy government that has work to do, and that is to create spaces for trans people, non binary and other gender fluid people and leave Women for those who are women. It is government that on behalf of a few men is throwing away its female population wholesale into a ditch of 'can't be defined, gets called body with vagina, and gets beat up by trans identified male in boxing matches for funsies'.

                A lot of my fury is for the politicians that have created this mess.

                • Sabine …
                  7 November 2021 at 4:38 pm

                  All of my fury is for them, as without them this would not be an issue mostly. And my question is, why. What is in for the political/media/academic class that pushes this shit on mainly working class and poor class women, as the nice and polite middle class and upper class women will only ever use a public toilet at their fancy eatery or the koru club in the airport.
                  The ones that will have to compete for a space in the loo at the mall are the shop girls that have to use the public loos there, or the school girls that suddenly end up in unisex toilets with boys galore while they try to change a tampon or a sanitary pad.
                  A pox on the house of everyone of the lawmakers that pushes that shit on us and our kids.

              • weka …
                7 November 2021 at 2:46 pm

                yeah, I know all that Sabine. And you know that I know that, so maybe consider you are missing what I am saying.

                If self-ID doesn't go ahead, do trans people have rights to take part in society like everyone else? What are the issues that are stopping them?

                • Sabine …
                  7 November 2021 at 3:05 pm

                  They already have the same rights you and I have. Those that pass already use female spaces without incidents – at least i have not heard of any issues. They have the same rights as all men and women, gay, hetero, bi, have in this country. This is not about rights, and frankly i don't think it ever was. If women don't have rights, then trans women don't have rights, and trans men being trans identified women also don't have rights.

                  I don't have an issue with the Identification of Transwomen / Transmen, i have an issue with Self ID that needs to be followed up by nothing, but grants access to US in spaces were we like to be on our own to everyone anytime without exception. Make it easier for adults to transition, put their paper work in order (born bio male, gender F or vis versa), grant them access to the law and courts if their 'rights' are not given. All that can happen without remotely doing what they propose now. And above all, stop pretending that Women and Transwomen and Men and Transmen are the same. They aren't. And that fault, is with government. These proposed chances are so drastic that i find it hard to believe that that was the best they could come up with to accommodate an actual trans population of less then a percent or two, into the women spaces of half of this worlds population.

                  Why are the government all over the industrial world – which funnily is enough the 'world' were women have the most rights, highest earning power and best life conditions and most rights – insisting in telling us that Trans identified men are women, and that no women, you can not be upset about this or else we give you big big trouble. So why are governments and here in NZ too, telling women to shut up and submit to Men in their spaces and just take that loss of actual rights on the chin and suck it up.

                  • weka …
                    7 November 2021 at 3:59 pm

                    explain to me what the needs are of a trans woman in regards to what it says on their birth certificate, in terms of job applications.

                    • Sabine …
                      7 November 2021 at 4:25 pm

                      Birth Certificate

                      'sex' M , Gender F or vis versa. There you have it. It should also clear that up if they have an accident and need medical care. That can be printed on Driver lisences, and any other legal document.

                      (for purpose of identifying trans as to their 'dead' personality, that should be kept in cases of the sexual offenders register or similar. i.e. Alonsus Alonsus, also known as Brigitte Brigitte).

                      Job applications, the one that i got was, My birth name is xxx, but i go by yyy. That was good enough for me, and besides i was hiring a baker and this transperson came recommended. In the same sense as you and I would identify as women, and men would identify as men. Why do we have to bake a special cake for these people? This is a serious question.

                      My point is that these people are someone before they transition, and there should be a reference to that person.

                      And last but least, why do we need to erase several thousand years of womenhood, language, and customs, to accommodate gender non conform males.

                      They have exactly the same rights as we all have. They have the same human rights. Heck, we are discriminating against women daily, we kill women daily, we abuse them daily, we don't hire them, we don't promote them, we rather hire and promote a Trans identified male to a board then a women. WE call this 'equity'.

                    • weka …
                      7 November 2021 at 8:19 pm

                      Sabine, "'sex' M , Gender F or vis versa."

                      What if the trans woman doesn't want their employer to know they are trans?

                      They have exactly the same rights as we all have. They have the same human rights. Heck, we are discriminating against women daily, we kill women daily, we abuse them daily, we don't hire them, we don't promote them, we rather hire and promote a Trans identified male to a board then a women. WE call this 'equity'.

                      Oh, so women's rights don't get respected, let's disrespect trans rights too.

                    • Molly …
                      8 November 2021 at 9:56 am

                      "What if the trans woman doesn't want their employer to know they are trans?"

                      That's a question worth a whole post, I think, weka.

                      I've been turning it over in my mind, having been through the eighties when declaring your sexuality required a lot of courage from friends, so I can understand how this may be a dilemma.

                      At present, I think that there has to be societal acceptance of however people want to identify, but to 'hide' those identities by passing, is also not going to help for individuals in the long run.

                      Accurate records of birth, and gender identity are necessary for statistics and the delivery of health, justice and support systems, so I don't support the replacement of biological sex with gender identity. I do support some form of official documentation that records gender identity for those that wish it. The gender reassignment surgery is one status that should allow people into their gender identified single sex space, particularly as they are no longer male or female bodied. It is the self-id access that is of particular concern.

                      Is it harmful to transpeople to not identify them as the biological sex they identify as? I can only think, No.

                      I believe it is more harmful to require them to have to hide themselves amongst others in order for them to feel accepted.

                      In addition, the removal of boundaries in regards to single-sex spaces, both physical and other, requires much more discussion. Trans rights do matter, but we do need to understand what rights they actually want, and need to be able to live their lives fully. At present, the demand is sophistry, Transwomen are Women, so they become a de-facto protected category, while removing that protected category by that inclusion.

                    • weka …
                      8 November 2021 at 8:29 pm

                      Is it harmful to transpeople to not identify them as the biological sex they identify as? I can only think, No.

                      I assume that part of the reason is that it alleviates gender dysphoria to an extent.

                      Don't want to think about the AGP side of it.

                • Shanreagh …
                  7 November 2021 at 4:38 pm

                  Yes trans people do have the same rights as we all do. Difficulties can arise with people living as another sex when it comes to presenting a birth certificate where the birth sex does not align with the lived in gender. Transpeople have the ability to change their birth certificates now ie without the proposed amendment. .

                  Some must believe it is unfair to either have to live life as a woman or to do the hormonal or surgical transition or get the certifications around this, hence the amendments proposed.

                  These amendments enable a person to aver that they are male or female etc. with no formal proof required that this is so. I thought at first, that looking at the Maori roll which has a similar provision that this 'averring' in the trans context was fair.

                  I no longer do. The reason is that Maori, if pressed, if this ever came to pass, are actually able to provide proof by way of whakapapa, certificates, genealogy even DNA. With no requirement to even live as a woman let alone embark on any transition this proof ipso facto is not attainable by a trans person.

                  Rather than forcing people to not believe the evidence of their eyes why was work not done around examining the existing ways to change birth certificates, examine them for unexpected/unfair difficulties but to expect evidence of a transition or active transitioning?

                  The longer this goes on and the more I see the evidence of malice, threats of violence against bio women the more I see it may be/is just more of oppression that men/patriarchy have traditionally dealt against women.

                  In other words my male bullshit meter is clanging like it does/did when sexist jokes were about and we 'did not have a sense of humour', the country was not 'ready' to enact equal pay, the rubbish about male overwhelming sexuality that means male cannot control it and so rape…….women wearing clothing that 'invites' rape etc etc. Many of the memes promulgated by trans women and their supporters are incredibly misogynistic, openly violent and crude like male bullshit often is.

                  If someone could answer me why the existing provision could not have been amended ……I gather it was around the legal costs around statutory declarations..at least that was said.

                  I personally think bio women have been 'snowed' by the mighty powerful US based corporations and males of all sorts and stripes…..by the trans community with the catchy rights based argument and by hetero men who probably thing we are 'over-reacting, again…..perhaps even being 'hysterical'.

                  Not holding my breath that any good will come from the submissions before the select Committee.

                  We have unsafe spaces in the public sphere to look forward to, women prisoners being raped by males in women's prisons (UK) , by born males trying to insert themselves through human rights legislation into sensitive female spaces such as Rape Crisis Centres (Canada)

                  • Sabine …
                    7 November 2021 at 4:50 pm

                    Rape Crisis Centre Edinbourough is run by an entire male who lied about his GRC in the first place to get a similar job previously. They then pontificated about 'rape and orgasms' (literally 14 century it was thought that if a women got pregnant by rape its because she had an orgasm'), and that bigotted rape victims need to be re-educated to their bigottry before they could get help. In the US they now hand out condoms to men in female prisons, and abortions to the women who end up pregnant. I read somewhere that some 3000+ males are looking to relocate to womens prisons in California alone. You can't get cancer care in the US unless you pay, but the state will pay for fake tits and a neo vag for a bloke, go figure.

                    This whole Self ID is an affront to women everywhere, it is sexual abuse made legal, it is putting women back on the urinary leash, and it is taking women out – no pun intended, one by one out of Universities, jobs, and generally public life.

                    And all of that here in NZ courtesy to the Green and the Labour Party, and one can't actually make this shit up. For the right we are 'helpmeets' at best, for the 'left' we are something that can't even be defined.

                    Women, politically homeless since ages ago.

                • Anker …
                  7 November 2021 at 6:28 pm

                  Weka, I think those are really good questions. It seems like some activists want transwomen, in particular, to be treated as if they are biological women.

                  I want to preserve biological women as a sex class and be referred to as women, not mensturaters, chest feeders, birthing parent etc.

                  I want female only spaces and sporting competitions for biological women only.

                  I am unsure why transwomen want the opposite…..i.e. to have their gender identity treated as the same as biological women, when it just isn't. Its not possible. Just one of those things.

                  But if trans people want help with being treated with respect, getting jobs etc no problem.

                  I tend to take people as I find them, no matter who they are.

                  • Blazer …
                    7 November 2021 at 7:01 pm

                    ' It seems like some activists want transwomen, in particular, to be treated as if they are biological women.'

                    Isn't this the case though?

                    How else does Laurel Hubbard get to compete in womens events.

                  • Puckish Rogue …
                    8 November 2021 at 9:04 am

                    Sounds entirely reasonable to me

                • Sabine …
                  7 November 2021 at 8:19 pm

                  Here an update from the female prisons in the UK, they are now apparently reviewing the rule to allow trans identified males into womens prison, they are even building a rather large annex to house trans identified people and youth offenders.

                  Now this is the bit that i thought is telling

                  https://www.womenarehuman.com/transgender-policy-that-led-to-male-sex-offenders-in-womens-jails-set-to-be-reviewed/

                  Some activists propose that housing male inmates who identify as transgender in separate units is a compromise that would take the safety and dignity of both the female population and the transgender-identifying population into account.

                  This push led to the creation of the first transgender unit in the UK. The dedicated transgender wing is in HMP Downview, a closed category women’s prison in England that houses 300 women and has a juvenile unit."

                  Transgender-identifying inmates have rejected the push for separate units like the one at HMP Downview (pictured), telling a researcher they wanted “to be treated in the same manner of people of the same gender as them” including “wanting to be searched more, to share a cell and shower at the same time as other people in custody.” Courtesy: @HMPDownview / Twitter

                  However, transgender-identifying inmates are overwhelmingly against separate units like the one available at HMP Downview, Dr Matt Maycock, a Dundee University-based researcher who has worked for SPS, found. Dr Maycock interviewed 13 transgender-identifying individuals incarcerated in Scottish prisons, and determined that the majority wanted “to be treated in the same manner of people of the same gender as them” including “wanting to be searched more, to share a cell and shower at the same time as other people in custody something that is in contrast to what would be seen as undesirable to their fellow people in custody.” The research was published in the Prison Service Journal. Continue reading Transgender Policy That Led to Male Sex Offenders in Women’s Jails Set to be Reviewed | Women Are Human. Read more at: https://www.womenarehuman.com/transgender-policy-that-led-to-male-sex-offenders-in-womens-jails-set-to-be-reviewed/

                  Maybe it is really only the access to women they want, and the right to behave in these places and around women and with women as they like. Maybe they really just want others to validate their existance every day as a women and if they don't get their fix then they get to complain about a hate crime.

                  And i find it very telling that a court in England knows that women are going to be harmed by these men, yet, they will put the wellbeing of men – violent men who have and will abuse women – before the wellbeing of the incarcerated women.

                  • Puckish Rogue …
                    8 November 2021 at 9:09 am

                    “to be treated in the same manner of people of the same gender as them” including “wanting to be searched more, to share a cell and shower at the same time as other people in custody something that is in contrast to what would be seen as undesirable to their fellow people in custody.”

                    I find it interesting that the vast majority of people know this is a bad idea, know exactly what this (or can at least imagine) will lead to yet I wouldn't be surprised if it happened lest someone in a government position be labelled a transphobe

                    That once again woman are the lest of peoples considerations

                    • weka …
                      8 November 2021 at 9:13 am

                      this is already happening. Both for ideology and because people are afraid to speak against that ideology (and that fear is reasonable given that people lose their jobs, careers, friends, SM accounts)

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      8 November 2021 at 9:23 am

                      Sure is.

                      So in Rolleston we have, I think two trans women and they aren't segregated however all but one of Rollestons units are voluntary segregation so no real issues there

                      Last time I was in Chch Womens there were two trans women and one was in directed segs, a little more solid but similar to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lb6OpRfyLFo

                      so imagine you're a women in prison and this person is in your wing.

                      The other was your more traditional Fa'afafine type, she was in the wing with the women but had seperate shower times and you couldn't have her anywhere near mens prison

            • francesca 2.1.2.2.1.2
              7 November 2021 at 3:32 pm

              And why is it women who have to figure this out and provide places.?

              • Sabine …
                7 November 2021 at 4:53 pm

                Because men simply don't.

              • Shanreagh …
                7 November 2021 at 5:30 pm

                Oh yes……women again making the accommodations trying to seek the best of a bad job, not accepting but trying to mitigate the inevitable.

                It would be interesting to do a femo-linguistic exercise on the words/sayings in this issue.

                I first came across it when the catch-cry was 'no debate'.

                This immediately struck me as profoundly anti democratic. Why? If something is as good as it is made out to be it will stand up the scrutiny of good hearted people.

                No debate (ie no democracy) was behind the case that went to the High Court so that SUFW could be stopped from holding meetings in Council premises. This was disguised by calling it 'hate speech' and was rightly called out by the Judges.

                Then in Wellington, some/a City councillors could not see that protesting against people who were legally discussing things in Council premises could be seen as a conflict of interest.

                My view is they should be impartial as far as the use of local govt premises are concerned….I see now of course why one was doing it. It also explains why my intuition about this particular person being self- rather than community-driven has turned out to be true right back from 2017 I have had the shivers running up my spine, they are our local councillor.

                The words 'no debate' also falls into male/female roles since time immemorial,

                no debate about bearing children until your insides fell out through multiple prolapses

                no debate about not being able to work when married,

                no debate about whose name went on to a certificate of title for a home, no debate just accepting what a male boss wanted to pay you,

                no debate about not being able to raise one's own money (always with a male guarantor)

                and, most overwhelmingly,

                no debate when a man is about to sexually assault or rape you.

                As well, like the covid anti vaxx movement, the trans movement here in NZ has some memes, 'players' and ways that are not NZ…..we have imported them.

                • Anker …
                  7 November 2021 at 6:30 pm

                  Agree Shanreagh

                • Sabine …
                  7 November 2021 at 6:57 pm

                  yes to all of it.

                • Blazer …
                  7 November 2021 at 7:06 pm

                  I don't want to upset anyone but our learned Jordan Peterson has this to add.

                  https://youtu.be/JB9sfe_mQ1I

                  • Shanreagh …
                    7 November 2021 at 7:19 pm

                    Jordan Peterson is a twit, not a learned anything and on feminism he is back in the dark ages.

                    Just my completely unbiased view though, he makes the hairs on my neck stand up and a shiver run down my spine.

                    sad

                    • Blazer …
                      7 November 2021 at 8:53 pm

                      Anything in that particular clip that you found him being non factual about?

                      It would be very shallow to label him a 'twit' on the basis that your opinion does not align with his,would it not?

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      8 November 2021 at 9:14 am

                      Jordans a good man and makes good points. However he was unfairly targeted as a transphobe and so had the twitter/social media mob come after him

                    • Shanreagh …
                      8 November 2021 at 9:52 am

                      @puckish Rogue. My distaste for the views of Jordan Peterson came about well before the current trans issues……at the time when Lauren Southern, Stefan Molyneux, Katie Hopkins and Tommy Robinson seemed to be thought worthy of respect and listened to.

                      Blazer, I do not want to spend time unpicking anything Peterson says through a feminist lens. It is a waste of my time that I would rather spend reading or listening to the views of people who can recognise patriarchy when they see it and not be apologists for it.

                      He had had a tough time health wise lately and it does not seem to have marked a sea change in his views, which often happens when confronting death in the face.

                      I know one should be exposing oneself to all views. Take it from me when the above were in the news, including Peterson, I spent hours and hours researching them to see their views so I could be fair in my appraisal of them.

                      At the end I felt much as I do now when trying to assess the reasons for anti vax sentiments by reading their views and going down the rabbit hole. It gives me a feeling of being besmirched/mental nausea.

                      https://www.vox.com/conversations/2018/6/6/17409144/jordan-peterson-12-rules-for-life-feminism-philosophy

                      https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/style/jordan-peterson-12-rules-for-life.html

                  • Anker …
                    8 November 2021 at 6:29 pm
                    • I think it is important Jordan P gets to put his views across.
                    • he does have some points (men with skills, most homeless men. Homicide victims so I do write him off.

                      • Blazer nothing i factual as such, but presenting info that favours his case. Like I said he has a perspective he is entitled too

                    but he does appear to gloss over sex assaults and also that women earn less overall.

                    most men I come across are really decent. But they have been brought up to be self focused and self need driven. Women more empathetic.

                    men seem to be able to watch porn or visit prostitutes (not all men) which to me shows a lack of empathy and an ability to objectify those human beings.

                    • Blazer …
                      8 November 2021 at 7:45 pm

                      Your statement that 'men seem to be able to watch porn or visit prostitutes' is hard to validate.

                      A quick search may surprise you, as to just how many women watch porn.

                      Regardless there are always differing viewpoints.

                      The lamest allegation imo….is the labelling of people whose views you disagree with as being…apologists.

                    • Anker …
                      9 November 2021 at 8:28 am

                      Reply to Blazer and Joe 90. I am aware women watch porn. Although not porn as such the movie 50 shades of grey seemed to be aimed at women (I never saw it) as somehow an exciting new way of spicing up your sex life.

                      I also accept what you say Joe 90 about extreme religious groups, although there is a difference between women being dominated in their lives by husbands and males they encounter and the sex industry.

                      I find the idea of porn destestable, but I understand that the stuff available on the internet is heavily dominated by men abusing and dominating women. ……..Also I belive there a very few women who visit male prostitutes.

                      I think its good to discuss these things as its not black and white.

                    • RedLogix …
                      9 November 2021 at 9:53 am

                      @Anker

                      As you may have noticed from discussion on recent threads – the two sexes are different, have quite different sexual strategies and engage with sex in different modes.

                      The extraordinary sales success of 50 Shades – driven almost entirely by female buyers – cannot be so lightly dismissed as you have. You can rightly criticise it on any number of literary and accuracy grounds, but as a fantasy it clearly worked for huge numbers of women all over the world.

                      It's always been my view that both sexes equally consume pornography but in different forms. Males typically, but not always, align their interest visually, while women through narrative. 50 Shades was nothing new – it was really just a romance novel with an extra dose of spice added on. And women have been avid consumers of these for generations.

                      The big difference really is that the one form of imaginative arousal is socially deprecated while the other goes unremarked on.

      • left for dead 2.1.3
        7 November 2021 at 11:39 am

        If you go to the RNZ web page,go to Sunday morning then Media Watch and have a listen. My linking skills are not renown.

        The last third of that program,there about's.

        • Anker 2.1.3.2
          9 November 2021 at 9:20 pm

          Reply to Red Logic,….."It has always been my view that both sexes equally consume pornography"…..That's an extraordinary claim, how do you justify it?

          Huge sales of 50 Shades of Grey I think means that it is commericially successful. Why this is, we can't be 100% sure.

          I have never read it or seen the movie. However I have read (feminists) critiques of it. The relationship between the two protaginists seems deeply problematic. It appears it is about an older man who stalks a younger women and enoourages/grooms her into S and M relationship. The control by the male isn't just into the context of the B and D sex. He apparently stalks her. This is not a healthy template for relationships.

          I also wonder about the damage for women who portray such scenes in movies. I note none of the big stars, such as Jennifer Anistan, Charleze Theron etc don't take on these roles. they don't have too. Melanie Griffiths daughter who was in 50 Shades of Grey was a virtual unknown it was her break out role. So yeah I do wonder what it does to these actress playing such parts. Afterall Holywood is full of exploitation of women.

    • Adrian Thornton 2.2
      7 November 2021 at 5:56 pm

      RNZ have far bigger problems than their alleged bias(?) on "trans genderism"……their class bias just for starters…..

  3. Foreign waka 3
    7 November 2021 at 9:43 am

    Todays paper suggests that ever since the Government has abandoned the elimination strategy, they are adrift as to what to do. I don't believe that this started with the drop of the elimination strategy. We have no planning, financial or with immigration, housing, poverty, law and order etc. None is actually in real terms improving, all blamed on covid of cause.

    I think that is should be mandated that everybody has a chance to get fully vaccinated until the 15 December. After that, we are back to "normal" and people have to take responsibility over their own health. I mean a year surely is enough notice. The only logistical work needed is border control in and out the country. Plane, ship, hang glider whatever is used. Resources need to be allocated to those areas and the health system freed up by allocation resourcing by rate of incidence. For example: 100% are 50 beds, Covid incidence is 10 % so 5 beds are allocated unless more are available due to not being used by i.e. accidents, heart attack's, etc. Sounds like rationing but this is done right now anyways.

    If the virus is to be "contained" rather than eliminated, the only choice is to manage all surrounding support systems. In the end you cannot hold someone's hand forever because it starts to look like milking the system.

    • Blazer 3.1
      7 November 2021 at 9:52 am

      This is a question put by a well known clinical psychologist-Jordan Peterson-'what threat do the unvaccinated present to the…vaccinated'?

      • dv 3.1.1
        7 November 2021 at 10:00 am

        One way is for the unvaccinated to overwhelm the health system, so the vaccinated have more trouble getting care they need.

        • Blazer 3.1.1.1
          7 November 2021 at 10:05 am

          Yes that is the conclusion I came to as well.

          Not sure it is a very compelling message to the reluctant though.

          • Robert Guyton 3.1.1.1.1
            7 November 2021 at 11:41 am

            Why? Selfish much…

          • Patricia Bremner 3.1.1.1.2
            7 November 2021 at 8:24 pm

            "Compelling message to the reluctant."

            Consider this…your family member/child has no help for a condition because the unvaccinated have overwhelmed the health system.

            • Blazer 3.1.1.1.2.1
              7 November 2021 at 8:41 pm

              So do you think presenting that scenario to the unvaccinated would encourage them to get vaxxed?

              • Patricia Bremner …
                8 November 2021 at 9:16 am

                Hi Blazer. Just a thought. The parent could be the unvaccinated party?

                When people take a stance for whatever reason, they are willing to risk themselves, yet will go to extraordinary lengths to protect their children.

        • Rosemary McDonald 3.1.1.2
          7 November 2021 at 11:38 am

          …the unvaccinated to overwhelm the health system, so the vaccinated have more trouble getting care they need.

          At the general practice level this is sorted already….with the Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners setting out the protocols for keeping the filthy, unworthy unvaxxed away from the clean, deserving vaccinated.

          If the patient is unvaccinated or refuses to say, then they should be:

          • Offered a tele consult in the first instance to manage their medical problems remotely.
          • If a face-to-face consultation is considered clinically necessary, then the practice needs to arrange for the patient to be seen face-to-face by a clinician. This clinician may or may not be the patient’s regular GP.
          • The patient should be treated as a ‘red’ stream patient according to practice procedures and appropriate precautions taken including:
            • separation in the waiting room, or waiting outside the practice (e.g., in the carpark).
            • the use of appropriate PPE by clinical staff interacting with the patient.

          The upshot of this will be that many, if not most, of us who are unvaccinated will not seek medical attention at all. (Who wants to be treated like unclean plague carriers, especially when the vaccinated can also carry and transmit the virus? )

          So we will not go to our GP for the usual health issues and those health issues will not be dealt to and could very well develop into the kinds of co- morbidities that are listed for those who the Covid kills.

          Result!

          I have not been able to access what advice is being given hospital based doctors, but I imagine it will be pretty much the same.

          All those kindhearted lefties lurking on TS who have been demanding that the unvaccinated are refused medical treatment and can expect nothing more than an area set aside in the carpark can celebrate.

          Their fantasies have come to fruition.

          PS. What happened to "herd immunity"? What % vaccinated before we get there?

          What about those who have had Covid and recovered and now have natural immunity? Why are they not a category on the Pass?

          • weka 3.1.1.2.1
            7 November 2021 at 11:52 am

            Afaik, there is no herd immunity for covid at this time. And natural immunity from previous infection apparently wanes over time.

            • Rosemary McDonald 3.1.1.2.1.1
              7 November 2021 at 12:17 pm

              https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1#disqus_thread

              Conclusions This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.

            • Shanreagh 3.1.1.2.1.2
              7 November 2021 at 6:54 pm

              Why would anyone play Russian Roulette trying to acquire a natural immunity by getting Covid? It might not work – you might die instead or get Long Covid.

              • weka …
                7 November 2021 at 8:17 pm

                is that a rhetorical question or would you really like to know?

                • Shanreagh …
                  7 November 2021 at 11:01 pm

                  I really would like to know. Why would anyone do this to themselves unless they were about ready to leave the world anyway. And there are easier ways now seeing it is now 7/11/21.

                  Wanting to acquire an immunity from catching covid that might mean you would die, or catch long covid does not seem to me to be capable of a rationale explanation.

                  BUT over to you.

          • weka 3.1.1.2.2
            7 November 2021 at 11:55 am

            I don't have a problem with GPs taking precautions, but that statement smacks of values judgements.

            Seeing people by phone/video makes sense anyway, but this one is fucked up,

            • If a face-to-face consultation is considered clinically necessary, then the practice needs to arrange for the patient to be seen face-to-face by a clinician. This clinician may or may not be the patient’s regular GP.

            That's just punitive shit.

            And I completely agree that the end result will be vulnerable people not getting medical care (and then ending up in A and E).

            Two New Zealands. Let's see how that works out.

            • Patricia 2 3.1.1.2.2.1
              7 November 2021 at 1:40 pm

              Right now in Auckland I haven't been able to have a face to face GP consultation for 3 months ; all done by tele consult. My quarterly oncology appointment has been postponed twice now and arranged (hopefully this time) for mid – December. By then it will have been a 6 month gap.

              My husband obtained an urgent dental appointment but had to have a Covid test as close as possible to the date of consult.

              So we've been living this way for months ; both double vaxed and hoping for booster shots in March.

              • Rosemary McDonald …
                7 November 2021 at 3:26 pm

                I have close friends in Hamilton who seem to have been in Level three forever. When one of the young adults experienced shortness of breath and heart palpitations after their first Pfizer injection I most strenuously advised going to the doctor…preferably the one he had been enrolled with since before birth. I was shocked when I was told that they will only see patients who are getting the Pfizer product.

                • McFlock …
                  7 November 2021 at 4:22 pm

                  I trust you also encouraged them to report the adverse event? It's useless if not used.

                  • Rosemary McDonald …
                    7 November 2021 at 4:37 pm

                    Of course I did. And of course they didn't.

                    I'm not sure if you are aware McFlock, but an awful lot of young folk are aware of the possible heart issues but feel they have no choice…what with jobs and all that. And pressure from all sides to do the decent thing. And being told that the vaccine is safe and effective and any side effects and mild and transitory and even full blown myocarditis will also be mild and transitory. And of course if you can't get to see a doctor or go to the hospital and even the ambos write it off as stress…your report to CARM will be dismissed anyway.

                    So what's the point?

                    We should be able to speak about the very real adverse effects of the Pfizer product… but we can't can we?

                    Go on…call me a misinformation peddling anti-vaxxer…

                    • McFlock …
                      7 November 2021 at 5:23 pm

                      WTF has work got to do with it? It's an online form. Heck, you could do it yourself if they were cool with it.

                      Even if CARM don't think it's linked, they log it. It's not usually about the individual, it's about the patterns of reports they get. But to establish a pattern, they need reports.

                      Big pharma doesn't need to cover anything up with folk like you around.

                • Shanreagh …
                  7 November 2021 at 6:49 pm

                  Don't understand this…..if he had had his first injection then he was getting the Pfizer product. The sheet that everyone is given says what to do and where to go if there are side effects. Not sure that they advised for heart things going to their own Dr or going to A & E.

            • miravox 3.1.1.2.2.2
              7 November 2021 at 6:16 pm
              • If a face-to-face consultation is considered clinically necessary, then the practice needs to arrange for the patient to be seen face-to-face by a clinician. This clinician may or may not be the patient’s regular GP.

              That's just punitive shit.

              This is normal practice already in a in some areas – I sort of wondered why they mentioned it at all. It's really frustrating for people with chronic illnesses, and has been for a long time.

              I guess it might be to do with the some sort of rotation among the doctors?

              • weka …
                7 November 2021 at 8:16 pm

                I have to book 3 days ahead if I want to see a GP of my choice. I didn't get that from the statement, I took it to mean that they would be at the back of the queue. I could be wrong about that, but their tone is really that of someone who highly disapproves and wants the person to know it.

            • Shanreagh 3.1.1.2.2.3
              7 November 2021 at 6:43 pm

              What is the problem here? Even in normal times with group practices and urgency your own Dr may not be available they may have a locum or because of urgency it might be better to see another in the practice. I have even been advised to go straight to the hospital or to an after hours clinic that has lab & xray facilities. These words continue what has been normal practice in my Dr's practice. It says they are to be seen by another clinician. This could be another Dr or the hospital, or a clinic.

              Surely a person who wanted to see a Dr could take advantage of the options under Manage my Health for repeats of prescriptions, Zoom/telehealth consultation, carpark consultation (I had one last year in lockdown).

              Since Covid last year my Dr has operated a screening process in his rooms with anyone who answers 'yes' to questions such as cold symptoms being required to remain outside in the corridor, masked until the appointment time The nurse will see you and then if necessary the Dr will come out masked to triage me, it was sinus and to take me through to his actual rooms.

              I do not see the problem with being referred another Doctor. This may be one who has premises better suited to consults with possibly infectious patients.

              I have just checked with partner who goes to a different practice they have operated a changed system since Covid came last year with more info being provided at phone up stage to work out the best ways of being seen. He then went to a closed door, had a nurse assessment/verbal questionnaire and then went to the waiting room where there were 3 other people at 2m spaces.

              Sister has had a couple of carpark consults in Gore since Covid last year but to be fair the Dr also used to do carpark consults, if needed, with my mother when she was frail (she died in 2010) .

              Have other people's Drs practices not been operating with changed procedures since last year?

            • Anker 3.1.1.2.2.4
              9 November 2021 at 8:31 am

              on this one I have to disagree with you Weka.

              If you have a GP who is older, overweight, is immunocompromised, Maori, diabetic etc etc, any of or all of the above, it is only right they protect themselves by not seeing people with Covid and those unvacinated will present more risk to them.

          • Shanreagh 3.1.1.2.3
            7 November 2021 at 7:04 pm

            Surely by not going to the Dr by availing yourself of the options that are there you are just 'cutting your nose off to spite your face', as my Dad, bless him, used to say.

            Many of us had telehealth, carpark consults last year. We did not feel either clean or dirty by accepting these practices but accepting of the fact that everyone is trying to keep others safe. .

            I really do not understand the problem here when these processes have been par for the course for many medical practices for over 18 months now.

            As I said below I had a carpark consult when no-one was vaccinated. I accepted this, I had covid-like symptoms and also the fact that my Dr looked a little space age-y when he came out. Now they feel that they can moderate this process as many are vaccinated.

          • Patricia Bremner 3.1.1.2.4
            8 November 2021 at 9:20 am

            The red and green streams at our Dr's practice are for feverish likely covid and no symptoms at all. Not vaccinated or unvaccinated.

            • Anker 3.1.1.2.4.1
              9 November 2021 at 8:38 am

              I think the medical staff are under such intense pressure it must be very scary for them and also infuriating that they will have to treat people with covid who have refused the jab. I am not saying this is right or wrong but human.

              I would hate to be in their postiion and I would feel resentment towards every patient who didn't do absolutely everything they could not to endanger me and my family. But maybe medical staff are people than I am.

              Its great your practice worked out red/greeen streams for their patients Patricia. But maybe that isn't want is formost in GPs mind at the moment.

              I visited my wonderful GP last week, to get as much stuff checked as possible before Covid hits. She told me that had done all their jabs for now and were now trying to work out how they were going to look after their patients who got sick with Covid in the Community. I doubt they prioritized how can we make sure the unvacinated don't feel bad about their choice.

              People have a right not to be vacinated, but their are consequences. If it is that important to people not to be vacinated then, thats what goes with it.

        • mauī 3.1.1.3
          7 November 2021 at 12:13 pm

          Yep, you may as well clear out the smokers, overweight, drivers who caused accidents from the hospital wards too… just so the vaccinated can get a clean run 🙄

          • weka 3.1.1.3.1
            7 November 2021 at 12:44 pm

            I don't believe that unvaccinated people should be denied health care, and it's reprehensible politically to promote that idea. But, there's a difference between smokers' personal choices and needing health services, and unvaccinated people. Smoking isn't contagious.

            • Sabine 3.1.1.3.1.1
              7 November 2021 at 1:16 pm

              it is 'contagious', we call it second hand smoking.

              • weka …
                7 November 2021 at 2:23 pm

                that's not contagious, it's sharing toxins. Contagious is when you end up with 200+ cases a day, some of whom will get a permanent disability.

                • Sabine …
                  9 November 2021 at 8:54 am

                  i put '' around the word for a reason. And for what its worth, my sister life time issues can be directly attributed to having spend her life in cars full of smoke, waiting for her parents to leave the smoky bar / restaurant, and generally be surrounded by smokers all her life. I would even go so far that the smoking of my parents contributed to the smoking of my siblings and I (with me being the only one to have kicked the habit). So yes, it is 'contagious' but not in the sense of a virus. Rather a social contagion, and a physical softening as clearly all my siblings and i were second hand smokes a day after we were born thus leading to addiction later in life.

                  contagion: the spreading of a harmful idea or practice.

                  contagion: the communication of disease from one person or organism to another by close contact.

                  both are valid word choices.

                  • weka …
                    9 November 2021 at 9:45 am

                    sure, but your parents' smoking didn't lead to 200 people being infected. Contagious has an actual medical meaning that differentiates it from the kind of issues that you are talking about, and it's why we have lock downs for covid but not smoking.

                    • Anker …
                      9 November 2021 at 5:20 pm

                      Ok Please don't take this seriously. I am posting it for light relief. One of my favourite comedians, Jack Dee on triaging health care for the NHS. (pre covid).

            • Shanreagh 3.1.1.3.1.2
              7 November 2021 at 7:14 pm

              There is no intention or practice of denying health care to people who are unvaccinated……all along in the info about the vaccine passport it has been clear to state that access to food or health care is not restricted.

              Some practices have been operating differently this since last year.

          • Foreign waka 3.1.1.3.2
            7 November 2021 at 12:59 pm

            No, read what I wrote. We haven't got unlimited resources and hence it has to be apportioned. It always has before but no one ever seem to have asked the hard questions. I wonder why.

            Smokers, overweight and drunk drivers are a different category then a transferable virus. The first lot is doing the harm to themselves and also others in some cases by administering a drug/food to their body. The people who get infected are getting the disease via a transferable virus that is not visible to the naked eye and is a living thing looking for a host. BIG DIFFERENCE.

            If an option exists to limit the outfall of this or any disease, an obligation on the citizen/resident to protect all people within their family, district, city, country that is within their means is not an unreasonable request. If a person feels that their right is to deny this, all good and fine. But please don't ask the same community to fork out endlessly for treatment whilst their family can't get access to an ICU or hospital bed for any treatment that is urgent.

            This has to be a managed risk rather than have a runaway health issue. I mean this is not the first time a pandemic has happened. Vaccination was then and is now a way to limit casualties. One has to wonder whether reason and logic has gone out the window.

            • RedLogix 3.1.1.3.2.1
              7 November 2021 at 1:09 pm

              You are pre-supposing in that argument that only the unvaccinated transmit the virus.

              • Foreign waka …
                7 November 2021 at 1:18 pm

                No, not at all. What I am saying is that everybody has a right to protection and as a nation we have to look at the sum of things rather than personal issues in cases like that. We are talking about a disease that does not differentiate between races, religion, age or income. It is an obligation on every person to do their best not to abscond from their responsibility within the community. I have a sister who is adamant to not vaccinate, that's ok with me. But she has to take precautions not to get ill. And this means limited contacts, family need to distance and wear mask to protect HER. Do you think that is a good outcome for anyone?
                And are all unvaccinated do the same and follow their own protection protocol? There is an issue here and it can cost lives.

                • RedLogix …
                  7 November 2021 at 1:34 pm

                  It is an obligation on every person to do their best not to abscond from their responsibility within the community.

                  Yup – that's why I vaccinated – more from a sense of duty than conviction. (It helped that I had something of a choice here in WA and could go with the AZ vaccine.)

                  But stepping from this position to compulsion erases the individual's agency and incurs a social and political cost – that may or may not be worth paying.

                  • Rosemary McDonald …
                    7 November 2021 at 3:55 pm

                    It is an obligation on every person to do their best not to abscond from their responsibility within the community.

                    And those of us who, after much careful consideration, have decided not to risk the Pfizer product are what…?

                    Sociopaths?

                • Rosemary McDonald …
                  7 November 2021 at 1:38 pm

                  ….family need to distance and wear mask to protect HER.

                  No, no, no!!!

                  [deleted]

                  22.10.21…the day New Zealand officially lost the plot…Science died, and those who have chosen not to risk the known side effects from the Pfizer product because of existing health conditions (which will not be recognized by doctors because the Word has already come down from On High that only those with an allergy to Pfizer product ingredients (specifically PEGs) will be allowed an exemption) will be called 'fucking filth anti vaxxers' who should be forced to wait in the carpark for medical attention.

                  Should we even risk seeking it.

                  As for 'absconding from their responsibility within the community' tell that to the people who rushed to get the Pfizer product and are now suffering the consequences… and are not allowed to speak publicly about it.

                  Those of us who have chosen to decline the Pfizer product on health grounds are of course going to practice good infection control and support our immune systems with good nutrition.

                  [if you want to make claims about a public figure in a heated debate, then you have to link. I’m now past asking for this (and it’s not just you). Feel free to repost once you have link so we know what you are talking about – weka]

            • Bearded Git 3.1.1.3.2.2
              7 November 2021 at 7:50 pm

              Agree and nicely put F Waka

          • Sabine 3.1.1.3.3
            7 November 2021 at 1:16 pm

            No liver transplants for anyone who ever drank an alcoholic beverage.

            No ACC for anyone who broke their body skiing or mountain biking.

            No helicopter service for anyone who is responsible for their own accidents.

            • Foreign waka 3.1.1.3.3.1
              7 November 2021 at 1:20 pm

              I can only shake my head because these are just emotional responses.

              • Sabine …
                7 November 2021 at 1:33 pm

                Of course they are.

                but this dystopian world were we are going to will produce this exact outcome. When everything is in a shortage they will start triaging, and guess who will not be provided a service or a reduced service.

                And we already do that. Women with physical ailments after giving birth are not receiving the same care by ACC then someone who breaks a leg while mountain biking down a hill – sober, drunk or high for that matter.

                And so as long as society is ok with doing that – to the groups is can get away with it i.e. Women, children, oldies, infirm, chronically ill etc, they have no issues putting us on waiting lists, medicating our ailments rather then finding what is wrong and curing that etc.

                So this is just good banter among good citizens proposing whom they would exclude from healthcare, and obviously it will never be the good citizens themselves cause 'good citizen'.

                • RedLogix …
                  7 November 2021 at 1:54 pm

                  Women with physical ailments after giving birth are not receiving the same care

                  Yeah this one definitely irks me. There's a whole history everything around sexual health, childbirth and post natal care falling into a chasms opened up by competing ideologies and ideas in tension with each other.

                  • Sabine …
                    7 November 2021 at 2:17 pm

                    We are merely defective men, and if men don't suffer from something, no one does. See how that is fixed now, and cheap too. No investments and pay out needed. It's just Non Males.

                    • RedLogix …
                      7 November 2021 at 2:24 pm

                      I'll limit myself to saying that this non-woman got into very deep shit here for insisting some years back that men and women were indeed different and this had many important implications.

                      My perspective here is not at all sophisticated – merely informed by this simple idea that I find so obvious I feel stupid for typing it out.

                • Foreign waka …
                  7 November 2021 at 6:00 pm

                  Sabine, I am originally from a country where we have not had any rationing of health services and women have 1 year paid parental leave. I am one of those who would like to have a solid system in place that is not from an anglo saxon origin where you show a stiff upper lip until you die.

                  Not in my world. But we need to take realities into consideration. NZ has a small tax base and a government that has not shown any vision or idea how to get out of this. Meanwhile we drown in debt and the kids will get the bill for that (not to mention the environmental issues).It will not be easy, no one in their right mind would assume this. But we have to find a way because right now, with the talk about freedom etc. everybody is loosing theirs. In case it isn't obvious.

                  • Sabine …
                    7 November 2021 at 7:04 pm

                    We lost our freedoms last year march on the eve of Lockdown L4. Since then nothing has changed. And despite that, we got us the Americas Cup, some Amazon Give a way for no return and the Wiggles, and gave our underpaid and over worked nurses a run around for a decent and deserved pay raise. We have priorities for our spending, and sadly we spend it on frivolous stuff rather then invest it in our healthcare.

                    And now we are going to sleep in the bed we made.

                    And i will not be blaming the people who don't want to be pfizered for the national shortage of trained staff for our ICU beds, and ICU beds. We always knew it was going to be bad when it gets here.

            • Bearded Git 3.1.1.3.3.2
              7 November 2021 at 7:51 pm

              Sabine….I assume you are anti vax then?

      • Treetop 3.1.2
        7 November 2021 at 11:00 am

        Not just a threat but a consequence. Smaller family gatherings and police call outs to businesses if entry to a shop is not permitted and a heated verbal exchange or an assault occurs.

      • AB 3.1.3
        7 November 2021 at 1:14 pm

        The deliberately unvaccinated are a threat to the passively unvaccinated. The unvaccinated are not a homogeneous group of steely-eyed ideologues who have made a firm decision to not get vaccinated. Some will be merely misinformed, indifferent, out of the loop or have other stuff going on in their lives. We need to try and get to these people and get them vaccinated for their own sake. As usual Peterson heads up to such a level of abstraction that he's dumb as a rock.

      • Shanreagh 3.1.4
        7 November 2021 at 5:57 pm

        Well Jordan Peterson, words fail me.

        Could you link to the background to this please?

        To respond to the question one has to accept the premise that in fact the vaccinated feel threatened by the unvaccinated.

        I am far from convinced the vaccinated do feel threatened other than the exhibiting innate good sense for fear of infection.

        Many in the US are wary on a personal level of the unvaccinated as they sometimes do not follow other public health advice such masking and physical distancing.

        There are very few public figure people in my life that my intuition clangs about

        I mentioned one, a Wellington City Councillor above, you have mentioned Jordan Petterson and please nobody mention Gerard Wall former Porirua MP and arch anti abortionist…….ooops!

    • weka 3.2
      7 November 2021 at 11:42 am

      long covid is estimated at between 10% and 40% of people who are infected. I'm guessing you haven't factored in that.

      2% of health care workers in the UK have long covid. Kids get long covid. People who had mild covid are getting decline in kidney function months later.

      It's a novel virus, there is a still a lot we don't know about it.

      • Sabine 3.2.1
        7 November 2021 at 1:19 pm

        We literally know nothing about it. And it would be very nice if our officials could actually admit that. And frankly, that is one of the reason people refuse the jabs. We know actually nothing much at all about this virus, we are always three steps behind, and then the bugger mutates into a different version.

        And thus, maybe saying that this jab is the best preventative medication we have would be more honest rather then sell it as a vaccine. And frankly, it might have also taken a bit the edge of the 'anti vac' movement, as obviously it ain't a vaccine.

      • RedLogix 3.2.2
        7 November 2021 at 2:56 pm

        You may find this dip into the causes of long covid interesting:

        Not definitive, but some solid indications as to why people are reacting so very differently.

        • weka 3.2.2.1
          7 November 2021 at 4:06 pm

          thanks, that was interesting. Have you come across any research or analysis on people with autoimmune conditions or PVFS having a flare after being vaccinated?

          • RedLogix 3.2.2.1.1
            7 November 2021 at 4:43 pm

            No. The only thing that comes to mind is that in my current workplace of about 40 people that I interact with regularly – 6 had an unhappy reaction to their vaccination that I know of.

            But I've no idea if there is any correlation between this and a vulnerability to long covid.

            • weka 3.2.2.1.1.1
              7 November 2021 at 8:23 pm

              it was a tangent (whether people with chronic illness are at risk of flare or relapse from vaccination). Looks like they are in somewhat low numbers, anecdotally and from what I can tell this isn't being researched very well.

              • Shanreagh …
                7 November 2021 at 11:23 pm

                An anecdotal story of one person, my sister, who has fibromyalgia rheumatica, still on prednisone and has had no problems or flares with either of her Covid vaccinations. She is also allergic to penicillin so getting Covid with the often follow-up lung etc infections would be very hard to treat.

                • weka …
                  8 November 2021 at 9:05 am

                  that doesn't really help much sorry. Most people are ok, some aren't, it's the ones that aren't that are being missed and afaik the research on this isn't being done (or at least not well or in a timely manner).

      • Bearded Git 3.2.3
        7 November 2021 at 7:22 pm

        Weka …the guardian reports today that (from a big study) 37 per cent have ended up with long covid, including some pretty scary symptoms.

        Sorry on my phone and can't link but someone will do this I'm sure.

  4. arkie 4
    7 November 2021 at 10:36 am

    The Limits to Growth is an MIT study from 1972:

    The report concludes that, without substantial changes in resource consumption, "the most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity". Although its methods and premises were heavily challenged on its publication, subsequent work to validate its forecasts continue to confirm that insufficient changes have been made since 1972 to significantly alter their nature.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/25/gaya-herrington-mit-study-the-limits-to-growth

    It has been reevaluated by KPMG sustainability analysist and found to be accurate:

    Technological advances have meant simply that we go farther and deeper to extract fossil fuels, and despite some efficiencies, consumption and emissions have only increased. The MIT authors, she points out, predicted as much.

    “They said that even if we innovate ourselves out of resource scarcity, we would probably see an increase in pollution from those adaptations unless we also limit our continued search for growth,” she said.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/25/gaya-herrington-mit-study-the-limits-to-growth

    Her assessment, Beyond Growth, is a call, not for 'degrowth' but 'agrowth':

    Under an agrowth strategy, a decline or increase in GDP/profits are both acceptable outcomes. Growth, and certainly progress, might still happen, but it’s no longer the goal.

    • weka 4.1
      7 November 2021 at 8:13 pm

      Nice one. I don't trust KPMG, but good to see The Limits of Growth being taken seriously.

    • RedLogix 4.2
      7 November 2021 at 8:18 pm

      Growth, and certainly progress, might still happen, but it’s no longer the goal.

      Now explain that to the roughly 6b people in the world who are nowhere near as wealthy as you are.

      • arkie 4.2.1
        7 November 2021 at 8:46 pm

        Obviously the only metric of any import is wealth. /s

        With an agrowth agenda, profit is no longer the only goal, so then we could use the productive capacity of the earth to feed and house those who need it rather than continuing to concentrate wealth in the global north.

        Pretty sure that approach would be popular with the 6b people you refer to.

        • RedLogix 4.2.1.1
          7 November 2021 at 9:14 pm

          Whether it's dressed up as 'agrowth' or 'degrowth' strikes me a semantic gymnastics. In essence it still comes down to the following:

          Advocates of degrowth propose to address this paradox through a process they call “shrink and share,” proposing not only to limit total global consumption but also to redistribute it equitably. A more equitable distribution of a smaller pie would presumably allow those remaining in deep agrarian poverty to make the leap to modern living standards and fertility rates.

          Such a scheme might be possible theoretically but as a practical matter would appear to be unlikely, requiring some combination of voluntary austerity and redistribution at a global scale or, lacking that, some form of global government that would mandate limits on personal consumption and would forcibly redistribute wealth from richer precincts of the global economy to poorer ones.

          Even if such a scenario were plausible, it is not clear that it would actually degrow the economy. Global per-capita income today is about $10,000–$15,000, depending on the accounting method.32 Even with perfect redistribution of wealth, this level of income would probably be insufficient to achieve something approximating modern living standards globally. Actually degrowing the economy significantly from present levels would probably leave large populations stranded in deep agrarian poverty. And to provide a first-world perspective, such a perfect redistribution would require — for global GDP to be maintained at its current level — High Income countries (World Bank designated) to reduce their present GDP by between about 60 percent to 70 percent, again depending on the accounting method.33 This surely qualifies as exceptional austerity, voluntary or otherwise.

          There is also the small matter of whether such a scheme could actually sustain itself economically or ecologically. It is not clear that such a scheme could work without large-scale collectivization, as it is not clear that the incentives necessary to keep producers producing, savers saving, and investors investing in new or replacement capital voluntarily could be sustained.

          https://thebreakthrough.org/journal/issue-6/does-capitalism-require-endless-growth

          Section 5

          Again it's worth asking – if you argue to impose this massive re-distribution and hard ceiling on human development indefinitely into the future – exactly how to you imagine to achieve this? For literally the whole of future of the human race however long this might be?

          • Blazer 4.2.1.1.1
            7 November 2021 at 9:26 pm

            High income countries can reduce their GDP easily.

            All they need to do is stymie the property market.

            I'm sure I read it makes up about 42% of GDP in either Auck or NZ.

            An unproductive class of unearned income.

          • arkie 4.2.1.1.2
            7 November 2021 at 9:29 pm

            We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.

            ― Ursula K. Le Guin

            • RedLogix 4.2.1.1.2.1
              7 November 2021 at 9:47 pm

              Nowhere have I suggested capitalism is an ideal, inescapable reality. And I've repeatedly said that it's not obvious that any of the economic systems we've tried so far will work well in the post-growth world we're heading into.

              As I've said a few times – from a political economy pov we're in uncharted waters. If I had to guess the coming evolution will conserve the proven elements of conservatism, capitalism and socialism – but leverage a wholly new social and ethical universalism.

              • arkie …
                7 November 2021 at 10:05 pm

                The fixation on wealth and global quality of life as zero-sum are from a capitalist, false scarcity point of view. Also, from your provided link:

                7.

                Getting to a zero-growth steady state economy with declining calls on natural capital will require, then, sustaining — or better yet, accelerating — two trends that capitalism has proven better able to advance than any alternative economic arrangement to date: lifting large agrarian populations out of poverty, and improving resource productivity through technological change.

                Both the USSR and China achieved lifting large agrarian populations out of poverty, so by any reasonable analysis some variation of socialism, not capitalism, has proven better. Capitalism has largely got us to where we are now, and still stands in the way of immediate action on a majority of the crises the world is facing. It is important to remember markets and their mechanisms don't only exist under capitalism.

          • Drowsy M. Kram 4.2.1.1.3
            7 November 2021 at 9:37 pm

            Again it's worth asking – if you argue to impose this massive re-distribution and hard ceiling on human development indefinitely into the future – exactly how to you imagine to achieve this? For literally the whole of future of the human race however long this might be?

            Large-scale wealth redistribution is an unachievable utopia – we know why.

            Limiting consumption to reflect the resource ceiling of spaceship Earth is an unachievable utopia – we know why.

            Tick tock.

            1.5-Degree Lifestyles: Towards A Fair Consumption Space for All
            [PDF; 2021]
            If applied, the recommendations from the 1.5-Degree Lifestyles report will bring us back to a status of good ancestry. Some of the policy proposals herewith may be perceived as too far-reaching and intruding on privacy and the rights of the individual. But we are in a precarious situation. Carbon emissions must be brought to net zero in less than a few decades. This means we have to explore all possible means at our disposal and design the future we want to truly emerge from the current planetary emergency. The 1.5-Degree Lifestyles report is a bold attempt to do just that.

            • RedLogix 4.2.1.1.3.1
              7 November 2021 at 9:53 pm

              This means we have to explore all possible means at our disposal

              Oh good:

              • Drowsy M. Kram …
                7 November 2021 at 10:25 pm

                China’s Climate Goals Hinge on a $440 Billion Nuclear Buildout
                China is planning at least 150 new reactors in the next 15 years, more than the rest of the world has built in the past 35.

                You must be stoked wink

                But what chance to meet the 1.5 degree global warming target?

                • RedLogix …
                  7 November 2021 at 10:38 pm

                  Yes I am rather and I've spoken to this earlier. But at the same time China will build more coal fired power stations will be built and for the next 15 odd years their CO2 trajectory will continue to rise. Due to their climate and geographic realities – renewables really is not an option for China, nor many other locations:

                  The actual technological pathways to deeply decarbonizing the entire global economy are few and far between. Nuclear is without question one of them.

                  Yet the good news is that contrary to the hype – in the developed world CO2 emissions per unit of GDP have been declining for some time now.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    7 November 2021 at 10:54 pm

                    What realistic chance to meet the 1.5 degree global warming target?

                    We’re Heading Straight for a Demi-Armageddon
                    What happens when we do something—but not enough—to stop climate change?
                    In a prelude to the conference, the UN added up the most recent pledges of parties to the 2015 Paris Agreement. If all 192 keep their promises, the synthesis found, the planet would still be on track to warm 2.7 degrees Celsius, or 4.9 degrees Fahrenheit, by the end of the century. This is nearly twice the 1.5-degree-Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) goal agreed to in principle in Paris. But it is also not nearly the jump predicted in the hottest scenario envisioned in the latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—4.4 degrees Celsius, or 8 degrees Fahrenheit.

                    https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/11/how-bad-will-climate-change-get/620605/

                    • RedLogix …
                      7 November 2021 at 10:59 pm

                      I've put up a number of references that address your question.

                      However if you prefer to wallow in unproductive catastrophism count me out.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    7 November 2021 at 11:20 pm

                    What’s your best reckon for a +1.5 degree future – a 50% chance? More? Less?

                    It’s your choice to characterise my lack of optimism as “unproductive catastrophism” – I’ll refrain from my usual response. https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-22-07-2021/#comment-1805387

                    • RedLogix …
                      7 November 2021 at 11:54 pm

                      In many ways I'm seeing CC as one of a number of important but not necessarily the most urgent issues facing humanity. Right now we're faced with some very urgent challenges around authoritarianism, covid disruptions to global systems and increasing social polarisation to name a few that leap to mind.

                      Longer term CC is on a list of quite a few catastrophe's that could kick us in the arse.

                      Part of the problem is the embedded psychological flaw that we put a far greater weight on negative events or the possibility of loss, than we do the positive. There are good evolutionary reasons for this – all the good years mean little if everyone starves during the one year of famine, or that rustle in the bushes turn out to be a predator. Yet when faced with complex technical problems our collective risk management is very prone to leaping to wrong conclusions.

                      But all other things being equal (which they probably won't be) I'd suggest by 2050 we should have CC under control. I'd rate the odds at over 70% – if and only if there is a global consensus on fast tracking advanced next gen nuclear. Absent that the odds drop – my main concern being the increasing economic and social impacts of de-globalisation, the disruption of trade, the return of famine, mass migrations and internecine strife. That would be the perfect storm that would cripple our ability to act on climate change directly and adapt to it's inevitable impact.

                      In short a bumpy ride, but we can choose to avoid the worst pot-holes.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    8 November 2021 at 12:30 am

                    But all other things being equal (which they probably won't be) I'd suggest by 2050 we should have CC under control. I'd rate the odds at over 70% – if and only if there is a global consensus on fast tracking advanced next gen nuclear.

                    Them's good odds, "all other things being equal" and "if and only if there is a global consensus on fast tracking advanced next gen nuclear." But, as you observe, the devil is in the "pot holes", and our easy ride is ending.

                    Nevertheless filled with optimism that I'll see out my days in relative comfort – so lucky to be born when and where I was.

                    “COP26 must be the COP for children,” said UNICEF Executive Director Henrietta Fore. “Climate change is one of the greatest threats facing this generation, with 1 billion children at extremely high risk. Yet, while the outlook is dire, world leaders at COP26 have a significant, time-sensitive opportunity to redirect the terrible path we are on. They can do so by committing to strengthening the resilience of services that children depend upon, and by cutting emissions faster and deeper. The futures of billions of children depend on it.”

                    https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/fact-sheet-cop26-children-and-climate-change

                    https://www.rnz.co.nz/international/pacific-news/454843/growing-numbers-of-children-forced-to-flee-by-climate-change-report

                    You’ve got to accentuate the positive …

  5. Blazer 5
    7 November 2021 at 11:16 am

    Apparantly 25,000 people die of starvation everyday….there appears to be a 'cure' …it's called FOOD.

    Losing 25,000 to Hunger Every Day | United Nations

    • Robert Guyton 5.1
      7 November 2021 at 11:42 am

      Probably had co-morbidities…

    • RedLogix 5.3
      7 November 2021 at 1:26 pm

      Yet at the same time we live in a world that produces roughly 25% more food than we can consume. The problem is clearly one of distribution rather than production.

      The boiler-plate left wing response is to blame capitalism for everything – yet the root cause is poverty something that capitalism has done a remarkable job in reducing. In 1800 almost all of humanity lived in extreme poverty – now after 200 years of capitalism life expectancies have doubled, population growth is slowing and less than 10% of people live in poverty. Indeed the more capitalist a nation is, the more likely it's people are to suffer obesity than starvation. We need a better explanation.

      The answers that on the ground are a good deal more pragmatic and less ideological than we'd like. Things like decent transport, reliable electricity, functioning economies, and rule of law governance. Boring stuff – but transformative.

      • Blazer 5.3.1
        7 November 2021 at 2:08 pm

        'The problem is clearly one of distribution rather than production.'

        affordability not relevant?

        • RedLogix 5.3.1.1
          7 November 2021 at 2:10 pm

          Yes affordability is absolutely relevant – and largely bundled up in the items I mentioned in my last para.

          • Blazer 5.3.1.1.1
            7 November 2021 at 2:52 pm

            So is the answer for so many African countries, where malnutrition is rife to become 'Capitalist'…..or just more Capitalist than they are at present?

            I always thought their access to beneficial capital was something out of their control.

            One would think that 25,000 people dying every day from something that does not need a vaccine ,but could be solved by benevolent intervention would be a big priority.

            • RedLogix 5.3.1.1.1.1
              7 November 2021 at 3:08 pm

              A fine 'so what you're saying' moment there. wink

              Nah – all I'm saying is that if we want to eradicate poverty and hunger (and on current trends we're well on the way to achieving this by the end of this century if not sooner) then smashing capitalism is not the most obvious starting point.

              I'll put this thought out there – the left might do better if it could formulate a constructive model of socialism that was capable of footing it on equal terms with both the energy and innovation of capitalism, and the stability and continuity of conservatism.

              Lot's of attempts have been made at this – and I'd argue it's well overdue we firmly relegated Marx and his fellow travellers to a big fat footnote of history and started thinking about a holistic political economy better adapted to the post-growth world we're heading into. The timing feels good on this.

              • Blazer …
                7 November 2021 at 3:16 pm

                I am very interested in your definition of Capitalism,and expressly where it exists in meaningful form.

                Everywhere I look I see varying degrees of…Socialism.

      • francesca 5.3.2
        7 November 2021 at 2:19 pm

        But the wealth of those capitalist countries is derived to a large part from their capture and control of the resources/labour of other smaller less powerful countries.

        https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2017/jan/14/aid-in-reverse-how-poor-countries-develop-rich-countries

        • RedLogix 5.3.2.1
          7 November 2021 at 2:38 pm

          Yup there is a great deal that can and should be done to enforce greater transparency and trust to global financial systems. That linked article is absolutely on the nail with this – there is every reason to build more fairness into global trade systems at the institutional level.

          Yet arguably the reason why poorer countries are too often the losers in this game is because they have weak governments – prone to corrupt kleptocratic elites, weak institutions and geopolitical considerations that put them on the backfoot in any negotiation.

          So while I'm absolutely in favour of more global multi-lateral action as the article suggests – top down action has it's limits unless also met with the kind of on the ground, human development basics like clean safe water, reliable electricity, education and basic medical care. Only then does a nation have the chance to build the kind of middle class that has sufficient political clout to hold it’s elites to account.

          • Blazer 5.3.2.1.1
            7 November 2021 at 3:06 pm

            'Yet arguably the reason why poorer countries are too often the losers in this game is because they have weak governments – prone to corrupt kleptocratic elites, weak institutions and geopolitical considerations that put them on the backfoot in any negotiation.'

            'Arguably is right!

            Tokenism by the worlds economic powers,whose corporations actively seek out resources and labour exploitation for their own shareholders profit ,definately doesn't help alleviate poverty.

            The 2plus trillion dollars the U.S 'spent' on Afghanistan ,largely went into the pockets of their own multi nationals and look at the outcome-a giant leap backwards .

            Millionaire western politicians doing the bidding of billionaire donors.

            • RedLogix 5.3.2.1.1.1
              7 November 2021 at 3:45 pm

              I posted to this in more detail elsewhere but in essence I see capitalism (with a little 'c') as little more than a set of economic tools coupled with one important social idea. (It's when it tips into the neo-liberal's singular insistence that markets can be the only measure of value that it becomes an ideology.)

              In brief the economic tools were things like fractional reserve lending (that greatly expanded money supply), double entry book-keeping (that formalised business accounts) and the rules of contract law. This isn't exhaustive but gives a sense of what I mean – think of them as commercial technologies that enabled modern business to exist.

              The other big idea was that of private property. It's so important that Marx was intuitively drawn to attack it – even if he was proven utterly wrong on this. Private property creates both incentives and the continuity to let economies grow.

              And in the 1600's when capitalism was being invented – grow they needed to do – because while the historic record speaks to the events and lives of a tiny minority of the elites, the vast majority of people lived lives of extreme poverty none of us moderns would tolerate for more than a few days, weeks at most.

              What we can immediately recognise is that while remarkably successful at enabling human production and development – none of these tools or ideas innately spoke to the subsequent problem of distribution. And this is where the socialist impulse has played a vital moderating role. As you say socialism is everywhere.

              The other days I spoke to a vision of a world in which say 9b humans lived fully upper middle class lives by say the end of this century. (This is not so crazy – if my grandfather who was born in 1870 was shown a video of my daily life in 2021 he would be astonished beyond all belief.) It's my sense that getting there is going to require the harnessing of human innovation, a just distribution and stable social structures – each of these drawing on all three of our existing economic modes.

              But to achieve this merger we need one more radical transformative idea.

              • Blazer …
                7 November 2021 at 4:21 pm

                Thank you.

                You appear to give Capitalism alot of credit I don't believe it deserves.

                The core premise is…who creates and gets first use of created capital.

                Its impossible to deny that it is only a small,select elite(born to rule) who have structured society on the cornerstone of compounding interest on debt.

                You allude to 'neo-liberalism' as a replacement/excuse for pure Capitalism.

                This standard of modern day living you are enamoured with, relies on infinite growth and material acquisition as a worthy goal for aspiration.

                We know that ,today a tiny % of the worlds population control 90% of the worlds wealth.

                We also know that to enforce any ideology dominant military power is required.

                Free markets,laissez faire capitalism and all the propaganda associated with them(trickle down etc)are an illusion.

                That bastion of freedom,democracy and supposedly Capitalism that you admire-the U.S.A empire is maintained by domination of financial markets and military might.

                This is not a sustainable regime.

                As an aside your belief that freedom from hunger will be alleviated before the end of this century,is not very comforting…its 2021,so @25,000 deaths a day times 365 days x 78 years is a hell of alot of…'collateral damage.

                • RedLogix …
                  7 November 2021 at 4:37 pm

                  You appear to give Capitalism alot of credit I don’t believe it deserves.

                  Only if you ignore everything else I’ve written to this on this theme.

                  relies on infinite growth and material acquisition as a worthy goal for aspiration.

                  Nowhere is there a rule that says capitalism relies on infinite growth. That's a strawman argument. It's fair to say it's well adapted to growth, but then we can point to Japan which has experienced at least two decades of post-growth see that capitalism has adapted to this as well.

                  You allude to 'neo-liberalism' as a replacement/excuse for pure Capitalism.

                  Neo-liberalism is what happens when you go too far with capitalism. There is a close parallel with what happens when you take socialism too far and it degenerates into communism. Or you take good ideas around social justice and it becomes the cult of woke. Or sane ideas around ethnic identity and pervert them into racial supremacy.

                  Getting a sense of where the boundaries lie is important.

                  • Blazer …
                    7 November 2021 at 5:04 pm

                    Capitalism does not seem to have a hard set of 'rules' regardless.

                    Its merits are a debate that can never be resolved.

                    ', how quickly a zero-growth economy is achieved, and calls on natural capital globally peak and then decline, depends upon three closely related phenomena: how rapidly global population stabilizes, how rapidly incomes among the global poor rise, and the rate at which resource-sparing technological change occurs.'

                    Does Capitalism Require Endless Growth? | The Breakthrough Institute

                    • RedLogix …
                      7 November 2021 at 5:17 pm

                      Breakthrough Institute are an interesting group and I've read a fair bit of their material in the past year or two. The article you reference is a good one and underlines my assertion that the left really needs to get over not only Marx, but Malthus as well. Oddly enough I was idly contemplating a post along those just those lines but hesitated at how to present it without pointlessly enraging some people here.

                  • Blazer …
                    7 November 2021 at 6:56 pm

                    @RL-I just wish the 'right' would get over their 2 options re geo politics-

                    1-we will bomb you back to the…Stone Age.

                    2-we will make your economy…scream.

                    All done in the best possible…taste…naturellement.

                    • RedLogix …
                      7 November 2021 at 7:51 pm

                      I get it – nowhere have I presented our history as anything like ideal. The US have – like all superpowers – behaved quite ruthlessly at various times. In a world where nation states are still the top social order and lacking any global authority to constrain them – one will usually dominate.

                      What we get to hope for is the least tyrannical one. And of all the realistic alternatives the post WW2 period might have offered – the US was probably the best bet.

          • francesca 5.3.2.1.2
            7 November 2021 at 3:36 pm

            Red , you must be aware , in Latin America for instance that any govt that has attempted these things tends to get very promptly regime changed

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 5.3.3
        7 November 2021 at 4:13 pm

        "… In 1800 almost all of humanity lived in extreme poverty – now after 200 years of capitalism life expectancies have doubled…"

        Since when was capitalism only introduced 200 years ago!? The timing sounds much more like the industrial revolution doesn't it?

        • RedLogix 5.3.3.1
          7 November 2021 at 4:22 pm

          Good question – the timeline I have in mind is that capitalism slowly emerged out of the Renaissance era (alongside a similar flourishing in the science domain) in the 15th and 16th centuries.

          But it took another few hundred years until roughly the 1840's when the first round of globalisation really took off that we started to see the industrial revolution have it's huge impact on our daily lives. And even by 1900 most people were still very poor indeed, it's only the post-WW2 period that has seen modernity really spread out across the majority of humanity.

          I accept this is a very low resolution presentation – and there is lots of opportunity to parse the precedents and details – but for the purposes of this conversation it's what I have in mind when I say 'capitalism'.

    • Sabine 5.4
      7 November 2021 at 4:27 pm

      We can't feed poor people for free, they might feel entitled……NZGovt/WINZ.

  6. higherstandard 6
    7 November 2021 at 12:22 pm

    While you did post a hypocritical partisan load of bile I don't for one minute condone some of the responses to your post but it could be said you asked for it.

    [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.]

    • weka 6.1
      7 November 2021 at 12:29 pm

      do you want the day off? Because while I appreciated the political point you are trying to make there, yours was the only abusive response so it’s hard to not be thinking you are still flaming.

  7. Anne 7
    7 November 2021 at 3:06 pm

    Congratulations to Counties Manukau!

    Full credit to the leaders of both Maori and Pacifica. This region has some of the poorest and most marginalised people in the country, so for it to reach nearly 90% ahead of many other regions means that the effort of so many in the region has been magnificent:

    @rarahsobson

    Counties Manukau DHB has 192 first doses to go to hit 90 percent. Sitting at 80 percent fully vaccinated. Auckland DHB 95 percent first dose, 87 percent fully vaccinated. Waitematā is 92 percent first dose, 83 percent fully vaccinated.

    • bwaghorn 7.2
      7 November 2021 at 3:49 pm

      Time to let them free then, instead of punishing them, as they've got to 90% , just move to a system of no entry to low vaccine areas .

      • weka 7.2.1
        7 November 2021 at 4:01 pm

        they need 90% double not single.

        • bwaghorn 7.2.1.1
          7 November 2021 at 5:20 pm

          Fair enough, just think this passport system is doomed to fail , they are already causing unintended consequences like a couple of events my youngster would have been in involved being canceled due to volunteers not willing to police the gates checking them , and just uncertainty on how it's going to operate.

          • solkta 7.2.1.1.1
            7 November 2021 at 5:29 pm

            Have you got a better idea? Now else can you balance rights to refuse medical treatment with rights to public safety?

            • bwaghorn 7.2.1.1.1.1
              7 November 2021 at 6:10 pm

              Broad brush is the only way

              Red light the the low % vaccinated areas, ie nortland ,westcoast.

              Passports are going to be un applicable as an internal method,

              Ok for air travel though.

              • bwaghorn …
                7 November 2021 at 6:17 pm

                Un policable!!! Fucking auto correct

              • solkta …
                7 November 2021 at 8:54 pm

                The traffic light system is only designed to work with passports. Without the passport thing you are stuck with the levels we have now. That doesn't balance out the conflicting rights.

                • bwaghorn …
                  8 November 2021 at 6:01 am

                  You cant expect Joe n Jill public to police passports.

                  The unvaccinated will have to protect them selves.

                  • Graeme …
                    8 November 2021 at 7:06 am

                    We expect Joe n Jill publican to police underage drinking in their premises, no different to vaccination status. It'll really be the police who do the policing though, quiet walk through by the force and check a few certificates / passports. Publican will probably wear it just like they do for underage.

                    Talking to a neighbouring publican about this and he's not worried about it, he sees it as an opportunity to get rid of his barflies, says there's a very strong correlation.

                    • bwaghorn …
                      8 November 2021 at 5:42 pm

                      I'm not concerned about pubs ,they can hire an orc or 2 to police the doors!!

                      It's my kids event that's been canned(I'm sure it wont be the only on in nz) because the organizers dont want to put the lions club who run the gate to face possible abuse from antis.

                  • solkta …
                    8 November 2021 at 7:22 am

                    I am not really concerned about protecting the unvaccinated, they have made their choice. Rather it is protecting everybody else from their selfishness both in terms of spreading covid and tying up hospital beds that concerns me. Yes policing the passports will be problematic but i can't see a better way forward.

    • Patricia Bremner 7.3
      7 November 2021 at 4:20 pm

      smileyGreat effort.

  8. Pete 8
    7 November 2021 at 7:44 pm

    People don't like being told what to do, especially by a Government led by Jacinda Ardern. The government should have come out at the outset and said "Don't get vaccinated."

    All the contrarians would have rushed to get vaccinated. Then the government could have announced, "Just kidding, get jabbed."

    • observer 8.1
      7 November 2021 at 9:28 pm

      It's a good joke, and yes, there are some contrarians that are that stupid.

      But (serious hat on) our divisions on vaccination are nowhere near those of some other countries. Every single MP is vaccinated (first dose or second). Across the country there are (e.g.) mayors who are anti-Ardern on many other issues, but encouraging their communities to get vaccinated. From Hone to Hosking, it's consistent across the range of political opinion.

      People ranting like Coutts and Gunn make for juicy headlines, but it doesn't alter arithmetic. The antis are a tiny minority.

  9. Grafton Gully 9
    7 November 2021 at 8:25 pm

    This late spring afternoon I unwrapped the carefully folded and labelled bean seeds my friend gave me weeks ago. She teases me. Seven white shiny seeds pressed into moist dark soil. Evenly spaced with three tall bamboo stakes in the tub to climb on.

    • Blazer 9.2
      7 November 2021 at 9:31 pm

      Hope you have better luck than me.

      I planted some baked beans a number of weeks ago and still….nothing.cheeky

      • Shanreagh 9.2.1
        7 November 2021 at 11:32 pm

        I think you take them out of the tin first Blazer and why waste a tin doing that? winkI'd just eat them if I were you.

        Grafton Gully might give you some of theirs….I still have some borlotti beans to plant.

  10. Joe90 10
    7 November 2021 at 10:50 pm

    There's a little Beruit vibe around these parts. Retired, terrified handy dog and her elderly scared witless heading dog friend say can you lot fuck off with your stinking fireworks.

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