Open mike 08/06/2016

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, June 8th, 2016 - 124 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

124 comments on “Open mike 08/06/2016 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Paul 1
    8 June 2016 at 6:16 am

    Another day in John Key’s neo-liberal nightmare.
    We have become a cruel, selfish, uncaring and selfish nation under his wretched leadership.

    ‘Wide range of Nelson families struggling, agencies say.
    Middle-income families in Nelson, as well as those on low incomes, are struggling to make ends meet, a Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) meeting has heard.
    The group held a post-Budget meeting in Nelson, where it was revealed that local agencies, from the Nelson Food Bank to the Salvation Army, have reported increased cases of hardship among a wider range of families.
    The agencies said emerging trends included that the cost of housing was now more than 50 percent of total income for an increasing number of families, the burden of debt repayment was growing, and the cost of food was also becoming an increasing burden for families.
    More families were seeking assistance through grants for items such as power bills, firewood and child car seats, they said.
    Local schools were also noticing the consequences.
    Stoke School – New Zealand’s second oldest school, in the suburb between Nelson city and Richmond township – runs a daily breakfast club, where up to 70 students get their first meal of the day….’

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/regional/305835/families-in-nelson-struggling-to-make-ends-meet

    • Paul 1.1
      8 June 2016 at 7:41 am

      Another day in John Key’s neo-liberal nightmare.
      We have become a cruel, selfish, uncaring and selfish nation under his wretched leadership.Worsening pay and conditions

      http://i.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/80819674/Farm-worker-advert-seeks-person-to-work-18-days-in-a-row

      • srylands 1.1.1
        8 June 2016 at 9:36 am

        One ad for a poorly paid job = ‘worsening pay and conditions’?

        Under the current Government nominal wages seem to be growing much faster than CPI:

        http://www.tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/wages

        • framu 1.1.1.1
          8 June 2016 at 10:01 am

          whats the average vs median?

          touting an increase using averages is misleading – and you know it

          • Bob 1.1.1.1.1
            8 June 2016 at 2:39 pm

            Here you go:

            Year 2000 median income:
            Gov Transfers: $231
            Total income: $449.50
            Hourly rate: $13.55

            2009 median income:
            Gov Transfers: $255 (DOWN $39.04 in real terms)
            Total income: $537 (DOWN $35.18 in real terms)
            Hourly rate: $17.25 (UP $1.45 in real terms)

            2015 median income:
            Gov Transfers: $315 (UP $35.55 in real terms)
            Total income: $621 (UP $32.51 in real terms)
            Hourly rate: $22.83 (UP $2.34 in real terms)

            So benefits, income and hourly rates all up under this Government, while under the previous Government, unless you were in full time employment you just kept going backwards.
            Don’t believe the bullshit the likes of Paul spin, check the numbers for yourself:
            2000
            2009
            2015
            CPI Calculator

            • framu 1.1.1.1.1.1
              8 June 2016 at 3:08 pm

              gov transfers is WFF yes?

              • Bob …
                8 June 2016 at 3:37 pm

                Gov Transfers is Benefits, Pension, Housing supplements etc. Any income from the Government. I am not sure if WFF is included in this.

              • Bob …
                8 June 2016 at 5:22 pm

                Found it:
                “Government transfers: income from benefits, working for families tax credits, paid parental leave, student allowances, ACC payments, New Zealand Superannuation, and veteran’s and war pensions.”

            • Expat 1.1.1.1.1.2
              8 June 2016 at 6:37 pm

              Yet fewer are able to buy their own home, at least most could afford to buy their own home 10 years ago, so the info has little relativity.

              It would also appear that the high cost of renting is not included in the CPI.

              And there are more over 65’s receiving the pension, ie: govt transfers.

              Relativity……….

              And lets not forget that NZ has the lowest avg incomes and the highest CPI in the OECD.

              • Bob …
                9 June 2016 at 9:10 am

                “And lets not forget that NZ has the lowest avg incomes and the highest CPI in the OECD.”
                Clearly based on the figures above this has improved under National after declining under Labour, I am simply pointing out that the rhetoric around National cutting benefits and pushing down wages simply doesn’t stand up to reality.

                “It would also appear that the high cost of renting is not included in the CPI”
                Housing is included in the CPI, but the CPI is calculated on a nationwide basis, not just an Auckland centric basis.
                Also, your assertion that “at least most could afford to buy their own home 10 years ago” shows how blinkered your views are. Auckland was already unaffordable by 2006, have a look a Figure 4 on page 6 here: http://nzinitiative.org.nz/site/nzinitiative/Priced%20out.pdf house prices have been skyrocketing since 2003, this is not a new problem.

        • Draco T Bastard 1.1.1.2
          8 June 2016 at 10:15 am

          Dude, those sorts of farming job adverts are a daily occurrence and have been for years.

        • Paul 1.1.1.3
          8 June 2016 at 5:01 pm

          A Tory shill prepared to defend the indefensible – a government that does not house its citizens.
          Your views are symptomatic of the greed, selfishness and cruelty that has seeped into those infected by the cult of neo-liberalism.

    • Nessalt 1.2
      8 June 2016 at 10:20 am

      a press release by CPAG run by red radio? chicken little.

      it’s all starting to be like the boy who cried wolf. entirely anecdotal as to the “Widespread” nature of the crises and running counter to the stats and science of it.

      Poverty is decreasing, not increasing. maybe when you provide a free lunch, you get free loaders.

  2. Paul 2
    8 June 2016 at 6:20 am

    ‘Max Key – know me before judging me.’

    Ok. So what do we find out.

    ‘Key doesn’t talk too much about politics except to say he has “similar views” to his father, ‘

    OK, I know enough.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11652412

    • mary_a 2.1
      8 June 2016 at 9:23 am

      Thanks for your posts today Paul (1), (1.1),(2) … always informative and thought provoking.

      Re the Max Key “news” item in today’s NZH. Seems msm is putting him out there at least a couple of times each week now, to keep him (and his Papa J’s family) in the public eye. Auditioning for the next “Bachelor” perhaps (sarc)??

      But really who gives a big rat’s backside, what the snotty nosed little prat is up to?

      Like father, like son it seems. Quite classless and crass!

      • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1
        8 June 2016 at 10:16 am

        But really who gives a big rat’s backside, what the snotty nosed little prat is up to?

        Yep, it’s not news. What it is is the sycophancy of the MSM as it kowtows to the rich.

      • Chris 2.1.2
        8 June 2016 at 11:10 am

        I don’t give a rat’s arse, either, but it’s still pretty interesting. The real Max Key? Yeah, it’s the real Max Key, all right. Un-bloody-believable. What about that blonde hair? Or that shot on the trampoline? Hey, hey it’s Max!!! It’s blinkin’ fantastic. Says a lot.

        http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv-radio/80833058/max-key-talks-music-money-and-public-profile

        • whispering kate 2.1.2.1
          8 June 2016 at 4:35 pm

          Yes, the kids are becoming more strange and weird lately, wasn’t impressed with his underdaks on show, the latest shot with the blonded hair was plain creepy and the daughter’s art is definitely weird and strange and her preference for vivid pink hair. Must be what they are eating!! Its the last thing we need shoved in our faces, surely there are better things that can be published.

          • mary_a 2.1.2.1.1
            8 June 2016 at 6:04 pm

            Correct whispering Kate (2.1.2.1) … an interesting point about the daughter is that she also enjoys being the centre of attention. If you notice, she is the sole focus of her “art.”

            Must be a character fault from the father’s side … always seeking positive attention. Something not right there!

      • Johan 2.1.3
        8 June 2016 at 3:54 pm

        To mary_a: This is just another PR stunt by MSM to bolster and soften the image of John Key. Instead of seeing him as a uncaring prick to many New Zealanders, we now see stories like, ” its a shame that the in-laws never saw the kids grow up”.

    • Psych nurse 2.2
      8 June 2016 at 10:32 am

      You know they’re in trouble when they trot him out as diversion.

  3. vto 3
    8 June 2016 at 6:46 am

    Was curious to hear on the tele last night on the programme “why am I” which covered the infamous longitudinal study of about 1,000 Dunedin people that they have been shunned over the finding that when it comes to domestic violence the violence is perpetrated in equal numbers by women. Said that various vested groups didn’t want to know about it.

    My my.

    Doesn’t that have some implications.

    Completing not surprising to me. Seems domestic violence is a female problem equally, which is concerning given the influence mothers have on young ones and their life outcomes.

    Time to reflect, women, on such.

    Unless this famous and revered Dunedin study is full of shit.

    • Sabine 3.1
      8 June 2016 at 7:39 am

      Can you link to the study?

      cheers

    • Puckish Rogue 3.2
      8 June 2016 at 8:19 am

      Infamous?

    • mauī 3.3
      8 June 2016 at 8:51 am

      You saw something that means you’ll be sexist for another 20 years, oh goodie.

      • vto 3.3.1
        8 June 2016 at 9:00 am

        lol, the sexism was also shown up in the data and papers as being exhibited against men… no surprises there either… you seem to be part of that club

        funny that that is all you have to say on the matter

        best get re-thinking – line yourself up with the evidence

        • weka 3.3.1.1
          8 June 2016 at 9:03 am

          the sexism was also shown up in the data and papers as being exhibited against men…

          Cite or it didn’t happen and I get to call you deceitful for the rest of the day.

          edit, And just to make it easy, the citation now needs to be actual data and papers, and those need to demonstrate that what the gendered violence is against men (so that’s two distinct things).

          • Colonial Viper 3.3.1.1.1
            8 June 2016 at 9:22 am

            Let’s just start with what the documentary said.

            • weka 3.3.1.1.1.1
              8 June 2016 at 11:27 am

              By all means. But experience (lots) with vto on a range of topics informs me that he often misrepresents what he has seen and heard on tv/radio, drops comments like the one today that are inflammatory by design and then won’t back up his claims.

              No-one I know disputes that women can be violent towards men.

              Most people who are either involved in violence prevention or have read the research and been involved in informed debate don’t believe that men and women are equally violent in the same ways.

              They instead tend to break down the reasons for violence, and the kinds of violence being done.

              Which doesn’t mean that women never beat or murder men. But likewise most extreme violence is done by men against women (or others perceived as weaker eg children), and most violence by women against men is self defense.

              This doesn’t make women as a class better than men as a class.

              It just means that we need to address the different kinds of violences in different ways by understanding them as gendered instead of pretending that they’re each as bad as each other and this missing the actual dynamics and what can be done.

          • RedLogix 3.3.1.1.2
            8 June 2016 at 9:54 am

            https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/170018.pdf

            It’s dated 1999 so it comes from the early part of the study and therefore it doesn’t cover what happens in mid-life. I don’t have time right now to do an exhaustive search for anything later, but the publications page is here:

            http://dunedinstudy.otago.ac.nz/publications

            Emphatically I don’t want to get drawn into a positional debate, except to note that the issue is probably more complex than we often like to think.

            • Colonial Viper 3.3.1.1.2.1
              8 June 2016 at 10:34 am

              Holy crap…in this phase of the study almost half of relationships were violent to some degree…male perps of partner violence are 13x more likely to suffer mental health disorders than non perpetrators…if a relationship is violent then both people in the partnership tend to inflict violence on each other…but the woman suffers more severe physical injuries.

              One of the chart makes it clear that there are more women perpetrators of partner violence than male perpetrators, and that there are more male victims of partner violence, than female victims. Sometimes, a lot more. (p4 of the pdf).

              • mpledger …
                8 June 2016 at 12:08 pm

                It’s a cohort study so, from the studies I could see, the people were 21 and 26 years old when asked about domestic violence and very few were married. These are the ages of people who are trying out relationships and learning about people – they are not representative of all NZers in relationships.

                In contrast, the same respondents were asked what family violence between parents they had witnessed. Of those that had 55% said their father was the only source, 34% said both mother and father and 16% said mother only (IIRC).

            • weka 3.3.1.1.2.2
              8 June 2016 at 11:31 am

              I don’t have time today to either watch the tv programme, or follow other people’s links and try and figure out what they are pointing to. I will say that every conversation I have been in where someone like vto is running the line that women are just as violent as men, when the evidence actually gets presented we see that the violences and why they happen are gendered and that there are very good reasons for that, and that in fact women aren’t as violent as men (but can be).

              I did read some of the Dunedin Study questionaire earlier this morning and I’m going to make an educated guess that what we will find is the same as in every other conversation. That there are gendered differences we should pay attention to, and that vto has flame baited Open Mike into a conversation without any actual fucking evidence and that he is probably misleading readers in how he presented what the doco said.

              • Colonial Viper …
                8 June 2016 at 11:41 am

                You asked for more scientific links and RL provided them.

                Read my brief points from that pdf.

                In phase 21 of the Dunedin study more females perpetrate partner violence than men, and more men are victims of partner violence than women. Women suffer the worst injuries from partner violence however. Men who perpetrate partner violence are generally very screwed up themselves, mental health issues (affecting over 80% of male perps), drug use and abuse etc.

                This is simply NZ data however; it may not apply internationally to other countries.

                • weka …
                  8 June 2016 at 11:55 am

                  I don’t have time today to be following people’s links and trying to get what they are inferring from them. If people want to cut and paste and make comment in context I’ll read that.

                  I didn’t ask for more scientific links, I asked vto to back up what he has said, because he has a now significant history on ts of making claims of things he has seen on tv/radio and when I go check them out the thing he is referring to isn’t as he claimed.

                  In phase 21 of the Dunedin study more females perpetrate partner violence than men, and more men are victims of partner violence than women. Women suffer the worst injuries from partner violence however. Men who perpetrate partner violence are generally very screwed up themselves, mental health issues (affecting over 80% of male perps), drug use and abuse etc.

                  Thanks for the summary. I just don’t think that is what vto was saying.

                  • greywarshark …
                    8 June 2016 at 12:38 pm

                    What constitutes violence is a key question here, levels differ. The catchall word violence can not go undifferentiated in a serious study.
                    A frustrated woman whose screwed up partner has spent all their food money on drinks or drugs might slap his face. That’s a tick for violence. The man slaps her back and breaks her nose. That’s also a tick for violence. But the degree is different.

                    And sometimes the reverse situation will happen. The woman is a lush and drunk or gambled all the money, again, and violence erupts. These people are living degraded lives, and any findings about them cannot be applied across society.

                    It has been pointed out that the men are often mental cases. But the women who live with them must also be under mental distress too, they would not be drawn to such a person if they weren’t under the effects of some mental debilitating condition.

                    How people behave whose lives have fallen apart and who have lost their sense of self and ability to cope should not be put into a straight comparison and classification with the majority, those still living and trying to make a working and harmonious relationship in everyday society.
                    edited

                    • Rosemary McDonald …
                      8 June 2016 at 5:40 pm

                      @greywarshark

                      “It has been pointed out that the men are often mental cases. But the women who live with them must also be under mental distress too, they would not be drawn to such a person if they weren’t under the effects of some mental debilitating condition.”

                      You may (or may not) want to have a look at what you wrote there.

                      “Mental cases”, like “head cases” or “nut cases” are no longer acceptable terms for those suffering from various forms of mental illness.

                      To say that a person was “under the effects of some mental debilitating condition” if drawn to a “mental case”….well, it could very well be that the mental illness developed over time (as illnesses do), or, the mental illness was transient and not apparent when the relationship started. It could very well be that there is actual love and commitment that transcends the real or perceived risks of being close to a person with a mental illness.

                      Instead of judging, of making rather unfortunate generalisations about the character or mental health of someone who is ‘drawn’ to someone with a mental illness, we should be demanding that the government address the appalling standard of care for those battling mental health issues.

                      Or not.

                    • greywarshark …
                      8 June 2016 at 5:51 pm

                      It’s really hard to look at the really bad problems in society and face them with open eyes when one has to constantly tiptoe around the narrow language that PC attitudes force on the language and description. Some people are mental cases, sad as their situation may be, and to acknowledge that is to get to the point and understand it. And try to help. Naming something does not mean that their difficulty should be dismissed, passed over. And speaking correctly can be just a show of caring and doing things right.

        • Bill 3.3.1.2
          8 June 2016 at 10:04 am

          @vto. Violence, not sexism, can be directed at men. That’s an important distinction and not mere semantics.

          Depending on the definition of ‘violence’ for the study, I’m not surprised that there may be a 50/50 split. What I’d be interested in is the comparative incidences of quite serious physical violence and also what the study has to say about systemic barriers to escaping violence as they’ve defined it.

          And that’s my entire contribution for today. Just saying, lest someone has it in their mind to get in to some argument that’s just a long drawn out finger pointing piece of shite.

          • Draco T Bastard 3.3.1.2.1
            8 June 2016 at 10:20 am

            Violence, not sexism, can be directed at men. That’s an important distinction and not mere semantics.

            So, what you’re saying is that women can’t be sexist?

            Yeah, I think I’ll call that a load of bollocks.

            • Bill 3.3.1.2.1.1
              8 June 2016 at 11:04 am

              You understand the specific cultural and systemic roots/power dynamics that give rise to sexism – the idea that men are superior to women, yes? You understand that it’s entirely on a par with the different but no less specific cultural and systemic roots/power dynamics that give rise to racism – the idea that there is a white race that is superior to all others, yes?

              And so you understand that given the specific historical or cultural contexts that define those things, that it’s no more possible for a black man to be racist towards a white man than it is for a woman to be sexist towards a man, yes?

              And yet you call ‘bollocks’ on it all. Oh well.

              And now I really do need to kill teh net and get on with shit. Have a good one.

              • theJonses …
                8 June 2016 at 5:06 pm

                That is complete bollocks in my opinion Bill. Sexism is discrimination based on sex, racism is discrimination based on ethnicity. End of story.

                The idea that one sex or race cannot be sexist or racist is in itself a sexist and racist point of view.

                The idea that at some point in time due to the current perceived cultural conditions of a civilization a certain race/sex gets the right to discriminate against other races/sexes without being labeled a sexist or racist is a ludicrous assertion.

                Think about it….

      • weka 3.3.2
        8 June 2016 at 9:01 am

        Heh, mauī. I’m just trying to figure out if I can be bothered yet again fact checking another one of vto’s stories and finding out that yet again it’s not as he represents it. I’m guessing that he thinks that yelling at someone is the same as choking or strangling them (yes vto, I’ve read some of the Dunedin Study questionaire), and that the reasons why people are violent is immaterial (eg whether someone is acting in self defense or not).

        • Colonial Viper 3.3.2.1
          8 June 2016 at 9:26 am

          Verbal and emotional abuse is different to physical abuse, that is true. The long term harm done to a victim’s self esteem and future outlook is not necessarily any less powerful however.

          Regardless, I’ll be interested to hear if this study is revealing if the phenomena of domestic abuse is more complex than is currently accepted.

          • weka 3.3.2.1.1
            8 June 2016 at 11:38 am

            “The long term harm done to a victim’s self esteem and future outlook is not necessarily any less powerful however.”

            I just think it’s better to see the situations on their own terms and addressing them thus. Trying to compare them to make out that they are the same or similar so as to somehow make men feel less hurt or responsible or to blame (which is what vto does IMO) actually works against men’s needs being addressed.

            There is no reason why the needs of men who are victimised can’t be addressed by the same politics that addresses women and other people who are victimised. But there is a definite problem when we are gender blind to dynamics like when a woman’s only defense is verbal and emotional abuse in a relationship where she is being physically beaten. This doesn’t make men as a class evil, it just acknowledges that there are dynamics happening here that need to be taken into account. The other big problem IMO is where there is no acceptance of structural factors eg sexism, or the way many men are socialised into violence.

            • marty mars 3.3.2.1.1.1
              8 June 2016 at 8:08 pm

              Personally I find many of the positions men take to ‘compare’ disingenous. It really seems like avoidance to me not some awakening to help others. It is similar to the gnats line that Labour did it too imo.

    • RedLogix 3.4
      8 June 2016 at 9:44 am

      Yes we got to see this on Australian SBS a month back. Both my partner and I were riveted by it.

      http://thestandard.org.nz/john-oliver-scientific-studies-or-why-media-are-so-useless-at-it/#comment-1176928

      The entire series is extremely interesting … each episode covers four or five major findings that all have implications for a lot of the topics we often debate here.

      While no single data study or data point is ever conclusive by itself … there are many good reasons to pay attention to the remarkably wide range of fresh insights and ideas that have come from this unique and widely respected study.

      • vto 3.4.1
        8 June 2016 at 10:10 am

        Yes it is for me too the most riveting thing on the tele at the moment..

        Very fascinating..

        and seems like it will lead to many many changes in our understanding of “why we are” – in an unprecedented number of aspects, not just the one aspect I mentioned above.

        highly recommended

    • The New Student 3.5
      8 June 2016 at 7:49 pm

      My my, how smug can one get? Nauseating and completely unnecessary for such a serious issue.

  4. Paul 4
    8 June 2016 at 6:49 am

    Another tool of the elite.
    Hillary Clinton speaks about inequality while wearing $17,000 Armani jacket

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11652433

    Brilliant cartoon about privilege.
    Maybe Hilary Clinton or Max Key could read it.
    http://thewireless.co.nz/articles/the-pencilsword-on-a-plate

    • Puckish Rogue 4.1
      8 June 2016 at 8:26 am

      Comparing Key and Little vs Trump and Clinton which country do you think has the better deal

      I’m curious because I think NZ has the better deal yet the USA, with a much larger population base has thrown up those two.

      • framu 4.1.1
        8 June 2016 at 10:16 am

        i doubt the US’ pop base has much to do with who gets the nod from dem and gop

        • Puckish Rogue 4.1.1.1
          8 June 2016 at 10:35 am

          No but you would have thought the USA could come up with something better then that

    • Tarquin 4.2
      8 June 2016 at 2:32 pm

      Hillary Clinton doing the old “Metiria Turei ” trick?

  5. Sabine 5
    8 June 2016 at 7:04 am

    Ms. Bennett lied to the PM. Oh dear!
    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1606/S00032/correction.htm

    Quote: In parliament on Tuesday, Labour’s Phil Twyford asked Ms Bennett, the social housing minister, whether she was responsible for the advice given to the prime minister.

    “Yes. I told the prime minister that the ministry of social development was working in conjunction with NGOS, including the Salvation Army, to reach out to homeless people to see if they could offer assistance,” she replied.

    Ms Bennett said she hadn’t been clear enough that MSD “was not actively with the Salvation Army”.

    Mr Twyford asked her why she hadn’t apologise for “misusing the good name of the Salvation Army”.

    Ms Bennett didn’t answer directly but said a number of NGOs had visited homeless people last week and most didn’t want help.” Quote End

    • Paul 5.1
      8 June 2016 at 7:11 am

      Deceiving the PM.
      That won’t do

    • David H 5.2
      8 June 2016 at 9:17 am

      Unfortunately the serial Liar that is our PM, couldn’t give a Rat’s Arse about a little dishonesty…

    • NZJester 5.3
      8 June 2016 at 9:21 am

      Yet again Shonkey has forced an underling to take responsibility for his words that have been proven a lie. She also needs to learn that there is a big difference between not wanting help and being wary of the intentions of those strangers offering it. That is something that all the privileged ministers need to learn.
      The NGOs need to earn the trust of the homeless who have been taught under this government that nothing comes for free and so are wondering what those NGOs want from them in return. Some simply do not want to be back on the radar of MSD and be swamped in their depressing paperwork and compulsory seminars.

    • ianmac 5.4
      8 June 2016 at 9:24 am

      Maybe protecting Key so that he doesn’t have to lie?

  6. Robert Guyton 6
    8 June 2016 at 7:07 am

    “Outright deceit”
    Winston Peters on National’s asset sales slush fund.
    He’s good with words, is Winston.
    Deceit. Deceitful. Deceive. Deception.
    No one likes to be deceived.

  7. Paul 7
    8 June 2016 at 7:22 am

    We need a better government.
    One that serves its citizens , not the ‘market’ and transnational corporations.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/305837/skycity-centre-steel-jobs-go-to-thailand

    • srylands 7.1
      8 June 2016 at 9:52 am

      So what do you suggest? We have a trade agreement with Thailand, negotiated and implemented by the last Labour Government.

      Do you think the Government should rescind the agreement and force business to source steel in New Zealand? If not what?

      Steel is struggling everywhere. It is in decline in Australia and is about to go almost completely from Britain with the impending closure of the last big steel works at Port Talbot.

      As we are seeing in this instance steel fabrication is now becoming uncompetitive in both NZ and Australia.

      Unless you want to turn the country into a fossil, there is no alternative. Is it Labour Party policy to rescind the trade agreement with Thailand? No, thought not. In which case a change of government is not going to change anything here.

      • save nz 7.1.1
        8 June 2016 at 10:20 am

        Germany’s focus on long term strategy, vocational training, government investment, focus on quality, and family run and community based manufacturing is part of it’s strategy.

        http://www.theguardian.com/global/2016/mar/30/the-uk-could-learn-a-lot-from-germanys-long-term-industrial-strategy

      • Draco T Bastard 7.1.2
        8 June 2016 at 10:29 am

        Unless you want to turn the country into a fossil, there is no alternative.

        Considering the quality of the steel coming from the cheap places it’s more likely to turn us dead from collapsed roads, bridges and buildings.

        And the reality is that if we want to develop our economy then we need to produce what we use here.

        Oh, and, of course, the simple fact that steel made in Asia really isn’t any cheaper than steel made here. It physically cannot be.

      • Stuart Munro 7.1.3
        8 June 2016 at 12:03 pm

        No reason not to do what China did to Fonterra milk powder – make the steel producers sort it out before they can sell their product here.

  9. Paul 9
    8 June 2016 at 7:32 am

    Rock star economy.
    ‘Reserve Bank data shows dairy sector debt has gone from almost $29 billion in 2009 to $40 billion.’

    http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11652362

    • NZJester 9.1
      8 June 2016 at 9:29 am

      This is a Rock star economy.
      Unfortunately the the kind of rock stars it is emulating are the kind who like spending their money faster than they are earning it and dumping loads of money on vanity projects and their fair weather friends.

  10. Paul 10
    8 June 2016 at 7:36 am

    Brighter future.
    Debt.

    ‘New Zealanders officially have around $15.7 billion in consumer debt although one money expert says it’s actually much higher than that.
    Retirement Commissioner Diane Maxwell says Reserve Bank figures don’t cover debt owed to utility companies, councils, pay day lenders, mobile truck shops and the government for unpaid child support.
    Adding those in could boost consumer debt levels by another $2.4 billion.’

    http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11652214

    • save nz 10.1
      8 June 2016 at 10:12 am

      As well as domestic debt – we also need to focus on government debt in the same context.

      By selling everything off and having enormous immigration which is hiking up property prices they are making Kiwis get into debt – while wringing their hands about the problem.

      The government created the problem in the first place and they are the worst borrowers!!! At least the public are borrowing for a roof over their heads unlike the government for the yet to be seen ‘trickle down’ gain, international bank memberships and tax cuts.

  11. Robert Guyton 11
    8 June 2016 at 7:47 am

    In case you ever suspect there’s one in play:
    “The Gish Gallop is the fallacious debating tactic of drowning an opponent in such a torrent of small arguments that the opponent cannot possibly rebut each one in real time. It is similar to the on the spot fallacy.
    Examples are commonly found in “list” articles that claim to show “100 reasons for [X]” or “50 reasons against [Y]”. At this level, with dozens upon dozens of minor arguments, each individual “reason” may only be a single sentence or two.
    More often than not, these myriad arguments are full of half-truths, lies, and straw men — the only condition is that there be many of them, not that they be particularly compelling on their own. They may be escape hatches or “gotcha” arguments that are specifically designed to be brief, but take a long time to unravel. Some and many may be a repeat or vague re-wording of a previous one.
    Although it is a trivial amount of effort on the Galloper’s part to make each point, particularly if they just need to rephrase an existing one, a refutation may take much longer and someone addressing will be unable to refute all points with similar ease. Thus, Galloping is frequently used in timed debates (especially by creationists) to overwhelm one’s opponent.
    And if even one argument in the Gish Gallop is untouched or insufficiently rebutted, the Galloper will claim victory — an abuse of the one single proof fallacy.”

  12. Jenny Kirk 12
    8 June 2016 at 8:09 am

    In the Herald this morning – Nats looking after their own.

    ” There are now 108 Communities of Learning operating throughout New Zealand, covering 1006 schools. Of the 174 teachers who had received pay boosts through the scheme in the March figures, 84 worked at decile nine and 10 schools.
    In comparison, only five teachers across decile one, two and three schools received the same extra funding. ”

    This funding was meant to be for low-decile students and disadvantaged schools.

  13. AsleepWhileWalking 13
    8 June 2016 at 8:20 am

    How long is this country going to torture Ashley Peacock?

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11652421

  15. save nz 15
    8 June 2016 at 8:25 am

    Surprise surprise our state house assets sales is going towards shocking overseas bank memberships…. instead of where it was promised, on social services….

    Asset sales cash used as Govt ‘slush fund’ – Peters

    “Proceeds from National’s state asset sell-off is being used to cover all sorts of costs like the TVNZ video archive, membership of an Asian bank and a visitor centre at Government House.

    That’s despite Finance Minister Bill English promising in 2011 that all revenue from the sales would be put in a Future Investment Fund to pay for “schools, hospitals, roads, rail and public transport”.

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/asset-sales-cash-used-as-govt-slush-fund–peters-2016060713

    • Chooky 15.1
      8 June 2016 at 8:59 am

      that is disgraceful!…good on Peters

    • vto 15.2
      8 June 2016 at 9:19 am

      That is fraud – deceptive conduct for the purpose of pecuniary gain

    • TC 15.3
      8 June 2016 at 9:30 am

      Why has no one been following the asset sale proceeds with oia requests and simple bookeeping as blinglush and shonky have had revolving bullshit about the use of those proceeds from day 1.

      A simple statement of proceeds deducting the promised use would show the lies from the get go and updating it for the revolving promises is a good way of holding the bastards to account.

  16. whispering kate 16
    8 June 2016 at 9:19 am

    How about Joyce on RNZ this morning when he reckoned there would be ex amount of jobs for NZ workers with the Casino and other big projects and now finds that half of the steel is being produced in Thailand, even after he advised a NZ provider to gear up production and get producing it for the casino – the NZ provider now has losses from over production and is laying off staff – Joyce’s comment – it has to be left to the market. Maybe the Casino will collapse under the weight of weak steel in the future and the convention centre in Chch – apparently the jobs available for NZers with the casino job will not be that promising after all. Great expectations for our work force for the future. I know which steel I would prefer if I was a construction engineer managing the build.

    • save nz 16.1
      8 June 2016 at 9:43 am

      The steel crisis shows Britain has given up on industry. But it doesn’t have to
      Bryan Gould – extract

      “The consequence of the decline of manufacturing is that we have run a perennial trade deficit in every year since 1982. We have, in other words, traded at a loss and failed to pay our way in every one of the past 34 years. That deficit – the country’s and not the government’s – is of course the one that really matters; yet it is now so much part of the familiar economic landscape that it scarcely warrants a raised eyebrow.

      How do we get away with pathetic rates of investment (a net rate of nil) and productivity growth (almost zero), and with running at a loss year after year? We don’t. We have to borrow from overseas and sell off our assets to foreigners to close the gap. We have sold more than £600bn of assets over recent years. This is a rake’s progress that cannot be sustained for much longer.

      On the few occasions that the matter is raised, we are given reassuring answers. We can’t compete in manufacturing against low-cost, low-wage competitors, we are told – so how come the Germans can, and that some of those “low-cost” economies now enjoy higher living standards than our own?”

      http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/04/britain-manufacturing-decline-tata-steel

  17. Richardrawshark 17
    8 June 2016 at 9:49 am

    Nothing on the Herald about any of the recent National lies for a couple days at least. No political posts covering anything recent.

    When I have seen the Herald go quiet for a couple of days previously it usually follows with a big set of articles coming out.

    Got a feeling the Herald going to write something which way they go will; be interesting this is surely to good a opportunity for them now to increased profits with some good attack articles.

    Now I know most of you , like me think that statements crazy when talking about Granny, but i’m just saying I have seen this before and I think it’s likely they are beavering away on something big.

  18. Richardrawshark 18
    8 June 2016 at 10:00 am

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cj_0eq1VAAARAkH.jpg

    A picture can say so much, words cannot.

    Check it out.. I advise sitting, Be prepared for the scariest thing you will ever see, this is more horrific than segments of the Exorcist so be prepared.

  19. reason 19
    8 June 2016 at 10:09 am

    When-ever you hear Tolley, Adams, Bennett or Collins claiming to care children who have been the victims of family violence or abuse they are hollow words which totally contradict their actions and voting records in parliament.

    Specifically National ignored, ridiculed and even did Dirty Politics smear jobs on health proffesionals and police calling for effective measures to lower alcohol abuse during the 2012 Alcohol law review …. And then Collins, tolley, Adams and basher bennett voted in favor of booze company profits ahead of any meaningful effort to curb alcohol abuse…….

    And with their shameful actions they guarantee more innocent victims and family violence …..

    “Women, children and young adults experience more harm from others drinking”
    71,91,1

    ” Studies have shown alcohol to be involved in more than 70% of all reported partner violence cases”

    ” Campaign for Action on Family Violence clearly stated the extent of
    harm that children experience as a result of parents or caregivers alcohol use, and the long term harmful consequences that result from the traumatic experiences that occurred during their childhood”

    “Children and young people who experience domestic violence and abuse are at heightened risk of alcohol and other substance abuse, delinquency, risk taking behaviour, eating disorders, depression, post traumatic stress disorders, self-harming behaviour and suicide, depression and post-traumatic stress reactions, increased aggression, violence and criminal activity in later life”

    So the evidence is quite clear that the women mps in national are just as nasty and dishonest as a key or brownlee ….

    But to compound their nasty actions the booze friendly law they did pass are a mess which have been palmed onto our councils ……….

    “The layout and wording of the Act and Regulations – the layout of the Act and the
    Regulations is difficult to follow, and many sections are confusing and unclear to those who administer them. The object of the Act is not well supported by the legislation itself.”

    “There had been 80 appeals on 19 provisional LAPs. Six had been dealt with.”

  20. Bill 20
    8 June 2016 at 10:11 am

    Is Hitlary in a panic trying to call the nomination for herself and having AP (more or less on a par with reuters in terms of dissemination, yes?) call it for her on the false basis of superdelegates?

    And why does she now suddenly need a ‘free run’ at Trump, when Trump was (according to all the liberal pundits) just a hopeless clown?

    • adam 20.1
      8 June 2016 at 10:23 am

      Because even after fixing the vote in state election after state election, it seems people still don’t like her.

      You know you live in a fubar world when the so called clown figure, looks less like a war monger, lair, misanthropic and sycophantic clown than the a so called left wing candidate.

    • Olwyn 20.2
      8 June 2016 at 11:47 am

      The whole news item appeared to be a plug for Hillary, including the claim that Obama is poised to endorse her. It involved no new information, just an interpretation of current information, but was nonetheless trumpeted across the world like a revelation. It looks a bit like an each way bet: either it helps to get Hillary over the line in California, thus saving her from a big embarrassment at this point in the campaign, or it doesn’t, it which case the spin will be that due to the news item Clinton supporters assumed she had already won and voted in smaller numbers, thus reducing the degree of embarrassment.

      • Bill 20.2.1
        8 June 2016 at 12:51 pm

        I’m picking there was some internal polling that found her super delegate support was softening. So to announce her successful candidacy, it makes it all that more difficult for doubting delegates to switch to Sanders now – it’s been announced world wide that she’s won.

        The announcement would also, I think, tend to discourage those who were going to turn out for Sanders in California. That means a dampened final expression of that groundswell or trajectory that has got behind Sanders. And that will weaken his hand at the convention. He kind of needed to demonstrate that his support was continuing to grow.

        edit – Clinton potentially dropping support due to a lower turnout in California doesn’t matter for her. She goes to the convention in the lead regardless. This latest bullshit play is a win/win for her.

        • Olwyn 20.2.1.1
          8 June 2016 at 1:03 pm

          The bit about the delegates softening in their support makes great sense – I have seen a few recently reported to have swapped over to Sanders, and she would certainly not want that to become a trend. I hope she has infuriated Bernie’s supporters into voting in droves. It says a lot about the Clintons that Bill bluntly told Bernie supporters that they were toast – so much for representative democracy as far as they are concerned.

          • Phil 20.2.1.1.1
            8 June 2016 at 5:36 pm

            The bit about the delegates softening in their support makes great sense – I have seen a few recently reported to have swapped over to Sanders,

            Citation needed?

            Superdelegates have been pretty steady in their support for one or the other candidate. The only one I can think of officially shifting allegiance in all of May was Emmett Hansen… and it wasn’t toward Bernie.

            http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-05-17/sanders-quest-for-superdelegates-loses-one-after-virgin-island-official-flips-to-clinton

            Meanwhile, Sanders hasn’t received the endorsement of anyone sitting in Congress/Senate/Governor since April.

            • Olwyn 20.2.1.1.1.1
              8 June 2016 at 7:06 pm

              Sorry I can’t give you a link, and I just did a fruitless search myself, but I have seen a few comments along those lines on facebook posts and the like.

              • Phil …
                9 June 2016 at 9:41 am

                So, you haven’t actually seen reports or any evidence at all?

                Right-o then…

                • Olwyn …
                  9 June 2016 at 9:52 am

                  I think that the conversations in which I saw these comments, on the “People for Bernie Sanders” page if I remember rightly, would have drawn corrections if they had been outright lies. But I suspect that I myself may have failed to register the difference between “delegate” and “super-delegate”.

    • DoublePlusGood 20.3
      8 June 2016 at 3:18 pm

      I think the AP call last night was designed and timed to drop the Sanders vote today. It might well have bagged her a win in Montana and South Dakota.

      • Phil 20.3.1
        8 June 2016 at 5:43 pm

        That’s weak sauce, dude.

        You could just as legitimately make the claim Clinton’s vote would be suppressed, because she’s already won.

        Edit: The California primary has mail-in, as well as on-the-day, voting. That’s a big nail in the suppress-the-vote coffin.

        • DoublePlusGood 20.3.1.1
          8 June 2016 at 5:46 pm

          The only suppression that has gone on has been of Arizona and Puerto Rico voters.

  21. Philj 21
    8 June 2016 at 11:19 am

    Saw the Television news the other night, my first for ages. Couldn’t believe how pathetic/flaky it was. TVNZ news is apparently worse! Most material on the ‘News’ wasn’t really news. It’s a total dumbing down. I won’t be watching. It’s a health risk.

  22. Chooky 22
    8 June 2016 at 11:53 am

    Corporate fascism?

    ‘Google involved with Clinton campaign, controls information flow – Assange’

    https://www.rt.com/usa/345749-assange-us-google-clinton/

    …”Assange is far from the only one to notice the link between Google and the Clinton campaign. Behavioral Psychologist Dr. Robert Epstein has pioneered research on how search engines affect elections and much more. He told Lee Camp, host of RT America’s ‘Redacted Tonight’, that “when one candidate is higher in search rankings ‒ that is, looks better than another candidate in search rankings ‒ that shifts a lot of votes to that candidate. And it’s not a tiny number. It’s a very, very big number of votes…

    …Assange believes that unlike Donald Trump, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is predictable and will constitute a problem for freedom of speech in the US if elected…

    …Another shocking claim from Assange is that 80 percent of the US National Security Agency’s (NSA) budget has been privatized as part of the merger between power and big business.

    “There is a merger between the corporate organizations and state… 80 percent of the National Security Agency budget is privatized,” Assange said, stressing that the NSA “is the core of the US deep state… There has been a smoothing out between the government and the corporations,” the whistleblower said.

  23. Ad 23
    8 June 2016 at 12:51 pm

    Even super-leftie Andrew O’Hehir, from super-Sanders fanboi mag Salon, has thrown in the towel for Clinton:

    http://www.salon.com/2016/06/07/hillary_clinton_democratic_nominee_now_the_left_begins_to_bargain_with_a_painful_reality_and_a_hopeful_future/

    He also admits that most Sanders supporters aren’t at the “bargaining” stage of their grieving, yet. Kinda Left Melancholy writ large for the moisties.

  24. Bearded Git 24
    8 June 2016 at 1:57 pm

    Latest primary results here now live…Sanders ahead in North Dakota…I think California results start coming in at 3pm.

    http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results

  25. Ad 25
    8 June 2016 at 5:25 pm

    Spectacular day for Hillary Clinton in the Democratic contests:

    – On track to win California
    – On track to win Montana
    – Creamed Sanders in New Jersey
    – Won in New Mexico
    – Won South Dakota

    – Lost North Dakota

    • b waghorn 25.1
      8 June 2016 at 5:55 pm

      Doesn’t change the fact that at best the world will be no better off with her as president of the united states of stupid.

      • Expat 25.1.1
        8 June 2016 at 7:10 pm

        Like voting for Labour, still the lesser of the two evils.

        I just heard her say that they will stop Wall St effecting Main street, I don’t hear that from Trump.