Open mike 08/12/2011

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, December 8th, 2011 - 85 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 link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

85 comments on “Open mike 08/12/2011 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. logie97 1
    8 December 2011 at 6:54 am

    Now the Herald finds its voice – strange that, and within a week of the election.

    Quote http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10767717
    Exodus to Oz swells under Nats

    Prime Minister John Key made the transtasman exodus of New Zealanders a major election issue in 2008 but, as the Herald reported last week, far from dwindling, that flow has increased under his watch … unquote

    • mik e 1.1
      8 December 2011 at 6:15 pm

      -0.3% growth inreal terms since coming to power with the best commodity prices for years trickle down is actually trickle up as the OECD has pointed out.Spread some moiney around History has proven that it works!

  2. mickysavage 2
    8 December 2011 at 7:13 am

    If anyone needs the perfect example of why I grin and grimace at the same time when NZ First is described as being on the left of the political spectrum then newbie MP Richard Prosser has provided one.
    His proposal to ban the burqa is dog whistle racist cant.  Why using the full force of the law to stop women from deciding to wear a small piece of material is beyond me.
    Not only this but he wishes to arm taxi drivers and bring back compulsory military training.
    He has that loud opinionated shrill and stupid approach to politics that I despise. 

    • The Voice of Reason 2.1
      8 December 2011 at 7:35 am

      NZF has always had its share of loony MP’s; Prosser is just a slightly less subtle Michael Laws. Have to disagree with your assessment of why women wear the burqa though; it’s not from their own choice, its a culturally enforced symbol of patriarchal ownership.

      • Tiger Mountain 2.1.1
        8 December 2011 at 7:52 am

        Once skimmed a column Richard Prosser penned in Ian Wisharts “Investigate” magazine, (in a waiting room) he appeared to have all the blustering insight of an inebriated talk back caller.
        The sound of barrels being scraped must be quite usual at NZ1 candidate selections. Will Winston operate the choker chain on this loose cannon once he gauges reaction to his utterances?

        • mickysavage 2.1.1.1
          8 December 2011 at 7:59 am

          I have this overwhelming urge to replace the “Pr” in his surname with a “T” …

        • just saying 2.1.1.2
          8 December 2011 at 8:36 am

          I’ve noticed that virtually every medical-related waiting room I’ve been in for a couple of years, both at home and in Auckland, has been heavily stocked with “Investigate”. Way out of proportion to its small market niche. And while I’m thinking, I can think of a few public ‘bureaucratic’ waiting rooms stocked with many copies too.

          I’m guessing Wishart either ‘donates’ them, or facilitates actual buyers doing so.

          I don’t like the way the waiting room stacking (however it comes about) seems to lend the magazine a bit of undeserved credibility. You don’t expect to find extremist fringe propaganda, including religious dogma in such places.

      • Uturn 2.1.2
        8 December 2011 at 8:00 am

        “…it’s not from their own choice, its a culturally enforced symbol of patriarchal ownership…”

        From a western perspective looking in, it may be a culturally enforced symbol etc etc. I’m not excusing the modern/practical abuses that are entertained under the guise of Islam by certain regimes and the kind of general manipulative ignorance found anywhere in the world, any more than I will say that Christianity is the sum total if it’s abuses. There are for sure “muslims” who would not wish to be muslims, but have no choice because of chance of birthplace. There will be those who barely fullfil the basic concepts of Islam and think themselves devout. But then there are true muslims who would take deep offence at being asked to remove symbols of the surrender to Allah.

        From a muslim perspective looking out (going from memory here so apologies to any muslim readers) it is an attempt to bring the individual into the sanctuary of the temple, recreating the closeness to Allah; Allah is everywhere at all times, and a muslim can be close to Allah anywhere, but in the temple is to be closest. It is the act of submission and moving towards Allah that is responded to by Allah moving twice as rapidly towards the disciple – that makes a large theological difference.

        I’ve strained most of the poetic beauty out of the concept as it was told to me originally, but just thought I’d offer that idea as I believe a better world encourages understanding of others from their perspective, not just that of the observer.

        • ianmac 2.1.2.1
          8 December 2011 at 9:13 am

          If we truly embrace the diversity of ideas, then we would accept that there are people who are different. Mr Prosser for example can have his opinion even if we disagree. Mr Brash can have his ideas about decriminalisation and Mr Banks can have his racist ideas and Mr Key can have his mean-spirited ideas about Education and Welfare. And those who wear the burqa are entitled to do so. We welcome diversity of ideas -don’t we?

          • Uturn 2.1.2.1.1
            8 December 2011 at 11:24 am

            Oh yes please, but they must live their ideals, themselves, and not be allowed to push them on the vulnerable or those who reject them. Any arguments that a muslim should in no way offend a taxi driver while a taxi driver may offend a muslim should be discussed. Please begin.
            And would Banks, Brash and others please put forward the basis of their ideology too, explained in full from all angles, so we can see clearly what they stand for and what they seek.

            The difference you’ll soon discover is that a muslim is obliged to reveal and face the source of their morality, whereas Banks and others will twist, turn and lie to either conceal theirs or avoid facing the truth. A muslim (theoretically) is not concerned with philosophy and politics, because his god outlines all there is, via the prophet. A politician will believe only in expediency because he is moving too fast or using false ideas.

          • mik e 2.1.2.1.2
            8 December 2011 at 6:22 pm

            RNZ breakfast show inter view with Prosser said a lot of these comments were taken out of context he said read investigate articles and see the real story.
            The Right wing have selectively released parts of sentences and not the whole sentence.
            Prosser also said he adheres to NZFirst policy and is a team player .

      • mickysavage 2.1.3
        8 December 2011 at 8:04 am

        TVOR

        I acknowledge the cultural complexities relating to Burqas.  I just don’t think criminalising Burqa wearers is the solution.

      • Frida 2.1.4
        8 December 2011 at 8:45 am

        +1 Voice of Reason. I agree, although I suspect Dick Prosser isn’t coming at it from the angle of protecting women from religious oppression!!

      • Annette 2.1.5
        8 December 2011 at 9:25 am

        Depends on the person – I have a friend who wears the niqab from choice. Her husband would be quite happy for her not to. Many women wear the niqab/burqa for modesty or tradition – there was a most interesting RNZ item some time ago on this very subject.

        Gross generalisations do not apply to most situations.

        • prism 2.1.5.1
          10 December 2011 at 10:43 am

          Annette and Arandar

          Annette – Gross generalisations do not apply to most situations.

          We need to know more about the subject when referring to niqab/burqa as if they are just a different form of ordinary female clothing. These are extreme forms of human camouflage.
          Burqa refers to the whole body covering that is needed in a country where in some places, in more traditional country areas, a woman can be condemned as loose if her eyes meet a man’s. And loose women may be dealt with terminally. (There have been many books written about the harsh penalties such as Burned Alive by Souad.) So the niqab which shows the eyes must seem quite an advance.

          Many women and some men have fought for women’s rights and respect in New Zealand and it is an unsatisfactory situation if some women retreat from what has been achieved and cover themselves in tents even if it they say it’s their choice.

          But there are other coverings that Islamic women wear that suffice to give comfort, modesty and religious conformity. The khima and chador both cover well leaving the face open. The niqab does this then other head coverings that are less extensive are hijab, al-amira and shayla. All these should be accepted by all as respecting Islamic choice and precepts, just as we accept Sikh headgear. It is only the burqa that obliterates the person’s appearance to others.
          Here is a good information link. http://www.apologeticsindex.org/505-muslim-veils-hijab-burqa

      • Arandar 2.1.6
        8 December 2011 at 4:16 pm

        Sorry, while I can’t speak personally, I do know a woman, a divorced, single, educated, professional woman, who chooses to wear the burqa and who challenges anyone who thinks she does it because she’s been forced to by anyone – she wears it because she wants to. That is all.

    • Pete George 2.2
      8 December 2011 at 7:41 am

      Prosser raised some ‘interesting’ ideas, none of which have much chance of progressing. You have to wonder why he was put at 4 on the NZ First list, but one of his quips…

      “As recently as 1973 every bank in New Zealand had a pistol under the counter and tellers undertook regular revolver training.

      “Whose brilliantly stupid idea was it for that policy to be abandoned?”

      …prompted some good anecdotes on bank security in the good old days – NZ First, and bank security

      • mikesh 2.2.1
        8 December 2011 at 2:10 pm

        In a firm I worked for in the sixties the pay clerk who collected the weekly pay from the bank carried a gun, and the briefcase containing the money was handcuffed to his left wrist.

    • The phantom 2.3
      8 December 2011 at 8:14 am

      in marked contrast to you???

    • Draco T Bastard 2.4
      8 December 2011 at 10:08 am

      NZ1st is left of Labour but not actually of the left. They’re also far more authoritarian – almost as much so as National and Act – which is where the cries for conformity come from. John Banks is another good example of this authoritarianism.

      BTW, The burqa is the full body covering so not a small bit of cloth. That would be the niqab. Plenty of women wear them voluntarily and it’s not our place to tell them what to wear.

      • Colonial Viper 2.4.1
        8 December 2011 at 10:15 am

        Yep pays to remember that NZ First originally appeared out of the socially conservative, though far more socially responsible wing of the National Party. The one which rejected the tenets of corporatist neo-liberalism. Old fashioned ‘wet’ Tories in other words.

      • mickysavage 2.4.2
        8 December 2011 at 11:33 am

        Thanks Draco and apologies for my cultural insensitivity.  You learn something new every day!

    • insider 2.5
      8 December 2011 at 1:55 pm

      NZFirst are not leftist, they are muldoonist conservatives.

      • mikesh 2.5.1
        8 December 2011 at 2:13 pm

        Muldoon, in one of his books, Rise & Fall of a Young Turk, described himself as an old fashioned liberal.

  3. Dv 3
    8 December 2011 at 8:21 am

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/headlines.cfm?c_id=466

    Fox news accuses the muppets of braiinwashing kids.

    Well they would know!

    • rosy 3.1
      8 December 2011 at 8:33 am

      So funny. Imagine what they think of that arch-liberal Walt Disney inventing Scrooge McDuck way back when.

      • The Voice of Reason 3.1.1
        8 December 2011 at 8:54 am

        Apparently Walt was obsessed with the idea that his writers were all closeted reds and that they were manipulating the various cartoon characters to undermine capitalism. He used to pore over scripts looking for signs of a pink tinge before OK’ing production and once referred to the Screen Actors Guild as a communist front, which must have come as a surprise to the organisation’s leaders, who included the well known lefty Ronald Reagan.

        • rosy 3.1.1.1
          8 December 2011 at 9:14 am

          Yeah, Walt was crazy about pinko infiltration… but not as crazy as Fox, it seems. I’d be struggling with that thought if I wasn’t laughing at them.

  4. Jester 4
    8 December 2011 at 8:34 am

    Prosser from NZFirst is a strange individual but it’s even stranger that Labour supporters are complaining about a member of a possible coalition party they were happy to utilize under MMP.

    Politics makes for strange bed fellows it seems.

    [source for Labour complaining about Prosser? Eddie]

    • Colonial Viper 4.1
      8 December 2011 at 9:38 am

      How is it strange that Labour Party members are complaining about someone who is advocating introducing firearms on to our streets, who is a climate change denier, and who is dismissive of others’ religious and cultural traditions to the point of authoritarianism?

      You must not know what Labour stands for.

      • Tigger 4.1.1
        8 December 2011 at 9:57 am

        Jester – look at the vile racist filth that inhabits comments on Kiwiblog and Whale Oil. And National was in coalition with the Maori Party for three years. At least here the focus is the man’s ideas, not the colour of his skin.

  5. Jackal 5
    8 December 2011 at 9:51 am

    USA repeatedly shipped arms supplies to Egyptian security forces

    Data obtained by Amnesty International shows that the US has repeatedly transferred ammunition to Egypt despite security forces’ violent crackdown on protesters.

    The capitalist running dogs are profiting from the unrest. One wonders if they intentionally create conflicts to keep their weapons manufacturers happy.

    • Colonial Viper 5.1
      8 December 2011 at 10:12 am

      Well, US corporations had lucrative existing munitions supply contracts with the Mubarak regime (even if most of them were paid for out of US Government funds anyway), why cancel them just because a new dictatorship is now in charge? Another day, another dollar.

  6. Tigger 6
    8 December 2011 at 10:05 am

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6104643/Numbers-firm-up-in-Shearers-favour Vernon Small says most members last night preferred Shearer.

    Really Vernon? Shearer was endearing last night but hardly ‘landslide’ worthy and everyone I spoke to after the meeting was having trouble choosing and couldn’t make up their minds. Why? All four were superb.

    But made up my mind last night. Cunliffe and Mahuta. Cunliffe needs to do some work on how he presents but he hit the right points for me last night – and both of them were able to provide more specific answers when pressed on how to fix things.

    Again, it was a superb evening. National should be crapping their pants.

    • Colonial Viper 6.1
      8 December 2011 at 10:09 am

      Tigger, what could Cunliffe do to sharpen his presentation up a bit? I’ll get word to his team.

      • Tigger 6.1.1
        8 December 2011 at 10:43 am

        I was watching all of them through the Crosby Trextor lens last night – ie. what spin lines will stick in critiquing them. Cunliffe comes across as a little ‘smarmy’ – his jokes are a little forced, a little ‘I’m funny and you know it’. And he’s got to do something about his smile when he’s listening, waiting. He’s very polished and that might actually work against him against Shearer (and indeed Key) who come off as a bit rougher.

        It’s all style though, CV, something that a good PR expert could fix in no time. I hate having to pick people apart like this but it’s the game the Nats have excelled in with Key and we need to take the fight to them. Substance-wise I’ve always been impressed by him and last night he sealed it for me.

        • Colonial Viper 6.1.1.1
          8 December 2011 at 10:48 am

          Ah thanks. Useful.

          • insider 6.1.1.1.1
            8 December 2011 at 1:47 pm

            I’d generally say – relax. Try not to be so earnest and precise about nearly everything. Show a bit of fun and spontenaity. You have a huge smile- use it naturally. Humanise your opponent, don’t talk about him as ‘my opponent’ – you guys are going to have to work together no matter what the outcome so make it clear that bygones will be bygones after the vote and that party unity is paramount.

            (note that I’ve not seen much of the two in the last few days, this is based on the election campaign and immediate post election period so he may be presenting slightly differently. With Shearer I’d say he needs to sharpen up in look and ideas. He is way too vague and the over relaxed image may not survive the hard grillings he’s likely to get in the selection process. I think he needs more solidity behind his vague concepts of ‘reform’. A bit too ‘third way’ for my liking.)

        • Olwyn 6.1.1.2
          8 December 2011 at 1:23 pm

          From what I have seen on the blogs, party members and supporters seem to largely prefer Cunliffe while those who get to vote reportedly favour Shearer. This leaves me hoping to hell that they listen to us, and are not just going through an “inclusive” exercise trundling them around the country.

          I am most concerned that those who get to vote may consider that “we have lost the centre & need to move to the centre to get it back” – a concern exacerbated by Shearer’s use of the term “the hopes & aspirations of all NZers.” My question is, move to the centre from where?”

          A brief potted history: By the 70s, liberal politics joined class politics, & while they were not 100% compatible at all times, they were able to function as a left wing. In the eighties Labour dumped the class politics and retained what remained its left wing credentials through liberal politics. The Clark government moved toward the centre from the Rogernomic outskirts, reasonably thinking that people had put up with enough disruption, & that the markets had matured enough for a new accommodation to be wrought, one that was not so unjust. This hope became untenable by 2008, but was reasonable at the time. Enter John Key who did not so much move toward the centre as woo it and bide his time, with a second term in mind. He wooed the centre so as to allay the fear many had of a right wing government, and this is the point of this whole paragraph: those who think that the centre is where it’s at forget about the fear factor.

          Both Helen Clark and John Key moved decisively to the centre (or in Key’s case pretended to) at least partly to allay fears. No one presently fears the Labour Party, and if it is going to gain traction, it needs someone who is going to scare the horses a bit. Cunliffe is far more likely to do that than Shearer.

    • js 6.2
      8 December 2011 at 12:26 pm

      All four are impressive but quite different. My main worry about Cunliffe is that although he is a very good speaker, he doesn’t seem to be a team player and could quite easily alienate people.

      • Carol 6.2.1
        8 December 2011 at 5:30 pm

        Actually, if you look at his bio & Standard posts, Cunliffe seems to have worked very well in teams before he got into politics. And comments from people active in his electorate describe him as working very well in his electorate team.

  8. Tigger 8
    8 December 2011 at 10:49 am

    One writer’s experience of an Occupy arrest. Beautifully expressed.
    http://myoccupylaarrest.blogspot.com/

  9. Carol 9
    8 December 2011 at 11:50 am

    Auckland Council vs occupy auckland is currently being heard in an Auckland court. Penny Bright has been on the stand critquing the Auckland Council actions and statements on the issue, making some references to law, Bill of Rights etc.

    http://occupyauckland.org/

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/6102227/Row-delays-Occupy-protesters-court-case/

  10. Draco T Bastard 10
    8 December 2011 at 11:50 am

    I’ve been reading Debt: The First 5,000 Years by David Graeber. I’m only a couple of chapters in but it’s got these sentences in it:-

    In [Adam] Smith’s time, at least it could be said that reliable information on Native American economic systems was unavailable in Scottish libraries. But by mid-century, Lewis Henry Morgan’s descriptions of the Six Nations of the Iroquois, among others, were widely published – and they made it clear that the main economic institution among the Iroquois were longhouses where most goods were stockpiled and then allocated by women’s councils, and no one ever traded arrowheads for slabs of meat. Economists simply ignored this information.

    He’s going on about the Myth of Barter (Chapter 2). It seems even the most basic assumption of economists, that people started bartering and thus invented money to make things easier, is wrong.

    If you want to study economics then study history – you’ll learn more and what you learn is more likely to be correct than if you study an economics text book.

    • uke 10.1
      8 December 2011 at 1:02 pm

      Karl Polanyi also provided an interesting debunking of the myth that humans are naturally inclined to “truck and barter” in his 1940s tome “The Great Transformation”. Prior to the advent of Western capitalism, most societies got by just fine on the systems of economic reciprocity, redistribution, and domestic householding.

      • Colonial Viper 10.1.1
        8 December 2011 at 11:14 pm

        Yep. The so-called ‘gift economy’.

        Dmitri Orlov speaks about it as a way to continue economic activity post-collapse and to improve social cohesion to boot.

  11. Tiger Mountain 11
    8 December 2011 at 12:10 pm

    Lotta posts today, but it is always somewhat reassuring to see bent coppers, in this case non sworn ‘copettes’ subject to the same rules as the rest of us for once.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/6107933/Police-staff-in-drug-bust-court-reveals

    All those confiscated sacks of dak, piles of Andean climbing powder and happy pills must be very tempting for some of the bluebellies.

    • Draco T Bastard 11.1
      8 December 2011 at 12:24 pm

      Quoting article:

      Several other people arrested in the drug bust also appeared in court, including a company director, but they sought continued name suppression.

      Now this guy, once found guilty, needs to be banned from being a director/manager or business owner for a time. I’d go for 5 years – same as bankruptcy. Why? Because he’s shown himself unfit to be such.

      • insider 11.1.1
        8 December 2011 at 1:53 pm

        To be a company director all you need to do is pay $150 to Companies Office to get a company registered and get yourself listed as a director. I wouldn’t get too excited about what he calls himself.

        • Draco T Bastard 11.1.1.1
          8 December 2011 at 2:27 pm

          Oh, so according to you it’s all about how big the company is and not about the simple fact that he’s proven himself immoral?

          • insider 11.1.1.1.1
            8 December 2011 at 11:03 pm

            it’s not about size it’s about relevance. lots of people commit crimes like assault but don’t get banned from say driving. It appears you just want to ban him because you assume he is a rich prick

        • Dv 11.1.1.2
          8 December 2011 at 2:36 pm

          insider- Not if you are banned.

  12. Colonial Viper 12
    8 December 2011 at 12:28 pm

    I understand from the media that the Chinese company buying the Crafar farms gave the National Party $50,000 as a campaign contribution.

    • Sweetd 12.1
      8 December 2011 at 1:01 pm

      Really? Link?

        • travellerev 12.1.1.1
          8 December 2011 at 2:17 pm

          Just Koha! ROFL.

          Here is a link someone put on a post on my blog: http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/about/whoweare/0092967.html connecting the Reserve bank with Fletcher building and assorted other conflicts of interests:

          Mr Hugh Fletcher (Deputy Chair)

          Auckland-based
          Company Director
          Chair – IAG New Zealand Limited; IAG New Zealand Holdings Limited
          Director – Fletcher Building Limited; Rubicon Limited; Vector Limited; Insurance Australia Group Limited; IAG Finance (New Zealand) Limited; NGC Holdings Limited; NZI Staff Superannuation Fund Nominees Limited
          Member – Australian and New Zealand Advisory Board of L.E.K. Consulting

          Trustee – Dilworth Trust; New Zealand Portrait Gallery; The University of Auckland Foundation

          First appointed 10 June 2002 – current term expires 9 June 2012

          And a member of the trilateral commission just like Mike Moore. That’s the old boy network at work for ya!

  13. Afewknowthetruth 13
    8 December 2011 at 1:07 pm

    Just think how much better things are than they were. In the past those who got in the way of rampant capitalism were killed ‘security’ forces.

    ‘On May 4, l970 members of the Ohio National Guard fired into a crowd of Kent State University demonstrators, killing four and wounding nine Kent State students.’

    http://dept.kent.edu/sociology/lewis/lewihen.htm

    ‘The Ludlow Massacre was an attack by the Colorado National Guard on a tent colony of 1,200 striking coal miners and their families at Ludlow, Colorado on April 20, 1914.

    The massacre resulted in the violent deaths of between 19 and 25 people; sources vary but all sources include two women and eleven children, asphyxiated and burned to death under a single tent. The deaths occurred after a day-long fight between strikers and the Guard.’

    Better not mention the Maori Land Wars. They had ‘nothing’ to do with rampant capitalism.

    Whereas those who worked for rampant capitalism got terrible diseases or died as a consequence.

    Even those unfortunate enough to be born near industrial activity frequently suffer, of course,

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/03/080326201751.htm

    Better turn a blind eye to what is going on in China and India etc. so we can cheap consumer goods too.

  14. Afewknowthetruth 14
    8 December 2011 at 1:26 pm

    DTB

    ‘study history – you’ll learn more and what you learn is more likely to be correct than if you study an economics text book.’

    Very true.

    The problem is, which version of history. Much of what is promulgated as history by the mainstream is not what actually happened, or has been given spin by the empire. The events of 9/11 are a prime example.

    Modern economics is a complete fabrication, built on misinformation and bizarre theories, some of which are fairly recent and others that go right back to the time of John Locke (they may not have seemed bizarre to people of his time).

    The fundamental [false] assumptions of economics are what are going to bring the current sytem crashing down shortly.

    One way of thinking about modern economics is that we are caught up in a ‘game’ that has a life expectancy of 420 years (plus or minus 15 years) and we are now in the 402nd year.

    • Draco T Bastard 14.1
      8 December 2011 at 2:39 pm

      The problem is, which version of history. Much of what is promulgated as history by the mainstream is not what actually happened, or has been given spin by the empire.

      Agreed. That’s why I tend to read multiple sources and then to think about what I’ve read.

      Modern economics is a complete fabrication, built on misinformation and bizarre theories…

      One of the fairly recent ones is the myth based around the Tragedy of the Commons. In the economic myths this is used to promote privatisation over common ownership. They ignore the simple fact that such commons have always had rules and regulations about their use which completely removes the tragedy. They also ignore the fact that privatisation without regulation is what’s leading to resource depletion, pollution and Climate Change.

  15. Jilly Bee 15
    8 December 2011 at 2:03 pm

    Talking about new MPs – I was impressed with Andrew Little on Back Benchers last night – he and Catherine Delahunty made David Bennett look the inept MP he appears to me to be. Andrew should go far.

    • Trowlie 15.1
      8 December 2011 at 2:32 pm

      Yeah I agree. Andrew Little was good wasn’t he.

      I also noticed David Shearer, Darien Fenton and David Farrar having a good ole chin wag at the end.

      I hope Back benchers is going to be back next year.

  16. joe90 16
    8 December 2011 at 3:12 pm

    James Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies: 2 Degrees of Warming a Recipe for Disaster.

    The history of ancient climate changes, which occurred over millions of years in the planet’s history as it moved in and out of ice ages, offers the best insight into how humans’ greenhouse gas emissions will alter the planet, Hansen said here today (Dec. 6) at the annual American Geophysical Union (AGU) meeting. And his research suggests the climate is more sensitive to greenhouse gas emissions than had been suspected.

    “What the paleoclimate record tells us is that the dangerous level of global warming is less than what we thought a few years ago,” Hansen said. “The target that has been talked about in international negotiations for 2 degrees of warming is actually a prescription for long-term disaster.”

    Earth’s Climate History: Implications for Tomorrow

    Paleoclimate data yield our best assessment of climate sensitivity, which is the eventual global temperature change in response to a specified climate forcing. A climate forcing is an imposed change of Earth’s energy balance, as may be caused, for example, by a change of the sun’s brightness or a human-made change of atmospheric CO2. For convenience scientists often consider a standard forcing, doubled atmospheric CO2, because that is a level of forcing that humans will impose this century if fossil fuel use continues unabated.

  18. Afewknowthetruth 18
    8 December 2011 at 5:51 pm

    Brooklyn

    the Clark government (nine years of it! ) set up all the preconditions for the collapse we will witness over the next three years

    like those disastrous surpluses. Fortunately the fiscally prudent Nats have have remedied that problem

    No, when thinking of the failures of the Clark government I was thinking more in terms of the promotion of an economy predicated on perpetual growth (which is impossible on a finite planet and is grinding to halt right now because it is a mathematical impossibility) and the promoting of looting of natural resources and turning them into waste by corporations.

    I was thinking more in terms of the abysmal failure of the Clark government with respect to local government of 2002 (ever read any of it Brooklyn?), i.e. permitting city and district councils to present, and then accepting from them, so-called 10 year plans which do not mention one factor that will determine the future ,plans that read like touurism brochures and are much use to the community as tourism brochures.

    I was thinking more in terms of Cullen pouring hundreds of milions of dollars into the banksters’ international Ponzi scheme and losing much of it for us.

    I was thinking in terms of the national debt, which went up under Clark, raher than the government’s fiscal balance.

    I was thinking of the urban sprawl and in-fill housing, the leaky home sydrome, the box-store ‘development’ and covering of agricultural land that the Clark government encouraged. I was thinking of the huge waste of resources that went into road transport infrastructure when we were ‘at or close to peak oil’, as acknowledged by Helen Clark.

    Sabotage (especially of the next generation’s future) is the word that always comes to mind when I think of Helen Clark and Michael Cullen.

    Of course, those who only look at superficialities never see the big picture.

    [lprent: And I’m thinking that you’re getting way off the point of the post and moved into speech mode. So I have moved your comment to OpenMike. ]

    • mik e 18.1
      8 December 2011 at 10:34 pm

      afew that ponzi scheme has grown by nearly $6billion since this govt took office without any further contribution. Clark and Cullen rescued and resuscitated rail. you such a pessimist time to go and get your prescription filled out. Better still join the Scientology movement they have plenty of conspiracy theories and doomsday dates.

      • Colonial Viper 18.1.1
        8 December 2011 at 11:33 pm

        AFKTT is pretty much right on this one. There aren’t enough chairs to go around and the bankster owned DJ is about to stop playing. Europe goes down first., and soon.

  19. kriswgtn 19
    8 December 2011 at 5:53 pm

    http://www.gaynz.com/articles/publish/2/article_11165.php

    This will open your eyes to exactly what a bunch of heartless aholes this govt is

    • Tigger 19.1
      8 December 2011 at 9:11 pm

      Next up, let’s just shoot them all. Don’t think that’s coming…? Give them time.

      [I’m having a bit of a crack down on calls for shooting at the moment – please don’t. Ta — r0b]

      • uke 19.1.1
        9 December 2011 at 7:01 am

        r0b – I don’t think Tigger is referring to the govt. The article is about how WINZ will now be requiring those with HIV/AIDS on the sickness benefit to be work-tested. Tigger is alluding (ironically) to “solution” preferred by Adolf Hitler and co.

  20. Reality Bytes 20
    8 December 2011 at 8:15 pm

    Cameron Slater and his Wail oily mates were most vehemently and frothingly accusing the Greens and Labor of being virtually culpable for murder over the Pike River mine tragedy.

    Now under oath evidence is coming out about the covering of gas safety sensors with plastic bags to prioritize profits over safety, and also other serious Health&Safety regulatory deficiencies…

    I’m wondering if Mr Slater and his cohorts will take a step back and acknowledge that the environmental policies of the Labor and the Greens weren’t the actual cause for this tragedy.

    My gut feeling is you won’t hear a peep from them about these revelations. I really can’t be assed dredging through whaleoil to see if that’s the case, so if Slater/team-WO is trolling this forum: What is your take on these revelations?

    • kriswgtn 20.1
      8 December 2011 at 8:23 pm

      The good thing is about this was that it was on TV 1 news and I am amazed they rolled with it

      Makes Whittle out to be the creep he is.

      A fuking bully.

      He needs to be charged over this

  21. logie97 21
    8 December 2011 at 9:00 pm

    Charter Schools

    Yet another way for Companies to launder their tax accounts no doubt, and get good publicity…

  22. Penny Bright 22
    8 December 2011 at 9:54 pm

    Full credit to this enlightened and sensible policing by Auckland Central Police which is respecting the basic democratic rights of New Zealanders.

    1) “…Police is aware that Council has issued trespass notices to the occupiers of Aotea Square. Having considered all the circumstances, including that the occupiers are protestors exercising rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression, Police has formed the view that there is not currently legal justification for Police to forcibly remove those in the square pursuant to a criminal trespass…”

    Andrew D Coster
    Inspector
    Area Commander
    Auckland City Central

    (Quote from ‘Letter for Consideration in the Auckland District Court Auckland Council v The Occupiers of Aotea Square, Auckland CIV-2011-404-002497 7 December 2011 )

    2) How many Kiwibloggers support Auckland ratepayers monies being wasted on unnecessary Court proceedings because the Auckland Council Manager for Risk and Assurance Natalie Verdouw didn’t properly double-check her purported and unsubstantiated telephone conversation with Andrew Hendrie “He told me no resolutions had been made”, regarding a collective response from the Occupy Auckland General Assembly to requests from Mayor Len Brown?

    This was NOT true, and the evidence to support this is a letter addressed to Mayor Len Brown dated 27 November 2011, which was was annexed to the ‘Supplementary Affidavit of Natalie Louise Verdouw dated 2 December 2011′.

    Why weren’t these unnecessary and precipitious court proceedings immediately stopped, once it was realised that Ms Verdouw had made this serious FACTUAL error?

    Doesn’t the buck for ‘operational’ matters stop with the CEO of Auckland Council Doug McKay?

    Why didn’t HE step in and stop proceedings?

    How come he didn’t even put in an affidavit?

    There were a number of affidavits filed by some of the Auckland Council ‘Indians’ – how about the ‘Chief’?

    How ‘accountable’ is THAT?

    Or is this really all about unlawful discrimination on the basis of political opinion, by some senior Auckland Council staff and some elected representatives?

    (Tomorrow should be VERY interesting in Court! 🙂

    Penny Bright
    Named ‘Respondent’ in the above-mentioned proceedings – who did not ask to go to Court.
    (But who WILL defend herself).
    [email deleted]

  23. Jum 23
    8 December 2011 at 10:08 pm

    Well done Penny Bright.

  24. Jum 24
    8 December 2011 at 10:11 pm

    “Doesn’t the buck for ‘operational’ matters stop with the CEO of Auckland Council Doug McKay?

    Why didn’t HE step in and stop proceedings?”

    Because the ex ‘sell lolly water with a kick to teenagers’ is too busy readying the local government assets for sale.

  25. Taylor 25
    10 December 2011 at 8:30 am

    Re: Andrew Little – At Pike River, Miners union (EPMU and forerunner) failed in representing workers industrial health and safety interests – with pay and benefits the most basic of workers welfare interests – (which of course includes monitoring performance by Dept. Labour of mining safety responsibilities). Basically this is the fault of trade union membership who have permitted a takeover of their union (and trade unions generally) by people from the urban educated liberal elite who see themselves more as part of the “labour movement” than as trade union activists. This description appears to fit Andrew little miners union/EPMU Little General Secretary for 11 years until recently – 2011 election Labour candidate for New Plymouth (and perhaps also predecessor Rex Jones) during which 11 years the rot set into mining safety – following the destruction of regulation by previous National Governments (left unremedied). Both Jones and Little found time to be President of the NZ Labour Party at the same time as being EPMU General Secretary. Mr Little apparently wasn’t likely to robustly challenge the industrial safety policy failures of Labour Government Ministers of Labour and dereliction of public duty by Dept.of Labour chiefs.

    [lprent: IMHO: just another fool from offshore ranting about something that they know even less on than I do (and I have never been in a union). Why do I get the impression that this has all just been copied from somewhere, given a theoretical faith driven spin and dumped here by a troll. If someone wants to convince people then this isn’t the way. It is just meaningless drivel where assertions are mixed with fact without a sustaining argument. It is symptomatic of the idiots that I usually just trash first comments from. I figure that if they can’t argue then they are unlikely to survive here. I’ll let this one through for peoples amusement. ]