Open mike 09/12/2009

14 comments on “Open mike 09/12/2009 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. ParkDrive 1

   9 December 2009 at 8:32 am

   So Key didn’t want to go to Copenhagen as he wanted to see Fleetwood Mac.

   What to see, what to see! Obama or Stevie? Obama or Stevie?
2. prism 2

   9 December 2009 at 9:27 am

   Just thinking as I noticed all the short rejoinders Tim Ellis makes plus posts from his merry band of right wingers – with this bunch The Standard will reach a statistical high for posts in NZ. It may take the prize, is there one, for being the most popular with the highest numbers of posts in NZ next year.
3. prism 3

   9 December 2009 at 9:36 am

   There was some soppy line in a song or film – being in love means never having to say you’re sorry. Being a rigidly oriented politician applies the same. In 1991 National deregulated builders and started us on this awful path of leaky homes and toxic funguses and millions spent on trying to patch the damage so homes don’t have to be demolished. The latest estimate is about health and I think $26 million was quoted as cost, I presume this is a rolling total. It is an awful and aweful problem because it is not only bad in so many ways, but also destructive of people’s lives and their savings and security.

   I think that a politician’s fidelity fund, similar to those for lawyers, should be set up and every instigator of a new law, or of wiping of an old regulation, should have to pay a sum into this which would be administered by some non-govt body. Some amelioration for the cock-ups that these half-trained managers would then be forthcoming.
   • Bored 3.1

     9 December 2009 at 10:25 am

     Interesting idea, politicians and fidelity…..just joking, the ones I know are as straight as even if you dont agree with them.

     When talking about fidelity funds I think of lawyers, surgeons, accountants etc, the professions who claim that they have Associations, as opposed to Unions. They are the true bastions of restrictive practices, ready to clip the ticket richly at every available opportunity, often by dint of regulatary practices. One thing you can be sure of, the leaky homes issue will line their pockets very generously with our money.
   • travellerev 3.2

     9 December 2009 at 10:39 am

     Love story and no I never saw it. To sugary for my taste.
4. Killinginthenameof 4

   9 December 2009 at 9:52 am

   In all those stolen emails, where is the evidence of a conspiracy to rule the world, that some so often mention? surely there would be some horse trading going on to in order to gain the position of head of the Wishart Memorial South East Asian Child Brothel/Farm?
   • Bill 4.1

     9 December 2009 at 10:11 am

     duh. It’s a secret conspiracy innit?

     And the fact that 40 odd countries under NATO command are involved in the continuing war in and around Afghanistan and Pakistan….a war that did not receive any resolution of support from the UN means, means that the pope is a strange fish from Atlantis and we had all better watch out or the UN in cahoots with the Vatican and lesbians everywhere will have us drowned in a sea of climate change…..or something.

     /
5. Bill 5

   9 December 2009 at 10:33 am

   Talking of conspiracies and secret agendas and all, here are a couple of genuinely interesting pieces…

   “The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN’s role in all future climate change negotiations.”

   http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/08/copenhagen-climate-summit-disarray-danish-text

   “The first case study I’ve posted reveals how a coalition of US coal companies sought to persuade people that the science is uncertain. It listed the two social groups it was trying to reach “Target 1: Older, less educated males”; “Target 2: Younger, lower income women” and the methods by which it would reach them. One of its findings was that “members of the public feel more confident expressing opinions on others’ motivations and tactics than they do expressing opinions on scientific issues”.

   http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cif-green/2009/dec/07/climate-change-denial-industry
6. Olwyn 6

   9 December 2009 at 12:15 pm

   Did anyone watch the Morgan/Wishart debate last night on Close-up? Morgan, having perused scientific claims from both sides, came out with the view that the probabilities favoured the truth of man-made global warming. He refused to go into the politic/PR/money questions, beyond asserting that there was bad behaviour on both sides, instead sticking largely with the science question. Wishart too made modest claims, especially for Wishart, but in the other direction. He did however, draw on the controversial emails, large research funds, etc to support his position. A viewers’ poll as to who was more convincing came out 77% in favour of Wishart, which gives support to the claim in the Guardian Article, that “members of the public feel more confident expressing opinions on others’ motivations and tactics than they do expressing opinions on scientific issues”. The problem is that people generally have neither the time nor the expertise to separate the two.
   • Bill 6.1

     9 December 2009 at 12:23 pm

     77%? Shit. That’s really fucking depressing.

     I have noticed that TV3 of late couches climate change in terms that would have a casual viewer believe that the jury is still out on the matter.
7. gitmo 7

   9 December 2009 at 12:37 pm

   Finally something useful to have a debate about !

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3143529/Sweeping-energy-sector-changes-announced
   • Armchair Critic 7.1

     9 December 2009 at 12:42 pm

     Looks like a shuffle of the deck chairs on the Titanic at first glance.
     Is there anything that addresses the fundamental problems, or did I miss that bit?
     • Armchair Critic 7.1.1

       9 December 2009 at 1:28 pm

       Okay, I read the press release that National put out, and that stuff.co.nz just copied and pasted from.
       The aim of the changes is to “[ensure] the market runs efficiently”, according to Mr Brownlee. Nothing about reliability of the supply, service to the customer, keeping the cost down (unless you are the sort that chants “the market will fix it” mantras), running the system efficiently or that sort of thing.
       So the changes are about as sweeping as if the only thing you had to sweep with was a small brush for painting model airplanes.
8. The Chairman 8

   9 December 2009 at 4:14 pm

   The Story of “Cap & Trade” (in a similar format as “Money as Debt’)

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS