Open mike 10/07/2016

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, July 10th, 2016 - 118 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 …

118 comments on “Open mike 10/07/2016 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Jenny 1
    10 July 2016 at 8:37 am

    Great stuff about the housing. What about the climate emergency?

    Any feedback or reports on this?

    • Halfcrown 1.1
      10 July 2016 at 9:36 am

      Well this government is not doing a thing about the climate emergencyt. In fact they are going in the opposite direction causing more climate problems.

      Last Sunday it was a nice frosty slightly foggy day so I decided to pack my camera gear and go down to Whakamarua and take some shots of the dense plantation forests I have been promising myself for years.
      The forest at Whakamaru used to be dense and I suspect this could have been one of the first area’s that got planted in the work schemes of the great depression (no not this one, the one in the 20’s caused by the same rightwing shit that is happening today).

      Some of the pine plantations have GONE. We now have a giant dairy farm, no cows on it at the moment but all the infrastructure is in place like races and water troughs.

      Bloody brilliant I thought all done for greed. Rip out pine forests that help to suck up the surplus CO 2, that can be harvested about every 20 years, and grown again and again creating less damage to the environment. Replaced by farting cows, polluting all the waterways, plus masses of fertilizer to make the grass grow just to produce MORE milk powder which the world has a glut of.

      No thought for the future, with no concern of the consequences.

    • leftie 1.2
      10 July 2016 at 11:40 am

      I think today is about Housing Jenny, it’s Labour’s birthday conference, not their main one that they hold.

    • whateva next? 1.3
      10 July 2016 at 11:40 am

      Andrew is accused of being “muddled” if he tries to talk about more than one thing in an interview, how to get it right?

      • Jenny 1.3.1
        10 July 2016 at 10:03 pm

        One policy at a time…

        Leftie, and WN. If that is the strategy, that is great.

        And undoubtably the housing policy is good one.

        I can’t wait for the release of the climate change policy.

        My hope is that it is as good.

  2. save nz 2
    10 July 2016 at 8:47 am

    UN Report Says Small-Scale Organic Farming Only Way to Feed the World

    http://www.technologywater.com/post/69995394390/un-report-says-small-scale-organic-farming-only

    • b waghorn 2.1
      10 July 2016 at 9:05 am

      Pie in the sky stuff. If enough people wanted it it would be happening , how many greenies and lefties want to get up and want to toil away in cold ,wet , hot and dirty conditions a small holder has to to make it economic.
      Add to that there are so many food safety rules that i couldn’t get a beast killed at at the local home killers to sell to make small scale profitable.
      Small block farming in the west is most often the hobby of the wealthy, and the domain of the poor in most other places.
      You would have to completely reset the rules around land ownership and food supply rules for it to happen.

      • marty mars 2.1.1
        10 July 2016 at 9:18 am

        Re the beast – can’t you sell it to your mates? That is how the meat eaters in our house get it.

        Re no one will do it because they arent already. People used to and i think they will again, maybe through choice maybe necessity but it is coming, and many will take it up.

        This idea is a practical way to build resilience and sustainability and option are limited by our timeframes.

        Info on HOW to do it would be a good part of a CC post

        • b waghorn 2.1.1.1
          10 July 2016 at 9:35 am

          “Homekill is the slaughter and butchering of your farmed animals for your own consumption or use. Homekill is not subject to the same rigorous regulatory controls that apply to meat purchased from a supermarket or butcher, so homekill is eaten at your own risk. It is illegal to trade or sell homekill meat.”
          That came up after a quick google, might pay to keep your meat habit on the down low!
          I’ve lifestyle blocked and even with both of us working off (we’re not big earners) progress was glacial.

          • marty mars 2.1.1.1.1
            10 July 2016 at 10:05 am

            Yep lucky whānau is wide including non blood family ☺

            One of the hardest things I had to get my head around when I did the cows was that in my previous corporate life I could work harder,get the work done quicker, and create space and time for myself. On the farm the cows walk at the pace they walk, the tractor chugs along and there was nothing I could do to speed it up I just had to accept the bitter truth that I wasn’t a master of the universe and I had to fit in not the other way round. Many who move from there lives to the country will find this lesson tough I think.

            • KJT 2.1.1.1.1.1
              10 July 2016 at 10:45 am

              I don’t know about that.

              On a farm or at sea your boss is the cows, plants or the sea.
              Both predictable and have a rhythm.

              Both don’t care about bullshit, egos or perceptions.
              Massaging your bosses ego is a huge part of life in an office.

              If you want to dance, sing, ponder the nature of the universe, they don’t care.

              You may have your storms, or bulls getting on the race, but it is your competence and preparation that determines the outcome, not others, often false, perceptions.

            • Graeme 2.1.1.1.1.2
              10 July 2016 at 10:55 am

              “On the farm the cows walk at the pace they walk, the tractor chugs along and there was nothing I could do to speed it up I just had to accept the bitter truth that I wasn’t a master of the universe and I had to fit in not the other way round.”

              On the button marty.

              That’s the reality that global humanity has to come to terms with. We can only go as fast as the world around us, and if we try and go too fast it gets really hard and there are consequences.

          • McFlock 2.1.1.1.3
            11 July 2016 at 10:34 am

            On the flipside, I recall what some folks in one or two local eateries have tried to get away with (and been shut down for), and quite frankly I’m thankful that commercial producers are held to mandatory standards rather than being left to their own devices.

            • b waghorn 2.1.1.1.3.1
              11 July 2016 at 12:28 pm

              I’m not suggesting a free for all, but a could get a beast killed at a home killers and invite 100 people around to eat it but i couldn’t sell it tho those same 100 people. cutting out the middle men could increase profits to small blockers and make meat more affordable.

              • McFlock …
                11 July 2016 at 12:57 pm

                And quite possibly bump up the e. coli infection rates. If not you, then some lifestyler who has NFI what they’re doing – their boutique “Central Otago” wines are bad enough.

                ISTR a friend bought half a cow butchered in little packages last year, arranged with the farmer and a local butcher. Seemed to be legal. Maybe you could do something like that?

                • b waghorn …
                  11 July 2016 at 7:40 pm

                  To be legal the friend would of had to own the cow for a period of time pre slaughter, and i bet he got it at cut price $5 a kilo carcass weight at best excluding butcher fees.
                  Where as if home killers where certified so joe small block(not me any more,got sick of the wolf lurking outside the door) could sell easily to locals he could double the price he’d get off the works and it would still be cheaper for the local buyer.
                  And doing it legal means he could be on the right side of the tax man.

                  • McFlock …
                    12 July 2016 at 1:20 pm

                    I think it was a grand all up for half the animal in little packets. dunno the details.

      • save nz 2.1.2
        10 July 2016 at 9:25 am

        “You would have to completely reset the rules around land ownership and food supply rules for it to happen.”

        Yep a bit like Key is trying to reset the rules around land ownership by selling off our land assets offshore and joining the TPPA so that Monsanto and GM can control our future. Don’t forget his idea about forcible farm sales to solve his residential housing crisis so that we can house more ‘farm workers’ and ‘restaurant managers’ who are on our skills shortages immigration criteria.

        Apparently something like 50% of the NZ farmers are near bankrupt under Nationals policies….

      • Graeme 2.1.3
        10 July 2016 at 10:00 am

        Probably more like we need to rethink the way we deal with food safety. A lot of the current rules effectively entrench the largest producers, and make it impossible for small producers to retain control of their produce to the consumer.
        In beekeeping the food safety has pushed the small producers underground, cash sales and koha, or right out of the game. Big outfits are doing fine, and there’s some big corporates emerging, but when did you last see local honey at the supermarket, or even specialty shop.

        • save nz 2.1.3.1
          10 July 2016 at 10:24 am

          +1 Graeme, how about a ‘food miles’ tax and a AGR chemicals tax ….

          Of course in NZ this would be sacrilege as we are constantly told how much we need to export food to survive economically.

          No one seems to point out that it is sad when many of your own consumers can’t afford a block of cheese and it is more expensive locally than in other countries.

          • Graeme 2.1.3.1.1
            10 July 2016 at 11:18 am

            “Food Miles” was really a nationalistic non-tariff trade barrier, and a very simplistic one at that. The outcome was that our farmers saw that there was not really any point in arguing that our low input pastural systems were better, so we may as well go high input as well. And look where that led.

            Now they are trying to unwind from high inputs and get production costs back down, which is really why we had the low input systems in the first place.

    • BM 2.2
      10 July 2016 at 9:25 am

      That’s not the future, this is

      • dv 2.2.1
        10 July 2016 at 9:31 am

        Where are the COWs BM

      • marty mars 2.2.2
        10 July 2016 at 9:48 am

        Not bad although I wonder about the cost and I could see it helping if it went really big – have to start building and diversifying now. More likely as systems break down simpler rather than more complex solutions will be the option.

        • save nz 2.2.2.1
          10 July 2016 at 10:17 am

          +1 Marty mars – yep keep it simple. The idea of people having control over their own food and (shock horror) not needing infrastructure, fuel and power to run it, is obviously very disturbing to those that profit from the current system.

          What has really affected farmers for example is being encouraged to go into marginal areas to farm and bring in supplementary feed (like palm oil). The borrow to do this, the stock prices fall or commodities fall, and then the bank owns them…

          The joke of Fonterra which is supposed to be owned by the farmers is that their milk payout is dependant on percentage of milk solids indexed to global dairy prices, and the value added payment for consumer products division. Not the overall profit of Fonterra. So although the “company” executives were allowed a bonus, the farmers were given a low payout and many left in debt.

  3. save nz 3
    10 July 2016 at 8:52 am

    The scary thing is that you don’t know anymore if this is a spoof or actually what Bill English really said!

    https://boonman.wordpress.com/2016/07/09/bill-english-we-were-the-first/

    • Enough is Enough 3.1
      10 July 2016 at 9:00 am

      Haha…It isn’t too far from what he actually said.

      The lying scuzz ball.

    • ianmac 3.2
      10 July 2016 at 9:45 am

      So true and so funny. Bill will be puzzled at the roars of laughter the next time he or Key repeats the mantra. Key said it numerous times this week in QT.

  4. Paul 4
    10 July 2016 at 9:01 am

    Chilcott has shown the deception behind the Iraq war.
    Now the left must challenge the original lie that made Iraq possible.
    9/11.

      • ianmac 4.1.1
        10 July 2016 at 10:09 am

        Pat. That is a fascinating splurge from John McTernan the adamant supporter of Blair over Iraq. To him black is white and truth is misreported. A truly weird chap! Worth the time to watch the Aljazeera clip.

        • Pat 4.1.1.1
          10 July 2016 at 10:14 am

          fascinating is one word……delusional is another. If he was advising Blair its not so difficult to understand how it all came about, though it doesn’t explain why Blair listened to him.

          • ianmac 4.1.1.1.1
            10 July 2016 at 10:33 am

            Yes Pat. Maybe McTernan is carrying a load of guilt so like Blair he is in denial. The truth might be too tough for him to cope with.

    • Paul 4.2
      10 July 2016 at 9:40 am

      To the left wingers unwilling to question the 9/11 story we have been told to believe….

      Can you produce any evidence that a Boeing 767 equipped with regular engines can fly for almost 2 minutes beyond 800 km / hour in the lowers strata of the atmosphere without suffering any visible structural damage?

      Apart from on the morning of 9/11, when this feat was achieved.

      • weston 4.2.1
        10 July 2016 at 7:52 pm

        seems like all the rules of normal physics were turned on their heads on that day paul …what particularly astonished me was how a plane weighing 300 ton and made largely from aluminum could collide with a massive structure such one of the wtc towers weighing 300 000 tons and fly right inside it like it was made of cheese and ultimately reduce that structure to dust and a compararatively small pile of rubble ..it just doesnt make sense .I look upon 911 like its THE murder mystery of the century and there are just so many angles to it and so many things that dont add up .Im aware of course that any variation of perception from the official conspiracy theory is anathema to most people and the 911 truther label will be applied instantly if one ever questions that there might be more to this story than the 19 highjackers version .Funny that on sites such as this and many others bringing governments to task and keeping them honest and uncovering their bad deeds is daily fare, its beyond the pale to consider that the us gov and those in power arround it might have something to hide about 911 !!!Shock horror !!! the us gov would NEVER keep secrets from its people !!All those secret intelligence agencies and industrial military establishments are engaged in peace making and making the world a better place dont you know ??Theres no such thing as corruption or warmongering or greed or torture .Yeah right

    • Reddelusion 4.3
      10 July 2016 at 11:25 am

      Look out conspiracy nutter alert

      • Paul 4.3.1
        10 July 2016 at 11:47 am

        Explain the collapse of WTC7 please.
        Name calling is not an argument.
        I am glad you are more of an expert than experienced engineers, physicists, pilots and engineers.
        People who questioned the official lie about Iraq have been vindicated.
        Those who question the lie about 9/11 will be vindicated too.

        Please explain how WTC 7 collapsed.

        • te reo putake 4.3.1.1
          10 July 2016 at 11:55 am

          They have google on the internet now, Paul. You can look up the answer for yourself. You really should try and be a bit more sceptical about right wing conspiracies; they’re engineered to make even good folk like yourself look foolish.

          • Paul 4.3.1.1.1
            10 July 2016 at 1:01 pm

            Right wing? You’re kidding me. The only consistent voices questioning 9/11 on this site are cv and myself. Both of us are to the left of the Labour Party.
            And who attacked me?
            Someone with a non de plume of ‘red delusion’!
            And who is challenged by questioning 9/11?
            Bush, Cheney and the neocon gang.
            Hardly left wingers!

            It would appear this is a question of ( like Iraq) the establishment vs those challenging it. And, as usual, Labour Party stalwarts like trp are on the wrong side of history.

        • marty mars 4.3.1.2
          10 July 2016 at 11:55 am

          How about this angle Paul – who gives a fuck. Really why should anyone care – what does it tell us about our world that we don’t already know?

          • Andre 4.3.1.2.1
            10 July 2016 at 12:04 pm

            “what does it tell us about our world that we don’t already know?”

            marty, that is the single best insight I have ever seen into the pointlessness of the 9/11 truthers.

          • Paul 4.3.1.2.2
            10 July 2016 at 12:06 pm

            Is that your view about Iraq as well?
            You are aware about what has happened to the world since 2001 as a direct consequence of 9/11.
            I care about the erosion of civil liberties, the invasions of countries around the world.
            Don’t you?

            • marty mars 4.3.1.2.2.1
              10 July 2016 at 4:19 pm

              “I care about the erosion of civil liberties, the invasions of countries around the world.
              Don’t you?”

              Of course I care – what has that got to do with anything?

          • Paul 4.3.1.2.3
            10 July 2016 at 1:09 pm

            Who cares?
            The people of Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan and Yemenwhose countries have been ripped apart as a direct consequence of the official lie about 9/11.
            The people of America, Britain and New Zealand, whose civil rights have been curtailed as a direct consequence of the official lie about 9/11.
            A lot of people do care.
            A lot of people don’t believe the 9/11 lie.

      • weston 4.3.3
        10 July 2016 at 7:59 pm

        Look out cognitive dissonance alert !!

  5. save nz 5
    10 July 2016 at 9:04 am

    If only they had MMP!

    Green party’s Jill Stein invites Bernie Sanders to take over ticket

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/08/jill-stein-bernie-sanders-green-party

  6. save nz 6
    10 July 2016 at 9:08 am

    Sorry to post so much, but this is something positive!

    New Zealand: Maori pop song with serious message knocks Justin Timberlake off No 1

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/09/new-zealand-maori-pop-song-with-serious-message-knocks-justin-timberlake-off-no-1

  7. Penny Bright 7
    10 July 2016 at 9:34 am

    New Zealand Prime Minister John Key – working for property developers and speculators?

    No surprises there , in my opinion, given John Key is a former Wall Street banker and current shareholder in the Bank of America.

    Bernard Hickey – calls ‘a spade a spade’ :

    http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11671668

    “….Prime Minister John Key’s response was immediate – and betrayed where he stands on the issue of using a supply shock to make housing affordable.

    It was “crazy”, would leave people in the market with huge losses and put pressure on developers.

    So there we have it.

    The leader of the Government is more worried about the short-term fates of leveraged-up speculators and developers than the long-term fate of Generation Rent.
    …..”

    Penny Bright
    2016 Auckland Mayoral candidate.

    • RedLogix 7.1
      10 July 2016 at 11:54 am

      Key is not betraying anything at all. He’s being utterly loyal to his roots as a money changer.

  8. ianmac 8
    10 July 2016 at 9:35 am

    This is what has often been written on the Standard.
    The Metro has an interesting column. Hope it is true.
    “Is the age of denial over?By Graham Adams.
    “The latest uproar over homelessness, Auckland house prices and immigration marks the end of an era when voters looked the other way at the government’s behest.
    … But in 21st century New Zealand so much is denied by the National-led government and so many problems swept under the carpet it has been almost impossible for many people to know what to believe, what is true or even what matters any more……”
    http://www.metromag.co.nz/current-affairs/is-the-age-of-denial-over/

    And this Morning on Media Watch:
    “Is a ‘post-truth’ era upon us?
    The government has shrugged off events and evidence contradicting claims made by ministers recently, frustrating many journalists. Are we really in a “post-truth” period where the facts don’t matter any more? If so, do the media share the blame?​…”
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/201807260

    • save nz 8.1
      10 July 2016 at 9:56 am

      @ Ianmac Yep, we are defiantly in a post-truth period and have been for a long time.

      But the good news is, time is a good healer most of the time. Aka Iraq war, what most people always knew and the MSM and politicians always denied – The Iraq war was a sham and Tony Blair was guilty of vanity and relationships to the US president rather than his responsibility to the British people and the UN. They did NOT had to invade as a last resort and they manufactured the reasons for the illegal war.

      Blair has gone, but here in NZ we still have our vain and reckless PM who although self proclaimed popularity (like Blair) and ability to control the media, will still not help him in history, which will judge him and his judas sidekicks very harshly as he continues to sell Kiwis out, for magic beans and our land and troops for his own ego to be ‘in the club’ and make money for himself and his financial cronies.

      Even Rebstock has been denounced as the neoliberal zealot and crony that she is.

      A lot of journo’s and public servants are going to regret what they did, under Key. And we all know he will throw everyone under the bus to save himself as the truth starts coming out.

      Soon even Business and farmers will be praying for a change of government to stop the madness of Key.

      • RedLogix 8.1.1
        10 July 2016 at 11:23 am

        A lot of journo’s and public servants are going to regret what they did, under Key

        Oh it will be a lot like the years after Muldoon; you could find no bastard who ever voted for him!

  9. Pat 9
    10 July 2016 at 9:36 am

    someone who hits the nail on the head……unlike some other high profile individual

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/sunday/audio/201807688/darrin-hodgetts-welfare-with-a-big-stick

  10. rhinocrates 10
    10 July 2016 at 10:08 am

    “Never read the comments” is usually a good rule regarding online newspaper articles, but this is interesting.

    The faux-left Blairite Guardian hauls up the corpse of Neil Kinnock and attaches some jumper leads to it to attack Jeremy Corbyn and the readers overwhelmingly against it:

    https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2016/jul/08/neil-kinnock-interview-brexit-corbyn-labour

    • RedLogix 10.1
      10 July 2016 at 11:25 am

      Priceless comment here:

      If only Kinnock had been as passionate in his opposition to Thatcher as he is to Corbyn he might have won a Fu**ing election for Labour. Granted, he wouldn’t have been as rich as he is now.

      Some of us still have memories eh!

    • te reo putake 10.2
      10 July 2016 at 11:29 am

      “But one (question) I got today really did puzzle me. They said: are you coping with the pressure that’s on you?

      I said: ‘There’s no pressure on me. None whatsoever. The real pressure, the real pressure – real pressure – is when you don’t have enough money to feed your kids, when you don’t have a roof over your head, when you are wondering if you are going to be cared for.”

      Jeremy Corbyn

  11. Ad 11
    10 July 2016 at 11:44 am

    For those of you who like to fit your tinfoil hats nice and snug in the morning, Donald Trump is seriously considering Lieutenant-General Michael Flynn for Vice Presidential candidate.

    Flynn was Chief of the Defence Intelligence Agency under Barack Obama.

    I personally don’t mind retired Generals in ceremonial positions, like our own Sir Gerry Mateparae. I also don’t mind them as advisors – Flynn is already a key foreign policy advisor to Trump. And need I say that two-term Bush senior came straight out of running the CIA itself.

    There needs to be modicum of separation of military intelligence and political oversight. Bit creepy.

    • Greg 11.1
      10 July 2016 at 12:20 pm

      Things improved in America under this General,
      https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Dwight-Eisenhower-so-highly-rated-as-a-president

      If Dwight can do it, why cant Key for New Zealand,
      =another term to go.

    • Colonial Viper 11.2
      10 July 2016 at 12:36 pm

      Michael Flynn would be an outstanding choice for VP. A realist on Iraq and Iran, and who understands that US military adventurism has been a disaster for both the American people and people around the world.

      Flynn contrasts directly with the ‘bombs for humanitarian purposes’ neocons that Killary has gathered around.

      BTW did you not approve of Colin Powell as Sec State?

      • Chooky 11.2.1
        10 July 2016 at 4:09 pm

        +100 CV

      • Ad 11.2.2
        10 July 2016 at 7:14 pm

        I don’t know Flynn’s views yet – I don’t want the military that close to executive authority on principle.

        • Colonial Viper 11.2.2.1
          10 July 2016 at 10:29 pm

          You didn’t approve of Winston Churchill then? Dwight Eisenhower? JFK? Bush snr? Teddy Roosevelt?

          Flynn was head of the DIA. He wasn’t just a grunt general.

  12. Stephen Doyle 12
    10 July 2016 at 12:38 pm

    Wondering how this is reflected in NZ. The diminishing importance of the print media, the growth of online news, and the strength of TV. From Politico.

    “A separate Pew Research Center report this week exposed the shrinking relevance of print newspapers in stark relief.

    Only 20 percent of Americans said they often get news via print newspapers — down from 27 percent just three years ago. That leaves print behind the other major sources of media: television (57 percent), online (38 percent) and radio (25 percent).

    The age differences are stark: Only 5 percent of Americans aged 18-29 get their news often from newspapers. And even among older audiences, few read newspapers. Only 10 percent of Americans aged 30-49, and just 23 percent of those aged 50-64, regularly get their news from newspapers. Roughly half of seniors, 48 percent, read newspapers often.

    Half of younger Americans — 50 percent of 18-29 year-olds, and 49 percent of those aged 30-49 — said they often get news from online sources. But just 29 percent of those 50-64, and 20 percent of seniors, get their news online.

    TV is king — for now. Television news, like newspapers, skews older: A whopping 85 percent of seniors and 72 percent of those aged 50-64 often get their news on television, whether local news, network or cable. But just 27 percent of Americans 18-29, and 45 percent of those 30-49, get their news from TV — a trend that guarantees a volatile media landscape in the years to come.”

    • ropata 12.1
      10 July 2016 at 12:47 pm

      The upside is that the corporate MSM narratives are getting less traction

      The downside is that media is dumber than ever before, and fragmented into isolated bubbles of ideology.

      At least Mediawatch has diagnosed the problem
      https://twitter.com/MediawatchNZ/status/751895116957097985

      Here’s another “reporter” being useless at her job and sucking up to Key:
      https://twitter.com/DawgBelly/status/751872795538132992

      And an excellent (factual) rant by Bomber
      http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2016/07/10/the-nz-medias-farcical-new-critique-of-the-opposition-why-you-should-show-it-contempt/

      • Pat 12.1.1
        10 July 2016 at 2:09 pm

        there’s one upside to that list…..the media at least appear aware what is occurring and where it could lead…..whether the general public understand that before even more disengage in disgust or it all unravels is yet to be seen.

        • ropata 12.1.1.1
          10 July 2016 at 2:18 pm

          yeah i like the fact that web based news is kinda mad chaos at the moment, the last thing i want is for the current anarchy to be walled off by big sites like Facebook controlling the message

    • Robertina 12.2
      10 July 2016 at 11:32 pm

      The last NZ figures I heard were roughly one third print alone as predominant news source, and another third print + online predominant.
      The E Tu submission on the print media merger has some good analysis – it’s on the union’s website (plus all submissions to the merger are available on ComCom’s website).
      NZ is a bit different from the States, for a start there’s no local news broadcast network.
      There’s also potential confusion about how news is produced these days. I daresay many readers think they have seen something ‘on the Standard’ or ‘on Facebook’ but they are clicking linked content.

      • Colonial Viper 12.2.1
        10 July 2016 at 11:37 pm

        NZ is a bit different from the States, for a start there’s no local news broadcast network.

        Used to be…

  13. Chooky 13
    10 July 2016 at 4:08 pm

    ‘Anti-NATO crowds march through Warsaw amid alliance summit (VIDEO)’

    https://www.rt.com/news/350331-nato-protest-poland-greece/

    “Protests have taken place in Warsaw with members of the public angry the Polish capital is hosting a NATO summit. A few hundred demonstrators gathered in the city to march towards the national stadium where the conference was taking place…

    The three-day ‘Anti-NATO Summit’ has brought together activists from Poland, the Czech Republic, France, the US, Belgium, Britain and other countries under the motto: “No to War! No to NATO! No to militarism!”

  14. Greg 14
    10 July 2016 at 5:39 pm

    Moved to ‘open Mike’.Too many comments drifting too far from the topic of the post thanks to this comment. – Bill

    Women will vote for a women just because of it, so theres no guarantee this coup of the Labour party isnt over yet.

    2008 general election:
    Other interesting voting behaviour statistics can be found in the Levine and Roberts chapters. For example, in terms of gender, ‘In 2008 – as in all the previous MMP elections – Labour’s vote was disproportionately female…. National’s vote was perfectly balanced in 2008 – half the party’s voters were men; half were women’ (p.37). Meanwhile, ‘Very nearly four-fifths of ACT’s voters are men’ (p.38).

    http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2010/02/key-to-victory-levine-and-roberts-new-book.html

    • Colonial Viper 14.1
      10 July 2016 at 5:57 pm

      Women will vote for a women just because of it, so theres no guarantee this coup of the Labour party isnt over yet.

      It seems likely that we are going to get another woman British Prime Minister. Lucky Brits.

      Should be a huge improvement on David Cameron. Right.

    • Sabine 14.2
      10 July 2016 at 6:17 pm

      @Greg

      Women will vote for a women just because of it,

      Men will vote for a man just because of it……:)

      No women don’t vote for women just because of it, and surely you are not saying that no man ever voted for Thatcher and that not women would ever have considered voting for Corbyn.

      Stupid, sexist statement.

      • Xanthe 14.2.1
        10 July 2016 at 6:46 pm

        Sorry sabine it is real and it does happen.
        Stupid and sexist….. yes but it does happen and it is significant in the results

        • Corokia 14.2.1.1
          10 July 2016 at 7:34 pm

          I’m with Sabine. It IS a stupid sexist statement.
          It’s bordering on offensive for Greg to suggest that women put voting for another woman ahead of consideration of the policies and issues.

          • Xanthe 14.2.1.1.1
            10 July 2016 at 8:03 pm

            But it still happens

            • weka 14.2.1.1.1.1
              10 July 2016 at 8:18 pm

              Yes and some men vote for men just because they are men. What’s your point?

              • Xanthe …
                10 July 2016 at 8:43 pm

                My point is that we should work together to discourage voting on demographic basis. It undermines the democratic process.
                Please think about the memes you promote

                • Sabine …
                  10 July 2016 at 9:02 pm

                  so are you saying this to the men aswell?

                  Consider that women just obtained the right to vote about a 100 years ago. Until then it was only men voting, often voting only for men!
                  In the last hundred years since women have been given the vote in NZ they had two Lady PM – one of each side of the isle. Which means that some of the women must have voted for men. Oh, yeah, cause women don’t run that often cause its to hard or something right?

                  • Xanthe …
                    10 July 2016 at 9:09 pm

                    Absolutely !
                    My message to ALL.
                    Dont vote for the person who will do the most for your demographic
                    Vote for the person you believe will work for the good of everyone.

                • weka …
                  10 July 2016 at 9:44 pm

                  “My point is that we should work together to discourage voting on demographic basis. It undermines the democratic process.”

                  You still haven’t made the case that large numbers of women vote for women just because (as opposed to say because they feel that a woman might represent them better or support issues they are concerned about).

                  “Please think about the memes you promote”

                  What memes?

        • Greg 14.2.1.2
          10 July 2016 at 7:53 pm

          and then theirs population stats,

          I’m not being sexist for pointing it out.

          gee, its like shooting the messenger bring bad news,

          I voted for Helen, and I’m a swinging voter.

      • Greg 14.2.2
        10 July 2016 at 7:50 pm

        I provided the data link to 2008 election showing where women voted,
        its not a sexist statement, Helen was a popular polling PM leader,

        But lost the election in a landslide.

        Do you want a link to population stats, hint men are in the minority.

        • Corokia 14.2.2.1
          10 July 2016 at 7:55 pm

          Please explain what you meant by “just because of it”

          • weka 14.2.2.1.1
            10 July 2016 at 8:20 pm

            He means that women have a hive mind and are too stupid to see that voting for a woman is a bad thing.

            • corokia 14.2.2.1.1.1
              10 July 2016 at 8:31 pm

              “Women will vote for a women just because of it”
              Wondering how he is going to explain how “its not a sexist statement”

              I’m guessing he’s frantically searching for (yet more) links to try and justify what he wrote.

        • Sabine 14.2.2.2
          10 July 2016 at 8:01 pm

          that must be the reason John Key is loosing.

    • RedBaronCV 14.3
      10 July 2016 at 6:21 pm

      Really – women will vote for a female just because she’s female? The quote you provide doesn’t suggest that at all.
      Women are voting further left – which is maybe not so surprising because they do a substantial part of the unpaid work ( child raising!) and a selfish right wing society derides those who aren’t “me first”.

    • weka 14.4
      10 July 2016 at 8:26 pm

      “Women will vote for a women just because of it…”

      Citation needed. The bit you already quoted says that more women will vote for Labour under MMP than men. Labour being a political party not a woman.

      And just to save us all a lot of time, I’ll note your previous multiple anti-feminist and misogynistic comments in ts as a frame of reference for this conversation. Which means you have a bit of an uphill battle to demonstrate that your comments in this thread are anything other than pushing your sexist agenda again.

      • Xanthe 14.4.1
        10 July 2016 at 9:03 pm

        Gosh that small truth really got under your skin !
        Do you feel some responsibility?

        • weka 14.4.1.1
          10 July 2016 at 9:39 pm

          Feel free to present some actual evidence to support your argument. Or try addressing the actual points I made.

    • Bill 14.5
      10 July 2016 at 9:26 pm

      You guys want to draw a line under this?

      Some women will give gender a place in their voting deliberations.
      Some men will give gender a place in their voting deliberations.

      If there are slightly more women than men of voting age, then it figures that a given party might have more votes coming from women than it does from men.

      Even if there’s no difference between the numbers of voting men and women, there’s a fair chance that one party or another will better reflect womens’ general concerns within a given social context, or that one will better reflect men’s concerns within a given social context – particularly in a world shaped by neo-liberal dog shite.

      That and a whole pile of other stuff (shite featuring large)- besides no-one with half a mind giving a second’s credence to Greg’s rantings.

      In essence, Gregs comments are stinky arse and Xanthe’s seem to be a weird attempt to perform some kind of internet rub-a-dub with them.

      And yes, maybe I should have been paying attention to that bit of the thread and shit shoveled it over to ‘open mike’.

      • weka 14.5.1
        10 July 2016 at 9:42 pm

        “That and a whole pile of other stuff (shite featuring large)- besides no-one with half a mind giving a second’s credence to Greg’s rantings.”

        Nevertheless, on a left wing blog, regular anti-feminist and misogynistic comments are a problem that need to be addressed. Greg has form, and he’s been warned before.

        Besides, if stupid were a criteria for not responding to a comment, then half the content on ts wouldn’t exists 😉 (am thinking of a chunk of the RW comments for instance).

        Shifting to OM might be a good idea.

        • Greg 14.5.1.1
          10 July 2016 at 11:51 pm

          My post was based on evidence of voting behaviour, read the book.
          Go and look at the Guardian link i gave, it claimed what i posted.
          vote for me cause im a breeder.

          Helen Clark feminism saw he introducing middle class welfare to the breeder.

          Now this is the outcome of polices against improving the economy of workers.

          http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/81788403/the-struggle-to-balance-budgets-for-todays-working-poor

          Will Labour make a difference, I doubt it, unless they improve workers bottom line, because it all just make workers poorer

          • weka 14.5.1.1.1
            11 July 2016 at 12:01 pm

            “Go and look at the Guardian link i gave, it claimed what i posted.”

            I read what you cut and pasted. It didn’t say what you claimed.

            And it’s not from the Guardian.

            And I have no idea what book you are talking about.

            The onus is on you to provide back up. In this case if you want to be taken seriously, you need to cut and paste the parts that you are referring to (not expect people to read whole articles and mindread your intent) as well as linking directly.

            You have now established yourself on ts as a misogynist and a class bigot. It’s up to you if you want to address that. I’ll just keep naming it every time I see it.

      • Xanthe 14.5.2
        10 July 2016 at 9:44 pm

        Bill …Its actually a very serious question about the basis of democracy!

        Is democracy where everyone votes for what they believe is the best outcome for their group? (or selves)
        Or
        Is democracy where everyone votes for what they believe is the best outcome for everyone?

        And which of these two outcomes does each of us encourage in our actions?

        This question cuts to the heart of this discussion. Please dont belittle it with talk of “rubadub”

        • Bill 14.5.2.1
          10 July 2016 at 9:54 pm

          Voting for representatives is no basis for democracy.

        • weka 14.5.2.2
          10 July 2016 at 9:56 pm

          Is democracy where everyone votes for what they believe is the best outcome for their group? (or selves)
          Or
          Is democracy where everyone votes for what they believe is the best outcome for everyone?

          I hate to break it to you, but lots of peopel vote from self-interest.

          As for people who vote for women, there are many reasons and at least some of those easily fall into the ‘best outcome for everyone’ category.

          • Xanthe 14.5.2.2.1
            10 July 2016 at 10:15 pm

            Agreed lots of people do vote for what they think is self interest. Our task is to convince them that their interest ultimatly lies in participating in democracy for the good of all

            Agreed also that people do support representitives of all demographic as best for all

            Bill.. Not quite ready to let go of representitive democracy yet even tho it demonstraively isnt working “for the good of all” at this time, I feel that direct democracy at this time would be worse!

            The reasoning behind that is because untill we deal with the organised misinformation, lies, misdirection, fearmongering, and quasiscience . That currently pretends as news media, democracy of any stripe wont work.

      • marty mars 14.5.3
        10 July 2016 at 10:15 pm

        Why not just delete it – what purpose does it hold, what does it offer for the left – nothing imo. Leaving it up just encourages more of it.

        • Bill 14.5.3.1
          10 July 2016 at 10:26 pm

          Maybe. Or maybe someone who was quietly thinking such thoughts has read the responses and altered their view.

          • marty mars 14.5.3.1.1
            10 July 2016 at 10:38 pm

            oh dear wouldn’t want to try that strategy with too many topics but I suppose it doesn’t matter if 1 man maybe changes their distorted and obnoxious thinking.

  15. b waghorn 15
    10 July 2016 at 6:24 pm

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11671955

    Blairo might end up in court yet, his own dp has changed sides!

    • Bill 15.1
      10 July 2016 at 10:32 pm

      He’s just covering his arse.

      I’m seeing it a bit like how all those UK TV celebrities suddenly discovered they’d never liked Jimmy Savile after all…like Michael fucking Aspel claiming he’d never had anything to do with him and then, upon being shown a clip from “This is Your Life” (that he hosted) claiming he had no memory and certainly never thought JS was anything other than a very nasty and unlikable piece of work.

  16. Chooky 16
    10 July 2016 at 8:34 pm

    This is seriously good…Tell Grandma and Grandpops about the ‘naughty drugs’

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/201807210/science-commentator-malvindar-singh-baines

    “Neuroscientist, Dr Malvindar Singh-Bains, discusses new research about psychoactive drugs and the applications they might have for neurological diseases.”

  17. Robertina 17
    10 July 2016 at 11:20 pm

    Thought it was weird the youth turnout was supposedly very low in the EU referendum, and it turns out that was wrong – it was actually nearly twice as high as the first figure:
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/09/young-people-referendum-turnout-brexit-twice-as-high