Open mike 13/08/2016

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, August 13th, 2016 - 87 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 …

87 comments on “Open mike 13/08/2016 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. miravox 1
    13 August 2016 at 7:31 am

    A bit of cash can keep someone off the streets for 2 years and is cheaper than the do nothing option.

    Researchers compared the eventual fate of individuals and families who called into a homelessness prevention call center in Chicago, Illinois, when funds were available versus those who called when funds were not. The results showed that

    If someone is about to become homeless, giving them a single cash infusion, averaging about $1000, may be enough to keep them off the streets for at least 2 years. That’s the conclusion of a new study, which finds that programs that proactively assist those in need don’t just help the victims—they may benefit society as a whole…

    It appears that people are often made homeless by an unexpected event/debt. Resolving that one-off crisis prevents homelessness.

    Not exactly rocket science, but this research puts in doubt the belief that giving funds to to people at risk of homelessness is futile.

  3. Penny Bright 3
    13 August 2016 at 9:29 am

    Effective CENSORSHIP of Auckland Mayoral candidate Penny Bright, by ‘The Nation’.

    I was invited to attend The Nation Auckland Mayoral debate on 27 July 2016, then ‘uninvited’ on 8 August 2016, for what I believe to be totally bogus reasons.

    Here’s the email correspondence :

    26 July 2016

    “Thanks for agreeing to be part of the Auckland Mayoral debate August 13.

    I wonder if you could be at 3 Flower Street , Eden Terrace at 0830 for makeup .

    We can organise you a cab if you would like as parking can be often tight at that time of the day

    Lisa Owen will be conducting the panel.

    There will be five of you altogether so it promises to be an interesting debate.

    I look forward to receiving the main points to your campaign.

    Kind regards
    …..
    (Senior Producer
    The Nation)

    9 August 2016

    “I am afraid that we will have to cancel plans to have you on The Nation this weekend.

    For two reasons

    1) Having more than four candidates in our studio just doesn’t work and puts too many demands on the studio and doesn’t lend itself to useful debate

    2) we have made a decision based on legitimate polling that the maximum people we will have is four.
    ….”
    (Senior Producer
    The Nation)

    _____________________________

    I’m a third time Auckland Mayoral candidate, with over 20 years local government experience fighting for the public and the public interest.

    I’m not a corporate or political party ‘sock puppet’, and have proven track record and policies that clearly set me aside from these other ‘centre-right’ Auckland Mayoral candidates.

    Do YOU think it’s fair that I was shut out of this Auckland Mayoral debate on The Nation?

    I don’t.

    Penny Bright
    2016 Auckland Mayoral candidate.

    • The Chairman 3.1
      13 August 2016 at 10:00 am

      Establishment candidates only?

      It’s undemocratic.

      So much for TV3 upholding their role within the fourth estate.

    • Garibaldi 3.2
      13 August 2016 at 10:00 am

      Don’t worry Penny, any show on Commercial TV is merely a talkfest for muppets these days! They are not interested fair and proper representation.

    • Lanthanide 3.3
      13 August 2016 at 10:33 am

      “Do YOU think it’s fair that I was shut out of this Auckland Mayoral debate on The Nation?”

      Yes, if they based it on publicly available polling figures that shows you far behind the other 4. If that’s not the case, then no.

      I wouldn’t expect a 3-way debate between Lianne Dalziel, John Minto and Michael Hansen member of the “Economic Euthenics” party.

      This is one of Mike’s previous entreaties to vote for him:

      The main issue this election is the treatment of mayoral 3rd party candidates, the use of a type of ray which can pass thru walls and sting, slow cook and annoy candidates to try to tireout and upset them before nomination day, should not be happening during the time of a Labour Govt. The use of an offensive tingle ray at meetings, and looking inside candidates houses and stinging them on the head with cellphone-lasers is disgracefull, there is no co-operation from the Labour Govt police, Remember, it is not compulsory to vote, but if you do vote, vote for me.

      • The Chairman 3.3.1
        13 August 2016 at 1:01 pm

        “Yes, if they based it on publicly available polling figures that shows you far behind the other 4.”

        All candidates should be allowed to partake in a televised debate, regardless of how they’re polling.

        Moreover, giving all candidates the opportunity widens their notability and may enable them to grow their support. Ensuring no candidate is disadvantaged by denying them the opportunity to partake.

        • Lanthanide 3.3.1.1
          13 August 2016 at 1:54 pm

          Even candidates who always come last and are complete nutjobs, like Mike Hansen?

          Just because someone is a candidate, doesn’t mean they’re worth listening to, or are on any sort of equal footing with the other candidates.

          • The Chairman 3.3.1.1.1
            13 August 2016 at 2:40 pm

            “Even candidates who always come last…?”

            Yes, regardless whether or not one presumes they’re worth listening too.

          • alwyn 3.3.1.1.2
            13 August 2016 at 2:44 pm

            I think you are being very unfair to Hansen.

            Looking at the results from the 2013 election he was only a tiny little way behind the winner, Lianne Dalziel. He got a grand total of 364 votes. She was only a little bit ahead with her 72,600 total. Close contest I would say.

            On the other hand I think you are being very kind to him when you describe him as a “complete nutjob”. He seems to be far worse than that.

        • Andre 3.3.1.2
          13 August 2016 at 2:08 pm

          All 17 of them?

    • Ben 3.4
      13 August 2016 at 10:55 am

      Do YOU think it’s fair that I pay my rates and you choose not to? Perhaps TV3 was showing you the level of respect you show towards the people in the region that pay their way.

      • Halfcrown 3.4.1
        13 August 2016 at 11:30 am

        Well done Ben, I was wondering when someone would bring that up. If you are so concerned about Bright not paying her rates, how do you feel about Jackson who has already had a gold-plated lifestyle courtesy of the NZ tax payer now expects the ratepayers of Welling to fund his latest ego trip.

        http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/film/76735650/City-councillor-questions-whether-Jackson-needs-ratepayer-help-for-film-museum

        • Ben 3.4.1.1
          13 August 2016 at 2:22 pm

          Jackson is not running for mayor, so I don’t care what he gets up to.

          • Rosie 3.4.1.1.1
            13 August 2016 at 3:05 pm

            I do. Jackson is nothing but a leech. Our rates have to play for his playthings. Our rates, that have gone from $2,400 pa to $3,000 in the space of four years. I will not vote for any mayoral candidate who promotes the convention centre/film museum and the white elephant airport runway extension.

            • Ben 3.4.1.1.1.1
              13 August 2016 at 3:33 pm

              You are well within your rights to vote for stagnation. And people wonder why Wellington is so dull.

              • Rosie …
                13 August 2016 at 3:37 pm

                🙄

              • Rosie …
                13 August 2016 at 4:04 pm

                You know what Ben, I wasn’t going to bother replying to your comment as it was “so dull” but I will, as it’s raining and I don’t have a book to read.

                Yours was a pointless meaningless passive aggressive comment. It didn’t even have any substance to it. In future, instead of behaving like a whiny kid in the school yard can you provide a solid argument? I don’t mind a smart arse if they actually give me something smart to reply to.

                And btw, regionalism is so outdated dude. Are you from the 70’s?

                • Leftie …
                  13 August 2016 at 5:12 pm

                  +1 Rosie.

                • Ben …
                  13 August 2016 at 5:56 pm

                  I am from the 70’s. Please explain to me what Peter Jackson has to do with Penny Bright expecting people to vote for her when she is using roads, footpaths, rubbish collection, recycling and countless other Council services without paying for them?

                  Yes Peter is rich and should pay for his pet projects, but slightly off topic don’t you think? The reason PB was uninvited was probably because she does not have a snowball’s chance in hell in gathering even a few votes, and to be frank doesn’t have a clue what it takes to run a city.

                  • Leftie …
                    13 August 2016 at 6:21 pm

                    I would like a go at answering that. Peter Jackson wants to use public money from ratepayers for his pet projects. There is your connection. Have you bothered to read why Penny Bright has been refusing to pay her rates? And Penny Bright probably has a better clue than you do Ben.

                    “The reason PB was uninvited was probably because she does not have a snowball’s chance in hell in gathering even a few votes”

                    You know that’s not the point in a supposed “democracy” don’t you, Ben?

                  • Rosie …
                    13 August 2016 at 6:48 pm

                    Sorry Ben, didn’t realise you were a moderator on TS, hence the telling off for “being off topic” on Open Mike.

                    Yes, that was sarcasm.

                    Glad you know the reason Penny bright was uninvited by TV3. You must work there and know these things.

                    Yes, that was sarcasm too. So, really, I’m as bad as you.

                    Oh, and what Leftie said. Twice.

                    • Ben …
                      13 August 2016 at 7:22 pm

                      Oh dear Rosie. I did not acuse you of being “off topic”, but was questioning the relevance of connecting Penny with Peter. Leftie had a go at joining the dots, but the relevance is tenuous at best, with Peter asking for money (they could have said no), and Penny simply not paying her way. I fully understand why Penny is not paying her rates, and fortunately for the other law-abiding ratepayers the court found her case did not stack up.

                      I do not work at TV3, and note I used the word “probably”. My opinion was based on TV3 stating “we have made a decision based on legitimate polling”.

              • Leftie …
                13 August 2016 at 5:10 pm

                Ben, Peter Jackson is a very rich man, he has already had the National government change our labour laws to rip off and side line kiwi workers in that industry for his corporate boss, Warner Bros, why should we fund his pet projects? Let him fund it himself if that’s what he wants. You can bet his “museum” won’t be free to view.

                • Mrs Brillo …
                  13 August 2016 at 7:42 pm

                  Totally agree with you both about PJ funding his own showcase.

                  In fact it was Wellington’s rates continually going up to fund “events” that we had no interest in (and the daily snarl up at the Mt Vic tunnel) that provoked our move away to a distant place. Now that there is no parking in the city, or that which remains is charging like a wounded bull, we don’t even bother going there. Bit of an own goal, WCC.

                  In Wellington’s situation, we would fund several large and convenient and cheap parking buildings, on the City dollar, and watch the out of towners stream back to shop and attend all those “events”. You can’t live forever on selling each other coffee, however gourmet.

            • Leftie 3.4.1.1.1.2
              13 August 2016 at 5:06 pm

              Well said Rosie, totally agree with you.

          • Halfcrown 3.4.1.1.2
            13 August 2016 at 4:18 pm

            I thought you were concerned about people rorting the system that is why I brought it to your attention.
            So I can take it then, as Jackson is not running for Mayor you are quite comfortable for the rate payers to subsidise his ego tripping, but Bright as she is running for mayor you are getting upset over her non-payment of rates. If you are concerned about non-payment of rates, what about Otago University who is buying up property like it is going out of fashion,, owns nearly all of North Dunedin reducing the rate take of Dunedin as they don’t pay rates or one cent towards that white elephant of a stadium that was forced on to the Dunedin ratepayer after they voted against it, Or the Velodrome at Cambridge Ratepayers voted against it 60/40 but still went ahead. Instead of shooting off glib comments , have you stopped and thought that Bright might have a point in her battle with the council and this could be one of the only weapons she has.
            Like Rosie, I am also very concerned about the amount of corporate welfare that goes on in this country, nationally as well as locally, and the amount ratepayers are expected to pay to support the lifestyles of these people who can well afford to pay for these things themselves. Like one Councillor in Hamilton who said “Three million is not a lot of money for a cycle track,” maybe not for her when they are spending others money, but to some ratepayers, it is a further burden on top of their existing rate burden which they are finding more difficult to pay each year.
            Perhaps if TV3 had Bright on The Nation programme she could have been crossed examined and asked why she is not paying her rates .
            I am sure she would have answered that question.

      • Kevin mCCready 3.4.2
        13 August 2016 at 6:35 pm

        Ben you fail to understand. She doesn’t pay her rates because she contends there is a legal reason not to. The Council does not publish proper accounts as it is obliged by law to do so. I support her and so do multiple levels of the court system. Whether or not she finally prevails, thus doing a service for us all in terms of forcing contract transparency at council, is a matter for the highest court of our land. I hope they make the right decision.

    • mary_a 3.5
      13 August 2016 at 12:28 pm

      Penny Bright (3) …

      No it’s not fair at all Penny. You aren’t a corporate/government moll, unafraid of challenging the establishment, so that in itself demonstrates where TV3’s media “objectiveness” lies! Shame on the network!

      You will be getting my vote Penny.

      • James 3.5.1
        13 August 2016 at 2:01 pm

        Well that’s a vote well wasted.

        • Leftie 3.5.1.1
          13 August 2016 at 5:20 pm

          Well, that’s just your opinion James.

          • Reddelusion 3.5.1.1.1
            13 August 2016 at 8:51 pm

            No it’s a fact on the premise that Penny sits in the novelty nut bar catogorary of mayoral candidates. If Mary is voting for PB because it makes her feel better that’s rationale as long as she is cosignant that her vote will have no impact on who actually becomes mayor

            • DoublePlusGood 3.5.1.1.1.1
              14 August 2016 at 2:16 am

              It’s quite possible though that she’s the strongest candidate. After all, have you seen the rest of the shoddy selection available?

        • mary_a 3.5.1.2
          13 August 2016 at 5:21 pm

          @ James (3.5.1) … you are entitled to your opinion.

    • Leftie 3.6
      13 August 2016 at 5:03 pm

      No Penny Bright, it’s not fair and it’s not right. TV 3 ‘s National government funded with tax payer monies was never into democracy, justice and fair play.

    • Reddelusion 3.7
      13 August 2016 at 8:53 pm

      I think an appearance on the comedy channel would be more appropriate

    • b waghorn 3.8
      13 August 2016 at 9:25 pm

      Have you considered running for just a position on the council .? as it’s possibly more attainable than the mayors job.

    • marty mars 4.1
      13 August 2016 at 2:59 pm

      Jeepers I wonder if zero will do this story

      “The Clintons’ prior tax returns showed that from 2007 through 2014, the couple made $139.1 million — much of it from paid speeches. The Clintons paid $43.9 million in federal taxes over those years — an average tax rate that works out to 31.6 percent.”
      and
      “The couple donated 9.8 percent of their adjusted gross income to charity, according to a campaign news release on Friday.”

      http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/83134770/clintons-paid-342-effective-tax-rate-in-2015-campaign-says

      Now believe it or not I’m not a great clinton fan but shit she’s so far better the donny it is embarrassing – for his supporters that is.

  5. Agora 5
    13 August 2016 at 10:15 am

    Good ! When the big one comes Jackson’s treasures will be swept into the middle of the harbour where they belong.

  6. Paaparakauta 6
    13 August 2016 at 10:45 am

    When the big one comes Jackson’s treasures will be swept into the middle of the harbour where they belong, together with Taonga from Te Papa.

    The film industry will probably not survive the next global downturn. One has only to look at the fate of film industries on both sides of the Tasman during the Great Depression.

  7. Sanctuary 7
    13 August 2016 at 12:04 pm

    Andrew Little seems to have shaken the cosy little neoliberal estalishment tree, if the outrage from the rightwing media is any guide. Fran O’Sullivan, Tracey Watkins and the government chief court jester David Farrar have all howled in outrage at Little’s temerity in demanding his MPs don’t frollick with the enemy.

    Good stuff.

    • alwyn 7.1
      13 August 2016 at 2:51 pm

      Andrew is trying to set up a precedent so that he can refuse to debate John Key before the next election.
      He certainly won’t want to let the public see how hopeless he is by taking part in such a debate and he will be trying to argue that it is a matter of principle that he should avoid the public humiliation he would undergo.

      • North 7.1.1
        13 August 2016 at 7:08 pm

        Ejaculate did you Alwyn ? Following that outburst. Tosser !

      • whispering kate 7.1.2
        13 August 2016 at 8:40 pm

        Alwyn seriously you are kidding , JK does not debate, he just spits and shouts/raves like a petulant spiteful child. Watch a few Oxford Debates and then look at JK – he’s a complete bully and idiot when it comes to debating. The moderators need a bloody good lesson in how to manage debates here in NZ – JK is like a runaway juggernaut with no control and needs reining in when debates of importance are taking place. Its more a circus (which is the only place suitable for JK) than a serious debate when he is participating.

    • Rodel 7.2
      13 August 2016 at 9:52 pm

      Little-Decisive strong leader stuff. I like it. Not wishy washy, ‘I’m comfortable with that, but what I can say is…………..’ zzzzzzz

  8. SmallFurryAnimal 8
    13 August 2016 at 12:10 pm

    More trouble for Hiltlary coming in October

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmYrDNSglag

    Wikileaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange promised to release more damning emails about the Clinton Foundation, and warned he has enough evidence on Hillary Clinton making secret deals with an alleged Islamic State sponsor for the FBI to indict her.

    Asked by British journalist Afshin Rattansi on Saturday if he had “the email which will put Hillary Clinton behind bars,” Assange claimed to have 350 emails on a French transnational concrete company named Le Farge that allegedly paid ISIS to do business in regions controlled by the terror group.

    The report, by British political blog The Canary, showed the Clinton Foundation accepted upwards of $100,000 from the ISIS sponsoring company.

    • Lanthanide 8.1
      13 August 2016 at 12:22 pm

      “The report, by British political blog The Canary, showed the Clinton Foundation accepted upwards of $100,000 from the ISIS sponsoring company.”

      And….?

    • Ben 8.2
      13 August 2016 at 2:27 pm

      The big reveal, just before the election! Now where I have heard that cunning plan before?

      Kim Dot Com was spouting about this reveal a good month ago.

      • James 8.2.1
        13 August 2016 at 5:30 pm

        I still remember dotcoms moment of truth – one of the funniest efforts for a political reveal ever.

  9. ianmac 9
    13 August 2016 at 2:21 pm

    Valerie dropped to Silver after being pipped on a last throw by an American.
    Good work though Valerie.

  10. Chris 10
    13 August 2016 at 3:07 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/83106447/government-chooses-preferred-buyer-for-sale-of-1100-tauranga-state-houses

    More right-wing thuggery from a morally redundant NGO. This sorry excuse for a community group needs to be completely shunned off the face of the earth. If its corporate MO isn’t allowing the people in its care to be neglected and abused it’s actively supporting this neo-liberal band of thugs we have as a government to destroy what little’s left of our welfare state. Those running IHC have ensured this is the only NGO with the type of conscience necessary to foist such corporate violence on to the people of New Zealand. They are despicable, greedy neo-liberal filth and must be stood up to.

    • Rosemary McDonald 10.1
      13 August 2016 at 5:56 pm

      +++many, Chris.

      There is at least one young man who would be alive today were it not for that mob penny pinching on staff.

      Always an interesting half hour spent on the Charities Commission website having a gander at their Annual Returns.

      There’s GOLD in them there ills….

      There was also an interesting wee bit of finagling done a few years back when a certain organisation was put into some kind of statutory management and, bugger me, if one of the top honchos was given a key role in the new management structure…very weird. I’d love to have to time to properly research and document that time.

      However…what do I know…these are very clever people….

    • BM 10.2
      13 August 2016 at 7:26 pm

      IHC will do a much better job.

      • Rosemary McDonald 10.2.1
        13 August 2016 at 8:10 pm

        “IHC will do a much better job.”

        What? At cutting ‘expenditure’ and increasing ‘returns’….?

      • Sabine 10.2.2
        13 August 2016 at 8:58 pm

        so you are saying that National has been doing a bad job then the last 8.5 years.
        would it be time then to let go of Nick Smith, Paula Bennett and Bill English for failure to perform their task as per their job description? Or would you like your government big enough for these three useless bludgers?

      • Chris 10.2.3
        14 August 2016 at 5:40 pm

        IHC will gradually kick people out and turn them into group homes for people with intellectual disabilities. There is no other reason for them to buy those houses. General community housing provision isn’t part of what IHC does.

  11. joe90 11
    13 August 2016 at 3:47 pm

    Those running IHC

    They’re experts at shitting on their employees so I’m sure they’ll have no problems doing the same to their tenants.

    • Chris 11.1
      14 August 2016 at 5:43 pm

      That’s what they’ll do, all right. No doubt about it. National Party toadies the lot of them. The hypocrisy of that organisation is gobsmacking.

  12. Gosman 12
    13 August 2016 at 6:05 pm

    I know some people here might bemoan me raising the example of Venezuela again but I am genuinely interested in how people on the left can explain how sugar production in that country has fallen so dramatically after it was nationalised in the early 2000’s. This is not just a one off event that can be explained by the effect of drought. It was a sustained declined over a period of years. Why couldn’t Venezuela keep sugar production at the levels it was when it was largely controlled privately?

    http://www.latimes.com/world/mexico-americas/la-fg-venezuela-imports-20160809-snap-story.html

    • Psych nurse 12.1
      13 August 2016 at 7:14 pm

      Probably something to do with the abolition of slavery among cane cutters.Or perhaps loss of markets for having the temerity to nationalize a USA owned industry.

      • Gosman 12.1.1
        13 August 2016 at 9:43 pm

        Do you have evidence it was US owned? By the way the market is Venezuela as they have bot been self sufficient in sugar. Therefore it shouldn’t matter what the US does market access wise. The nationalised sugar producers should have a captive domestic market. Why can’t it satisfy it?

        • Psych nurse 12.1.1.1
          13 August 2016 at 10:06 pm

          Like you I manufactured an example to justify my argument.We all know the collapse of their economy relates to the collapse of the price of oil. They used the high oil returns to subsidize other industry and provide employment.

          • Gosman 12.1.1.1.1
            14 August 2016 at 2:33 am

            How did the price of oil dropping impact on them producing sugar for domestic consumption? Surely it should have made it more attractive to create sugar locally rather than spend scarce foreign exchange to import it.

  13. North 13
    13 August 2016 at 7:32 pm

    Val’s the bomb. “A medal and I’m gonna celebrate…..!” What a champ’ ! You look at that and you look at the Fiji Sevens team and their humility. In world excellence……man ! That New Zealand is so naturally the populous part of the Pacific……makes me soooo proud. Guess that’s why I prefer South Aux over Remmers. And dare I say it……brown over…….

  14. b waghorn 14
    13 August 2016 at 8:25 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/discovery

    One more step in the sff farms sale

  15. Draco T Bastard 15
    13 August 2016 at 9:06 pm

    Dumb and Dumber: Economist vs. WEF on Biggest Threats to Economy

    Yeah – please note the “rigorous” expert opinions who all said Brexit would crash the stock market. Amusingly, they said Brexit would never happen in the first place.

    In the US, “rigorous” expert opinions said there was no housing bubble. Rigorous expert opinions at the Fed believed there would be four hikes this year!

    “Rigorous” expert opinions on the global economy have been wrong for years.

    The experts have been so wrong, for so long, that it’s a wonder people did not turn to social media sooner.

    And that is the big problem in today’s world. The so-called financial ‘experts’ are simply wrong about pretty everything.

  16. UglyTruth 16
    13 August 2016 at 9:20 pm

    According to her Doctor, Mrs. Clinton suffers from “Dementia, Seizures and Black-outs.”

    http://halturnershow.com/images/HillaryMedicalRecords.jpg

  17. millsy 17
    14 August 2016 at 12:43 am

    Well well well….looks like Marama Fox is a hard right moral conservative. Homophobic, anti sex, anti abortion, anti women, anti this and anti that. Probably anti evolution as well,

    No wonder she supports charter schools – they are perfect for religous indocrination centres.

    You give Destiny Church one, and within a generation, you will see gays hanging from the lampposts of South Auckland.

  18. millsy 18
    14 August 2016 at 12:46 am

    Is Marama Fox a Manchurian candidate for the Destiny Church. We shall see..