Open Mike 15/01/2018

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, January 15th, 2018 - 291 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 Policy).

Step up to the mike …

291 comments on “Open Mike 15/01/2018”

  1. One Anonymous Bloke 1

    Are Bunnings really trying to do the right thing?

    Bunnings to pull Yates pesticide allegedly link to bee deaths…

    Or was their parent company forced into taking action by overseas protests…

    Homebase remains the only garden retailer out of the 10 surveyed not to publicly pledge action to reduce the use and sale of neonicotinoid…

    So are they going to go the whole hog and stop selling eg: neonicotinoid-based pesticides altogether, the way they plan to in Europe? Or will they try and dump product here until our regulators catch up?

    Still, it’s an opportunity to put pressure on all the local retailers.

  2. Ed 2

    Why is the weather so hot?
    Newshub investigated. The closest to the truth came in this response from MetService meteorologist Lisa Murray.

    “”We had 5-6degC higher than normal in some areas of the Tasman Sea. In our coastal waters it was 3-4degC for some areas as well.
    “It’s going to have a big impact on life within the sea, and also on weather events. One of the ingredients for these really intense lows is these warmer sea temperatures.”

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2018/01/record-breaking-weather-why-is-it-so-hot.html

    Of course Metservice spokespeople are going to be cautious.
    They remember what happened to Salinger for mentioning the cc words.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10568596

    • James 2.1

      Again you tell lies and deliberately try to twist things to your story.

      Salinger was fired for ignoring company policy and talking to the media without permission on several occasions.

      • Stuart Munro 2.1.1

        Salinger was sacked for telling the truth when NZ was governed by liars.

        • James 2.1.1.1

          Any evidence to back that up?

          No of course not.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.1.1.1

            At the time, Jacqueline Rowarth said there were very fine people on both sides.

            So yes, Salinger told the truth.

            That NZ was governed by liars at the time is well documented.

          • Stuart Munro 2.1.1.1.2

            No amount of evidence would persuade a perverse individual like yourself. We have had this conversation many times.

            But since you ask:

            Salinger didn’t understand why he was dismissed.

            https://thestandard.org.nz/the-great-big-list-of-john-keys-big-fat-lies-updated/ substantiates the dishonesty of that government.

            • alwyn 2.1.1.1.2.1

              You don’t really believe that there is anything sensible in that diatribe do you?
              The title would be far more accurate if it was labelled “The great big list of Blip’s lies about John Key”.
              I had a look at these claims of Blips on a number of occasions. His problem is that he claims that Key said things that he didn’t actually say.
              He then claims that his misinterpretation of Key’s words is somehow the real thing.

              But no amount of evidence would persuade a perverse individual like yourself. Sad really.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                We’re still waiting to discover whether you lied deliberately about SCF and the extended guarantee the other day.

                There are plenty of open-and-shut cases on BLiP’s list. Tranzrail, Brethren, Standard & Poors, troops to Iraq, Whitechapel – itself a corrupt device, Pike River, drinking age, etc etc.

                • alwyn

                  I am sorry that I have illustrated that your ridiculous beliefs about the SCF affair have not a skerrick of truth to them.
                  Can I suggest you give up on the topic and go back to something that will no doubt give you orgastic pleasure.
                  You remember that John Key was of Jewish descent. He was actualy sent to New Zealand as part of a vast Jewish plot to take over the world.
                  Have a look here and you will see a description of that affair.
                  https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007058

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    I already linked to Treasury’s information on their application for entry into the extended guarantee scheme in 2010. Your assertion that they “couldn’t be dropped” from it makes no sense, because they hadn’t been accepted into it (the extended scheme) at that time.

                    Still, your admission that the National Party should have exercised more oversight concedes the point. Thanks.

                    • alwyn

                      You really are determined to come across as rather thick, aren’t you?
                      I’ll break into little steps.
                      1. SCF were included in the guaranteed company list in 2008.
                      2. That guarantee scheme was going to be replaced.
                      3. The company, SCF, was on the verge of collapse in 2010.
                      4. If they were not going to be in the replacement scheme most of their funds would have immediately been withdrawn.
                      5. They couldn’t possibly repay their debts.
                      6. The original guarantee would have been called on.
                      7. The Government, foolishly perhaps, hoped that the company could still be salvaged.
                      8. The were included in the new scheme in the hope that the salvage could succeed.
                      9. It didn’t.
                      There, is that now clear to you? They couldn’t have had their Government guarantee, under one scheme or another, withdrawn without immediately inducing a collapse.

                    • dv

                      Yep Alwyn, that what I said a couple of days ago.
                      Th NATZ paid out 1.6Billion to SCF.

                    • alwyn

                      @dv
                      There is one thing you still don’t seem to understand.
                      Either that or you do understand it but aren’t willing to recognise the truth.
                      The National led Government did not pay out 1.6 billion to SCF as you have repeatedly been claiming.
                      The Government paid out nothing to SCF.
                      I’ll repeat it so that it might penetrate.
                      The Government paid out NOTHING to SCF.
                      Nothing, zero, zilch.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    “Foolishly”.

                    Thanks for conceding the point again.

              • Stuart Munro

                Actually I think Blip was probably overly generous – Key’s was unquestionably the worst and most corrupt government ever to blight New Zealand.

                You seem to lack the perspective to appreciate that lying and stealing public assets are not a public service – no doubt because you were in some sense part of the blight.

                • Stunned Mullet

                  “Key’s was unquestionably the worst and most corrupt government ever to blight New Zealand.”

                  Comedy gold or lack of long term memory ?

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    Why, did Muldoon turn the country into a tax haven and run a cash-for-access scheme for Ministers?

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      😆

                      Muldoon had a number of less than complimentary actions during his time in government amongst them

                      Abolishing Labour’s superannuation scheme without new legislation. In the case it was found that revoking a law in such a manner without consent of Parliament was illegal under the Bill of Rights, The Moyle Affair, Appointing Sir Keith Holyoake as Governor-General upon Sir Denis Blundell’s term ending,the constitutional crisis after the 1984 election and his ‘pissheadedness’, the Keith Allen affair etc etc…

                      Also NZ is not a tax haven and your continued panty bunching over National’s fundraising is quite dull. In twenty year’s time historians will see the Nat government of 2008-16 as very much a continuation of the Labour government’s actions and policies of 1999-2008. Whether they view the government as a good and the country well run will have more to do with the state of the world and that time.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      New Zealand is a tax haven.

                      Or perhaps this is false advertising:

                      New Zealand is not looked upon as being a traditional offshore financial center, nor is it known as a “tax haven,” yet the country provides all of the advantages of an established offshore jurisdiction.

                      If you can’t see anything problematic in Cabinet Club I shouldn’t be at all surprised.

                    • reason

                      …. And Mossack fonseka were not tax haven pimps founded by a real nazi …. with those nazi ‘grey area’ ethics

                      And they were not pimping John Keys little tax haven …

                      oh hang on …. yes they were.

                      Stunned discord ……… Cognitive Mullet

                      Talk to the Mossack … fool

                  • Ed

                    Sorry fourth worst government.

                    1. Massey’s government 1912 – 1925
                    2. Douglas’s government 1984 – 1988
                    3. Richardson’s government 1990 – 1993

                  • Stuart Munro

                    Perhaps you think the use of NZ as a repository for criminal proceeds is a good thing. The parties involved felt sufficiently guilty about it to murder a journalist who uncovered part of what was going on.

                    I don’t imagine that Hubbard considered the Key government in a positive light, given that it stripped him of the wealth he built up over a lifetime without even bothering to employ legal processes.

                    The employees of Solid Energy, too, have reason to curse the name of that fuckwit Bill English, the ‘responsible minister’ who allowed it to be run into the ground.

                    Muldoon was rightwing, but neither a crook nor a traitor. The Key government abounded in both – and its leader was the worst of all.

                  • Ed1

                    Tragi-comedy, and yes Key and Nat ministers made an artform of short and long term memory loss – accompanied by misleading and ambiguous statements and dirty tricks . . ..

                • Ed

                  Yes there are quite a few New Zealanders whose own private assets increased as a result of the Key government
                  I would predict that some of the most fervent defenders of neoliberalism onnthis site have benefited from either the government stealing our assets or allowing the housing market to run out of control.
                  Their love of the free market is just a reflection of the greed and selfishness.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    I predict they’re mostly middle-class turkeys chanting for Xmas.

                    • Stunned Mullet

                      I predict both your fine self and Ed undertake bukake parties with goats.

                    • Ed

                      Very well put.
                      The middle class were happy to buy into neo-liberalism in the 1980s, not realising that once the working class had been devoured, the plutocrats would be coming for them.

                    • greywarshark

                      OAB
                      …chanting AGAINST Xmas. They are bright enough to know where their interests lie. And the fact that Christmas is cherished by other NZs makes no bones with them. Any bones that fall, will not be turkey ones if they can help it.

                    • ropata

                      I predict that Stunned Mullet will get banned from TS and go over to Yawnz to moan about it

                  • red-blooded

                    Ed – Are you one person with two different visual symbols (I never know what to call these) or two people with the same name? I’m guessing the former, but the visual thing is confusing. Is there a way to fix it?

                  • NZJester

                    The Free Market has never really been that. Through the actions of the Key lead government, for instance, they weighted the employment market heavily in favor of employers. They put in employment legislation into the market to help keep wage increases artificially low.
                    While business had record profits they begrudgingly increased wages and some even tried some tricks to get rid of union workers to replace them with non-unionised labor at a lower price. Then there was the way the contracting fo services like transportation etc. were set up by the Key Government to allow wages and conditions of those employees helping provide the public services could be lowered by changing them from employees of the councils to employees of subcontractors.

              • Wensleydale

                Okay, so why don’t you do us all a favour, since we’re such witless and easily led sheep, and write up a list of Blip’s lies about the lies Key told. Go on. It’ll give you something to do that doesn’t involve making snarky remarks about anyone who says something disparaging about Saint John of Key.

                • alwyn

                  I’ve done it before for representative examples of Blips claims..
                  Why don’t you have a look on this blog and you’ll find several examples.
                  I can only assume you are to lazy to do it or you just go “nah, nah, nah” when someone demonstrates that you are too foolish to read the comments carefully.
                  All good politicians do it. They say things that sound very open but are very carefully hedged so that they can back out of them if they want to.

                  Look at Grant Robertson on TV3 recently. He was asked about the pay of the New Zealand Women’s Rugby team. He said something that sounded as if he thought they should be paid the same as the All Blacks. Thrilling if you think there is a huge Gender pay gap.
                  People took him to say something like. “I am looking forward to talking to the Rugby Union about pay equality”.
                  Wonderful for women, right? What he said was “pay equity” which would allow him in the future to turn into anything at all.

                  Look at Winston in 2005. He said that he wouldn’t accept “the baubles of office”. People took it to mean he wasn’t demanding a Ministerial role and all the perks that go with it. What happened of course that he became Minister of Foreign Affairs and toured the world in style. When questioned he said that the Ministerial position he took wasn’t a bauble, which is a thing of little worth.

                  Key was just very good at it and Blip was one of the many KDS sufferers who chose to pretend things Key said didn’t mean exactly what they said.

                  • Hornet

                    Hi Alwyn

                    I don’t support any political party, and have voted across the political spectrum over the years. But the left’s obsession with John Key was much the same as the right’s obsession with Helen Clark. It was born out of confusion (perhaps envy?) about how someone they despise can be some popular, and about how such a person can be so astonishingly successful.

                    • Ed

                      Not confused why he was popular.
                      The corporate media ran a 9 year propaganda campaign for him.

                      Martin Bradbury explains it perfectly.

                      Where the hell was the NZ media for the last 9 years?

                      The greatest fraud in the BIMS reports that highlight the horror of National’s 9 years in power is that the NZ mainstream media unquestioningly allowed these scumbags to get away with it for a decade!
                      Where the hell was the NZ media for the last 9 years when the conclusions of the BIM reports were so obvious to everyone else?
                      Let’s call the last 9 years of National’s rule what it really was – class-austerity. A draconian policy that destroyed the most vulnerable but because media are middle class they never saw it and allowed them to get away with it.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Exactly. The Left despises Key’s dishonesty and gutter ethics, and the Right despises Clark’s gender.

                    • alwyn

                      Of course they disliked him.
                      He defeated their Joan of Arc, the sainted Helen.
                      That could never be forgiven.
                      There was, of course no difference between Clark Derangement Syndrome and Key Derangement Syndrome.
                      Both were functions of total incomprehension that someone the sufferers couldn’t stand was so incredibly popular and successful.
                      The CDS sufferers recovered. Even Hooton got over it. Sooner or later the KDS group will also recover and wonder how they could have been so silly.

                      As far as taking Bradbury’s opinion on anything as being sensible and meaningful you would have to be crazy.
                      He is the only person I have ever heard of who was more than 11 without having got over the idea that a nickname of “Bomber” was not really something to be disposed of along with your teddy bear.

                    • ropata

                      There is no comparison because all the Right could come up with was silly accusations about a painting that Clark signed for charity, and the speeding motorcade incident.

                      What else? so-called “Nanny state” stuff like lightbulbs, showerheads, anti-smacking legislation.

                      The National Party Herald(tm) helped with their “attack on democracy” campaign against the Electoral Funding Act. (but they forgot to mention Cabinet Club or the Nats dodgy backers like China, SkyCity, Exclusive Brethren).

                      Hollow Men and Dirty Politics exposed their lies, and no politician has the guts to try and sue Nicky Hager because they know they will lose.

                    • Hornet

                      “The corporate media ran a 9 year propaganda campaign for him.”

                      That’s the same nonsense the right ran about Helen Clark. It’s simply another form of the sort of denial I mentioned above.

                    • Hornet

                      “Both were functions of total incomprehension that someone the sufferers couldn’t stand was so incredibly popular and successful.
                      The CDS sufferers recovered. Even Hooton got over it. Sooner or later the KDS group will also recover and wonder how they could have been so silly.”
                      To be fair, Key’s popularity was incredible, and his level of popularity outlasted even Clark. That must have really lurked the left even more.

                      “As far as taking Bradbury’s opinion on anything as being sensible and meaningful you would have to be crazy.”
                      Bradbury has a sorry reputation for getting things wrong. There are many excellent left wing bloggers; he isn’t one of them.

                    • Hornet

                      “There is no comparison…”

                      There is a direct comparison. The lefts obsession with ‘dirty politics’ is a case in point. As if the left never engaged in dirty politics.

                    • I feel love []

                      Please give an example of “the left” engaging in Dirty Politics.

                    • Hornet

                      “Please give an example of “the left” engaging in Dirty Politics.“
                      The so called ‘pledge card’. BTW, in my view ‘dirty politics’ is just ‘politics’.

                  • Wensleydale

                    “National is not going to raise GST. National wants to cut taxes – not raise taxes.” – Saint John of Key on the campaign trail, 2008.

                    2010, Key raises GST from 12.5% to 15%.

                    “I am not interested in selling assets – I’m all about building assets.” – Saint John of Key on the campaign trail, 2008.

                    Goes on to sell a metric butt-load of assets, despite an opposing referendum, including… state houses. And then plays a shell game with the proceeds: https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/285835/have-asset-sale-funds-gone-where-promised

                    Now, you can dance around mendacious crap like that all you want, Alwyn, but the fact is a lie, is a lie, is a lie. Key was a serial liar. Fact.

                    But, hey, go crazy trying to defend the indefensible. It’s your time to waste.

                • greywarshark

                  Reminds me of a sort of joke I heard.
                  A confused signwriter’s big mistake.
                  Instead of John Key, Used Car dealer
                  he put –
                  Car Key, Used John Dealer.
                  We misread the signs when we voted him in!

                  I see John Slater, Whaleoil’s dad and Jenny Shipley, a woman of substance, encouraged him to come here and bring his money magic.
                  http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11760707

                  David Farrar is either tongue in cheek or is embedded in a culture of his own cognisance, like a raspberry in jelly.
                  https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/06/the_john_key_biography_-_the_early_years.html

                  Some interesting background on John Key that may have slipped by unread.
                  http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/250525/Who-is-John-Key

                  • OncewasTim

                    What sort of substance is that Jenny Shipley. I’d love to know so I can find out what sort of antiseptic to use if I ever come across it

                    • greywarshark

                      I think the situation is that it is many-sided and hard to treat. It is difficult with some ailments, you carry them within you and by the time they break out noticeably, you’re very poorly indeed.

          • In Vino 2.1.1.1.3

            He was sacked for publicising ‘climate change’ when the powers that were did not want it publicised and tried to silence him. But those who, like James, do not want to see will ask for ‘evidence’. History will judge James poorly, I think.

            • James 2.1.1.1.3.1

              Again you cannot point to him being fired for that because that’s not what happened.

              Sorry that the evidence points to you being wrong again.

              • In Vino

                I bet you can read between the lines when it suits you. But here you prefer prevarication based on technicality. Of course NIWA would find weasel-words to obscure the issue, and it suits you to bleat about it.

        • Ed 2.1.1.2

          Key’s wretched government was particularly embarrassed by an infamous interview by the BBC Programme Hardtalk.

          One line stood out from the interview that displayed Key’s contempt for independent scientific research.

          “He’s one academic, and like lawyers, I can provide you with another one that will give you a counterview.”

          The transcript of part of the interview is on this link.

          http://www.noted.co.nz/archive/listener-nz-2011/john-keys-unhappy-week-at-the-bbc/

          Another interesting point is in this excerpt from the Listener article.

          “More alarming still, perhaps, is Joy’s suggestion that scientists have become afraid of speaking out, for fear of losing funding: “He says people are scared to voice concerns for fear of political backlash, or the ‘Jim Salinger effect’, in which a top NIWA scientist lost his job in 2009 after speaking to the media.”

          The Salinger sacking clearly had an impact.

          Here are video links to the ghastly Key’s shaming by Steve Sackur.
          Sadly few New Zealand journalists had the courage to question this dodgy character.

          • cleangreen 2.1.1.2.1

            100% Ed,

            Anyone who ‘idolises John Key; is either living off the ‘ill gotten gains’ his policies of sell/carpetbag/extort from the taxpayers sold/lost assets is a sick puppy.

            You and our side have some ‘conscience and wish to see them gone to another planet like ‘planet key’.

      • Salinger was fired for ignoring company policy and talking to the media without permission on several occasions.

        ZOMG, a knowledgeable person spoke to the MSM about what they know. HOW DARE HE.

        See, part of the problem is that our scientists and public servants now have to get permission first. They didn’t have to previously and the government was effectively more open because of it.

        We actually need these people talking openly so that we can have an open and honest society rather than one hidden behind the lies of the politicians.

        And according to that article he wasn’t even warned about it which means that the employer broke the law.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.2.1

          How can that happen under the SOE model?

        • greywarshark 2.1.2.2

          This is the way that a government operating with a profit motive, not a service motive or even an efficient and effective motive on a not-for-profit basis, treats erstwhile civil servants. Most uncivilly!

          From link Ed provided above.
          http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10568596
          24 April 2009, 11.59pm

          Dr Salinger, 62, says he was summarily dismissed from the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa) at 4pm on Thursday, and given three and a half hours to clear out his Auckland office.

          He told the Weekend Herald he received no formal written warnings leading to his dismissal, which followed a 27-year career as a Government scientist, and no criticism of his work.

        • BM 2.1.2.3

          See, part of the problem is that our scientists and public servants now have to get permission first. They didn’t have to previously and the government was effectively more open because of it.

          I did some work for DOC 25 years ago, part of the employment contract was that I wasn’t allowed to say or do anything that could negatively impact the government of the day and if I did, immediate termination of employment.

          My job was pretty low level so I guess that condition applied to every individual who worked for the government.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.2.3.1

            Sure, no-one wants wooden sweaty cheerleaders expressing their ignorance. Dr. Salinger doesn’t fall into that category. In fact, informing people within his area of expertise is his duty.

            NZAS strongly supports the right of scientists to speak out freely in their area of scientific expertise. Any underlying institutional problem with this issue should be addressed before serious damage occurs…

            NZ Association of Scientists.

            • BM 2.1.2.3.1.1

              Working in the private sector is probably his best option then, he’s then free to say whatever he wan about the governments( as long as it doesn’t negatively impact on his employer)

              We can’t have special people, rules have to apply to everyone.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                😆

                The Cabinet Manual, for example.

              • People should be able to speak out freely as long as they’re speaking the truth.

                Anything else is oppression.

                EDIT: David Fisher: OIA a bizarre arms race

                So, when thinking of the OIA, I had thought to start in happier times.

                The difference between when I started 25 years ago and now is astounding when it comes to dealing with the public service. If I was writing a story which in any way touched on the public’s interaction with government, I would pick up the phone and ring an official. It really was that easy.

                Receptionists would direct you to areas in departments, and staff there would know who would be best placed to fill the gaps in my knowledge. That’s what we in the media need – knowledge. We don’t need quotes, although they inevitably come with the information. We need information, unvarnished, unspun and in a form in which we can understand what it actually means.

                Which is how it should be. None of this carefully crafted BS that we get now that seems designed to protect the politicians and their policies.

                • McFlock

                  But the flipside of that is when the media look for quick confirmation of what turns out to be – or should obviously be – made up bullshit. A careless confirmation by someone answering off the top of their head, possibly sarcastically, becomes “confirmed by the department”.

                  The classic example being the (Asia Air?) flight that had a hard landing in the US west coast and got evacuated – injuries and a couple of deaths – the local station had been informed by some wag late one night that the crew names were fit for a ChCh restaurant menu. The station called the NTSB in washington, and an intern apparently confirmed that the crew names were “Sum Ting Wong, “Wi Too Lo”, “Ho Lee Fuk”, and “Bang Ding Ow”. I shit you not, the station went live with the “breaking news” because some intern said an obvious wind up was true.

                • cleangreen

                  100% Draco,
                  BM comment hit a raw nerve with us all.

                  ‘We can’t have special people, rules have to apply to everyone.’

                  In the right wing bloggers world this effectively means “as long as it is anyone outside the right wing beltway” – it seems.

    • Drowsy M. Kram 2.2

      Thanks for reminding us about this. I was pleasantly surprised that a NZer who was a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (which was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007) chose to voice his concerns in the media. All the more courageous given that he has suffered from depression.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Salinger

      Why was/is informing the public, via the media, against the policies of SoEs and other corporates? What/who does that silencing seek to protect?

      Thankfully, Dr Mike Joy doesn’t work for NIWA.

      • Why was/is informing the public, via the media, against the policies of SoEs and other corporates? What/who does that silencing seek to protect?

        Those are the big questions.

      • alwyn 2.2.2

        “NZer who was a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (which was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007)”.
        Gosh, that sounds terribly impressive doesn’t it?
        Does that mean that he is Jim Salinger, Nobel Prize Winner?
        Actually my own record is vastly more impressive. I regularly donate to the Red Cross. Does that make me a 3 time Nobel Prize winner. After all MY organisation won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1917, 1944 and 1963.

        • red-blooded 2.2.2.1

          Were you carefully selected by the Red Cross from a field of eminent worthies, based on your proven expertise, experience and leadership in the field of charitable donations? No? I thought not.

          • alwyn 2.2.2.1.1

            Well no I wasn’t, but neither was Salinger. He certainly doesn’t seem to have been “carefully selected from a field of eminent worthies”, as you seem to think.
            He was one of about twenty editors of one chapter of one report, as far as I can discover. It was solely about Australia and New Zealand and the majority of the editors were Australian.
            He wasn’t even the senior of the New Zealand editors He was just one of the lower level group. The leading New Zealander representative in the group was a retired Geography Professor named Fitzharris.

        • Drowsy M. Kram 2.2.2.2

          That’s some magnificent spin, Alwyn – all I had to offer was facts and questions.

          Perhaps you bowled for Aussie in another life?

          • cleangreen 2.2.2.2.1

            100% Drowsy M. Kram
            Alwyn is one of the ‘key’ partners in the right wing junk science spin machine.

            ignore the idiotic spin.

  3. eco maori 3

    Congratulations to Bryce from the Rock radio for the new baby I said that the Lady’s contributions to our society is a lot greater than they are given credit for Congratulations to your lady to M8 it a lot of work raising children. Congratulations to Jens new marriage may you 2 be happy forever. It was awesome to hear the rumble crew back on air. Its awesome to hear that Joseph has got the fight all signed up and Ka pai I want to put this up before you people came back on air just to busy. Ka kite ano

    • James 3.1

      I’m with you on the fight – looking forward to watching it. Good to see a kiwi boy doing so well on the world boxing stage.

      The sweet science is beautiful

  4. Anne 4

    Jacinda Ardern nails it nicely:

    https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/would-new-zealand-feel-jacinda-ardern-says-trumps-alleged-shithole-remark-hugely-offensive?auto=5711045042001

    Imagine if Trump knew anything about NZ (which he doesn’t) then he would know we have a dark skinned indigenous race called “Maori” who represent a sizable proportion of our population. So much so, around half of the so-called white “Pakeha” population also have ‘Maori” blood streaming through their veins.

    I guess we qualify as one of his “shithole” countries.

    Edit: here’s the complete interview

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/world/2018/01/donald-trump-s-s-thole-comments-hugely-offensive-ardern.html

    • James 4.1

      No because he was talking about the countries not the people.

      I know people like to try and spin it as a racial issue but it’s not – note Jacinda wouldn’t say it was either.

      And the truth is – those countries are shitholes.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1.1

        No, he was talking about the people – specifically their migration to the USA.

        Why are we having all these people from shithole countries coming here?

        To put it another way, “why don’t people from nice places want to come and live here?”

        Your man’s an idiot.

        • James 4.1.1.1

          Even your quote identifies that he was saying the country was the shithole nothing to do with the people – which is the point.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 4.1.1.1.1

            Explain why they’re undesirable as potential citizens then. Dear White Supremacist Leader makes a clear connection between country and people.

            The reason you can’t see it is that he’s your man.

          • weka 4.1.1.1.2

            So if someone said NZ was a shithole you wouldn’t think it was a comment about the people as well?

            • Muttonbird 4.1.1.1.2.1

              This. Deliberate incomprehension from James but no surprise – these people must fein denseness to defend their position.

              • North

                James has an interest in saying Trump is not racist.

                • Muttonbird

                  He’s trying to wriggle out of a clear statement that when you refer to a place as a shit-hole you are not talking about the people in it.

                  It’s pretty pathetic, but that’s James.

            • James 4.1.1.1.2.2

              Well there have been commenters on here who have called nz a shithold and I didn’t assume that they were racist.

              Given the lack of outrage at the comment I assume that others readers didn’t as well.

              • weka

                You argued above that Trump was talking about countries not the people that live in them. I’m asking you if someone called NZ a shithole, would you think that wasn’t about the people as well?

                Trump is obviously a racist. There is probably nothing he can say at this point about non-white people that is outside of that context.

                • AB

                  I have occasionally thought NZ was a bit of a shithole – because in my experience people like James (actually worse, our James is pretty mild really) are in the majority.

              • In Vino

                By the way James, ‘shithole’ is a metaphorical term, and calling it a fact makes you look as silly as Trump was to use the term – which he now denies doing, but who would believe him?

      • mary_a 4.1.2

        But James (4.1) a nation is its people. Or put another way, the people are the nation.

        Trump was without doubt slagging off the people from those countries he called shitholes!

        • Puckish Rogue 4.1.2.1

          Haiti is a shithole, why else would its people be trying to leave (and going to ‘murica)

    • Bill 4.3

      Does anyone, for even the briefest of moments, believe that previous US admins and leaders of western governments and institutions have held these places (and the people that live there) in less contempt than that expressed by Trump?

      Because if you do, I’d argue that you really need to pick up a history book and throw away all those “ready to hand” rosy glasses that are probably strategically dotted around the show.

      Trump is an ignorant racist. I don’t think anyone would seriously argue with that. But what he did was merely give expression to an attitude that is more or less ubiquitous within echelons of power and that can be traced back to at least the 1830s and Britain’s actions against Egypt… the aftermath of Haiti’s independence in 1804…the Atlantic slave trade from the 1400s onwards.

      Anyone care to comment on “super-predators” or the size of the African American prison population today, or anything about colonisation or the economic and political subjugation of post colonial entities and the accompanying unprecedented transfer of wealth from “South” to “North” that’s still continuing today?

      And does anyone think that the very people in positions of influence and power who are front-footing and encouraging this hue and cry over Trumps statement are somehow divorced from the deeply ingrained institutional racism that Trump guilelessly, by dint of giving voice to his own prejudice, shone a light on?

      In short, my enemy’s enemy can fuck off too.

      • red-blooded 4.3.1

        Bill, there’s been plenty of comment from people on this site about things like the effects of colonialism on indigenous populations, racial profiling by police, inequities in arrests, prosecutions, guilty verdicts and sentences, trade disparities and exploitation of the “developing” world by the “developed”, America’s culpability in trying to shape the world around their perceived self interest… It’s not an either/or situation. Recognising and deploring Trump’s casual racism (which, let’s remember, does actually impact his decision making and hence other people’s lives) doesn’t stop people being able to think about, comment about and work against other kinds of racism or exploitation.

        If you don’t want to join in when people condemn the latest Trump fuck-up, then don’t. But dumping on people who do doesn’t achieve a lot, does it?

        • Bill 4.3.1.1

          Oh dear. Tell me red-blooded. When you were a kid and you got one of those ‘dot to dot’ books, did you manage, after you’d put the tip of the pencil to the paper, to draw it across the paper so that dots got joined up? Or did you just sit there all day feverishly focused on the dot beneath your pencil tip…perhaps lift the pencil and set it down on the next dot?

          I ask, because you’ve just more or less stated an inability to chew gum and walk at the same time – ie, it’s beyond you to contemplate Trump’s bullshit in a wider, revealing context.

          And by the way – since you made the accusation, just where in the name of fuck in the comment you’ve responded to, is it that I’m dumping on people who have joined with others in condemn[ing] the latest Trump fuck-up?

          Seems to me you’ve just provided an excellent variant of an observation made by Hanswurst

          I’ve noticed that it’s a particularly common trait in liberals to equate a failure to prioritise condemning whatever is most important to them with supporting or defending that particular thing.

          Now sure. You’re not suggesting I’m supportive of Trump, merely that I ought to shut the fuck up if I’m not prepared to read from the script everyone’s apparently signed up to.

          • adam 4.3.1.1.1

            No matter how many times you have said trump is drop kick (politest phrase I could think of).

            Intersectional comments which bring in the wider economic issues or historical analysis , will get you told off Bill – did you miss the memo?

            • Bill 4.3.1.1.1.1

              Was that memo circulated by the liberals4U crowd?

              I got excommunicated a good number of years ago for mentioning the five letter C word. So yeah, nah – I missed it 🙂

          • red-blooded 4.3.1.1.2

            Bill, it’s possible to disagree with someone and rebut a comment without being abusive. Maybe you missed the memo.

            And you spent a lot of time and venom yesterday dumping on people who were condemning the latest Trump fuck-up. I’d argue that you took a pretty aggressive tone with Stuart Monroe, above, too.

            Nice of you to notice that I’m not accusing you of condoning Trump. In light of that, it’s hard to see the relevance of your quote from Hanswurst, though…

            You can say whatever you like about Trump. Nowhere above did I suggest you shouldn’t. Just maybe be a bit less aggressive when responding to others.

            • Bill 4.3.1.1.2.1

              Well. Seeing as how I didn’t submit a comment in response to Stuart Munro…

              Anyway. It seems your not going to offer any comment on the three broad questions posed in the original comment above, nor comment on the observations made in that comment either.

              Just another sub-thread running down the drain….

        • Drowsy M. Kram 4.3.1.2

          R-B, like you I interpreted Bill’s summary “My enemy’s enemy can fuck off too.” as asserting that enemies of Trump should “fuck off” too, i.e. dumping on those that condemn Trump. But maybe that’s too narrow an interpretation, and Bill is saying that, when it comes to Trump, everyone should F-off.

          I’m finding all the comments here (both negative and, incomprehensibly, positive) on Trump’s ‘fuck-ups’ informative. The unprecedented public circus that informs these comments will continue, and so will the comments.

          • Bill 4.3.1.2.1

            I’d have thought it was pretty obvious that was aimed at liberal elites given that I was very specific in the comment (and have been in most others too) about who I consider the hypocrites to be.

            Seems clarity might have nothing to do with anything afterall and reactions could just be down to straight up bias. Oh well.

            Do I have to accentuate the qualifiers in that there last bit btw?

            • Drowsy M. Kram 4.3.1.2.1.1

              Thanks Bill, that might help, but I’m probably too disconnected from some PoVs to understand even the apparently simplest of statements. I will endeavour to keep these misinterpretations to myself in future.

              • Bill

                Elements within the Democratic party have teamed up with neo-cons to push against Trump and get back to a situation where the US is aggressively belligerent in its foreign policy.

                spikeyboy provided a link to a very good article on the goings on. (Here it is again – Glen Greenwald writing at The Intercept.)

                Now (assuming you’ve read the above link), everyone who’s following the lead offered by the unholy alliance of neo-cons/Democrats on Trump, is not only undermining and marginalising those within the US who are seeking to build something for meaningful change, but they’re also unwittingly helping some very (how to say politely?) unsavoury characters and elements gain or regain their position of primacy within US politics.

                • Drowsy M. Kram

                  Very helpful – sincere thanks for taking the time to put it together. So, neocons (still) loathe Trump (even though he has been largely bought into line on neocon orthodoxy), but presumably aren’t completely unhappy with some of his policies/promises (repeal ‘Obamacare’), and his support for tax cuts.

                  Paints a depressing picture of the stranglehold the neocons have on political representation in the US (and presumably even here in NZ).

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    Assuming the word “neocon” is a catch-all phrase with no meaning whatsoever: so far as I can tell, the gross melange of kick-backs, tax-breaks, rorts and special interests encapsulated in US legislation is about as far from “small government” as you can get.

                    Describing the denizens of the US government as “neo-cons” stretches the meaning to breaking point.

                    Then again, anyone can “paint a picture”.

                    • Bill

                      Neo-con was the name given the “hawks” (that tendency) that left the Democratic Party in the 70s, aligned with the GOP and wound up in the political wilderness after Bush and Obama…but have now (it seems) gained favour and influence within the Democtaric Party.

                      It’s all in the Greenwald piece that is very much worth the read.

      • weka 4.3.2

        “Does anyone, for even the briefest of moments, believe that previous US admins and leaders of western governments and institutions have held these places (and the people that live there) in less contempt than that expressed by Trump?”

        Yes, I do. I think that different people at different times hold differing levels of culpability. Some people try and do something good, some are utterly venal, lots of variation.

        Just because other administrations are also varying levels of evil doesn’t make them all the same. Making out there is no difference is basically minimising Trump’s actions and culpability.

        • Bill 4.3.2.1

          Did I say there was no difference or did I ask if any had held lesser contempt?

          I can think of some who were more racist and whose pronouncements were at least as contemptible. And while at a push I could probably conjure up a piece of rhetoric or two, I can’t bring up an example of any western leader, government or administration that pursued or enacted foreign policies that ran counter to the inherent racism that lies beneath the economic exploitation driving liberal capitalism.

          • weka 4.3.2.1.1

            You asked if anyone believed that any other admin or govt held Haiti etc in less contempt, implication being that they hold Haiti in at least the same contempt as Trump. You’re second paragraph appears to support that.

            • Bill 4.3.2.1.1.1

              Yup. And I’ve explained or expanded on why I asked in 4.3.2.1

              I can’t think of any, who in your words, “tr[ied] to do something good” – ie, pushed back against institutional racism in foreign relations or set to compensating nations of ‘the Global South” in any way for the Norths racist colonialism and post colonial, similarly racist, imposed economic order.

              Maybe I’m either over-looking or not aware of some admin, government, leader or policy.

              • One Anonymous Bloke

                imposed economic order

                The Kyoto Protocol exempted “the Global South” from emissions targets at least partly on that basis.

                Obviously it doesn’t say “imposed economic order”; it’s more diplomatic 😉

                The UN decolonialization program?

                The UDoHR?

                Are these not attempts to “do something good”?

                • Bill

                  The Kyoto Protocol is dead, no? And I’d punt that the Global South had to fight for some modicum of equity. You reckon it was an expression of altruism on the part of richer parts of the world?

                  Fuck knows, they’ve had to fight like bastards to have any sense of equity included in subsequent climate agreements and accords. And rhetoric, as we know, is cheap.

                  Decolonisation was a somewhat cynical process of replacing direct (and expensive) occupation and rule with a more remote economic domination…and even that economic “lock down” generally wasn’t just given (if “given” is in any way the right expression).

                  And anyone who left or attempted to leave the “economic fold” was hammered – removal of democratic government and imposition of western friendly dictatorships etc.

                  UDoHR maybe nice words and maybe an expression of assumed western superiority.

                  And how many of the above were freely entered into by “the west” with the interests of “the south” uppermost in mind?

                  On first blush and just a little passing thought, I’d tend towards answering “no” to your question.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    That’s more-or-less what I figured you’d say. Personally I think it’s toxic; a similar “burn it all down” “logic” to that applied at Ben Tre.

                    • Bill

                      What you “figured” I’d say is irrelevant.

                      If you think those things you listed are example of western leaders, governments or institutions genuinely attempting good with regards the Global South, then some level of argument or reasoned opinion is due…not some vacuous bullshit about what ‘you reckons’ of what I think.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Your premise is that no-one “tr[ied] to do something good”. Nobody.

                      I’m satisfied that you’re wrong.

                    • Bill

                      No OAB. You obviously need to either go away and brush up on basic levels of reading comprehension or else fuck off and have a wee think about lying.

                      My comments here have revolved around previous US admins and leaders of western governments and institutions (4.3) any western leader, government or administration (4.3.2.1) and admin, government, leader or policy.(4.3.2.1.1.1)

                      Up. your. fcking. game.

                      I don’t mind if you disagree (however vehemently) with what I say, argue or reason. But that shit – of lying and replacing others’ arguments with spurious nonsense you yourself have just made up is going to end in a dogshit on shoe situation.

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Ok then, I’ll rephrase for clarity and comprehension.

                      Your premise is that nobody in the group defined as

                      previous US admins and leaders of western governments and institutions, any western leader, government or administration, and admin, government, leader or policy tried to do anything good.

                      I’m sorry for any offence you may be feeling if that’s not quite right either.

                      I’m satisfied that you’re wrong, and I don’t feel any need or obligation to engage with you any further on the matter.

                    • Bill

                      Belief’s sometimes like that OAB – groundless satisfaction necessarily nursed along by the act of “shutting up shop”,

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Belief…

                      replacing others’ arguments with spurious nonsense you yourself have just made up

                      😆

                    • Bill

                      An unexpectedly self effacing or aware comment from you there OAB… 😮

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Too cryptic for you, eh.

                      My satisfaction isn’t based on belief: that’s just some spurious nonsense you made up, which is funny, because you just got all offended when you thought I was doing the same, and compared me to a piece of dogshit on your shoe.

                      I hope that’s clearer.

                    • Bill

                      So no self awareness afterall. Ah well.

                      (The “shoe” was a metaphor for the site btw)

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      Will you be ok?

  5. Whispering Kate 5

    He needs to clean up his own backyard before criticising other people’s backyards I would think. He has tunnel vision.

  6. Ed 7

    Massey University professor of freshwater ecology Russell Death discusses the health of our waterways.

    Luckily for him John Key and Nick Smith are no longer in charge – or he might be looking for another job (as Salinger found out).

    Here are some of his frank responses to some questions about the state of our rivers and lakes.

    The greed of industrial farming and a slack neoliberal regime has destroyed our environment. People should be put on trial for this – not knighted.

    Herald question.
    “What are the principal drivers of freshwater degradation? What pollutants, from which sources, are doing the most damage?”

    In New Zealand, intensified agriculture is driving the decline in freshwater.

    This agriculture increases in-stream nutrients – nitrogen and phosphorus – and deposited sediment.

    Herald question.
    “The latest stocktake by the Ministry for the Environment and Statistics New Zealand found that, of the 39 native fish species covered by the report, 72 per cent were either threatened with, or at risk of, extinction. How grim is the outlook for our freshwater species?”

    As of right now I think the future for river ecology and Kiwis’ ability to swim and enjoy our water – just look in the news – is very grim.
    But as with Steve Austin and The Six Million Dollar Man, we can rebuild, restore and save them.
    We just need to do the right thing for the right stream.
    Fence the correct riparian width for the farm type you have or fix the urban sewage infrastructure.
    It’s not really rocket science. We just need to do it.
    And perhaps if the Government and the agricultural industry was showing more leadership, we would.

    Herald question.
    “We’ve now seen New Zealand’s freshwater problems reported on by major outlets like The Guardian, The New York Times, The Economist and Al Jazeera. Do you feel our clean, green image is sustainable if we can’t tackle the issue?”

    The image is almost gone, I think.
    And like virginity, once it is gone, it is gone.
    We have lots of foreign students who come through the university and they are all telling me the pristine view of “Hobbiton New Zealand” is rapidly disappearing.
    I always conclude my public talks by saying we can only fool people for so long.
    It seems the international press has already figured it out.

    Read the rest of the interview here.
    50 questions about the environment: Our rivers

    • indiana 7.1

      Can’t argue if anyone ever describes NZ as a shithole country…

      • Pete 7.1.1

        … and maybe the proof is on a site called Kiwiblog. Everyday.

        Whether such a clump of shithead people with shitty attitudes is representative of the whole country and is enough to term the country as a shithole I don’t know, but there they are.

        • Ed 7.1.1.1

          New Zealand certainly has an ugly underbelly with racist views that would not go unnoticed in Queensland, Warsaw or Alabama.

    • Ed 7.2

      Herald question.
      How has this (freshwater degradation) changed over the past few decades, and why? Where are the worst parts of the country for degradation?

      Russell Death

      Many aspects of ecological health and water quality have declined precipitously in the last few decades because of the massive conversion of sheep and beef farms to dairy, and the further intensification of dairy farms.
      In terms of severity the worst areas are still in urban and industrial areas.
      But they are proportionally a very small length of stream affected.
      Whereas the intensified dairy areas of Waikato, Manawatu, Taranaki, Canterbury and Southland have the greatest length of stream where ecological health is degraded.

    • Ed 7.3

      The Herald has given up on saying we have a pristine environment.
      Apparently, according to them, we now have pristine beaches.

      Our pristine beaches and Hobbiton film set are something to celebrate.

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11975358

      The Herald must have been ignoring these news stories…..

      Faeces to blame for 16 Auckland beaches too filthy for swimming

      Dirty Auckland beaches to avoid this summer

      It clearly doesn’t even read its own articles.

      Auckland’s polluted beaches: the five big questions

  7. greywarshark 8

    This heading caught my eye.
    Stephanie Rodgers on Boots Theory makes some good points to continue thinking about for the next 3 years, and these were made presciently, in March 2017.
    https://bootstheory.nz/2018/01/15/2017-rewind-why-fiscal-responsibility-is-the-bog-of-eternal-stench/

    2017 rewind: Why fiscal responsibility is the Bog of Eternal Stench

    The fourth-most-read post on Boots Theory last year questioned a pretty strongly-rooted tenet of modern Labour Party faith. People have said to me since the election result, “see, it worked!” Yet National still gained 44.4% of the vote, and Labour’s boost came directly from Jacinda Ardern’s amazing personal appeal. And the question now becomes: is winning one election worth it if we don’t actually change the status quo?

  8. Ed 9

    The Herald has called it ‘weird weather.’
    The Salinger effect means even more informed repeaters won’t call it by its proper name – c****** c*****.

    35C heat for south as lightning, humidity hits north.
    The solar blow torch is firmly directed on the south of the country with temperatures expected to soar to a scorching 35C.

    In the north sweltering humidity, that saw temperatures barely fall under 20C overnight, is turning to yet another day of violent thunderstorms for central regions.

    Already the mercury has skyrocketed to 31C at Dunedin Airport by lunchtime with many other places in mid to high 20s.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11975241

  9. Ed 10

    Good news.

    “Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern pours cold water on National’s highway projects.

    “We’d be much better off investing in some of those neglected regional roads, and in urban areas some alternatives to roading as well,” Ardern said.
    “If you ask a local mayor, they will say, ‘Can you please help us with our regional roads, particularly some of the safety issues we have?’ ”

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11975332

    • adam 10.1

      If this has happened then what is going to happen to Onehunga wharf? Seeing as it’s owned by the transport agency.

  10. adam 11

    FREE AHED!!!

    How many of this family can the state of israel arrest ? Well all of them of course.

    Now they just arrested another teen.

    https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/tamara-nassar/israel-arrests-another-tamimi-teenager

    Edit: If you don’t know the story.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/ahed-tamimi-speaks-of-her-struggle-all-i-wish-is-for-palestine-to-be-free/5625807

  11. Ed 12

    Maybe you saw this story on the Herald online.

    Kiwi sausage company grilled over ‘foul, disgusting’ image

    Kiwi sausage company Bangerritos has come under fire over an Instagram post featuring a pig in happier times, which followers deemed “disgusting”.
    However, the company has denied the image is in poor taste – and says people should know more about where their meat comes from.

    I agree with the company.
    People should know more about where their meat comes from.
    This is where people’s meat comes from.
    New Zealand Pork Industry Expose, Part 1

    The company also said

    Only a tiny fraction of pork sausages in NZ are free-range.

    I agree with the company.
    Only a tiny fraction of pork sausages in NZ are free-range.

    The vast majority of pigs in New Zealand live like this.
    New Zealand Pork Industry Expose, Part 2

    The company also said.

    We believe happy pigs make for happy sausages.

    It’s a this stage that I part company with the company.
    There is no way an animal about to be slaughtered would be happy.

    As you can see from the video linked below, pigs are certainly not happy as they are about to be slaughtered. They are in extreme pain and distress.

    A brave pig tries to save another from slaughter

    The company also said.

    We use NZ free-range pork and will continue to do so. Not just because it tastes better, but because it’s the right thing to do.

    I disagree completely with the company,
    The right thing to do is not to eat pigs.

    Encouragingly, the negative responses on Instagram to the sausage post would suggest many people would agree with me.

    However, on the whole, the public in New Zealand have no idea where there meat comes from.

    As Paul McCartney famously said,

    If slaughterhouses had glass walls, everyone would be vegetarian.

    So here are pig factory farms in New Zealand – with the walls removed.

    • Sam 12.1

      More and more eating meat is not seen as distributing surplus to your kids and furthering the winners genetic lines. More and more eating meat is seen as a trophy wall. While one meaning is easy to argue morally against the later is not.

      For most people they are living in tight economic circumstances and will eat what’s available to them on the open markets because there opinions are not reflected in government policy. This is how the 1/4 acre dream came about because planners wanted kiwis to be able to afford enough land so they could grow there own crops during a Great Depression that they where trying to grow away from. But this growth brings up the problem of losing institutional knowledge as new industries retrain subsistence farmers into factory workers. So they forget how to grow food, and 50 years on a great many kiwis have forgotten what it’s like to struggle because we’ve experienced 3% economic growth, give or take, year on year, and that’s dangerous because things can go terribly wrong terribly fast. And in our finest of hubris a great many kiwis believe that 3% can be maintained year on year indefinitely. As if a sudden event like a missile destroyer off the coast has been eliminated from the human condition, or rapid deforestation due to hyper-commercialisation has been eliminated.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 12.1.1

        1/4 acre dream

        More like a mirage: all the so-called 1/4 acre sections I have checked are actually 1/5ths. Someone got royally ripped off.

    • Union city greens 12.2

      “I disagree completely with the company,
      The right thing to do is not to eat pigs.”

      No it isn’t. That’s you attempting to set the narrative according to your own agenda.

      Ffs admin/moderators, do we have to have this shit foisted on us multiple times every day?
      These single issue warriors are oxygen sucking the life out of daily mic.
      Haven’t people been banned for carrying on campaigns of this type before?

      • Stunned Mullet 12.2.1

      • Drowsy M. Kram 12.2.2

        Don’t agree with some of Ed’s comments [these days I limit my consumption of pork to the occasional delicious rasher of crispy bacon], but find many of his/her links interesting and/or informative.

        https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/05/05/402584436/tales-of-pig-intelligence-factory-farming-and-humane-bacon

        Who decides what topics and ‘agendas’ are un/acceptable for Open Mike?

        • Union city greens 12.2.2.1

          The same topic multiple times every day is just too much.
          It’s trolling and attention seeking, pure and simple, to get responses from those he knows will oblige.
          There’s no way he’s changing people’s opinion, especially since he’s become an out and out under bridge dweller, so it’s a futile exercise, unless the object of the game is as above, in which case it’s working out great for him.

          There’s gotta be a better way of raising points and topics than repeated daily blunt force trauma.
          I hope someone who can, will take the spamming issue on board and edict accordingly.

          • Sam 12.2.2.1.1

            I’m actually really curious about how I survived the right wing ninja purge of 2017 😂😂😂😂

            • Union city greens 12.2.2.1.1.1

              You must be a hero in a half shell. Heh.

              Thing is, it’s a valid point. The other week someone was rounded on and criticised for posting what meat they were eating. This is the same thing.
              Just like my gravy, it’s all about the consistency.

              • Sam

                Idk what it is with this place. It’s the outrage that makes me curious. It’s about the PC Police trying to control language and censorship. Theres a reason for it. Because there only so many was to censor and the Stasi pretty much excelled at them all. Some people may think in there heads that that makes me a right wing ninja. But heh, if Yu don’t know the difference try googling it. Self educating is almost never a bad thing…

          • Drowsy M. Kram 12.2.2.1.2

            I can’t speak for others, but Ed’s comments and links here have (over time) changed my attitude to eating meat, and I am now genuinely trying to cut down with the end goal of one or at most two meat meals per week (that includes the bacon).

            “We see things not as they are, but as we are.”

            https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/03/09/as-we-are/

      • james 12.2.3

        I believe Paul was.

        Some say he came back as another poster ….

      • mauī 12.2.4

        Will you be eating meat tonight..?

      • adam 12.2.5

        You really like your echo chamber pure, ah union city greens.

        Another topic you struggle with, if people have a point of view different from yours. Telling really.

        • Union city greens 12.2.5.1

          You’ve got nothing but an angry chip on your shoulder.
          And I’m not interested in enabling your twisted bitterness.

          You have a nice day now. lol

          • adam 12.2.5.1.1

            Still not willing to see, or tolerate other people’s opinions. Nice to see you think your better than everyone else, you rwnj.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 12.2.5.1.1.1

              🙄

              • adam

                Can you use your words?

                Or am I to assume your juvenile?

                • One Anonymous Bloke

                  No, you can assume I’m the Judean Peoples’ Front.

                  • adam

                    Your a purist?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      No, I think internicine conflict is another thing that provides ‘comfort to the enemy’.

                    • adam

                      Echo chambers are a dangerous place. Who the enemy by the way?

                      Personally I consider liberalism the enemy of people, you?

                    • One Anonymous Bloke

                      In this specific example, ‘the enemy’ refers to the merchants of doubt, deniers and fossil-fuel greedheads, although the thesis applies in any adversarial situation.

                      As for ‘the enemies of the people’, the Liberals can get in line behind Fascists, the centre-right, organised criminals and kleptocrats, insofar as these groups can be distinguished from one another.

              • Union city greens

                ” 🙄 ”

                Quite right. This idiot doesn’t seem to realise it’s not the difference of opinion that’s the problem, but the daily dose of more of the same old shit.

                Light weight arguments from chippy.

                🙄 indeed.

        • Ed 12.2.5.2

          ucg close minded on plant based diet, climate change, and more…

    • james 12.3

      “There is no way an animal about to be slaughtered would be happy.”

      Really? – I know my animals are happy and free range right up to the point I have them slaughtered.

      They are all happy and out in the fields like any other day – then nothing. Easy as anything.

      • Drowsy M. Kram 12.3.1

        You seem to have a good rapport with your future meals, but how do you know they’re happy? Feel it in your bones?

        I was happy today, much like any other day – then nothing?

        That’s the way to go – easy as, one day at a time, and best not to overthink it.

        • james 12.3.1.1

          If you cannot tell is an animal is well cared for and happy – then you probably should not have animals.

          • Drowsy M. Kram 12.3.1.1.1

            So it’s an innate thing, something you and some others can ‘feel’, but not put into words? Maybe you can put yourself in their hooves/trotters?

            Cats purr when they’re content, and sometimes when they’re in pain, sick and/or about to die.

            BTW, Jacinda’s having a great time on ‘The Project’ tonight. Cat’s got the cream.

            • james 12.3.1.1.1.1

              Yeah – Im guessing animals are not for you. esp cats from the sound of it.

              • Drowsy M. Kram

                Your guess is dead wrong, James, at least on this occasion.

                Which is surprising for someone with so much innate empathy. Did you ever consider training as a vet?

                Weka, much like human animals, having a good life and being happy are not completely corelated. Animals are not machines; their behavioural responses are not completely predictable. esp. as they age.

                • weka

                  “Weka, much like human animals, having a good life and being happy are not completely corelated. Animals are not machines; their behavioural responses are not completely predictable. esp. as they age.”

                  That’s self-evident and teaching your grandmother to suck eggs, but not sure what your point is exactly.

            • weka 12.3.1.1.1.2

              I’ll second what james said. If you can’t tell whether an animal is happy or not, whether it’s got a good life or not, then best not to have them.

              I can tell the difference between my cat purring from pleasure and purring from stress. It’s not a feeling in my bones (although I’m sure intuition is part of it). It’s observation, interaction and sensitivity. Same with other animals I have been around.

              Having said that, there are plenty of people who think animals are ok but the people are pretty clueless. I’ve seen people argue that fish aren’t distressed when hooked and pulled up onto a beach. That’s just daft. Not hard to see how that kind of justification can be applied to other animals being killed for food, but also pets.

              • Ed

                And it is known animals know they are about to be slaughtered and get highly stressed.
                Does James send his cows to a slaughter house? If so , that is very cruel.

                • James

                  No – I have them killed out the back.

                  • Macro

                    Yep when I was life styling that was what we did too, and so much better. I have been reading about Carbon sequestration in soils recently and the importance of livestock in the process. The important thing to do is to ensure that grasses and all vegetation for that matter is allowed to develop and develop a good root system because it is there that the soil organisms develop and fix carbon. Grazing to severely and cutting back too much causes the plant to die back and then have to start all over again – and this actually releases carbon.
                    A good overview of the topic by the FAO is here:
                    http://www.fao.org/soils-portal/soil-management/soil-carbon-sequestration/en/
                    and how improved grazing management increases carbon sequestration.
                    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4490272/
                    Extensive cropping for grains actually depletes soil carbon.

                • weka

                  I agree Ed, or at least, some animals get stressed depending on the situation. There is a difference between home kill and sending animals to the abattoir.

                  All things die at some point, the ethics for me are in how we do that to the extent we have a choice.

                  James’ animals wouldn’t have been born at all if he wasn’t intending to eat them.

                  • red-blooded

                    So, by that reasoning, it’s OK to farm people for organs? And people bred to be slaves should be happy that they got a chance at life? After all, they wouldn’t have been born if we didn’t intend to use them…

                    The fact is, we don’t need to kill animals for food. Maybe our ancestors did, but we don’t. People who continue to eat animals are making a choice. Personally, I choose not to eat animals and not to contribute to suffering and killing (eg the slaughter of bobby claves) through eating animal products.

                    That choice was originally based solely on the issue of animal rights. Over the years, I’ve learned more about the environmental consequences of farming animals, and that’s reinforced my decision.

                    • weka

                      “So, by that reasoning, it’s OK to farm people for organs? And people bred to be slaves should be happy that they got a chance at life? After all, they wouldn’t have been born if we didn’t intend to use them…”

                      Only if you think slavery is ok, which I obviously don’t.

                      “The fact is, we don’t need to kill animals for food.”

                      Depends on whether you are arguing biology, ecology, or animal welfare. Very hard for humans to reproduce over time on a vegan diet (that’s why there are no vegan cultures). Once you get past the first few generations shit goes down hill (lots of people give up during the first generation).

                      One of course could argue that humans should give up their ability to reproduce so freely. I’d be happy to have that conversation.

                      I choose to eat animal products for health reasons (no, don’t at me about nutrition, I am very well informed and experienced), but my original shift from being a long term vegetarian with limited dairy to eating meat was because I was reading about Peak Oil and could see that eating a diet composed of so much imported food left me at risk should we have to transition fast to a post-PO state.

                      That led me to looking at ethical eating more broadly than the rights of individual animals, and to ecosystem rights and the rights of nature. Vegetarians who rely on big ag do just as much damage to the planet as those who eat meat. I choose as much as I can to eat local and ethical in terms of the whole environment, with attention paid to animal welfare.

                      The rabbit I eat that a friend shoots is exponentially more ethical environmentally than the vegan eating monsanto grown soy that’s been industrially processed and shipped across the globe. I get good protein and I help keep the rabbits in check that are decimating the environment and my friend gets a trade (good nutrition, environmental protection and local economy with very small carbon emissions). She’s a pretty good shot, so there is limited suffering for the rabbits (they don’t even know they’re about to die).

                      I also practice an inclusive philosophy, so I am good with people who are omnivores, vegetarian, vegan, whatever, so long as (a) they’re not politically fundamentalist with it, and (b) they don’t misrepresent evidence around climate change and the environment (Paul regularly does both).

                    • Union city greens

                      Love the point about your Rabbit.
                      I suspect my locally reared, sourced, butchered and sold meat has less of a carbon footprint than imported soy, rice and mung beans.

                      Regardless of the daily propaganda, being green and an omnivore are not an anathema.

                    • weka

                      It’s one of my sore points that people of conscience are choosing veganism over eating local. It’s not what we eat, but how we eat that matters in environmental terms. So yep, your local meat does far better than imported soy, providing you are not eating shitloads, and the meat is being killed locally too. Unfortunately in NZ so much local meat is sourced from animals that have been transported and then the meat transported again. The solution too that is to have local slaughtering but that needs enough people wanting it and choosing veganism takes us further from local food not closer.

                      Also good is if the animals are raised as part of regenag farming, and again we need local people demanding that, not vegans ignoring that and letting farmers do what they have to to survive (i.e. industrial farming). Biggest thing we could do in NZ to help restore farmland and the flow on effects is help farmers develop alternative models of selling than what they generally are locked into now.

                  • James

                    “James’ animals wouldn’t have been born at all if he wasn’t intending to eat them.”

                    That’s incorrect- they were already born when I purchased them. I don’t breed.

      • Gabby 12.3.2

        No you don’t know that jimbo. In the unlikely event that you’re a lot less callous than you seem, you hope they aren’t. A bit.

        • james 12.3.2.1

          Gabs

          I do know – my animals are very well cared for – and there is little else that could be done to make them happier. Lots of grass, water, shade in all paddocks.

          I run less units of stock than I could to ensure that they have room and food.

          and I can afford a vet when there is a problem.

          • weka 12.3.2.1.1

            I’m curious how you do the slaughter too. Is it home kill?

            • james 12.3.2.1.1.1

              Yes – Homekill. We keep animals that we eat.

              With the sheep – I used to just slit their throats, and that was OK, albeit messy.

              We now do them the same as the cows, which we have always used homekill professionals – a quick shot to the head and its all over.

              We leave the animals in their fields until about a week before “d-day” – them I move them to a smaller field that has lots of trees around it, basically allowing the animal to relax and be comfortable in its new surroundings. The small field has an open ‘kill run’ which after a week I move the animal into the kill run – which they are happy with as they have been in and out for the last week eating.

              The kill run allows the homekill guy to just walk up behind the bushes etc, reach over and BANG! – all done.

              As stress free as possible – and better than any animal will get in a meat works.

              the lack of Adrenalin makes the meat taste so much better – there really is a difference in quality, which is why we do it.

              • Ed

                “the lack of Adrenalin makes the meat taste so much better – there really is a difference in quality, which is why we do it.”

                As I suspected , your concern is not the welfare of the animals, but rather your own personal enjoyment.
                Is there anything you do where you put the needs and concerns of others above your own selfish desires?

                • Union city greens

                  “And it is known animals know they are about to be slaughtered and get highly stressed.”

                  “As stress free as possible”
                  “the lack of Adrenalin makes the meat taste so much better – there really is a difference in quality, which is why we do it.”

                  Two cows with one stone.

                • James

                  It’s a win – win.

                  Happy cow. Happy James. Wailing Ed.

                • Is there anything you do where you put the needs and concerns of others above your own selfish desires?

                  If you really want to moralise about other people’s diets resulting in the deaths of animals, you should ensure that your own doesn’t involve that. The only way to do that is to stop eating. Good luck with it, I wish you well.

              • weka

                Thanks for the explanation James. Sounds pretty good.

      • Ed 12.3.3

        How are your cows slaughtered?

        Shotgun ?
        .44 Magnum ?
        A .30-30 Rifle ?

        https://www.wikihow.com/Slaughter-Cattle

    • mauī 12.4

      Thanks Ed, I agree with a lot of what you post, and you keep the place ticking over too. Ignore the naysayers.

      • Ed 12.4.1

        Thank you.
        Some days it’s hard to believe this is a progressive blogsite, given the number of closed minded individuals who are not open to new thinking.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 12.4.1.1

          Funny how this “new thinking” of which you speak has been familiar to me since the 1980s.

        • Union city greens 12.4.1.2

          Are you saying all progressives don’t eat meat, and they can’t be one if they do?
          Or all progressives are closed minded if they reject your daily anti meat propaganda posts?

        • Grey Area 12.4.1.3

          I don’t get it either Ed. I would have hoped more here would be more ready to consider changing from eating animals killed by industrialised farming. But it seems not.

    • BM 13.1

      New boss, same as the old boss.

      You’d have to be feeling a bit stiffed if you voted Labour or NZ First, no wonder people have no faith in politics.

      • weka 13.1.1

        Labour have been reasonably clear that they weren’t going to do much about rural land sales other than tighten up the OIO process a bit. However,

        “OIO approval was given in November for the purchase in the latest round of decisions for overseas investment of sensitive New Zealand land.”

        so Labour barely had its feet under the table at that point. That sale process would have been going on for months, not a lot Labour could do about that. I’ll be more interested in what happens over this coming year.

    • David Mac 13.2

      I’m in support of most of your barrows Ed.

      But geeze, I think you’d be tough company. There is little joy in anything you have to say. It’s got a ‘Boy who cried Wolf’ thing festering.

      I fear you throw your curtains open every morning and see a wretched bankrupt landscape.

      Yeah there are crappy bits but we all need a taste of joy to make traversing the crappy bits worthwhile. Purveyor of Doom is not good real estate to own. It’s a position lubricated by fear.

      Bring a bit of Ed joy to your posts man. We all already know we’re all gonna die.

      What do you love?

      • Ed 13.2.1

        I love nature.

      • Ed 13.2.2

        Tramping

      • Ed 13.2.3

        Philosophy

      • BM 13.2.4

        Eds one of those back whipping, hair shirting types of socialists.

        He’s only happy when he’s miserable.

        • Ed 13.2.4.1

          Actually a happy positive person…
          And proud to be a socialist.

            • adam 13.2.4.1.1.1

              james, telling more lies to make himself feel better. Why do the people of Venezuela keep voting in a socialist government if its so shit? Odd that.

              And who can not forget that the exit polls in Venezuela match the polls – unlike some recent elections.

              Edit: your link is just propaganda james, but hey, whats new.

              • James

                Anyone who doesn’t believe there is a crisis in Venezuela is an idiot denyer.

                • Union city greens

                  No crisis in Nicolás Maduro’s kitchen.

                  • adam

                    Funny how you always side with the right wing trolls.

                    Just an observation.

                    • Union city greens

                      That’s just not truthful from you. I’m very much left wing, and proud of it. I even vote for anti tory government left parties in general elections and everything. lol.
                      I doubt I’ve ever really sided with right wing trolls based on policy and ideology, but of course it’s a statistical anomaly that once in a while the same conclusion can be reached from different ends of the spectrum.

                      Funny how you always resort to lies, slurs and other insults when you get angry.

                      Just an accurate observation.

                      lol

                    • adam

                      prize for second goes too….

                • One Anonymous Bloke

                  Whereas anyone who pretends Ed rates Venezuela over say, Finland, is a lying troll.

        • David Mac 13.2.4.2

          I don’t believe that’s true BM, as above. But you feeling that way was what I was getting at.

          The way to win my heart Ed is tell me of the close to extinction bird you saw while out tramping. Describe what you saw and how you felt.

          Then drop the link for the work people are doing to assist the specie’ survival.

          I’ll click.

        • mauī 13.2.4.3

          The world needs more Eds in my opinion.

          It comes over as negative because his morals are being confronted every day and he is a seeker of truth not bullshit.

          The fact that you’re attacking him shows Ed has already won.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 13.2.4.3.1

            Ed’s enthusiasm doesn’t come across as negative – it comes across as the zealotry of a relatively recent convert.

    • ropata 13.3

      Short term thinking that leads to all the forests and farms owned by overseas corporations, employing cheap foreign labour, and paying no tax.

      The New Zealand economy is not based on actual production any more. It’s based on farming for Capital Gains.

      • Graeme 13.3.1

        I doubt you’d find any period in New Zealand’s history where the farming was totally based on production. Even primarily based on production. It’s always required some element of capital gain for the business model to stack up, some times a lot more than others.

  12. eco maori 15

    Apologies Joseph my last post about the Gramercy Norton show I sort of made it about me but It all about you and your team getting to where you are and to winning. Kia kaha

  13. Ed 16

    Have just discovered a new independent source of news.
    May be worth a try when looking for non partisan sources for world events.

    https://www.newsbud.com/

    Sibel Edmonds is the founder and editor-in-chief of NewsBud,

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibel_Edmonds

  14. Ed 17

    We’re toast if it’s 3 degrees.
    Will post in more detail tomorrow.

    Herald.
    “So how hopeful are you, actually, that the world will avert the worst possible effects of climate change? Where do you place your optimism on a scale of one to 10?”

    Professor James Renwick
    “I am hopeful we can avoid the real worst-case scenario but I am pessimistic about the 1.5C or even 2C limit.
    My gut feeling is that we won’t stop the warming until we are committed to 2.5C or even 3C of temperature rise.
    That would lock in loss of the West Antarctic ice sheet, plus most of Greenland and part of the east Antarctic and would commit the globe to 10m or more of sea level rise.
    Plus of course a big rise in extreme high temperatures, droughts, floods and crop failures.
    Because of the delay time built into the climate system, it’s my feeling that we won’t take decisive action until a lot of change is baked in, so we’ll have a great deal of adapting to do.
    On a scale of one to 10 for optimism, I’m about a three.”

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11962099

    • One Anonymous Bloke 17.1

      The implications of 3° are old news.

      The same can be said for reality-based pessimism.

      I hazard a wild guess that you will propose plant based diets and eliminating fossil fuels as solutions to these problems.

      • adam 17.1.1

        So what your solutions One Anonymous Bloke? Because as far as I can see, there are no longer any political solutions. The only option left is direct action.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 17.1.1.1

          That being so, revisiting the science is a little redundant, no?

          • adam 17.1.1.1.1

            So your solution is?

            Edit: Because you link is a classical example of ” standing to close the elephant”, and what factional liberalism in action looks like. Can’t see any solution in there.

            And as I said, I don’t think there are any political solutions.

            • One Anonymous Bloke 17.1.1.1.1.1

              When someone (eg: me, just now) says “that being so”, it means that they agree with whatever came immediately prior, which in this case is your remark that the only option left is direct action.

              Lots of direct action is already taking place, from Ed’s recent conversion to a plant-based diet, to NYC’s recent decision to divest from fossil fuels, and also include monkeywrenching and cycling instead of taking the car.

              I still think the weather is just going to smash things until the problem is moot though.

              • McFlock

                Well, the NYC thing is a political action. Europe and China are moving ahead at the nation level, and many of the sane bits of the states are ignoring Trump.

                Trouble is, historically political action on any crisis usually came to late to completely mitigate the effects of that crisis. So we’ll have decades of extreme weather events and sea level rise, if not centuries. It won’t be as bad as if no action were taken, but it won’t be without harm (we’re already seeing it, frankly, for at least the last ten years).

                Nothing will save us, and globally it might get up to black death / khmer rouge proportions. But not much worse. Veganism or not.

                • adam

                  So your happy to wait then? Enjoy you life style, drive your car and bask in the slow decline?

                  Is it to much to ask for you to actually do somthing?

                  You agree that politics is way behind the eightball on this issue, so the thing to do is direct action, no?

                  • McFlock

                    “Direct action” by ordinary individuals won’t do shit now. Maybe 40 years ago.

                    The reason I don’t have a car has nothing at all to do with carbon footprints. It’s because there was a better, cheaper substitute for my needs. And I actually do think about my purchases beyond immediate gratification.

                    People indoctrinated into consumerism are not going to reduce their lifestyle voluntarily, and any government that tries to make them do it is going to lose votes on a massive scale. But the AGW mitigation requires both groups to act. So the problem becomes reconciling that conflict between lifestyle preservation for the complacent middle class and elimination of carbon use.

                    Which revolves around technologies for energy production, storage, and use. Sort that out and the V8 or even the bunker-fuel-powered container carrier will go the way of the horse and cart. The coal-fired power plant is already on its way out.

                    • Ed

                      Doesn’t work, does it?

                      ‘Iceland’s ‘pots and pans revolution’: Lessons from a nation that people power helped to emerge from its 2008 crisis all the stronger’

                      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/icelands-pots-and-pans-revolution-lessons-from-a-nation-that-people-power-helped-to-emerge-from-its-10351095.html

                    • adam

                      I don’t think individual direct action is very useful generally. Collective action like the anti-war and pro-refugee stuff that has been happening in Britain has been good. Becomes more real when more people are involved.

                      I agree any government which cuts into peoples consumerism is going to fall, and fall quickly.

                      That said, one thing they could do, is a substantial cut in taxes for individuals who have never owned a car.

                    • McFlock

                      Iceland is a fucking tiny nation, and the discussion was about AGW.

                      There are many things that governments can do, but just shouting out ideas without consideration of the competing interests that would ensure such a government lost votes is not going to achieve policy change.

                      Tax breaks for people who have never owned a car will piss off the car industry and anyone who ever owned a car. Remember the beat-up about lightbulbs? Imagine everyone who’d ever used an incandescant bulb being told they were paying extra even if they switch.

                      Tax levies according to fuel use, on the other hand, might be achievable. But the really achievable policy might be making emissions tests progressively more restrictive, phasing out any carbon compound emissions by the same time as the EU bans.

                      The only people you piss off are the fuel sellers and the car manufacturers who were too slow off the alternative fuel mark – and they’re bad enough political enemies to have.

                    • adam

                      You missed the subtally of my point, a reduction in tax for people who never owned a car. Not an increase of tax for others, a reduction.

                    • McFlock

                      And you missed that merely changing to lightbulbs that would save people money caused a fucking nightmare of bullshit.

                      Crosby Textor would spontaneously orgasm at the thought of your proposal.

                    • Sam

                      Luxury cars make up 65% of automakers profits and super cars make 35% of profits so production car owners are pretty much getting a free ride.

                      So this meme that says the 1% own 50% of the wealth and 50% of the income, all it means is the rest have zero say in how there surplus is distributed. And that’s a consequence of marginalising unions. Workers just have no power any more. They’re a modern day Luddite.

                    • Union city greens

                      “And you missed that merely changing to lightbulbs that would save people money caused a fucking nightmare of bullshit.”

                      You’re wasting your time. He’s a dreamer, and while there’s nothing inherently wrong with that, after all, most of us here spent 9 years dreaming of the day our votes changed the national government, this one’s a bit ‘épais comme deux planches courtes’.

                      The point was also made below that if cc is to be seriously and rapidly addressed, then having 40 green mps leading a government, for example, will effect more change than anarchic direct action, as the will of the people at the ballot box gives the mandate to act.

                      Yes, we can make personal decisions to use led bulbs, reduce consumption and waste, limit the use of fossil fuels, like a lot of us already do, and have for many years, but there’s no way, other than through mandated political policy, that 99% of voting kiwis will accept a rapid change in direction, therefore I conclude, the answer is to win hearts and minds to achieve cc goals before planning our adventures on fury road.

            • Union city greens 17.1.1.1.1.2

              “And as I said, I don’t think there are any political solutions.”

              Of course there are political solutions. If people voted green led governments instead of holding on to student dreams of changing the system, then the world would be a much better place.

              Voting for a mp electorate candidate and completely ignoring the party vote, won’t do shit. If there were 40 green mps in our coalition, then maybe, yeah.

              It’s hypocritical, and armchair easy, to spout the odds on climate change when you don’t take measures at elections to vote the right people in.

              • adam

                Try looking at the solution on offer, rather than your attempt to limit the debate again.

                Do you even understand what socialism is? Because you seem confused on that, political economy? The role of outlying actors? Anything apart from this fantasy of 40 green MP’s?

                • Union city greens

                  Limiting the debate by expanding wider than your very short sighted, closed off ‘no political solutions’ rhetoric, and offering a common sense rebuttal that to get green policies which will seriously address CC expediently, you’ll need green led governments and the only way to get them is to vote accordingly.

                  Ah McCain, you’ve done it again 🙄

                  • adam

                    Sheesh learn some other ways at looking at the world.

                    Ever heard of intersectionality?

                    Here some reading for you, she one of the smartest people ever to live, may just open your mind.

                    https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/voltairine-de-cleyre-direct-action.pdf

                    • Union city greens

                      So while you’re waiting for this anarchic direct action to provide you with a utopia to call your own, you’ll spend your time on the internet lecturing me about other ways of looking at the world. lol

                      Mate, you’re a blow hard with what appears to be sod all to blow hard about.
                      Keep dreaming and if us greens don’t manage to get it fixed, you’ll still have your mad max fantasy down the track.

                      Plank 🙄

                    • adam

                      I see you didn’t read it then, should have guessed. Is it becasue your to lazy? Or that you’re a smug tosser?

                      My guess, the later.

                    • Union city greens

                      Definitely a bit of both, probably in equal amounts lol

                      Anarchist library. You might as well just have posted a link to student Rik on the young ones.

                      Try and ignore me now, if you can, ’cause I’m pretty contemptuous of engaging further with a slogan repeating caricature and stereotype, but please promise to write a long post when your direct action gets you further than insults on the internet.

                      You couldn’t even jump on board the cross party change the government movement last year. Solidarity, yeah, nah. Selfish ‘look at meism’ in action. I’m not hopeful for your success, but I’ll wait. 😉

                    • adam

                      What is up with laughing at your own jokes, it’s a bit sad you know.

                      That said, do you hate women, is that why you won’t read Voltairine?

                      Or you don’t read people smarter than you?

                      Your shot about the young ones is rather 1980’s isn’t, and in poor taste seeing as the actor who played rick is dead. But then again, you like your other rwnj mates, have no moral compass.

                    • Union city greens

                      Hates women, cleverphobic, rwnj and insults the memory of the dead. Anything else, Chips?

                      I voted green at the election, you didn’t. You lack of authority in questioning my credentials about cc or being left wing just adds to the laugh factor when reading your student times, burn it all down, grrr I’m dissected 101 philosophy.

                      Call me out when you vote against climate change avoiding tory governments, or got involved in the greens, or when you’ve changed that system of yours. When all 99% of labour, nat, green, nz1st neo liberal voters cast of the shackles of oppression and follow you to the land of milk and honey.
                      Until then, dream on, kid. 🙄

                    • adam

                      You may have voted green, but you act and think like a tory.

                      You have been repeated asked by me what else you do, apart from vote, and failed to respond with anything.

                      All you are is a one trick pony of abuse who gets all upset when people call them on their narrow world view. I’d say grow up, but I’m guessing with your last attempt at an insult, that would not help.

                      By the way, your analogies are at best dull, at worst like you 40% green vote, utter buffoonery.

        • Ed 17.1.1.2

          OAB is relentlessly negative.
          Always grumpy- always dismissive of solutions – always knows more than the rest of us.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 17.1.1.2.1

            What do you think of my thesis that sloppily presented tautologies ‘comfort the enemy’?

            Edit: “knowledge is not wisdom”, “ignorance is a condition we all share”.

  15. eco maori 18

    The sandflys are that desperate that they us that they used that ass hole who abuse my wife for 9 years as bait. These idiots don’t know who they are playing with. I have all ready kicked his when I first found out he pulled a gun through I would run fuck no he put it away and tried to lie to me about the whole situation. In court he tried to say that it was my wife fault WTF he’s European and thats why it took 15 years before they took action against this parrsite because my wife Maori and he’s European like them. He had a family before my wife mothers one and he abuse those kids to his father hung himself because he got caught doing that to someone not sure who and You expect me to feel sorry for them. What about all the people in jail under bullshit charges mostly Maori. Ana to kai

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • New Zealand bans military style semi-automatics and assault rifles
    Military style semi-automatics and assault rifles banned under stronger gun laws Immediate action to prevent stock-piling Military style semi-automatics and assault rifles will be banned in New Zealand under stronger new gun laws announced today, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says. ...
    2 days ago
  • Membership: Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board
    The Governments of Australia and New Zealand have announced the membership of the Australia and New Zealand Electronic Invoicing Board (ANZEIB) today. This is an important step towards implementing e-Invoicing across both countries to help businesses save time and money ...
    2 weeks ago
  • An end to unnecessary secondary tax
    Workers who are paying too much tax because of incorrect secondary tax codes are in line for relief with the passage of legislation through Parliament late last night. The Taxation (Annual Rates for 2018-19, Modernising Tax Administration, and Remedial Matters) ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Chatham Islands pāua plan approved
    Efforts to reverse the decline in the Chatham Islands pāua fishery are the focus of a new plan jointly agreed between government, the local community and industry. Fisheries Minister Stuart Nash says the plan was developed by the PauaMAC4 Industry ...
    3 weeks ago
  • Bill introduced for synthetics crackdown
    The Police will get stronger powers of search and seizure to crackdown on synthetic drugs under new legislation, which makes the two main synthetics (5F-ADB and AMB-FUBINACA) Class A drugs. The Government has today introduced the Misuse of Drugs Amendment ...
    3 weeks ago