Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
6:00 am, August 16th, 2018 - 244 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
Good news on a Thursday morning.
‘The Overseas Investment Amendment Bill passed its third reading in Parliament on Wednesday night by 63 votes to 57.
The Government announced in October that it would end the purchase of existing houses by classifying them as “sensitive” under the Overseas Investment Act, and introduce a residency test.
The Overseas Investment Amendment Bill would stop overseas residents from buying most types of homes, except for new apartments in large developments and multi-storey blocks.”
Anything opposed by David Seymour and the Real Estate Institute of New Zealand must be a good thing.
Now let’s stop the foreign ownership of New Zealand agriculture, business.
The government can be bolder.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/106297829/labours-bill-to-curb-foreigners-buying-new-zealand-houses-becomes-law
More on the story. Better reporting on the story from the Guardian than the corporate msm in New Zealand. How strange………
‘’Tenants on our own land’: New Zealand bans sale of homes to foreign buyers..
The statistic that stands out is
‘Only a quarter of adults in New Zealand own their own home, compared with half in 1991,’
“Associate minister of finance David Parker said the ban would mean housing would become more affordable for locals, and supply would increase.
“We think the market for New Zealand homes and farms should be set by New Zealand buyers, not overseas buyers,” said Parker in an interview with the Guardian.
New Zealand housing crisis forces hundreds to live in tents and garages
Read more
“That is to benefit New Zealanders who have their shoulder to the wheel of the New Zealand economy, pay tax here, have families here. We don’t think they should be outbid by wealthier people from overseas.”
In a speech to parliament on Wednesday he said: “We should not be tenants in our own land.”
Only a quarter of adults in New Zealand own their own home, compared with half in 1991, and in the last five years homeless figures have increased, with some New Zealanders forced to live in cars, garages and under bridges.”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/15/tenants-on-our-own-land-new-zealand-bans-sale-of-homes-to-foreign-buyers
I thought you despised the guardian as msm lackeys and anti corbyn traitors?
Thats its columnists. This was a news story. Do you know the difference?
I dunno ed you were throwing a lot of shade their way – seemed a bit of both to me.
Even Fox News occasionally acts as a news organization, marty. I’ve even heard Mike Hosking make some intelligent comments. Only a fanatic would write off everything that the Grauniad or the Telegraph publishes.
It was a genuine and honest question albeit with a bit of bite and a wonderful turn of phase – a wordsmith like you must appreciate that at least.
I do.
However this is a news story.
Yes sorry it seems i stuffed up with this one duh…
Thank you sanity – stop selling our damn crown land!!!
How to get Kiwibuild to an affordable $300,000, by Stephen Selwood
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12107783
He is advocating urban sprawl into the countryside. Much better to build much smaller houses or apartments that are prefabricated (economies of scale here) and on crown land.
You realise he is Chief Executive of Infrastructure New Zealand, so clearly more corporate welfare to corporations like them, to apparently “solve the housing crisis” with some fairy land scenarios such as $25k sections.
Someone was telling me that the council alone is charging something like $150k to develop a section in west Auckland, then somehow the money disappears and we have some massive deficit for the infrastructure that the rate payers have to pay for.
So $150k is half the budget already just to the Auckland council and related ground works and infrastructure just for the site aka power/water, without the land to be paid for or the building to be built and the developments are also driving higher rates going onwards for everyone else in particular the poor areas who have had the biggest rates increases!
So another fiction bought to us by Granny Herald and the corps that create the messages driving inequality further. (While apparently worrying about the poor).
Thats mostly a fiction. All councils have development contributions to cover the use of existing assets by a new site.
I did a calc for a simple subdivision into 2 new lots , one with existing house and 1 new build
$26,000 or so.
To pay $150k must be 5 or 6 new houses
http://dcestimator.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Default.aspx
Yep Duke you are right…SaveNZ you are wrong.
Developers love to talk up the costs of development when in fact councils are usually asking quite small amounts as an entirely reasonable contribution towards infrastructure.
So does that also include the other fees, such as legal, surveyors, connection to water, sewer, power and telecoms and earthworks, council consents, resource consents etc?
You are in dream land if you think to get a section ready to build on, it costs $26k.
The council and their COO’s aka metro water will require multiple bites of the cherry, contributions is just part of it, there are the resource and building consents, the other requirements like legal, surveying, drainage, power, telecoms, often a driveway on site before you can subdivide the section.
All that is adding up to $150k for an easy section. It is the profiteering model and subcontracting model that we use in NZ, with everything needing a piece of paper by another expert/company or what have you, before you can do anything.
Anyway from the horses, mouth a friend was quoted $150k PER Section and the site had multiple zoning for houses but it did not go down per section, it was the same and would be $150k x the amount of sections allowed, that is because each section obviously needs the above aka power, a building consent etc
The council and processes seem do everything possible to stop young families building their own houses and make it as expensive as possible for them.
Some how though if you are a business and decide to develop on mass for profit, not for living in, the council are all ears and happy to waive all manner of contributions and make the rate payers pay.
Look at Westgate mall. Developers were given millions from the council to develop it, which has just created litigation and actually sounds like a total failure with locals not using the mall as expected and businesses going bust who are paying a fortune to the Aussie mall owners to be in there, not to mention all the congestion around that site.
Here is a much more sensible suggestion for how to run KiwiBuild.
http://www.massey.ac.nz/massey/about-massey/news/article.cfm?mnarticle_uuid=97E6E0EB-018B-4AEF-9706-7BC28C1EF40B
Why should the public of New Zealand provide billions to provide the prizes in a lottery for a lucky set of winners of a KiwiBuild lottery?
In spite of the stupidity of their Vice Chancellor there is the occasional good idea that comes out of Massey.
Yes the government can be because, IIRC, that’s what the majority of NZers want.
But are not the apartments the ‘affordable’ housing being proposed. Another screw up and pandering to luxury developments that the locals are having to pay the infrastructure costs for, while then also taxpayers having to pay the infrastructure costs and emergency housing costs of the affordable housing which has not been build yet, miles away…
Also since you only have to live in NZ 2 years to obtain permanent residency and then be outside of the rules, buy up housing freely, qualify for Kiwibuild and have the locals giving you cheap housing, and after obtaining permanent residency you can work and pay taxes overseas, while getting all the benefits of being a NZ resident such as free health care and schooling and be considered a resident for investment purposes.
Until the government tightens up residency the whole thing is meaningless.
Government need to get their heads around global transportation with the concept of permanent residency and quick and easy citizenship. Gone are the days when permanent residents got around by ship and it cost a fortune to come to NZ. Permanent residency has people coming and going daily and it seems to be the local residents living here that seem to be expected to pay for richer people’s habits and lifestyles.
The great Steve Bell’s cartoon on the latest “Labour antisemitism” fabrication
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DkogtzvX4AEPgfq.jpg:large
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12106503
“I was present when it was laid, I don’t think I actually was involved in it.”
Does the press in nz need to be rained in .
What public good came from the publishing of the leaked material on Winston Peters and bridges .?
All it has achieved is to undermine politics in nz .
The real story the journalists should be puttuing out is publicly shaming the people who do this dirty work for no real public good.
Yes, we need to free the voices of many others apart from billionaire media moguls.
https://www.google.co.nz/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn-images-1.medium.com%2Fmax%2F1600%2F1*BiuG9MoWFt3NDw_gDid3qQ.jpeg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fmedium.com%2F%40jnoted%2Fthe-abuse-of-corbyn-and-his-supporters-and-how-they-survive-it-the-other-side-of-the-story-aa383235b22d&docid=jZRY6-uM2vTlBM&tbnid=A1ZucVjjMooGTM%3A&vet=10ahUKEwjx6PjH3u_cAhVLybwKHR7qDyUQMwh2KBAwEA..i&w=747&h=381&hl=en-nz&client=safari&bih=922&biw=768&q=corbyn%20quote%20media&ved=0ahUKEwjx6PjH3u_cAhVLybwKHR7qDyUQMwh2KBAwEA&iact=mrc&uact=8
Great quote from Corbyn. (Thanks Ed).
In my opinion Corbyn’s statement taps into the free speech debate in this country, especially the point that TRP was trying to make; HERE
Just like every other resource in an inequitable society, free speech is not equitably shared.
When Don Brash can be barred from Massey U, for his extreme views on race, and it creates a massive furore. But Hone Harawira can be banned from speaking at Auckland U. and nobody makes a fuss.
Maybe the real story is….. simons government enjoyed traveling around at great expense to the tax payer, they did nothing to change it. simon’s used to such luxury and will defend it to the death.
It’s part of his job . I believe Ardern spent $83 k in the lead up to the election .
Yeah, but that’s how they justify it…. it’s part of the job etc… it’s just how much it costs etc…. the other person did it too etc…
When we should be asking, why does it cost so much and how can that cost be brought down? Am sure that’s something everyone can agree on.
It’s NZ, not appearances are everything USA.
Many do not buy into a persons false sense of importance due to their chauffeur driven limo rocking on up to the local RSA to appeal to the ‘common man’.
so Ardern spend 83 k in the lead up to the election.
Bridges spends 100.000 after the election.
the one achieves a win, the other did what?
Also, did you see where Labour spends 17.000 less then the No Mates Party and is successful?
There’s quite a big difference though bwaghorn. It was an election campaign… leaders are expected to travel the length and breadth of the country and I doubt Bill English’s expenses would have been any less. Also, Jacinda had only just become the leader so she had an awful lot of catching up to do which would normally have been carried out months sooner. That would have added to the overall cost.
But to her credit, she was horrified at her expenses and has chosen to “change her habits”.
I’m not knocking Ardern it’s just part of running a democracy .
The spending has now been released.
Remind me again who is in government?
Because it’s the opposition spending up big time on perks and travel.
Labour almost $500k
Greens around $80k
NZ First around $100k
National.. over $1.4 million…
Spread sheet is on this link… see for yourselves.
https://www.scribd.com/document/386296144/Disclosure-of-Members-Expenses-From-1-April-to-30-June-2018#fullscreen&from_embed
Link below… article via stuff on said topic… comments are open…
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/106310719/full-list-of-mps-expenses-shows-spending-topped-21-million
You did notice one thing did you Cinny?
These figures are only for MPs who are not part of the Executive.
Thus we have all the National and ACT MPs but only about half of the Labour, Green and NZF members. That is a ratio of about 2:1.
If you look at the Green MPs for example there are expenses for Davidson, Gharahman, Hughes and Swarbrick but nothing at all for Genter, Logie, Sage and Shaw.
It is the same for all the Government Parties.
Your comparison is therefore a silly one and is comparing apples and oranges.
If you think you claims are sensible I will suggest that I compare the figures for Ministerial spending when they are released and I will point out that the Labour, Green and New Zealand First Parties spent a couple of million and that National spent NOTHING at all. No doubt you will accept that the Government are total spendthrifts and that the Opposition are very sparing in spending the public’s money?
Incidentally why is Bridges’, (and Mallard’s as well). use of a Limo charged out at a higher rate than the rate used for Ministers? Does anyone know why and what are the different rates?
Yes I noticed that later, re the exect’s not being included lmao. Like you am interested to see those figures when released.
Found a handy dandy link to help me out 🙂
https://www.parliament.nz/en/mps-and-electorates/mps-expenses/
Most def would like to know re the difference in limo charge rates too, good point Alywn. Fingers crossed someone here may have the answer.
Why has national bill exploded after previous 3 months then. ?
Opposition is more expensive , why?
Without going into the numbers in detail I would suggest one thing as the main reason.
Parliament follows the old fashioned tradition of New Zealand. It shuts down for the month of January.
The previous 3 months you mention would be January 1st to March 31st. In 2018 the first Parliamentary sitting day was 30th January. There is no real reason for any of the MPs, not in the Executive, to be in Wellington before the end of January. It doesn’t mean they aren’t working but most of what they are up to will be duties in their Electorate or around their home base. For the majority therefore there won’t be very much travel until Febrary and thus there will be little in the way of expenses until a third of the first quarter of the year has passed.
Even the Cabinet all take a good part of the month off. Frankly I can understand why they need a break.
As an example the Labour Party, the largest party in Opposition went up from $493k to $666K between the corresponding quarters in 2017. That is an increase of about 35%
False its $23,000 for Ardern in lead up to election
https://www.parliament.nz/media/4493/members-expense-disclosure-1-july-to-30-september-2017.pdf
Cheers
i agree cinny, he spent north of $1300 a day.
spent.
ultimately for his own job security.
And his ‘friends’ are doing the same…
Top 10 Spenders….
national leader and MP for Tauranga Simon Bridges: $113,973
national MP for Clutha-Southland Hamish Walker: $39, 387
NZ First list MP Mark Patterson (Clutha-Southland based): $37,778
national MP for Waitaki Jacqui Dean: $34,796
national MP for Taupō Louise Upston: $34,434
national MP for Rotorua Todd McClay: $32,561
national MP for East Coast Anne Tolley: $31,867
national MP for Auckland Central Nikki Kaye: $31,517
Labour list MP Kiri Allan (East Coast based): $31,303
NZ First list MP Jenny Marcroft (Rodney based): $30,734
Wtf nikki kaye?? !!! Cause central Akld is such a geographically large electorate?…. I don’t think so..
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/08/parliament-expenses-released-top-ten-spenders.html
Politics as a career! No wonder they will fight on the beaches to stay in there when they get such a sense of importance and reasonable surroundings with their own piece of carpet and probably a piot plant and cleaning provided. Back in society with the ordinary people they would have a lot less.
So 3 terms and you’re out I think. Historical memory doesn’t seem to be much used by them anyway, except to remember the various ways they manipulated the populace.
Way to miss the point you lot . Not one has told me what leaking these things achieves that’s positive.
Positive achievement from said leak….. easy… momentum to enable the penny to drop for some members of the public.
Positive possible achievements from the publishing of expense account today….
An overhaul of the expense spending system?
On going exposure of how some take advantage of the public purse?
Or… maybe it will educate the public to make wiser voting decisions in the future. Ok that one might not be so positive for national… bloody good then.
It’s good that the expenses are published ; leaking to destabilise any politician who is not breaking the rules so as to embarrass and damage them is rotten and needs to be stopped .
Personally I’m usually on the side of a whistler blower.
The thought police already have enough power.
It’s not about the money.
It’s about the factions in national manoeuvering for position.
Those leaks go hand in hand with the Hollow Men hack and various journalistic investigations (such as into the current deputy police commissioner), though.
The ones against individual MPs are pretty small beer unless they actually come up with something illegal (or should be, like double-dipping), but it’s all the same tree. Stomp on that, and you end up protecting real scum from seeing the light of publicity.
I hope it’s the right leaking I expect better from the left.
lol it usually seems to be over the last few years. Little really stamped them into line.
How about bridges or someone else leaked the expenses early to make the sTory about leaks and a victim?
Rather than the story about troughing and did you really need to use the limo for that.
I don’t think he is that savvy and it’s a very high risk play as the public viewpoint has shown. He has been slaughtered on social media over it.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12107737
brash destroys key’s legacy
That’s going to be pushing the boundaries of free speech a bit. The fanboys might find that a little challenging.
Wonder how long the discussion remains on topic and civil.
Is this a one man crusade to “correct” the National Party, or part of a wider play to move the party away from the Key legacy of just doing what’s required to stay in power, toward a more ideologically driven party. The current leak of bridges expenses could be part of this.
So Don Brash thinks that John Key failed for not being right wing enough. How surprising.
Why is this news?
The wonder really, is why this unrepresentative right wing neo-liberal bigot, who has never won an elected mandate is given such a massive platform by our media.
(It probably relates to the the observation that Jeremy Corbyn makes about the UK media. 3.1 above)
“That’s going to be pushing the boundaries of free speech a bit.”
Why?
Because it is putting down a right wing god…. we all know that the right wing defenders of free speech only defend it when it is being used to put down people they don’t like anyway… How will they all deal with people talking smack about the holy JK?
“we all know that the right wing defenders of free speech only defend it when it is being used to put down people they don’t like anyway”
No we really don’t know that.
Dr Don Brash has as much right to speak as much as anyone and given his former positions what he has to say should be of interest to anyone with a passing interest in politics
Martyn Bradbury got kicked off Radio NZ for criticizing Key who was PM at the time
Wasn’t/isn’t, jk simons mentor?
I commend brash for his speaking out . I doubt anything he would have done would have helped though given were his politics is at.
Brash is pulling his pud. Why anyone listens to that human kauri dieback disease ill never know. His cred.is bullshit – he’s a failure start to finish imo. A hater still hating on people – even his bedmates.
Quite – that is the lols part.
Some of the Key Government’s failures he identifies are correct. The joke is that just about every political, economic and social idea that has wormed its way into Don’s oddly-wired brain, if enacted, would make those problems worse.
Why I am even talking about that grotesque little caricature of a fully-functioning human is beyond me.
Graeme Good question.
Might be why he got banned from Massey
Thanks bwaghorn. Brash was dead right with this:
“Key was exceptionally gifted as a self-deprecating after-dinner speaker. He had enormous political capital. Alas, he almost totally failed to use it to deal with the deep-seated problems we faced in 2008 and still face today.”
But still they repeat the myth that National were great managers of the economy.
Care to name the deepseated problems from 2008 that we still face today?
Cause according to the No Mates Party all was well while they ran the show.
People sleeping in cars? NZ as !!
Kids going hungry to school? NZ as!!
People dying while on a waiting list for surgery? NZ! NZ! NZ!
People getting settled with 10 of thousands of dollars dept just to stay two weeks in emergency accomodation? NZ as!
Girls getting raped but not getting justice? NZ as!
Standstill Traffic on crumbling motorways? NZ !!!!!!
Cowshit in rivers? Wadeable as fuck!
Working for Welfare = communism by stealth? Only when Labour does it!
Taxcuts for the well of, GST Increase for everyone else? Rockstar economy!!
National had 9 years to fix the ‘problems’ they imagined, and they did nothing.
Oh they filled their private bankaccounts, someone needed to profit from the Tax Cuts :), but surely Mr. Brash is not talking about that? Someone needed to make money from unaffordable housing and Housing Allowances, and i am sure Mr. Brash did not talk about that either? Subsidies for Farmers? But only for farmers, otherwise it would be socialism.
The no mates party is good for the economy – their economy and that of their benefactors. The rest can get fucked.
I guess there were not enough Tax cuts for the old fart to appease his freezedried heart.
AWESOME+999999999999999
“Cowshit in rivers? Wadeable as fuck!”
brilliant!
Surely you were one of those people who, a couple of days ago were attacking Brash and claiming that he had never said a sensible thing in his life.
Now he is to be treated as a fountain of wisdom.
What a spectacular back-flip.
LOL
A government running a surplus is out of balance and is forcing the need for ever more debt that will result in the collapse of the economy.
This is how you destroy the environment and then society.
Yeah, all of that was Brash spouting his failed ideology.
The US Congressional Budget Office, which isn’t forecasting any recessions for the next 10 years, has the annual interest payments for U.S. debt hitting a trillion dollars by 2028.
“The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve is required to have seven members. It has three. Two of the current governors were put into their position by President Trump. Two more have been nominated by the president and are awaiting confirmation by the Senate. After these two are put on the Fed’s board, the president will then nominate two more to follow them. . . . [I]t is possible that six of the seven Board members will be put in place by Trump.” (R Bove, CNBC, July2018)
so plastic bags are going.
when do we realise it is supermarkets that we need to do without?
one of the chains moves all the meat it buys to auckland, processes it then sends it round the country to the stores.
we must eat locally and seasonally.
gsays
That is good. Trouble is supermarkets and malls have become community meeting places. So we also need less opulent surroundings in covered daily markets.
Have never met anyone in a supermarket and I’m pretty sure that you’ll find that I’m in the majority.
If you want a centralised social gathering place then the supermarket doesn’t fit the bill. The local pub does much better or even a cafe.
In any city, urban or provincial there are alternatives to supermarkets.
The change is not gonna come from a business that does well. The change is only going to come from people changing their habits.
And for what its worth, our local butcher here in provincial NZ is cheaper then the supermarket and is better quality. Same for the local frock makers, why buy made in Bangladesh when you can have made to measure for no more then what a dress is sold in a boutique in town.
How much value do you put on convenience?
And finally please can we have covered market places like they do in Europe. T’would be so nice.
On the 1st August, our local NW supermarket went plastic bag free. NW is trialing the scheme with a view to expanding it to all of their supermarkets. It has been a raging success story. The place looks tidier, there’s less noise – had no idea how much noise the rustling of plastic bags makes. Best of all, the wait at the check-outs have halved. If we forget our bags, there are good sized solid brown paper bags available @ 20 cents each. As a regular forgetter, I’m finding the paperbags useful for all sorts of things including bin-lining.
Haven’t met anyone who is not super happy with the change over.
Supermarkets are here to stay gsays so lets make sure they improve their services.
Good to have the bags out but now I have to buy 50 kitchen-tidy bags for $5. (10cents a bag) Might consider no bags for my Kitchen-tidy and wash it out each time.
Thats what I do with my kitchen scraps bucket- compost the contents and sluice out the bucket. Mrs Mac1 will go to lining the kitchen tidy with newspaper, she says.
Just thinking though that plastic waste disposal bins are all plastic-bag lined, and the Council still gives us fifty bags a year for household waste……
We might have to…..”Substitute” by The Who
“Substitute your lies for fact
I can see right through your plastic mac….
My fine-looking suit is really made out of sack…..”
Prescient stuff from 1966!
personally I’d prefer a paper bag option if I don’t have the reusable bag on me.
The cynic in me says that the reason supermarkets are being responsive to this is because they get to sell reusable bags and don’t have to by thousands of plastic bags a day.
they’ve essentially got us paying for what they provided for free, and thanking them for it, lol
Each supermarket seems to do their own thing. Mine gives a 5 cent discount per own bag used.
I also would prefer a paper bag option if you forget your own bags or need a bag.
You are a cynic McFlock. 🙂
Maybe the plastic bag is cheaper to produce than the paper bag. These are the solid, stand-up paper bags.
I think you are right Anne that those good solid paper bags are much more expensive than plastic bags. Used boxes are OK if you have a car, but not if you are walking or on public transport.
Completely off topic, I have been meaning to send you this – maybe this is what a s………. c…. looks like. LOL.
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/periodicals/NZI19020201.2.7.5
lols. Just seen it.
Yeah if paper bags were cheaper then plastic bags wouldn’t be a problem.
But single use paper wouldn’t break the bank or the environment, and they wouldn’t bloody cost $5, either.
A point echoed in Why we can’t afford the rich. The authors point out that it’s ridiculous to grow the produce in Scotland, send it to South England for processing and then send it back with all of the associated extra costs particularly GHG emissions.
It’s a point I’ve been making for years as I look at the ridiculousness of international trade. It’s people holding on to the 18/19th century delusional Economies of Scale theory put out by the economists.
Bit early for Labour to be feeling the pressure or is it just Hipkins?
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=12107631
‘The accusation was not from Ardern herself but from another bloke, Education Minister Chris Hipkins, who took umbrage when Bridges suggested that muttering by Grant Robertson was supplying Ardern with the answers.’
‘Bridges referred to Robertson as “the ventriloquist,” a reference to the frequency with which Robertson actually does answer other people’s questions under his breath.’
The thing is, that comment by Bridges was about the best he could muster… he looks way out of his depth
I listened to that exchange as I was following question time that day. Members had been grouchy, with the Speaker unusually busy with controlling across House exchanges.
As for the Hipkins ‘apology’ it could have been seen as an example of a man defending his female leader, which I can understand fully. When a woman is attacked in a mysogynist way, the challenge to that offending male best comes from another man. As an example, when I did workshops with facilitators who were female, it was the duty of a male facilitator to moderate the language of the participants when especially the ‘c’ word was used- quite daunting when the user was a prison inmate. But in the spirit of those workshops offering alternatives to violence, it always went well.
The adversarial nature of the House at Question Time breeds different behaviours to that. Some members are constantly rebuked by the Speaker for their constant barrage of comments. A frequent offender is the Leader of the Opposition who often asks a question and then barracks rather than listening, a behaviour he must have learnt since his time as a Crown prosecutor in our criminal courts. I can imagine the learned judge’s response to a barracking mysogynist lawyer who had just asked a question of a witness in a trial…….
“As for the Hipkins ‘apology’ it could have been seen as an example of a man defending his female leader, which I can understand fully. When a woman is attacked in a mysogynist way, the challenge to that offending male best comes from another man.”
What’s mysogynistic about this:
‘suggested that muttering by Grant Robertson was supplying Ardern with the answers.’
‘suggested that muttering by Grant Robertson was supplying Ardern with the answers.’
Except it turned out he was doing nothing of the sort. He was just “agreeing” with something she said. Normal practice on both sides. It’s become a part of the Nat. Party meme to try and instill in people’s minds that Jacinda Ardern is a woman who is not up to the job. That is misogynist-like behaviour. It is why Hooton is pushing the same meme as hard as he can – calling her a feather weight etc.
Thanks, Anne.
Mrs Mac1 agreed when I described saying that a woman needed a man alongside her to supply the answers was mysogynistic.
It is wrong, just as it would be for me to say that Paula Bennett’s behaviour alongside her male leader is anything more than over-egged supporting performance.
Bennett understands mysogyny, as does Collins. The rebuke from Hipkins would also have been a reminder to those two, the other women in National’s caucus, and also any National males with the credibility to stand up to Bridges’ behaviour. Hipkins’ comment was a response, I believe to more thn one instance of mysogyny.
It’s reminiscent of that unfinished saga of the mysogynistic comments heard by Speaker Mallard from the National side. Did National’s strong women give a serve to their offending caucus fellows, even on the quiet?
I heard Bridges at his public meeting twice refer to “Aunty’ Helen. What is that if not partly a mysogynystic reference to a persons’ gender when the behaviour complained of could be also described without gender-critical language?
Well, the line they are following which was demonstrated by Bridges when he used the word “ventriloquist” is that Grant Robertson is the real leader of the Labour Party and Jacinda is just his puppet.
It’s demonstrably untrue. Jacinda is very much in charge, but everyone knows she and Grant are close personal friends and have been for years. Of course she values his judgement in the same way she values all of her friends’ views.
I’d suggest that the PM of NZ needing a man to ride to her rescue is pretty damn sexist
If you see that she needed a man to ride to her rescue, then that’s your bias.
If you see it as men’s business to clear up men’s dirty business, then that’s what I meant.
You see, Puckish, there are some who would say that a woman defending her own gender under gender specific attack as being “politically correct”. or “needing to get out more”, or “unable to take a joke”, or ‘needing to go back to the kitchen.”
Much better that a man say to other men where the boundaries of offensive behaviour lie.
And I’m also not riding to anyone’s rescue. I’m standing for my own beliefs, for my standards, for my own values.
I’ve never been on a horse, btw, to go riding to the rescue, though I might be tilting at windmills at the moment………..
I was referring to Grant Robertson riding to the rescue
That windmill’s still a-spinning…….
You are quite capable of finding the truth out for yourself but since you are reluctant to do so, here is the video which shows you are wrong:
https://www.parliament.nz/en/watch-parliament/ondemand?itemId=202158
The relevant part starts @ 3:40 mins in.
Jacind’as answer to the accusation re- Robertson is delayed due to the antics by – or on behalf of – Simon Bridges. Chris Hipkins was right. Bridges was behaving like a “chauvinistic pig”.
Far from issuing instructions, Robertson was reiterating what Jacinda had just said with the words “we didn’t” in answer to a false claim made by Bridges.
Strewth… you have to spell it out for these rwnjs sometimes.
Labour has form in helping out each other so its not that far out of the realms of possibility it was happening here
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12069352
Bridges asked if Little was right to say NZ First was at the table when Cabinet agreed to reforms including three strikes. Enter Robertson, sitting two down from Peters, who said quietly to Peters: “Yes.”
Peters stood: “Yes.”
The next question asked if there was a breach of protocol around consulting coalition partners.
Grant Robertson mouthed “no” at Peters.
Peters stood: “No.”
The ease of this prompted a delighted laugh from Robertson until he realised media had spotted him and Peters’ supply of answers dried up.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/98982731/labour-has-a-problem–we-need-to-talk-about-acting-prime-minister-kelvin-davis
Every question Davis had thrown at him on Tuesday was answered first in muffled tones by ministers Phil Twyford, Chris Hipkins and Grant Robertson. Davis then stood up and repeated the answers.
The first and second time could have been written off as them helping him get started but it was just absurd when it continued for the entire stretch of supplementary questions.
The ministers didn’t even try to hide the fact they were doing it and Davis blatantly looked to them every time before rising to his feet.
What a bugger. Trusting your colleagues, listening to your friends, helping others out.
Then put that alongside the collegiality shown Party Leader Bridges by caucus member Collins who contradicted her leader by denying that they had had a discussion when the leader specifically said that he had done so with Ms Collins both by phone and the next day in person, over the question of fake news tweets.
“Ms Collins also denied that National’s leader Simon Bridges had spoken to her about her actions – even though he said he had.” RNZ
but he wasn’t. Which was Hipkins’ point, in fact.
“Mrs Mac1 agreed when I described saying that a woman needed a man alongside her to supply the answers was mysogynistic.
In that context sure but thats not the context it was used
“heard by Speaker Mallard from the National side”
Do you mean the claim Trevor made that he had heard something, with his deaf ear no less, that nobody else heard and was nowhere to be found on the tapes recording everything said in the house?
I think Mallard was imagining things. Probably he was just awaking from a little snooze after lunch.
Or alternatively, and possibly sharpened by Occam’s razor a little more than Speaker Mallard’s hearing, the Speaker did hear but could not identify the source of the remark. The perpetrator did not have the gumption to own up. The answer with the fewest assumptions, as required by Occam’s razor, is that The Speaker heard but the comment maker did not own up. The alternative is to postulate that the Speaker was nodding off, is hard of hearing and misheard a comment.
It must be noted that Speaker Mallard has not misheard anything at any other time in the same way.
It must also be noted that Speaker Mallard requested someone on the Government side to own up to some unparliamentary comment today. MInister Fa’afoi owned up, had to withdraw and apologise and cost his side five supplementary questions. Note- he owned up to what the Speaker heard.
As a side-word, I thought Speaker Mallard ruled fairly and firmly today.
“Party meme to try and instill in people’s minds that Jacinda Ardern is a woman who is not up to the job”
No, shes not to the job irrespective of her gender
meh
On her worst day, she’s a better PM with one hand holding the baby than Key ever was.
When did you last hear of a PM changing their schedule specifically to meet protestors?
“When did you last hear of a PM changing their schedule specifically to meet protestors?”
Good, the more political capital she spends the faster it’ll run out, especially given when announcements like this are made:
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/08/government-hands-one-billion-trees-scheme-240-million-boost.html
and then having to explain why teachers will just have to wait…or will they
Jacindas new theme:
Not up to the game, eh? She controls her question time fluently and forthrightly, she fronts up to public demonstrations (where were the Opposition- cowering from the fear of the nine long years’ pigeons coming home to roost with a preliminary flyover load-lightener), she has a success rating four times Mr Bridges and twelve times that of Ms Collins as preferred PM, she is on top of her portfolio and her international rating is high.
Her main opposition even conceded in a public meeting which I attended last week that he probably would not win in 2020.
Her opposition yielded to her being up for the job for six years.
Where were the unions over those same nine years? Collecting the dues and doing sweet FA
“She has a success rating four times Mr Bridges and twelve times that of Ms Collins as preferred PM”
Wow the PM has a higher success rating than the opposition, thats just so impressive. Whats her rating in comparison to John Key or Helen Clark?
“she is on top of her portfolio and her international rating is high.”
Easy to be on top of your portfolio when you have help from other ministers and I doubt her rating is as high John Keys was, or Helen Clarks for that matter
“Her main opposition even conceded in a public meeting which I attended last week that he probably would not win in 2020.”
John Key went out on his own terms and Helen Clark lost and then quit, theres a lesson there about going out on top
“Her opposition yielded to her being up for the job for six years.”
I’ve said in previous posts that shes as good as John Key was and that National shouldn’t underestimate her
We were out on strike at various points during the last National term as well as during the current Labour term – why do you ask?
“I’ve said in previous posts that shes as good as John Key was and that National shouldn’t underestimate her.”
“No, shes not (up) to the job irrespective of her gender”
How do you reconcile these two statements of yours? They appear quite contradictory, unless you believe that Key was not up to the job?
I should have expanded on that, my bad. She is as good a communicator as john Key and maybe even a better figurehead but she doesn’t have anything more than a variation of “absolutely positividiy” in anything she says but she doesn’t need anymore than that because people warm to her
People liked John Key, people like Jacinda Ardern but it doesn’t mean shes up to the job of being a prime minister
No, that she is a lightweight politician (like Kelvin Davis) who is not up to the job. Unless you think the criticism of Kelvin Davis along those same lines is racist.
I think the exchanges yesterday, particularly by Hipkins, were a little more tense than usual in light of the teachers’ strike and the march on Parliament which Hipkins and Ardern had fronted up to shortly before Question Time. ( (I noted Tracey Martin and Carmel Sepuloni also alongside Ardern and Hipkins, amongst others.)
IMHO Hipkins’ calling Bridges a “chauvinist pig” was a more general comment than a direct response to Bridges’ own comment re “expecting a response from the ventriloquist” which of itself is not really misogynistic. But I do agree with Anne and Mac 1 that Hipkins’ remark was intended as a wider warning, response to Bridges’ and certain other Nats and their supporters misogynistic remarks re Ardern and others (including their own women – eg Bridges to Bennett “get me some water, luv”.
The whole exchange is a little more clear from the video but much clearer from the Hansard transcript.
Video – https://www.parliament.nz/en/watch-parliament/ondemand?itemId=202158
Draft Hansard – https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/combined/HansD_20180815_20180815
Here are extracts from the draft transcript (bolds are mine):
Well done Veuto. Black and white text is better than memory.
Thanks, also, Veutoviper. Was the reference to the ventriloquist mysogynistic?
Firstly, it is derogatory. The ventriloquist does use a ‘dummy’ after all. Was it gender specific? No, but it’s also about context, patterns and history of behaviour, and non-verbal communication as well. Bridges has a history.
Not sure if your looking for a white night to put the fear of god into your enemy Skippy Really cuts the mustard, Likewise I am sure Ardern can look after her self Likewise not sure if Bridges comment it is a sexist a comment as insult could be made to a women or man, it’s more about Robbo been a puppet master, also does it for Kelvin “I dunno what’s really going on” Davis I think sloppy got all a bit precious to be fair
Mac1, I agree with you that the ventriloquist reference was derogatory and possibly misogynistic. I possibly did not make this clear in the second part of my second para when I said:
But I do agree with Anne and Mac 1 that Hipkins’ remark was intended as a wider warning, response to Bridges’ and certain other Nats and their supporters misogynistic remarks re Ardern and others (including their own women – eg Bridges to Bennett “get me some water, luv”.
Cheers.
kapai..
It’s just National and their typical dirty politics.
Labour over-promised during the election and are now having to come up with the goods and are now feeling the pressure
Pressure doesn’t build character, it revels it so it’ll be interesting to see how Labour handle being under the pump
Labour seem to be handling it quite well.
National… not so much.
For now maybe but a weeks a long time in politics
It’s been nearly a year and National keeps going from bad to worse.
Well ackshully National got 44.45% of the vote on election day and are currently (kiwiblogs poll of polls) 45.1% so no not going from bad to worse
There are other indicators. Popularity of the leader, quality of questioning, performance in general in the House, quality of news releases, cogency of argument, discipline. How does National do with that stuff?
Union admonish meatworks’ hiring overseas workers
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/business/364180/union-admonish-meatworks-hiring-overseas-workers
Maybe to do this
“Affco was instead taking on inexperienced workers who agreed to individual contracts, the union said.”
https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/298328/workers-laid-off-days-after-returning-to-job
The government should stop it. The taxpayers are having to pick up the slack, health services, infrastructure, carbon costs, lack of income taxes and ACC for all these overseas workers being used by low life employers to lower wages and conditions, keep contracts temporary, while laying off local workers and then surprise surprise, wreck their own industry by making their low wage, high stress, temporary work with arbitrary lays offs attractive to people in NZ to go into that industry, and then wah, wah, crying they can’t get people?
Cheap overseas workers, being ‘sold’ like cattle from employment traffickers, now seems to be a new way to pretend to save money and put the risks of their business onto the taxpayers, exploiting overseas people by lying to them and relying on them not understanding NZ law and not speaking very good english.
You used to have to prove beyond any doubt with immigration, that you could not get a local worker and then it would cost $10k a worker to get someone in from overseas, not just herd people in to be exploited with traffickers, like the cattle they are slaughtering.
Soon you get the US system, when only a few players are in the meat industry and the products are so polluted with fecal matter due to the low standards of workers that they have to chorinate the meat and have e coli deaths from eating it.
Meanwhile taxpayers are paying people the dole in NZ. Somethings is wrong with this picture!
That situation shows that the ‘labour crisis’ comes down to employers being picky, more than anything else.
Who is going to be able to get a rental or mortgage in all these out of the way areas with careers that are temporary and casual? If they want to get good and experienced staff and have stability in their employment then you have to have stable employment conditions. The industries that don’t do that, plus pay poor wages to boot, are the ways crying they can’t keep anybody.
In the 1970’s and even 1980’s fruit picking and freezing work was good money and people wanted to do it. Now it’s hard work, poorly paid, dangerous and casual. And those industries are coining in the money for exports, but clearly the staff doing the work aint getting a share of it. Nor are the taxpayers with the low wages being offered.
The government needs to say, F-ing pay more and have better conditions to keep staff, not pander to the whinner’s who can’t keep anybody because they keep laying people off in down turns and then come crying crocodile tears to government because they can’t get anyone or don’t want anybody in a union or whatever their issue is.
When is someone going to ask NZ industry why, if they are shipping around US 37 billion of products a year, they feel the need to pay minimum/poor wages to their workers with poor conditions and expect the taxpayers to give them hand outs for their wage bills and issues like accomodation that they seem unable to solve?
Looks like plenty of money in the pot for these industries to pay workers well, and actually share the profits fairly in particular to those who do the hard labour at the bottom end and the primary producers.
Export earnings.
Dairy, eggs, honey: US$10.2 billion (27.6% of total exports)
Meat: $4.7 billion (12.7%)
Wood: $3.3 billion (9%)
Fruits, nuts: $1.9 billion (5.1%)
Beverages, spirits, vinegar: $1.4 billion (3.7%)
Fish: $1.1 billion (3.1%)
Cereal/milk preparations: $1.1 billion (2.9%)
Machinery including computers: $978.6 million (2.6%)
Modified starches, glues, enzymes: $884.6 million (2.4%)
Miscellaneous food preparations: $873.2 million (2.4%)
Likewise tourism, worth over $12 billion is also as an industry that apparently has difficulty in paying staff well either and require government wage top ups for many of their workers. Nor do they seem keen to clean up exploitation.
It’s not so much about the businesses being picky as them working to lower wages so as to boost profits for the bludging shareholders.
Quoting Why we can’t afford the rich:
And the bludging owners of businesses, shareholders, landowners, money-lenders, speculators and value-skimmers always want more.
I thought it was quite interesting in light of a post I did a couple of days ago on racial bias at RNZ, that BBC stalwart Andrew Neil is being exposed as being anything but a neutral player in his political leanings…
“If the BBC is politically neutral, how does it explain Andrew Neil?”
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/11/bbc-andrew-neil-media-politics
In the quote below, substitute the RNZ for BBC and think of David Farrar, regular guest on The Panel with Jim Mora.
Now before you hit the roof, I know Farrar is just a guest, but as I have pointed out to Mora on many occasions, he never has the equivalent voice from the Left, so he has no balance on his show. I have also called out Mora for quoting from The Kiwi blog as if it is a legitimate news site.
I won’t post his response to my questions, but will say his defense was pretty flimsy.
Owen Jones
“Imagine this. The BBC appoints a prominent radical leftist, a lifelong Bennite, the chairman of the publisher of a prominent leftwing publication no less, as its flagship political presenter and interviewer. This person has made speeches in homage of Karl Marx calling for the establishment of full-blooded socialism in Britain, including a massive increase in public ownership, hiking taxes on the rich to fund a huge public investment programme, and reversing anti-union laws. “
A few years back he had the bomber, who got a tad too rabid & was banned by RNZ management. In regard to why another leftist didn’t get wheeled in to replace him, you have a valid point. Personally I think the binary frame is antiquated anyway. Any media who use it are trying to get away with discriminating against the third of the electorate who aren’t left or right.
True.
We need to be sticking to reality rather than people’s reckons and ideologies.
They used to have the Trotsker until his head got too big to fit through the studio door.
Elizabeth Warren’s Bill to restructure capitalism in the US – not ending capitalism, but giving workers and local communities a stake in companies:
I guess that is the most radical a potential US presidential candidate could get.
Small step in the right direction so we ought to credit her for trying I suppose. Some authors have reported on the co-operatives in the USA that have long provided an alternative model for business – a surprisingly large number.
Stephen Selwood is Chief Executive of Infrastructure New Zealand seems to think that we can solve our affordable housing problems by just somehow obtaining $25k sections (free from the taxpayers no doubt) and putting on Greenfield land that the taxpayer fairies apparently come down and grant billions for infrastructure for public transport and infrastructure to industries like his in an instant to build, and increase the prices of food for the average person…
Sounds like a great idea,(sarcasm) lets get Stephen Selwood to finance his own project and show how he can get it done, (or is this just another blowhard expecting the taxpayers to give him more corporate welfare contracts)…
There actually used to be $300k houses and apartments in Auckland 5 years ago, before someone decided to import nearly 1 million cheap workers and satellite families into the area and create ‘gold bricks’ opportunities for people to take out money from their own countries and hide it here and change the zoning so create millions overnight for landowners.
There are a multitude of reasons we will never have $25k sections again, one being the massive earthworks now required to make the land earthquake resistant, underground power supply, stormwater ponds that take up land previously built on.
For as long as houses are built by developers and builders who control what is built to maximise profit we will never have houses built that reflect what is needed.
Those with a memory will recall building what you could afford with plans to expand your house as money came available, now a first house will be four bedrooms, office and media room. The banks and investors will be happy as borrowers will be tied to huge loans that will never be paid off.
No wonder the infrastructure companies are going bust with the CEO who thinks they can do the infrastructure and buy a section for $25k and have a completed new build for $300k. You would be lucky to get power connected with our rip of culture of profiteering in the construction industry, for $25k.
“Auckland 5 years ago, before someone decided to import nearly 1 million cheap workers and satellite families into the area ”
That is a truly amazing statistic. Are you really making the claim that the population of Auckland has risen by at least a million people in the last five years?
If you are making that claim can you provide a source for the numbers?
If not can you please tell us what you are really claiming?
Add the amount of permanent residents per year, the amount of student and temporary visas, the “tourists” who seem to be living here and estimate the amount of illegal workers and you are getting around that figure over the 5 years. Surprisingly nobody seems to be able to understand why there is so much congestion in Auckland and it is spreading, why so many shortages of teachers, beds in hospitals etc are already full… and if you think the botch up census will provide answers you are wrong.
The government even relys on visitors cards and voluntary information to track what is going on and seems about a decade behind what is actually happening.
We even have pearls of wisdom from the CEO of infrastructure this morning thinking he can organise some Greenfield sections for $25k. God help us if this is the standard of thinking we have to deal with. If you can get the water and power and telecoms on a site for that, you are doing well! Let alone buy and develop it.
Government already had sites with power, water, drainage, telecoms etc. They were called state houses and provide affordable housing before successive governments sold them off and now the former tenants live in private hotels at $1000 per week while where they used to live is being sold at $800k +.
Everywhere you look, the taxpayers and the most vulnerable are picking up the price for idiotic thinking and then the neoliberals are trying to spin it as solving something.
Surge in families seeking food parcels
https://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018658324/surge-in-families-seeking-food-parcels
Meanwhile, it has been a record year for wealth creation
https://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018658329/record-year-for-wealth-creation-nbr-rich-list
save nz @ 11
Your explanation sounds about right. Having stripped the country of micro business so that we can buy stuff cheaply from the countries that we are exporting our produce to, and leaving damage where it’s been, and reduced wages so that people can hardly afford to buy the cheap things brought in that are made wonkier and so ever cheaper, so they can be affordable but only last one season and then be replaced, which is the way that countries trade and achieve growth and good returns by clipping the ticket in numerous ways and in NZ by 15% consumer tax on everything, through all that we achieve harmony and to ensure that those making profits do not lose too much from stock exchange or international currency exchange fluctuations the governments open up the most attractive as investment and permanent things of worth in NZ that can be sold, houses.
That’s tl;dr but isn’t that it for NZ in a large nutshell from someone who views NZ as lost in a larger nutcase and nuthouse. We will have to learn to sing, and sing this song from Porgy and Bess, and keep singing and hold onto our gals and fellers and kids with love and resignation, and be wise and determined to get what we really need, because anger wastes time unless positively directed and becomes self-destructive.
Ella Fitzgerald Lyrics
“I Got Plenty O’ Nuttin'”
I got plenty of nothing
And nothing’s plenty for me
I got no car – got no mule
I got no misery
Folks with plenty of [plenty]
They’ve got a lock on the door
Afraid somebody’s going to rob ’em
While there out (a) making more – what for
I got no lock on the door – that’s no way to be
They can steal the rug from the floor – that’s OK with me
‘Cause the things that I prize – like the stars in the skies – are all free
I got plenty of nothing
And nothing’s plenty for me
I got my gal – got my song
(I) Got heaven the whole day long
– Got my gal – got my love – got my song
Oh, I got plenty of nothing
And nothing’s plenty for me
I got the sun, got the moon
Got the deep blue sea
The folks with plenty of plenty
Got to pray all the day
Sure with plenty you sure got to worry
How to keep the devil away – Away
I ain’t frettin ’bout hell
‘Till the time arrive
Never worry long as I’m well
Never one to strive
To be good, to be bad
What the hell
I am glad I’m alive
Writer(s): George Gershwin, du Bose Heyward, Ira Gershwin
https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/ellafitzgerald/igotplentyonuttin.html
Incidentallly I think Ella Fitzgerald, 76 is very ill.
Ella Fitzgerald died in 1996.
you are thinking of Aretha Franklin who is now in hospice care.
Aretha Franklin
http://int.search.myway.com/search/video.jhtml?n=784865ef&p2=%5EBXZ%5Exdm012%5ETTAB02%5Enz&pg=video&pn=1&ptb=588D7DF5-9CD5-495D-8989-307886F67516&qs=&searchfor=diner+scene+in+Blues+Brothers+movie+you+tube&si=google_engremarketing&ss=sub&st=tab&tpr=sbt&trs=wtt&vidOrd=3&vidId=WY66elCQkYk
Umm, Ella Fitzgerald died in 1996.
Aretha isn’t too flash, though.
Thanks I just saw Ella’s name and thought of news piece I heard lately. But Aretha, it is. People to remember but good younger ones coming along.
I liked Hollie Smith version of Bathe In the River
The years from 1900 – 1945 produced some very talented people. Not too sure how that came about.
A higher standard of living (thanks capitalism) than previous generations had experienced at a guess
High taxes and increasing wages in the USA, actually.
Helped by the full employment and economic stimulus, from bringing down the capitalist monopolies with antitrust laws, and high wealth taxes, and several Government funded wars.
But. Don’t let me burst your right wing fantasies.
All the evidence indicates that capitalism has produced more poverty and destroyed every single society that it’s arisen in.
Capitalists manage to bludge so much because people want to produce and create.
Capitalism has never done anything but make people poorer.
The reason that living standards went up was not so much do to ‘Capitalism’ or its enforcers the Business Class but rather to do with the work of Unions and the courage of people to go on strike with all that entails.
The polite classes never gave anything up for free, not the right to vote, not the right to be a free man/women, not the pennies paid upon hour worked, nor the few rights workers today posses. The reason you can claim unemployment benefits, health care benefits, accident benefits and the likes is that many many people a hundred + years ago dared to storm the barricades and put fear in the hearts of the nouveau riche and their dependents.
Just a small sampling of strikes in the US from 1900 – 1940
Strikes in the US 1900
St. Louis Streetcar Strike of 1900 (1900, U.S.)
Anthracite Coal Strike (1900, U.S.)
Machinists’ Strike (1900, U.S.)
U.S. Steel Recognition Strike of 1901 (U.S.)
Machinists’ Strike (1901, U.S.)
San Francisco Restaurant Workers’ Strike (1901, U.S.)
Anthracite Coal Strike (1902, U.S.)
Chicago Teamsters’ Strike (1902, U.S.)
Cripple Creek Colorado, Miners’ Strike (1902, U.S.)
Colorado Labor Wars, Western Federation of Miners (1903–1904, U.S.)
Oxnard Strike of 1903 (U.S.)
Utah Coal Strike (1903, U.S.)
Fall River Textile Strike (1904) (July 25, 1904, U.S.)[2]
New York City Interborough Rapid Transit Strike (1904, U.S.)
Packinghouse Workers’ Strike (1904, U.S.)
Flint Glass Workers’ Strike (1904, U.S.)[3]
Santa Fe Railroad Shopmen’s Strike (1904, U.S.)
Goldfield Nevada, Miners’ Strike (1907, U.S.)
Pensacola streetcar operators’ strike (1908, Pensacola, Florida, U.S.)
New York shirtwaist strike of 1909 “Uprising of the 20,000” (1909, U.S.)
Georgia Railroad Strike (1909, U.S.)
Pressed Steel Car Strike of 1909 (McKees Rocks, Pennsylvania, U.S.)
Watertown Connecticut, Arsenal Strike (1909, U.S.)
1910
1910 New York cloakmakers strike, also known as “The Great Revolt” (1910, U.S.)
Westmoreland County coal strike of 1910–11 (U.S.)
Chicago garment workers’ strike of 1910–1911 (U.S.)
1911 Liverpool general transport strike (UK)
Illinois Central shopmen’s strike of 1911 (U.S.)
1911 Grand Rapids Furniture Workers (U.S.)
1912 Lawrence textile strike, often known as the Bread and Roses Strike (1912, U.S.)
1912 Little Falls textile strike (U.S.)
Louisiana timber workers’ strike (1912, U.S.)
Paint Creek–Cabin Creek strike of 1912 (U.S.)
Copper Country strike of 1913–14 (1913–14, U.S.)
Ludlow Massacre Strike (1913, U.S.)
Paterson silk strike (1913, U.S.)
1913 New York City hotel workers’ strike (U.S.)
Indianapolis streetcar strike of 1913 (U.S.)
1913 Detroit automobile strike (U.S.)
1915 Chicago garment workers’ strike (U.S.)
Bayonne refinery strikes (1915 and 1916, U.S.)
Mesabi Range miners’ strike (1916, U.S.)
BLE strike in New York City (1918, U.S.)
Coal strike (1919, U.S.)
Lawrence (Mass.) textile strike (1919, U.S.)
Boston Police Strike (1919, U.S.)
Steel strike of 1919 (U.S.)
1920s
Battle of Matewan (1920, U.S.)
Denver streetcar strike of 1920 (1920, U.S.)
1920 Alabama coal strike (1920, U.S.)
Clothing Workers’ Lockout (1920, U.S.)
Oahu Sugar Strike of 1920 (1920, U.S.)
1929 – 1939 Great Depression
Battle of Blair Mountain (1921, U.S.)
Seamen’s Strike (1921, U.S.)
Great Railroad Strike of 1922 (U.S.)
Herrin massacre (1922, U.S.)
Anthracite Coal Strike (1922, U.S.)
Bituminous Coal Strike (1922, U.S.)
Railroad Shopmen’s Strike (1922, U.S.)
Portland Waterfront Strikes (1922, U.S.)
Hanapepe massacre (1924, U.S.)
Anthracite Coal Strike (1925, U.S.)
Passaic New Jersey, Textile Strike (1926, U.S.)
Bituminous Coal Strike (1927, U.S.)
Columbine Mine Massacre Strike (1927, U.S.)
New Bedford Massachusetts, Textile Strike (1928, U.S.)
Loray Mill Strike (Gastonia, North Carolina, Textile Strike) (1929, U.S.)
1930s
Imperial Valley California, Farmworkers’ Strike (1929, U.S.)
Tampa cigar makers’ strike (1931, U.S.)
Santa Clara Cannery Strike (1931, U.S.)
Harlan County War, Harlan County, Kentucky (1931, U.S.)
California Pea Pickers’ Strike (1932, U.S.)
Century Airlines pilots’ strike (1932, U.S.)
Davidson-Wiler Tennessee, Coal Strike (1932, U.S.)
Ford Hunger March Detroit Michigan (1932, U.S.)
Vacaville California, Tree Pruners’ Strike (1932, U.S.)
Briggs Manufacturing Company Strike (1933, U.S.)
California Farmworkers’ Strike (1933, U.S.)
Detroit Michigan Tool and Die Strike (1933, U.S.)
New Mexico Miners’ Strike (1933, U.S.)
Harlem New York, Jobs-for-Negroes-Boycott (1934, U.S.)
Kohler Strike, Sheboygan, Wisconsin (1934, U.S.)
1934 New York Hotel Strike (1934, U.S.)
Imperial Valley California, Farmworkers’ Strike (1934, U.S.)
Auto-Lite Strike (1934, Toledo, Ohio, U.S.)
Minneapolis Teamsters Strike of 1934 (U.S.)
1934 West Coast Longshore Strike (U.S.)
Rubber Workers’ Strike (1934, U.S.)
Textile workers Strike (1934) (U.S.)
NewarkStar-Ledger Strike (1934, U.S.)
Oklahoma, Kansas and Missouri Metal workers’ strike (1935, U.S.)
Pacific Northwest Lumber Strike (1935, U.S.)
Southern Sharecroppers’ and Farm Laborers’ Strike (1935, U.S.)
1935 Gulf Coast longshoremen’s strike (U.S.)
Atlanta Georgia, Auto Workers’ Sit-Down Strike (1936, U.S.)
Berkshire Knitting Mills Strike (1936, U.S.)
Flint Sit-Down Strike (1936, U.S.)
RCA Strike (1936, U.S.)
Gulf Coast maritime workers’ strike (1936, U.S.)
Seattle Post-Intelligencer Newspaper Strike (1936, U.S.)
Rubber Workers’ Strike (1936, U.S.)
S.S. California strike (1936, U.S.)
Remington Rand strike of 1936–1937 (U.S.)
Flint Sit-Down Strike General Motors (1936–1937, U.S.)
Hershey Pennsylvania, Chocolate Workers’ Strike (1937, U.S.)
Little Steel Strike including Memorial Day massacre of 1937 (U.S.)
Lewiston-Auburn Shoe Strike (1937, Maine, U.S.)
Chicago Newspaper Strike (1938, U.S.)
Maytag Strike (1938, U.S.)
Hilo Massacre (1938, Territory of Hawaii)
Chrysler Auto Strike (1939, U.S.)
Tool and Die Strike of 1939 (1939, U.S.)
Ford Motor Strike (1939, U.S.)
Disney animators’ strike (1939, U.S.)
So the ‘better living conditions due to capitalism’ in the US is a bit far fetched my dear PR, consider as well the Dust bowl and the Great Depression from the 1929 – 1939 which literally was caused by the exess of the monied classes gambling like the addicts they are on the Stock Market. (kind of like 2008?)
But i am sure you remember that fellow here, Franklin D. Roosevelt, President of the US from 1933- 1945 who with his New Deal, his social idea of ‘public works programme’. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal I wuz told it worked wonders lifting at least white skinned US Americans out of the grinding poverty of the great depression (you know the after math of the folly of the rampant capitalism of the roaring twenties).
For the black US American Population i would put the music down to the day to day experiences of living the Jim Crow law. Somehow that was the best outlet for them to speak about their life without getting lynched for shits n giggles and a photograph of a picnic under the tree bearing strange fruit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnlTHvJBeP0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franklin_D._Roosevelt
Great – we need development to save the areas being developed // sarc. If you think this is not about making money then you are deluded.
“A Hong Kong billionaire’s development of a high country station in the Mackenzie Basin is shifting up a gear.”
https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/106311291/mackenzie-stations-tourism-plans-get-green-light
And this highlights imo the issue of those not wanting to learn about Te Ao Māori
“But my second column established the opposite. It was live for less than 12 hours before Stuff disabled comments… Of the 200-plus comments that remained on the article, cynicism, ignorance and resistance thrived…
I’m the first to admit that just a few months back I rolled my eyes when Taika Waititi described New Zealand as ‘racist as f…’. But scratch below the surface a little and you’ll discover a vibration of racist energy of which many of us are blissfully unaware. Because it’s ugly, we try not to see it.”
https://i.stuff.co.nz/life-style/106290769/te-reo-naysayers-build-a-bridge-and-dont-be-the-troll-under-it
Yep until you live it, are aware of it, are affected by it – it doesn’t exist. It isn’t reality. This is the crisis of empathy and the legacy of neo liberalism and capitalism. THIS is the enemy.
Nah, this is the legacy of imperial Europe’s racist version of manifest destiny, colonial paternalism, and emboldened by the most recent helpings of racial enmity, resentment, othering and crisis of empathy, with a newly found license to let the masks slip.
“I’m the first to admit that just a few months back I rolled my eyes when Taika Waititi described New Zealand as ‘racist as f…’. But scratch below the surface a little and you’ll discover a vibration of racist energy of which many of us are blissfully unaware.”
That bit was the bit i noticed.
Marty, due to events in my own life the scales fell, and when I knew what to look for, I saw the country Taika Waititi describes.
That was more than forty years ago and for a long while I really thought things would change.
I was wrong.
I hear you mate – it is my lived reality too.
marty mars
Ata marie marty
Kia ora
Kia ora grey
Good first step.
Our NZ Labour led coalition government have passed into law one of Labours pre-election promises and banned non-residents from buying up NZ houses….. well done them and it’s a good first step.
Undoubtedly a lot of ‘dirty’ money has been invested, laundered and hidden in NZ …. especially as our last corrupt Natz government kept Real estate agents, accountants and lawyers out of and immunized from our money laundering laws for year upon year upon year.
A good next step to flush out and remove the rich thieves that National protected …. is the proceeds of crime laws we have…..
Internationally logging and forestry is a giant environment wrecking criminal racket …. and many of these criminal forestry companies operate here …. specific examples being Malaysian ones.
Their ill-gotten land and trees should be seized …. and as with all confiscations under our proceeds of crimes laws …. if they can prove the purchase money was clean …. they get the property back …. but they won’t as their criminality is well documented …. The Sarawak report being a good place to show this. http://www.sarawakreport.org/search/?q=logging&lang=en&page=1
https://news.mongabay.com/2016/12/interpol-says-corruption-in-global-forestry-sector-worth-29-billion-every-year/
The same goes for all the farms, vineyards, companies, power company shares, property etc etc …. purchased using shell companies or trusts based in the Bahamas, Cayman Islands, Jersey , Hong Kong …. or all the other shadow banking / tax haven centers.
Under National New zealand became part of the world wide problem of the rich and super rich stealing from the poor….. we’ve been aiding and abetting the criminals.
Cleaning up their muck would be good for everyone worldwide ….. but especially in NZ
I am hearing from friends during last weekend get together, that there is some unrest and dis satisfaction with their union NZEI, and there was talk of leaving the union.
As many of those I socialise with are on the Q1 or Q2 primary teachers scale, and even though they are full time teachers there (current) max pay scale caps out at $59,621 or $63,929, and they see that the union as not supporting their position. Not the $89,700 being reported. Yet both perform the same tasks and parents would not be aware of the qualification that their child’s teacher has, only if they are good or not
https://www.nzei.org.nz/AgreementDoc/PTCA.pdf
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/104148838/secondary-teachers-aim-for-15-per-cent-pay-increase-extra-nonteaching-hours
There can’t be many Q1 and Q2 teachers left in the system. They must have all qualified at least 25 years ago at Teachers Training College (as they then were) with a Diploma in Teaching. That is, they are pre the time when all teachers at least got a Bachelor of Education through the Training Colleges.
My understanding is that would have been before the early 1990’s. It also implies they have not done any additional papers to upgrade their Diploma’s to degree level, which I know a large number of that group have subsequently done.
I know the Ministry and Schools have put a lot of effort in trying to encourage people with Diplomas only to upgrade their qualifications. The pay scale is supposed to be one of the incentives to do so.
We obviously run in different areas !!
I know quite a few in the 45-55 age group.
When pay parity was achieved in the late 90s (??) The Q1 and Q2 were to be addressed. This never happened. Yet theses teachers still commit and achieve the same as those with degrees. Yet are rewarded $15-$17k pa less. I thought the unions were all for “A fair day’s wage for a Fair day’s Work”
And the NZEI wonders why they have lost support with a increasing number leaving the union. And for a guy at an intermediate school IMO is dangerous
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1881/05/07.htm
Obviously
I wonder why it’s got so difficult to find manual teachers now. The whole real teachers have degrees thing was a massive self inflicted wound.
And an insult to qualified tradespeople.
The whole contempt for the trades, and productive workers, imported from the UK, is part of the problem with ex British colonies, economies.
As Angela Merkel said to a British Prime Minister who moaned about their economic stagnation, compared to Germany, “We still make things”.
Good automation means that we don’t really need tradespeople any more which means that we need more people doing R&D which means people in universities.
Of course, we’re not getting good automation because our business leaders are too cheap.
This video covers it.
Total bullshit Draco.
What are we short of at the moment?
Hint. It is not designers and Lawyers.
Who is going to design, develop and build your “automated factories”.
It will be skilled trades, as usual.
I take it you didn’t watch the video. It won’t be people carefully hand-crafting each individual piece and carefully putting it together with each product being different. It will be people designing it on computers and the designed piece being 3D printed. It may then be assembled by labourers but even that’s becoming iffy.
You cannot make a IC by hand. You can’t even make TVs by hand, putting all the individual bits in place and soldering them, any more even though they used to be.
The skills that you say we need are already gone while automation and the high precision that it brings has taken their place.
I’m not dissing tradies. Hell, I am a tradie and have a trade cert to prove it. I’m just saying that their time has been and gone.
3/4 of NZ houses needing over 20k in repair work says different. Bro.
Funny, trades are in the skills shortage list, while graduates are flipping burgers.
3/4 of houses needing such repair work tells me that 3/4 of houses in NZ need to be replaced. To do so requires machinery.
Did you notice me saying that our business leaders were being too cheap?
We don’t need useless jobs but we do need better manufacturing capability.
A well developing economy reduces the number of jobs needed while still providing everything that the local populace needs.
Ever wondered why prefab houses never took off here?
Because sole trader builders are efficient, but also relatively cheap.
The building materials cost the same inflated prices, whatever you do.
“The taste of victory will be like ashes in our mouths” Kennedy
“I’m fine with Sunni jihadists getting aerially gang-raped” Cemetery Jones
Photo of regime soldier waving government flag in Yarmouk ruins.
https://syriadirect.org/news/dozens-of-bodies-remain-buried-beneath-rubble-of-yarmouk-camp-as-long-road-to-reconstruction-looms-ahead/
The amounts of blood and misery unleashed in the middle east …. and elsewhere around the world ….. is a horrific evil …. one which our pro-war media hides ….. in their support building sanitisation of our humanitarian slaughters / bombings / interventions. https://www.mondialisation.ca/united-states-bombings-of-other-countries-americas-bombing-list/5533371
New Zealand has blood on it’s hands https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58bcc6ac893fc04255abbbcc/t/58cfb45a37c5819ccd2bfd50/1490014002150/?format=500w … it’s what you do to be part of “the club”.
“It is a scandal in contemporary international law, don’t forget, that while “wanton destruction of towns, cities and villages” is a war crime of long standing, the bombing of cities from airplanes goes not only unpunished but virtually unaccused. Air bombardment is state terrorism, the terrorism of the rich. It has burned up and blasted apart more innocents in the past six decades than have all the antistate terrorists who ever lived. ”
A terrorist is someone who has a bomb but doesn’t have an air force.
The bombing list
Korea and China 1950-53 (Korean War)
Guatemala 1954
Indonesia 1958
Cuba 1959-1961
Guatemala 1960
Congo 1964
Laos 1964-73
Vietnam 1961-73
Cambodia 1969-70
Guatemala 1967-69
Grenada 1983
Lebanon 1983, 1984 (both Lebanese and Syrian targets)
Libya 1986
El Salvador 1980s
Nicaragua 1980s
Iran 1987
Panama 1989
Iraq 1991 (Persian Gulf War)
Kuwait 1991
Somalia 1993
Bosnia 1994, 1995
Sudan 1998
Afghanistan 1998
Yugoslavia 1999
Yemen 2002
Iraq 1991-2003 (US/UK on regular basis)
Iraq 2003-2015
Afghanistan 2001-2015
Pakistan 2007-2015
Somalia 2007-8, 2011
Yemen 2009, 2011
Libya 2011, 2015
Syria 2014-2015
————–
What has and is going on is Syria …. Like Libya before it … and Iraq … and Afghanistan … Palestine etc.
Should be seen for what it is https://gowans.wordpress.com/2016/10/22/the-revolutionary-distemper-in-syria-that-wasnt/
https://www.bookdepository.com/Great-War-for-Civilisation-Robert-Fisk/9781841150086
Almost all those places had one thing in coMmon.
Governments which restricted US corporate earnings.
Your pretty much on the mark there KJT …. This informative Author refers to “the axis of resistance” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LF21hR0PgbQ
friendly “in club” country’s like NZ only get strike breaking airlifts to buckle the socialist left wing influences here …. and media disinformation.
As happened in our famous historic watersiders strike …. and which our pro-war right wing media suppressed all information of at the time….. it took a CIA declassification of old 50 year and over files for us to find out about it ….
when thousands upon thousands of NZers must have known about the free usa provided air freighting operation .
By that measure alone, Syria was not in the Axis of Resistance. Prostrating itself to the IMF and fully opening up its economy to foreign penetration in the neo-liberal reforms of the late ’90s early 2000s.
The Assad regime also supplied 19,000 Syrian troops to the US led, “Coalition of the Willing” in the first Gulf War against Iraq.
And the Assad regime kindly lent out its torture chambers to the CIA for the purposes of Extraordinary Rendition because the poor old CIA was not allowed under the US Constitution to apply cruel and unusual punishments. Something erstwhile US friend, Assad has no qualms about.
So much for resistance to imperialism. That the regime has now switched to being servile to Russian imperialism, still doesn’t make it part of the mythical Axis of Resistance.
If there is an axis of resistance to imperialism in the MIddle East it belongs to the millions of Arab peoples who rose up in the Arab Spring including the opposition to Assad in Syria.
You don’t mention Syria. But I can guess from the context of this thread, that what you are trying to infer without saying it; Is that Syria has tried to restrict US corporate earnings.
One thing is for sure KJT.
Though Hafez Assad may have operated a more command type economy, his zealous neo-liberal reforming son Bashar, has not tried to restrict US corporate earnings, in fact the opposite.
Syria to Open Its Economy to Foreign Investors
Jay Solomon – May 14, 2009
Note the qualifier, most.
Finally got some time to follow up on this Jordan Peterson dude. On first blush there seems to be four types of material that’s been published; ephemeral clickbait excerpts from others that may or may not have some value, edited media interviews of limited interest, many hundreds of hours of his own academic lectures going back quite a few years, and long form discussions with other interesting people. This last category are quite absorbing in my view.
At an hour and half this is actually one of the shorter ones it would seem, but I think most people here might find it interesting, or at the least thought provoking:
https://youtu.be/nj9NEKisvB4
Yeah, he’s multifaceted.
For a start Vice is definitely a hostile source; it seems they’ve track record in distorting his ideas before with some very clumsy and selective editing, so they’ve gone for something a bit more sophisticated in this article.
But really the only point on which they really challenge Peterson is to reference PZ Myers comments on the lobster dominance/serotonin thing. Well Myers himself definitely has an agenda:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZ_Myers
so while that doesn’t immediately disqualify what he’s saying here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/7v9wo2/pz_myers_this_has_been_bothering_me/
But Myers himself makes a bunch of absurd strawmen assertions as the comments and this thread suggest:
https://www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/7v9wo2/pz_myers_this_has_been_bothering_me/
All up PZ is both derogatory, arrogant and I’m not impressed. I’ve no doubt Peterson could well be challenged on the serotonin story, especially given the relatively casual and simplified version he uses to present to general audiences … but this guy seems more focussed on attacking Peterson personally than making a thoughtful argument.
Hope you’ve gotten to the end of the video I linked to by now; it is as you say multifaceted. 🙂
Heres one you really should watch:
I find Peterson repulsive.
So no thanks.
And a lot of people don’t. Why do you think your reaction is so different?
You’d learn something and Joe Rogan is always interesting to listen to
I didn’t link to Vice, but rather Cracked. Dunno who PZ Myers is, not overly bothered to find out. I actually thought the Cracked article was reasonably fair to Peterson.
And no, I’m not going to bother to watch a single hour and a half video, as a single video could never be representative of his ouvre. I’ve never said that he doesn’t put out reasonable content, I’ve even said he helps people (as the article I linked to also says). But he also calls women’s rights a “murderous equity doctrine”.
OK so you’re not interested in even looking at the link I put up, much less address any of the content, but you are happy to play gotcha.
Which ironically enough was a main point of the discussion, in the link.
And I think your jibe on women’s rights is also another rather obvious strawman.
the dude has produced probably thousands of hours of lectures, interviews and videos. You’ve found an hour and a half that’s reasonable. Good for you. One might even be able to find an hour and a half of T-45 acting reasonable. It doesn’t overrule the rest of his material. So why should I bother watching it – to confirm something I’ve already acknowledged? A waste of time.
This is the “murderous equity doctrine in all it’s glory. Justin Trudeau tweeted “It’s incredibly inspiring and motivating to see so many people come out to support women’s rights. We see you, we hear you, and @MaryamMonsef and our government will keep fighting for gender equality in Canada. #womensmarch2018”. Peterson’s reply: “Is that the murderous equity doctrine @JustinTrudeau? Do you understand where that leads? Or do you think you’ll do it differently?”.
Call that a strawman if you want, but it’s hardly a reasonable response to a banal politician’s tweet, surely.
And there are other examples I’ve come across elsewhere. So, like I say, he’s a bit more complex than the clicksturbaitors, but it’s not like he’s completely benign, either.
Brilliant! I must bookmark this. “I can’t be arsed actually reading/watching anything you link to, but I’ve already made up my mind it’s a waste of time”. Why didn’t I think of this foolproof gambit years ago? Wins every argument, every time.
Peterson’s reply: “Is that the murderous equity doctrine @JustinTrudeau? Do you understand where that leads? Or do you think you’ll do it differently?”.
Exactly what ‘equality’ was Trudeau referring to? Equality of rights and opportunity (which has already been effectively achieved in countries like Canada and nobody objects to) or equality of outcome which is what Peterson was asking about when he used the word ‘equity’ ? They are of course two quite different things, so it’s a legitimate question I would imagine.
Yawn.
Peterson isn’t controversial because he has long interviews with interesting people.
He’s controversial because even in the sense of “equality of outcome” for “gender equality”, to call it “murderous” blatantly misrepresents who is killing whom. Even in Canada.
IIRC in most countries the majority of people killed are men, mostly by other men. As an extreme behaviour there are good reasons why men are the primary perpetrators of aggressive, lethal violence. (I’d link but you wouldn’t be arsed reading it.) In general the best social predictor of violence is economic inequality, and the specific causes of intimate partner violence are another complex set of issues. (I’d also link but again … you and not reading things.)
But neither of these have anything directly to do with women’s legal and social rights, or equality of opportunity; I think that blatantly misrepresents the actual causes of the problem.
BTW … in over a decade here I’ve never resorted to a puerile ‘yawn’ in any debate, however tendentious. Lift your fucking game.
Well, how about you stop being so damned boring, instead?
All you said about that video is that some people might find it interesting or thought provoking. What new new and relevant information about peterson does it contain? Because I’ve already said that he does provide some interesting and reasonable content. The problem is the other content he also provides.
I’m not the one who called gender equity “murderous”. Calling the movement behind a women’s rights march “murderous”, as Peterson explicitly did, is a pretty drastic leap. Which was my point in the first place.
And as for me not taking an hour and a half out of my life to watch something on the offchance, you read my link so damned carefully that you referred to the wrong site and wrong author. Lift your own game.
Sorry for being boring, I find doing this in Android rather bloody.
One of his main arguments is that whenever left wing movements get enough power to implement equality of outcomes, the result is always murderous. There are only bad precedents to go by.
Gosman’s Venezuela obssession had him pipped at the post with that one.
But even if his argument were true and fair, it doesn’t justify tolerating the inequalities of outcome that currently exist.
Precisely. Peterson actually makes exactly the same point forcefully in many places.
At the very least he casts a very harsh light on how deep and a serious problem inequality is. And in doing so lays out some constructive ground work towards resolving it. As the theme I’ve returned to here over many years it’s a fresh view I find intriguing.
Great. That makes the stuff about male violence being caused by a lack of monogamy so much more reasonable. /sarc
I’m not sure why you find that so unreasonable. Is it a totally unjustifiable proposition?
For several reasons. My favourite of which is that it’s a switch: he goes from describing what he sees as the cause of a problem (sexually frustrated males) and proposes a solution (get them laid by socially pressuring people to be monogamous so the actual nonviolent guys don’t sleep with as many women so the women have to settle for fuckwits) based on an incorrect social assumption (we actually have quite high rates of monogamy in the western world) and wilfully ignoring a third option (the “not if you were literally the last fuckwit on earth” negation of his solution). The trouble is that the more direct solution, even if this is a significant cause of the violence problem (very arguable) is that a better solution is to simply teach young men how to productively deal with their frustrations of any nature.
If there is a problem with my behaviour at work, my boss gets me to stop doing that. My boss does not propose a dramatic shift in everyone else’s conditions in the office in order to stop me wanting to do that bad behaviour.
So no, I really don’t believe his position is justifiable and his solution most certainly is not.
Great, and exactly the same answer Peterson gives, that ultimately young men need to take responsibility for their behaviour and own lives in order that they stand a decent chance of attracting a mate.
The problem is that if as a society we trend away from monogamy, the odds become hopelessly stacked against a large fraction of young males, and I’m of the view this does trend towards a more violent society. Certainly one where young men are more disposable in wars.
His solution being exactly the same as yours, I struggle to see your beef with it. Unless I’m wrong and you’re arguing against monogamy as a bad thing because it constrains female sexual selection.
Because monogamy doesn’t need to be in the conversation at all.
The entire assumption that non-monogamous societies revolve around just men having sex with lots of women is bloody stupid, for a start.
And it’s not like a cab on the rank – Peterson’s assumption is that if there are only dweebs left on the market because the would-be-promiscuous guys are in monogamous relationships, women will pick the dweebs. What a load of bull.
If Peterson’s solution is the same as mine, why the hell does he even bring up monogamy? Why doesn’t he stick to teaching young men how to not be fuckwits, rather than bringing his ideas on monogamy into it? Because the two conflict and end up providing solace to fuckwits who blame women for the fact that nobody wants to have sex with them.
Because virtually all non monogamous societies DO finish up with just some men having sex with most of the women. Far from being a stupid assertion, history demonstrates that this is pretty much exactly what you get. There us even good genetic evidence supporting this.
Monogamy has to come into it, otherwise the game isnt worth playing. And it’s no accident that monogamy,or at least a constraint on excessive polygamy is a core teaching of all the major religions.
I don’t see any conflict at all. His 12 Rules book is all about putting yourself together and not being a ducking dweeb… no solace in it at all.
Only in those societies where sexual partners are regarded as property and expressions of power. Although even then, some cases like Rome also made sure guys got laid regularly. At the expense of the women, of course.
Indeed, it’s no accident that the systems used to preserve existing power structures control every aspect of human life.
Let’s look at it another way – if sexual frustration is a contributing factor for violence in society, if we simply gave all young men a monthly voucher to the local brothel then by what proportion would you expect the prison population to decrease?
Going over the thread, I don’t understand this line:
What do you mean? Which game?
FFS. While it doesn’t surprise me RL is enamoured with Jordan Peterson (RL is of the landlord class after all), his parroting of the RIght Wing constant – ‘it’s about equality of opportunity not equality of outcome ‘ – beggars belief.
+ 1
Here comes the implied violence ‘0ne of the landlord class’. It’s disturbing how little it takes to scratch off the veneer of niceness around here.
Still if you are so certain that equality of outcomes is such a good idea, then feel free to explain in detail. Because I know it sounds a good thing, but it quickly degenerates when you start doing the details
Petersen, or Islamist Cleric?
https://twitter.com/@JBPorCleric
Totally reasonable guy.
And then my favourite JBP tweet;
Almost poetic. I hope he cleaned his room.
In both instances you’ve deliberately omitted the context.
Ok RL, I’ve just gone looking for the context of those two quotes, and I’m appalled.
Would you care to lay out for us the context of those and explain how that context in any way mitigates Petersen’s utter reprehensibility?
What exactly appals you so? Given that neither quote appears in the slightest bit consistent with everything else he’s saying, it’s reasonable to assume it’s mischievously selective.
The second relates to a particularly vile personal attack on Peterson, that also implicated a close friend of his. His anger was justified in my view.
Context?
Dude’s innate thuggery exposed by his lamenting the fact that he can’t win an argument with women without resorting to violence, and that he’s unable to clock someone he disagrees because they’re too far away.
Whenever you see a short provocative quote with no context it’s 95% probable it’s intentionally misleading.
Put your brain in gear, no sane person would actually say something with the intent being implied here. So what do you imagine the actual conversation was saying?
This exactly what the right did to Cunliffe over the ‘sorry to be a man’ moment, so it shouldn’t be too hard to join the dots.
Here he is squealing about the fact that he’s forbidden to respond to women as he would men, with violence.
And here, because he imagines he’s been slighted, he gets his wannabe thug on.
Ah nope. I think he’s saying the exact opposite of what you are implying.
There was nothing imaginary about the accusation, and it was clearly the fact of his entirely innocent friend being dragged into it was the root of his anger
You’d think he’d be grateful that his smug little clock is relatively safe from cleaning.
Could you try putting these quotes into a context where they don’t sound unhinged?
People can watch his videos for context but good luck, there’s a lot of misunderstanding Nietzsche, post-modernism and ‘cultural marxism’.
As well as misinformed notions of biological hierarchy, socialism and atheism. He became famous for not understanding Canadian human rights law and now he is paid by PragerU to continue to rant hysterically.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PragerU
Other PragerU big thinkers include Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin and Steven Crowder. That is JBP’s context.
Absolutely he’s a conservative, but it’s a mistake to view him through an exclusively political lens.
It’s a mistake to view him as anything but another slippery right wing sophist spreading reactionary illiberal ideas and chicken-soup-for-the-soul-equivalent self-help for profit.
I think the more obvious mistake I’ve made is to think you might have been arguing in good faith. My bad.
Jordan ‘My Bad’ Peterson
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QO9j1SLxEd0
I’m not arguing with you Red, in faith or otherwise. I have listened to and read Peterson and fail to see his value to the readers of a left-wing blog.
For the simple reason that he points to why the left has been do bloody useless for so many decades.
Still I can understand why a lot of people here might not want to see much value in that. Orwell was right about middle class socialists.
He doesn’t understand what the left is, and he is paid by the other team.
As far as I see it, the left started failing the moment they listened to the right and started their third way triangulation and neo-liberal economics.
The left needs to move left, big ‘S’ socialism is popular with future voters, the last thing we on the left should do is platform people who disingenuously misrepresent it.
.
And what did Orwell say about middle-class socialists? Was it this:
Which, interestingly enough, is Jordan B Peterson’s summary of an excerpt in Chapter 11 of Orwell’s “The Road to Wigan Pier”
reproduced here: https://www.quora.com/What-s-the-full-Orwell-quote-that-is-often-paraphrased-that-middle-class-socialists-don-t-care-about-the-poor-they-just-hate-the-rich-Where-was-it-written
For context.
Well that’s a decent response. Fleshing out Orwell’s quote is actually appreciated. In my experience here it’s not the whole story, but it’s too often a pretty fat subplot.
I agree that the entire left wing enterprise needs to reinvent itself. But exactly what lessons from our own bloody past are we willing to admit to?
It is of course insane to label Peterson a Nazi. But because men are forbidden to attack women (in any manner) then exactly what recourse does any man have and retain respect?
The only option is to walk away. That seems perfectly real to me.
Aussies brace themselves for the new normal.
How long before Australian citizens are in the situation, that refugees the Australian state are persecuting are?
‘It’s all bad’: Earliest total fire bans on record an ominous sign
Peter Hannam – Sydney Morning Herald, August 15, 2018
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/it-s-all-bad-earliest-total-fire-bans-on-record-an-ominous-sign-20180815-p4zxn8.html
Got back to Brissy a few days ago; August and it hasn’t rained all winter. Dry as a something Aussie proverbial.
“The bans beat the previous earliest such declarations anywhere in NSW by almost two weeks, according to NSW Rural Fire Service records going back to 2009”
Should say earliest fire ban since 2009!
using these silly comparisons does no good. No doubt it is one of the drier periods but making a ridiculous claim serves no use.
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/it-s-all-bad-earliest-total-fire-bans-on-record-an-ominous-sign-20180815-p4zxn8.html
Here’s a couple of articles from the Australian ABC’s News website that sort’ve explains what’s going with our Australian weather atm.
Which is getting a wee bit unusual atm for example an early start to the fire season in SE Queensland and parts NSW, an early start to the build up season prior to the start of the wet season (to a point my wife and I have noticed are ants moving to dryer areas, cane toads are getting more actived, the banya trees are breaking in new leaves and even today I felt a few drops of rain. All of this and many more such activities is something we don’t see to about the end of September or early to mid October). I’ve heard dad mention when he was a kid at the Hill that you would see Roo’s hoping around urban areas, but emu’s during a drought and Broken Hill being class a city is the first major city to natives roaming the its streets as smaller towns have had happen already.
I’ve spent the last odd 20 yrs in some pretty remote areas, outback towns, and regional towns to the big smoke with work and play. Over that period I’ve notice that wee changes to the environment are to become big changes and the landholders, farmers, station mangers that I’ve known over the have gone back to their records to found tends to changes to the weather/ environment have now started to understand that CC is now becoming a real big concern because the trends to the weather/ environment of the many years/ decades.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-14/southern-annular-mode-and-how-it-affects-our-weather/10106134
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-01/what-you-need-to-know-about-droughts/10051956
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-16/emus-take-over-broken-hill/10122430
Tim Watkin is a marked improvement on Jim Mora, but he
burbled out something really foolish this afternoon.
The Panel, RNZ National, Thursday 16 Aug. 2018, 4:50 p.m.
Tim Watkin, Nevil “Breivik” Gibson, Paula Penfold, Julie Moffett
In the course of a mainly serious discussion about the bombing of a school in Kabul, host Tim Watkin made a rather thoughtless and naïve comment. I quickly sent him a quick update from the real world….
Afghan fighters are neither unique nor bizarre in their strategy of violence
Dear Tim,
You said: “In Afghanistan, violence is seen as a negotiating strategy, bizarrely.” That implies that Afghanistan’s factions resorting to violence is unusual, even unique.
That will come as a surprise to anyone familiar with the history, including the very recent history, of the United States, France, the U.K., Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Syria and many other regimes that routinely resort to the most extreme violence.
Yours sincerely,
Morrissey Breen
Northcote Point
That was pretty pettifogging even for you morrie.
Question Time in the house is getting to the point of embarrassment. The Nationals are belabouring the same points ove r and over and it is getting tedious and boring.
Agreed RP. The silly thing is that the Nats don’t seem to realise that their questions do not get them any further ahead. Perhaps the repetitions hope to get them mileage in the eyes of some reporters. But really?
And Trevor seems to be getting tougher on Labour.
Is ‘I refer the member opposite to my answer of 20 June’ considered unparliamentary?
I tried to find Aretha Frankijn’s song It’s A Man’s World can’t find it ??????????????.
These 2 will do fine to honer a Great African American Lady .
This is how a real Man behaves
Good morning The Am Show condolences to Aretha Franklin whano
Eco Maori they to find her great song It’s A Man’s World could not find it that’s telling me something oppression of the Ladys so it’s not just Japan that is doing this.
Duncan The New Aotearoa Government has only been in Parliament for a few month’s
not 3 year’s I will say this the Media should have some respect for OUR new Prime minster she got thrown into leading the Labour Party 2 to3 month’s before a election won enough support to form a Government. Then she has a baby this is no easy feat and the Media hound her looking for any flaw’s to exasperate and shonky could cheat and lie and get minimal exposes from the media
about those major flaws we know that it’s the neo capitalist mone that cause’s this Phenomenal flaw’s with OUR media ana to kai.
This M bovis disaster is the national party mess that the New Government has to clean up if we ended up with foot and mouth from this sweep under the carpet that shonky is a master at it would have devastated our economy costing 10’s of billions stuffing our primary exports earning & reputation for 50 years. There is a small % of people who will cheat and don’t care if there way’s ruin the Aotearoa.
With OUR road accidents number going up when you jam a xtra 500.000 vehicals 700.000 people and then choke the funding for roads cut police number’s instead of increasing them well the road accident rate is going to go up. Ka kite ano P.S Eco Maori can’t even get a job because the undercover sandfly’s interfering I got a business thinking I would be fine but the sandfly’s went and seen every one of my clients so they started leaving me this made the business un economical this cost me $50 k in all loses
My last job a cop & marked cop car parked outside the address for a hole day I was trying to get a job there .Here’s a link to a story and read the comments on how the nz police behave in reality well cop’s all over Papatuanuku are the same when one does not have to answer for there wrong’s the think they can do what ever they like and the state will cover it up.
Can’t have everyone know that they are human
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/106315821/mcleod-nicholas-role-in-the-haumaha-controversy-leaves-me-uneasy
There you go these organizations that have been hiding the real fact’s about some of there products deserve the Wrath from Eco Maori the link is below ka kite ano.
P.S this is why I back organics food production its good for Papatuanuku and the mokopuna’s
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
With this technological break we don’t need to use genetic engineering to help produce food we can use the tried and safe way that is plant breeding Ka pai link below
Ka kite ano
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/aug/16/scientists-sequence-wheat-genome-in-breakthrough-once-thought-impossible P.S this genetic sequencing would have completed earlier if GE people did not suppress the tec
Some music to let te tangata whenua know Eco Maori is there for you well not just tangata whenua for all the common people link below
Good evening Newshub I still can not find Aretha Franklin’s best song to Eco Maori on youtube IT’s A MAN WORLD . I had all her cd 25 year ago My wife and cousin blasted her song’s
I seen this story on Stuff website The hospital did not even check my mokopuna health problem correctly so they did not even find the problem so there was no debate about weather to give her antibiotics or not .
I’m busy with the mokopuna’s .
Hope the weather is good to us Ingred Ka kite ano
P.S I no Jame Brown wrote and sung It’s A MAN’S WORLD but Aretha covered it and I say see was the best
Good evening The Crowd Goes Wild Wairangi and the boss man Rick I seen you around young fella lol you mite have to send Mull’s to some UFC training after last nite lol
plenty of confidence Wai ka pai tangata whenua need more of that yes I can hit a golf ball but that’s it E Hoa
It will a be good game of Rugby this weekend .
Ka kite ano