Open mike 16/12/2009

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, December 16th, 2009 - 33 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

mike

Topics of interest, announcements, general discussion. The usual rules apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

33 comments on “Open mike 16/12/2009 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Bored 1
    16 December 2009 at 6:40 am

    Just heard on the news that the government has given the green light to build new Terrace and Mt Victoria tunnels, plus the Transmission Gully route. Back when the automobile was king, prior to emissions being an issue and oil depletion a reality this would have made great sense. All I can see is a total resource misallocation, I would rather the cash was spent on light rail and better public transport.

    • mickysavage 1.1
      16 December 2009 at 8:10 am

      Agreed. Someone needs to analyse the financial aspects of this. It is a billion dollars worth of spend and all it will do is increase car use and cannibalise public transport useage for the area by 13%. And all that it does is save 10 minutes a trip …

      • Tigger 1.1.1
        16 December 2009 at 10:08 am

        We still need ways to move people en masse or else no matter what we do we will have conjestion (ever tried to cycle in a big group of people? it’s damn frustrating and dangerous). Light rail best – give that it’s own route and you can be sure it would get used.

    • vto 1.2
      16 December 2009 at 8:39 am

      Silly sausages, try and think outside the internal combustion engine square.

      Population will continue to increase. So too will the availability of private transport. There will be more and more cars and the like. But they will not be powered by carbon will they. Think fullas think. Highways and byways and trails and tracks are required by manwomankind to get around, as they have throughout all of history.

      Which is quite a different issue to oil and emissions (though at this stage in our history confusingly closely related)

      Burning carbon to power our cars will soon change but the highways and byways will still be required.

      Attack the internal combustion engine and carbon burning, but not the trails and tracks required for human movement across the land.

      • rainman 1.2.1
        16 December 2009 at 9:36 am

        Silly sausage yourself.

        “Population will continue to increase. So too will the availability of private transport. There will be more and more cars and the like. But they will not be powered by carbon will they.”

        Lot’s of assumptions there. So what will these magic cars be powered by? And when will they all magically appear?

        http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/14/report-meaningful-numbers-of-plug-in-hybrids-still-decades-away/

        • vto 1.2.1.1
          16 December 2009 at 9:54 am

          Well yes assumptions of course. Anything regarding the future has an element of assumption about it.

          I am simply taking human history and extrapolating into the future.

          I think if we think that mankind will be unable to come up with an alternative energy source to carbon burning and that the whole world is going to implode then we are denying history. In general. On average. Looking at the bigger picture.

          • rainman 1.2.1.1.1
            16 December 2009 at 10:08 am

            Logic test: Please choose the more correct of these two statements:

            1. It’s happened before, therefore it will happen again
            2. It’s happened before, therefore it might happen again

            Then, considering the stakes with which we are playing, feel free to use your decision to justify a policy of laissez-faire inaction.

            I’ll go fetch the popcorn.

            • vto 1.2.1.1.1.1
              16 December 2009 at 10:26 am

              Hang on hang on. I was talking about trails and tracks not emissions etc. Trails and tracks have always been needed and, if population growth continues, more will be needed in the future. Hence transmission gully. Which is a different issue than carbon burning and emissions. That was my point.

              But following your logic, please choose the more correct of these two statements;

              1. Population will not increase.
              2. Population will increase.

              • Bill …
                16 December 2009 at 10:47 am

                Point taken about ‘highways’ and ‘by- ways’ except…..that currently paths and roads are comprised of an oil industry by product ( bitumen) that craps out quite quickly….that things grow through quite easily…that kind of ‘flows away’ quite readily….so, why bother?

                Plus, why will we need to regularly move ourselves en mass? We move en mass because of job requirements. But in a future that will presumably be much more decentralised than at present, massive flows to and from industrial zones or to and from cities will be historical curiosities.

              • rainman …
                16 December 2009 at 10:52 am

                Actually I thought you were saying we’d find a ready substitute for cheap oil as we’ve been clever enough to do so before.

                Anyway, despite you having side-stepped my question, I’ll chuck in another:
                Is “more will be needed” the problem, or the solution?

                I can see a case for both population scenarios, but would tend towards #2 in the short term, given inertia. Doesn’t mean they’ll all be driving SUV’s, y’know. Where are the rates of population growth the highest, and what sort of roads and cars do they typically have there?

      • prism 1.2.2
        16 December 2009 at 10:00 am

        “wise” anti spam
        vto That point about us wanting to get around, travel for all sorts of reasons, never gets mentioned in discussions. Even if we get on bicycles, we will need roads, routes, not just holey tracks. I can’t see us getting like Nigerian athletes, running huge distances as a matter of course. We haven’t got the long legs for it anyway.

      • Bored 1.2.3
        16 December 2009 at 10:01 am

        Silly sausage perhaps, I will let history judge. A few points to make:
        * you are right, those of us around will need roads and byways (we always have) but they may not be as you see them today, primarily set up for auto transport.
        * anybody who has faith in the replacement of oil based fuel by sufficient “alternative” energy needs to understand that we are currently (and probably never will) unable to break the laws of thermodynamics. In short the planet does not have enough energy available to carry on doing what we are doing. The technology will save us argument is a crock of ****
        * This population increase you speak of….goes along with that silly sausage assumption that populations and economies can grow infinitely. In a finite world how do we manage that?

        • vto 1.2.3.1
          16 December 2009 at 10:33 am

          I would suggest Bored that the science pointing to population increases is more accepted and reliable than the science pointing to AGW. You rely on the AGW science …

          And I am not relying the on ‘technology will save us’ argument. There may well be a a period of heavy adjustment in between. But I do have faith in humanity. It has been successful throughout the mast majority of history. But feel free to deny history and claim the end is nigh – you are quite entitled to.

          • Bored 1.2.3.1.1
            16 December 2009 at 10:53 am

            Just quickly, Malthus was right….
            Oil will be gone
            people eat oil (thats why there are so many of us
            No oil less people
            History littered with examples of failure to adapt

  2. Jenny 2
    16 December 2009 at 8:03 am

    I see that the Transport Minister Steven Joyce, has invoked soothsayers to support this crazy scheme.

    “I think we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to build a fit-for-purpose highway connection between our capital city and points north. I am very confident [the projects will happen]. The stars have aligned.”

    • felix 2.1
      16 December 2009 at 8:23 am

      Hi Jenny, I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on whether Transport Minister Steven Joyce has been invoking soothsayers.

  3. Jenny 3
    16 December 2009 at 8:03 am

    I see that the Transport Minister Steven Joyce, has invoked soothsayers to support this crazy scheme.

    “I think we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to build a fit-for-purpose highway connection between our capital city and points north. I am very confident [the projects will happen]. The stars have aligned.”

  4. Jenny 4
    16 December 2009 at 8:03 am

    I see that the Transport Minister Steven Joyce, has invoked soothsayers to support this crazy scheme.

    “I think we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to build a fit-for-purpose highway connection between our capital city and points north. I am very confident [the projects will happen]. The stars have aligned.”

  5. Jenny 5
    16 December 2009 at 8:05 am

    I see that the Transport Minister Steven Joyce, has invoked soothsayers to support this crazy and wasteful scheme.

    “I think we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to build a fit-for-purpose highway connection between our capital city and points north. I am very confident [the projects will happen]. The stars have aligned.”

  6. Akldnut 6
    16 December 2009 at 8:10 am

    WTF Jenny

  7. felix 7
    16 December 2009 at 8:21 am

    Credit where due:

    I was pleasantly surprised to hear John Key on morning report yesterday talking about flags. The interviewer gave him plenty of opportunities to pander to the racist element of our society and he pretty much stood fast and refused to bite.

    To be clear, the flag issue is a bucket of fuck all and a substitute for actual progress on maori representation. Nonetheless it’s good to hear Key making the right kind of noises about it, and more or less coherently for a change.

    • Pascal's bookie 7.1
      16 December 2009 at 8:25 am

      Yeah. Hopefully he can stay coherent for his BBC debate gig on climate change.

      • felix 7.1.1
        16 December 2009 at 8:32 am

        Those remedial reading classes from Tolley should pay off. I hear he’s almost finished Riley the Rat.

    • lukas 7.2
      16 December 2009 at 8:31 am

      100% agree Felix

    • Ron 7.3
      16 December 2009 at 9:48 am

      I’d give him credit if I thought for one minute that he and his party had any committment to any soprt of partnership with Maori.
      The flag is one of convenience. It is convenient for the NACT/Maori Party to look like it’s a warm fuzzy group of bicultural NZers. Itr’s convienient for the maori party to look olike it’s getting something in return for selling NZ down the drain by sleeping with the Tories.

  8. prism 8
    16 December 2009 at 11:56 am

    This morning RadioNZ lawyer Robert Lithgow gives good analysis of Dame Margaret Bazley’s report on legal aid. Finds few facts but is intrigued by up to 80% of South Auckland legal aid lawyers could be rorting the system. Find the holes in that! Its a trick. You can’t – the whole statement is holey and the task is to find the substance.

    Just looking up Dame Margaret’s background – started off as a nurse and was in that sector to 1984. Then after that magic year, got into forming SOEs, Transport (merged into police), Social Welfare from 1990s and retired in 2001. Then looked into science, police conduct, etc. Handy person for looking into things and tidying them up apparently. Probably starts with the idea that everyone is inefficient and need a good shake-up.

  9. grumpy 9
    16 December 2009 at 12:25 pm

    How about this?

    Absolutely disgusting sentence. Enough to make think of changing sides.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10615792

  10. Quoth the Raven 10
    16 December 2009 at 12:53 pm

    I’m surprised no one here has got onto this news: Racist insults end Napier test cricket party

    A corporate box hired by a brother of National MP Chris Tremain was refused alcohol at Napier’s McLean Park after racial abuse was hurled at Pakistani cricketers.

  11. the pinkpostman 11
    16 December 2009 at 3:54 pm

    Icant believe all this concern and ballyhoo about a bloody flag .
    Personally I could not care if they flew the skull and crossbone from the Harbour Bridge , The world is in danger of coming to an end through global warming and the clowns we have sent to Copenhagen
    are completely incompetent , unemployment is out of control,

    • the pinkpostman 11.1
      16 December 2009 at 4:04 pm

      continuation from above.Lockouts ,strikes and PM who has no control over his members and here we are discussing flags .No wonder we have so many Tory Governments ,
      Im begining to realise that we have the government we deserve.
      This flag episode will only distract the real issues from discusion and will end up as a racist divisive beat up.
      key and his mates must be laughing their head off.