Open mike 19/02/2020

Written By: - Date published: 7:00 am, February 19th, 2020 - 113 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

113 comments on “Open mike 19/02/2020 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Herodotus 1
    19 February 2020 at 7:58 am

    No wonder workers get exploited- It is sooo difficult to turn a profit, almost not worth being in business. Just as well that one party is promising to rescind and minimum wage increase so such businesses will become MORE profitable. Now if we can only protect those workers being exploited under visa requirements.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/119602924/liquor-store-owners-planned-mansion-while-company-probed

    • Kevin 1.1
      19 February 2020 at 11:39 am

      Meanwhile we hear 'Kiwis' don't want to work'.

      A lot easier to exploit a migrant than a local. Same problem in HB in horticulture.

    • Wensleydale 1.2
      19 February 2020 at 1:12 pm

      That poor Mr. Singh. My heart goes out to him. How is he ever going to complete his unnecessarily opulent home now that he's no longer able to siphon the wages of his indentured servants via threats of deportation? And he's been disowned by Super Liquor. Dear me. It's all a ghastly nightmare. I wonder if he's considered setting up a GoFundMe page to see him through these turbulent waters?

      Seriously, he should be in prison. This guy has form for this crap, and he's shitting on his own people. How he's regarded as a 'prominent person in the Sikh community' while pulling stunts like this is anyone's guess. Singh and people like him should be fined into penury and prohibited from running a business for the rest of their natural lives. And his wife looks as though she's happily complicit.

  2. A 2
    19 February 2020 at 9:18 am

    Let's do this:

    It would "shift the onus of proof", says Keene, and could lead to "more equal" outcomes – and might have made a difference in Jazmine Bell's case.

    "The alleged perpetrator could be required to describe how they knew the other person was consenting throughout the process, so, for example, if the victim was asleep or unconscious, they would need to demonstrate why they thought they had obtained enthusiastic consent from the other person," she explains.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/119484045/he-said-she-said-how-we-might-tackle-changes-to-our-sexual-consent-laws

    • Ad 2.1
      19 February 2020 at 6:53 pm

      It was great to hear the Police Officer in charge of Crime Prevention say on RNZ this afternoon that no one should have sex with drunk people.

      Many will argue that getting at least slightly drunk is the only way they actually get sex.

      But in the context of Orientation Week, it's the right message for the Police to get out.

  3. francesca 3
    19 February 2020 at 9:30 am

    The MSM generally does not linger on any controversies that embarrass the western

    PTB, the news cycle must go on

    Peter Hitchens ,however , is not letting this go.

    https://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2020/02/someone-has-been-telling-lies-about-a-and-b-kafka-comes-to-the-hague.html

    An excerpt

    "This pretence that A and B are unimportant marginal figures is very odd. Both had in fact been considered outstanding professionals for the OPCW throughout their careers, and have many written notes commending the quality of their work. They were rehired – something the OPCW very rarely does – because the OPCW needed their experience.

    The OPCW says they were rehired on a lower grade from the one they had previously held. It does not say that this was because the old higher grade had been abolished, and so it was no reflection on the two men’s skills and competence."

    Hitchens , a long time anti-Assadist says there is more to come

    https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/12/in-praise-of-telling-the-truth

    • RedLogix 3.1
      19 February 2020 at 10:39 am

      I haven't followed this story much (the ME being a Deccan Death Trap where the truth crawls off to die) … but I must confess to considerable sadness at seeing an important UN organisation being subverted on such an important matter.

      When people are punished for telling the truth, everyone else around them very quickly learns to tell nothing but lies.

    • Adrian Thornton 3.2
      19 February 2020 at 11:50 am

      Thanks for the link francesca, I notice that one of the big pushers of the original narrative our very own RNZ National, have remained very very quite on this story…

      I have just been sitting in the lunch room flicking through a copy of Manufacturing Consent that just arrived in the shop, I read it a long time ago, it has lost none of it's power or relevance..it should be required reading at secondary school IMO.

  4. Chris T 4
    19 February 2020 at 10:19 am

    Personally would prefer not having more of my tax dollars paying for the nutty Green Party, New Conservatives or the next Colin Craig.

    • Nic the NZer 4.1
      19 February 2020 at 11:59 am

      They don't. Your tax dollers are specially selected out and used to pay for Winstons personal Wiskey collection. You can change to who your taxes are contributed by emailing, spending-programs-which-dont-exist@govt.nz at any time.

    • AB 4.2
      19 February 2020 at 12:32 pm

      Personally – I would prefer not having my tax dollars pay for roads that Chris T drives on to get to his work computer and disseminate odd opinions. But I'm not six years old any more, accept that in the scheme of things my personal preferences don't amount to much, and that we have this thing called a society that we have to make work without killing each other.

      • Nic the NZer 4.2.1
        19 February 2020 at 1:19 pm

        The idea of Chris's taxes paying for anything makes no sense what-so-ever. The govt controls and operates the accounts which record these transactions of course but if they wish to change the numbers in the account entries they can just do so without needing to ask permission. Essentially we are just discussing changes in spreadsheet entries.

  5. Billy 5
    19 February 2020 at 10:34 am

    So apparently the Spinoff-Twitter crowd just got one of the world’s most famous left wing philosophers and animal rights activists cancelled?

    I always thought that Peter Singer’s remarks about sentience in babies born disabled vs animals were made to serve his argument towards the improved treatment of animals, not the worse treatment of disabled people… it’s an argument supposed to induce a moral shock in readers. Should we ban a Modest Proposal next?

    Singer’s comments were not meant to be satire but they were firmly about improved animal welfare and anyone who thinks otherwise is a moron…

    • Billy 5.1
      19 February 2020 at 10:47 am

      “It’s a similar realm to Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneaux in that it’s about a ‘supreme race’…"

      What! OMG I guess the only response in this intellectually impoverished day-and-age is an emoji.

      Singer takes utilitarian to its logical end point, to the point of reductio ad absurdum, to call out specious arguments about human superiority based on arguments relating to sentience and quality of life, not in order to argue for infanticide.

      Whoever is responsible for this should get a job running black ops for Fonterra.

      This is perhaps, hands down, the stupidest and most counter-productive thing the “left” have done this year – so far.

    • Rosemary McDonald 5.2
      19 February 2020 at 11:30 am

      I'm assuming that you have failed to provide a link to the Spinoff article because, like, disabled people who discuss Singer's warped attitudes are like, moronic?

      My excuse is that I haven't been able to paste the link from my phone.

      The Spinoff article is more than well worth a read and Red Nicholson nails it.

      • Billy 5.2.1
        19 February 2020 at 11:33 am

        I don't think Red Nicholson understands what Peter Singer is doing.

        I've got to get busy now but I will rebut the article here this afternoon.

        The article: https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/19-02-2020/disabled-voices-on-peter-singer-whos-actually-listening-to-this-guy/

        • Rosemary McDonald 5.2.1.1
          19 February 2020 at 11:53 am

          Oh, well done for providing the link…good on you!

          Pray, oh Wise One, exactly what is Singer "doing" that Red Nicholson is failing to understand?

        • Billy 5.2.1.2
          19 February 2020 at 12:13 pm

          OK I can't help myself so I will quickly make a few points.

          First, in response to your putting words in my mouth is saying:

          "…disabled people who discuss Singer's warped attitudes are like, moronic?"

          You are half right. Disabled people who discuss Singer's attitudes can be morons. They can also discover black holes from their wheelchairs. They can also get drunk and repeatedly drive their wheelchairs into their wives or nurses.

          Judgement of a person's arguments or moral character does not come into my assessment of disabled people. I wouldn't want to prejudice them by suggesting they require me to treat them with kid gloves when the fact they can't walk, for example, has little to do with their potential to become one of the greatest living physicists.

          By the same token, I won't pretend that because you have some diminished physical capacity that you can't be an asshole.

          Second, to quickly address where Red Nicholson goes wrong from the get-go.

          Nicholson writes "In 1979’s Practical Ethics, Singer wrote that the value of a life should be based on “rationality, autonomy and self-consciousness”.

          That should Nicholson inserts is very important.

          Singer does not write that the value of a life should be based on “rationality, autonomy and self-consciousness.

          Singer is arguing within a specific philosophical tradition, utilitarianism, which variously argues that maximizing pleasure (higher, lower – it varies) is the end individuals and societies should aim for. He then argues for an expansion of our field of moral concern: to encompass people who we are not related to directly or by tribe or by nation, and also for non human beings. Controversially, he points to arguments about human superiority over animals based on sentience, as superior sentience is argued by some – like lots of utilitarians – to have a bearing on a human or non-human's persons capacity for pleasure.

          There are arguments within utilitarianism which support the position that INDIVIDUAL sentience or capacity are less relevant to one's ability to experience pleasure, or a happy society.

          There are also arguments outside of that tradition which argue for value on different grounds. In saying that, most utilitarians agree that human beings have inherent value. I can't remember what John Stuart Mill wrote about that off the top of my head but I will look it up.

          Nicholson needs to work out what he is grappling with before he jumps into the arena because without doing that he could end up mischaracterizing a very deep thinker and contribute to getting him banned… by a gambling venue.

          A copy of Practical Ethics should anyone want to read a book that presumably should be banned alongside Mein Kampf:

          http://www.stafforini.com/docs/Singer%20-%20Practical%20ethics.pdf

          • adam 5.2.1.2.1
            19 February 2020 at 1:10 pm

            You know Billy when you make an argument – it's consider good form to attribute the right quote to the right people.

            Strawman arguments are also a bit boorish as well – which general make me feel you have the need to full up space, and/or you know your wrong so you gotta make shit up, to knock it down.

            • Rosemary McDonald 5.2.1.2.1.1
              19 February 2020 at 1:23 pm

              "…good form to attribute the right quote to the right people.. "

              Come, come now Adam….give Billy a break.

              There's an awful lot going on in Hayden's article…so very easy to get a wee bit muddled.

              wink

            • Billy 5.2.1.2.1.2
              19 February 2020 at 7:03 pm

              Hi Adam, where's the wrong attribution? I quoted directly from the Spinoff article.

              In that article, as I pointed out, Nicholson characterizes Singer as someone who advocates euthanasia for disabled people. I referred to Singer’s book and the passage from where Nicholson took and then altered the partial quote, turning it into a different sort of statement: as advocacy. Nicholson’s mischaracterization is the strawman argument here.

              I’m not sure your response is in good faith.

              It’s not “philosophical wank”, as someone claimed, to seek to right the way a philosopher’s position has been misrepresented. The later is, or worse.

              • Billy …
                19 February 2020 at 7:20 pm

                Singer states quite clearly in a number of sources, primary and secondary, that that his questions around personhood "[are] a way of getting people involved in species membership. And try and get them to break this automatic nexus between species membership and moral status."

                source: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/1999/nov/06/weekend.kevintoolis

              • Rosemary McDonald …
                19 February 2020 at 7:49 pm

                Go back and have another read Billy, laddie.

                It was the author of the piece, not Red Nicholson, who wrote that sentence you quoted.

                If you do take the time to go back and actually read the Spinoff article entire, you might just come to realize that Singer has a serious issue with disability.

                • Billy …
                  19 February 2020 at 8:15 pm

                  Thanks Rosemary. I attributed something written by Leonie Hayden to Red Nicholson, who was quoted later in Hayden’s opinion piece. My mistake.

                  My criticism of that passage stands. My attribution did not affect my point.

                  My point was that the author put a spin on Singer's words in the original text, to which I linked. It's not the only passage that was coloured Singer’s arguments in that way.

                  Singer argues for the radical expansion of our definition of personhood and not for eugenics.

                  It’s true that Singer has stated that 28 day postpartum infanticide is acceptable. He also notes that this is already common practice in hospitals, and that parents frequently choose to abort severely disabled children up until late term, suggesting that infanticide is a lot less controversial in reality. I expect to see you with a picket sign outside an abortion clinic or hospital with the radical Catholics and the Evangelicals some day soon.

          • Ad 5.2.1.2.2
            19 February 2020 at 1:29 pm

            If you had actually sat down and read Practical Ethics you would have seen that Singer as a strong Utilitarian places no limit on abortion and struggles to find limits to getting rid of people who have major degenerative diseases.

            Utilitarians like Singer are a pain in the ass, and as a general rule philosophers – particularly Utilitarians – have no place getting their mitts on the levers of power.

            If you want to see a full-on Fordist hardass utilitarian really get their hands on power and see what they do with it, have a good look at McNamara planning the bombing of Vietnam in The Fog Of War. It's in his own words so there's no misinterpretation.

            Not also Singer’s version of sentience based on self-consciousness means dealing with beings lower down the food-chain you can essentially harvest things for food, or otherwise use them as resource. As soon as you conceive of things as resource, as Heidegger reminded us, the more the entire world gets used up fast.

            Singer has no concept of being.

            Essentially everything starts to look like food.

            So before you start having another good wank quoting philosphical passages at someone with a severely disabled dependent who has been doing so for many years (as in Rosemary's case), suck it up first and be more careful.

            • RedLogix 5.2.1.2.2.1
              19 February 2020 at 1:49 pm

              Thanks I was idly thinking about a response myself, but that's far better than I would have done. Utilitarian's are a refined form of materialism. Yes humans have to do business with the material world, but to pretend this is sufficient leads to terrible places.

              McNamara is an especially unlovely character in US history. Then there is this episode of shame.

            • Psycho Milt 5.2.1.2.2.2
              19 February 2020 at 2:09 pm

              Utilitarians are very valuable philosophers, in that they don't work on the principle that Homo Sapiens is the be-all and end-all of the Universe. The ability to step outside the automatic self-interest of your own species is a rare talent and a useful one. At the very least, utilitarians force us to think about the basis of our morality and what rational arguments there are for it. Unsurprisingly, people who think humanity is the pinnacle of evolution or God's special creation hate utilitarians, but that's their business.

            • Billy 5.2.1.2.2.3
              19 February 2020 at 3:35 pm

              Those are all fair points, but I don't think Singer can be lumped in with McNamara.

              I sympathize with the difficulties you must have. And I can see how even a hint of these arguments could cause offense. Though, the arguments Singer makes around this are about logical inconsistencies with utilitarianism, for animal welfare (and the welfare of people not in your tribe).

              I would like to unpick your response a bit because there are problems with it but I don’t have time at present.

              • pat …
                20 February 2020 at 5:20 am

                Theres lived experience and then theres intellectual (?) exercise …ne'er the twain shall meet

                • Billy …
                  20 February 2020 at 10:16 am

                  And then there's the Socratic method which people no longer seem to understand and wish to stamp out.

                  It’s disturbing that those people seem to have a purchase on the state.

                  • pat …
                    20 February 2020 at 6:07 pm

                    The Socratic method is limited and I would suggest not applicable in this instance.

                    A time and place for everything

    • Psycho Milt 5.3
      19 February 2020 at 11:41 am

      So apparently the Spinoff-Twitter crowd just got one of the world’s most famous left wing philosophers and animal rights activists cancelled?

      Yep. On the one hand it's refreshing to see philosophers once again considered a threat to established social order with their unpopular ideas, on the other hand it sucks to see the growth of intolerance, authoritarianism, anti-intellectualism and irrationality in our society.

  6. Macro 6
    19 February 2020 at 1:31 pm

    Meanwhile..

    Bloomberg Enrages Trump by Buying Greenland

    By Andy Borowitz

    NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report)—In an apparently successful attempt to get under the skin of Donald Trump, former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg has purchased Greenland from Denmark.

    In an official statement released on Tuesday, the Prime Minister of Denmark, Mette Frederiksen, would not disclose the price that Bloomberg paid for Greenland but indicated that it was an “all-cash offer.”

    “Mr. Bloomberg has a lot of money,” Frederiksen added.

    News of Bloomberg’s purchase of Greenland reportedly infuriated Trump, who immediately ordered his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, to make an offer to buy the Faroe Islands from Denmark.

    Within minutes, however, Denmark rebuffed Kushner’s bid. “We do not believe Donald Trump is capable of running the Faroe Islands,” Frederiksen said.

    As for Bloomberg, his campaign released a brief statement about the historic purchase of the 836,330-square-mile landmass, saying only, “Mike gets it done.”

    /sarc

  7. Jimmy 7
    19 February 2020 at 1:58 pm

    Andrew Little just did an interview on Magic Talk did anyone hear it as I missed it but its getting a lot of negative flak.

  8. Sacha 8
    19 February 2020 at 2:03 pm

    Singer may know about animals but he is blatantly ignorant about disability and the value of being human. He echoes common stereotypes but his extremism with them is even more socially harmful.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/119641143/skycity-cancels-philosopher-peter-singers-booking-over-disability-concerns

    Singer said it was disappointing that a speaking tour that was meant to be about the benefits of "effective altruism" has instead become focussed on infanticide.

    He said he supported laws that ban hate speech against any group of people but he did not see his views as being in that category.

    Saying it is good to kill a class of people because you do not see any value in their life seems pretty hateful from here. Be really brave, dude, and make it about race or gender, go on.

    He is welcome to spitefully mutter into a beer at his local but no way is a public platform justified. Not adding anything new or useful. Others have already done it 'better'.

    • McFlock 8.1
      19 February 2020 at 2:32 pm

      The trouble with "hate speech" is that people think it necessarily involves hate. Not so. People calmly doing a job can also utter or commit the most vile things, with no particular emotion or desire any more than one would file an invoice.

    • Psycho Milt 8.2
      19 February 2020 at 3:37 pm

      … he is blatantly ignorant about disability and the value of being human.

      I couldn't comment on what he knows about disability, but a lot of his work is about what "the value of being human" actually means and what arguments there are for that value being significantly higher than the value of being something else. Doing that is one of the tasks of philosophy, and the fact that people don't like having to contemplate the basis and merit of their morality doesn't make philosophy "hate speech."

      • Rosemary McDonald 8.2.1
        19 February 2020 at 5:01 pm

        I haven't the time, but point me to the place where Singer the Wise states that recidivist rapists and child sex offenders should also be euthanized?

        • Psycho Milt 8.2.1.1
          19 February 2020 at 6:34 pm

          I'm not aware that Singer has suggested anyone should be euthanised. That would be political advocacy rather than philosophical argument, and would surely have been widely publicised.

          • Rosemary McDonald 8.2.1.1.1
            19 February 2020 at 6:50 pm

            Err…you did, of course, read the Spinoff piece?

            The one that directly quotes the Wise One?

            Where he says the bit about parents being able to kill a disabled newborn?

            That this would be a good, an ethical and moral thing to do?

            You might want to read a little more widely on the pontifications of Singer.

            • Psycho Milt 8.2.1.1.1.1
              19 February 2020 at 8:10 pm

              I did, which is why I'm wondering about these accusations that he advocates killing people. Recognising that there's a philosophical argument for infanticide not being unethical under some circumstances is not advocating for infanticide. Feeling strongly about something doesn't given a person the right to misrepresent what the object of their anger is saying.

              • Billy …
                19 February 2020 at 8:35 pm

                He doesn't. Our society has decided that the magic point at which someone achieves personhood is birth. Catholics believe the magic point occurs much earlier. Singer has said it is acceptable to terminate a newborn 28 days postpartum, and noted that it is common practice in hospitals today to let severely disabled children die. Personhood for him should include animals. He’s not an advocate for eugenics.

      • Sacha 8.2.2
        19 February 2020 at 6:03 pm

        All just a harmless thought experiment, guv.

        • Rosemary McDonald 8.2.2.1
          19 February 2020 at 6:52 pm

          He's a clever lad is that Singer fellow.

          He has a reputation for philosophizing right back up his own aft crevasse.

          • Billy 8.2.2.1.1
            19 February 2020 at 9:03 pm

            Rosemary, do you believe in abortion?

            If you do believe in abortion, at which point is personhood achieved by the fetus or infant, or when falls the magic point at which termination is no longer acceptable, and why?

            If you can’t provide an answer, you have no business preventing a philosopher who has considered these questions deeply from holding a talk on those and many other matters of profound ethical, social, cultural and political importance.

            • Sacha 8.2.2.1.1.1
              19 February 2020 at 10:11 pm

              Deciding when people count as humans never seems to end well.

              • Billy …
                19 February 2020 at 10:18 pm

                But doctors decide when people should die all the time.

                When they give cancer patients a push-button controller for fatal doses of morphine. When they decide to stop treating someone, including a severely disabled child. Sometimes guardians or partners give their input. When a baby is in an incubator, at what point should we decide to turn that incubator off?

                What if the advancement of medical technology meant that hospitals could keep every baby born alive artificially? Should hospitals keep every baby born alive, even if they are so severely disabled that they would otherwise die? Many disabled people rely on medical technology without which they would be dead. Some people are unable to communicate whether they want to continue living.

                It seems to me that if it is not going to end well, we should at least have the best reasons for those decisions. And the public deserves forums in which those arguments can be aired – or should it be left up to the DHB’s accountants? Abortion legislation has passed through Parliament and been quite contentious. Battles over health funding are never going to go away. Those battles should have informed public input.

                • Billy …
                  19 February 2020 at 11:58 pm

                  This is insane. I'm out.

                  • Rosemary McDonald …
                    20 February 2020 at 8:33 am

                    Whoa there Billy lad….!!!

                    If you feel you're decending into Alice territory, take the hand of Harriet McBryde Johnson (a link to her article in the NYT is in the Spinoff piece for your conveniencewink).

                    Walk with her through the maze, and perhaps drag yourself from the mire.

                    All the best. smiley

                    • Billy …
                      20 February 2020 at 10:09 am

                      The self-appointed woke left have just cancelled perhaps the world’s most important moral and environmental philosopher who was in the country to give a talk on our collective duty to address global poverty.

                      Furthermore, they were content to advocate the silencing of this radical voice without even bothering to understand what he was actually saying. They’re not even willing, seemingly, to address the same difficult questions, which are unavoidable.

                      If you count yourself among this group you are a reactionary narcissist and not a leftist.

                      If there's no place for Peter Singer there's no place for me.

                    • te reo putake …
                      20 February 2020 at 11:08 am

                      Hey, Billy, nobody from the left has cancelled Singer's visit. He's only lost a venue. He could still turn up and give his talk in another venue or even on a soapbox in Albert Park for that matter. If he doesn't front, it's entirely his own decision.

                    • Rosemary McDonald []
                      20 February 2020 at 12:22 pm

                      True that TRP, but would He be able to charge the folks $160 to hear his Words of Wisdom from his soapbox in Albert Park?

                    • Sacha …
                      20 February 2020 at 11:23 am

                      Billy, the only people 'appointing' the 'woke' are the same right-wing gits we have suffered from for decades.

                      And do not let the door hit you on your way out.

                    • Sacha …
                      20 February 2020 at 12:29 pm

                      (@lprent – interesting that nesting of these final level comments is not keeping to the posting time.)

                    • Andre …
                      20 February 2020 at 12:33 pm

                      @Sacha – it seems sometimes a reply can be made to a comment at the bottom nesting level – I was really bummed when weka slipped one in above my "Bowelly" comment a while back and totally ruined the flow. Maybe it's when a reply is made from some mobile devices?

                    • Sacha …
                      20 February 2020 at 12:58 pm

                      @Andre – I wonder if it might be the same person replying to themself that gets treated differently? Not a standard WordPress platform behaviour as far as I know.

  9. Red Blooded One 9
    19 February 2020 at 2:54 pm

    Stuff report Jami Lee Ross and the 3 others, Yikun Zhang, Shijia Zheng, and Hengjia Zheng have had name suppression lifted. No surprises there then I guess. Poor little "Beijing Bridges" will be putting on his ballet shoes right now, ready for a bit of Pin Head dancing.

  10. Adrian 10
    19 February 2020 at 3:12 pm

    I suspected one was JLR because Bigmouth Bridges said at some stage early on that "no current Nat party member " had been charged. Bridges must be shitting himself because as JLR is charged Bridges is complicit. If only they did it like the old days, waiting for a big crowd outside his office before leading the perp out in cuffs before gently placing a big cop's hand on his head while still managing to whack it on the door opening of the Police Holden Kingswood.

    I am suddenly having a good day.

    P.s, I once asked a detective mate of mine over a few beers if that was deliberate, "Yeah, of course mate '" was the reply.

    • ianmac 10.1
      19 February 2020 at 3:22 pm

      Seems a bit odd that by the telephone record, Bridges was complicit, but not charged.

      And those big donors are very rich and can buy good lawyers, but Jamie…

      And those others charged said,""Our clients are proud New Zealanders and philanthropists. They were urged to follow a process and are now deeply disappointed at being caught up in a donation's fiasco.

      Sniff?

  11. Puckish Rogue 11
    19 February 2020 at 3:34 pm

    I think Winston is, putting it mildly, a blight on NZ politics. I would like it if Jacinda read him the riot but of course she won't because of the power Winston appears to have over her.

    To counter this how difficult would it be, politically speaking, for Bridges to say to Ardern that if she strips everything she can from Winston (and if he throws his toys out of the cot and threatens to bring down the govt and cause an early election) then National will support the COL until the general election

    Is this doable or even possible?

    (Basically I want Winston gone)

    • Psycho Milt 11.1
      19 February 2020 at 3:41 pm

      On what basis could Bridges make a case to Ardern that his integrity is higher than that of Winston Peters? That is, why should Ardern feel that Peters isn't a fit person to work with but Bridges is a fit person to work with?

      • Puckish Rogue 11.1.1
        19 February 2020 at 3:49 pm

        Not quite the point of the post (but well done for for the attempted diversion)

        • McFlock 11.1.1.1
          19 February 2020 at 3:51 pm

          Not really. Why would Ardern fire Winston to rely on a promise from Bridges?

          • Puckish Rogue 11.1.1.1.1
            19 February 2020 at 4:00 pm

            Yeah good on you, you managed to to say in a post how untrustworthy Bridges is, well done, big round of applause, herp derp Bridges bad

            Its a hypothetical question therefore we can assume everyone is acting in good faith

            The point of the post was about the implications, if any, of NZFirst breaking away from the COL and National supporting the govt through to the next election

            Would this course of action help Labour or National more

            Would this course of action reinforce peoples positive views of MMP and democracy in NZ or would it be viewed as a negative

            • Red Blooded One 11.1.1.1.1.1
              19 February 2020 at 4:09 pm

              Take your "COL" and shove it up your arse. Calling people Losers because they have different views than yours is nasty and with regard to your Grand Coalition arrangement to eliminate Peters, that's just further ganging up and bullying to eliminate a rival, but then I guess that comes easily to your ilk. Next they came for the National Supporters but …. etc

            • McFlock 11.1.1.1.1.2
              19 February 2020 at 4:15 pm

              You want Winston out, fine.

              The people didn't.

              I figure on the basic level a perceived coalition between Labour and National would go down as well with Labour voters as NZ1 and National went down with NZ1 voters in 1996. The Greens would probably have the integrity to walk and force an early election, in which case Labour is now reliant on national to replace greens and nz1. The "grand coalition" wet dream of friendless tories media pundits finally eventuates, Labour goes back to 20% or less, nats get bolstered for looking competent, and Luke blows up the death star.

              Nice "hypothetical". Now, if we include people's characters and histories, Bridges has a fair chance of making the pact 4 months of hell followed by a snap election after he (or his successor) pulls support, NZ1 has a fair chance of being returned to office, and then Winston calls a plague on both parties because he doesn't like being treated like shit. Oh, and people think Labour is full of shit for swapping between two parties who both appear to be similarly dodgy with their donations.

              Labour must keep ditching one or both, and only one has a track record of actually working well with Labour.

              • Puckish Rogue …
                19 February 2020 at 4:30 pm

                So coalition is a non event but confidence and supply might be a better option then

                To my way of thinking theres only 7 months to the next election so if things turned to custard with Winnie (and on past history thats not impossible) we might not need an early election

                • McFlock …
                  19 February 2020 at 4:41 pm

                  The distinction between a formal coalition agreement and simple support for C&S is a subtle one that I suspect most people won't care about – it's the difference between seeing your partner in bed with someone else and simply seeing them having a romantic dinner with that person.

                  • Puckish Rogue …
                    19 February 2020 at 4:51 pm

                    Thats an accurate if slightly disturbing way of looking at it.

                    I don't know much about what crossbench support means but would that be another option?

                    • McFlock …
                      19 February 2020 at 4:57 pm

                      That's seeing them having coffee in a cafe.

                      If you're friends with the other person and your partner is open about it, no worries. If you hate the other person and don't trust your partner because of a past betrayal, you might have an issue.

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      19 February 2020 at 5:00 pm

                      Well at the very least it would seem that there are a few options for the govt (including future ones) to not be held to hostage by another party threatening an early election

                      Hypothetically speaking of course

                    • McFlock …
                      19 February 2020 at 5:09 pm

                      There are all sorts of mathematical possibilities – hell, NZ1 can go with national if Labour try to cut them loose.

                      It comes down to how contradictory parties are in policy principles and how the personalities work together. And some proposals are more wishful thinking than realistic ideas.

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      19 February 2020 at 5:12 pm

                      Oh I know mine is wishful thinking but its good to know its possible, if extremely unlikely

                      Also good to know that Winnie can't hold the country to ransom anymore

                    • McFlock …
                      19 February 2020 at 5:18 pm

                      Meh.

                      I'd prefer no nats to no winston.

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      19 February 2020 at 5:21 pm

                      Interesting, I'd prefer any of the minor parties to Winnie

                    • McFlock …
                      19 February 2020 at 5:27 pm

                      You almost had me in agreement, then I remembered ACT lol

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      19 February 2020 at 5:32 pm

                      I predict three MPs for Act this election, possibly even four and they'd be disappointed with two

                    • McFlock …
                      19 February 2020 at 9:54 pm

                      Maybe. Seymour's really trying hard to appeal to the voters not even NZ1 or the nats will go after openly (well, not since the nat staffer got all "emotional" for some reason).

                      I mean that seriously. Fuck ACT.

    • Alice Tectonite 11.2
      19 February 2020 at 3:59 pm

      Swapping the party that's only under investigation over donations for the one whose then MP & Whip has been charged would be a good look.

      Especially as the leader is on record having interesting phone conversations with the MP in question …

  13. Eco Maori 13
    21 February 2020 at 8:34 am

    Kia Ora The Am Show.

    Congratulations on winning NZ of the year.

    Poverty is a big driver of most of the bad stats some people don't get it.

    I say our farmers can lower their carbon footprint.

    There is a study that points out that green house gases produce by big oil is under estimated by 40 %. In my view we need to focus on getting fossil fuel energy out of our energy mix not deflect all the blame on our farmers.

    Tikapa beach is nice and clean.

    You know that the last government of nine years was lead by a climate change denier under them thousands of heacture of forest got cut down prematurely wind turbine project got canned of course under a government like that farmers were not mitigating their environmental footprint.?????.

    Ka kite Ano

  14. Eco Maori 14
    21 February 2020 at 6:27 pm

    Kia Ora Newshub.

    Treating others with respect even when they are a different culture is a great quality.

    I agree racism is a dumb thing so are haters.

    The Milfordsounds roads are fixed the rain made a mess of those roads.

    Children can be quite cruel to children that are different to them.

    Ka kite Ano.

  15. Eco Maori 15
    21 February 2020 at 6:46 pm

    Kia Ora Te Ao Maori News.

    The Crown did a lot of dirty deeds. Taking Ngāti Apakura whenua.

    That's cool pop up health clinics to give advice and health services to the people.

    Mana Wahine.

    Ka kite Ano

  16. Eco Maori 16
    22 February 2020 at 9:52 am

    Some Eco Maori Music For The Minute.

    https://youtu.be/mWRsgZuwf_8

  17. Eco Maori 17
    22 February 2020 at 6:27 pm

    Kia Ora Newshub.

    Times are changing some people can't see when the writings on the walls for Electric cars.

    The good old roundabout intercetion are a good low carbon efficient way to sort traffic.

    All products need to have a charge built into them to pay for recycling. What a big messy problem for Africa Western waste piling up.

    That's cool A new 1 hour Friends HBO being made.

    Ka kite Ano

  18. Eco Maori 18
    22 February 2020 at 6:48 pm

    Kia Ora Te Ao Maori News.

    That's a good cause to champion lowering the voting age some parents have a hard time looking into the future past there hip pockets to see we are stuffing the future up.

    Ngāti Kahunga had a good Kapa Haka festival.

    Kura Kaupapa is saving tangata whenua o Aotearoa Te reo and cultural kia kaha.

    Its cool seeing Iwi fighting to keep their Awa pristine and clean.

    Great Waiheke Island is aiming for a predator free sanctuary for Aotearoa native wildlife.

    Never to long in the tooth to learn your culture.

    Ka kite Ano

  20. Eco Maori 20
    23 February 2020 at 6:28 pm

    Kia Ora Newshub.

    Aotearoa makes some of the Best Kai in the world with our environment being cleaner than most other countries.

    Ka kite Ano

  21. Eco Maori 21
    23 February 2020 at 6:55 pm

    Kia Ora Te Ao Maori News.

    Ngāti Paoa the same thing happened in Te Tairawhiti during the Maori land court scams.

    Ka pai.

    Sports is good for Te tangata.

    Ka kite Ano.