Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
6:00 am, September 19th, 2022 - 63 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.
Time for a republic!
“King Charles III has no such reputation. He’s already sacked his staff and made several brattish clangers on video. He helped make a hero of his late wife Diana through his and his family’s antics, and his Jeffrey Epstein-linked brother Andrew will automatically deputise for the king in case of emergencies. On top of this, Charles has been for many years an ambassador for the British arms industry.”
https://www.thecanary.co/opinion/2022/09/16/we-need-a-fierce-new-republicanism-not-the-twee-deference-of-liberal-anti-monarchism/
"We need a fierce new republicanism, not the twee deference of liberal anti-monarchism"..+1
A week has now ended of enduring the most disgusting display of slavish boot licking I have witnessed by New Zealand media in my life time…
But now, finally Queen Elizabeth the Second will be buried…just as the crumbling Imperialist regime that she was the active and vigorous figurehead for, buried (destroyed or seized) records of its Imperialist crimes and atrocities carried out in 23 countries and territories in the aptly name ‘Operation Legacy’ carried out during the 1950’s-60’s, an operation that she would have been fully informed of at the very least.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Legacy
“One of the most pernicious aspects of modern Britain, about which so many are in denial, is its failure to address the real history of the British Empire.”
https://jacobin.com/2016/11/british-empire-kenya-oman-ireland-state-secrecy/
This woman whom we are supposed to mourn for, maybe even shed a tear for, was the proud figurehead of a nation that murdered, raped, tortured, stole on an industrial scale, its way around the world until it was no longer able to..not because it had repented its multitude of sins against humanity and the environment, of course not..no, it was only when it had lost the physical power as a Nation to inflict its brutal Imperialist nature around the world, that it finally stopped…much like some sick podophile, that only stops to inflicting abuse upon his victims when he is too old and frail.
I would suggest that some acknowledgment and some mourning and maybe even some tears for the untold numbers of victims of postwar British Imperialism under the reign of Queen Elizabeth II would be a far more appropriate response that this time.
“Common torture tactics included starvation, electrocution, mutilation, and forcible penetration”
https://mandemhood.com/operation-legacy-how-the-british-government-destroyed-its-history/
And have no delusions that Queen Elizabeth II and her Royal family are a beguine presence in UK politics…..right up to her death..and beyond..
How the Queen lobbied for changes in the law to hide her wealth https://www.theguardian.com/news/audio/2021/feb/10/how-the-queen-lobbied-for-changes-in-the-law-to-hide-her-wealth-podcast
Queen secretly lobbied Scottish ministers for climate law exemption
https://inews.co.uk/news/queen-lobbied-scottish-government-land-exemption-climate-law-1125202
The Queen exempt from 160 laws after immunity written in to protect her
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/queen-exempt-160-laws-after-24490290
Royals vetted more than 1,000 laws via Queen’s consent
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/08/royals-vetted-more-than-1000-laws-via-queens-consent
I am sure King Charles will most certainly maintain Queen Elizabeths and the British Royal families deep ties and empathy with the common man….
Prince Charles vetted laws that stop his tenants buying their homes
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/09/prince-charles-vetted-laws-that-stop-his-tenants-buying-their-homes
Its time to stop the whitewashing of the history of Queen Elizabeths II and allshe stands for and represents…lets start that legacy project today…
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/9/17/whitewashing-queen-elizabeths-legacy-wont-save-the-monarchy
Agreed Tony and Adrian, and well researched. A republic is long overdue both in NZ and in the UK.
UK Labour MP Clive Lewis puts the argument well here:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/16/mourning-republicans-system-privilege
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/sep/16/idea-of-monarchy-as-symbol-of-duty-or-sacrifice-a-lie-says-labours-clive-lewis?fbclid=IwAR2L99LCXZlPClsiXiH6yEWr-GdcipGPiednJVCABOnOYTUoLKo7prpbDNg
Shame on Starmer for kow-towing to the monarchist element by stifling political debate on this issue and others during the never-ending royal mourning period.
I, for one, will be washing my hair when the funeral starts this evening.
Scotland is planning an Independence referendum on 19th October 2023. With Scotland exiting the Union, and Northern Ireland already half way out, the edifice that we call Britain and UK will become defunct.
The argument to retain the Windsor monarchy as Aotearoa’s Head of State become very weak at that point.
The nose dive in the economy and international standing of England resulting from it’s isolationist project will further distance Kiwis from that place.
Agree with all of that Bill. This article says much about the rotten state of the UK:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/18/levelling-up-liz-truss-boris-johnson-britain-inequalities
When people attempt to graft Q Anon metaphors, about the Democratic liberal regime in DC, with western imperialism in general a lot of dots get joined. When that becomes apology for both isolationism nd extra territorial aggression by others/non western actors, it ends up being incoherent.
In fact the chance of Andrew deputising for King Charles 111 is about the same as the Queens recently deceased dog Candy rising from the dead to do it instead.
The one and only job left to Andrew is looking after the remaining dogs of the Queen.
I was referring to the British Imperialist project as being like a predator, not Andrew..but as it so happens, Andrew is himself a well known podophile…and was protected from facing justice by his mother…Queen Elizabeth.
Queen ‘to spend millions funding Prince Andrew’s defence against sex abuse claims’
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/queen-prince-andrew-epstein-millions-legal-case-b1931084.html
And I did not mention in 1.1.2 – just quoted your post paragraph 4.
Your reply is tagged to mine to that of Tony Veitch.
I will say that neither funding a defence in court if ones family is able, nor using state provided defence counsel otherwise, is protection from facing justice.
And we are referring to a female over 16 and under 18 by the way.
"And we are referring to a female over 16 and under 18 by the way"
No we are not…you and I have no idea how old the girls were who where abused by Prince Andrew (favorite son of and protected by Queen Elizabeth)…over what appears to be years of that deviant behaviour…
Jeffrey Epstein abused girls as young as 11 on secluded private island, lawsuit says
Ghislaine Maxwell trained underage girls as sex slaves
Queen moves to protect Andrew from media at Balmoral, report says
Then you are posing your belief in the reality of other cases of abuse, despite no charges made. The case made against Andrew in a court involved a person between age 16 and 18.
Well I for one are not going to waste any more time on this subject…if you are fine with a sex abuser participating in the abuse of sex slaves (of any age or sex) and facing no legal ramifications for those crimes because of his wealth and position that is your business.
You get/got to display your inability to back up what you claim, and your resort to strawman about the person you debate with is risible.
Nope, just not interested engaging in drawn out, pointless debates with defenders of known sex abusers.
You were the one who responded to my post to another person, rather than to the one I made to your own.
Agree, the logical (and I think the statutory) deputy for KC3 is his heir – William.
.
Vaguely / unenthusiasitically / more-or-less republican on principle … but, at the same time, I recognise the practical utility of a constitutional monarchy … and I'm fiercely – and I want you to reflect extensively on this over the next few hours (possibly while quietly smoking a pipe), I am fiercely – proud of my apathy / half-heartedness / significant de-prioritisation of the issue.
The Guardian article linked in that post contradicts itself on the redundancies. It regularly refers to redundancies which elsewhere in the article, transpires that they haven't happened yet. It's possible people have resigned or taken voluntary redundancy, but as far as I can tell, the changes are still being consulted on in line with UK law.
Agree that the timing sucked though.
Testing…my comment keeps disappearing?
I can see it : )
Too many links
What is the rationale for NZ allowing multiple citizenship?
You see someone like citizen Thiel adding NZ to his passport collection, which includes Germany and the U.S.A.
There are of course countries like Malaysia who do not allow dual citizenship.
Malaysian immigrants can retain their Malaysian passport and still qualify for NZ Super.
Surely govt benefits should only be accessed by citizens apart from emergency situations.
PR covers all bases,why bother with citizenship?
Am I missing…something regarding the status quo?
There are a couple of references online to Thiel’s currently holding German citizenship, but I don't think he does, and it would seriously surprise me, since Germany does not permit dual citizenship, and neither New Zealand nor the US prohibits relinquishing citizenship. Much as I'm no fan of Thiel or the circumstances of his having been granted NZ citizenship, it's singularly annoying to read comments railing against bloody foreigners from a position of lazy ignorance.
Why should someone not qualify for NZ super if they have paid into the scheme during their working life?
I have mentioned previously about an example where a 55 y. o immigrant could not meet the points criteria in Australia.. but could for NZ.
Came here bought a house, got PR… never worked here and recently became eligible for Super.
Your allegation of 'lazy ignorance' is not supported by any compelling arguments.
Rather lazy of you.
Dual citizenship, I will presume.
Germany doesn't allow dual citizenship (except for children – who get to make a choice at their majority)
https://manila.diplo.de/ph-en/service/citizenship/-/1988130
There are some esoteric exceptions – but I'd be surprised of Thiel qualified for any of them.
It seems most likely that he relinquished his German citizenship when he got his US one.
Your lazy ignorance is borne out by the fact that you simply assumed that Thiel had triple citizenship, and launched into some nebulous stuff about some countries not allowing dual citizenship, when one of them was, in fact, one whose citizenship you were claiming he had alongside others.
Your lazy ignorance is exemplified by not knowing facts..and relying on 'but I don't think he does'…
Germany’s new coalition government to allow dual nationality (thelocal.de)
Germany and the US both recognize the principle of dual citizenship but only in specific cases. Usually, dual citizenship in Germany and USA is permissible when obtained by birth— regardless of which country you were born in. But, German and US dual citizenship is impossible for naturalized citizens unless exceptional circumstances apply.'
Dual Citizenship – Germany/US (schengenvisainfo.com)
:Facepalm:
Peter Thiel, as far as I know, was born to German parents who subsequently emigrated, not to one German and one US citizen. Germany does not, as a rule, allow dual citizenship, and I could find only a couple of vague references to Thiel's citizenship of Germany, with no accompanying, exceptional information. It therefore seems unlikely, as I stated. There are several situations in which Germany allows dual citizenship, but it would become very long-winded to go into them here.
I am also well aware that all three of the current governing parties in Germany have a stated intention of allowing dual citizenship, which they included in their coalition agreement; the fact is, however, that they have not implemented it to date, and I’ll believe it when I see it.
Do yourself a favour, and don't just spend ten seconds googling something before deciding you're an expert.
Wiki….
Peter Thiel
'Peter Andreas Thiel is a German-American billionaire entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and political activist. A co-founder of PayPal, Palantir Technologies, and Founders Fund, he was the first outside investor in Facebook. As of May 2022, Thiel had an estimated net worth of $7.19 billion and was ranked 297th on the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.Wikipedia
Born:Peter Andreas Thiel, October 11, 1967, Frankfurt, West Germany
Citizenship:Germany (1967–present), United States (1978–present), New Zealand (2011–present)
Education:Stanford University (BA, JD)'
you decided to just zoom in on Thiel…my original post was NOT solely about him.Don't be a silly sausage…Mr Wurst.
[Don’t play the man, play the ball and the ball only – Incognito]
Mod note
Yeeeeeeeees (slow clap). I said I could find a couple of references online, and that was one of them. If you looked a bit furter, you'd find similar Wiki-articles, in various language giving him German citizenship until 1978, and US citizenship from then onwards. If you look at the (many) articles from the time that his NZ citizenship came to light and later, in German and in English, or reviews of his biography, you will struggle to find a mention of his holding German citizenship*.
Given that you presented your point as a grouch about people, implicitly from various nations, holding multiple citizenships, I would expect you to check your facts properly. Your statements are a lazy, throw-away potshot at foreigners, but you’re actually dealing with a serious issue, the sort that tends to foster similar lazy grumblings, and is a huge blight on discourse in culture in New Zealand and elsewhere. If you are going to foray into that territory, you should learn to be specific, and to make sure you have your ducks on a row.
* A quick glance at the Wikipedia edit history shows that the change to state his German citizenship as current was made on 11.02.2022, as a sole edit and with no reason or reference provided.
The source of 'facts' is often contested.
If the Wiki reference has been amended this year, I can accept it.
The reality is my original post had 7 paragraphs.
You chose to zoom in on the one that mentioned Thiel.
I posed the question regarding the value of citizenship.
As for-' 'and launched into some nebulous stuff about some countries not allowing dual citizenship, '
Unless nebulous has a new meaning,I specifically mentioned Malaysia .
For me, it's more around citizenship. If you want to be a Kiwi, and entitled to live here, and be supported by our social security system, then you need to become a Citizen, not a Permanent Resident. If that means that you have to relinquish your US or Malaysian citizenship, then that's your choice.
I think that 'Permanent Residence' status should be limited to (say) 10 years – thinking here of people seconded to work here, or on long term contracts – and should only be renewable under extraordinary circumstances.
I don't give Kiwis a free pass on this either – I'm glad that the residence rules are changing for qualification for super (though not quickly enough IMO). Provided you've lived in NZ for 10 years after the age of 20 – you currently qualify. So there are a large chunk of Kiwis who have effectively never contributed to the NZ tax base – since they've been living and working overseas, but who are eligible to 'return' to NZ when they’re 60 (last 5 years) and get the pension when they're 65. It just doesn't sit well with me.
Too many contradictions in there! Please do better.
Sorry, not seeing the contradictions – perhaps the link to the official website will make it clearer.
https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/products/a-z-benefits/nz-superannuation.html
You can (and I know this because a cousin has done so) – leave NZ at the age of 25. Live, work, and pay tax overseas (in a range of countries around the world, in her case), and return to NZ at the age of 60. Live here for 5 years, and qualify for the pension. She has, over the course of her working life, contributed almost nothing to the NZ tax base – but will be drawing benefits from it (both super and healthcare) for the next 20+ years.
Surely, however, by that reasoning, the only qualification should be the contributions one makes, and citizenship should be utterly irrelevant. I'm not seeing a compelling argument for anything at all regarding citizenship here.
In that case, what is the benefit to NZ of having PR?
It seems to me that the question invited by your line of enquiry so far is not what the point of PR is (the overarching point is obviously to enshrine a framework of legal rights around somebody's commitment of life and work to a geographical region), but what the point of the rather more nebulous concept of citizenship is.
Nailed it!
I can’t be bothered with your obvious selective blindness to your own contradictions except to point out that your wording has already changed ever so slightly and subtly. You’re also missing a huge fact of contributing to the NZ tax base.
Perhaps you can explain how you're contributing to the NZ tax base, if you're not resident in NZ? You don't pay NZ taxes on your overseas income.
Perhaps you can engage your brain and stop erecting those contradictory walls. If you’re not a resident in NZ this whole thread becomes moot, doesn’t it?
I realise that you are a moderator…however your assumptions about my intentions….are wrong.
The proof is in the pudding. If it looks like, smells like, and tastes like chocolate, then it is most likely chocolate pudding. Or it is that you’re shite at making pudding.
PS it seems that your reply was to the wrong comment in the thread
That's a bit too broad a brush. Residency for tax purposes and immigration status are not the same thing. This thread is just continuing in the same handwavy vein as it started, with the brilliant, "That millionaire Peter Thiel with his thousand passports, and all those Malaysians getting rich off stealing our super, and all that sort of type" gambit.
Melodramatic drivel.
The wider discussion is citizenship,what does it mean,what are the priveleges.
You single out Thiel…is it because you have a German sounding…user name!
You introduced Thiel at the start of this thread with a clear intention to steer it in a certain direction and in a certain way. You got called out on that and obviously can’t handle that and the fact that somebody disagrees with you, with good reason. Deal with it or don’t start disingenuous discussion threads aka if you can’t stand the heat then get out of the kitchen.
BTW, don’t play the man!
Yours was, in fact, a very narrow discussion. If you want to have a wider discussion about citizenship and what it means, go ahead. However, I think, 'That millionaire Peter Thiel with his thousand passports, and all those Malaysians getting rich off stealing our super, and all that sort of type' was a perfect summation of your argument so far.
Also, I didn't single out Thiel. You did that; just look at your first post.
I spent getting on for fifteen years working abroad because wages and positions in my industry were decimated by the widespread, corrupt and actually illegal use of foreign slave fishermen.
In compensation various governments hit me with punitive tax impositions. If they'd done their job, I'd never have left in the first place.
It is possible to have a dual citizenship (German and New Zealand). I have both: German since my birth and New Zealand since I successfully applied for it.
In general Germany doesn't allow dual citizenship, but there are exceptions. You can apply for such an exception via "Beibehaltungsantrag" (if you already have German citizenship). You have to explain two things:
German Internal Affairs is going to review your application and decides if you can keep your German citizenship with the additional citizenship.
For a well resourced and connected person like Thiel this shouldn't be a major hurdle.
True. However, the date given for Thiel's naturalisation as a US citizen is 1978, when he was 10 years old, and presumably considerably less well-connected than he is nowadays (by the time he was grown up, the ship of ‘Beibehaltung’ would have well and truly sailed); there are virtually no references to his having German citizenship in articles (in German or English) about the minor scandal over his NZ citizenship several years ago, despite a significant proportion of them including the angle that he is a US nationalist, and that a 2nd citizenship would compromise his allegiance.
The original comment smacks heavily of grabbing a prominent person to frame a narrative of divided allegiance, and lifting a little factoid about triple citizenship from Wikipedia to enhance the implication, despite a preponderance of available evidence not supporting his triple citizenship, in order to smear 'Malaysians' (and by extension any foreigners). Especially galling is the reference to Malaysia's not allowing dual citizenship, when the German situation, also referenced in the comment, is also heavily restrictive.
Your summation of my post is not accurate and you know…it.
"Am I missing…something regarding the status quo?"
This bit is American centric…but you get the idea…
It’s A BIG Club & You Ain’t In It!
Because we're a tiny weak country with no savings generating next-to-no capital and so we have to suck in capitalists by any means necessary including being a safe boring country where you can get dual citizenship. That's what the Immigration categories look like.
Not sure if it does us any good in reality.
Your saying NZ has next-to-no, what appears to be, savings which the country then can't invest. Is this the claim?
Because relying on foreign investors to compensate for that will surely see the profits of their investment are sent off shore. If thats the strategy the country appears to have picked a worse than merely doing no good strategy.
The problem is not so much the capital , it is the lack of capability, therefore we need foreign capital to provide the wherewithal for the offshore technology we desire/need….and when I say technology, I mean pretty much anything that is not cottage industry…i.e. what we need is not available in NZD.
Over 7% of Americans have long covid (twice the UK rate)
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/nc…
I did some back of the envelope calculations the other day about NZ and LC.
Let's say that in another year's time 50% of the NZ population has had covid (2.5m). If the LC rate is 10% of infections (more likely higher than that), that's 250,000 people with ongoing symptoms. Let's say 25% of those are serious to the point where people can't work or can only work part time. That's 62,500 people that need health care and financial support as well as support with life tasks like childcare or cleaning their house.
For comparison, current SLP numbers are about 90,000 (long term people unable to work due to disability who get a WINZ benefit).
What I want to know is what is likely to be happening at year 5. Or year 10. If subsequent covid infections increase risk of LC, are we heading for most people eventually getting LC? What happens at the point that there are more people with LC unable to work than those able to keep society functioning? Or even running the health system?
Mostly I want to know what is going on in people's minds that we aren't talking about this as a major crisis on the horizon.
I can't quite get my head around it, because if those figures are in the ball park of correct, then how will this not make society seriously dysfunctional?
We urgently need the data on the rate of LC by degree of disability.
Potentially yes…however what is far more likely to occur is a reduction in productivity that we will argue over the cause of and learn to live with (until we no longer can)
Once upon a time Napoleon noted two things
The royal family live above the shop (preside over the merchant economy) and represent the continuance of the old aristocratic order (landed gentry) but neither Victoria nor Elizabeth 11 exercised decision-making power (though Albert's interest in urban renewal had an impact). Others decided the extension of the franchise and the NHS and the empire to Commonwealth transition.
The concept of blaming the figurehead of the regime for what was done by the government of the people is a bit like the ritual of parties changing leaders on losing an election. Blaming royalty for an empire largely built since 1689 (constitutional monarchy) is simplistic. It's a parody of ritual sacrifice to redeem a people from their own past to build some new republican utopia – a Mayflower ship exodus journey to the New World.
Of course nations formed by immigrants and the local indigenous people will forge their own destiny, connected to, or separate from other nations, in their own time.
At the moment our and their royal performs a ceremonial function, a bit like an animated mannequin in a shop window – in that Liz Truss will write the words that her King will speak to parliament (and here our PM for Dame Cindy Kira). From a mothers son, who could express his views, to a ventriloquist dummy for the person in No 10.
Probably just as well, given Charles is so much of the 20th C, then William can develop the role for a monarchy in the 21st C.
Who is 'Elizabeth 11'? The late queen was the second English monarch to hold the name 'Elizabeth', which means she is usually referred to as 'Elizabeth II', or, if you are intent on using Arabic numerals, Elizabeth the 2nd. 'Elizabeth 11' is a nonsensical description.