Open mike 19/10/2011

112 comments on “Open mike 19/10/2011 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Colonial Viper 1

   19 October 2011 at 8:32 am

   Roy Morgan puts NATs further ahead

   http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1110/S00311/new-zealands-national-led-govts-winning-lead-increases.htm

   7% undecided in the poll. Interesting that they released that.

   New Zealand National-Led Govt’s Winning Lead Increases

   59.5% (UP 4%) CF. LABOUR 40.5% (DOWN 4%)

   Finding No. 4705 – This latest New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll on voting intention was conducted by telephone with a NZ wide cross-section of 847 electors from September 26 – October 9, 2011. Of all electors surveyed 7% (unchanged) didn’t name a party.: October 18, 2011

   The latest New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll shows support for Prime Minister John Key’s National-led Government has risen to 59.5%. Support for Key’s National Party is 55.5% (up 4.5%), ACT NZ 1.5% (unchanged), the Maori Party 2% (down 0.5%), and United Future 0.5% (unchanged).

   Support for Opposition Parties is at 40.5% (down 4%) — Labour Party 28% (down 2.5%), Greens 9.5% (down 2%), New Zealand First 2% (up 1%), Mana Party 0.5% (unchanged) and Others 0.5% (down 0.5%).
   • mickysavage 1.1

     19 October 2011 at 8:42 am

     Roy Morgan is bouncing up and down and I still think that people will not contemplate change until closer to the elections.  

     The poll was  taken mostly pre Rena and before Key’s lies about S&P was publicised.  The next batch will be the most interesting.
     • Sweetd 1.1.1

       19 October 2011 at 9:12 am

       Yes Mikey, keep hope alive. Its always the next batch the most interesting.
       • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1

         19 October 2011 at 10:23 am

         Why are you supporting a Government which is asset stripping our country for the benefit of foreign banksters and financiers?
         • Sweetd 1.1.1.1.1

           19 October 2011 at 10:43 am

           Sorry, I thought we were talking about polls?
           • freedom 1.1.1.1.1.1

             19 October 2011 at 10:55 am

             well done sweetd, good of you to admit that the reality of our political situation is not represented in the polls
             • Sweetd …

               19 October 2011 at 11:23 am

               Actually no Freedom….what I was commenting on is the reality of a weak labour party, and when all else has failed there is always hope……….hope that the polls may change……….hope that labour may be resurgent this election……….keep hope alive.

               The polls are our reality, they have framed the narative are are the talking point.
               • freedom …

                 19 October 2011 at 12:57 pm

                 why are you assuming everything deriding polling is about Labour?
                 This is not a Labour Party site and that is made implicity clear in the ‘about’
     • chris73 1.1.2

       19 October 2011 at 11:28 am

       Yes, the people will see Phil Goff mucking in and will realise that Phil Goff is a man of the people and will flock around him and cast the National party out of office
       • McFlock 1.1.2.1

         19 October 2011 at 1:42 pm

         More likely they’ll just view votes as slightly preferable to torches and pitchforks.
2. Ianupnorth 2

   19 October 2011 at 8:47 am

   So, bidders for the Crafar farms, those Chinese folks, are now up for money laundering and bribery charges – http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10760101
    
   But it’s OK, no National party involvement, except squeaky clean Michael Jones, one of Keys social buddies is being dragged into the mire!
   • Craig Glen Eden 2.1

     19 October 2011 at 9:24 am

     Interesting how Michael Jones name keeps popping up around dodgy business dealings. Jenny Shipley was linked with this group to from memory.
     • tc 2.1.1

       19 October 2011 at 11:08 am

       And that loyal kiwi job creator sir M Fay underbids for them and goes on the PR charm offensive that he’s got NZ’s interests at heart (again) as the offer is rejected …..tui moment.
     • The Pink Postman 2.1.2

       23 October 2011 at 3:43 pm

       I think you are correct Craig G .E. I’m sure Shipley went to China with the Wongs. what a greedy cunning woman ,and is she not recieving a huge amounts of taxpayers money thanks to Brownlee . the more I see of Tories and their ilk the more I wonder how they can con the public time and time again . It just beats me!.
       • millsy 2.1.2.1

         23 October 2011 at 4:04 pm

         Petain, Laval and Quisling were hanged. The likes of Shipley should remember that…
         • higherstandard 2.1.2.1.1

           23 October 2011 at 4:39 pm

           You are a nasty piece of work millsy – taking lessons from Campbell Larsen ?
           • millsy 2.1.2.1.1.1

             23 October 2011 at 4:44 pm

             I seem remember reading worse from the right.

             And besides, to some poeple, patriotism means more than cheering for some rugby team.
3. Uturn 3

   19 October 2011 at 9:04 am

   At what point in NZ did our collective outlook on life become underpinned by sociopathy?

   Why are our national tales of overcoming struggle used as clubs to beat our young into silence and submission?

   When the same amount of effort goes into perpetuating problems as that which would solve them, why chose abuse as default?

   At what point does a guy figure that buying a new suit, car, house, boat or swimming pool, is a better option than learning to be a happy person and better lover?

   If he knows he’s unhappy, why not change, rather than abuse those around him for lack of personal responsibility?

   If happiness and sadness have the same value to him, why not finally discover what human life really is, instead of engineering the next iphone app?

   This is what happens when you have dried blueberries from Bolivia on your porridge. They must have been grown next to coca plants.
   • chris73 3.1

     19 October 2011 at 11:33 am

     I’m guessing the Lange/Douglas government?
     • Colonial Viper 3.1.1

       19 October 2011 at 12:15 pm

       Followed up with extra helpings of Prebble, Caygill, Bradford and Richardson.
       • chris73 3.1.1.1

         19 October 2011 at 12:53 pm

         No arguements there
4. Peter 4

   19 October 2011 at 9:07 am

   IMF warns against early returns to Budget Surplus (which is the Nats plan)

   http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/severe-risks-in-culture-of-thrift-imf-warning/story-e6frg6so-1226170147423
   • Puddleglum 4.1

     19 October 2011 at 10:20 am

     I wonder if Bill English has ever heard of Schelling’s book ‘Micromotives and Macrobehavior‘?

     From your link, Peter:

     Julia Gillard said yesterday the summit must “expunge” Europe’s crisis of confidence. “The time for muddling through is over,” the Prime Minister said. “Substantial and comprehensive reforms must be put in place – nothing less.”

     In issuing its Great Depression warning, the IMF referred to the work of economist John Maynard Keynes, who showed that when everyone tried to lift their savings simultaneously, the total savings in the economy fell because there was not enough demand for goods and services. 
      In issuing its Great Depression warning, the IMF referred to the work of economist John Maynard Keynes, who showed that when everyone tried to lift their savings simultaneously, the total savings in the economy fell because there was not enough demand for goods and services.

     “The overarching risk is of a global paradox of thrift as households, firms and governments around the world reduce demand,” the IMF said.
     “Downside risks have increased and are severe.”  
     • Colonial Viper 4.1.1

       19 October 2011 at 10:26 am

       The IMF is complicit in creating the overwhelming banking debt/interest burden faced by sovereign nations today.
     • Deadly_NZ 4.1.2

       19 October 2011 at 11:00 am

       Here’s a question Would it be so bad if the so called PIGS just told the IMF and World bank to go screw??? I mean Argentina did it years ago.
       • Colonial Viper 4.1.2.1

         19 October 2011 at 11:14 am

         French and German banks are completely overleveraged due to their casino risk taking and would fall over in a heartbeat.

         In essence what is happening now is that the political leaders of the PIIGS are no longer working on behalf of their people, they have been induced to work on behalf of the international banking cartel.
       • Draco T Bastard 4.1.2.2

         19 October 2011 at 1:46 pm

         That’d be the best thing that they could do. Just declare all external debt null and void and drop the Euro. The “negotiations” are just attempts to save a few people from losing some money due to their own bad decisions.

         When you loan out money you’re taking the risk that not going to get it back.
         • Colonial Viper 4.1.2.2.1

           19 October 2011 at 6:55 pm

           First they can do is net off all the liabilities, payments and interest charges between the different countries. That immediately destroys about 30% of the debt.
           • Deadly_NZ 4.1.2.2.1.1

             20 October 2011 at 12:44 am

             But if these countries just defaulted , hell what would be better if all default what happens??? NO think about it what really happens??? Nothing. The sun still rises and sets the baker still bakes Planes still fly there will be chaos as the materialistic banker type will scream and wriggle and try to regain their previous positions to hopefully no avail. And the only ones hurt are the one who caused the pain. The Bankers.

             Well that fantasy land here they’ll call out the army to protect their pile.
             • Colonial Viper …

               20 October 2011 at 12:56 am

               The most critical thing governments must do in the event of a massive debt default and subsequent banking failure is to take over the utility operations of all banking transaction systems.

               This will allow normal day to day economic transactions to still occur.

               Wages still need to be paid into bank accounts. ATMs still need to be refilled. EFTPOS and credit card transactions still need to be processed nightly. Bill payments for power, rates and taxes made. In the modern day internet banking systems also need to be maintained.

               In other words, in the short term the utility banking functions which allow the real economy to function day to day must experience continuity of operation.

               This will buy time for us to distance ourselves from the globalised financial system (which simultaneously disempowers the banksters who all want centralised global control). And all the bullshit securities and (false) asset trading side of the banks are split off and quietly incinerated, and quite a few banksters put away for long prison terms.

               Plus mega debt moratoria/debt jubilees…
5. Lanthanide 5

   19 October 2011 at 9:22 am

   National’s Kiwisaver “policy” is a complete joke. Here’s why:

   1. It’s all predicated on returning to surplus in 2014-2015. That is almost certainly not going to happen. This is how to promise something that you know is never going to happen and take the thunder out of the oppositions PR.
   2. They’re expecting to enrol 275,000 people permanently into the scheme. The current adoption rate of kiwisaver suggests that by 2014-2015, approximately that many people would have joined the scheme anyway.
   3. If they’re wrong and more people stay in than expected, their economic projections are screwed.
   4. Enrolling everyone, setting up wage redirection, and then having most people opt-out again is a huge bureaucracy make-work scheme.
   5. If they paid the $1,000 kickstart spread over 5 years at $200 year, with the requirement that you must have made some contributions in the same year to qualify for that year’s allocation, they would both cut the total contribution required and spread it out over more years. A guy from the savings working group says that with these changes they could easily start the program this year without causing much stress on the budget.
   • Puddleglum 5.1

     19 October 2011 at 9:59 am

     National’s Kiwisaver announcement was the lead story in the print edition of The Press today.

     Labour’s workplace policy announcements were featured in a small article in the ‘lost’ perceptual area in the top left corner on page 8.
     • Pete George 5.1.1

       19 October 2011 at 10:56 am

       National brought forward their 2014 Kiwisaver policy but didn’t change inplementation dates.
     • interesting 5.1.2

       19 October 2011 at 1:31 pm

       It also was a news item on ONE News before the Labour policy…not sure which one was reporte first on 3NEWS.

       The Nats used the policy announcment to try and steal the lime light from Labours announcemnet. Finally the election proper is getting underway.
6. ak 6

   19 October 2011 at 10:13 am

   Triple downgrade just round the corner, milk prices dropping like a stone, PM blatantly lying and obvious bogus email cover-up, govt twiddled thumbs as birds are slaughtered….

   Good old “independent” press, not even pretending any more. Unabashed gangster pimps and whores to their paymasters. Cucified Hels for signing a painting for charity, pack-raped Winnie for an alleged minor fib, now protecting their boy with non-stop spin, flim-flam and rah-rah.

   Know the enemy and ignore it. Leaflets, tweets, the net, the street.
7. freedom 7

   19 October 2011 at 10:37 am

   One of the more interesting aspects of OWS are the growing number of the 1% who are in support of change. This is either a well co-ordinated manipulation of the message or perhaps there really are some rich folk with a heart. I think most of us will agree it is the latter.

   here is one example
   http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread765539/pg1
8. marty mars 8

   19 October 2011 at 10:41 am

   for those interested i have laid out a case for the lowering of the retirement age for Māori.

   http://mars2earth.blogspot.com/2011/10/lower-maori-retirement-age.html

   The inequalities faced by Māori are obvious when the facts are noted. Facts around income and workforce participation show Māori disadvantage and that translates into more financial difficulties after retirement. It is not just that many Māori struggle to save, there is less opportunity to save and cultural responsibilities for older Māori also have a financial cost not borne by others. Add in lower life expectancy and the unfairness of treating Māori as a sub-group of the general population is obvious.

   I blame Government – todays and yesterdays, because the Treaty, specifically Article 2 and 3, have not been actualised and even today tangata whenua and their situation are not considered. The beginnings of a solution to this issue must be a reduction in the retirement age for Māori. This would alieviate the financial stressors for kaumātua and lead to a resurgence of marae activity which would be positive for the Māori Nation and the country as a whole.
   • Pete George 8.1

     19 October 2011 at 10:51 am

     You should be interested in the UnitedFuture approach which addresses this.

     “60 to 70 choice on superannuation – New Zealanders should be able to take superannuation at reduced rates down to 60 or increasingly enhanced rates if they hold off until between 66 and 70”

     http://www.unitedfuture.org.nz/superannuation-policy-launch-dunne-unveils/
     • marty mars 8.1.1

       19 October 2011 at 10:59 am

       Awesome that you agree with me pete – well done. Although I am not talking about reduced rates and whilst I have sympathy for all people nearing retirement, the inequality that Māori face is quite specific.
       • Pete George 8.1.1.1

         19 October 2011 at 11:06 am

         It would have to be at reduced rates, but that doesn’t mean reduced benefits. If someone’s life expetancy was, say, 70 then 10 years super at a reduced rate adds up to a lot more than 5 years at a higher rate.

         You need to look at the total likely to be received, not the rate.
         • Lanthanide 8.1.1.1.1

           19 October 2011 at 11:15 am

           “You need to look at the total likely to be received, not the rate.”

           People pay today’s power bill and grocery shop with today’s money, not the total they may have received after 10 years.
           • Pete George 8.1.1.1.1.1

             19 October 2011 at 11:39 am

             Better with a reduced rate than none.

             People with diabetes have a life expectancy 10-12 years shorter than the norm. So if someone with diabetes retires at 65 they have a retirement expectancy of something like 5 years, compared to the norm of 15+ years.

             Why shouldn’t they be able to chose to retire earlier at a lower rate so they get, say, 10 years retirement?

             They can still choose 65 if they want to.
             • Draco T Bastard …

               19 October 2011 at 2:08 pm

               Why don’t we just let them retire 10 to 12 years earlier so that they can enjoy the same retirement as everyone else?
               • Pete George …

                 19 October 2011 at 2:19 pm

                 Choose your entitlement age with a friendly doctor’s certificate?

                 It’s far easier – and more fair – to have a universal system that provides the same choices for everyone.
                 • Colonial Viper …

                   19 October 2011 at 2:21 pm

                   Easiest option is not necessarily the best or fairest option.

                   For those who die years younger than others, especially.
                 • marty mars …

                   19 October 2011 at 4:57 pm

                   easier? fairer? to who pete? ‘everyone’ you say but the facts don’t support that view, not even slightly. The same choices are not there or do you dispute the facts, because if you don’t then are you are implying it’s just tough and tangata whenua suffering disadvantage and facing inequality can just eat it – maybe for some that is easier, I feel sorry for those people, they lack empathy and are the cause of most of this worlds problems. Isn’t equality worth taking a solid stance for pete and if not, what is?
           • aerobubble 8.1.1.1.1.2

             19 October 2011 at 2:16 pm

             Those in their forties will retire after the bulge, yet will be at their
             height of earning income paying for the boomer retired. They
             will of course inherit a glut of care homes and other age
             infrastructure. So where’s the fairness? Well there isn’t any.
             We can’t manage retirement on the basis of what people pay
             or paid. We need to give everyone the same basic level,
             reward those who saved (for obvious reasons we need people
             to save), and stop this when we set the retirement age thing.
             The old will need to work longer because their decile
             have most of the jobs now, most of the population, but
             likewise we have to insure the stragglers get by too.
             But those in their forties and younger will not need to
             work longer because the population spread would have
             rebalanced as the boomer are decimated by attrition.
         • freedom 8.1.1.1.2

           19 October 2011 at 11:16 am

           wow Pete, So you can see into the future and tell us when someone is going to die? You really are the Messiah we have awaited all these years. The actuaries must be knocking on your door daily.

           ( I always thought the Messiah’s name in the second coming would be more …you know… inspiring , Brian first time round, now it’s Pete ?)
         • mickysavage 8.1.1.1.3

           19 October 2011 at 11:18 am

           Here is a toughie for you Petey boy.
            
           We have an ageing population and a baby boomer bulge.  In 15 years time current levels of support will be unsustainable.  So what do we do?  Do we:
            
           1.  Increase retirement age
           2.  Decrease entitlements
           3.  Means test it
           4.  Put our head in the sand and not worry about it because some future government will have to deal with it.
            
           And before you cite your policy I note it is cost neutral so will not address affordability issues.

           EDIT: I see that other aspects of UF policy will actually make Superannuation MORE expensive and benefit the wealthy.
           • Pete George 8.1.1.1.3.1

             19 October 2011 at 11:33 am

             We don’t have a retirement age. We have an age that people can receive National Super from, quite different. Many people work much longer, some can’t work that long but can’t “retire” on a pension.

             Before we can put up the entitlement age – which incidentally if it’s done without any other changes, as per Marsman’s point will make it even worse for those who have worked hard manually or have lower life expectancies due to ethnic or medical reasons – we need to get retirement savings working.

             “Kiwisaver should be made compulsory but we cannot afford to wait until 2015 or when we get back into surplus to do it, said UnitedFuture leader Peter Dunne.”

             http://www.unitedfuture.org.nz/national-not-going-far-enough-on-kiwisaver/
             • mickysavage …

               19 October 2011 at 11:37 am

               Bzzzt Petey.  You did not answer the question.  
                
               What will you do to make Superannuation affordable.  And why if you want to get retirement savings working did the coiffured one vote for a budget that stuffed up the Cullen Fund and severely handicapped Kiwisaver?
               • Lanthanide …

                 19 October 2011 at 11:41 am

                 Peter Dunne in a nutshell: Don’t like my principals? I have others.
               • Pete George …

                 19 October 2011 at 12:49 pm

                 You don’t understand Confidence and Supply agreements?

                 Same as UnitedFuture had with the Clark/Cullen government. Standard for a coalition arrangement.
                 • freedom …

                   19 October 2011 at 1:11 pm

                   Pete you are right about that as i for one do not understand Confidence and Supply agreements because in case you have not noticed we are meant to have MMP , not defacto FPP.

                   Over the years I have had long battles trying to get the difference into thick skulled robots like yourself and there is not enough hours left before the election to try again.
                   Political convention and self protection have made our MMP a twisted perversion of what it could have been.

                   The referendum is looming and the pressure is being put on people to throw out MMP
                   before we have even experienced a single MMP government.
                 • mickysavage …

                   19 October 2011 at 1:18 pm

                   And you Petey do not understand “answer the feckin question”.
                    
                   Stop prevaricating and going off on tangents and answer the question.
                    
                   We have an ageing population and a baby boomer bulge.  In 15 years time current levels of support will be unsustainable.  So what do we do?  Do we:
                    
                   1.  Increase retirement age
                   2.  Decrease entitlements
                   3.  Means test it
                   4.  Put our head in the sand and not worry about it because some future government will have to deal with it.
                   • Pete George …

                     19 October 2011 at 1:33 pm

                     I’ve already said what I think (I agree with United Future policy on this).

                     And I repeat – there is no retirement age.

                     1. Give people a choice at what age they get entitlement from 60-70.
                     2. Make Kiwisaver compulsory so people have their own retirement savings.

                     Just increasing the entitlement age disadvantages some sectors even more than they are disadvantaged now.

                     Means testing isn’t fair and creates huge complications.
                   • interesting …

                     19 October 2011 at 1:34 pm

                     HI Mickey

                     Here are my thoughts on a possible solution to the superannuation problem. They are just thoughts…no costing or anything as i wouldnt know where to begin with that….but what do you think?

                     SUPERANNUATION IDEA:
                     To help with the cost of the climbing retirement population here are some thoughts on how we could reduce the cost to the taxpayer in the long run and also create a better savings culture among New Zealanders.

                     Making it compulsory for people to save for retirement (Kiwisaver?) from the moment they are 18 years old. Also, gradually phase out the current super scheme as follows:

                     Have a law that states that super payments are ALWAYS guaranteed to be at least 67% (or whatever it currently is) of the average wage (or whatever it is benchmarked against). But that the government only makes up the difference.

                     How they get this is done as follows:
                     When they reach retirement, their total super that they have saved via Kiwisaver (or another scheme) is divided out over how many years the average person is meant to live. I.e. if the retirement age is 65, and the life expectancy is 85 then you get 20 years. Thus, the amount they have saved is divided by 20. Then whatever the difference is between what that amount works out to be and what 67% of average wage is, the government meets to ensure they are getting the average. (for instance if they saved enough, that when divided out of 20 years equaled $200 a week, but the benchmark of 67% of average wage is $300 a week….then the government makes up the $100 difference only. If on the other hand they have saved enough, that when divided over 20 years is $350 a week, and the benchmark 67% is $300… then the government doesn’t pay anything towards superannuation)

                     If they live longer than the 20 years, then the government starts paying the full amount of super.
                     If they die before all the money is paid out that they saved, the government gives the money to the family or to the persons estate.

                     Also, if they choose not to retire at 65 (or whatever the retirement age is at the time) they will not stop contributing to Kiwisaver (or another scheme) until they retire and they will not get government super until they stop working.

                     Obviously this is aimed at starting for everyone that turns 18 from the time such a policy would come in. However that does not mean it could not be adapted using the same above mentioned principles for people who are already 18 or over and who may even be close to retirement now, if they have some form of super scheme at present.

                     Clearly none of this is costed and it is just my humble idea.
                   • insider …

                     19 October 2011 at 1:43 pm

                     Can you imagine the interesting conversations the Minister of Finance will be having with Treasury officials in 50 years time trying to find a solution to the unfunded liability caused by people living too damn long. Wait for the word ‘carousel’ to be tossed in…
                   • mickysavage …

                     19 October 2011 at 2:24 pm

                     Petey baby
                      
                     I’ve already said what I think (I agree with United Future policy on this).
                     And I repeat – there is no retirement age.
                     
                     
                     Pure semantics.  Do you want me to say “the age at which National Superannuation payments commence” instead?
                      
                     1. Give people a choice at what age they get entitlement from 60-70.
                      
                     Does not address the issue.  The change is cost neutral.

                     2. Make Kiwisaver compulsory so people have their own retirement savings.
                      
                     You mean that you are going to abolish super and make savings compulsory?  Good luck in selling that.  But what will you do about the baby boomers who retire in the next 15 years?  Or do you propose to make the cuts in the near future?
                      
                     Interesting – I agree with you that changes would be over decades.  But 15 years is when the crunch hits.
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
                      
   • insider 8.2

     19 October 2011 at 11:58 am

     ‘Maori’ is self defined – there is no objective test. Won’t the risk be we all define ourselves as Maori as we get close to retirement age?
     • marty mars 8.2.1

       19 October 2011 at 12:10 pm

       not sure how you are going to unless you think life expectancy for everyone should decrease
       • insider 8.2.1.1

         19 October 2011 at 1:36 pm

         Well as Pete pointed out there is no ‘retirement age’ – you can retire any time you want. You want super for Maori earlier than anyone else. But super is not timebound and it is not dependent on work status – you get it till you die even if you are working (with abatements or high tax isn’t it or did Winston get rid of that?). So if I declared myself Maori at 55, I could gain 10 years of extra super and might still live till 80 mumble. And I can do that unhindered because Maori is a matter of self definition. I’s is what I says I’s is. Nice scam you are enabling.
         • Pete George 8.2.1.1.1

           19 October 2011 at 1:44 pm

           That’s why it needs to be a universal choice – anyone can choose to start getting super sooner or later depending on their circumstances and preferences.

           It wouldn’t work if you start trying to select some groups for preferential treatment, too complex and too open to manipulation. And it discriminates – if you choose Maori do you also choose PI? What qualifies as PI – Taiwanee? Japanese? And that’s not fair on non-Maori who have worked physically har all their lives and their bodies won’t last until 65 – or 67, or 70. And it’s not fair on those with expectancy shortening medical conditions like diabetes.
           • marty mars 8.2.1.1.1.1

             19 October 2011 at 2:28 pm

             damn you were doing so well pete and then you go and drop the ball. Why are you dillydallying now – the whole point of the original comment was about the inequality for tangata whenua and a small, almost token way, that could be remedied for older Māori nearing retirement. Your plaintive, “it’s not fair… it discriminates” frankly sickens me.
         • marty mars 8.2.1.1.2

           19 October 2011 at 2:16 pm

           yes there may be scum who would do that – so what? Do you think they wouldn’t get caught out and put on the news?
           • insider 8.2.1.1.2.1

             19 October 2011 at 2:37 pm

             The point is they can’t be caught out, because there is nothing wrong being done – I mean if Christian Cullen and Tony Brown can be Maori All Blacks then why can’t I retire early? I must be as Maori as they are. The ones who probably won’t do it will be the racists who want nothing to do with Maoris on principle (which ironically means they won’t be scum…).

             The only way you can avoid it happening is by defining who a ‘real Maori’ is. Good luck with that one.
             • marty mars …

               19 October 2011 at 2:53 pm

               you seem to be arguing… nothing. As you said ‘nothing wrong being done’ but I think you get to your main point a bit later, don’t you.

               If you are Māori and could be in the Māori All Blacks then good oh. If not, so what?

               the ones who on principle want nothing to do with Māori are scum – they are delusional and pathetic but I suppose one could quibble about the definition of scum – which dictionary? which authority? hmmm such a tough decision.
               • insider …

                 19 October 2011 at 3:09 pm

                 Marty

                 If you can’t see that the fundamental flaw in your proposal is that it is just free money for anyone who asks, no qualifications needed, then you need to go and think a bit harder
                 • marty mars …

                   19 October 2011 at 3:21 pm

                   insider, your fundamental flaw isn’t my fundamental flaw – but it’s fun to practice against 101 derailing, so thanks for that.
9. freedom 9

   19 October 2011 at 10:42 am

   Another angle of OWS you may not have caught up with

   http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2049976/Banks-country-refuse-let-customers-close-accounts-protest.html

   arrested for trying to close a bank account, any of the RW cheerleaders care to defend that action
   • Ianupnorth 9.1

     19 October 2011 at 5:07 pm

     Mary poppins – that is a classic scene in that movie!
10. randal 10

    19 October 2011 at 11:08 am

    another drongo day athe dompost. front page has a hybrid bike thing with no exhaust and the reporter having orgasms at this thing designed to break the law. What is this fascination with noise?
    Everywhere you go there is some drongo making a noise. I gues they just compenating for havinga small penis. National said they would get rid of noise and drngos on the roads but hey are creeping back again.
    • Afewknowthetruth 10.1

      19 October 2011 at 11:24 am

      randal.

      Nicely said but the corporate press has an important role to play in keeping the masses distracted and entertained, and supporting dysfuntion.

      To expect anything different from a corporate shill is to be deluded.
11. logie97 11

    19 October 2011 at 11:18 am

    Can you spot the difference – (clue – in one one of the he really minces his words)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=flizcv-NcOY

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKtmlN7ILsY&feature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLGnE7Ga7z8&feature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHJb1DB42rg&feature=player_embedded

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jk8ujDUujFE&NR=1
12. ultra-left sectarian 12

    19 October 2011 at 11:19 am

    Is Quade Cooper a victim of racism?
    http://readingthemaps.blogspot.com/2011/10/why-they-hate-quade.html
    • chris73 12.1

      19 October 2011 at 11:35 am

      Maybe hes just a git?
      • Chris 12.1.1

        19 October 2011 at 1:27 pm

        Yeah pretty much he’s just a dick, plus no matter what he says you can tell it gets to him and makes him play worse. So of course the crowd will keep doing it.
    • freedom 12.2

      19 October 2011 at 12:45 pm

      complete and utter drivel, why waste your time and ours posting such crap
      In his entire career i have heard many people mention many things about ‘that man’, mostly unprintable.

      the only people i have ever heard mention his race as a contributing factor in the derision he attracts are people in the media,
13. travellerev 13

    19 October 2011 at 11:46 am

    Here’s another shining example of PM John Key’s benevolence:

    Dying man turned away at Parliament
14. Brett Dale 14

    19 October 2011 at 12:00 pm

    Again every poll has shown that National can either govern alone or with one coilation partner. the election is as good as over.
    • Colonial Viper 14.1

      19 October 2011 at 12:12 pm

      Hey mate in that case why don’t you do us all a favour and stay home on Nov 26? 😀
      • Brett Dale 14.1.1

        19 October 2011 at 9:57 pm

        Cool I might.
15. The Baron 15

    19 October 2011 at 12:06 pm

    Yo Lynn,
    Ever since iOS 5 update, the standard comes up “blurry” more times than not in safari for iPad.
    Just letting you know…
    TB
    • freedom 15.1

      19 October 2011 at 12:52 pm

      on a related tech subject…
      (have tried to send this to email a few times but never get an answer)

      I still cannot post from android ,
      ‘enter name’ ok, press next
      ‘enter email address’ ok, press next
      goes to ‘enter site info’ and that is as far as it goes,
      i do not have a site to enter. Is there any way to bypass this step?

      anyone have a suggestion?
      • logie97 15.1.1

        19 October 2011 at 4:02 pm

        … are you trying from the “contact us” screen? If your browser is not supported the screen may be prefaced by a note advising you to send via the .com address supplied
      • lprent 15.1.2

        20 October 2011 at 1:43 pm

        Wow that is odd. I presume that it is asking the questions.

        I don’t have an android so I can’t even check what the mobile version does. It is running completely on the WPTouch plugin

        Best work around I can think of is to login – then at least those questions won’t get asked for comments.
    • Kevin Welsh 15.2

      19 October 2011 at 1:56 pm

      I have had the same problem Baron. I usually quit Safari completely and relaunch and it works again.
      • Ianupnorth 15.2.1

        19 October 2011 at 5:08 pm

        Safari is a dog – nothing but trouble with it of late
    • lprent 15.3

      20 October 2011 at 1:40 pm

      the standard comes up “blurry” more times than not in safari for iPad

      In the mobile version or standard version on the mobile? (Switch is at the bottom of the page). In haven’t booted up a windoze box to run iTunes to do the upgrade myself yet.
16. thejackal 16

    19 October 2011 at 1:19 pm

    National’s Election Hoarding’s 6

    National promised to create 170,000 jobs in the 2010 budget and failed to deliver. In fact unemployment has increased by around 57,000 since National took over. They then made the same promise to create 170,000 jobs in the 2011 budget…
17. freedom 17

    19 October 2011 at 1:23 pm

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/5810565/Police-mull-charging-for-big-events

    as it is a requirement for all public protest actions, including marches, to co-ordinate with the Police for issues of public safety, will exercising your rights to free speech also warrant a fee?
18. aerobubble 18

    19 October 2011 at 1:30 pm

    We are a nation of law? No!

    A drug addict kicks their habit, taken up to stay awake on onerous
    long trunking jobs, and their pusher drops their bong into the truck
    and tips off a ex-police officer.

    A management who doesn’t random test for, or offer drug testing
    so saving the company money rehiring, or testing cabs routinely
    for burn marks etc.

    Creates an injustice. Where the lawful truthful actions of an
    employee inevitable loose them their jobs. Had they lawyered
    up, had a lawyer mate or family member, like so many
    middle class pakeha families, he;d still have his job.

    Welcome to the rule of law. Not.

    But worse. Many French and America soldiers died from
    a truck bomber in Lebanon, a bomber flawed but likely an
    honest man frustrated living in an emerging nation of law????

    When honest men lose we are all less safe.

    Managers have a duty to their investors and that means
    retaining, with routine drug testing, their workers. This
    did not happen.
    • Campbell Larsen 18.1

      19 October 2011 at 2:07 pm

      Maybe a link to an article would help make your point?

      Because at the moment all I’m getting from your comment is some sort of incoherent arguement for routine drug testing, which I will file along with your enthusiasm for implementing Team America World Police and giving all the cops guns to usher in a new era of peace.

      And why is it that you can construct sentences when asking a tech question but default to babble when you are commenting politically?
      • Campbell Larsen 18.1.1

        19 October 2011 at 2:13 pm

        Sorry the tech question was someone elses, your babble is it seems a consistent feature.
        Aerobubble I would really like to understand you so please hook me up with some links to the events that you are commenting on so I can decipher the point you are trying to make.
        • aerobubble 18.1.1.1

          21 October 2011 at 3:12 pm

          rnz pod cast on law about case where a trunk driver was sacked when they told the truth
          at the outset and at the time had done nothing wrong. the glee of the law expert at
          this case which does a disservice to a civil society given the truck driver do drugs to
          stay awake, and are also unlikely to dob their dealer in.
19. Jum 19

    19 October 2011 at 1:53 pm

    Whenever National and Act attack Labour you know Labour is doing something that workers will like and employers/owners/shareholders will hate because it loses them profit. There is such a thing as egalitarian behaviour which gives a fair profit and a fair wage and a fair lifestyle for all New Zealanders. That is not what NACT want. They want the power, the money, the resources and the control over the other 90% of New Zealanders.

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1110/S00316/labour-launches-attack-on-small-businesses-act.htm

    There is nothing remotely Kiwi’ish about that thinking. That’s just greed imported from places like America.
    • aerobubble 19.1

      19 October 2011 at 1:59 pm

      My problem with the National party is they reward bad management practice,
      the best economy is the widest and broadest economy, yet National target
      only the few to be winners and everyone else is poor from it. But worse,
      now even the winners that National are targetting with their legislative
      largesse are suffering from National incompetence. How exactly does a
      business owner make profits when their customers have little discretional
      spending? And I’m not just talking in S.Auckland, I’m talking on the
      streets of London and NY. National are completely out of touch not only
      with the global economy, but with Epsom voters who loaded up on debt
      to get into Grammar zone.
20. aerobubble 20

    19 October 2011 at 2:09 pm

    Big bang shoved a whole lot of energy into energy states, seems it even powered
    up angular momentum so the universe is lefty. 😉

    Given faster than light particles are now possible, yeah right, don’t physicists
    know distance is a classical concept.

    So that makes faster than light lefty particles???
    • insider 20.1

      19 October 2011 at 2:38 pm

      The universe is lefty? Isn’t it all relative? 🙂
21. Colonial Viper 21

    19 October 2011 at 4:24 pm

    Rugby world cup a disaster for tax payers and rate payers

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/local-government/news/article.cfm?c_id=250&objectid=10760088

    Screw that social housing and services for those in hardship, none of that stuff is as important as circus games.
    • Draco T Bastard 21.1

      19 October 2011 at 4:54 pm

      This week Prime Minister John Key defended the country’s investment in the World Cup, saying it was “$39 million well spent”.

      ???

      Budget blowouts have pushed public spending on the Rugby World Cup well above $200 million – without counting $555 million in stadium upgrades and $39 million in direct losses from hosting the tournament.

      But we’re saved…

      But the economic returns are also starting to arrive, including an extra $4.4 million in tourist spending on Paymark eftpos systems during the tournament’s penultimate weekend.

      Yep, we’re going to get almost $5m in extra tourist spending for our almost $800m in spending…

      /wanders off to be physically sick at the thought of this rort we had forced upon us for the amusement of a minority of us.
      • Jum 21.1.1

        21 October 2011 at 3:43 pm

        No wonder we’re being encouraged now to go for the Olympics – they’ve realised that we love giving money to foreigners – in imports, in investment returns, in sending our best and brightest to Australia…

        A small loss with the RWC, a much bigger loss with the Olympics – yay say the circling scavengers. – come and get it says John Key. You don’t want the energy companies? Then take the Ports of Auckland and the airport and our water infrastructure – I’m not staying either, says Key. I just came to pack up the assets and send em back to my place.
22. William Joyce 22

    19 October 2011 at 6:14 pm

    Manawatu gorge road closed yet again until Christmas.
    Surely this road was of greater “National Significance” than a holiday highway to Wellsford?
23. Draco T Bastard 23

    19 October 2011 at 7:32 pm

    The Energy Trap

    By itself, a 2% decline year after year—while sounding mild—would send our growth-based economy into a tailspin. As detailed in a previous post, across-the-board efficiency improvements cannot tread water against a rate as high as 2% per year. As we’ll see next, the Energy Trap just makes things worse.

    Long but well worth the read.

    Peak Oil

    According to a study of the largest 811 oilfields conducted in early 2008 by Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA), the average rate of field decline is 4.5% per year. The IEA stated in November 2008 that an analysis of 800 oilfields showed the decline in oil production to be 6.7% a year, and that this would grow to 8.6% in 2030.

    Oops.
    • Colonial Viper 23.1

      19 October 2011 at 7:37 pm

      Outfits like the IEA are counting on a massive ramp up of unconventional oil sources and new fields to make up for that shortfall.

      http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_D9-JNTtRKgs/TNqSZgT_-EI/AAAAAAAABag/3M5sNJlG61Y/s1600/Screen+shot+2010-11-10+at+7.36.37+AM.png

      No, I know, its never going to happen.
      • mickysavage 23.1.1

        19 October 2011 at 8:41 pm

        To be fair CV it might happen, but we will need to prepare to accept that more and more of the world’s coastline is going to be destroyed by oil.

        Tauranga will be a walk in the park …
        • Colonial Viper 23.1.1.1

          19 October 2011 at 9:05 pm

          Between now and 2020. I think that there is a roughly 10% chance that net available oil exports* will manage to supply enough cheap oil to OECD countries to sustain net economic growth per capita over the next ten years.

          And I think that there is a 90% chance that it will not.

          *This seems like an awkward contrived measure, but it takes into account the fact that many major oil producers, even growing ones, are keeping more and more of their yearly production to satisfy internal use, which means it is not available for trade on the world market.
24. Colonial Viper 24

    19 October 2011 at 8:55 pm

    Remember remember, the fifth of November

    Activist bank depositors and “Bank Transfer Day”.

    http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2011-10-18/why-i%E2%80%99m-sad-about-leaving-bank-america
    • Draco T Bastard 24.1

      19 October 2011 at 9:04 pm

      I hope that works. People will get a real live example of how corrupt the financial system is.
25. M 25

    19 October 2011 at 10:31 pm

    Enjoyed this Bill Maher interview on OWS vs teabaggers and religion – really liked that he realised his wealth was mere fluke instead of the tired I worked my arse off to get where I am:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZqszutXKTU
26. Campbell Larsen 26

    19 October 2011 at 10:55 pm

    Felix – why for gods sake did you encourage Pete G?
    Stirring is for a non – bond martini.
    Surely The Standard has enough comments without Petes special blend of 2 parts sanctimonious & holier- than -thou, 3 parts drivel, and 5 parts of nothing at all?
27. Colonial Viper 27

    20 October 2011 at 1:56 am

    The Greek people will not accept their sovereignty being stolen by the International Bankster Occupiers

    Biggest national strikes ever.

    http://rt.com/news/greeks-strike-protest-biggest-163/

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS