Open Mike 19/10/2016

144 comments on “Open Mike 19/10/2016 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. weka 1

   18 October 2016 at 9:49 pm

   [Please note, we are trialling something new for Open Mike and Daily Review.

   In order to keep OM and DR free for other conversations, all comments, link postings etc about the US election now need to go in the dedicated US election discussion here.

   If you are unsure, post in that thread rather than here. It’s not possible for moderators to shift comments from OM to there, so any comments here may get deleted.

   Have fun folks – weka]
2. Nick 2

   19 October 2016 at 6:31 am

   Look at our new invisible surplus clothes……yes said Msm…..looks fabulous..
   • ianmac 2.1

     19 October 2016 at 8:53 am

     The Emperor has no clothes? Surely not!
3. Paul 3

   19 October 2016 at 6:34 am

   A new private prison being built.
   Suicide rates spiralling.

   Meanwhile the corporate media reports on Dan Carter, The Real Housewives of Auckland and ‘one perfect leap for a lamb.’

   The brighter future.
4. Cinny 4

   19 October 2016 at 7:12 am

   The housing crisis is really hitting home around here. Next door sold within 10 days of being on the market, a sharp contrast considering it was on the market for a couple of months a few years back before being sold. Welcome to Motueka, most of the ‘for sale’ signs have sold stickers on them.

   My sister is about to find herself homeless, the investor that owns the rental she is in decided to put it on the market, it sold within 10 days. She’s been looking for anything for her and her son for the last 4 weeks, she has two weeks left to find some where, but there is nowhere, rentals are let out within hours of being advertised, she’s even going to open homes to ask real estate agents if a property investors are potential buyers, she’s doing everything she can to find a home.

   I’m now cleaning out one of my garages, lucky it’s coming into summer. Her son has one term left at primary school, my place is 30 mins away on the open road to his school, changing his school at this stage is not an option. Did I mention she is working?

   Housing crisis is causing massive mental health issues and stress for so many, it’s not just an Auckland issue, I’ve never seen my sister so stressed, and she is just one working parent with a child, it’s heartbreaking.

   http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/09/zealand-relentless-housing-crisis-160928153415463.html
   • James 4.1

     19 October 2016 at 7:32 am

     She should try trademe. A quick look shows 10 houses for rent right there in motueka.

     Starting at only $240 per week.

     Your welcome.
     • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1

       19 October 2016 at 7:59 am

       /facepalm
     • Garibaldi 4.1.2

       19 October 2016 at 8:01 am

       Great stuff James… not. It’s your bloody mob that’s deliberately doing this to our society. And it’s not ‘your welcome’, it’s ‘you’re welcome’.
       • James 4.1.2.1

         19 October 2016 at 8:04 am

         Blinking typo on the you’re.

         Thank you.
         • Ma Rohemo 4.1.2.1.1

           19 October 2016 at 5:33 pm

           @ James. A double typo to be accurate. The ‘ and the e.

           Two out of six characters is more likely poor spelling.
     • Cinny 4.1.3

       19 October 2016 at 9:02 am

       Thanks but she does not live in Motueka, she lives in Richmond.

       A quick look on trade me says there are 2 places with 2 bedrooms in her price range, but Tapawera is 45mins on the open road away from her sons school.

       There are 4 places in her price range on trade me, but they are all one bedrooms. JS

       Do you have any rentals in Richmond James?

       She is my sister by love not by blood, sadly her mum has passed away, I’m all she has. Planting a massive vege garden this year, excess veges are given away free at my gate, it’s all part of making a good community
       • weka 4.1.3.1

         19 October 2016 at 9:18 am

         Good for you on all counts Cinny. I hope you all find a better way soon, and it’s heartening to hear about what you do to make it work in the meantime. James’ comment was incredibly ignorant, and worse, the whole implied neoliberal slant of you’re not trying hard enough, I know what’s best, has just been shown up by your generosity, self-reliance, and ingenuity. Kia kana.
         • Cinny 4.1.3.1.1

           19 October 2016 at 9:38 am

           I really feel that the ‘what’s in it for me’ philosophy rather than the ‘it takes a village’ outlook is what is screwing up so many lives.

           Very lucky in Motueka, it’s more about ‘we’ here than ‘me’, seems to work better for us like that.

           Thanks for the good vibes, much appreciated
   • Michelle 4.2

     19 October 2016 at 9:30 am

     poor thing Cinny hope things work out for her ( your sister) its really hard now and we have a government that is not ruling for all the people
     • Cinny 4.2.1

       19 October 2016 at 11:44 am

       IKR, I’m like sheez if this is taking such a toll on her, one can only begin to imagine the stress for thousands like her, and those with children. And how can renters have the security of a home with speculators flicking off properties for gain, worries about the residents, profit over people. It’s a disgrace.

       The housing crisis is a reality for white middle class NZ, among thousands of others hurting. Landlords are taking the cream with accommodation supplements aplenty, and the ability to pick and choose crippling rent prices. The outgoing government does nothing, no capital gains, no rent caps, nothing to prevent speculators milking the system for all they can, no matter where in the world they reside.

       Hi Garth Barefoot, made any more donations to the outgoing government? No doubt your real estate empire will be making a very tidy profit.
   • Sabine 4.3

     19 October 2016 at 11:59 am

     This is what i have been saying for the longest time.
     It is not only AKL it is everywhere.

     And the move out of Auckland (insert what ever other city might apply) and move to the country side is not helping as it fucks up the housing market there.
     Fact is there are not enough houses in NZ to keep up with standard population growth and continued unrestricted migration (those that come to live and work and those the only come to buy a speculation object or several).

     its fucked up beyond believe.
5. TheExtremist 5

   19 October 2016 at 7:15 am

   A very interesting, though no doubt controversial, article:
   http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/american-intervention-syria/504512/?utm_source=atlfb

   A thought provoking read
   • Ad 5.1

     19 October 2016 at 8:05 am

     Recommended.
   • ianmac 5.2

     19 October 2016 at 9:06 am

     Firefox won’t play that Extremist, but a switch to Chrome will. Something to do with advertisements.
6. marty mars 6

   19 October 2016 at 7:29 am

   I put this up on the Daily Review last night – I’ll reiterate it here

   “Tough stuff coming up

   “Men aged between 25 and 29, and women aged between 40 and 44, are the most at-risk when it comes to suicide, new figures show.

   The female suicide rate is the highest on record, with 170 women dying by suicide during the past year.

   While more men die by suicide in New Zealand, the gap between the genders is the smallest it’s been…

   …Maori suicide rates remain higher than any other ethnicity in the country.

   …The Canterbury Region has recorded its highest suicide total since records began in 2008, with 78 deaths.

   …In 2016, 252 employed people died by suicide – up from 246 the previous year.

   Meanwhile, 146 unemployed people took their own lives, followed by 70 retirees or pensioners, and 55 students.”

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/85449334/nz-suicide-toll–unacceptably-high

   yep it is unacceptable that so many desperate people make the choice they do and the families, loved ones and whānau left behind with so many questions and effects that do resonate through generations.

   Kia kaha to all.”

   [sorry marty, short of deleting the conversation below (which we try not to do) I can’t do much to put it elsewhere. Thanks for reposting. – weka]
   • James 6.1

     19 October 2016 at 7:41 am

     I’m sorry – (and this is not aimed specifically at the poster above) it pisses me off when people on this blog use sucicide stats to have a crack at the government yet are happy to tell people on here to do things like hang themselves should they have a different view to them.

     This behaviour has generally gone unchecked by other posters – as opposed to trying to stop bullying behaviour that can actually lead people to self harm.

     but sadly for some posters on here – telling a righty to kill themselves is all good. As I have said before – I hope they never have to live with that kind of pain in their family – it’s a hard way to learn what damage their actions can cause.
     • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1

       19 October 2016 at 8:07 am

       yet are happy to tell people on here to do things like hang themselves should they have a different view to them.

       [citation needed]
       • james 6.1.1.1

         19 October 2016 at 8:26 am

         “Richardrawshark 9.1.1.1
         16 June 2016 at 11:55 am
         I think fisi BM Bob, Little’s words that you are on about were “bla bla this deal LOOKS dodgy”.
         I remember the interview very well

         At no time did he come out in public saying it WAS a dirty deal.

         Then Hagaman threatened a law suit if he didn’t retract, well why would he the deal looks dodgy. It’s just a statement of fact.

         You guys are pathetic. hang yourselves, it’ll be easier now than after the election when the NZ public massively vote red green or anything but blue.”

         [Right, you’ve provide one example below. Now you need to provide two more examples in the next hour (you seem to think ‘people’ not person are doing this), and provide the actual links this time so I can see the context. As a moderator I am interested in anyone telling other commenters to kill themselves and anyone here can bring that to the moderators attention.

         However it is completely unacceptable to do it in the way you have done as a major derailment of an incredibly serious topic. At the least, you could have started a new subthread, and taken more care in how you brought this up. Whatever grievance you have about being abused on this site (you’ve commented on this before), it doesn’t take precedence over the people reading OM today who have had someone they love commit suicide.

         It is also not ok to tell lump all commenters into one mass and then make out they are responsible for others’ behaviour e.g. saying that people who comment on suicide also tell people to kill themselves. I am going to ban you for a time, but want to see the links first. You also own marty an apology – weka]
         • Puckish Rogue 6.1.1.1.1

           19 October 2016 at 9:30 am

           I don’t know if it counts but does someone thinking it’d be hilarious if I got HIV count, I mean I know its not the same as telling someone to go hang themselves but its getting up there

           https://thestandard.org.nz/stop-the-sanctions/

           Brigid 8.1.1.2.1.2

           16 September 2016 at 12:44 pm

           So no, you don’t care to know if, or not, there are children as a result of your irresponsible behaviour.
           Wouldn’t it be hilarious if, in the fullness of time, you discovered you have HIV.
           (but you know sometimes you have a little too much to drink…)
           Maui is right
           “We’ve seen all this from rwinger men before. Eww.”
           And yuck

           [no, it doesn’t count. James was referring to people telling others to kill themselves. That’s not what Brigid said. Also she appears to be being sarcastic to make a point in the middle of somewhat contentious exchange. It was a rude thing to say but I wouldn’t have moderated that myself unless there was an escalation of abuse going on. Honestly, if we moderated everyone who was rude like that, we’d be at it all day and we’d basically be controlling what the conversation was. No-one wants that unless there is a bloody good reason. I probably would have moderated the go hang yourself one by placing a warning. – weka]
           • mauī 6.1.1.1.1.1

             19 October 2016 at 10:03 am

             They pointed out a consequence of your own behaviour, that you see it as threatening or bullying is interesting.
             • Puckish Rogue …

               19 October 2016 at 10:17 am

               The thing was though as I said numerous times on the thread (probably didn’t seem important I guess)

               Puckish Rogue 7.2.1.1
               16 September 2016 at 9:34 am
               Did you happen to notice this sentence by any chance?
               “But yeah the law should be amended at the very least or dropped altogether and hopefully National will”
               See I thought that was pretty clear but I guess not

               followed by

               Puckish Rogue 8.1.1.2.1
               16 September 2016 at 10:20 am
               Well first off I don’t know that I have any, I was usually pretty good with protection (but you know sometimes you have a little too much to drink…) so I don’t know that I have any
               Secondly as I stated previously:
               “But yeah the law should be amended at the very least or dropped altogether and hopefully National will”
               So I guess the answer is I’d like the law to get dropped then my taxes can towards paying all solo mums fairly

               And as for pointing out the consequences of my actions (from over a decade ago) you don’t think that contracting HIV is a tad over the top?

               This just illustrates my points later on, people didn’t even bother to note that I was supportive of solo parents getting paid fairly but instead people focused on the supposed “nasty” comments I made (whoever here hasn’t had a one night stand or unprotected sex then please feel free to cast the first stone) to justify their own actions
             • Psycho Milt …

               19 October 2016 at 1:48 pm

               They pointed out a consequence of your own behaviour…

               So, if someone was to comment that it’s hilarious when gays or IV drug users get HIV, they’d just be helpfully pointing out a consequence of those people’s behaviour? I don’t think so.

               …that you see it as threatening or bullying is interesting.

               That you see it as anything other than abusive is interesting. I don’t have any great complaint to make against abusive comments, but let’s not pretend they’re something different from what they are.
     • marty mars 6.1.2

       19 October 2016 at 8:10 am

       Show me where I had a “crack at the government” above. In fact I didn’t mention them at all.

       What pisses me off is rwnj’s who shit all over serious topics because they are too thick and dim to just stfu about things they don’t or can’t understand or care about.

       You James can take your bullshit and fuck off.
       • james 6.1.2.1

         19 October 2016 at 8:31 am

         Far from shitting over serious topics – this is close to my heart and I take it very seriously. Sadly I know a bit about it.

         I stated that I wasn’t talking specifically about you. I was simply building on your comment.

         But – hey good on you – someone talks about the bully behaviour on this blog (as opposed to robust debate) and the damage it can cause and you counter with “take your bullshit and fuck off”

         classy, well thought out robust reply there.
     • Nick 6.1.3

       19 October 2016 at 8:17 am

       I don’t want anyone to commit suicide, even RWNJ…… So maybe you can ask your leader ShonKey to focus on the people, not just his money and power……. And leave little girls hair alone as well….. Fkn creepy.
       • james 6.1.3.1

         19 October 2016 at 8:33 am

         Ive never communicated with John Key – so not much I can do there – but I DO communicate with people on blogs – why not start there?

         Whats wrong with a “bottom up” approach to helping people, to stop behaviour which can cause such terrible outcomes.

         Would we not be better as a society for this?

         People are happy to call out “rape apologist”, but in general are happy to go with a pack mentality to “attack” others who they dont agree with. Isnt that just as bad?
         • xanthe 6.1.3.1.1

           19 October 2016 at 8:52 am

           Inclined to agree with james here, there is a serious problem of bullying on this site, not a good look at all, you moderators need to get together and sort out a code and then apply it consistantly and to everyone, including yourselves

           [don’t tell the moderators/authors what to do. Reread the Policy. You and James will now both take yourselves out of this subthread or expect to be banned. See my comment above. If you want to discuss moderation policy on ts, this is NOT the way to do – weka]
           • adam 6.1.3.1.1.1

             19 October 2016 at 9:07 am

             Then don’t say nasty and stupid things. Then people would not have to resort to calling you Tory scum, wingnuts, rwnj and other descriptions which fix so well.

             You have to admit it is ironic that you get upset when it gets dished back, but many wingnuts are happy to dish it out. Boohoo, is it sad that the poor little leftists have a spin. Sad little Tory rebates finding that hard are they, cry me a river.

             Politics is a bit of hardball, if you want it to be nice a cuddly, then stop voting Tory, because the only reaction to the reactionaries is to come out fighting or give up. Remember it’s Tory wind bags like you, who support the creepy one, and his flock of incompetent ministers…

             Too soon.
             • weka …

               19 October 2016 at 9:20 am

               Actually I think we err far too much on the side of robust instead of on building a place where we can learn things, and things can change. At times this place looks like a straight out den of whack the RWer. People see that and stay away and we miss many voices that should be otherwise heard. That includes lefties and righties and people who aren’t on the spectrum.
               • adam …

                 19 October 2016 at 9:40 am

                 I agree weka, but most of the time it is driven from some pretty nasty comments to begin with.

                 Many comments from the Tory club I just find stupid, and as such, I leave alone. But more than a few are actually just nasty, these need to be responded to. It’s not so much whack a Tory rebate, it’s call them out for there repeated nastiness and bereft reasoning.

                 I for one, am sick of the continued calumny that pours forth from too many Tory commentators on this site.
               • xanthe …

                 19 October 2016 at 10:07 am

                 Yes
               • TheExtremist …

                 19 October 2016 at 2:17 pm

                 @Weka – totally agree.
             • Puckish Rogue …

               19 October 2016 at 9:33 am

               Are you sure you’re not just using it as an excuse to say what you say because you feel justified in your actions?
               • adam …

                 19 October 2016 at 9:45 am

                 Come on Puckish, you play the wind up game with people – then play the poor me card. You are hardly one to talk.

                 Too soon…
                 • Robert Guyton …

                   19 October 2016 at 9:59 am

                   Adam’s got Pucky pigeon-holed perfectly.
                   • Puckish Rogue …

                     19 October 2016 at 10:08 am

                     I disagree, I think adam is justifying his own actions by deciding how I post irrespective of my own intentions

                     As I posted below if he thinks what I post is nasty then I must be nasty which “allows” him to post nasty replies back

                     and of course its all the nasty torys fault:

                     “But more than a few are actually just nasty, these need to be responded to. It’s not so much whack a Tory rebate, it’s call them out for there repeated nastiness and bereft reasoning.”
                   • adam …

                     19 October 2016 at 10:46 am

                     it was too soon…
                 • Puckish Rogue …

                   19 October 2016 at 10:05 am

                   No I think you use these supposed transgressions as an excuse to vent your spleen.

                   You dismiss peoples opinions that you disagree with as wind ups, nasty or stupid yet not even considering that the people posting them actually believe those opinions and because those opinions are “nasty” then the people posting them are “nasty” which justifies your comments
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     19 October 2016 at 10:41 am

                     “Come on Puckish, you play the wind up game with people – then play the poor me card. You are hardly one to talk.”

                     Pucky said: “…I think adam is justifying his own actions…”

                     Adam’s not “justifying his actions. He’s accurately describing yours.
                   • Puckish Rogue …

                     19 October 2016 at 10:48 am

                     Incorrect Robby, I could say that your contribution to this thread is trolling, that you are a troll and you may (or may not be) but I don’t really know what your intentions are, only you know for sure

                     So adam can say I’m nasty or whatever to justify his own actions but only I know what my intentions are and its on him when he misinterprets what I (or other people he disagrees with) say

                     Or you could simply ask me instead of assuming
                   • adam …

                     19 October 2016 at 11:01 am

                     What the matter Puckish, feeling a bit exposed that people got your number?

                     Don’t feel to bad, we all have patterns – yours are just a bit more obvious than most.

                     I was not actually saying you are nasty Puckish, actually you are one of the Tories here who says the least nasty or stupid things. You play a different game. Again, back to patterns.

                     But come on Puckish you call people when they say stupid things, is it that the Tory flock, are a bit thin skinned…
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     19 October 2016 at 11:07 am

                     “… you could simply ask me instead of assuming…”

                     Okay, thanks for the opportunity, Pucky, I’ll take it.
                     Have you played the wind up game with people – then played the poor me card?
                   • Puckish Rogue …

                     19 October 2016 at 11:16 am

                     “What the matter Puckish, feeling a bit exposed that people got your number?”

                     – If I had a dollar for everytime someone said they had my number I’d have a lot more money then I do now

                     “Don’t feel to bad, we all have patterns – yours are just a bit more obvious than most. ”

                     – Theres that assumption again…

                     “I was not actually saying you are nasty Puckish, actually you are one of the Tories here who says the least nasty or stupid things. You play a different game. Again, back to patterns.”

                     – Well thank you for that, a while back there were some posts on how the site was becoming nasty (especially towards females) so I took some of the stuff on board and have, somewhat, altered the way I post

                     I’ve actively stopped mentioning anything negative about peoples looks or bodies

                     As soon as theres anything to do with rape, sexual assault etc then I tread very warily around the subject or indeed not post at all

                     Basically I’ve tried to improve what I post and how I post it because if we want this site to be a certain way then all of us have to do our part, it shouldn’t be up to the moderators only to police things around here

                     Essentially I have rule that I only post what I’d be willing to say out loud, in a group setting

                     “But come on Puckish you call people when they say stupid things, is it that the Tory flock, are a bit thin skinned…”

                     – If I had major problems with what people said about here I wouldn’t come back but I do think that the occasional threats of violence, death or just plain nastiness that happens is maybe a bit much, robust sure but come on the whole “up against the wall” thing that some (hello Millsy) on here seem to yearn for isn’t going to happen anytime soon
                   • Puckish Rogue …

                     19 October 2016 at 11:29 am

                     “Okay, thanks for the opportunity, Pucky, I’ll take it.
                     Have you played the wind up game with people – then played the poor me card?”

                     Quick answer is no if you mean I’ve wound up people on purpose then played the poor me card

                     However if we break the question down separately like have I wound people up and played the poor me card then to the first part of the question, yes sometimes depending on the situation but not as often as most people think and probably as much as most others on here do (much like yourself at times)

                     To the second part I’ll say probably, I mean I can’t think of any times but I’ve also been posting for a very long time so at some point I might have

                     Now that’s a completely 100% honest answer but I’m curious if anyone will say I’m wrong
                   • adam …

                     19 October 2016 at 11:37 am

                     Here you go Puckish this should make you feel better.

                     The only blue man group I like…

                     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTJfITfbYNA
                   • Puckish Rogue …

                     19 October 2016 at 11:51 am

                     Could have been worse I suppose

                     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BinWA0EenDY
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     19 October 2016 at 12:40 pm

                     Disarming answer there, Pucky, thanks for making the effort. Tell me, if you will, do you regard saying here, “National will win in 2017” a wind-up?
                   • Puckish Rogue …

                     19 October 2016 at 12:49 pm

                     “Disarming answer there, Pucky, thanks for making the effort. Tell me, if you will, do you regard saying here, “National will win in 2017” a wind-up?”

                     A good question, the type of question that might help explain some things.

                     If I came on here and said National will win in 2017 and I didn’t think they would then yes I’d consider that a wind up as I’m saying something I don’t believe merely to get a reaction out of the posters

                     However I do believe that National will win in 2017 (most likely in coalition with NZFirst) so its not a wind up because that’s what I think is going to happen
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     19 October 2016 at 1:12 pm

                     ” so its not a wind up because that’s what I think is going to happen”
                     Here we differ and I suspect others here will feel as I do. Just because you think a certain thing doesn’t justify your repeating it often on a site where most readers and commentors sincerely hope for the opposite of “what you think”. In any case, you are not prefacing your claim with, “I think”, you are usually making the claim bald, as if it was true. I’m certain that you are not a practiced and successful crystal ball gazer, and so your declaration comes across as arrogant, provocative and a wind-up. But you must know this already, Pucky.
                   • Puckish Rogue …

                     19 October 2016 at 1:35 pm

                     Ok thats reasonable but I also normally explain why I think the way I do so its not like I go National will win and then bugger off

                     “I’m certain that you are not a practiced and successful crystal ball gazer, and so your declaration comes across as arrogant, provocative and a wind-up. But you must know this already, Pucky.”

                     Its only perceived that way because I’m on the right of the political spectrum, if I posted in the same way but from a left view nobody would say a word

                     If, as some posters on here seem to want, all right voting posters on here were banned all you’d end up with is Red Alert 2.0 and I don’t think anyone wants that

                     Hell there are posters on here that want CV gone, is that what you really want, an echo chamber?
                   • Psycho Milt …

                     19 October 2016 at 1:56 pm

                     In any case, you are not prefacing your claim with, “I think”, you are usually making the claim bald, as if it was true.

                     There was a running gag on The Good Wife of a judge who demanded lawyers add “in my opinion” to any assertions they made, because it would be unreasonable to expect the court to recognise that assertions rather than expressions of proven facts were being made. Thanks for volunteering Robert, but you’re really going to have your work cut out for you making everyone preface their claims with “I think.” Er… in my opinion.
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     19 October 2016 at 2:51 pm

                     Psycho Milt – that’s right, requiring an “I think” before every statement would be unnecessary, however, in Pucky’s case, where he is using his “Key will win, Little will lose” regularly, it would be good manners for him to use the preface, as a sign of good faith. He’s moderated his behaviour significantly in recent months and there’s no reason, I believe, why he wouldn’t do us all the favour of qualifying his most irritating claims with a modest, “I think”. Of course, he doesn’t have to do what I suggest, but I’ve noticed that he wants to fit in better, not attract ire and be accepted as a reasonable commenter and adopting my suggestion would help a great deal, in my opinion.
                   • inspider []

                     19 October 2016 at 3:03 pm

                     I encourage you to take up your suggestion with the author of this post https://thestandard.org.nz/key-could-still-win-and-heres-why/ because he seems to be flirting On the edges of good manners and is at risk of not fitting in.
                   • Puckish Rogue …

                     19 October 2016 at 3:14 pm

                     How about this for an idea Robby, how about we all assume that there’s an invisible I think or In my opinion before every statement on this site, you might not see it but its always there…
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     19 October 2016 at 3:15 pm

                     @inspider – you are encouraging me to criticise the author of a post here, something I’m too polite and respectful to do 🙂
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     19 October 2016 at 3:22 pm

                     Pucky – you will stop commenting here the day Key and National lose the election (something to practise your “Invisible I think” idea on)
                   • Puckish Rogue …

                     19 October 2016 at 3:36 pm

                     “Pucky – you will stop commenting here the day Key and National lose the election (something to practise your “Invisible I think” idea on)”

                     We’ll see in 2020 then won’t we 🙂
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     19 October 2016 at 3:47 pm

                     “We’ll see in 2020 then won’t we”

                     By then, we’ll not have heard from you for 3 years, so it’ll be a reunion of sorts 🙂
                   • Puckish Rogue …

                     19 October 2016 at 3:56 pm

                     Ok Robby lets make a bet on the next election if you’re so confident…

                     When National wins you, at your earliest convenience of course, praise Nationals win and admit that I, Puckish Rogue was right all along and that my predictions are accurate

                     If Labour win…I’ll praise Labours victory and admit I got it wrong and that my predictions are as accurate as Martin Bradburys

                     In this instance winning means being part of the next government of course
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     19 October 2016 at 4:04 pm

                     Can we do that thing when we see who can pee the highest as well? Can we Pucky? Can we?
                   • Puckish Rogue …

                     19 October 2016 at 4:06 pm

                     Wouldn’t it have just been easier to say “I think you’re right but I just don’t want to admit it?”
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     19 October 2016 at 4:29 pm

                     Cross his palm with silver and Pucky the Mysterious will reveal the True Secrets of Your Future! Be Amazed by Pucky’s Powers, see Up-Coming Events through Pucky’s All-Seeing Eye! Be Be-Dazzled by the Swirling Miasma in Pucky’s Cryptic Crystal Ball. Swoon at the Confidence the All-Knowing Pucky the Mysterious exudes.

                     * Quality of experience may vary. Satisfaction not guaranteed.
             • Chuck …

               19 October 2016 at 5:37 pm

               “Then don’t say nasty and stupid things. Then people would not have to resort to calling you Tory scum, wingnuts, rwnj and other descriptions which fix so well.”

               Its in your DNA adam…nasty is the automatic go to when someone does not agree with your world views.

               As for me I don’t care about any “name calling” I do have a little fun by calling certain people here far left activists 🙂 However the truth of the matter is most NZ’ers are not far left nor far right, rather someone in the middle of those two extremes.

               Kept in mind at the end of the day we all need to get along with each other. And that means with people whom do not share the same political leanings as you may do.
               • adam …

                 19 October 2016 at 6:09 pm

                 So says the conspiracy theorist. You Chucky hide behind civility and an attempt at moderation to justify your hate and use it to have a go at people. Which is funny, you fall in the catagory of stupid most of the time, as you fall for conspiracy theories, or make them up.

                 So sorry Chucky you are one of the rwnj I try and avoid, except for the occasional reminder to people that you are a hard right conspiracy theorist.
                 • Chuck …

                   19 October 2016 at 6:33 pm

                   adam you do realise you have just validated my post…

                   The only “hate” occurring here is your response to anyone that has a different view to yours.
               • weka …

                 19 October 2016 at 6:48 pm

                 
                 Its in your DNA adam…nasty is the automatic go to when someone does not agree with your world views.

                 The problem with that argument is that it’s pretty nasty to tell someone that they are genetically predestined to be nasty. What shall we attribute your nastiness to then?
                 • In Vino …

                   19 October 2016 at 10:15 pm

                   Chuck is a right-wing troll who does not know when to use ‘whom’. He is a hostile who pretends to be an affable mate. I recommend avoidance of contact. Adam – you can see how he misconstrues victories for himself? You are dead right about him.
                   • Chuck …

                     20 October 2016 at 10:12 am

                     Heavens In Vino…

                     “He is a hostile who pretends to be an affable mate”

                     “I recommend avoidance of contact.”

                     Maybe you would feel safer if I and a large portion of the population are made to wear an arm band…so you and adam know to avoid us when walking down the street 🙂

                     I think you need to get out of the class room and into the real world.
                   • Robert Guyton …

                     20 October 2016 at 10:18 am

                     “Heavens In Vino”
                     Give it an apostrophe and you’re saying what many people happily believe, Chuck. There’s a lot of truth in Vino’s comment (I’m sure I know his sister, Veritas).
                 • Chuck …

                   20 October 2016 at 10:04 am

                   “What shall we attribute your nastiness to then?”

                   Not nasty weka, just pointing out the inconvenient truth.
                   • weka …

                     20 October 2016 at 10:09 am

                     Fortunately for the rest of us, you don’t get to decide what is nasty.
           • xanthe 6.1.3.1.1.2

             19 October 2016 at 10:04 am

             OK I have (re) read the policy. Now I have a genuine question please treat it as such, (even if i have stupedly missed something)
             Question : What is the approved process/venue to discuss or raise issues of moderator guidelines/conduct here

             [thanks xanthe, I’ve got stuff to do, will reply later – weka]
             • te reo putake …

               19 October 2016 at 11:04 am

               Hi, Xanthe.

               There isn’t a process, exactly. But if you disagree with a mod’s decision, you can try putting a case via email at thestandardnz@gmail.com. That approach might result, for example, in a ban being shortened.

               Generally speaking, the rule of thumb is that the other mods do not overrule a mod’s decision. So if you piss a mod off, expect to have to cop a ban. Whining about it is unlike to change the result.

               Bear in mind, all authors and mods are volunteers. We don’t get paid for this and we have to put up with a lot of crap to keep this joint rockin’. The commenters are important to us, but so are the many thousands who just read the posts. We moderate to make sure this site is worth reading, so occasionally that means making decisions like ending a thread because it’s degenerating.

               If you really want to influence the moderation on site, start writing posts, become an author, and eventually you’ll get to mod yourself and see how much of a challenge it is.

               Cheers, TRP
               • xanthe …

                 19 October 2016 at 11:35 am

                 Thanks TRP I want to make it clear that this is not about challenging any specific ban. I totally get that you have a volunteer job to do and its not an easy task. I actually think that thestandard is an important part of the new zealand political discourse and my sole motive is to assist you in reaching and holding as wide an audence and engagement as possible. I am more concerned with the interactions that lead to a ban. and the methods availiable to the moderators to “moderate” discussion that is veering towards abuse so that it dosnt get to the ban stage.

                 i will email the address you have given and say no more here for now
                 • te reo putake …

                   19 October 2016 at 11:39 am

                   Good as gold, Xanthe and thanks for the thoughtful approach you have taken.
         • Puckish Rogue 6.1.3.1.2

           19 October 2016 at 9:12 am

           What I’ve noticed (on both left and right wing blogs) is that when someone with a differing view comes along then the other side feel “justified” in saying really nasty stuff to that person, stuff they wouldn’t normally say because they consider themselves a “good” person but its almost as if they’ve decided the other person “deserves” it

           You can see echoes of it when a female commentator dares to speak up and men, lets be honest its mostly men, say really horrendous things to her
           • McFlock 6.1.3.1.2.1

             19 October 2016 at 12:37 pm

             I’m not so sure that’s entirely fair.

             Different people have different ideas as to what constitutes “nasty” – I tend to swear in real life, so don’t particularly care about it. Call me “fuckface” and I’ll forget about it in moments (just after retaliation 🙂 ).

             What surprises me are the number of people who come out with contemptable views who then get upset about me calling them a fuckwit, well before I’m really trying to get personal. Note that I didn’t say “differing views”.

             Someone who comes to a blogsite with a known large left-wing/progressive group of commenters and calls the poor “parasites” is looking to wind people up. Fisiani’s blatant lying is also an example.

             The moderators do a pretty good job of keeping responses legal and the general abuse trolls out, in my opinion.
             • Puckish Rogue …

               19 October 2016 at 12:57 pm

               Well sure not everybody that’s posts here is like that of course
               • McFlock …

                 19 October 2016 at 1:12 pm

                 What I’ve noticed on the better blogs I’ve seen (not that I read a lot) is that the folks who say “really nasty stuff” just because someone has differing views have an extremely short lifespan on the site, mostly due to moderators but also from community response.

                 James’ comment was “This behaviour has generally gone unchecked by other posters”. In my opinion that’s bullshit – one or two might slip through everybody’s attention (probably because by that time nobody but the two foes are reading the thread any more), but mods crack down on that shit here and if they don’t, commenters will try to bring it to the mods’ attention.
                 • Puckish Rogue …

                   19 October 2016 at 1:17 pm

                   Thats fair, as much as I think it’d be amusing to wield the ban hammer it just sounds like to much hard work
                 • weka …

                   19 October 2016 at 2:02 pm

                   Which is exactly what happened in the single instance that James pointed to, and it was in fact yourself in the comments that took Richard to task for what he did. From a moderators perspective (this one at least), that’s great because it’s less work for me.
                   • McFlock …

                     19 October 2016 at 3:20 pm

                     hah – so I was, amongst several others. Hadn’t bothered to search for the instance before now 🙂
                 • inspider …

                   19 October 2016 at 3:07 pm

                   Would you consider this kind of comment on the nasty end of the scale? (I would)

                   “What pisses me off is rwnj’s who shit all over serious topics because they are too thick and dim to just stfu about things they don’t or can’t understand or care about.

                   You James can take your bullshit and fuck off.”
                   • McFlock …

                     19 October 2016 at 3:30 pm

                     Really? I wouldn’t.

                     I mean, what about it is nasty? Sure, there are rude words. It’s definitely passionate. I wouldn’t say it’s any nastier than telling someone who asks a basic question to RTFM.

                     It’s definitely not as nasty as taking a pretty apolitical and straight-up comment about NZ’s tragic suicide rate, an issue that has probably affected most commenters here via friends and loved ones, and then “building on” that comment with an unsubstantiated snipe that on this blog telling those with differing views to kill themselves has “generally gone unchecked”. Which was the context of your quote.

                     As I say, rude words might be distasteful, but some of the nastiest shit that I read online was written with surface courtesy and polite language.
                   • inspider []

                     19 October 2016 at 3:55 pm

                     I got censored and ban threatened for obliquely calling a commenter an idiot. I guess it’s ok when the left do it 🙂

                     Ps what’s happened to the search function? Seems to have disappeared
                   • weka …

                     19 October 2016 at 4:27 pm

                     This one?

                     https://thestandard.org.nz/i-see-a-poverty-of-ideas-and-a-poverty-of-government-responsibility/#comment-1244402

                     I can’t see anything there that tells the moderator that you are RW (I assume that’s what you are referring to).

                     Further, you’ve hardly been censored. You’ve had two instances of what I assume were the same word removed and been told you’re stepping over the line. Your comment seems designed entirely to have a go at someone in a put down way. What was the point other than that?

                     Without knowing what the word was, I can’t say if the warning was for something considered offensive, or because you were seen as deliberately winding someone up. Either way it happens on both sides of the spectrum (I’ve moderated lefties recently too).

                     Seriously, if RWers here believe they are being unfairly moderated due to their politics, you need to put up some actual evidence, because at the moment you just seem like you’re annoyed at being moderated.

                     btw, you can use google to find phrases, or use google site search for things that are more obscure.
                   • weka …

                     19 October 2016 at 4:30 pm

                     …
                     19 October 2016 at 3:07 pm (Edit)
                     Would you consider this kind of comment on the nasty end of the scale? (I would)

                     “What pisses me off is rwnj’s who shit all over serious topics because they are too thick and dim to just stfu about things they don’t or can’t understand or care about.

                     You James can take your bullshit and fuck off.”

                     I’m actually curious what you find problematic with that.
                   • McFlock …

                     19 October 2016 at 4:39 pm

                     Was it this one?

                     You’ll note the policy is against pointless abuse.
                     The trick is to make an associated point more explicit as the abuse becomes less “oblique” (I’m not sure you were quite as subtle as you think if that’s the example). Think of it like a bank balance: the more developed your point, the more you can spend in the way of abuse, right up until you hit the card limit for daily withdrawals and they ban your arse 🙂

                     While I would rarely hold myself up to be an example of ideal behaviour, I’ve commented here for years and don’t recall ever getting a ban. I’ve certainly been warned a couple of times (Bill was within a hairsbreadth of banning me once), but generally survived.

                     BTW, I tend to google with “site:thestandard.org.nz” when the site search engine is down. Not as useful, but gets one there eventually 🙂
                   • gsays …

                     19 October 2016 at 6:21 pm

                     hi inspider,
                     i was reading as the comments unfolded.

                     i thought james was thoroughly lacking in empathy with his comment.
                     heartless.

                     he may have had a point, but time and place.

                     this epitomises to me the difference between those of the left from those of the wrong: it is people, it is people, it is people.

                     while i do not like overly savoury langauge, i saw nothing inappropriate to the response to james.
           • stigie 6.1.3.1.2.2

             19 October 2016 at 5:44 pm

             Im not sure Robby wants to take up that bet with you PR
             Is this a nasty comment then ?
             • Gangnam Style …

               19 October 2016 at 5:57 pm

               Or this one? “If Robert Guyton left the room would you say “there’s one less [deleted] in the room” or “there’s one fewer [deleted] in the room”?”
               • In Vino …

                 19 October 2016 at 10:19 pm

                 Look, we all have fewer grammar nowadays.
           • reason 6.1.3.1.2.3

             20 October 2016 at 9:22 am

             I

             Pucky … I think you may have participated in group bullying while being rude to Penny …… from memory

             And have you not read the stuff of BM , Ross ……. and james when they talk about and smear strippers ????

             Rape apology central with those three dicks posting ………

             Did you hear about how it took two brave children not even old enough to vote to stop our devious prime minister promoting to a judicial role the most creepy thing/man to crawl out of the new zealand police force since clint rickards ???……..

             Perhaps you have heard of roastbusters ?????…. and the police dishonesty and inaction regarding it ….

             Or how about Customs officers sexually assaulting females who are visiting people the Government does not like ……………..

             I can not remember you condemning any of the above …..

             Your concern for females feels hollow and false to me ……………. based on your own actions and approval or indifference towards the cruelty served up by people like Collins & key

             Did you speak up when Key twisted the words of Cunliffe speaking out against men beating women and children ??? ……

             I think we all know the answers to the above ……
     • Stuart Munro 6.1.4

       19 October 2016 at 1:26 pm

       The precedent goes back to Amartya Sen – suicide is robust objective data on dissatisfaction with governance.

       Of course as a shill for this government we understand your hatred of data.
   • gsays 6.2

     19 October 2016 at 10:14 am

     hi marty, i read yr post last night and it is grim reading.

     i am wary of commenting too much for fear of being misinformed or causing pain to others.

     while i agree we do not need to lionize victims of suicide (haka at school assembly), i do not think the current policy of remaining silent is working.

     from reading around, one of the most cited causes of distress and pain, leading to suicide seems to be feeling isolated from people/community.

     sometimes having someone to listen makes a huge difference.
     it is hard to comprehend the cutting of funding to youthline and other services which are often the first port of call for someone in distress.
     • Puckish Rogue 6.2.1

       19 October 2016 at 10:22 am

       “while i agree we do not need to lionize victims of suicide (haka at school assembly), i do not think the current policy of remaining silent is working. ”

       I agree with this
     • marty mars 6.2.2

       19 October 2016 at 5:48 pm

       Yep gsays it is a real tough one – on one hand we don’t want to be seen to glorify suicide and on the other we don’t want to not talk about it. In my work with these individuals – validation of their right to their feelings, listening without trying to shove solutions at them, and helping them build new skills which create other options and choices can work. But it all takes time and if we miss the small envelope they can be lost – the reduction in funding is a nationwide emergency imo.
       • gsays 6.2.2.1

         19 October 2016 at 6:25 pm

         amen to the listening.
         to my mind the most profound act of love you can visit on another.
   • Gangnam Style 6.3

     19 October 2016 at 1:45 pm

     Apparently they are called ‘completed suicides’, there are many more attempts (incomplete suicides) & people who are considering it (& all the self harmers?), which all added up must be a huge amount for our tiny population. How do our stats compare to a city of 4 million I wonder?
     • marty mars 6.3.1

       19 October 2016 at 5:53 pm

       Yep the suicide attempts and self harming incidents are through the roof in terms of numbers both gross and percentage wise. And the coroners have quite specific criteria before they call it a suicide which again reduces the statistics. I can’t imagine anyone in this country who isn’t affected by suicide and/or (I’m putting this in here because they are on the same continuum) self harming.
   • Stuart Munro 6.4

     19 October 2016 at 3:43 pm

     This topic is worth a post – if only to get past the sad tr0ll derailment technique.
7. The Chairman 7

   19 October 2016 at 8:21 am

   The ongoing increases in tobacco tax is fueling robberies nationwide.

   A growing number of victims have been harmed and lives are being put at risk. It’s only a matter of time before someone is killed.

   Increases in tobacco tax is also fueling a growing black market.

   Taxpayers are being forced to pay for more police and new prisons as a result.

   It’s also driving those who continue to smoke into further fiscal hardship, adding to the cost, harm and stress growing poverty creates.

   When is a enough enough?

   There are alternatives to tobacco tax increases. Therefore, isn’t it time we put an end to this crime fueling and harm causing experiment?
8. pat 8

   19 October 2016 at 9:08 am

   http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/201820507/salvation-army-wants-to-limit-immigration-to-give-kids-jobs

   http://www.salvationarmy.org.nz/research-media/social-policy-and-parliamentary-unit/latest-report/what-next
   • The Chairman 8.1

     19 October 2016 at 9:22 am

     http://50500.co.nz/
9. Chooky 9

   19 October 2016 at 10:19 am

   Talking about sexist language

   …and given recent Posts and discussions on this site which are primarily attacking Trump …eg this is a typical statement “Like a great many women and a fair amount of men too, I’m disgusted (but not surprised) with the misogyny expressed by Trump.”

   This is study is interesting:

   ‘Women more likely to use misogynistic terms online, report finds’

   https://www.rt.com/uk/363048-women-online-misogyny-report/

   “Women in the UK and US are more likely to use misogynist language on social media than men, according to the results of a four-year study.
   The research was carried out by the social media research firm Brandwatch and looked at 19 million tweets over a four-year period to assess the levels of anti-woman sentiment expressed online.

   The study found that over that period there were 3 million posts which contained terms abusive to women – with women most likely to have posted them…

   The report was carried out for anti-bullying charity Ditch The Label, and found that words like “bitch,” “cow” and “slut” had passed into common usage by women online…
10. The Chairman 10

    19 October 2016 at 11:16 am

    This is key.

    He said the huge rise in income inequality in the 1980s and 1990s was not just a historical event. Its social impact continued to this day, and people were increasingly recognising the damage that poverty was doing, he said.

    “The biggest issue I have is The New Zealand Initiative seems completely oblivious to the point that even if the big increase in inequality was in the 1980s and 1990s, and hasn’t worsened since then, it still has big implications for the country today.

    “They seem to think that if something happened in the past it doesn’t matter. It is really quite an extraordinary way of looking at the issue,” Rashbrooke said.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/85445497/housing-crisis-the-cause-of-inequality-in-nz-the-new-zealand-initiative
11. joe90 11

    19 October 2016 at 11:22 am

    Seems the 48 hour rule applies to things on the interwebs, too.

    Wikileaks responds.

    https://wikileaks.org/Background-and-Documents-on-Attempts-to-Frame-Assange-as-a-Pedophile-and.html?update3
    • weka 11.1

      19 October 2016 at 2:07 pm

      Good grief, that’s making my head spin. Conspiracy upon conspiracy.

      The thing that stands out for me is that for such an elaborate plot they did some very stupid things e.g. the ranty/rambly nature of the post on the dating website. Plus the details in the story were weird if they were made up, and weird if they were true (by true I don’t mean the accusations, I mean that the main players are actual people in real life).

      Still don’t know which bits had actions in RL and which were completely happening in cyberspace e.g. is the dating agency real or not?
      • Bill 11.1.1

        19 October 2016 at 2:11 pm

        Third sentence of link…

        An unknown entity posing as an internet dating agency…

        So, no. The dating agency is a fabrication.
        • weka 11.1.1.1

          19 October 2016 at 2:21 pm

          Yeah I saw that, but I prefer to have something in addition to wikileaks or Assange’s lawyers backing that up. Call me cynical (not saying they are lying, just that I don’t trust them as a source to that degree).
        • joe90 11.1.1.2

          19 October 2016 at 7:30 pm

          The dating agency is a fabrication.

          Google says they’ve been around for a year or so.

          https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=todd+and+clare&client=firefox-b&biw=1920&bih=940&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A19%2F10%2F2011%2Ccd_max%3A19%2F10%2F2015&tbm=
12. Muttonbird 12

    19 October 2016 at 11:40 am

    Parata sacked. Not sure whether this is a good thing or not.

    Now they’ll get someone in to ram through the privatisation changes without the consultation.

    She advised Prime Minister John Key of her decision earlier this year.

    Heh.
    • repateet 12.1

      19 October 2016 at 11:42 am

      A great win for education – unless they get some other idiot in to be Minister.
      • Muttonbird 12.1.1

        19 October 2016 at 11:44 am

        That’s what I’m saying. She was terrible but they’ll get someone even worse – Seymour…!
        • Cinny 12.1.1.1

          19 October 2016 at 11:51 am

          Noooooooooo!!!!! oh please no
    • Cinny 12.2

      19 October 2016 at 11:49 am

      OMG! I thought you were joking, good job, that list MP has done enough damage. Can’t think of any in the outgoing government whom have the slightest interest in education. Please please please NickOff follow her lead and bugger off too.

      If you listen you will be able to hear the cheers in school staff rooms around the nation this lunch time 😀

      http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1610/S00282/parata-will-not-contest-2017-election.htm
      • Puckish Rogue 12.2.1

        19 October 2016 at 11:58 am

        The refreshing of the cabinet has begun, will Labour follow suit?
    • fisiani 12.3

      19 October 2016 at 12:03 pm

      You will see a big change in Cabinet before the next election. John Key has so much talent on the backbench and you can expect that a few Ministers will opt to retire to make way for a fresh face.
      Parata is not the only senior Minister who has advised John Key that they want out of politics.
      • Muttonbird 12.3.1

        19 October 2016 at 12:06 pm

        You can’t seriously believe that. Nothing is done without the say-so of Key’s inner circle.

        It’s John Key doing the ‘advising’.
      • Cinny 12.3.2

        19 October 2016 at 1:04 pm

        Where is the talent on the back bench?
        • fisiani 12.3.2.1

          19 October 2016 at 2:04 pm

          https://national.org.nz/team

          Watch for the promotion of Alfred Ngaro,Brett Hudson , Mark Mitchell, Scott Simpson , Paul Foster-Bell, Chris Bishop , Barbara Kuriger,Todd Muller, Alistair Scott to name but a few.
          • Puckish Rogue 12.3.2.1.1

            19 October 2016 at 2:06 pm

            That Mark Mitchell is going to be a good addition
            • Cinny 12.3.2.1.1.1

              19 October 2016 at 5:22 pm

              is that because he is involved with Lusk and Slater?
          • Sacha 12.3.2.1.2

            19 October 2016 at 3:39 pm

            Ngaro is a shoe-in once Lotu Iiga gets his marching orders.
          • left for dead 12.3.2.1.3

            19 October 2016 at 4:05 pm

            Yes they are back bencher’s, were is the talent.
          • Cinny 12.3.2.1.4

            19 October 2016 at 5:20 pm

            Brett Hudson, the ‘low profile’ List MP based in Ōhāriu whom the Nat’s put up against Dunne last election. Sales and account management background. Older fella.

            Alfred Ngaro another older fella, another List MP, sounds like he has a violence issue.
            http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9139312/Punched-for-not-praying

            Mark Mitchell the Rodney MP ex police man whom was said to have hired Simon Lusk whom went on to collaborate with Slater in an attempt to discredit Mitchells political opponents. I wonder if Mitchells email account is now secure lolz

            Scott Simpson the MP for Coromandel whom loves to meet up with Donhua Liu, he received a $5000 donation from the controversial Chinese-born property developer for his 2011 election campaign, after meeting Liu about 10 times, including a couple of dinner dates. Connections with Lusk to it’s been said.

            Paul Foster-Bell, Mr big spender and apparently a bully with a high staff turnover.
            http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/81513231/pm-national-mp-paul-fosterbells-high-travel-costs-due-to-his-expertise

            Chris Bishop, List MP for the Hutt, his Mrs is Jenna Raeburn, she is a lobbyist for Barton Deakin, well lololol
            http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/78650109/arrival-of-australian-political-lobbying-firm-in-nz-raises-questions-about-oversight

            Barbara Kuriger, MP for Taranaki-King Country, and a shareholder in 2 family owned farming businesses, ex dairy board. Wonder if her and Judith compare notes?

            Todd Muller MP for Bay of Plenty, former Zespri and Fonterra executive and asker of Patsy Questions. What has he done for his voters?

            Alastair Scott is MP for Wairarapa and also owner of Matahiwi Estate winery and a former banker, I wonder what his agenda is?

            Dang, it appears there is nothing new about this lot, more of the same, more executives, farmers and bankers looking after their own. Wonder what they have done for NZ or their local voters since coming into parliament?
      • tinfoilhat 12.3.3

        19 October 2016 at 3:46 pm

        I suspect there is more talent in the beehive rest rooms than on the backbenches of parliament.
    • Whispering Kate 12.4

      19 October 2016 at 1:53 pm

      Parata sacked – how do you know she was sacked. I dislike the woman but how do you know it is not a resignation? explain please.
      • Cinny 12.4.1

        19 October 2016 at 2:08 pm

        more ‘pushed’ than ‘sacked’ is what I heard on the political grapevine
        • Puckish Rogue 12.4.1.1

          19 October 2016 at 2:18 pm

          Clear out the perceived dead wood and bring in new faces, win win situation
13. Richard Rawshark 13

    19 October 2016 at 11:49 am

    cracks open champers, swigs merrily..

    Hekia isn’t standing next election, she’s resigning from politics…

    yay, don’t let the beehive door hit you on your way out.
14. Puckish Rogue 14

    19 October 2016 at 12:53 pm

    Forget Parata, this is the real important news of the day:

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=11731830

    Hell yeah
15. TheExtremist 15

    19 October 2016 at 2:19 pm

    [if it refers to Trump, it’s about the election. Please put it up in the discussion thread. I’ll leave this one here until you do, then delete it. See the bold at top and bottom of thread. Mods can’t move comments out of OM (except to trash). If in doubt stick it in the other thread. Thanks for checking – weka]

    [thanks – weka]
16. save nz 16

    19 October 2016 at 3:37 pm

    http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/acci-comes-out-swinging-against-the-aspects-of-the-trans-pacific-partnership-20161017-gs47gz.html

    ACCI comes out swinging against the aspects of the Trans Pacific Partnership

    “Australia’s biggest business organisation has distanced itself from claims the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership will create hundreds of thousands of jobs and be a “gigantic foundation stone” for Australia’s future.”
17. tinfoilhat 17

    19 October 2016 at 3:44 pm

    Not the person or place I expect these kind of comments..sent by a friend.

    “I am not an economist but I have come to the conclusion that central banks collectively have now indeed lost the plot. The whole point of their independence was that they could be brave enough to make people confront reality. Yet in reality they are blowing up a bubble of make-believe money to avoid immediate pain, except for penalising the poor and the prudent.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/17/central-bankers-have-collectively-lost-the-plot-they-must-raise/
    • save nz 17.1

      19 October 2016 at 5:54 pm

      Yes raising interest rates would be fantastic for NZ, sarc.
18. ianmac 18

    19 October 2016 at 4:40 pm

    Not important but every Spring I have serious hay fever through to December at least. But none this year. First time in my life.
    Anyone else ab-normal strikes?
    • McFlock 18.1

      19 October 2016 at 4:51 pm

      Really? In dunedin I’ve been a bit worse than usual, a couple of others mentioned it too.
19. weka 19

    19 October 2016 at 11:30 pm

    [In order to keep OM and DR free for other conversations, all comments, link postings etc about the US election now need to go in the dedicated US election discussion here.

    If you are unsure, post in that thread rather than here. It’s not possible for moderators to shift comments from OM to there, so any comments here may get deleted – weka]

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS