Open mike 21/04/2010

53 comments on “Open mike 21/04/2010 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Bored 1

   21 April 2010 at 6:46 am

   What really drives me fucking mad, makes me want to metaphorically kill people? Simple answer, and its not the economy, predatory capitalism etc etc, it is the real disregard my fellow humans have for other species.

   In todays Press there is a story about ECan and the government legislating powers for their commissioner so that water conservation orders can be scrapped at the stroke of an officials pen. I doubt if our Minister of Extinction (Nick “give my brother water” Smith) really gives a fuck about the birds who live on the river beds. Then there are the farmers who just want the cash, (“stuff a few extinctions, who cares”). And on top of that the useless business types who just want growth regardless of the consequences, and the workers who support them because its jobs and the ability to buy more useless shit from China to show what their meaningless lives aspire to.

   A requiem for species written to the silent “ching” of eftpos terminals. May these people rot in hell.
   • vto 1.1

     21 April 2010 at 8:20 am

     agreed Bored. It is truly an abhorrent situation dominated by greed for money.

     No pro-irrigation person has yet answered this:..

     Once the current demand for water is sated the rural economy will grow to a new plateau. Then there will be more demand for ‘growth’ and hence another round of demand for more water to grow to yet another plateau. At some point there really will be no more water left to add to dirt to achieve that desired growth and the farmers will have to find some other way of achieving growth – you know, think outside the small-brain square. Something other than adding more water to their patch of dirt.

     As such, the farmers and current govt have a choice – either think outside the square now and save the rivers or think outside the square later and fuck the rivers.

     Simple.

     Stark.

     Ignored.
     • graham 1.1.1

       21 April 2010 at 8:48 pm

       to vto
       i am a dairy farmer on the canterbury plains
       their is a finite limit of how much water we can put on our land
       it denpends on soil temp,saturation levels and the time of year
       its not a case of if .4ls per hectare is good lets put on it 100ls per hectare it dosent work like that
       too much water removels the oxygen from the soil and limts grass growth
       when you are in business it is all about the most efficent use of resourses when you have to pay for them out of your own pocket you learn to be carefull
       • vto 1.1.1.1

         21 April 2010 at 9:14 pm

         so what choice will you make graham?

         think outside the square now and save the rivers or leave that thinking for someone else later and fuck the rivers?
   • vto 1.2

     21 April 2010 at 8:30 am

     And the farmers and current govt have clearly made their choice – worry about thinking outside the square later and fuck the rivers.

     For this they get no respect and their standing in the community goes down. imo.

     They have already fucked most rivers in the North Island. Can anyone name a river in say the Waikato, or King Country, or Northland, or (choose a region) that they would be happy to swim in and let their kids swim in? serious question.
     • prism 1.2.1

       21 April 2010 at 12:46 pm

       Talking about thinking outside the square. It is my contention that our education system should be drastically revamped with side basic learning provided but much advanced detail of subjects left to be absorbed on a need to know basis when studying for a particular career or following a passionate desire to learn and understand that subject.

       What would be introduced is Edward de Bono type thinking. Problem solving, making smart decisions in hazy situations, learning critical thinking and listening and reasoning skills. Has anyone done one of his courses? The books are interesting but a workshop would better demonstrate his methods.

       Did anyone hear on Tuesday 20/4 9to12 Nat Radio interview with Feature guest – Dolly Freed – The author of ‘Possum Living – How to live well without a job and with no money’ She got her education largely by self and father help with mathematics. Lived simple, not consumer-driven life then thought that being an aeronautical engineer would be a job to be proud of, studied and became one. (Got disillusioned after the bosses set the match to Challengers touch paper when told not to and resigned). Interesting interviewee.
   • Bill 1.3

     21 April 2010 at 9:14 am

     Rotting in hell is a bit, well….how about;

     “May these people live long enough to see dogs piss on their childrens’ graves”?
     • Bored 1.3.1

       21 April 2010 at 2:55 pm

       Thanks VTO, Bill, Prism…I am still fucking angry but much appreciated. Do you think perchance the dogs will have survived their depredations too….these excrables will have farmed them to extinction as well.-
   • toad 1.4

     21 April 2010 at 9:32 am

     To save people searching, the story is at http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3603414/Papers-disclose-concern-over-ECan-water-rules
2. logie97 2

   21 April 2010 at 7:32 am

   What happened to that promised extra leisure time.

   Anyone else remember the dawning of the sunrise industries and the captains of industry lauding people like Clive Sinclair (computers/electric cars) – promising us how we should look forward to greater prosperity as technology eases us from the drudge of many of our occupations and that we can look forward to greater leisure time?

   Tell that to the latest poor lot at Telstra who are losing their livelihoods. What the captains of industry are doing is harnessing the technologies for their own and shareholders’ benefit and sending the rest down the road.

   Watch the comments from the right accuse these same new unwashed as being dole bludgers in a years time as well…
   • Bill 2.1

     21 April 2010 at 9:35 am

     Go back to post WW2…up to the 1970s Production needs were satisfied in the west.

     That was when leisure time could have kicked in and a more contemplative approach to market capitalism undertaken.

     Instead we got wiped out by massive amounts of consumerist propaganda that saw us throw away all that durable stuff that had 30, 40 or 50 years of life left in it and replace it with fashionable tat that fell to pieces in 2…or was out of fashion and so in need of replacement after 30 months.

     There was talk at the time in the senate or congress of workers only needing to undertake a 4 hour working day to keep things ticking over. Very bad for our political and economic masters that. Think of the leverage in bargaining…and the space to think…. and what it all might have done to their position in society and their profit margins.

     So we got ‘throw away’ 70s and TINA 80s and so on. And now as a consequence of us not utilising our productive capacity to furnish ourselves with durable, high quality products… for not stepping back and down from a productive/consumptive helter skelter where labour saving devices only freed us up for more wage slavery or consumption … we have peak oil and we have climatic collapse.
     • RedLogix 2.1.1

       21 April 2010 at 9:41 am

       Bill,

       It was never likely that we would walk in ideological lockstep; no two thinking people ever do. But it’s contributions like this that make me want to cheer you on and appreciate having you round.

       Thanks.
       • Bill 2.1.1.1

         21 April 2010 at 9:50 am

         Thanks for the acknowledgement RL. Appreciated.
   • nzfp 2.2

     21 April 2010 at 10:40 pm

     “What happened to that promised extra leisure time”?

     Scottish Engineer C. H. Douglas, the founder of “Social Credit” demonstrates how technological advances reduce the requirement for labour in an economy, the result is unemployment and paradoxically “poverty amidst plenty”. However, Douglas also demonstrates how unemployment can also be perceived as increased leisure time. One of the tennents of “Social Credit” economic theory is the Guaranteed National Income (GNI) or National Dividend. The GNI guarantees every citizen an income based on the difference between the GDP and the nations purchasing power or “aggregate demand”. For New Zealand, this works out at about $14,000 per year per person. The GNI is a dividend paid to all citizens based on the profits of the accumulated knowledge of generations of scientists, engineers and inventors. A GDI would allow unemployed people to “job share” with other people who are employed. Our Canterbury farmer Graham could hire extra staff – especially if he knows their wages are supplemented by the GNI and that they are ready and willing to share their job in exchange for “leisure” with other citizens. Mothers with small children could job share so that Sally and Jenny (both teachers with small children) could work mornings and afternoons alternately with the other watching their children while the other is working. The possibilities and permutations are endless.

     So that’s where the promised “leisure” went – it is now what we call “unemployment” and “dole bludgeing”.
3. Jenny 3

   21 April 2010 at 7:40 am

   Commenters commit thought crime at The Standard.

   http://www.thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-20042010/
   • felix 3.1

     21 April 2010 at 8:49 am

     eh?
     • Ianmac 3.1.1

       21 April 2010 at 9:28 am

       Yes. Eh Jenny?
   • Bill 3.2

     21 April 2010 at 9:40 am

     Jenny

     You have to click on the blue text below the commenters name to link a specific comment.

     So if I wanted a link to show your comment above, Id click on 21 April 2010 at 7:40 am, which would open in a new window and then I’d cut and paste that url into my comment.

     [lprent: or right-click the date/time for a comment, and select “Copy link location” (on firefox, IE and safari will be slightly different). That will put it in the clipboard. When you’re where you want to paste it, right-click and Paste (or just press Ctrl+V). ]
4. randal 4

   21 April 2010 at 12:31 pm

   about time somebody took up the cudgels on matheww hotton who never fails to mention every monday morning on radio new zealand that every policy position espoused by anyone who is not an avowed rabid rightie is communistic.
   It is very dispiriting to listen to this drivel every monday and no one ever challenges him or asks him to justify this reptitive slimy insinuation.
5. Armchair Critic 5

   21 April 2010 at 2:15 pm

   Where’s little Johnny for question time today? Looks like he’s left it up to Blinglish again. Are the questions too scary today? Or are there photos to be taken elsewhere?
   • bobo 5.1

     21 April 2010 at 2:26 pm

     off to Gallipoli ?
     • Armchair Critic 5.1.1

       21 April 2010 at 2:31 pm

       Oh, right, I didn’t know Obama is going to Gallipoli this year.
       • bobo 5.1.1.1

         21 April 2010 at 2:47 pm

         Yeah a fistpump with Obama on the way then a few upbeat awkward “what was it like” questions to old soldiers at dawn service .. snap crackle and pop…
         • felix 5.1.1.1.1

           21 April 2010 at 8:33 pm

           And then a “what I did on my holiday” talk to the rest of the class. Yay!

           Seriously though, it seems like ages since Key attended more than one question time in a week. Anyone know how to check the roll?
6. gingercrush 6

   21 April 2010 at 5:25 pm

   Um why did Phil Twyford ask the initial question number 12 then Brendon Burns took over meaning Twyford couldn’t ask any other questions because they used them up.

   Why is Labour sending out a pathetic branding survey? Do they even need to change their brand?

   Why does Metira Turei ask questions as if she’s a Miss World Contestant? Honestly its rather gut wrenching to watch.

   And why when I read this: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10639763 do I wonder what is the point of talking to children when all children with obvious stress aren’t included.
7. bobo 7

   21 April 2010 at 7:14 pm

   “being harmless to everyone ” great beige politics strategy we got going 🙂 so another 3min clip on tv1 of internal labour focus groups on being “cool” “retro” …..labour how about keeping it simple and focusing on just policy with a bit more passion and fire… Goff looked good on the first day of parliament in the house we need more of that more often..
8. bobo 8

   21 April 2010 at 7:24 pm

   Did I hear Hide call Bill English a C**t today in the house? While asking about what parts of the declaration the gov agreed with..
   • felix 8.1

     21 April 2010 at 8:28 pm

     Yeah you did, at around the 20 minute mark.

     Remember though, English was answering as the PM so Hide actually called John Key a cunt. 😉
     • Lew 8.1.1

       21 April 2010 at 8:42 pm

       Also, Pete Hodgson said “half the frigging cabinet” during his GD speech. Pretty loose rein from the Powers That Be today.

       L
     • bobo 8.1.2

       22 April 2010 at 12:37 am

       Yeah Felix, Hide made it look like a stutter for “country” but I reckon it was intentional , shame Key wasn’t there but he probably wouldn’t have noticed anyway.
       • gingercrush 8.1.2.1

         22 April 2010 at 12:48 am

         The strangest thing was when Rodney Hide was speaking from the National benches.
9. graham 9

   21 April 2010 at 8:52 pm

   again it needs to be said that less than 5 percent of water in canterburys rivers is used for irrigation hardly the rape and pillage that toad and his mates would have you believe
   • vto 9.1

     21 April 2010 at 9:09 pm

     graham, have you ever heard the one about lies, damned lies and statistics?

     And anyway, if a mere 5% has caused the damage that it has to date then clearly any further minor take at all is simply not sustainable and cannot be tolerated. Your own argument shoots yourself in the foot.

     Farmers have raped and pillaged enough at 5% thanks. People complain they cannot swim at Coes Ford anymore, Dunsandel people have to put up with both shit and chemicals to deal with the shit in their bore water now (how long until Chch too?), the list goes on and on and on … and still their is no end in sight to the farmer lust for MONEY !!

     Farmers should leave our water alone. Are the farmers upstream of Dunsandel paying for the clen-up of the towns water? Eh? Are they? why not? they are the ones who have shat in it.

     They should also learn to farm within the geographical and climatic confines of their own farm. Are they not able to farm like that? I have always been told kiwi farmers are great farmers …

     I read one farmer bleating on in a letter-to-the-editor (old style blogs) that farmers NEEDED the water to make a living off their land and to maintain their rural ways. Well wake up fulla – if you can;t make a living off your land then ship out. Everybody else has to live within these reality confines.. nobody else can simply take a chunk of the environment all for themselves to the detriment of everyone else to maintain the type of lifestyle they think they deserve or want.

     Fuck me, farmers are just way off the planet over this demand for water situation. I don’t know who the hell the think they are. It has me completely fired up – and I am from full blown farming stock meself.

     This issue getting hotter and hotter in these here parts. It gonna come to blows..
     • graham 9.1.1

       21 April 2010 at 9:15 pm

       i will farm within the geographical and climate confines of my farm when you do the same in the towns
       when you stop useing power stop takeing water and live out side during winter then you can begin to lecture me mate
     • graham 9.1.2

       21 April 2010 at 9:25 pm

       “nobody else can simply take a chunk of the environment all for themselves to the detriment of everyone else to maintain the type of lifestyle they think they deserve”
       i dont get that ?are you having a go at me or yourself because citys are not bird santuarys
10. graham 10

    21 April 2010 at 9:18 pm

    my experience is the biggest anti farming group comes from the sons and daughters who were to lazy to work hard on the farm but end up resenting their siblings who worked hard for years and are now rich
    • Chess Player 10.1

      21 April 2010 at 9:37 pm

      That’s usually the way it works, and that problem extends well beyond farming.

      While you’re no doubt up at 5am with the cows, vto and his mates are probably still at least 5 hours away from waking up and deciding whether they’ll bother showing up at their first year sociology lectures….

      Your cows might produce a lot of flatulence, but at least they also produce a handy by-product known as Food, while vto simply churns out the hot air…

      [lprent: bad call. I’d suggest that you revise your assessment rapidly. Believe it or not (who cares), this is done for your benefit. ]
      • vto 10.1.1

        21 April 2010 at 9:43 pm

        Oh really Chess Player?

        So I provide hot air to the economy and community, wake up at 10am and go to first year sociology lectures? What a waste of space. Say something useful.
        • Chess Player 10.1.1.1

          21 April 2010 at 9:52 pm

          Hook, line and sinker…
11. graham 11

    21 April 2010 at 9:19 pm

    people complain they cant swim in the heathcote to mate or the avon
12. vto 12

    21 April 2010 at 9:27 pm

    Oh, is that where I live? Big assumption there.

    And so you can’t farm within the confines of your own farm? You need to take from others to make your farm viable… well done. Maybe everyone should start doing that.

    Stop using power? Stop taking water? Live outside during winter? You are making no sense and just getting all het up now. Make a cogent argument.

    You feel lectured? Perhaps that is because you are starting to feel the very legitimate heat being applied to your industry. It is long overdue. Farmers have a lot of shit to clean up all around the country before they can start making more shit.

    And save the pithy one-liners mate, try answering the issues
13. graham 13

    21 April 2010 at 9:30 pm

    as for thinking outside the box
    i have 2 man made lakes on my farm (120000sqm) i store high flows from the ashburton river and release over the season
    plus i employ 3 other people what do you do for your fellow man moan and bitch
    take from the state
    • vto 13.1

      21 April 2010 at 9:37 pm

      You are a fool to assume so much Graham. I guarantee my turnover and employment contribution to the economy has swamped yours in the last few years.

      Just calm down and answer the issues.

      You farmers have to answer them because they aint going away. Merely firing cheap and nasty shots at anything non-farmer gets you fullas absolutely nowhere.
    • Armchair Critic 13.2

      21 April 2010 at 10:31 pm

      CP and graham, farmers are far from being saints. Just in the last week there have been two more well publicised convictions of farmers flouting the law and fucking the environment, including more from the usual suspects’.
      If it wasn’t an ongoing thing (I can track down links for years back if you care to dispute this) I would put these down to rogue farmers, but it’s not.
      So graham, if farmers gave a shit about the environment, why was there so much resistance to the Clean Streams Accord that it earned a dishonourable mention on wikipedia? What an embarassment! And why does the Clean Streams Accord measure the implementation of methods, not actual improvements in water quality? No, scrub answering that last one, from what I recall from your previous comments you are totally incapable of understanding the question, and as for answering it… But if anyone who can string a sentence together wants to have a go, please be my guest.
      And graham, what does employing people have to do with not polluting the environment? Are you saying that if you can’t pollute you won’t employ? That’s a weak argument.
      I’m with vto on this one, I’m totally pissed off that this group of bludgers is saving themselves the cost of taking measures to contain the pollution they make (and thereby make a profit) by passing what will ultimately be a much greater cost to the community as a whole. FTR I’m sure vto is not a first year sociology student, in fact I recall vto is not generally particularly left-leaning. So I would give up on the cliches.
      And I’m even more pissed off that the government are happy to remove democracy just to help out their cronies in the short term. Fucking wankers!
14. nzfp 14

    21 April 2010 at 10:03 pm

    graham and vto,
    At the risk of getting between the two of you, I would like to propose an economic point of view.

    German Architect and Economist Professor Margrit Kennedy in her book “Interest & Inflation Free Money” demonstrates that on an average we pay about 50% capital costs in the prices of our goods and services [due to interest on loans from the private banking sector]. Therefore, if we could abolish interest and replace it with another mechanism to keep money in circulation, most of us could either be twice as rich or work half of the time to keep the same standard of living we have now. This is important as it gives insight into modern farming, and manufacturing processes in New Zealand.

    Author Michael Rowbotham, in his book “The Grip of Death: A Study of Modern Money, Debt Slavery and Destructive Economics” demonstrates that debt based economies such as ours require continued growth and foreign investment in order to service the interest on debts owed to private banks in the form of loans. Rowbotham shows how farming practices in the last 100 years have been heavily influenced by the need to produce as much as possible at the lowest cost. These new “industrial” farming techniques have resulted in the replacement of organic sustainable family farms with mechanised industrial farming – which is environmentally unsustainable and economically destructive.

    However, as both Kennedy and Rowbotham point out in their books, one solution is to replace our debt based economy – where the RBNZ C1 Monetary aggregates estimates that 98% of the money in our economy is created out of thin air by private mostly foreign (Australian) banks as loans with the majority of those loans, as suggested by the C7 Sectoral analysis of outstanding NZD claims: registered banks, are against mortgages (both private and commercial) – with a monetary system where the money supply is created by the Government free of debt and spent directly into the economy. The RBNZ and KiwiBank could provide a family farm loan scheme with 0% – 1% interest rates. Such a scheme would remove the 50% burden of interest as shown by Kennedy and would provide a mechanism for farmers to reshape their farming practices from the unsustainable industrial methods employed to stay afloat in todays economy, back to the organic sustainable small family farming model that the original settlers intended for our nation. The same funding mechanisms of 0% – 1% loans could be offered to students, small medium businesses.

    In an article written in November 5th, 2007 titled “Sustainable Energy Development: How Costs Can Be Cut In Half’ author Ellen Brown demonstrates how a nations central bank (the RBNZ in our case) could provide all of the nations monetary requirements by creating and spending directly into the economy the money required for creating a sustainable and green power and transport infrastructure. Free of foreign offshore borrowing, free of inflation and free of debt – consequently free of the requirements to tax the farmers, students, SME businesses or citizens.

    From an economic point of view we can see that our debt based economy forces farms and buisness to behave the way they do in order to survive. Rather then attacking them for doing what they need to do to survive, we should be providing the environment to allow them – and us as a nation – to move to more economically and environmentally sustainable model.

    These suggestions are neither left or right wing but have been clearly articulated by Classical Economists for centuries.

    peace
15. Lew 15

    21 April 2010 at 10:10 pm

    The most outrageous thing about this thread is the notion that vto might go to a sociology lecture. Priceless.

    L
    • vto 15.1

      21 April 2010 at 10:29 pm

      Ha ha Lew, it was never on my list though I do find all things sociological of quite some interest in putting together the great puzzles of humanity.

      nzfp, I like the sound of that and have sometimes wondered along those lines. 50% of the price of goods made up of capital cost? That is a sin. But not surprising – it is a sizeable chunk of the one link of the industry chain that I occupy. Then when all the other links are included the multiplication effect clearly must take its toll. I can see how it adds up. Nevertheless, that is truly sinful and wasteful.

      And I agree re people / industries doing what they need to do in order to survive. That is one problem with this current farmer / water debate – it quickly becomes very personal and the hairs on people’s back go straight up. My points above are aimed at the farming industry and not the individual people like Graham.

      However the points still stand unanswered.

      The farming industry has had 150-odd years of doing pretty much what it wants with NO regard for the consequences. That era has now passed and the current generation of farmers seem to be struggling with that change in the public’s attitude to them and their approach. As perfectly illustrated in Canterbury this very day.
      • nzfp 15.1.1

        21 April 2010 at 10:49 pm

        “However the points still stand unanswered”,

        Don’t wait for an answer – make it happen. Vote for a Government that is serious about the types of monetary reform I’ve mentioned above. It is in the economic interest of you, Graham and myself to break free of private foreign banking debt. Stick the question of economics to your candidates whenever you can – you’ll soon learn which politician is paying lip service and which ones are serious. Also keep a close eye on your politicians financial interests – if they are heavily invested in property speculation (Bill English) or financial speculation (John Key) you can guarantee they are not interested in monetary or economic reform.

        By the way – there are many different economic models beyond what I propose in these posts. While I don’t agree with all of them – most of the economic contributors to this forum recoginise that our current system is – to use your word – a sin.
16. Ianmac 16

    22 April 2010 at 12:20 am

    The 5% take for irrigation is misleading as there is heaps of water being taken up country which is not measured.
    John Key’s remark that there must be plenty of water because so much just goes out to sea, is daft. Would he argue that therefore if you took all the water out of the rivers so that none was wasted at sea, then all that water could be used to irrigate. Obviously not but there are consequences if 6% or 10% or 30% is taken. And probably the damage to land and water is irreversible.
    So farmers who respect the land should farm within their means!
17. graham 17

    22 April 2010 at 5:17 am

    no all irrigation water takes are measured .if any thing there are more consents out there than water being taken
18. graham 18

    22 April 2010 at 5:25 am

    i love the lack of unstanding of the flat earthers
    i have no problem with the clean stream accord
    the river is fenced off on my property
    when you say you farmers are all bad etc
    its a bit like me saying that if one labour mp is gay the must all be gay therefore all labour party supporters are gay
    replace labour mp with farmer
    replace gay with breaking enviourment laws
    • vto 18.1

      22 April 2010 at 8:03 am

      graham, it was made clear above that the issues concern the farming industry. It is not a matter of saying all farmers are bad. Also, for your info it has been a rare day that my vote has gone left.

      I think Key has misjudged this one (ecan rort) and the effect will be felt very keenly by those who are pushing the water theft. First to feel it may well be Bob Parker in October and then marginal seats around Canterbury the following October.

      Given that at some point in the future economic growth (the main aim of CPW) on farms will have to come from doing something other than adding water to dirt, because all the water will already have been taken, why don’t farmers look to do that now and save the waterways, rather than do that something later and fuck the waterways? Why wouldn’t they graham?

      I would much prefer a vibrant busy Canterbury Plains with near-National Parks full of clean fresh water and vibrant wildlife down the Hurunui, Ashley, Waimak, Raikaia, Selwyn, Ellesmere, Ashburton, Rangitata, and etc. Imagine it for a minute – lush. Thick lines of National Parks running across the Plains.

      I do not want a vibrant busy Canterbury Plains with dry, windblown, dead riverbeds instead. And that is where the current mentality is taking it. Why are farmers following the path to such an environment graham?

      Excuse my ranting before, I tend to get a little hot under the collar at times. Your well thought out answer would be appreciated to those last two simple questions.
    • Armchair Critic 18.2

      22 April 2010 at 10:10 am

      Most people won’t admit their shit stinks, graham.
      I’ll be charitable and assume you have the best, most environmentally friendly farm in the country – it would be great if all the other farms in NZ were as good as yours.
      While you might not have a problem with the Clean Streams Accord, I do. By not measuring water quality and using proxies instead it does not directly assure streams are clean. I would have much more confidence in it if it had more water quality monitoring in it.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS