Open Mike 23/10/2017

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, October 23rd, 2017 - 234 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

234 comments on “Open Mike 23/10/2017 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Andre 1
    23 October 2017 at 6:34 am

    Is today the day the door opens on CV’s cage? Should we have a pool for how long from when he emerges until he earns another ban? I give it five hours.

    • Stephen Doyle 1.1
      23 October 2017 at 8:39 am

      If that’s Tat Loo, he’s very active on Twitter, and more rabidly weird as ever.

      • greywarshark 1.1.1
        23 October 2017 at 10:14 am

        Was he rabidly weird or offering different points of view than those being conformed to by the majority? And getting angry and combative to those disagreeing with him, and sneering at him? There is an inability to allow free speech if it disagrees with the ‘in-group’ who Know All. He steps outside the circle.

        • rhinocrates 1.1.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 10:51 am

          Yes, calling Infowars a reliable news source and praising Hitler for “making Germany great” and lying directly to and about moderators (against site rules) is “stepping outside the circle” if you want to put it that way.

        • Karen 1.1.1.2
          23 October 2017 at 1:46 pm

          I don’t support giving free speech to rabidly misogynist neo-nazis.

          • Incognito 1.1.1.2.1
            23 October 2017 at 2:16 pm

            That’s’ quite a mouthful; do you want fries with that 😉

            Seriously though, free speech is free speech. Shouldn’t we tolerate the intolerable?

            • Karen 1.1.1.2.1.1
              23 October 2017 at 2:17 pm

              Nope.

              • greywarshark …
                23 October 2017 at 3:30 pm

                I agree with Karen – free speech is like a free lunch, and really there isn’t one. There is a limit that cannot, should not be tolerated. But where the limit is has to be thought about.

                People being awkward and demanding that another point of view should be considered by the entrenched and the prejudiced, can raise hate against that sort of free speech.

                People mocking the good efforts of sincere people – there needs to be a limit. Repetition is tiresome after the fourth/fifth time?

                • Incognito …
                  23 October 2017 at 4:18 pm

                  I agree that free speech comes at a cost: eternal vigilance.

                  Moral and legal boundaries are fuzzy and subjective human constructs, not absolute Laws of Nature.

                  Once you start to limit free speech because of perceived or anticipated risk or because of mockery or tiresome remarks or because of general dislike and disagreement you start to erode the fundamental basic principle of freedom and choice. But there’s more to it; it is an immensely complex issue:

                  Only in the freedom of our speaking with one another does the world, as that about which we speak, emerge in its objectivity and visibility from all sides.

                  Hannah Arendt

                  • tracey …
                    23 October 2017 at 5:18 pm

                    Can we agree that people may freely speak their minds but it doent mean without consequence, seen and unseen? I dunno.

                    • Incognito …
                      23 October 2017 at 6:52 pm

                      Agreed.

                      Indeed, what would be the point of writing something online if it had no intended consequence? I always try and keep in mind the silent readers (‘lurkers’) of TS.

                    • rhinocrates …
                      23 October 2017 at 6:56 pm

                      Whenever someone shouts ‘But I have freedom of speech!’ to justify malicious speech, remind them that they do not have freedom from consequences.

                  • McFlock …
                    23 October 2017 at 5:28 pm

                    Not really.

                    What people say in your dining room is up to you. If you don’t like them, they don’t get invited to dinner.

                    That’s all that happened here – he was entertaining and interesting, but became an obnoxious jerk, and then went well off the deep end into being nothing more than a crudely offensive liar. Invitation:revoked.

                    • Incognito …
                      23 October 2017 at 7:10 pm

                      Disagree to a point. There are a few people I socialise with because I really like them but their political views I utterly disagree with. Sounds like a contradiction, doesn’t it? That’s people and human relationships for you 😉

                      I find that there’s enormous leeway here on TS on what people can say, which is as it should be IMO; a reflection of how we like society to be perhaps? That said, there are clear rules here and if these get repeatedly violated then this has obvious consequences. However, this is not an argument against free speech, rather the opposite IMHO.

                      I most certainly don’t like everything that appears here on TS but I would not want any of that content be blocked or banned solely for that reason – nobody would know anyway and taken to extreme, everything would be blocked because there’s always one that disagrees. In fact, I’d like to read more counter-arguments and proper debate here between mature people; the day I’d agree with everything that gets written here on TS is the day I’d leave this site because life is too short to be constantly nodding in agreement with essentially and effectively myself …

                      I hope I explained this well enough; as I said, it is a hugely complex issue.

                    • McFlock …
                      23 October 2017 at 7:28 pm

                      On the personal level, yeah, you like those folks. But people we don’t like, we don’t socialise with.

                      With regards to the wider “free speech” issue, whether legally some things should be banned, of course things like incitement to violence should be banned.

                      And frankly, I think nazis/neonazis/tikitorchists come under that level. When someone gets to the degree that they’re yelling, in the bible-belt US, “the Jews will not replace us”, that’s a contagious paranoia that can only lead to violence.

                    • Incognito …
                      23 October 2017 at 7:48 pm

                      Hi McFlock,

                      Thanks for replying.

                      I guess I wasn’t clear enough, my bad. I like “those folks” enough to socialise with them but I vehemently dislike their political and racist views. Somehow, I can look/move past their ‘objectionable’ views because it doesn’t fully describe or define them, if that makes any sense.

                      Yes, there have to be boundaries but these are almost always very fuzzy and open to interpretation and dependent on context, etc. It never is black & white, thankfully or unfortunately …

                      Inciting violence crosses a line. Making threats crosses a line. But somebody with extreme views is allowed to speak as long as he/she doesn’t cross certain lines. Similarly, unless somebody poses a definite risk (…) to the community (or State) there’s nothing that can and should be done to silence this person (or lock them up). The real question is not so much where to draw the line but how to avoid or prevent the line from being crossed by when it is already too late. Free speech might actually help although it can be a double-edged sword …

                    • Macro …
                      23 October 2017 at 7:59 pm

                      @ McFlock
                      Yes I agree – and when someone takes over the discussion – shouts everyone else down – turns everything to what they think, and dominates to the exclusion of everyone else. Is that “freedom of speech” tolerable? Particularly if they are merely parroting memes from propaganda sites?

                    • McFlock …
                      23 October 2017 at 8:19 pm

                      @incognito

                      I am friends and have amiable relationships with the occasional tory, but not nazis. They’re jerks. Because nazi. Not just because their views are different to mine, but mostly because the nature of nazi beliefs means that they want someone with my beliefs (i.e. not nazi) to die. Because that’s what nazis do: make non-nazis die.

                      As for fuzzy boundaries, that’s what courts are for. When in doubt, charge them and let the courts sort it out.

                    • ropata …
                      23 October 2017 at 8:28 pm

                      I thought CV banned himself when he decided TS was overrun by PC SJWs

                    • lprent []
                      23 October 2017 at 10:05 pm

                      Nope there was a ban in place for one month past the election. Essentially tomorrow. But it was set for today, so I removed a pile of bans last night.

                    • weka …
                      23 October 2017 at 8:38 pm

                      People left the site last year because of what was going on. So for me it’s not an issue of free speech. Everyone in NZ is free to say what they like up to the limits of the law around things like inciting race hatred or violence. But they don’t all have equal access to publishing.

                      On TS it’s an issue of supporting robust debate for the widest range of people possible within the aims of the site (the labour movement).

                      When you have people being anti-social from their racism, sexism etc, it’s not a problem of their views but their behaviour.

                    • Incognito …
                      23 October 2017 at 9:10 pm

                      @ McFlock,

                      My friendships can be quite complex, I admit; I’m a complex person myself.

                      The courts are there to determine whether legal boundaries have been crossed. The BSA deals with other kinds of complaints, etc. Who decides when/where moral/ethical boundaries have been crossed? It depends on the realm and nature of the transgression or alleged violation of the rules. But generally speaking, morality is less well covered than legal boundaries by the Law and for good reasons I think …

                      It may be better to distinguish between the freedom of speech here on TS and the fundamental right that is freedom of speech for every citizen in a democracy such as ours; there’s much overlap/similarity, of course, but they are not one and the same thing.

                      I feel it is beyond my ‘remit’ as occasional Guest Poster to do a post in this but I’m tempted; it is obviously a contentious issue, as this thread and a very recent exchange in OM have shown, and potentially risky as it might ‘test’ the boundaries of TS rules …

                    • lprent []
                      23 October 2017 at 9:44 pm

                      You’re definitely safer doing it as a post than as comments. I’m a lot more willing to give more time and latitude to the former than I do to the latter.

                      The reason is obvious. We usually have something between 25-60 posts a week and about 12 of those are routine ones, OpenMike etc. But we can have 1500-8000 comments in week, and that is after I automatically chop a thousand or so of comments with prefilters for robots. (I have been promising some stats on that for a while without having the time to pull them off).

                      Anyway, the amount of time spent reading comments is several orders of magnitude larger for moderators, and that is even without the time required to respond to issues. So we skim comments and apply some pretty coarse routines.

                      Basically the way I run it after a decade on this site (and more on older systems) is that if I have to slow down to actually read a comment, then you are already guilty of something. It could be intelligence or lie or liability or trolling or stupidity or just a good laugh. The next pass is essentially a question of if I think it adds to the site dialogue or not. And then I start looking at exactly what was said and sometimes the context.

                      CV’s problem (since this discussion started about him) was in the latter stages he was making the virtually every discussions he was involved in to be about him and not about much else, it was highly repetitive, and spread across posts. The same had happened in the backend previously with his senseless war with TRP. It didn’t add anything to the site, but caused a lot more work and purposeless aggravation to moderation and authors. So he progressively got the chop from author down to a ban.

                      That was an extreme example because of the descent from author to banned. But it is essentially the same as every other person who gets a ban. We like robust debate, which is why you see a pretty deliberate policy to try not to ban on ideological grounds. But senseless, boring and above repeated stupidity just makes work for us both directly with things like legal liability and because we have to wind up cleaning up the flamewar messes.

                      The basic rule about “free speech” here is to do it without substantively increasing the workload of the volunteer moderators for with valueless waffle or having to stop too much to check the comments. In short, we expect you and all other commenters to self-moderate.

                      If people absolutely have to have a say that is going to cause issue here, then it pays to signal that you are aware that is what you are doing to the moderators. Then consider that the net is wide and we don’t constrain your “free speech” at one of the many other sites that you can have your say on. We just constrain it where we have to do the work for you.

                    • McFlock …
                      23 October 2017 at 9:24 pm

                      I reckon this discussion has gone pretty well.

                      It’s only drawbacks seem to be that we’re not always clear when we’re talking about the personal realm (in which I include privately-funded blogs as much as dinner guests), the legal realm, or the moral realm.

                      I also think we’re on pretty much the same page regarding how the law should treat freedom of speech and where the line is, but we may disagree on whether certain cases (nazis) meet that line.

                      I also think there might be a discussion as to whether there’s a point that one’s opinions or behaviour does in fact define them. From my perspective, an amiable and gregarious raconteur who happens to be a nazi is just a more dangerous kind of nazi, rather than just being pleasant company with alternative views to mine.

                    • Incognito …
                      23 October 2017 at 10:17 pm

                      Yes, it has been a very good discussion so far, which I really appreciate, thank you.

                      Many arguments are based on or start off as misunderstandings, talking passed each other, and then descend from there as it were. Once you’re down the rabbit hole in a communication or relationship – pretty similar things IMO – it is very hard to find your way back and crawl out of it. If you do manage you’re covered in ‘soil’ and feel ‘dirty’, at least, I do.

                      You’re saying that a ‘pleasant’ Nazi still is a Nazi. This is true, to a point, because they are so many things, all in one person. There’s a difference between being a Nazi, behaving or acting like a Nazi, and crossing a legal boundary (i.e. committing a punishable offence) IMO. I guess your argument is that it is only a matter of time before they will cross such a line. This is where I beg to differ and give them the benefit of the doubt. I do agree that many, but not all, can do horrible things under certain circumstances, but this is by no means unique to Nazis; Hannah Arendt held this view too.

                      Nazis have an ideology of sorts, but many racists or sexists, for example, do not. That’s an important difference in how we deal with people and their views that we don’t agree with or intensely dislike and outright reject. Many simply parrot their parents or peers …

                      Free speech and raising awareness is the best way to be vigilant and possibly even to transcend extreme views. Once you stop/block communication evil will run its course, no matter what is its ‘name’ …

                    • McFlock …
                      23 October 2017 at 10:32 pm

                      But then discussing with evil as if it’s a reasonable argument lends evil a legitimacy that it should be denied.

                      Nobody is perfect in their outlook, but as soon as people start saying Hitler was nice to his dog or put equally irrelevant praise upon him, they’re trying to minimise the entire holocaust. Or if they’re parading in the streets using the old slogans, they’re supporting the holocaust.

                      Let me be completely clear: Nazis shouldn’t be shunned, banned, mocked, and so on because they are at the top of a slippery slope and might break the law. All of those things should be done to them because spreading those opinions as a rational point of view necessitates murder. Every single time solitary nazis feel empowered to gather and express their views as if they are a legitimate part of society, people end up dying before society is forced to crack down on them again.

                      A pleasant nazi is a dangerous nazi because they make nazis seem pleasant, acceptable, even entertaining. They legitimise being a nazi. But as soon as one is a nazi, one isn’t a number of things, one is a nazi with a number of characteristics.

                      There’s no such thing as a moderate nazi. There’s just a nazi who hasn’t killed anyone yet.

                      To paraphrase Indiana Jones: “Nazis. I hate ’em”.

                    • Incognito …
                      23 October 2017 at 10:46 pm

                      @ Lynn,

                      Thank you for the clarification and I will keep it in mind if/when I write such a post; I’d like to think I’m quite good at self-moderation; not so good at self-medication 😉

                      I think TS is a wonderful forum with shed loads of freedom and moderated as well as is humanly possible.

                    • Incognito …
                      23 October 2017 at 11:16 pm

                      @ McFlock,

                      My apologies, but I’ve run out of time to reply; maybe tomorrow but another long day ahead.

                      Many thanks for the discussion.

                    • Bill …
                      23 October 2017 at 11:16 pm

                      @ McFlock.

                      All this talk of Nazis… John Maynard Keynes. I’m going to assume you’d have been fairly open to sitting down for a beer with him. Nice chap. Some interesting stuff to say on economics.

                      The same John Maynard Keynes who was director of the Eugenics Society from 1937 to 1944.

                      Eugenics. The widespread and popular belief that pre-dated the Nazis, that justified forced sterilization in many states in the US and an idea that the Nazis merely exploited, didn’t conceive.

                      Fascism – Mussolini’s Italy. Where Roosevelt turned to in order to figure out how to lay in the social provisions of the ‘New Deal’.

                      USSR – the idea that an elite could order a society ‘just so’ for the betterment of humankind….Not fascism?

                      Methinks you lack nuance. Or maybe it’s that you’d position yourself betwixt and between those supposedly extreme poles of left and right, in some civilised or “safe” space, But then what wind-blown seeds does that ground inevitably contain?

                    • McFlock …
                      23 October 2017 at 11:29 pm

                      @bill

                      Was Keynes a nazi? No?

                      Was Rooseveldt a nazi? No?

                      You put your finger on it with the USSR: as you put it, initially designed to bring about the betterment of human kind. So, not nazis, even if it was an authoritarian dictatorship that killed millions of people.

                      Upon consideration, I’m not sure I’d put nazis on the continuum between left and right, let alone the extreme end.

                      In the case of nazis, we should all lack nuance. Even the fascists were originally better than the nazis, although they jumped on board so fuck them, too.

                    • Bill …
                      24 October 2017 at 12:07 am

                      McFlock.

                      Had the term “fascism” been around in 1919, it would have been applied to the Bolsheviks.

                      Mussolini (just like the Bolsheviks) insisted his order was for the betterment of humankind. The difference was that he teased the monolithic Bolshevik model a tad to give more agency and legitimacy to things other than “the party” – the state.

                      Roosevelt wasn’t a fascist (to be a Nazi one would have had to have been German and living in Germany), but he was very accommodating of fascism and, like I say,relied on fascists to show him how to implement social programmes.

                      And Keynes wasn’t a Nazi either. Like I say. He was a proponent of eugenics.

                    • McFlock …
                      24 October 2017 at 10:01 am

                      If the fascists and bolsheviks were interchangable, the fascists would have been called bolsheviks because the bolsheviks came first.

                      So Roosevelt looked at fascist social programmes and keynes was a eugenics supporter. That makes neither of them nazis. Did roosevelt only look at fascist social programmes? Did the fascists invent the concept? I bet no. Does one have to be a nazi to be a eugenicist? Again, no. Does one even need to be a eugenicist to be a nazi? I doubt many could even spell the word.

                  • greywarshark …
                    23 October 2017 at 9:45 pm

                    I think that Hannah makes something sound clear and noble that is debatable and moulded. Do kiwiblog points get clearer and more visible as their denizens partake in that echo chamber?

                    I like your point about fuzzy and subjective human constructs.
                    But the things you mention and I noted can destroy an attempt at thoughtful discussion on the blog. People can’t be distracted from focussing on the various important points by mockery et al and still be able to get an overview of strengths and weaknesses of whatever they set out to consider.

                    • Incognito …
                      23 October 2017 at 10:56 pm

                      Not all of us have clarity of thought and/or writing (communicating) especially when dealing with complex topics. Sometimes mockery is a bad/failed attempt at humour or sarcasm; it’s not always necessarily intended to distract. But I take your point that there are people who like to deliberately derail debate. I can ignore these but others may not be able; banning bad behaviour on TS is not the same as banning free speech as Lynn has just explained very well @ 9.44 pm.

                      Edit: for me clarity often comes through writing …

              • Patricia Bremner …
                23 October 2017 at 7:09 pm

                You have it right Karen.

                Speech which incites killing, racism, bigitory, and sexism or bullying or out right lies needs moderating.

                Add to the list if you like.

                I do believe in free speech, but with responsibility.

                Let’s us discuss not destroy.

            • Andre 1.1.1.2.1.2
              23 October 2017 at 2:18 pm

              We should tolerate it. But we don’t have to give it a platform and megaphone. Nor should we insulate it from consequences.

              • Incognito …
                23 October 2017 at 2:46 pm

                Agreed, but it is a paradox that cannot be solved as such, only debated over and over again.

                • rhinocrates …
                  23 October 2017 at 6:53 pm

                  Indeed, it is a paradox. Explained by Karl Popper here:

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

                  Free societies have plenty of sanctions against toxic speech – a common example is shouting ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theatre when there is no fire, slander, false advertising, criminal conspiracy and so on.

                  Any ideal can be subject to reductio ad absurdum and absolute liberalism that gives free reign to those who seek to destroy it is untenable.

                  CV sought to actively disrupt discourse with misogynistic, racist, antisemitic and racist abuse and outright lies and deliberate misinformation.

                  A perfectly liberal forum is not possible, and in the interests of a maximally liberal discourse, restrictions on those who seek ultimately to destroy it are reasonable and justified.

                  Another thread warns of the coming digital war and whether or not you believe that Russia interfered in the US presidential election, you know that trolling can be systematic and targeted.

                  On an aside, people talk about Aldous Huxley, George Orwell and Margaret Atwood as being the dark prophets of our age, I’m thinking that the one who really got it was William S. Burroughs with his writing about viral information, feedback and Nova Mobs.

                  • Incognito …
                    23 October 2017 at 8:21 pm

                    Yes, I agree with all that. The Devil is in the detail, as they say.

                    The only possible way to protect freedom against those who seek to limit it is to give them as much freedom as possible, without prejudice. That’s the paradox.

                    There seems to be some apprehension about CV returning here. It might never happen and if it does a ‘welcoming guard’ might be poised to pounce … Regardless of whether I like the guy or not, whether I like his views or not, he’s done ‘his time’ and should be given a fair chance IMHO. I can only speak for myself and fully accept that other people don’t share my views on free speech in general or CV in particular. In any case, it’s not about winning an argument, it’s about exploring the tension between opposing views.

                    • greywarshark …
                      23 October 2017 at 9:56 pm

                      Incognito
                      But where and how is the freedom allowed, pursued? People can’t come in and take over this blog with prattle. How could we ever get to discuss anything and be able to see trends and exchange information that a few people could add to their info and make discoveries on important subjects.

                      To me it’s not necessarily winning an argument, it is seeing other points of view which after consideration, would need to be put aside, until a clearer picture of the situation would be seen. I myself question whether I should be spending time exploring tensions between opposing views. Ultimately I might not give a fig for someone’s view unless I know enough about their expertise and ability to sift information. It’s getting useful information and putting it all together so that a possible scenario can emerge that’s best.

                      But hearing others points and then asking them questions, and receiving understandable answers back, enables a hypothesis to be developed. It’s groping your way to a real possibility, rather than having sweeping, confident opinions dumped take it or leave it.

                      What a load of old rubbish I am talking probably anyone would say.

                    • Incognito …
                      23 October 2017 at 11:10 pm

                      @ greywarshark,

                      Your comment made perfect sense to me, thank you, although I had to read it twice 😉

                      Ultimately I might not give a fig for someone’s view unless I know enough about their expertise and ability to sift information.

                      This is where I differ in opinion; it is the quality of the argument that counts for me and how it is supported by verifiable facts and reasoning. For example, you don’t know anything about my area(s) of expertise yet I am an expert. I do try to let my words do all the talking without having to rely on my known & public credentials. FYI, my credentials would be no help for what I write about anyway.

                      The learning is done and new insights are being attained between opposing views, not at the extreme ends; this is the nature and pursuit of debate IMO.

                    • greywarshark …
                      24 October 2017 at 9:38 am

                      Incognito at 11.10 23/10
                      Actually what I meant about knowing the person, I meant what I can gain as to reliability and honesty from reading their comments, as much as what they actually share about their persona. I respect yours and not only because you occasionally agree with me!

                      There are others here that I think highly of, and I may never know just who they are or meet them. But their minds are great, and their intellect sparks and their integrity seems good, and if they have some humour and sometimes self-deprecate, I think they are all right!

            • The Fairy Godmother 1.1.1.2.1.3
              23 October 2017 at 9:01 pm

              Free speech always comes with consequences. Telling lies about people is slander and you can be sued for that. You can also be discredited and shunned by others and on a blog banned. It would be very unhealthy if people could say whatever they liked with no consequences. Screaming out fire in a crowded movie theatre when there is no fire should also have consequences.

              • Incognito …
                23 October 2017 at 9:24 pm

                I do not disagree the slightest. I was not referring to crossing lines but rather to the large grey area, the ‘dark zone’ or ‘desert of discontent’ that you have to transverse before you cross an imaginary line/boundary, a ‘point of no return’.

    • r0b 1.2
      23 October 2017 at 9:05 am

      lprent confirms that those banned until post election have had the bans (comment blacklist) lifted.

    • mauī 1.3
      23 October 2017 at 9:02 pm

      Nice to see the warm welcome back for CV. Judging by the level of vitriol you’re sadly missed. See you tomorrow.

      • Keepcalmcarryon 1.3.1
        23 October 2017 at 9:34 pm

        I found CV intelligent and interesting – didn’t agree with everything but at least someone was thinking and contributing outside the groupthink that can take hold here. Granted I missed the controversy being discussed above by the sound of it.

  2. Andre 2
    23 October 2017 at 6:43 am

    A brief look at some of the gun control laws in effect at the time the Second Amendment was written and ratified.

    https://www.salon.com/2017/10/22/five-types-of-gun-laws-the-founding-fathers-loved_partner/

    With that context, it’s quite plausible that if the US had followed a different socio-cultural development the current interpretation of the Second Amendment would focus entirely on the starting bit ” A well-regulated militia…” and there would be no individual right to bear arms at all.

    • Macro 2.1
      23 October 2017 at 11:15 am

      True Andre – but then John Wayne would have been out of a job.. and Roy Rogers.. and the Lone Ranger…. Then where would we get the silver bullet to solve all the world’s problems?…

      /sarc

  3. Robert Guyton 3
    23 October 2017 at 7:20 am

    Here it is, readers of The Standard, our raison d’etre! Chris Trotter describes the driving need for us all to do what we can to support the new Government against the forces of darkness, as exemplified by Richard Prebble, here on this blog and out in the wider world – cool bananas!

    “And not only Peters’ protection will be needed. Every progressive New Zealander who understands the magnitude of the fight which Peters’, Ardern’s and Shaw’s decision to pursue “real change” has made inevitable, must be prepared to come to the aid of the three parties – Labour, NZ First and the Greens – which have committed themselves to fulfilling the hopes and dreams of the 50.4 percent of the New Zealand electorate who voted for them.”

    http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.co.nz/2017/10/dark-transactions-winston-peters.html

    • Carolyn_nth 3.1
      23 October 2017 at 8:10 am

      Ah. Yes.

      Out of the post-election turmoil, let’s hope we can build a better society and government.

      Yesterday saw the despair of the WiPeds – those poor souls afflicted with Winston Peters Demonisation Syndrome; and of the JASPs – those other souls in awestruck fear of Jacinda Ardern’s Supernatural Powers.

      For the majority of us Pipeds, now is the time to work really hard for the humanisation, and democratisation of politics, economics, and social policy.

    • greywarshark 3.2
      23 October 2017 at 10:16 am

      Thanks for putting that up Robert G. I put it up on Ad’s post but haven’t received any acknowledgment of anything I have put up there. C’est la vie.

    • Ian 3.3
      23 October 2017 at 6:26 pm

      Your a regional councillor Robert and I have a lot of time for your enthusiastic support of all things green and I have heard you talk on your bush tucker and your Eden in the south.
      The forces of darkness have been working overtime in Canterbury this weekend ,targetting a regional councillor like yourself. I may have missed it because I have been fishing but how can we stop hate crimes like this ?

  4. Ed 4
    23 October 2017 at 8:08 am

    Making news overseas.

    New Zealand’s new prime minister calls capitalism a ‘blatant failure’

    ‘If you have hundreds of thousands of children living in homes without enough to survive, that’s a blatant failure. What else could you describe it as?’

    Ms Ardern said: “When you have a market economy, it all comes down to whether or not you acknowledge where the market has failed and where intervention is required. Has it failed our people in recent times? Yes.

    “How can you claim you’ve been successful when you have growth roughly three per cent, but you’ve got the worst homelessness in the developed world?”

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/new-zealand-new-prime-minister-jacinda-ardern-capitalism-blatant-failure-a8012656.html

    • greywarshark 4.1
      23 October 2017 at 10:27 am

      Capitalism a blatant failure.
      On Radionz this am Colin Peacock has had two interesting speakers both giving their take on capitalism and its future moves. I’m really enthused about Paul
      Mason’s ideas which provide a framework for the future that mirrors things said on this blog when looking to the future, UBI moves etc.

      politics
      The future of the labour force
      From Labour Day, 8:40 am today

      Listen duration 25′ :01″ Add to playlist
      Listen http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/labourday/audio/2018618886/the-future-of-the-labour-force

      Economics journalist Paul Mason says globalisation has created a whole new class of working people and the world is on the verge of a post-capitalism where work is being reinvented.

      politics
      Bringing capitalism back from the brink
      From Labour Day, 8:10 am today

      Listen http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/labourday/audio/2018618884/bringing-capitalism-back-from-the-brink

      The face of British business, former UK Minister for Trade – Lord Digby Jones, explains how business and capitalism needs to be fixed to benefit everyone.

      • Draco T Bastard 4.1.1
        23 October 2017 at 12:02 pm

        The face of British business, former UK Minister for Trade – Lord Digby Jones, explains how business and capitalism needs to be fixed to benefit everyone.

        The problem being that it can’t be fixed as the whole point of capitalism is private ownership of everything. Which leaves out all those that can’t own anything because of everything being owned by a few.

        Poverty is caused by capitalism and it cannot be corrected because it’s how capitalism operates.

        • ropata 4.1.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 8:34 pm

          Yep the clue is in the word “capital” + “ism” == worship of money, i.e. “the business of business is business”, building massive glittering edifices of steel and glass to honour their false gods.

          As in all things, it shall pass.

          As opposed to “socialism” which prioritises social outcomes, i.e. people. The taonga of Aotearoa.
          “He tangata, he tangata, he tangata”

    • NZJester 4.2
      23 October 2017 at 5:26 pm

      A market economy would work if everyone followed the rules. The problem is those with money do not follow the rules and cheat at the market economy every chance they can. They get a National government to break the unions that help the workers get their fair share of the profit to keep wages down artificially low below real market rate. If they are not paying a fair wage to attract local workers, they get a National government to allow them to import cheap labor from outside of the country as another way to help keep the wages artificially low. Greed is the thing that always makes a market economy fail.

  5. Patricia Bremner 5
    23 October 2017 at 8:17 am

    And the 1% know they are challenged to show a kinder face.

    Why do I feel this is an ‘Oliver Twist’ moment, as the empty bowls are presented?

    • greywarshark 5.1
      23 October 2017 at 10:20 am

      Eventually empty bowls and empty bowels enforce desperate action.

      • cleangreen 5.1.1
        23 October 2017 at 11:38 am

        greywarshark

        Thanks for posting those sites of the (RNZ National) True “Labour day” programs.

        I thought Sir Digby Jones was great.

        http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/labourday/audio/2018618884/bringing-capitalism-back-from-the-brink

        They must be repeated later also as some people dont wake up early as we all do.

        Some dont have internet or any method other thatn radio broadcast so repeats of these true “public affairs” programs be re-presented again today on “Labour day”

        The incomming new Minister of Broadcasting must take the word Steven joyce put behind RNZ (National) out of the broadcasting platform as Political parties names should not be advertised on a Public radio netwok.

        • eco Maori/kiwi 5.1.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 2:31 pm

          Isn’t it controversial that Back Benches burnt down not once but twice I liked watching Wallies mediate on that program they put the neo libreals feet to the coals a few times and helped keep people honest I guess Key could not handle the truth getting out in to the public there is a sure trail to follow there

        • greywarshark 5.1.1.2
          23 October 2017 at 3:11 pm

          cleangreen
          Yes I feel that National is now a tainted word.

          I have just been trawling in Radionz under search – author interview. What a mine of golden ideas and experiences.

    • Craig H 5.2
      23 October 2017 at 11:43 am

      Guillotine insurance, to borrow the phrase.

  6. Andre 6
    23 October 2017 at 8:23 am

    Yet another reason to carefully watch and manage China’s influence in New Zealand: deeply entrenched institutional sexism.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/22/asia/china-female-leaders/index.html

    • Ed 6.1
      23 October 2017 at 8:35 am

      Let us not forget this.
      ‘Newsroom Investigation: National MP trained by Chinese spies

      https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2017/09/13/46657/national-mp-trained-by-chinese-spies

      or this

      ‘Revealed: China’s network of influence in New Zealand.

      A major research paper into China’s soft-power campaign in New Zealand has detailed ………… extensive links between China and former New Zealand politicians and their families, and also highlights significant political donations.

      University of Canterbury professor Anne-Marie Brady, the author of the research paper, said she was disturbed by her findings.
      “This is about our democracy and about our sovereignty. Anybody who reads the report will find this troubling,” she told the Herald.
      Brady said the influence campaign being waged in New Zealand would be of concern regardless of its source.
      “It’d be the same if it was any country: it’s not about China, but it’s our country and our democracy where we value freedom of speech and association. It’s our right to choose our government.”

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11924169

  7. Ed 7
    23 October 2017 at 8:25 am

    Hard-hit families struggle under crippling debt

    ‘Budgeting services in Rotorua say hard-hit families are struggling under the weight of crippling debt.
    People were juggling millions of dollars in debt with one agency working to help its clients reduce $12.6m in the year to June.
    Rotorua Budget Advisory Service manager Pakanui Tuhura said to the year ended in June it had worked one on one with 564 clients that had a total debt of $12.6m. The majority was owed on mortgages, money to government departments, bank loans, finance company loans and other types of loans.
    Its figures show about $4.6m was unsecured debt with $8m secured, while in the year ended in 2016 it had helped 764 clients deal with $19.4m in debt.
    Mr Tuhura said unfortunately the clients it dealt with “have pretty much hit rock bottom”.’

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rotorua-daily-post/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503438&objectid=11934373

  8. Ed 8
    23 October 2017 at 9:14 am

    At least 20 people have died after smoking synthetic cannabis, but where is the community outrage and Government action plan?

    https://interactives.stuff.co.nz/2017/09/killer-chemicals/

    • cleangreen 8.1
      23 October 2017 at 11:44 am

      100% Ed,

      I too am worried about second hand smoke damages occurred byothers recieving exposure effects from this human toxicity from “synthetic cannabis”

    • Naki man 8.2
      23 October 2017 at 12:52 pm

      What do you think Labour will do to stop stupid poeple from taking drugs that might contain weed killer or fly spray or other poisons that may kill them??

      • Andre 8.2.1
        23 October 2017 at 12:58 pm

        I’m hoping they’ll do the sensible thing and legalise drugs and tax them and sensibly regulate them so they actually contain what’s claimed and not weedkiller or flyspray or whatever else.

      • Molly 8.2.2
        24 October 2017 at 8:24 am

        It might do to recall that these products were legal and that they have a high incidence of addiction from users.

        The stupidity started with decision to make these products legal without concern for the consequences.

        Synthetic cannabis is no longer legal, but we still have to deal with the consequences of introducing this toxic product to the public without due consideration and precaution.

        You should save your vitriol for Dunne, and those who considered allowing synthetic cannabis to be preferable to the conversation about decriminalising the use of the natural product.

    • Draco T Bastard 8.3
      23 October 2017 at 3:37 pm

      Why would the government, which legalised this deadly cocktail, want to bring attention to it?

  9. tracey 9
    23 October 2017 at 9:21 am

    According to 1 herald journalist the Nats will introduce a PMB on Kermadec sanctuary to “drive a wedge” in the coalition… not because a sanctuary is of itself a good idea or in the interests of NZ… but to get back in power sooner.

    • Ed 9.1
      23 October 2017 at 9:41 am

      The Herald is now advising the National Party on strategy.

    • aom 9.2
      23 October 2017 at 9:53 am

      Not surprising in the least tracey – the strategy of poor losers who are continuing to support an ill-prepared brain-fart that Key used to big-note himself at the UN. If necessary, the coalition can use the English (Parental Leave) veto strategy while engaging in meaningful and transparent dialogue to ensure that a just, viable and legally enforceable sanctuary is established.

    • chris73 9.3
      23 October 2017 at 11:35 am

      Right and the opposition should just sit there and do nothing, the Kermadec sanctuary was a good idea and if the Green party decide to support it then thats how MMP works

      Mind you I would have thought the problems with the coalition wouldn’t have started until after they’ve become the actual government

      • tracey 9.3.1
        23 October 2017 at 5:20 pm

        No they should not do nothing. They should be constructive in opposition for a better NZ. A sanctuary that Nats never mentioned during an election campaign seems a strange place to start. Not that they have started anything openly yet

        • chris73 9.3.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 5:37 pm

          This, if it happens, will do a lot of good for National. It’ll embarrass Labour, it will reiterate what National were saying about NZFirst (though I think National should reach out to NZFirst personally) and will remind the population about how effective National is even when its not in power and, by default, how ineffectual the government is

          Throw in the morale boost of sticking it to the government and putting the government on the back foot it can also start to signal to the Greens that maybe, in the future, the Greens don’t have to be Labours poor cousin and maybe a seat in cabinet is a possibility…

          Also this is only a possibility because of what Labour was willing to do for power

          • tracey 9.3.1.1.1
            23 October 2017 at 8:15 pm

            So back to the game playing and fuck the good of NZ. Nats bringing on lies on steroids ay. If lying doesnt get you want you want. Double down.

          • NewsFlash 9.3.1.1.2
            23 October 2017 at 11:05 pm

            Chris

            The only thing the National party was effective at was doing nothing and racking up the largest debt this country has ever seen to pay for their dumfounded tax cut policy that resulted in massive deficits and took nearly a decade to correct.

    • JC 9.4
      23 October 2017 at 12:23 pm

      So it would seem… A Dirty Nick Smith trick, concerned he has lost any legacy after 9 years of SFA. (oh there are swimmable rivers off course)

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11935754

      (Item up on midday bulletin on RNZ just now.)

      A New era… or yet another DP trick. But guess we’ll have to wait another day to find out
      as “New Zealand First Party refused to say whether the Kermadec proposal was alive or dead.

      It said that information would have to await the release of the party’s coalition agreement with Labour on Tuesday….”

      http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/342141/nz-first-refuses-to-say-if-kermadec-plans-are-afloat

      https://twitter.com/thekermadecs

      • JC 9.4.1
        23 October 2017 at 3:45 pm

        National is considering a member’s bill promoting the Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary – and potentially driving a wedge between two parties in the new government in the process.

        http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/342180/kermadec-member-s-bill-could-divide-new-govt

        Speculation yet. But is Nick Smith being malicious, spiteful, hostile, evil-minded, baleful, bitter, evil-intentioned, poisonous, venomous, evil, malign, malignant, rancorous, vicious, vindictive, revengeful, vengeful, pernicious; cruel, fierce, nasty or malevolent ?

        • cleangreen 9.4.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 5:29 pm

          All of the afore mentioned JC when’describing’ Nick Smith.
          But is Nick Smith being “malicious, spiteful, hostile, evil-minded, baleful, bitter, evil-intentioned, poisonous, venomous, evil, malign, malignant, rancorous, vicious, vindictive, revengeful, vengeful, pernicious; cruel, fierce, nasty or malevolent” ?

  10. Carolyn_nth 10
    23 October 2017 at 10:15 am

    Very important series of tweets from Bronwyn Hayward (NZ Assc Prof of Politics & advocate for kids & a democratic imagination in a changing world @ Canterbury Uni)

    A big problem #nzpol (needs full written constitution to tackle) if older National voters start eroding MMP see p 93 https://www.victoria.ac.nz/law/centres/nzcpl/publications/nz-journal-of-public-and-international-law/previous-issues/volume-71,-june-2009/miller-vowles.pdf

    I should add, not the fault of older National voters, they are amongst those least likely to understand proportionality & are being wound up

    But a big problem if mainstream or social media just appealing to audience share, start writing op-eds that delegitimise democratic process

    Countries like NZ earn status as stable, transparent, effective law & order because we have a peaceful fair transfer, of power post-election

    We had a careful review process of MMP chaired by 2 Nat party apointees to the Electoral Commission back in 2012 but it was ignored by govt

    The Vic Uni & Auskland study of MMP attitudes showed how all NZers, esp younger people, women prefer Coalition govts, but we vary about type

    older people & those without uni education prefer “strong” leaders, other NZers not so convinced -but everyone wants leaders who listen

    So #Nzpol needs National supporters who uphold the rule of law (nearly universal that all do) to talk to friends about why MMP IS fair

    This isn’t saying we agree with all of MMP- many want tweaks but its fair, and Key in 2008 also showed how National can campaign well in MMP

    The fact that National lost in 2017 but had used FPP rhetoric to wind up support that they were a strong party isn’t a reason to change MMP

    By same token, small parties on the left can’t wind up their supporters expectations, reality is moderate coalition as no one one a majority

    it will need discipline on left-its a huge burden for any PM but Ardern is competent negotiator. Coalition on policy is bigger than parties

    And no, a big party has no more moral authority to try to create a coalition than a small one-sometimes easy for them but MMP is all parties

    • joe90 10.1
      23 October 2017 at 10:52 am

      Rather than labouriously C&P individual tweets – this to unroll and then C&P the entire thread.

      https://tttthreads.com/

      https://tttthreads.com/thread/922203214824472576

    • bwaghorn 10.2
      23 October 2017 at 1:25 pm

      correct me if i’m wrong .

      but when a fulla i was docking with complained about mmp and wanted it gone ,
      i said it’s the only way to control political party getting out of control as we have no upper house

      • Andre 10.2.1
        23 October 2017 at 1:42 pm

        In these days of people losing connection with rural areas and getting more open-minded about how people relate to each other, “fulla I was docking with” might not get understood the way you meant.

        But yeah, MMP makes it more likely compromise and coalition building will be needed for government. But the presence of more than one layer of government won’t prevent elected dictatorships. The only thing that’s saving the US from one right now is the turd tornado’s utter incompetence. And they have three levels of government.

        • bwaghorn 10.2.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 1:52 pm

          cheers ‘ but imagine if the turd had won a fpp election in a one tier system.

          as for the other just adding a bit of flavour , although was a little hesitant to mention docking (removing lambs tails ) here

          • weka 10.2.1.1.1
            23 October 2017 at 2:32 pm

            Imagine what will happen when townies find out their roast required an animal to die! 😉

            • Andre 10.2.1.1.1.1
              23 October 2017 at 2:36 pm

              I’ve seen it happen a few times. And been soundly told off when my niece and nephew asked “what’s for dinner” and I told them “Bambi’s mother”. But the sudden vegetarianism usually only lasts until the next bacon fry-up.

          • lprent 10.2.1.1.2
            23 October 2017 at 2:36 pm

            Used to bugger my back after the 3rd day of stooping down to ring those nuts.

            • eco Maori/kiwi 10.2.1.1.2.1
              23 October 2017 at 3:10 pm

              I enjoyed those mountain oysters . but me thinks there is more to that story

            • bwaghorn 10.2.1.1.2.2
              23 October 2017 at 3:21 pm

              aye it does ill pick up some where near 6000 lambs this season , as i’m the new boy in the Valley i just moved to it’s back down the order for me.

              (wouldn’thttp://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/animalwelfare/TAFS-2-Management-to-Avoid-Tail-Docking-Sheep-9-22-09.pdf change a thing mind.)

              There was a bloke called Dr Scobie doing good work on tails but guess what , no funding for research is what happened to him i believe.

              • lprent …
                23 October 2017 at 11:21 pm

                It was one of those tasks that convinced me that farming was all about doing automatable tasks by hand whilst sitting on the land and making enough to get get by. While looking for a good capital gain out at the end. Not my scene back in 1977 when I spent a year as a farmhand to make that decision.

        • weka 10.2.1.2
          23 October 2017 at 2:30 pm

          All the more reason to keep any vernacular we have.

      • Draco T Bastard 10.2.2
        23 October 2017 at 3:43 pm

        /facepalm

        And upper house doesn’t stop a political party getting out of control – ever. Just look at the US.

  11. greywarshark 11
    23 October 2017 at 10:43 am

    I have to change my email because of Vodafone’s clear.net.nz shutting down. Someone replying to my email had it returned address unknown and Vodafone was giving till end of November I thought.

    That’s why I still want to keep my landline. When you get into the hands of these flighty capitalist concerns, they are always trying to take over each other, or invent something that will take the others’ business or put them out of business. Half our time is spent on learning new stuff that replaces old stuff that worked okay.

    • Carolyn_nth 11.1
      23 October 2017 at 11:39 am

      I find it frustrating that big corproations push people to use new technologies in the way they want.

      I still prefer landlines for phone and Internet. I can’t understand why so many people have switched to pay for use mobiles, when landline free local calling is still available. i rarely have my mobile switched on, have voicemail for my landline, but businesses especially try to contact me by mobile, and ignore my landline.

      Sometimes I don’t switch my mobile on for days or even weeks.

      I also prefer my email to come through my computer system. I distrust wifi and clouds and think landlines, and backups to external hard drives, are still more secure.

      I am switching to spark, and have to wait til the connection is activated before I get a Spark email account.

      I have requested vodafone to forward my mail to a gmail addy in case there is a period between vodafone and spark email accounts.

      But, I think vodafone’s email was already not working well, which is why they have closed thee service down.

      My vodafone emails to friend in the UK have not got to her for the last year.

      gmail is not adequate for all my email – it’s clunky.

      While I like many new technologies, I’m mostly selective about the ones I go for. I distrust the motives of big corporations when trying to push us in specific directions.

      • Sabine 11.1.1
        23 October 2017 at 11:43 am

        i have not have had a mobile phone now for nigh on 6 years. I don’t need it, i don’t want it, and i don’t want to pay for it. It offers me no service.

        I have a landline, internet. If i don’t pick up the phone or answer messaging i don’t want to be contacted. It works a treat!

        I am pondering letter pigeons tho, that would be a cool addition to my communication services.

        • rhinocrates 11.1.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 12:28 pm

          Vodafone’s internet service drove me back to drink (briefly). It was an unfunny version of the dead parrot sketch spread over weeks. Now I’m with Spark and I’ve found the service reliability and customer relations immensely superior.

          Never use Twitter, Instagram etc. Never noticed any deficit in my life for not having them. Someone once titled a book Data Smog and that seems to suit most social media – they obscure instead of reveal and they’re toxic.

          I agree, gmail has an awful interface.

          Likewise, I still use a landline and I’ve never had a mobile. Christopher Nolan supposedly never uses one either. If he can handle the logistics of big budget films without one, everyday life is easy without one.

          I get most of my information from books because they’ve been researched, referenced, attributed, edited, redrafted and critically reviewed.

          While I have a voracious appetite for information, I take Mustrum Ridcully’s example with messages – if someone comes up to you with a message, ignore them. If they go away, it wasn’t important or they could deal with it themselves.

          In the end, I think that time capsules are even superior to pigeons. Someone opens one up, finds a note and it reads, “Go away, I’m dead.”

          • Sabine 11.1.1.1.1
            24 October 2017 at 9:45 am

            but but
            i like pigeons. 🙂

          • Draco T Bastard 11.1.1.1.2
            24 October 2017 at 10:57 am

            I agree, gmail has an awful interface.

            I use my Gmail through Thunderbird. The only problem I have with that though is that it’s interface with Google Calendar is rather limited.

            I get most of my information from books because they’ve been researched, referenced, attributed, edited, redrafted and critically reviewed.

            Well, sometimes anyway. I doubt a book from The Heritage Foundation is any of those things as they’re designed to lead people to the wrong conclusions.

      • greywarshark 11.1.2
        23 October 2017 at 3:21 pm

        Carolyn-nth
        Recently I gave my landline number, which has an answerphone, to a business and they said don’t you have a mobile. Time wasn’t important and I couldn’t see why they dismissed the landline number.

        I agree about using emails. This drive to have your whole life targeted at your cellphone, so little, so portable, so slippery, so likely to need constant topping up, I can’t understand.

        It seems that people are hypnotised by tech, and conformist to the extreme in all wanting to use it. Also businesses want everything these days, your address, your email, your cellphone, and landline. Stuff them, why, are they going to sell it.

        Now the tech mad are talking about not having codes for door locks, and keys are out, and the latest is no plastic cards but eye reading etc. Everything is becoming too complicated, and creates barriers rather than facilitating entry and freedom.

      • Draco T Bastard 11.1.3
        23 October 2017 at 3:57 pm

        I can’t understand why so many people have switched to pay for use mobiles, when landline free local calling is still available.

        Because it’s cheaper than a landline while also being mobile.

        • Carolyn_nth 11.1.3.1
          23 October 2017 at 6:45 pm

          It may be cheaper for those who use mobiles a lot, and feel a need to have a phone connection wherever they go.

          For me, who rarely uses a mobile from one month to the next, it looks like the frequent users are being subsidised by those of us who use mobiles only very occasionally.

          There may be a bit of that with landlines, but it’s more of a level playing field. And I prefer a landline connection for the Internet – so basically, my mobile is only for emergencies.

          • Draco T Bastard 11.1.3.1.1
            23 October 2017 at 10:14 pm

            It may be cheaper for those who use mobiles a lot, and feel a need to have a phone connection wherever they go.

            For those on a benefit WINZ requires you to have a phone. As they don’t then pay for the phone it’s only the cheapest option that works.

            For me, who rarely uses a mobile from one month to the next, it looks like the frequent users are being subsidised by those of us who use mobiles only very occasionally.

            Pre-pay with most telcos is $20/year.

            There may be a bit of that with landlines, but it’s more of a level playing field.

            The people being subsidised the most happen to be businesses. Same as retail customers subsidise them on power as well. And the subsidy is huge. When I was at TelstraClear they were actually losing money on business customers but still making a decent profit because of the residential. Meanwhile the business customer were called VIPs.

            And I prefer a landline connection for the Internet – so basically, my mobile is only for emergencies.

            So do I – it just doesn’t have a phone number on it. Why have a home phone when anybody who calls you is going to call on the mobile?

          • lprent 11.1.3.1.2
            23 October 2017 at 11:06 pm

            It is increasingly becoming the case that mobiles seldom get used for voice.

            I’m a pretty typical bleeding edge user of technology, and usually shift patterns well before anyone else. I have a moderately expensive plan. It has unlimited voice. Unlimited texts. And 7.5GB of mobile data.

            So my average voice this year was 20 minutes per month, and 30 txts. But I average 5.8GB of data over the last year and about 3GB the year before. If I could drop voice and txt and still have a phone number then I would do so. Easy enough to use something like signal or whatsapp.

            At home I have unlimited data (mostly for The Standard) and a VOIP landline that costs $10 per month. That is only used for incoming for the elderly and the apartment door.

            • Draco T Bastard 11.1.3.1.2.1
              24 October 2017 at 11:01 am

              It has unlimited voice. Unlimited texts. And 7.5GB of mobile data.

              To be honest, I’m still amazed that we’re letting the telcos screw us over with the idea of texts and voice minutes which they charge more for. It’s just data and should be charged at the same rate as data.

      • Patricia Bremner 11.1.4
        23 October 2017 at 7:29 pm

        We have had to change as well. I do not like the gmail format, but Norm does.
        Each to their own.

        Landlines when the power goes down, are great, as they work.

        After switching to all broadband we had nothing during a power outage.

    • James Thrace 11.2
      23 October 2017 at 12:55 pm

      Did you tell Vodafone your new email address? You need to should you wish for email to be redirected to alternative email address. Voda is doing it for free. Much better than Sparks $20 per month fee if you want to keep @xtra email address when you move elsewhere.

      • weka 11.2.1
        23 October 2017 at 1:02 pm

        Doesn’t take effect until the end of November. There shouldn’t be any interruptions to email before then.

        I doubt that vodafone will offer the redirect service free forever.

      • red-blooded 11.2.2
        23 October 2017 at 1:39 pm

        It doesn’t cost anything to have any email sent to my old Spark address forwarded to Gmail – I just used the “push” function that’s available as part of setting up a Gmail account.

      • Carolyn_nth 11.2.3
        23 October 2017 at 3:33 pm

        Spark does provide free email with a net connection, though.

        And, I don’t like any web-based email as a reception for vodafone emails indefinitely.

        Ultimately, sometimes we have always had to change ph numbers, addresses, and email addresses.We let people and organisations that matter know of the changes.

    • NewsFlash 11.3
      23 October 2017 at 11:23 pm

      GWS

      Get a gmail account, it’s free and can be accessed anywhere in the world and does’t matter who the internet provider is, it will be the same for the rest of your life.

      • greywarshark 11.3.1
        24 October 2017 at 9:45 am

        Thanks NewsFlash
        Good advice. I may just have to take it and also revise other that I have received. I am conflicted. When it comes to google I use it so much, and have an email a/c with them which had become a necessity to fit in with others I work with. But I feel that google is right beside me everything I do.

        And perhaps I can have my own email a/c separate from the google one connected with my volunteer work. So I was thinking of Outlook which is Spark I think. There are only two I am told. So.. I will have to get onto it next week.

  12. mac1 12
    23 October 2017 at 10:59 am

    I note in my false news that India is blaming their first ODI loss to the Black Caps on being bewitched by New Zealand’s female Prime Minster. 😉

  13. Tamati Tautuhi 13
    23 October 2017 at 11:01 am

    Just been over at KB quite entertaining reading the nonsense, they refer to Jacindarella as the Tooth Fairy, Mr Ed and describe her as flippertigibbert, some quite nasty little people over there at KB or should we call it Hobbitsville.

    • greywarshark 13.1
      23 October 2017 at 3:23 pm

      I think the Hobbits in general were just little people trying to make a life. I don’t think that applies to KW and WO – they try to dissect life, and throw away all the good bits.

    • joe90 14.1
      23 October 2017 at 3:47 pm

      Perhaps, if they did something about the price – dried gauged 96 x 46 H1.2 framing is around a third the price in Australia.

    • Draco T Bastard 14.2
      23 October 2017 at 4:04 pm

      So, an industry is now calling for government subsidies to survive?

      You’ll note that that industry was quite happy selling all their logs offshore for premium prices when the going was good. Now that it appears to be not so good they’re calling for government assistance.

      EDIT:
      And. no, I wouldn’t build a high-rise building out of wood. The fire hazard would be atrocious.

      • Graeme 14.2.1
        23 October 2017 at 5:30 pm

        The fire hazards are similar. It’s what’s in the building that’s the fire hazard rather than the structure. Steel and concrete structures have to be fire protected so the steel doesn’t loose strength in a fire long enough for everyone to get out. It’s trivial to give a big wooden structure the same protection, and the wooden structure will stand up much better from the heat.

        I’m the opposite, I wouldn’t live in a steel framed house because they melt like chocolate in a fire.

        • In Vino 14.2.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 10:14 pm

          Agreed. At a school I was working at, there were 2 Gymnasia (!) together side by side. One was with big Lockwood beams from the early 70s. The other was a tidy, modern steel-frame unit. One fire started by arsonists between the two buildings burnt both badly. Afterwards the Lockwood beams stood proud, badly charred, but in original shape. The steel frames of the modern building slewed in all directions, broken, twisted, and in utter disarray.

        • Draco T Bastard 14.2.1.2
          23 October 2017 at 10:30 pm

          I wouldn’t live in a steel framed house because they melt like chocolate in a fire.

          1. Neither would I. I’d probably use foam sandwich.
          2. We’re actually talking about high-rise buildings which, as you point out, have all the necessary protections built in already. I doubt if it would be trivial to build those protections into a high-rise building made out of wood due to the wood taking up so much more room.

          • Andre 14.2.1.2.1
            24 October 2017 at 8:19 am

            Foam sandwich, huh? What kind of foam core you got in mind?

            Every candidate foam I’m aware of either is a fantastic fuel for fires (such as polystyrene as used in panels for coolstores etc), stuffed full of really nasty flame retardants, or really really expensive.

            • Draco T Bastard 14.2.1.2.1.1
              24 October 2017 at 10:43 am

              Well, definitely wouldn’t be using polystyrene. That stuff shouldn’t be anywhere near a building.

              Haven’t really looked beyond conception yet. More of a if you can build boats out of it then you can build houses out of it and get all the insulation benefits. And, if done right, be a faster build.

              And the resins and fibres in it can be sourced from hemp.

      • KJT 14.2.2
        24 October 2017 at 8:08 am

        Wood frames actually keep their strength for longer in a fire than steel.

        And their insulating properties don’t spread the fire as fast as steel.

        Steel rapidly loses strength when too hot, or cold.

    • Graeme 14.3
      23 October 2017 at 5:21 pm

      Back in the 70’s the old Forest Service built a lot of bridges, with gluelam beams. Some of them were quite big, and to a very high loading for off highway logging trucks. I’d presume they are still standing. I was involved with a couple in Lake Taupo Forest, east of Turangi.

      One of the advantages of the material choice was fire performance. A wooden beam will maintain strength in a fire much better than a steel or prestressed concrete one of the same cold strength. Steel looses strength rapidly when it gets hot.

      • greywarshark 14.3.1
        23 October 2017 at 9:29 pm

        Well, well TS does it again, we come up with some really useful information to give us understanding of what’s going on politically, business-wise and technically.
        Thanks Graeme that adds to the general mix of info.

  15. Penny Bright 15
    23 October 2017 at 11:04 am

    NZ WHISTLE-BLOWER ALERT!
    23 October 2017

    Thousands rally in Malta to honour slain Panama Papers journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia.

    Murdered Maltese investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia played a leading role in exposing the role of NZ foreign trusts in international money-laundering.

    ‘They won’t silence us’:

    https://www.google.co.nz/amp/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4366590

    On Sunday morning, all seven national newspapers had their front pages black in Caruana Galizia’s memory.

    Printed in bold letters against the black backgrounds were the words:
    “The pen conquers fear.”

    Just before her death, Caruana Galizia had posted on her closely followed blog, Running Commentary, that there were “crooks everywhere” in Malta.

    The island nation has a reputation as a tax haven in the European Union and has attracted companies and money from outside Europe.

    The journalist focused her reporting for years on investigating political corruption and scandals, and reported on Maltese mobsters and the island’s drug trafficking.

    She also wrote about Maltese links to the so-called Panama Papers leaks about offshore financial havens.
    _________________________________

    http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/national/81521/continous_updates__thousands_attend_demonstration_in_wake_of_daphne_caruana_galizias_murder

    Political commentator James Debono said that on Monday, Daphne was given the death penalty by someone who thought he was omnipotent.

    It was very good that the government would do everything to catch the culprits he said, but that was not enough.

    “We do not want to live in a mafia state, we do not want to be the washing machine of dictators’ and criminals’ money,” he said, “we need to show the criminals who killed Daphne that Malta has functioning institutions which we trust.

    In the last years, the institutions have failed us, with the Panama scandal being hidden under the carpet.”
    ________________________________

    Panama Papers journalist killed in Malta car bomb | Radio New Zealand News

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/world/341712/panama-papers-journalist-killed-in-malta-car-bomb

    The Maltese investigative journalist and blogger who led the investigation into the Panama Papers scandal has been killed by a car bomb.

    (Includes April 2016 Radio NZ interview with Daphne Caruana Galizia)

    _________________________________

    So – when is former NZ Prime Minister John Key going to be investigated over the Panama Papers?

    On 1 August 2017, the Chair of Transparency International Jose Ugaz stated at a meeting of over 200 people at Rutherford House, Victoria University that John Key should be investigated over the Panama Papers.

    How do I know?

    I was at that meeting and heard
    Transparency International Chair Jose Ugaz say that John Key should be investigated over the Panama Papers, myself.

    Penny Bright

    ‘Anti-corruption whistle-blower’.

  16. eco Maori/kiwi 16
    23 October 2017 at 11:25 am

    Well looks like I’m going to get Labour day off checked the weather cam in Tauranga its pisisting down and I would get a wet ass .
    Now we can see all the bullshit money sloshing around in our MSM environment .
    Prebble well he looks like a washed up bum and he will take anyone money and jump through any hoops I bet he is loving all the new media coverage he is getting so discount any thing he has to say as payed proper-gander.
    Key well letts vote with our wallets and boycott anything he is doing in New Zealand .
    As he is just setting him self up to launder all the 1% money through New Zealand and this gives him the power/ money to manipulate OUR systems to benefit him and his neo liberal M8. We don’t want him imprinting his bullshit values on US.

    Kermadec Isands well my knowledge on this subject stems from my fishing days and observation of our country’s situation at the minute.
    Back in the late 80’s we use to see heaps of lights out sea this was a foreign fishing fleet and they were reaping a bonanza and paying minimal money to US for there bounty.
    These fishing fleets were more advanced than ours and they new more about our fishery’s than we did so in my view they were ripping US off.
    Now the Kermadec are about 800 klm away So if they are made a sanctuary how are we going to protect these assets . It would cost to much to have our Navy or Air force protect these assets .
    So in my view the best way to protect and preserve these assets is to have a sustainable fishing system put in place for OUR fishing fleet not a Quoter system but something more sustainable like limited horsepower and technology in that fisheries. As in the trawler industry it is horsepower that ultimately catchiest fish and this horse power could be a trader able asset in this location .This is one of the system that the fishermen wanted back in the day to preserve our fisheries .
    And with OUR fishing fleet out there fishing sustainability they will protect our asset as if they see on there radar a boat that is ilegally fishing there they would call our air force and then they will be able to peruse the offender identified them and proceed with prosecution . Now please don’t get pissed off about my view as this is the only way we can protect an preserve OUR Kermadec Island assets and in the prosess we will benefit sustainable an keep foreigners from raiding them you see I did listen when I was a younger. Key wanted to make it a sanctuary and get back hands from his foreign M8 So they could keep raiding our assets Key’s no conservative who has hired him for promoting golf and they were the ones pillaging our fisheries back in the day kick Key OUT Ana Tou Kai

    • Draco T Bastard 16.1
      23 October 2017 at 4:47 pm

      Now the Kermadec are about 800 klm away So if they are made a sanctuary how are we going to protect these assets . It would cost to much to have our Navy or Air force protect these assets .

      I’d put a navy station up there and permanently keep some decent patrol ships there.

      And, no, it wouldn’t cost too much. That’s a delusion caused by having the profit motive in producing military weaponry.

        • Draco T Bastard 16.1.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 5:54 pm

          that too. I’ve been keen on NZ having a polar orbit surveillance satellites for sometime now. And we just so happen to be in a good place to launch them.

            • eco Maori/kiwi 16.1.1.1.1.1
              23 October 2017 at 9:52 pm

              People this is about the now this is about a simple acceptable solution to a problem that national will use to dived OUR new coalition government and steal there mana and national will put a lot of effort to stain and strain this new partnership. About cost don’t we already owe 100 Billion + so any simple cost effective solutions to our problems should be grabbed with both arms as this method will mean more resources for our needy and everyone in our new coalition government will have reached there goal . Kei te pai

              • Exkiwiforces …
                23 October 2017 at 11:51 pm

                It’s doable, but it comes down to money weather you single layered or multi layered surveillance system. The issue I have how to enforce it from illegal fishing, so we take a soft or hard nose approach? I know what I want, but it comes with big price tag as well.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                24 October 2017 at 10:49 am

                About cost don’t we already owe 100 Billion + so any simple cost effective solutions to our problems should be grabbed with both arms as this method will mean more resources for our needy and everyone in our new coalition government will have reached there goal .

                And that’s because we’ve all been sold a lie about the basic nature of the economy. We’ve been told that we need to borrow from offshore and that is a lie.

                A country/nation never needs to borrow money as it can create the money it needs and, as long as it has resources available and the taxes are done right, it’s non-inflationary.

  17. The Fairy Godmother 17
    23 October 2017 at 11:41 am

    Anyone thinking that the nasty wizards in the National party bewitched the weather to make it rain on Labour Day. Spiteful people. Sarc

  18. adam 18
    23 October 2017 at 11:48 am

    So the right are carrying on with the lies, and are upping the game with threats of violence.

    I see the herald is back to being the poster boy for violence against working people. Now they want a coup to put the pesky people who believe in democracy in their place.

    What worries me is the incitement to violence which is so casual in this piece. Yeah the bare faced lies are there, but the casual call for political violence is disturbing, and shows a shift away from democracy for exponents of neo-liberalism.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11935125

  19. cleangreen 19
    23 October 2017 at 11:51 am

    We need to have the new government investigate if George Soros money is being channelled to NZ spin doctoring and media platforms, as this article shows it is possibly occurring world wide by this very sick man George Soros.

    Austria bans Soros for funding the undemining of countries democratic systems..

    http://yournewswire.com/youngest-leader-george-soros/

    • Andre 19.1
      23 October 2017 at 11:55 am

      How many times have you posted this now? At least three that I can think of.

      If your article paints a fair picture of Kurz, then the guy’s nuttier than the buffet at a squirrel convention. But one look at the home page of that outfit suggests it’s probably not a fair picture.

      • cleangreen 19.1.1
        23 October 2017 at 2:02 pm

        There you go again Andre,
        Comment without substance.

        Read the post!!!!

        “We need to have the new government investigate if George Soros money is being channelled to NZ spin doctoring and media platforms,”

        I am now sending the message to Government to investigate if Soros money is being used to fund anti Government action such as trolls?
        Maybe you can relate to that better than I do as you often send anti labour messages thinly spread I see.

        • Andre 19.1.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 2:14 pm

          The article was a conspiracy-nut rant devoid of any substantiation. It had precisely zero useful information about Soros and his activities. But it did helpfully let us know Kurz is a 9/11 troofer among his other apparent delusions.

    • veutoviper 20.1
      23 October 2017 at 1:22 pm

      My god – talk about the pot calling the kettle black in demanding that Peters show some humility and stop acting like a peacock!

      The peacock is much closer to home, Kate. (Actually that is an insult to peacocks – sorry, real peacocks.)

  21. joe90 21
    23 October 2017 at 12:17 pm

    Coms people….this!.

    Now 31 days since @jacindaardern last tweeted. What a waste of 100,000 followers when all eyes are on you as you form a new government. #nzpol— Gwynn Compton (@gwynncompton) October 22, 2017

    • veutoviper 21.1
      23 October 2017 at 1:15 pm

      I agree, although there has been a bit more action on her Facebook account since the election but little in the last week. https://www.facebook.com/jacindaardern/

      Jacinda seems to do all her own social media on Twitter and Facebook, so it is perhaps understandable that she has had little time particularly in the last week.

      In terms of her age and tertiary qualifications in Communications, social media seem important to her and she uses Facebook brilliantly* – but she is unlikely to be able to maintain these by herself in future. So I am hopeful she sees it as a priority to get help with this asap as it would be a shame to waste the vast number of followers she has on both Twitter and Facebook.

      * Her two little ‘at home’ videos on the evening of the election (23 Sept) and the next day after the BBQ are well managed little ‘glimpses into life in the Ardern/Gayford household’.

      But Paddles Ardern-Gayford now has a new Twitter account (“(Independent cat – not affurliated with the Labour Pawty”) with over 245 tweets in just two days!

      https://twitter.com/FirstCatofNZ Clarke got time to kill at present? LOL.

      • greywarshark 21.1.1
        24 October 2017 at 10:46 am

        veutoviper
        Why not tweet Jacinda and suggest having a helper with her tweets to her. I thought that twitter was supposed to be good for getting personal thoughts to the individual more directly.

        • veutoviper 21.1.1.1
          24 October 2017 at 11:14 am

          LOL, I am not actually signed up to Twitter! I am strictly a ‘voyeur’ when it comes to Twitter and have no desire to join as it can be a very toxic environment.

          However, it is an excellent early information system to things happening before they hit the news. A quirk of the Twitter system is that if you don’t actually belong, you can read most Twitter accounts without following that account except where the account is fully protected – and you cannot also be blocked.

          I have other direct communications channels to certain Labour (and other) MPs etc so will raise maintaining Jacinda’s social media accounts and providing help with them, but suspect it will be me telling much more social media qualified people ‘how to suck eggs’ so to speak!

          In the meantime Paddles the cat’s Twitter account is getting a great worldwide following and is a lot of fun.

  22. eco Maori/kiwi 22
    23 October 2017 at 12:17 pm

    One other thing that got my scepticism going was that piece on news hub about vandalism down south on those dairy farms for one what would some intelligent people who are pro our environment gain from doing that stupid shit well nothing but bad publicity
    against there cause come on these people are not stupid.
    Whom is part of that story and could not hold a strait face to the camera well he is no other than Derek Crombie chief executive of the central plains water irrigation scheme.
    So I say there is a conflict of interest going on there a smear campaign against OUR green movement. Where is all the proof one Tyre with a hole drilled in it a shot of a 10.000 ltr milk tank well that’s no proof in my view. these farmers are not coming up with this shit by them selves someone else is driving this deceit I have a good idea whom it is and I say that this threat to OUR new coalition Government should be taken as a threat to OUR national security and these people be found and prosecuted to stop this propergander and a pro advising campaign like no other all around our world put heaps of effort and resorces into it Like Bill Gates whom just had a ordinary operating sustems but he used advertising win the world over to his prouduct and this will guarantee our governments success to run Tautoko OUR fledgling Coalition Government Kia Kaha

  23. eco Maori/kiwi 23
    23 October 2017 at 12:32 pm

    And Bill Gates has more soft power than many countrys now and other power. This advertising campaign will benefit our exporters to so lets do this We have to win the world over to our ideals to win in the long game of things 100 + years

    • eco Maori/kiwi 23.1
      23 October 2017 at 5:25 pm

      And the day to launch this campaign is the day that Winston crowns our new Queen prime opportunity to make a lasting impression of our new positive coalition government to the World. I’m making a donation to the Labour party now .

      • eco Maori/kiwi 23.1.1
        23 October 2017 at 10:29 pm

        Please take this opportunity seriously as opportunity knocks but once and this is a great opportunity cement our new coalition government into power for a decade.

        • eco Maori/kiwi 23.1.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 10:59 pm

          Did you hear how Trump was nice to Jacaranda and New Zealand .
          That’s because we have a loud voice in most of the country’s in our world a voice that can influence people to see there reality and join the cause for mother earth and equality He should be nice to everyone .Lett’s start this promotional campain for our coalition Government and show the rest of the world there reality Ka pai

          • greywarshark 23.1.1.1.1
            24 October 2017 at 10:50 am

            EcoMaori/Kiwi
            Jacinda I think. Jacaranda is a large tree with purple blossom I think.

  24. The Chairman 24
    23 October 2017 at 12:44 pm

    Are we happy with Labour’s minimum wage position ($16.50 an hour from 2018)?

    This minimal increase will do little to meet the party’s rhetoric (a fairer NZ) and address inequality. Thus, personally I’m not impressed.

    How long will it take Labour to get the minimum wage up to the living wage?

    Will they get there in their first term? And if not, will they get another innings?

    • Craig H 24.1
      23 October 2017 at 1:12 pm

      I’m not – they have to do a review every year anyway, so this is maybe 25c better than National would have done.

      • The Chairman 24.1.1
        23 October 2017 at 1:49 pm

        Yes. It’s a poor effort. Especially considering the rhetoric during the campaign.

        It will create some voter disillusionment.

    • eco Maori/kiwi 24.2
      23 October 2017 at 1:29 pm

      When one is sailing a Waka one does not shift the load to fast as this could cause the Waka to sink. I.E If wages are lifted to fast this will justifies some neo libral employers to say the sky is falling on there head and sack some staff and this will help the neo libral cause and one will have to check that the cargo in not rotten before they can make promises to dish it out Kapai.

      • The Chairman 24.2.1
        23 October 2017 at 1:34 pm

        IMO, in this case, failing to move fast enough will see the ship go down too.

        Moreover, as wages increase, so to does consumer demand, thus the need for employers to take on more staff.

        • red-blooded 24.2.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 1:53 pm

          Labour have already signalled that this is just the first step. Remember, too, that they’re also promising a move to the living wage for state sector employees, an end to the 90 Days’ Bill (no more “fire at will”, bringing in a “referee” service), honouring the equal pay recommendations of the recent working group, instituting Fair Pay Agreements for workers in exploitative industries… I’m not saying that we shouldn’t aim for a bigger shift over time, but let’s celebrate the good stuff, too!

      • Craig H 24.2.2
        23 October 2017 at 4:47 pm

        I agree that a staggered approach is important to avoid sinking employers, but National have put minimum wage up every year since they were in office, generally 50c/hr, so IMO Labour have to put it up enough to significantly improve upon that.

    • greywarshark 24.3
      24 October 2017 at 10:51 am

      When in 2018?

  27. eco Maori/kiwi 27
    23 October 2017 at 12:50 pm

    And if everyone makes a donation for this positive advertising campaign to Tautoko our new coalition Government we will have our fair and equal society influencing the rest of the world to to change to a fair and equal WORLD this is what we need to do as this is the way our world works ka pai

  28. The Chairman 28
    23 October 2017 at 1:08 pm

    Seeing as Labour won’t increase core benefit rates and the Greens were unable to secure it as a win, is there any possibility of beneficiaries getting a little extra over Christmas and long weekends? Giving them more fiscal scope to get together with their family and friends.

    • Craig H 28.1
      23 October 2017 at 1:14 pm

      Possibly. There’s meant to be a review, and at least the winter heating package means more money even if it’s not every week.

      • The Chairman 28.1.1
        23 October 2017 at 1:25 pm

        The heating package will be in one hand and out the other.

        And the review made no mention of reviewing core benefit rates. It is more to do with how the system operates and how beneficiaries are treated.

        • red-blooded 28.1.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 1:55 pm

          Surely that’s a pretty big thing. There’s been a lot coming out about failure to inform people of their rights and a bullying culture in WINZ.

          • The Chairman 28.1.1.1.1
            23 October 2017 at 2:06 pm

            Holding a review is required.

            Ensuring people are receiving their full entitlements, are treated fairly and with respect will help. But so too will more money in the hand.

            • Craig H 28.1.1.1.1.1
              23 October 2017 at 4:43 pm

              I agree with both of those points. That said, the review will ensure people actually get paid their full entitlements which will go a long way to get more money into people’s hands. Also, while I don’t think the review encompasses the actual rates specifically, it covers:

              The welfare system will be overhauled. Specific promises include ensuring access to entitlements, removing “excessive sanctions” and reviewing Working for Families “so that everyone has a standard of living and income that enables them to live in dignity”.

              http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/election/2017/10/the-greens-10-big-policy-gains.html

              Certainly leaves some room there to improve the welfare system!

              • The Chairman …
                23 October 2017 at 7:56 pm

                While ensuring people receive their full entitlements is important and will help some (a number are already receiving their full entitlements) we must keep in mind full entitlements have largely been insufficient since the Ruth Richardson cuts.

                As for improving Working for Families, it does nothing for families who’s children are no longer young and for those that don’t have dependents.

                So yes, plenty of room for more improvement.

                • In Vino …
                  23 October 2017 at 10:26 pm

                  Whose, not who’s. Who’s means either who is or who has.

                  Chairman, you have been trying so earnestly to appear genuinely left-wing, but here you are concern trolling again, casting gloom over policies, and urging towards policies you secretly hope will alienate the public.
                  I just want other, new readers to be aware of you.
                  Of course, I may be wrong, and I am sure you will protest…

                  • The Chairman …
                    24 October 2017 at 3:43 pm

                    I’m merely shining the light of reality over policy. If that casts them in a gloomy way, it’s because in reality, they are.

                    If you are unhappy with that, blame the ones who created it, not the ones who highlight the flaws.

                    I advocate my own policy suggestions that I believe are required, thus will help. Moreover, are likely to muster support.

                    When it comes to you speculating on my positioning, you’ve always been wrong. And as I’ve told you (and a number of others) it’s not about me. So if you want to keep banging on about me, you can do it from the sideline.

                    • McFlock …
                      24 October 2017 at 3:59 pm

                      “Shining a light”?

                      Gloom is a matter of perspective. We’re just walking out of a dark cave of tory government, and you’re the dude looking at the sky and complaining it’s a little bit cloudy.

                      Most normal people are still blinking and trying to adjust to the new light level and warmth.

  29. The Chairman 29
    23 October 2017 at 1:27 pm

    The give a little extra over Xmas campaign.

    Sign in if you support the notion of the new Labour/NZ First Government giving beneficiaries a little extra over Christmas.

    • The Chairman 29.1
      23 October 2017 at 2:31 pm

      There’s been a few posts made since the give a little extra post (at 29) was made, therefore I sincerely hope it’s a case of the post not being noticed rather than an indication of the lack of support.

      • Kay 29.1.1
        23 October 2017 at 3:35 pm

        I noticed just now but first time I’ve looked at OM today so that’s my excuse 🙂

        There’s been a “Christmas bonus” for beneficiaries in the UK forever, as far as I know it was still happening a couple of years ago despite the horrendous situation they’re in; I will check with my friend there tomorrow to see if she still gets it.
        Of course one should be given here. Ethically and morally an increase for cost of living is more justified but we’re not naive enough to think that will happen. It hasn’t for 25 years, why change the habit of a generation now?

        • The Chairman 29.1.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 4:48 pm

          “There’s been a Christmas bonus for beneficiaries in the UK forever”

          Interesting, I was unaware of that.

          Unfortunately, Labour won’t commit to increasing core benefit rates, therefore a Christmas bonus would be better than nothing. And I thank you for your support.

          I was surprised the Greens couldn’t even secure that (a Christmas bonus) from Labour, but at least they’re happy with their 3 MPs (outside of cabinet).

          To be fair, perhaps they (the Greens) didn’t even consider it. Therefore, it could be something they could consider and help advocate for now?

    • Olwyn 29.2
      23 October 2017 at 4:06 pm

      Are you able to give a link to the relevant page? I agree with the idea but don’t know what I am meant to sign.

      • The Chairman 29.2.1
        23 October 2017 at 4:51 pm

        This is it. You’ve already signed in, thanks. Just gauging support for the notion at this stage.

        • eco Maori/kiwi 29.2.1.1
          23 October 2017 at 9:22 pm

          I support your cause The Chairman. I’v just got to much going on at the moment to comment Kia ora

          • greywarshark 29.2.1.1.1
            23 October 2017 at 9:34 pm

            It would be like getting Scrooge to have a change of heart at Christmas to get some extra for the bennies. And it should be only for the under 65s.
            The poor things they do need it very badly some of them and while us oldies could do with more we tend to do better and get better treatment.

            • The Chairman 29.2.1.1.1.1
              24 October 2017 at 3:27 pm

              Jacinda comes across as very caring, but this would certainly put her to the test. If she knocks this back as well (Labour refused to increase core benefit rates) then she would be a “Scrooge”.

              To be fair, the extra payment should be across the board.

              The Government would get a lot of it back in tax as it is spent throughout the economy. And businesses would get a surge in demand.

              Which would help appease a number on the right, giving it support from both sides, making it less of a political risk.

              If enough of us here support and join in this cause, do you think we (through our combined blogging power and this site) could influence the new Government into paying out an Xmas bonus by this Christmas?

              There’s a challenge.

          • The Chairman 29.2.1.1.2
            24 October 2017 at 3:50 pm

            Thanks, eco Maori/kiwi.

  30. greywarshark 30
    23 October 2017 at 1:47 pm

    Why would businesses hosting online material take a long time to take down offensive or vicious material? A. Because their income and usefulness as a medium for others to interact with is affected by clicks and if there is a controversy, they will get more of those. A deviant system that feeds on others’ dramas and distress more than on the lesser results from good, happy events and news.

    This happened to someone very tech savvy and now as a way of hopefully preventing it, there is a site to go to.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/afternoons/audio/201858368/zoe-quinn-why-are-we-calling-death-threats-trolling

    • Incognito 30.1
      23 October 2017 at 2:30 pm

      A very good article, thank you.

      Likes there already something like ‘ethical investing’ by which people can demand their investment (e.g. pension/superannuation) not be invested in something they consider unethical (e.g. weapons industry). Similar pressure can and should be applied to advertisers who place their ads on ‘dubious’ or contentious websites. These advertisers should never be able to use the argument (excuse) that they didn’t know because they were only looking at a spreadsheet containing numbers of clicks and dollars earned, for example.

    • eco Maori/kiwi 30.2
      23 October 2017 at 4:51 pm

      Good link GWS we need to come up with some innovative Ideas to clean that shit up I would not be a happy Grandfather if anyone does that to my grandchildren keep up the good work Zoe Quinn Ka pai

  31. cleangreen 31
    23 October 2017 at 2:18 pm

    I see that the voice of the ‘Road freight Transport’ industry is now all over the media groaning about the shortage of “truck drivers”

    I have heard this said by the road transport Forum Ken Shirey and his associated shills have said this, from memory at least four times this year!!!!

    Perhaps Ken Shirley needs to read the incomming Government ‘policies on land transport’ as even Heather du plessis alllen said it right in the NZH yesterday that the new labour lead government is hell bent on moving a lot more freight back to rail well good on them!!!!

    So then our roads are again much safer and cheaper to maintain and our CO2 emission targets will be reached with no more penalties to us all.

    I say that is a win win win for us all – as we dont need more imported cowboy truck drivers that would be just cheap labour for the trucking industry sorry.

    Here is the article for Ken Shirley’s information.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=1193550

    NZ HERALD SAYS THIS; The days of freight-carrying trucks cutting up
    our highway network are numbered. Both NZ First and the Greens are
    obsessed with getting freight off our roads and back on the railways.

    NZ Herald.

    NEW ZEALAND

    Heather du Plessis-Allan: Winners and losers of the new Government

    22 Oct, 2017 5:00am

    Jacinda Ardern will be New Zealand’s next Prime Minister but who
    really won when New Zealand First decided to back Labour.

    By:
    Heather du Plessis Allan

    Heather du Plessis-Allan is a columnist for the Herald on Sunday

    Change is coming. Big change. That much Winston Peters has told us.

    Exactly what that means we won’t know until the new government reveals
    its coalition policy deals in the next few days. But still, we have
    enough hints and clues to already declare some winners and losers.

    WINNERS

    Anyone with a car

    The days of freight-carrying trucks cutting up our highway network are
    numbered. Both NZ First and the Greens are obsessed with getting
    freight off our roads and back on the railways.

    • Ed 31.1
      23 October 2017 at 2:22 pm

      Shirley.
      Wasn’t he ACT?

    • Ed 31.2
      23 October 2017 at 2:23 pm

      ‘Obsessed’…
      du Plessis is such a National tool.

      • cleangreen 31.2.1
        23 October 2017 at 2:43 pm

        Yes she is Ed but the ‘meat is sweeter closer to the bone”

        As Heather’s article cuts across national ‘ideology ‘ of using road transport for everything in NZ did not feature in Du plessis allen’s article, so it is useful to us on the rail side.

  32. Ed 32
    23 October 2017 at 5:08 pm

    Another Tory tool.

    Mark Richardson

    TV and radio host Mark Richardson tweeted that he is worried the new Labour Government will drive up the price of his morning latte.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=11935935.

    This has prompted some great responses.

    Finlay Macdonald
    ‘Wait till he hears about the penis tax.’

    Chris Mugford
    ‘maybe you and Mike Hoskings can carpool to save costs’

    Ian Grant
    ‘Or move to New York and live in trump tower where you won’t have any complaints’

    DaveMac‏
    ‘That’s fine, we had several years of getting our heads round stupid statements from f..kwits like you most mornings, & as for slow batting..’

    Bronwyn Cross
    ‘Rich, entitled, white men whining about the cost of coffee get what they deserve. ‘

    William Mason‏
    ‘if tht’s all you’ve gt 2 moan abt the new govt then u shud spend time helping ppl @ the city mission buttercup’

    • Ed 32.1
      23 October 2017 at 5:22 pm

      The response continues…

      Finlay Macdonald
      ‘Wait till he hears about the penis tax.’

      Rachel Stewart
      Based on size, he won’t be paying much.

      Finlay Macdonald‏
      ‘Each according to their ability to pay, only fair.’

      • eco Maori/kiwi 32.1.1
        23 October 2017 at 5:49 pm

        Yes Mark’s a tosser lol.
        Many thanks for the Big man that Tautoko me that while I was band for 9 days he comes from the same city that I have decided to build my Maunga in Rotorua you been playing good M8 and yes they are still giving me the underarm bowl .
        I like the way you Tautoko OUR youth Kia kaha Big man.

    • NZJester 32.2
      23 October 2017 at 6:35 pm

      National would have upped the price of his morning latte during their term in power more than anything Labour will do. Remember when National promised no tax increases and increased GST claiming it was not a tax increase. That would have rocketed the cost of his morning latte quite a bit. Labour should consider increasing PAYE a bit and lowering GST to reverse the tax swap National did. Most of those in the middle class will notice little difference and it will only really affect those on higher incomes and lower incomes by increasing lower incomes spending power and fractionally lowing those on higher incomes a bit.
      The lower cost of morning lattes would surely help them out anyway.

  33. tracey 33
    23 October 2017 at 5:22 pm

    The Union movement seemed quiet, near invisible during Campaign 17. Was that by design or devolution?

    • cleangreen 33.1
      23 October 2017 at 6:07 pm

      Good question Tracy,

      We certainly expect the unions now show their might as National disolve into history.

      • tracey 33.1.1
        23 October 2017 at 6:33 pm

        Labour, imo, will not go close to evening up the imbalances generated by targetted neutering of the unions over the last 30 to 40 years.

  34. logie97 34
    23 October 2017 at 7:27 pm

    I used to visit his blog site fairly regularly. Brian used to be the foil to Boag on RNZ’s “The Panel,” but recently has appeared to be confused as to where he stood on the political spectrum. http://brianedwardsmedia.co.nz. He hasn’t, to date, posted a comment on the new left of centre government.