Interesting-the sheep deal has made McCully a liability-the smiling assassin has sent him on his way. Wonder who the Nats have lined up for this plum seat and maybe it will become vulnerable with no McCully and a swing to Labour?
I reckon,
They are saying the Kocks are pissed that Trumps ahead, because he’s rich and paying his own way, so they cant get their claws in there. But Trump in the Whitehorse? This could put the US back to the days of Hoover, with his attacks on the Muslim Religion, and the other insanities coming out..
More likely it will put the US back to the days of Germany 1933.
That guy also had no economic policy except, “I will make this country great again.” His only election message was anger and outrage because of his country’s fall from power.
Today, one one-thousandth of the American electorate is responsible for 25 percent of campaign funding. Members of Congress spend 30–70 percent of their time raising money for their next campaign. No one doubts that politicians are more responsive to the one one-thousandth than to the 99.9 percent.
…so sad to see the twilight of democracy in the US eclipsed by neofascist kochocrats
You’re either being deliberately obtuse or you’re an idiot, arguing from bad faith or stupidity. In other words, it’s a complete waste of time discussing this with you.
The problem is the GINI, and that won’t stop fuckwits like you doing even more harm.
National had a golden chance to lower the rates of domestic violence, lower the number of childhood abuse victims ……….. and lower our prisoner numbers.
It was the Alcohol law review …………..
They had good advice from medical professionals, police officers and others.
But they spent the bulk of their time meeting with liquor company lobbyists ( and political donars ?), and ended up ruling out any changes which would lower alcohol abuse …………….
Our high rates of domestic violence and abuse are Nationals achievement …….and they will use their crisis to give us something that will make us even sicker ……
When you look at the total cost to the government of domestic violence, including: police, prison and court time, and prevention. The amount spent on prevention is less then 1% of total money spent. It’s no surprise nothing changed, and if anything we can expect further cuts to prevention as the government ‘invests’ more money in the prison complex. I think this government will instead focus it’s energy’s on coming up with new ways of measuring data.
You obviously haven’t read enough studies of what happens to animals when you put them in cages.
I seriously doubt that you can extrapolate violence/testoserone levels in men in prison out to the general population. Lots of other criticism of your idea but that will do to start with.
That’s the right’s answer to everything, is that it all comes down to personal responsibility if you’re not a winner in life, blah bla bla, a bloody great scapegoat that one. You don’t have to offer any solutions, its all your own fault.
I have had family involved in several of these as volunteers or professionally. They are largely run on a voluntary basis by groups outside the government, and usually get a slither of funding but are grossly underfunded.
Perhaps you should ask yourself a more basic question – why are there so many ‘options’ and how many of them are effectively defunct. Try using the date filter and see how many of those sites (which is what you were looking at) are dead.
Which is probably part of the problem. People simply don’t know where to go.
The real issue is more about people realizing they’ve got a problem and for those people to take the necessary steps to deal with their anger issues.
People with anger issues usually don’t realise that that they have anger issues. They need to have it pointed out to them which means that we need a proactive organisation doing so.
Such an organisation would be where people who need help from people with anger issues can go to get that help and then that organisation would have the power to force the people with anger issues into dealing with their anger.
He says “public service not delivering, can see why the govt wants to get private organisations involved”.
This is THE classic tactic. Run down the public service, deprive it of the necessary funds, then say its not working and the private sector can do it better ….. and hey presto – the private sector comes in with a big financial incentive from the govt.
with a watertight contract that ensures they get the taxpayer dollars even when they fail to deliver the promised results…but hey, its better value ,right(wing)?
The point of a new project for Bill, like the traditional commission of enquiry, is to delay a public accounting for his failures, ideally until out past the next election.
there is much love for Aunty Double Dipper from Dipton Bill English, also Finance Minister for our current National led Government.
It must be him admitting that despite cuts to all services in regards to Domestic Violence, nothing was achieved that brings out the love sweet love. His solution? More cuts 🙂
I think he is trying to get his micro surplus up and going 🙂
because it is a business. Nothing weird about that. Especially the privatising part of it is business, big business.
I think Pull’s her Benefit calls it ‘sexy business’ the selling of vital services to for profit business…cause you might can’t milk a stone, but you sure can milk a poor person for what their worth, and then off to a private prison they go 🙂
Now that is an A+ response. Poor Bill must be so conflicted that the cost of that private prison business is coming from the budget for which he’s guardian *cough*
Problem is the accademics are not interested in the data because the solution is bleedin obvious. Put more actual money into poverty reduction programs. The governments new fangled data department is (if successful) a cost cutting measure on the other hand. If they dont start getting results soon they will start burying the issues.
Um, which ‘academics’ are you talking about? How will spending more money on poverty reduction address domestic violence in middle and upper income families?
So if we made the poor richer, and the rich poorer i.e. reduced our GINI, then the newly worse off middle class households will have less domestic violence?
How does that work?
Again my general point: most money and most effort in our universities is no longer focussed on solving the crisis level problems facing Kiwis and facing the country.
The role of universities as the “critic and conscience of society”? Out the window. University departments up and down the country should have been backing Jane Kelsey up against the TPP. Instead: crickets.
And it is understandable why that is the case: these are areas with limited international and academic prestige, they are areas which are longstanding and easy to neglect through familiarity, they are areas which are politically controversial and hence always a problem for funding, they are areas which are seen as too low brow pragmatic and not conceptually or theoretically challenging enough, etc.
“So if we made the poor richer, and the rich poorer i.e. reduced our GINI, then the newly worse off middle class households will have less domestic violence?”
We need to reduce inequality across the board (not just who is rich and poor economically). When we do that, reducing domestic violence programmes will be more successful. Do both.
Is that the only way you can think of reducing inequality? I’m pretty sure that such cak-handed incompetence would cause a backlash, so I suggest we don’t do it your way.
Why do upper salaries have to fall if lower ones are rising? Is it because that was the only white-anting approach you could think up on the spur of the moment?
Why do upper salaries have to fall if lower ones are rising? Is it because that was the only white-anting approach you could think up on the spur of the moment?
That of course would be the smarter way to do it, but when Nic the NZer suggested simply giving more income to the poor, you dismissed the suggestion out of hand with your typical clever bullshit reasoning.
Fine, so Nic the NZer gets to put more money directly into anti-poverty programmes, and you get to hand over more money to comfortable and high income earners.
Or you could admit your first paragraph at 3.4.1 was just you mouthing off and poverty reduction programes will likely improve violence measures and GINI measures. (Even if some body else said it)
Australia, for example, has a lower GINI than we do, and a higher average wage, so clearly the “make rich people poorer” approach is nonsense, although I can see why those who specialise in white-anting (whether from the right or the left) fixate upon it.
It is widely acknowledged (among those despised academics at the World Bank, OECD, etc.) that a lower GINI increases a country’s wealth across the board.
So it follows that a sensible approach might actually raise top salaries, just not as quickly as low ones.
I don’t have a strong opinion about it one way or another. Where “earning shit loads” involves environmental degradation, for example, it follows that everyone else isn’t doing ok.
If everyone else is genuinely doing ok then maybe…
While generally very wealthy people develop power to cause mischief somewhat akin to that of states, some enterprises do not intrinsically degrade the environment. JK Rowling’s work wasn’t particularly destructive if you accept that the publishing industry would have printed something else had she been absent.
Seems AOBs reasoning fails on its own merits here however. Or does somebody want to seriously claim that middle and upper income house holds are engaging in domestic violence because they are not paying enough tax?
The main reason to remove wealth from the top to me seems to be so their political power doest reach extremes.
And i would always point out pragmatically you should not put on hold the near term goal of spending on the lower end, to wait for the ability to collect from the top end. Its not an easy task getting wealth off the wealthy and putting poverty reduction on hold is a disservice.
Superb. So where’s the disagreement? Raise wages for all (not just union workers, they are only a small minority of wage earners) and implement a universal basic income set at a decent level. No one here would disagree with that.
You really should go back and address wtf you mean leading up to 3.4.1.1.2.1
As far as i can see i suggested pretty sensible plan of funding poverty reduction programs which would help with abuse rates (I believe).
Of course this would also improve GINI statistics if it reduced absolute poverty.
Apparently thats not going to address middle and upper income abuse rates. But you didnt seem to have any plan yourself there (other than demanding GINI rates fall). Whats the plan there? Your going to bring GINI rates down by shouting at them? Will that address middle and upper income abuse rates anyway.
1) boost incomes for the poor. While the corresponding decrease in incomes for the rich will be the same monetary amount, the percentage drop in their income will be much lower than the percentage increase for the poor because that’s how capitalism works.
2) if there is a socioeconomic relationship at all consistent with almost all other forms of violence and harm, the decrease in violence amongst the poor will be quantitively and proportionately many times greater than any corresponding increase amongs the upper and middle classes
3) one could also imagine a socioeconimic mechanism whereby in more equal societies there is less risk associated in leaving an abusive relationship with a rich partner
4) for the rest, other solutions apply such as social workers, support groups, mandatory follow-ups on IPV incidents to make sure the behaviour isn’t continuing, etc etc etc. Money isn’t the sole factor for any problem except poverty, just a major one for many other problems.
the corresponding decrease in incomes for the rich will be the same monetary amount
Not necessarily: as above,
It is widely acknowledged…that a lower GINI increases a country’s wealth across the board.
So it follows that a sensible approach might actually raise top salaries, just not as quickly as low ones.
@Nick: already answered above at 9:52 am. Lower GINI, less violence across the board. There’s lots of information about the mechanisms involved at the Equality Trust site previously linked.
@Nick: already answered above at 9:52 am. Lower GINI, less violence across the board. There’s lots of information about the mechanisms involved at the Equality Trust site previously linked.
Next: timeframe.
Things are at a crisis point so how many years are we going to give ourselves to signficantly reduce GINI? Maybe four or five?
Edit – Helen Clark’s govt did nothing to lower GINI. Levels of GINI during most of Key’s term appear directly comparable to Helen Clark’s day.
“Boost incomes for the poor. While the corresponding decrease in incomes for the rich will be the same”
Its a bit hard to resolve what the exact policy is from comments like this. That may have something to do with missconceptions in economic discussions.
I fully agree with AOB that its good enough if you can get incomes at the bottom to gravitate up maybe with govt subsidies of some form. Better if that reduces some GINI measure. You dont need to collect more tax for that to happen. The left has already tried to push forward policies about taxing wealth more (and paying less to supposedly well off pensioners). The problem is if they are unpopular then the left doesnt get elected and cant do anything. Clearly thats not doing the best for left wing constituants.
For those who have forgotten what a GINI is – voila Wikipedia.
The Gini coefficient (also known as the Gini index or Gini ratio) (/dʒini/ jee-nee) is a measure of statistical dispersion intended to represent the income distribution of a nation’s residents, and is the most commonly used measure of inequality.
Gini coefficient – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient
Further explanation:
A Gini coefficient of zero expresses perfect equality, where all values are the same (for example, where everyone has the same income). A Gini coefficient of one (or 100%) expresses maximal inequality among values (for example, where only one person has all the income or consumption, and all others have none).[3][4]
However, a value greater than one may occur if some persons represent negative contribution to the total (for example, having negative income or wealth). For larger groups, values close to or above 1 are very unlikely in practice.
Now you know, or not, as the case may be. Clear as mud.
And you take what English says at face value? The Sallies say his party tells lies: perhaps everyone else has noticed that it’s counterproductive dealing with callous deceitful hypocrites.
What’s the point of doing a whole lot of research into lies? You’re not going to get published anywhere reputable, unless you shift focus and do a Poli-Sci analysis of exactly how and why the lies are being told.
I think if academics were in it for the money academia wouldn’t appeal to them.
On the funding note, and on what is smiled upon charity-wise and what is not, I thought it was interesting looking at a 2002 ‘book’ guide on charities
to see the following (which says a lot about government wanting people to be fully informed):
2. Under Advancement of education as a legal charitable purpose, the last entry reads:
Education for political or other similar purposes is not charitable as it does not provide a public benefit.
Our problem in NZ a government that desires and ensures our ignorance of our polity! (Being a bit ignorant myself, I checked I had the right word –
Google defined it – an organized society; a state as a political entity.)
I’m saying that English is a minister of a government that tells lies, as detailed by the Sallies, and that while academics would no doubt love to get their hands on the data, they can’t, because the National Party has constructed a dishonesty machine.
All this has been detailed in the Sallies’ report: ‘Moving Targets’ – I suggest you familiarise yourself with it.
Why can’t you give a link One Anonymous Bloke. Always short and sharp you are, and all knowing. Can we gain the background to that info with your help. That’s what we have a left leaning blog for, to assist the spread of useful information and understanding, I thought.
you are correct in saying that funds spend on poverty will not eradicate ‘all’ domestic violence, but it will alleviate the worst of it.
I think that to a large extend it depends how one defines ‘domestic violence’ on a private level – violence by family members, and how one defines ‘domestic violence’ on a state / governmental level – violence by a state who simply does not care how its populace survives.
On a private level, one can help by providing funds to schools for a. appropriate and science based sexual education, education about how to prevent being violent oneself, how to speak to someone in authority should one be a victim of domestic violence or sexual assault at home etc etc.
Then funds could be provided to Shelters and Refuge Centers, so that victims of domestic violence and sufferers of abuse have a save place they can go to.
On a state / governmental level funds could be provided to create social housing and / or maintain current social housing stock (aka State Houses) so that children and their parents can live in a decent home that they can afford.
Benefit levels could be reviewed so that Children and their Parents have enough funds to not only pay rent, but also pay electricity and have food.
Benefit levels could be reviewed so that children of poor parents (there is a big growing class of working poor here in NZ) will receive adequate clothing and other needed items for their schooling.
Not eating, not being warm, being bullied at school for being poor are all symptoms of ‘domestic violence’.
Children dying of cold in a government owned and maintained state house?
Now these are just a very few examples of how to ‘fight’ domestic violence, and all of the examples listed would prolly not cost more than the money that the Double Dipper from Dipton has squandered on ‘Statistics’ to prove that nothing can be done.
What I would like to know is why these guys are actually in government if they believe that the private industry is so much better at governing. It must be that they are so bad that no one would want them in private business.
“Not having Police around to patrol the streets and make certain parts of town safer is a part of ‘domestic violence’ and usually it is women who bear the costs. i.e.
That’s not domestic violence. The most straightforward solution to that is to put a curfew on men. But ultimately men have to do the anti-violence work or the problem just goes somewhere else. Having police patrol the streets to the degree needed to stop rape in public places is ineffective, inefficient and makes people paranoid.
good idea. Or women police could do it. Or do you think that women aren’t capable and that only men can do such a job?
edit, thinking about it, in some places in NZ police men could probably be trusted with the job, whereas in other places obviously not. I’m sure we could come up with a system that allows us to determine who is trustworthy or not.
Frankly i consider the Idea to put a curfew on Men a bit ‘out there’, and maybe to harsh, as there are also female offenders, and there are also man who get raped. And most rapes happen with someone we know and in areas / homes/ office we live and use, aka our domestic environment.
But, our police force is being harmed by budget cuts, an extension of these budget cuts results in certain areas to loose their cop shops, the loss of presence of cops in the street and loss of community constables etc etc. In such an environment were effectively the state has abandoned its duty to provide safety to all citizens, domestic violence will grow. Mugging, Burglaries, Dairies being robbed, assault and sexual violence are all a consequence of this.
This is not a case of this is someone who will beat the living day light out of his/her partner or child/ren, or if this is someone who will assault someone alone in a park. Both happen because they can.
both are instances of domestic violence, if i consider the Park, the road, the sports fields and the shops were i get my milk and bread an extension of my domestic area of habitat.
I don’t say that police on the streets can prevent all rapes or many, but not having police in the streets will for sure do nothing.
I am not saying that having science based sexual education, education re sexual boundaries, and sexual assault, and sexual consent in schools will prevent pregnancy, std or rape, but not having programmes like will surely not create a better outcome.
So we need to have an approach that works in the intimate area of the family home, and the more open area of the families community and surrounds.
“Frankly i consider the Idea to put a curfew on Men a bit ‘out there’,”
Me too. I’m not actually suggesting we should do that, it’s more a device to get people to think (and to see which regressive men would argue against it 😉 ). If we were serious about ending domestic and other sexual violence we would be looking at the behaviour of men and the control structures in society.
Rape of adults (which is what your link was about) is an act done overwhelmingly by men. Yes women can rape, but most women and men who are raped are raped by men. See, that’s putting the responsibility back on the class of people who do the bad thing.
I agree that police should be better funded and that a presence on the street in a community based way is a good thing. But if we are at the stage of thinking that police patrols are needed to control violent crime after dark then we’ve lost a lot of ground. To have prevented the assault in that link by patrolling would have required a huge police presence. I think there are better ways of using police time.
“if i consider the Park, the road, the sports fields and the shops were i get my milk and bread an extension of my domestic area of habitat.”
Fair point, although we don’t know if that was the case for the woman who was assaulted. I also think there is value in differentiating between sexual assualt that happens at home or by one’s partner/family and that which happens in other contexts. As you say, most rape is done to women by people they know in places they are familiar with.
I don’t base anyting on that case, but it is a standard case. A dark park, as per comments from people that live near the area for some reason Lights have been cut in this park so now its dark, is a good place to mug, rob, beat or rape someone. That is my point.
A neighbourhood with our a presence of police is a good place to mug, rob, beat or rape someone. Taht is my point.
Children who think that Dad beating Mum, Mum beating the kids is normal, will do what if no one tells them that it is not normal.
Children who think that being sexually abused by Dad, Uncle or Cuzzie is normal will do what if no one tells them that it is not normal.
So we need to look at domestic violence as ‘societal violence’ that to an extend is even condoned – Women and Children as chattel to be treated as the owner – Dad – Head of the Family – sees fit, and if he spares the rod he spoils the chattel. This is still a valid thought in the eyes and brains of many hyper religious types of all creeds.
And in a nutshell, this is what Bill English is essentially saying, We can’t do anything about it, so lets stop wasting money on it. These ‘domestic violence’ incidents might be not so violent at all, when one has a religious believe in which a women is helpmeet, subservient to the husband, and ultimatively only does as he pleases. (and a women can have an education and a job and still live by the doctrine that the father or husband will decide what is best for her – after all she is only women).
So really we have to look at domestic violence as something that happens intimately in families all over the country, but also as something that happens with the blessings of the state, that refuses to secure the outdoors for the public, that refuses to educate the young ones on how to build boundaries, keep themselves safe, and on how to report domestic violence and to whom, a state that refuses to assure that everyone has a safe dwelling and a plate full of nutritious food to eat, a state that refuses to keep communities safe by rationing their community constable away. (something i am sure that will only happen in certain neighbourhoods), and we have to see domestic violence that is while not outright condoned by our churches – after all violence is bad – but still tolerated in the name of biblical teachings and christian(insert any other creed in that suits you better) values.
Not disagreeing with anyone here so don’t take this the wrong way but there seems to be a strong theme of religion in your views, its probably just my view (being an atheist) but does religion in NZ still have that strong of a hold outside ethnic minorities?
Generally speaking most of our current laws are based on a system stemming for an age where the church (roman catholic, or protestant or anglican) has very much decided the norms and laws.
Don’t forget that until the seventies a women could not have a bank account without her husbands signature, could not have a cheque book without her husbands signature and could not get a contraceptive without her husbands permission to name just a few. These privileges that men have held were those given to men by the church/law of yesteryears. And if you look at communes like the Brethren, LSD, Evangelic Christians (purity, sexual abstinece,), you will find that christian/judaic/islamic believes are still very much alive and still rule when it comes to the relationships of women vs men there is a certain undertone of man knows best and mum goes with the flow.
And yes, religion in NZ is big, have a look at the mega churches being build, chirstian radio stations, tv channels etc etc.
I do believe that half of domestic violence is simply just people not being able to deal with life and letting someone else pay for their frustrations by controlling / beating / abusing partners, kids or elders, and the other half of domestic violence is simply just people living out their believes, i.e. women have to be submissive and do as the husband wishes, and the same counts for children, and she / he is poor and its their fault for them being lazy and this is why they should live in a hovel and only eat when we (government/state/society) judges that they have suffered enough or jumped through enough hoops (WINZ anyone) to get a food voucher, or a bed voucher.
“A dark park, as per comments from people that live near the area for some reason Lights have been cut in this park so now its dark, is a good place to mug, rob, beat or rape someone. That is my point.”
Agree.
Our planners and park designs are purely functional (often for singular sports) and ignore the myriad uses to which the local community can put them.
In particular, sports fields which are used only in evenings and weekends and make up the majority of easily accessible park spaces for most NZers.
Planners also provide blind alleys in the suburbs, where walkways are surrounded by 2 metre high fences, and follow the back or sides of houses where community eyes are unlikely to be looking. (A solution: allow similar builds to laneway homes on back sections, and you will completely change the atmosphere of current dark and unloved spaces.)
Parks and community spaces need to be designed to encourage multi-use, and multi-generational use. In many European communities the public spaces are considered an extension of your home, and social activities with friends and family utilise those spaces at all times of the day and night. As NZ has not been limited by space or transport when planning, designing and building – this public extension has not been common. But it has benefits, and needs to be encouraged.
Better community social cohesion, and also, better public safety due to that extended use and sense of community ownership.
It would be a good initiative programme for some of our currently ignored Auckland suburbs, where family overcrowding is rife.
If you are an owner-occupier of a house, then you should be able to build a small home on the back of your section that both provides affordable living to friends and family (not just an elderly relative) and provides a community benefit of redirecting attention to currently unwatched (and unsafe) public spaces.
Yes, I think I made that point (that the violence just shifts elsewhere). My suggestion was to prompt people to think about what is going on when a woman gets sexually assualted at night in a park by three men.
The problem is that most men will think wtf because its just completely out of their scope of understanding whereas the men that do this sort of thing won’t care at all
I suppose you could if you had millions of cameras in every nook and cranny and every one was chipped.
Every time there was a crime you’d just look at whatever camera caught the incident, over lay that with the stored chip ids and voila, no one would commit crime because you could never get away with it.
“The problem is that most men will think wtf because its just completely out of their scope of understanding whereas the men that do this sort of thing won’t care at all”
In my lifetime the attitudes of men have changed hugely. Men can be educated and made aware of what the issues are and what is acceptable and what is not. Plus, this conversation is happening in the context of GINI and inequality. Do something about those and many other things become easier to solve.
perhaps PR if you believe it is just individuals rather than a culture – that is men’s culture, masculinity as defined and applauded within our society and so on
most men know exactly what the problem is and a fair few know the answers too imo
one easy way to start is to not laugh when certain man make jokes about rape among their mates or on the radio.
another way is to accept that if a girl does not like her hair pulled and she says no, that she said no, consent was not given, and that the pulling of the hair has to stop and not call that ‘horsing around’ or ‘having a bit of fun’.
Baby steps really.
IF you don’t want to have it happen to your wife/mother/ sister/daughter/cuzzie/coworker etc etc then dont let it happen to someone else, and don’t just go a shucks if it does happen saying nothing can be done.
Agreed and when others start talking about inserting beer bottles where they shouldn’t be or start using swiss balls in ways they weren’t designed we really shouldn’t turn a blind eye
Puckish Rogue …
24 February 2016 at 1:08 pm
Agreed and when others start talking about inserting beer bottles where they shouldn’t be or start using swiss balls in ways they weren’t designed we really shouldn’t turn a blind eye
ouch. and no i don’t even want to know what swiss balls are. But i think it goes without saying that is as equally abhorrent as some bloke on the radio joking about soaps.
“What I would like to know is why these guys are actually in government if they believe that the private industry is so much better at governing. It must be that they are so bad that no one would want them in private business.”
Sabine, I believe it goes deeper than that, more complex. These guys, Double Dipper, Paula Benefit and Ann Tolley for example are well paid and receive exceptionally generous superannuation benefits plus perks so they hang in there. They could get jobs outside from directorships etc – but they would never get the freedom and power to exert the control they do without being scrutinised and these punitive cost cutting exercises put pain on vulnerable people and affect morale in State Services Departments – like the police, teachers and nursing staff. Its more a control thing which is very addictive, plus there has to be a streak of sadism/vindictiveness in their psyche to enjoy stretching the rubber band so fine. Control is a big component of family violence as well and it makes the person perpetuating it feel more powerful and its like a dose of “feel good” for them. No normally balanced human being would enjoy cost cutting, to the state that ill and unemployed exist hand to mouth week by week. I suggest that these ministers just love their jobs.
Yes, hence why I call it ‘state sanctioned domestic violence’.
i suggest that these ministers are control freaks that not only love their jobs, but that also love the power that they have and the misery they can inflict.
Marquis de Sade comes to mind ,and most of what the dear Marquis wrote about had nothing to do with sex but all to do with what people that have power do to people that don’t have power.
i suggest that these ministers are control freaks that not only love their jobs, but that also love the power that they have and the misery they can inflict.
Maggie says that the generous Government put in a “modest amount”. Are we as outraged as we were with Gareth? Other bidders put in some dollars as well. Announcements later today.
didn’t he come out and say it was a ruse to get ‘ordinary’ kiwis to go hard to beat him and ensure the campaign succeeded – I didn’t buy it of course 🙂
If so, he was smart, it apparently worked. Can we try something similar for the next election to get what we want for NZ?? We have tried asking nicely, we have thrown a dildo, we’ve pushed in an onion on a stick! (Referring to comedy Rinse the Blood off my Toga.) We’ll do – almost – anything.
No, because the government (I hope) is not going to, whenever it’s in residence , prevent people walking above the high tide mark (and what a bargain residence that would have been, getting the public to part pay).
Why would a tiny slither of land put back into public hands in a National Park be covenanted and have a different legal status? Wouldn’t it make more sense to consolidate it into the park.
The most interesting part of this is that Maggie Barry said on RNZ this morning that the government is going to buy up other parts of Abel Tasman and merge them into the national park as well. She was expecting to announce this within 3 weeks.
So it seems National is tapping this crowd-funding and cheerful sentiment around it for votes.
Fair enough; but at what cost? Where is the money coming from?
yep they’ve found a seam of gold – smacked the original claim owners over the head and proceeding to take the ‘claim’ over and dig the shit out of it – until it runs dry or their pollsters tell them someone else has some better gold over there.
Hopefully funding for National park extensions would come from fresh funding from the taxpayer. Funding through tax is the ultimate and fully democratically sanctioned original crowd-funding.
Am I the only one who sees the irony of the public crowd funding to keep a piece of beach, while the government can’t wait to sell as much land off as soon as possible?
imo the measurement is ‘popular’ – after rigorous polling the MOST popular (to middle potential swing Gnat voters) is determined. This is then championed, alluded to, connected to the gnats via maskKey. This then dipilaTories from general popularity into popularity for the gnats. Meanwhile the polling continues 24/7, day and night – else how will the gnats know what to support and push.
Caligula was able to govern, but he didn’t do a lot for his country. Like Brownlee, he diverted national resources to ambitious construction projects. Ultimately he was killed by his own security people.
Suppose Key were toppled in a bloody insurrection by a charismatic antipodean Danton – she too would be able to govern.
Mere governance is no achievement at all – there is always someone on top – the trick is to get considerate folk who leave things better than they found them. That doesn’t describe the Gnats at all – they’re wrecking the place.
I’m a bit ‘meh’ on the whole campaign as well. As mentioned above, National have found another wagon to hitch their “fern” to and will ride it for all its worth.
Gareth wanted the use of the existing bach for 15 years. That upset many folk. I think that under DOC that bach will be demolished as not allowed in a National Park. The bach was I think an old boat dragged up from the beach years ago.
In a lot of cases replanting creates a human interpretation of what land should look like, returning land to a “natural original state” is almost impossible. I’ve seen many restoration projects where they don’t even have the care to plant species from that same region. Then there’s the issue of no one being certain of what the land looked like 1,000, 100,000 or a million years ago.
True, although there are also groups that source plants from within the rohe. We don’t have to go back 1,000 years (especially given that there has been localised climate change in that time). If there are still local intact native ecosystems they will tell us a lot. But I take your point, much of the restoration happening is about making it look like something rather than be something.
“The electronic voting machines are owned by private corporations, which are Republican in orientation, generally. And the courts have ruled that the source code on these electronic voting machines is proprietary. So, even the governments that buy or lease these machines have no access to a final verification process.”
“And this year, about 80 percent of the vote nationally will be cast on electronic voting machines. There is no verifiability. In six key swing states—Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Michigan, Iowa and Arizona—you have Republican governors and Republican secretaries of state, and no method of verifying the electronic vote count. At midnight or whenever it is on election night, those two guys can go in there with an IT person and flip the outcome of an electronically counted vote within about 60 seconds.”
A humorous short video about how easily 4 University of Michigan undergraduates hacked to pieces a Washington, D.C. election site that used computer voting. The kids had a great time, but no one has learned the lesson they are teaching us.
Is there any meaning in what the site policy refers to as ‘ reasonably rational debate’ if a ‘debater’ can simply ignore any point that is inconvenient to them?
IMO, the level of ‘genuine debate’ on this blog would be greatly improved if there was a tighter expectation that commenters should engage directly and honestly with ‘reasonable’ discussion points.
At a minimum, If a commenter has willingly engaged in a discussion, and a point is put to them that is: directly relevant to the original post, their own comments, is tightly focused, is based on referenced facts, draws a logical conclusion from those facts, is put politely…. Then it is entirely reasonable that the point should be met in a genuine and direct manner?
Can a discussion actually be ‘debate’ if that minimum level of engagement is not met?
I think sheep is meaning that he is sick of people giving him shit. Which is fair enough. It’s also fair enough that people are sick of his right wing ideas.
You yourself always attempt to answer points directly and honestly Weka.
If you put a rational fact based point to someone yourself, do you have an expectation of a genuine reply?
And If someone answered your genuinely put rational discussion with an accusation that you fucked pigs, would that bother you?
(On a personal level it doesn’t bother me, as I think that kind of comment says more about the abuser than the abused), but what I would ask is whether or not that kind of approach has any place in a ‘reasonably rational debate’?
And does ‘not liking someones ideas’ justify refusing to engage with reasonable fact based points they make, and simply abusing them?
Does ‘don’t like’ make something untrue and therefore requiring no rational debate?
Just over time, I have noted how small a group of people it is who comment here, and how rare it is for new commenters to join the discussion. Do you think that the quality of ‘debate’ and the ‘abuse’ has something to do with that?
“You yourself always attempt to answer points directly and honestly Weka.
If you put a rational fact based point to someone yourself, do you have an expectation of a genuine reply?”
It depends on the person and the context and whether I’ve been giving that person a hard time recently or given them respect.
“And If someone answered your genuinely put rational discussion with an accusation that you fucked pigs, would that bother you?
(On a personal level it doesn’t bother me, as I think that kind of comment says more about the abuser than the abused), but what I would ask is whether or not that kind of approach has any place in a ‘reasonably rational debate’?”
Pig fucker and rat fucker accusations bother me because I think that animals deserve more respect. Generally that particular insult is aimed at people with right wing ideas. I don’t think anyone has used it at me.
There is a lot of commentary here that isn’t rational debate. The rational response to that is to work with what is, or if one wants to fight it or argue within it, then accept the consequences.
“And does ‘not liking someones ideas’ justify refusing to engage with reasonable fact based points they make, and simply abusing them?
Does ‘don’t like’ make something untrue and therefore requiring no rational debate?”
Depends on the ideas. The rationale I hear for abuse is that the ideas are sufficiently abhorrent as to need ridicule in response. OAB takes it to the extreme and condems all people he perceives as fools before the words have even left their mouth. Most other people engage then give up. The point where they reach their limit varies.
You have to understand too that many people here know you from past exchanges, so they’re going to come down hard on the same kinds of right wing ideas.
“Just over time, I have noted how small a group of people it is who comment here, and how rare it is for new commenters to join the discussion. Do you think that the quality of ‘debate’ and the ‘abuse’ has something to do with that?”
I think stomping on newbies as soon as they arrive like OAB and Lynn do is very counter productive. But I don’t think the robust nature in general is the problem, so much as the lack of moderation around politics. Hence we have few feminist authors here, and while there are more women commenting than there used to be, I’m sure the culture here puts many off. How much of that is the politics and how much the macho stuff I don’t know, I’d say both are a problem.
In general I see the long threads where people end up slagging each other off as tedious. But you take part in those as much as OAB or McFlock or whoever, hence my suggestion that if you don’t like how you are being responded to, talk to different people. There are good commenters here who don’t behave like that. Others of us just like the argument. I have a foot in both camps.
ok I’ve just looked at the thread you are referring to and it’s full of people engaging in genuine debate, a lot of effort put in by people to addressing points and backing their views up with facts. Your complaint seems disingenuous now. This is a robust debate culture. It includes people being rude. But people did respond to your ideas, so what’s the problem?
What’s the problem?
As you point out Weka, ‘many people are put off commenting here’, such as ‘feminists’.
Given the general left wing ideals of tolerance, respect, open mindedness, inclusion, etc, that many here would claim to uphold don’t you think there is something wrong when this forum’s culture is such that so few people are willing to engage with it?
Ok, so now you don’t want to talk about rudeness and you don’t want to talk about what constitutes reasonable debate, you want to debate whether there should be a robust debate culture on the standard? Lynn replied to you below, why not take it up with him? He’s one of the ones that ultimately controls what happens here.
Hard to comment on that without you giving an example so we know what you mean. But there is no onus on people here to have to talk to anyone, so if you don’t like the kind of responses you are getting, try talking to different people.
The level of engagement is purely up to the people concerned. We deal with the trolling behaviour of bait and run as flame starters or diversion from the post, but what you are describing doesn’t sound like that. It sounds like someone has raised a point, you have answered it and they have ignored your point for whatever reason. That sounds more like a degree of shunning – which in your case sounds more like your methods of presentation than anything else. But moderators generally don’t perform forcing to debate..
There is a particular case that we will enforce replies. That is when someone makes an unsubstantiated assertion of fact without a link or a explanation. Usually someone stating an opinion of a bit of outright bigotry or urban myth as fact. That is a practice that is designed to start flamewars and is for the site legally dangerous. We keep an eye out for those and will force substantiation on the penalty of a long ban because idiots who do that make the moderators lives a lot harder and we can do without them.
But generally we aren’t going to act on complaints from the floor if they don’t point to instances in the comment (yours did not) and an explanation about why we as moderators should be concerned about it for the good of the site (we really couldn’t give a rats arse about why you or anyone else personally thinks it is important).
So if someone makes a claim something is ‘fact’, and ‘facts’ are produced to challenge that statement, there is no kind of expectation that the person who made the original claim should address those facts?
I had wondered whether this part of the policy implied that there was an expectation of a certain level of genuine engagement with a reasonable debate, but it seems it does not?
Typically trolls do not interact with other commentators as they either ignore what others say in reply or write a reply that ignores what they said. In either case it is ignorant, anti-social, annoying to read, and will often result in a banning
Sure Weka.
Look at the link I give above if you are interested.
Consider the discussion around whether or not the Salvation Army said that Material Hardship was dropping or not.
“Does the report make the following statement based on Perry’s data?
“Table 2 reports estimated changes in material deprivation or hardship measures between 2010 and 2014, and this offers a slightly more positive picture. The number of children estimated to be living in households experiencing levels of material hardship that might be seen as more than moderate is reported to have fallen from 210,000 in 2010 to 145,000 in 2014. This is encouraging.”
Simple eh. Only one possible answer? Would you have a problem accepting that point Weka?
Or the discussion on whether or not the data that backed that assertion was sound or not.
You’ll see I provided the factual evidence that the S.A. considered the data perfectly sound, and a statement from the Author himself that countered OAB’s claim that the data was not valid.
Simple then. We accept the data is sound and the S.A. is making that statement based on it? But no. The answer is a tirade of explicit sexually themed abuse…..
I’m just wondering if ‘debate’ has any credibility at all if no one ever has to concede a point to facts?
See, what you’re rather dishonestly doing is ignoring other parts of the Sally report.
The quote you made referred to “more than moderate material hardship”. You’ve confused it into “Material Hardship”. So the literal “one simple answer” to your question is that there is insufficient data upon which to base a response.
You’ve then ignored other comments in the report that have a wider focus than just one aspect of one estimate of one measure, such as
CHILD POVERTY RESULT
While the data offers a mixed picture, in total it is difficult to see any meaningful change in rates of child poverty and material hardship since the GFC. It is beginning to appear that this area of social progress is not a political priority at present given that the economy and household income have continued to grow modestly.
In that case, the simple answer to your question is “possibly, possibly not, but overall the measures are pretty constant”.
And you argue that “Two examples of these practices are cited in this report” means that measures not included in those examples are considered “perfectly sound”.
Those are a few examples of why I think that time is better spent calling you a fuckwit than actually engaging with your pretence of a debate.
But be sure, the finite and arbitrary number of these examples doesn’t mean that I regard any other comment by you as being perfectly sound. While there is a theoretical possibility that you might end up understanding the implicit messages used in conversational English, the odds are higher that you’ll yet again fail the Turing test worse than an ’80s text adventure computer game.
The quote you made referred to “more than moderate material hardship”. You’ve confused it into “Material Hardship”. So the literal “one simple answer” to your question is that there is insufficient data upon which to base a response.
I agree that anyone who had not read the report might be confused by that. Apologies.
To clarify the data in Table 2 of the report, The number of children living in ‘more than moderate hardship’ (EU standard threshold) in 2010 was 210,000, and in 2014 it was 145,000. The number of Children living in ‘severe’ hardship was 90,000 in 2010, and 80,000 in 2014.
Combined children in hardship figures are 300,000 in 2010, and 225,000 in 2014. (% figures: -30%, -11%, -25%)
1.These figures are correct McFlock?
While the data offers a mixed picture, in total it is difficult to see any meaningful change in rates of child poverty and material hardship since the GFC. It is beginning to appear that this area of social progress is not a political priority at present given that the economy and household income have continued to grow modestly.
In that case, the simple answer to your question is “possibly, possibly not, but overall the measures are pretty constant”.
The Sallies certainly say that. But if you look at the figures above or what they quote for the peak of the GFC, (the % drops being -34%, -23%, -32%. 110,000 less children in hardship),
2. I find it very hard to reconcile those figures with ‘no meaningful change’?
And to go back to my original point, which was that the report was further evidence that the ‘poverty and hardship are increasing meme was false.
3. You will agree that ‘difficult to see any meaningful change’ does at least eliminate an ‘increase’?
And you argue that “Two examples of these practices are cited in this report” means that measures not included in those examples are considered “perfectly sound”.
No. I say that they do not say all data is unsound, and in some areas they explicitly state they have confidence in the data. For Child Poverty they state ‘we have a number of official measures of income adequacy and material deprivation that allow us to create a consistent
and useful picture of poverty trends over time’, and they clearly reference Perry as the source of much of their data. They make definite assertions based on that data.
Is not a meme. The meme, if you insist, is that poverty and hardship have doubled since 1984 (using median household income as a metric) as a result of neoliberalism and will not improve until neoliberalism is abandoned (I’d like to see it smashed and broken too) in toto.
1) I have no way of knowing if those figures are correct. Wasn’t it only a couple of years back that Treasury seriously fucked up the raw data for some of Perry’s work?
2) whoa there, fucko, what happened to “my original point, which was that the report was further evidence that the ‘poverty and hardship are increasing meme was false.” Let’s call that “1b”
1b) from the paragraph above Table 2 in the report:
The proportion of children estimated to be both materially and income poor has declined from around 13% in 2010 (or about 130,000 children) to 8% in 2013, before rising again to around 9% or 90,000 children in 2014.
So, well after the peak of the GFC, the number of children in poverty and hardship seems to be on the increase again. If the figures are accurate. And where the hell did you get “110,000 less children in hardship”?
2) Well, any meaningful increase. But then you need to be clear that you are comparing apples with apples, rather than taking a single measure that happens to suit your data. This is where you keep falling over. But, for example, according to Perry all the income poverty measures had increases from 2013 to 2014. They might not be meaningful, but they are increases.
3) That appears to be the same data source they used in their 2013 report, and the data source turned out to undercount by 20,000. So while it’s correct from a certain point of view, from other points of view its reliability could be regarded as “debatable”.
But bear in mind that this is the best you can do using the peak of the GFC as a starting point. No meaningful change. Not “massive improvement”. Not “continued gains”. Advances in some narrowly-defined measures balanced by regressions in others.
And comparing the rates with 10 years or thirty years ago, the increases are most definitely meaningful.
1) I have no way of knowing if those figures are correct. Wasn’t it only a couple of years back that Treasury seriously fucked up the raw data for some of Perry’s work
Yup. Detected back in 2014 and corrected well before the data the Sallies base their report on.
As I have said several times. The Sallies are happy with the figures…
So, well after the peak of the GFC, the number of children in poverty and hardship seems to be on the increase again. If the figures are accurate.
The number of children in both income poverty and hardship rose by 1% between 13/14, at the same time as the total number of children in moderate or severe hardship dropped by 15%. (see tables 1 and 2)
This reflects an increase in relative income poverty measure, and further illustrates how the linkage between the 2 measures is problematic.
And where the hell did you get “110,000 less children in hardship”?
Table 2. Total number of children in hardship 2011 335,000, in 2014 225,000. That’s 110,000 less by my calculation. (How is that not significant? If it had gone up by that amount it would not be significant?)
2) Well, any meaningful increase.
Agreed. But yes, relative income poverty measures showed a small increase in the year. According to Perry, “On the moving line approach there was a reported rise to 2014, reflecting the sharp rise in the median. ” Again, indicating that Relative poverty can increase at the same time as hardship drops.
And comparing the rates with 10 years or thirty years ago, the increases are most definitely meaningful. Perry makes very interesting reading on trends since 1980.
In short, Inequality has increased significantly.
Income has risen for 80% of us (bottom quintile stayed flat).
Income based poverty measures have been very mixed over that time, and peaked in the mid 90’s, since when they have been dropping. Currently, depending on the measure used they are roughly between 3-10% above 1980 levels.
On the ‘Constant value’ measure (the closest we have to measuring hardship across 1980 to today, current rates are 13% below 1982 levels.
Between 2011 and 2014 you say! Astonishing. Something must have happened in the meantime to make that big a difference!
Oh, yeah, that’s right, they changed the way they measure it in 2012. I know this because I can remember the last time you tried to make something of it.
Detected back in 2014 and corrected well before the data the Sallies base their report on.
As I have said several times. The Sallies are happy with the figures
You can say it all you want, but the fact remains that Treasury phoned it in in 2013. You know, less than reliable.
And where the hell did you get “110,000 less children in hardship”?
Table 2. Total number of children in hardship 2011 335,000, in 2014 225,000.
Your numbers are incorrect:
Sally’s report Table 2: Estimates of proportion and number of children facing material hardship EU ‘standard’ threshold:
2011: 220,000
2014: 145,000
75,000 might or might not be significant. But again what you fail to grasp is that we are not dealing with instrument guages. We are looking at a basket of indicators, some of which measure things precisely but are indirect, and others that are estimates of estimates but are slightly more direct. And through it all there’s the filter of political interference that affects at least, but not restricted to, two indicators relating to the wellbeing of children in NZ. Looking at hardship, extreme hardship has bounced up and down in alternate years, while moderate hardship has decreased. Is this meaningful, if the number in extreme hardship remains steady? Meanwhile, income poverty is not even that rosy.
Income based poverty measures have been very mixed over that time, and peaked in the mid 90’s, since when they have been dropping.
well, until 2007, then they’ve not been dropping. Of course, stating which tables you’re getting this from would be useful, too, given that the Perry report is 229 pages.
Currently, depending on the measure used they are roughly between 3-10% above 1980 levels.
you do realise that the Perry report is “Trends in indicators of inequality and hardship 1982 to 2014″
not that fucking mixed, anyway. Always above, never below.
On the ‘Constant value’ measure (the closest we have to measuring hardship across 1980 to today, current rates are 13% below 1982 levels.
Which table? And have you considered the effect of inflation on constant-value threshholds over decades?
Basically, you are so full of shit it’s not funny. Then you whine when people point this out.
Your numbers are incorrect:
Sally’s report Table 2: Estimates of proportion and number of children facing material hardship EU ‘standard’ threshold: 2011: 220,000, 2014: 145,000 Total number of children in both categories of the table…..2011 335,000, in 2014 225,000…
75,000 (110,000) might or might not be significant.
25-32% might or might not be significant? If it was Auckland house prices it would not be significant, or an increase in unemployment, or inequality? I bet you would be saying it was…
you do realise that the Perry report is “Trends in indicators of inequality and hardship 1982 to 2014″
not that fucking mixed, anyway. Always above, never below.
Page 98. The graph does start at 1980. I agree the trend has been flat since 2007.
Which table? And have you considered the effect of inflation on constant-value threshholds over decades?
Page 86. The Constant Value Threshold does take inflation into account and according to Perry it “reveals whether the incomes of low-income households are rising or falling in real terms.”
But again what you fail to grasp is that we are not dealing with instrument guages. We are looking at a basket of indicators,
I do understand that McFlock, but my point is that we should be willing to look at all those indicators that are credible with an open mind. It seems to me that you and some others here are unwilling to accept any indicator which doesn’t suit your dogma, even when it is from a credible widely accepted source that is being used quite happily by organisations like The Sallies and The Child Poverty Monitor.
@OAB
To quote from that document … 1. There is no on-going ELSI time series, but the MWI series begins from 2012–13. Because items are common to earlier and later datasets, Perry considers there is sufficient commonality to have a ‘good-enough’ index that will show the shape of the trend line from 2006–07 to 2013–14.
Nowhere in the document does it make any suggestion that Perry’s figures as used extensively by themselves and The Sallies are incorrect.
Apart from in the entire introduction, where it casts doubt on anything that comes out of this government. You’ll deny that, and it’s all there in black and white.
what you fail to grasp is that we are not dealing with instrument gauges
Your numbers are incorrect:
Sally’s report Table 2: Estimates of proportion and number of children facing material hardship EU ‘standard’ threshold: 2011: 220,000, 2014: 145,000
Total number of children in both categories of the table…..2011 335,000, in 2014 225,000…
On what basis do you assume that the kids beyond the extreme hardship threshold are not merely a subset of those kids who are below the standard hardship threshold?
Do you understand what the term “threshold” means?
75,000 (110,000) might or might not be significant.
25-32% might or might not be significant? If it was Auckland house prices it would not be significant, or an increase in unemployment, or inequality? I bet you would be saying it was…
Absolute numbers might or might not be significant, depending on their accuracy. Percentage change in absolute numbers might or might not be significant. Population rates might or might not be significant. Significance depends on things like context, whether the change is within the margin for error of the measurements, and what aspect you’re trying to understand. As a human being, you’d understand all this, of course.
you do realise that the Perry report is “Trends in indicators of inequality and hardship 1982 to 2014″
not that fucking mixed, anyway. Always above, never below.
Page 98. The graph does start at 1980. I agree the trend has been flat since 2007.
Do you mean graph F.2? Y intercept is 1980. Do you see a fucking data point at the Y intercept?
It’s this sort of sloppy shit from you that fucks people off.
But then graph F.2 relates to all individuals, not children, so you’re doing a multi-dimensional bounce around.
On the ‘Constant value’ measure (the closest we have to measuring hardship across 1980 to today, current rates are 13% below 1982 levels.
Which table? And have you considered the effect of inflation on constant-value threshholds over decades?
Page 86. The Constant Value Threshold does take inflation into account and according to Perry it “reveals whether the incomes of low-income households are rising or falling in real terms.”
Table and figure E.1, right? Labelled:
“CV threshold set at 60% of the 1998 median expressed as a proportion of the contemporary median (BHC)”
That doesn’t measure the rate of anyone in poverty. It measures the difference between the CV and REL measures. So what table or chart did you use as your basis for your claim “On the ‘Constant value’ measure […], current rates are 13% below 1982 levels.”?
But again what you fail to grasp is that we are not dealing with instrument guages. We are looking at a basket of indicators,
I do understand that McFlock, but my point is that we should be willing to look at all those indicators that are credible with an open mind. It seems to me that you and some others here are unwilling to accept any indicator which doesn’t suit your dogma, even when it is from a credible widely accepted source that is being used quite happily by organisations like The Sallies and The Child Poverty Monitor.
“Quite happily”. Absence of explicit criticism does not always indicate complete satisfaction.
But what fucks me off about you is that you confuse “any indicator” with “any relevant indicator”. You bounce around with what measurements you use, and finding out what your basing your bullshit on is like extracting hens’ teeth. And nine times out of ten, when we do find out what you’re talking about, it turns out that you’re either making massive assumptions or you’re completely delusional. And then you whinge when people call you a stupid fuckwit because of it.
Here’s a thought: if you don’t want abuse, stop being a dickhead. If people ask for evidence, don’t make them hunt through a 220 page document: at least give the table/chart reference. That way we can quickly see “oh, the lost sheep is just being a fucking moron again, they still haven’t grown a brain”.
On what basis do you assume that the kids beyond the extreme hardship threshold are not merely a subset of those kids who are below the standard hardship threshold?
My basis is the figures the tables show and the commentary provided for them. It’s plain enough IMO, but as you and I are not going to agree on it, I’m happy to leave it to any interested party to read it themselves.
Absolute numbers might or might not be significant, depending on their accuracy. Percentage change in absolute numbers might or might not be significant. Population rates might or might not be significant. Significance depends on things like context, whether the change is within the margin for error of the measurements, and what aspect you’re trying to understand.
That is politspeak. You’ve entered the world of smoke and mirrors and I’m not following you in there. I say that a 30% change in any figure is significant, and If it was going the other way you would be claiming it was hugely significant.
But then graph F.2 relates to all individuals, not children, so you’re doing a multi-dimensional bounce around
The data measure across that timeline is based on Household measures. Children do tend to live in households I believe.
That doesn’t measure the rate of anyone in poverty. It measures the difference between the CV and REL measures.
I referred to ‘hardship’ not poverty, but agree it is not an ideal measure. As I have quoted Perry above “it (CV) reveals whether the incomes of low-income households are rising or falling in real terms.” The tables on real income do show a steady increase for all except the lowest quintile…but i will see if I can find more explicit figures for ‘hardship’ across that time.
“Quite happily”. Absence of explicit criticism does not always indicate complete satisfaction
Sorry McFlock, but that is a fallacious ‘argument from ignorance’. Absence of explicit criticism is just that. It is not evidence of anything else at all.
The fact is that Perry is perfectly well accepted as reliable data by the Sallies and Child Poverty Monitor and everyone else. You and OAB do not accept it and that’s fine by me.
It isn’t ‘politispeak’ – not even Physics deals in absolute numbers – your frequent references to ‘proof’ indicate that you don’t really understand this,
Luckily, we have Einstein to explain it:
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
On what basis do you assume that the kids beyond the extreme hardship threshold are not merely a subset of those kids who are below the standard hardship threshold?
My basis is the figures the tables show and the commentary provided for them. It’s plain enough IMO, but as you and I are not going to agree on it, I’m happy to leave it to any interested party to read it themselves.
So, no basis for that assumption. If Perry had meant 350,000, Perry would have said 350,000. Because people with 8 or more criteria by definition meet the threshold for 4 or more criteria.
Absolute numbers might or might not be significant, depending on their accuracy. Percentage change in absolute numbers might or might not be significant. Population rates might or might not be significant. Significance depends on things like context, whether the change is within the margin for error of the measurements, and what aspect you’re trying to understand.
That is politspeak. You’ve entered the world of smoke and mirrors and I’m not following you in there. I say that a 30% change in any figure is significant, and If it was going the other way you would be claiming it was hugely significant.
So a change from three degrees to two degrees is just as significant as a change from thirty degrees to twenty degrees?
Or three cases of measles in one year and two cases the following year is as significant as the same population having 30,000 assault hospitalisations down to 20,000 the following year? No, because the context of the numbers dictates the significance of those numbers.
But then graph F.2 relates to all individuals, not children, so you’re doing a multi-dimensional bounce around
The data measure across that timeline is based on Household measures. Children do tend to live in households I believe.
Not evenly distributed, however. Which is why the data in section H of perry’s report differs from the household data. Again, your assumptions lead to your irrelevance.
That doesn’t measure the rate of anyone in poverty. It measures the difference between the CV and REL measures.
I referred to ‘hardship’ not poverty, but agree it is not an ideal measure. As I have quoted Perry above “it (CV) reveals whether the incomes of low-income households are rising or falling in real terms.” The tables on real income do show a steady increase for all except the lowest quintile…but i will see if I can find more explicit figures for ‘hardship’ across that time.
So just to clarify, the page 86 chart (E1) comparing CV against REL was irrelevant not just to hardship, but also to child poverty, and your entire case. You fucked up.
“Quite happily”. Absence of explicit criticism does not always indicate complete satisfaction
Sorry McFlock, but that is a fallacious ‘argument from ignorance’. Absence of explicit criticism is just that. It is not evidence of anything else at all.
So it is not evidence of how “happily” (or grudgingly) research is used in an environment that involves less than straightforward or reliable measures.
The fact is that Perry is perfectly well accepted as reliable data by the Sallies and Child Poverty Monitor and everyone else. You and OAB do not accept it and that’s fine by me.
I can’t help but notice the continued absence of explicit evidence to support your description of how happy everyone is.
It isn’t ‘politispeak’
It was straight from an episode of Yes Minister.
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
This is an equally pathetic attempt to cast doubt on perfectly credible and accepted data, in order to avoid facing up to facts that contradict your dogma.
So tell me OAB/McFlock, are you going to be consistent in your stance that no data can be really said to be ‘real, certain or significant’?
@McFlock.
Thinking about the discussion re. the level of ‘debate’ here McFlock, we have made some good progress, thanks, but I’m no longer going to respond to points that would involve both parties in a 3rd repetition of what have obviously become fixed and immovable points.
And I think we’ve reached that state on some of the areas we’ve been discussing.
Happy to continue responding to any point that still has some potential for ‘progression’ in the debate.
“So just to clarify, the page 86 chart (E1) comparing CV against REL was irrelevant not just to hardship, but also to child poverty, and your entire case. You fucked up.”
I’ve already stated 3 times what Perry says the significance of it was. As a general indicator of those factors, it shows a very steady downward curve from 1980…..make of that what you will.
I looked to see if I could find any more direct data on ‘material hardship’ across 1982 – 2015, but the answer seems to be that there is no such comparison available due to lack of credible data pre 1998. Perry, in The material wellbeing of NZ housejolds etc, page 57 on, explains why it is only scientifically valid to report on trends from 2007 onwards, with very limited reference back to 1998.
The rest of the chapter contains in depth the material that forms the basis of almost all discussion on material deprivation in NZ, including the base material for the reports of The Sallies and C.P.M much discussed in this thread.
You can choose to acccept it or not McFlock, but as all credible organisations do accept it, it doesn’t matter a damn if you don’t.
Page 57/58 also contain the authors full explanation of why OAB’s claim that ‘changes in data measures completely undermine the validity of the conclusions’ is poppycock.
I can’t help but notice the continued absence of explicit evidence to support your description of how happy everyone is.
You are battling against your own strawman McFlock. I have made no such statement.
You are incapable of summarising my argument. Either that or you’re deliberately misrepresenting it.
You are the one expressing confidence in Perry’s conclusions about material hardship. I am saying that you haven’t made your case, and the problems with the data as detailed by the Sallies cannot be ignored.
Is there the remotest chance you could avoid lying about that in the future?
I’ve already stated 3 times what Perry says the significance of it was. As a general indicator of those factors, it shows a very steady downward curve from 1980…..make of that what you will.
On the ‘Constant value’ measure (the closest we have to measuring hardship across 1980 to today, current rates are 13% below 1982 levels.
I asked:
Which table?
And a supplementary question. You responded:
Page 86.
and an explanation about adjustment for inflation.
The only tables and figures on page 86 have nothing to do with either the CV or REL rates of poverty. The proportionate value of CV is 13% below 1982 REL levels.
You might think all this is piddling stuff, but it’s actually a really good example of why people find more value in just calling you a fuckwit. We’ve said a lot, but the debate has gone nowhere because you:
This is by no means an exhaustive list: what’s also concerning is that you confuse “best available” with “ideal”, and that you seem to believe that silence equals approval. And then there’s your outright bullshit “Perry, in The material wellbeing of NZ housejolds etc, page 57 on, explains why it is only scientifically valid to report on trends from 2007 onwards, with very limited reference back to 1998.” Where in section G does it even mention the year 1998? Let alone “scientific validity” (don’t use words too big for you to understand).
If this tit-for-tat had all your unsubstantiated bullshit and outright imcompetence removed, there would be almost no discussion remaining. You might call that “good progress”, but it’s not. It’s activity masquerading as utility. That’s why you’re frequently on the receiving end of abuse: you’re a fucking moron who thinks they’re a genius. You never acknowledge imperfection on your part, and therefore any disagreement with you must be incorrect. You’re a pointless waste of space.
Much more productive to just call you a stupid fuckwit. Now go write another comment on open mike about how people are mean. Then run crying to your mummy, she’s waiting for you.
Thanks McFlock, but they are all points that we have batted across the net several times now, and have obviously irreconcilable positions on. I’m not going to restate the same answers a third time.
Besides which, I’m really over this situation where you and OAB on the one hand deny the credibility and/or significance of Perry’s data, while at the same time asking me to answer points based on Perry’s data….
bullshit fucking moron pointless waste of space stupid fuckwit run crying to your mummy, she’s waiting for you.
Mate. I worked for 20 years in freezing works / coal mines / fishing boats / building sites / farms, and after that I can assure you that blank shots fired by an effete intellectual hiding behind the anonymity of a computer screen has absolutely zero effect on me.
Abuse can have gravitas, but IMO, only in a situation where the abuser is in the direct vicinity of the abused, and delivers the abuse in full awareness that they will be personally responsible for it. That can take real balls. But abuse from a position of hiding is just cowardice.
McFlock hasn’t denied the credibility of the data: they’ve pointed out that you don’t understand it, and where you have misrepresented it.
Whereas I pointed out (among other things) that (even if your reading of Perry were correct, which it isn’t) relying on a single study as proof of anything is a mistake, especially under the circumstances outlined by the Sallies.
Is there the remotest chance you could refrain from misrepresenting that in the future?
Thanks McFlock, but they are all points that we have batted across the net several times now, and have obviously irreconcilable positions on. I’m not going to restate the same answers a third time.
Restate? Answering even once would be fine. It’s pretty obvious,really: when you said CV rates today were 13% below 1982 levels, you meant that the value of the CV poverty line was 58% of the corresponding REL line in 1982, but is only 45% of the REL value today. But you can’t admit the slightest error, so you keep digging yourself a hole.
Besides which, I’m really over this situation where you and OAB on the one hand deny the credibility and/or significance of Perry’s data, while at the same time asking me to answer points based on Perry’s data….
You’re the one who brought Perry into this. I’m pointing out that what Perry authored isn’t what you say. I’m also suggesting that people who had to put a full column disclaimer at the top of their website might have experienced a little bit of trepidation at having to rely on the same source in future, rather than being “happy” about it.
Mate. I worked for 20 years in freezing works / coal mines / fishing boats / building sites / farms, and after that I can assure you that blank shots fired by an effete intellectual hiding behind the anonymity of a computer screen has absolutely zero effect on me. Abuse can have gravitas, but IMO, only in a situation where the abuser is in the direct vicinity of the abused, and delivers the abuse in full awareness that they will be personally responsible for it. That can take real balls. But abuse from a position of hiding is just cowardice.
lol: besides the confusion between “anonymity” and “pseudonymity”, you just called me a coward from behind a pseudonym. So you’re a hypocrite as well as a fucking moron, even if you’re ever so butch.
But perhaps I didn’t make myself clear: I don’t call you, for example, “a moron so stupid that any of your repeated attempts at pigfucking could well have resulted in your telling an extremely confused zebra to start squealing” because I want you to feel bad. I do it because it provides more opportunity for creativity and catharsis than “debating” statistics and complex issues with someone who can’t even read a single-line chart.
I’m not really too worried about you, your dissonance is strong enough to preserve your ego from even the most accurate criticism. Saying that I’ve trod in horseshit with more brains than you is not expected to have any effect upon your self esteem. I just find it a cleansing experience to describe you as more fucking stupid than Donald Trump’s hairdo.
So suck my balls, I soaked them in Evian rosewater just for you.
I’m not going to read a whole day’s worth of debate lost sheep. The onus on you is to give specific examples by linking. If you want to be taken seriously.
eg, here’s the actual quote you just gave in context so people can see that it was part of a comment, not a comment on its own, and that it was part of a very large conversation.
Again, if you don’t want to be ridiculed, I suggest you don’t pull such disingenuous stunts as you have just done in reply to me. You’ve been here long enough to know how this works.
“Simple eh. Only one possible answer? Would you have a problem accepting that point Weka?”
Only one possible answer if you are a badly programmed AI who doesn’t understand any nuance or context. People did answer you, you just don’t like what they said. You don’t get to dictate how people debate here.
As for the rest, why on earth would you expect me to know what went on in a conversation I wasn’t part of? You give OAB shit for not linking, then you don’t link and then you come here and whine about it. FFS man, if you want to pick a fight with the site, just be more honest about it.
If you want a gentlemen’s club where people abide by the rules that you have had a part in setting up, you are in completely the wrong place.
The reason you attract so much derision is because of how you debate. Today in OM is a classic example, although people seem remarkably restrained given you pull this shit as a matter of course. Me, I’m fucked off at having my time wasted.
I don’t talk to you very often, but my memory is that this is how it always goes. You got a good debate yesterday, so stop complaining about it. No-one here is going to do what you want them to so long as you keep trying to make them behave better than you are.
Weka’s considerably more tolerant than I: I consider her a role model. Me, I’ve been reading your zombie arguments for too long – thirty years at least, and it’s not like these are academic points of difference.
The only controversy here is political, which is utterly shameful, and you’re all bent out of shape because you think you were called names.
“You didn’t even have to reply to my first comment Weka. I didn’t force you…”
Ok, my summary of your comments in OM today is that you appear to believe you get to control what other people do and you don’t like it when people don’t do what you want. Lol, good luck with that. As Lynn said recently, it’s like trying to herd goats.
Thanks for also reminding me that you are basically incapable of engaging in ways that generate discussion that doesn’t end up in this mess. Which is a shame, because even though I disagree with much of your politics, you do have the ability to raise important issues from a RW perspective to be debated here and we need that. If you can find a way to drop the resentment that people don’t act in the way you want then it would probably go way better.
The other thing I was thinking through this was that although I get frustrated by the regulars who love arguing more than I do, I also know instrinsically that people like McFlock and OAB contribute a huge amount to this site. Maybe look at that way, what is it you want to contribute? At the moment it doesn’t look too flash.
Nope. It explains what moderators will look for with fire and forget trolls.
Not getting the conversation you desire under your rules of engagement (which to my reading you read like you are after) isn’t part of that.
I notice that you haven’t said why you think this will be good for the site for months you to try to set the rules of behaviour. Perhaps you should read further into the policy. I am sure I may have noted how we feel about non-existent authors trying to set policy for their own benefit.
I’m not trying to change anything here.
Was simply trying to get clarification on the level of ‘debate’ here, so that I could adjust my expectations accordingly. I’ve shifted them down a notch or three.
Personally, I think that a discussion where neither party has any obligation to meet a fair point squarely is something short of ‘debate’ and definitely of less value, but arguments are more fun.
The best rule of thumb here is to take it as given that a point ignored is a point proven.
Quote: nnovative safety rails especially designed to protect motorcyclists if they crash have been installed on New Zealand roads for the first time.
The new rails have been added to existing roadside safety barriers along a 130km state highway route called the Coromandel loop. Popular with riders, it passes through Kopu, Whangamata, Waihi and Paeroa.
Statistics show around four per cent of fatal motorcycle crashes involve collisions with the traditional roadside barriers, which are designed primarily to protect people in cars.”Quote end.
well considering that we pay some of the highest Rego and ACC levies, yes.
Considering also that riding on two wheels uses less space, less engergy/oil etc etc yes.
We had quite a bit of a ruckus at the time when the ACC levies increased and teh Cheese Cutters became the norm.
And yes, every year we loose people to these machinations from hell, and needlessly.
So yes, this pleases me, but only the Coro Loop? I would like to see these extra rails added to the cheese cutters on our motorways and elsewhere.
Gangs, i heard that some 30 years ago some NZ government went on a crack down on gangs and all male bikies are gang member and all chrome vixens must be gang owned pussies.
And sadly that idea is still prevalent in the minds of many, and also we are a good cash cow to milk. Many of us have a family car, and a bike, so we get to pay ACC on both, even tho we can only drive / ride one at a time.
but heck when the bike hikoi went to Nick Smith, Fuckwit for ACC in Wellington at the time, NZ had no issues giving us shit. right or left, cause bikies…. Never mind that our double triple and quadruple (some have spontaneously multiplying bikes, and cars…..addicts i think would be the right word, and lovers of chrome) ACC donations made for a big fat surplus.
I’m thinking the surplus comes from the failure of ACC to pay out on claims. There are a lot of claimants out there not getting the service they need to get back on their feet.
A systematic move to denigrate the ACC in the minds of the public, before privatisation.
Ahh! I drove over to the beach at Whiritoa today (absolutely magic weather) and saw the new guard-rails up! They went up quickly. Mind you as a motorcyclist from way back ( have just restored my 1957 R50 BMW) I think some of the riders going over that route are just accidents waiting to happen. My bach is right by the road and I see the way they ride – as if they are on a race track. Its a narrow winding road and there can be a lot of traffic during the weekends and logging trucks as well.
“The real damage is done by those millions who want to ‘survive.’ The honest men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don’t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won’t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness. Those who don’t like to make waves—or enemies. Those for whom freedom, honour, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, mate small, die small. It’s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you’ll keep it under control. If you don’t make any noise, the bogeyman won’t find you. But it’s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe?! From what? Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. I choose my own way to burn.”
once upon a time when i was about 11 years old I went to find a ‘good german’.
I did not find many, but i did found her and her brother. So much honor, so much humanity, so little fear of living and even less fear of dying. She was made of good stuff this Lady.
I periodically stop to think about what it would be like to be willing to die for what one believed in and how one could do that well. We are so far away from that here*. Finding Sophie Scholl was a gift.
*outside of war, who have we had? The guy who tried to blow up the Whanganui computer comes to mind.
Imagine that. Spending taxpayers money on something that benefits the taxpayer. I would much rather my tax was spent on a beach than on some academic trougher that after 3 years will tell me that excessive sugar will make me fat.
Waiting for some considered and vote-winning words from Little on this one.
You know what Andrew is like.
He was calling for the Government to jump in wasn’t he?
Now he will be screaming blue murder because the Government did so.
“They didn’t oughta have done it” will be Andy’s call now.
“after 3 years will tell me that excessive sugar will make me fat”.
Really? That seems an amazingly short time to discover that. I thought it would have taken some academic their entire career to work that out?
“mortgages in Australia are full recourse”.
As are they here. It was only in the US, as far as I know, that it was normal to just be able to walk in to your mortgage holder, drop the keys and simply walk away from any further obligations.
“Investors” – that is, multinational corporations – can sue New Zealand under the treaty, and taxpayers get to pay damages for lost corporate profit.
New Zealand cannot sue the corporation/investors for any damage they may do. In effect, for corporations it is “heads I win, tails you lose”.
If the TPP is truly without danger from ISDS, as Mr Borrows would lead us to believe, then why have we signed a side agreement with Australia stipulating neither we nor they will allow their corporations to sue under ISDS against the other.
Smearing of TPP opponents is designed to paint peaceful protesters as radicals, hence untrustworthy. But the radical shoe is on this government’s foot amd no amount of cognitive diffusion can hide the fact the TPP contains a Trojan horse called ISDS, bringing an invasive force of legions of lawyers of multinational corporations.
The German Magistrates Association rejects the proposal of the European Commission to establish an investment court within the framework of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). The DRB sees neither a legal basis nor a need for such a court.
The investment court ICS was the proposed substitute for the ISDS that was rejected by the EU for being so flawed!
The German Magistrates Association sees no need for the establishment of a special court for investors. The Member States are all constitutional states, which provide and guarantee access to justice in all areas where the state has jurisdiction to all law-seeking parties. It is for the Member States to ensure access to justice for all and to ensure feasible access for foreign investors, by providing the courts with the relevant resources.
Qutoe: Mediaworks’ head of news Mark Jennings has resigned from the role.
Mark Jennings had been with Mediaworks since 1989.
Quote:” Jennings joined MediaWorks TV in 1989, and was appointed director of news in 1994. In December 2014, he was appointed to lead the integration of MediaWorks’ TV, radio and digital news operations into an unified news team, which launched as Newshub earlier this month.
Earlier today it was revealed that ninemsn editor-in-chief Hal Crawford had resigned to take on the “chief news officer” role at Mediaworks, and he will join the organisation “in the coming months”.
In a statement released this afternoon, Jennings said the company had become part of his DNA”.Quote End
Surely not!
“The latest interim dividend figures from the partially-privatised Mighty River Power, Genesis, and Meridian show that the Crown has forgone $945.14 million in dividends since the asset sales. The National Government spent $96 million on the asset sales programme, including bonus-share sweeteners for investors. Combined, that means the asset sales have a total cost of $1.041 billion to date.” http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1602/S00347/asset-sales-cost-hits-1-billion.htm
It is all very well cutting the backrooms of public agencies but it may compromise the frontlines. One of the frustrations of the Productivity Commission’s 2017 review of universities is that while it observed that their non-academic staff were increasing faster than their academic staff, it did not bother to ...
Buzz from the Beehive Two speeches delivered by Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters at Anzac Day ceremonies in Turkey are the only new posts on the government’s official website since the PM announced his Cabinet shake-up. In one of the speeches, Peters stated the obvious: we live in a troubled ...
1. Which of these would you not expect to read in The Waikato Invader?a. Luxon is here to do business, don’t you worry about thatb. Mr KPI expects results, and you better believe itc. This decisive man of action is getting me all hot and excitedd. Melissa Lee is how ...
…it has a restricted jurisdiction which must not be abused: it is not an inquisitionNOTE – this article was published before the High Court ruled that Karen Chhour does not have to appear before the Waitangi Tribunal Gary Judd writes – The High Court ...
Lindsay Mitchell writes – One of reasons Oranga Tamariki exists is to prevent child neglect. But could the organisation itself be guilty of the same?Oranga Tamariki’s statistics show a decrease in the number and age of children in care. “There are less children ...
David Farrar writes: Graeme Edgeler wrote in 2017: In the first five years after three strikes came into effect 5248 offenders received a ‘first strike’ (that is, a “stage-1 conviction” under the three strikes sentencing regime), and 68 offenders received a ‘second strike’. In the five years prior to ...
Bryce Edwards writes – Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has surprised everyone with his ruthlessness in sacking two of his ministers from their crucial portfolios. Removing ministers for poor performance after only five months in the job just doesn’t normally happen in politics. That’s refreshing and will be extremely ...
TL;DR: These are the six things that stood out to me in news and commentary on Aotearoa-NZ’s political economy in the two days to 6:06am on Thursday, April 25:Politics: PM Christopher Luxon has set up a dual standard for ministerial competence by demoting two National Cabinet ministers while leaving also-struggling ...
Hi,Today I mainly want to share some of your thoughts about the recent piece I wrote about success and failure, and the forces that seemingly guide our lives. But first, a quick bit of housekeeping: I am doing a Webworm popup in Los Angeles on Saturday May 11 at 2pm. ...
It is hard to see what Melissa Lee might have done to “save” the media. National went into the election with no public media policy and appears not to have developed one subsequently. Lee claimed that she had prepared a policy paper before the election but it had been decided ...
Open access notablesIce acceleration and rotation in the Greenland Ice Sheet interior in recent decades, Løkkegaard et al., Communications Earth & Environment:In the past two decades, mass loss from the Greenland ice sheet has accelerated, partly due to the speedup of glaciers. However, uncertainty in speed derived from satellite products ...
Buzz from the Beehive A statement from Children’s Minister Karen Chhour – yet to be posted on the Government’s official website – arrived in Point of Order’s email in-tray last night. It welcomes the High Court ruling on whether the Waitangi Tribunal can demand she appear before it. It does ...
Mr Bombastic:Ironically, the media the academic experts wanted is, in many ways, the media they got. In place of the tyrannical editors of yesteryear, advancing without fear or favour the interests of the ruling class; the New Zealand news media of today boasts a troop of enlightened journalists dedicated to ...
It's hard times try to make a livingYou wake up every morning in the unforgivingOut there somewhere in the cityThere's people living lives without mercy or pityI feel good, yeah I'm feeling fineI feel better then I have for the longest timeI think these pills have been good for meI ...
In 1974, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in United States v. Nixon, finding that the President was not a King, but was subject to the law and was required to turn over the evidence of his wrongdoing to the courts. It was a landmark decision for the rule ...
Every day now just seems to bring in more fresh meat for the grinder.In their relentlessly ideological drive to cut back on the “excessive bloat” (as they see it) of the previous Labour-led government, on the mountains of evidence accumulated in such a short period of time do not ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Megan Valére SosouMarket gardening site of the Itchèléré de Itagui agricultural cooperative in Dassa-Zoumè (Image credit: Megan Valère Sossou) For the residents of Dassa-Zoumè, a city in the West African country of Benin, choosing between drinking water and having enough ...
Buzz from the Beehive Melissa Lee – as may be discerned from the screenshot above – has not been demoted for doing something seriously wrong as Minister of ...
Morning in London Mother hugs beloved daughter outside the converted shoe factory in which she is living.Afternoon in London Travelling writer takes himself and his wrist down to A&E, just to be sure. Read more ...
Mike Grimshaw writes – The recent announcement of the University Advisory Group, chaired by Sir Peter Gluckman, makes very clear where the Government’s focus and priorities lie. The remit of the Advisory Group is that Group members will consider challenges and opportunities for improvement in the university sector including: ...
Eric Crampton writes – The Reserve Bank of New Zealand desperately wants to find reasons to have workstreams in climate change. It makes little sense. They’ve run another stress test on the banks looking to see if they could find a prudential regulation case. They couldn’t. They ...
Rob MacCullough writes – Pundits from the left and the right are arguing that National’s Fast Track Bill that is designed to speed up infrastructure decisions could end up becoming mired in a cesspool of corruption. Political commentator ...
Looking at the headlines this morning it’s hard to feel anything other than pessimistic about the future of humanity.Note that I’m not speaking about the future of mankind, but the survival of our humanity. The values that we believe in seem to be ebbing away, by the day.Perhaps every generation ...
Swabbing mixed breed baby chicks to test for avian influenzaUh oh. Bird flu – often deadly to humans – is not only being transmitted from infected birds to dairy cows, but is now travelling between dairy cows. As of last Friday, Bloomberg News reports, there were 32 American dairy herds ...
On February 14, 2023 we announced our Rebuttal Update Project. This included an ask for feedback about the added "At a glance" section in the updated basic rebuttal versions. This weekly blog post series highlights this new section of one of the updated basic rebuttal versions and serves as a ...
What is it with the mining industry? Its not enough for them to pillage the earth - they apparently can't even be bothered getting resource consent to do so: The proponent behind a major mine near the Clutha River had already been undertaking activity in the area without a ...
Photo # 1 I am a huge fan of Singapore’s approach to housing, as described here two years ago by copying and pasting from The ConversationWhat Singapore has that Australia does not is a public housing developer, the Housing Development Board, which puts new dwellings on public and reclaimed land, ...
Buzz from the Beehive Reactions to news of the government’s readiness to make urgent changes to “the resource management system” through a Bill to amend the Resource Management Act (RMA) suggest a balanced approach is being taken. The Taxpayers’ Union says the proposed changes don’t go far enough. Greenpeace says ...
I’m starting to wonder if Anna Burns-Francis might be the best political interviewer we’ve got. That might sound unlikely to you, it came as a bit of a surprise to me.Jack Tame can be excellent, but has some pretty average days. I like Rebecca Wright on Newshub, she asks good ...
Chris Trotter writes – Willie Jackson is said to be planning a “media summit” to discuss “the state of the media and how to protect Fourth Estate Journalism”. Not only does the Editor of The Daily Blog, Martyn Bradbury, think this is a good idea, but he has also ...
Graeme Edgeler writes – This morning [April 21], the Wellington High Court is hearing a judicial review brought by Hon. Karen Chhour, the Minister for Children, against a decision of the Waitangi Tribunal. This is unusual, judicial reviews are much more likely to brought against ministers, rather than ...
Both of Parliament’s watchdogs have now ripped into the Government’s Fast-track Approvals Bill. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāMy pick of the six newsey things to know from Aotearoa’s political economy and beyond on the morning of Tuesday, April 23 are:The Lead: The Auditor General,John Ryan, has joined the ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Sarah SpengemanPeople wait to board an electric bus in Pune, India. (Image credit: courtesy of ITDP) Public transportation riders in Pune, India, love the city’s new electric buses so much they will actually skip an older diesel bus that ...
The infrastructure industry yesterday issued a “hurry up” message to the Government, telling it to get cracking on developing a pipeline of infrastructure projects.The hiatus around the change of Government has seen some major projects cancelled and others delayed, and there is uncertainty about what will happen with the new ...
Hi,Over the weekend I revisited a podcast I really adore, Dead Eyes. It’s about a guy who got fired from Band of Brothers over two decades ago because Tom Hanks said he had “dead eyes”.If you don’t recall — 2001’s Band of Brothers was part of the emerging trend of ...
Buzz from the Beehive The 180 or so recipients of letters from the Government telling them how to submit infrastructure projects for “fast track” consideration includes some whose project applications previously have been rejected by the courts. News media were quick to feature these in their reports after RMA Reform Minister Chris ...
It would not be a desirable way to start your holiday by breaking your back, your head, or your wrist, but on our first hour in Singapore I gave it a try.We were chatting, last week, before we started a meeting of Hazel’s Enviro Trust, about the things that can ...
Calling all journalists, academics, planners, lawyers, political activists, environmentalists, and other members of the public who believe that the relationships between vested interests and politicians need to be scrutinised. We need to work together to make sure that the new Fast-Track Approvals Bill – currently being pushed through by the ...
Feel worried. Shane Jones and a couple of his Cabinet colleagues are about to be granted the power to override any and all objections to projects like dams, mines, roads etc even if: said projects will harm biodiversity, increase global warming and cause other environmental harms, and even if ...
Bryce Edwards writes- The ability of the private sector to quickly establish major new projects making use of the urban and natural environment is to be supercharged by the new National-led Government. Yesterday it introduced to Parliament one of its most significant reforms, the Fast Track Approvals Bill. ...
Michael Bassett writes – If you think there is a move afoot by the radical Maori fringe of New Zealand society to create a parallel system of government to the one that we elect at our triennial elections, you aren’t wrong. Over the last few days we have ...
Without a corresponding drop in interest rates, it’s doubtful any changes to the CCCFA will unleash a massive rush of home buyers. Photo: Lynn GrievesonTL;DR: The six things that stood out to me in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, poverty and climate on Monday, April 22 included:The Government making a ...
Sunday was a lazy day. I started watching Jack Tame on Q&A, the interviews are usually good for something to write about. Saying the things that the politicians won’t, but are quite possibly thinking. Things that are true and need to be extracted from between the lines.As you might know ...
In our Weekly Roundup last week we covered news from Auckland Transport that the WX1 Western Express is going to get an upgrade next year with double decker electric buses. As part of the announcement, AT also said “Since we introduced the WX1 Western Express last November we have seen ...
TL;DR: The six key events to watch in Aotearoa-NZ’s political economy in the week to April 29 include:PM Christopher Luxon is scheduled to hold a post-Cabinet news conference at 4 pm today. Stats NZ releases its statutory report on Census 2023 tomorrow.Finance Minister Nicola Willis delivers a pre-Budget speech at ...
A listing of 29 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, April 14, 2024 thru Sat, April 20, 2024. Story of the week Our story of the week hinges on these words from the abstract of a fresh academic ...
The ability of the private sector to quickly establish major new projects making use of the urban and natural environment is to be supercharged by the new National-led Government. Yesterday it introduced to Parliament one of its most significant reforms, the Fast Track Approvals Bill. The Government says this will ...
This is a column to say thank you. So many of have been in touch since Mum died to say so many kind and thoughtful things. You’re wonderful, all of you. You’ve asked how we’re doing, how Dad’s doing. A little more realisation each day, of the irretrievable finality of ...
Identifying the engine type in your car is crucial for various reasons, including maintenance, repairs, and performance upgrades. Knowing the specific engine model allows you to access detailed technical information, locate compatible parts, and make informed decisions about modifications. This comprehensive guide will provide you with a step-by-step approach to ...
Introduction: The allure of racing is undeniable. The thrill of speed, the roar of engines, and the exhilaration of competition all contribute to the allure of this adrenaline-driven sport. For those who yearn to experience the pinnacle of racing, becoming a race car driver is the ultimate dream. However, the ...
Introduction Automobiles have become ubiquitous in modern society, serving as a primary mode of transportation and a symbol of economic growth and personal mobility. With countless vehicles traversing roads and highways worldwide, it begs the question: how many cars are there in the world? Determining the precise number is a ...
Maintaining a safe and reliable vehicle requires regular inspections. Whether it’s a routine maintenance checkup or a safety inspection, knowing how long the process will take can help you plan your day accordingly. This article delves into the factors that influence the duration of a car inspection and provides an ...
Mazda Motor Corporation, commonly known as Mazda, is a Japanese multinational automaker headquartered in Fuchu, Aki District, Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan. The company was founded in 1920 as the Toyo Cork Kogyo Co., Ltd., and began producing vehicles in 1931. Mazda is primarily known for its production of passenger cars, but ...
Your car battery is an essential component that provides power to start your engine, operate your electrical systems, and store energy. Over time, batteries can weaken and lose their ability to hold a charge, which can lead to starting problems, power failures, and other issues. Replacing your battery before it ...
In most states, you cannot register a car without a valid driver’s license. However, there are a few exceptions to this rule. Exceptions to the RuleIf you are under 18 years old: In some states, you can register a car in your name even if you do not ...
Mazda, a Japanese automotive manufacturer with a rich history of innovation and engineering excellence, has emerged as a formidable player in the global car market. Known for its reputation of producing high-quality, fuel-efficient, and driver-oriented vehicles, Mazda has consistently garnered praise from industry experts and consumers alike. In this article, ...
Struts are an essential part of a car’s suspension system. They are responsible for supporting the weight of the car and damping the oscillations of the springs. Struts are typically made of steel or aluminum and are filled with hydraulic fluid. How Do Struts Work? Struts work by transferring the ...
Car registration is a mandatory process that all vehicle owners must complete annually. This process involves registering your car with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and paying an associated fee. The registration process ensures that your vehicle is properly licensed and insured, and helps law enforcement and other authorities ...
Zoom is a video conferencing service that allows you to share your screen, webcam, and audio with other participants. In addition to sharing your own audio, you can also share the audio from your computer with other participants. This can be useful for playing music, sharing presentations with audio, or ...
Building your own computer can be a rewarding and cost-effective way to get a high-performance machine tailored to your specific needs. However, it also requires careful planning and execution, and one of the most important factors to consider is the time it will take. The exact time it takes to ...
Sleep mode is a power-saving state that allows your computer to quickly resume operation without having to boot up from scratch. This can be useful if you need to step away from your computer for a short period of time but don’t want to shut it down completely. There are ...
Introduction Computer-Assisted Translation (CAT) has revolutionized the field of translation by harnessing the power of technology to assist human translators in their work. This innovative approach combines specialized software with human expertise to improve the efficiency, accuracy, and consistency of translations. In this comprehensive article, we will delve into the ...
In today’s digital age, mobile devices have become an indispensable part of our daily lives. Among the vast array of portable computing options available, iPads and tablet computers stand out as two prominent contenders. While both offer similar functionalities, there are subtle yet significant differences between these two devices. This ...
A computer is an electronic device that can be programmed to carry out a set of instructions. The basic components of a computer are the processor, memory, storage, input devices, and output devices. The Processor The processor, also known as the central processing unit (CPU), is the brain of the ...
Voice Memos is a convenient app on your iPhone that allows you to quickly record and store audio snippets. These recordings can be useful for a variety of purposes, such as taking notes, capturing ideas, or recording interviews. While you can listen to your voice memos on your iPhone, you ...
Laptop screens are essential for interacting with our devices and accessing information. However, when lines appear on the screen, it can be frustrating and disrupt productivity. Understanding the underlying causes of these lines is crucial for finding effective solutions. Types of Screen Lines Horizontal lines: Also known as scan ...
Right-clicking is a common and essential computer operation that allows users to access additional options and settings. While most desktop computers have dedicated right-click buttons on their mice, laptops often do not have these buttons due to space limitations. This article will provide a comprehensive guide on how to right-click ...
Powering up and shutting down your ASUS laptop is an essential task for any laptop user. Locating the power button can sometimes be a hassle, especially if you’re new to ASUS laptops. This article will provide a comprehensive guide on where to find the power button on different ASUS laptop ...
Dell laptops are renowned for their reliability, performance, and versatility. Whether you’re a student, a professional, or just someone who needs a reliable computing device, a Dell laptop can meet your needs. However, if you’re new to Dell laptops, you may be wondering how to get started. In this comprehensive ...
Te Pāti Māori are demanding the New Zealand Government support an international independent investigation into mass graves that have been uncovered at two hospitals on the Gaza strip, following weeks of assault by Israeli troops. Among the 392 bodies that have been recovered, are children and elderly civilians. Many of ...
Our two-tiered system for veterans’ support is out of step with our closest partners, and all parties in Parliament should work together to fix it, Labour veterans’ affairs spokesperson Greg O’Connor said. ...
Stripping two Ministers of their portfolios just six months into the job shows Christopher Luxon’s management style is lacking, Labour Leader Chris Hipkins said. ...
Tonight’s court decision to overturn the summons of the Children’s Minister has enabled the Crown to continue making decisions about Māori without evidence, says Te Pāti Māori spokesperson for Children, Mariameno Kapa-Kingi. “The judicial system has this evening told the nation that this government can do whatever they want when ...
It appears Nicola Willis is about to pull the rug out from under the feet of local communities still dealing with the aftermath of last year’s severe weather, and local councils relying on funding to build back from these disasters. ...
The Government is making short-sighted changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA) that will take away environmental protection in favour of short-term profits, Labour’s environment spokesperson Rachel Brooking said today. ...
Labour welcomes the release of the report into the North Island weather events and looks forward to working with the Government to ensure that New Zealand is as prepared as it can be for the next natural disaster. ...
The Labour Party has called for the New Zealand Government to recognise Palestine, as a material step towards progressing the two-State solution needed to achieve a lasting peace in the region. ...
Some of our country’s most important work, stopping the sexual exploitation of children and violent extremism could go along with staff on the frontline at ports and airports. ...
The Government’s Fast Track Approvals Bill will give projects such as new coal mines a ‘get out of jail free’ card to wreak havoc on the environment, Labour Leader Chris Hipkins said today. ...
The government's decision to reintroduce Three Strikes is a destructive and ineffective piece of law-making that will only exacerbate an inherently biased and racist criminal justice system, said Te Pāti Māori Justice Spokesperson, Tākuta Ferris, today. During the time Three Strikes was in place in Aotearoa, Māori and Pasifika received ...
Cuts to frontline hospital staff are not only a broken election promise, it shows the reckless tax cuts have well and truly hit the frontline of the health system, says Labour Health spokesperson Ayesha Verrall. ...
The Green Party has joined the call for public submissions on the fast-track legislation to be extended after the Ombudsman forced the Government to release the list of organisations invited to apply just hours before submissions close. ...
New Zealand’s good work at reducing climate emissions for three years in a row will be undone by the National government’s lack of ambition and scrapping programmes that were making a difference, Labour Party climate spokesperson Megan Woods said today. ...
More essential jobs could be on the chopping block, this time Ministry of Education staff on the school lunches team are set to find out whether they're in line to lose their jobs. ...
Te Pāti Māori is disgusted at the confirmation that hundreds are set to lose their jobs at Oranga Tamariki, and the disestablishment of the Treaty Response Unit. “This act of absolute carelessness and out of touch decision making is committing tamariki to state abuse.” Said Te Pāti Māori Oranga Tamariki ...
The Government is trying to bring in a law that will allow Ministers to cut corners and kill off native species, Labour environment spokesperson Rachel Brooking said. ...
Cancelling urgently needed new Cook Strait ferries and hiking the cost of public transport for many Kiwis so that National can announce the prospect of another tunnel for Wellington is not making good choices, Labour Transport Spokesperson Tangi Utikere said. ...
A laundry list of additional costs for Tāmaki Makarau Auckland shows the Minister for the city is not delivering for the people who live there, says Labour Auckland Issues spokesperson Shanan Halbert. ...
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi, and Mema Paremata mō Tāmaki-Makaurau, Takutai Tarsh Kemp, will travel to the Gold Coast to strengthen ties with Māori in Australia next week (15-21 April). The visit, in the lead-up to the 9th Australian National Kapa haka Festival, will be an opportunity for both ...
The Green Party has today launched a step-by-step guide to help New Zealanders make their voice heard on the Government’s democracy dodging and anti-environment fast track legislation. ...
The National Government’s proposed changes to the Residential Tenancies Act will mean tenants can be turfed from their homes by landlords with little notice, Labour housing spokesperson Kieran McAnulty said. ...
Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson is calling on all parties to support a common-sense change that’s great for the planet and great for consumers after her member’s bill was drawn from the ballot today. ...
A significant milestone has been reached in the fight to strike an anti-Pasifika and unfair law from the country’s books after Teanau Tuiono’s members’ bill passed its first reading. ...
New Zealand has today missed the opportunity to uphold the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, says James Shaw after his member’s bill was voted down in its first reading. ...
Today’s advice from the Climate Change Commission paints a sobering reality of the challenge we face in combating climate change, especially in light of recent Government policy announcements. ...
Minister for Disability Issues Penny Simmonds appears to have delayed a report back to Cabinet on the progress New Zealand is making against international obligations for disabled New Zealanders. ...
Ambassador Millar, Burgemeester, Vandepitte, Excellencies, military representatives, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen – good morning and welcome to this sacred Anzac Day dawn service. It is an honour to be here on behalf of the Government and people of New Zealand at Buttes New British Cemetery, Polygon Wood – a deeply ...
Distinguished guests - It is an honour to return once again to this site which, as the resting place for so many of our war-dead, has become a sacred place for generations of New Zealanders. Our presence here and at the other special spaces of Gallipoli is made ...
Mai ia tawhiti pamamao, te moana nui a Kiwa, kua tae whakaiti mai matou, ki to koutou papa whenua. No koutou te tapuwae, no matou te tapuwae, kua honoa pumautia. Ko nga toa kua hinga nei, o te Waipounamu, o te Ika a Maui, he okioki tahi me o ...
Paul Goldsmith will take on responsibility for the Media and Communications portfolio, while Louise Upston will pick up the Disability Issues portfolio, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced today. “Our Government is relentlessly focused on getting New Zealand back on track. As issues change in prominence, I plan to adjust Ministerial ...
Recreational catch limits will be reduced in areas of Fiordland and the Chatham Islands to help keep those fisheries healthy and sustainable, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones says. The lower recreational daily catch limits for a range of finfish and shellfish species caught in the Fiordland Marine Area and ...
Energy Minister Simeon Brown has welcomed an important milestone in New Zealand’s hydrogen future, with the opening of the country’s first network of hydrogen refuelling stations in Wiri. “I want to congratulate the team at Hiringa Energy and its partners K one W one (K1W1), Mitsui & Co New Zealand ...
The coalition Government is delivering on its commitment to improve resource management laws and give greater certainty to consent applicants, with a Bill to amend the Resource Management Act (RMA) expected to be introduced to Parliament next month. RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop has today outlined the first RMA Amendment ...
Overseas models for regulating the oil and gas sector, including their decommissioning regimes, are being carefully scrutinised as a potential template for New Zealand’s own sector, Resources Minister Shane Jones says. The Coalition Government is focused on rebuilding investor confidence in New Zealand’s energy sector as it looks to strengthen ...
Emergency Management and Recovery Minister Mark Mitchell has today released the Report of the Government Inquiry into the response to the North Island Severe Weather Events. “The report shows that New Zealand’s emergency management system is not fit-for-purpose and there are some significant gaps we need to address,” Mr Mitchell ...
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith is today travelling to Europe where he’ll update the United Nations Human Rights Council on the Government’s work to restore law and order. “Attending the Universal Periodic Review in Geneva provides us with an opportunity to present New Zealand’s human rights progress, priorities, and challenges, while ...
Associate Agriculture Minister, Mark Patterson, formally reopened the world’s largest wool processing facility today in Awatoto, Napier, following a $50 million rebuild and refurbishment project. “The reopening of this facility will significantly lift the economic opportunities available to New Zealand’s wool sector, which already accounts for 20 per cent of ...
Hon Andrew Bayly, Minister for Small Business and Manufacturing At the Southland Otago Regional Engineering Collective (SOREC) Summit, 18 April, Dunedin Ngā mihi nui, Ko Andrew Bayly aho, Ko Whanganui aho Good Afternoon and thank you for inviting me to open your summit today. I am delighted ...
The Government is delivering on its commitment to bring back the Three Strikes legislation, Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee announced today. “Our Government is committed to restoring law and order and enforcing appropriate consequences on criminals. We are making it clear that repeat serious violent or sexual offending is not ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters has today announced four new diplomatic appointments for New Zealand’s overseas missions. “Our diplomats have a vital role in maintaining and protecting New Zealand’s interests around the world,” Mr Peters says. “I am pleased to announce the appointment of these senior diplomats from the ...
New Zealand is contributing NZ$7 million to support communities affected by severe food insecurity and other urgent humanitarian needs in Ethiopia and Somalia, Foreign Minister Rt Hon Winston Peters announced today. “Over 21 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance across Ethiopia, with a further 6.9 million people ...
Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage Paul Goldsmith is congratulating Mataaho Collective for winning the Golden Lion for best participant in the main exhibition at the Venice Biennale. "Congratulations to the Mataaho Collective for winning one of the world's most prestigious art prizes at the Venice Biennale. “It is good ...
The Government is reforming financial services to improve access to home loans and other lending, and strengthen customer protections, Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Andrew Bayly and Housing Minister Chris Bishop announced today. “Our coalition Government is committed to rebuilding the economy and making life simpler by cutting red tape. We are ...
“China remains a strong commercial opportunity for Kiwi exporters as Chinese businesses and consumers continue to value our high-quality safe produce,” Trade and Agriculture Minister Todd McClay says. Mr McClay has returned to New Zealand following visits to Beijing, Harbin and Shanghai where he met ministers, governors and mayors and engaged in trade and agricultural events with the New ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has completed a successful trip to Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines, deepening relationships and capitalising on opportunities. Mr Luxon was accompanied by a business delegation and says the choice of countries represents the priority the New Zealand Government places on South East Asia, and our relationships in ...
New Zealand is demonstrating its commitment to reducing global greenhouse emissions, and supporting clean energy transition in South East Asia, through a contribution of NZ$41 million (US$25 million) in climate finance to the Asian Development Bank (ADB)-led Energy Transition Mechanism (ETM). Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Climate Change Minister Simon Watts announced ...
The Government is today releasing a list of organisations who received letters about the Fast-track applications process, says RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop. “Recently Ministers and agencies have received a series of OIA requests for a list of organisations to whom I wrote with information on applying to have a ...
Attorney-General Judith Collins today announced the appointment of Wellington Barrister David Jonathan Boldt as a Judge of the High Court, and the Honourable Justice Matthew Palmer as a Judge of the Court of Appeal. Justice Boldt graduated with an LLB from Victoria University of Wellington in 1990, and also holds ...
Education Minister Erica Stanford will lead the New Zealand delegation at the 2024 International Summit on the Teaching Profession (ISTP) held in Singapore. The delegation includes representatives from the Post Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA) Te Wehengarua and the New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI) Te Riu Roa. The summit is co-hosted ...
A stopbank upgrade project in Tairawhiti partly funded by the Government has increased flood resilience for around 7000ha of residential and horticultural land so far, Regional Development Minister Shane Jones says. Mr Jones today attended a dawn service in Gisborne to mark the end of the first stage of the ...
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters will represent the Government at Anzac Day commemorations on the Gallipoli Peninsula next week and engage with senior representatives of the Turkish government in Istanbul. “The Gallipoli campaign is a defining event in our history. It will be a privilege to share the occasion ...
Science, Innovation and Technology and Defence Minister Judith Collins will next week attend the OECD Science and Technology Ministerial conference in Paris and Anzac Day commemorations in Belgium. “Science, innovation and technology have a major role to play in rebuilding our economy and achieving better health, environmental and social outcomes ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon held a bilateral meeting today with the President of the Philippines, Ferdinand Marcos Jr. The Prime Minister was accompanied by MP Paulo Garcia, the first Filipino to be elected to a legislature outside the Philippines. During today’s meeting, Prime Minister Luxon and President Marcos Jr discussed opportunities to ...
The Government has announced that $20 million in funding will be made available to Westport to fund much needed flood protection around the town. This measure will significantly improve the resilience of the community, says Local Government Minister Simeon Brown. “The Westport community has already been allocated almost $3 million ...
The Government is proud to support the first ever Repco Supercars Championship event in Taupō as up to 70,000 motorsport fans attend the Taupō International Motorsport Park this weekend, says Economic Development Minister Melissa Lee. “Anticipation for the ITM Taupō Super400 is huge, with tickets and accommodation selling out weeks ...
Local Government Minister Simeon Brown has announced an increase to the Rates Rebate Scheme, putting money back into the pockets of low-income homeowners. “The coalition Government is committed to bringing down the cost of living for New Zealanders. That includes targeted support for those Kiwis who are doing things tough, such ...
The Coalition Government is investing in a project to boost survival rates of New Zealand mussels and grow the industry, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones has announced. “This project seeks to increase the resilience of our mussels and significantly boost the sector’s productivity,” Mr Jones says. “The project - ...
Benefit figures released today underscore the importance of the Government’s plan to rebuild the economy and have 50,000 fewer people on Jobseeker Support, Social Development and Employment Minister Louise Upston says. “Benefit numbers are still significantly higher than when National was last in government, when there was about 70,000 fewer ...
The Government’s commitment to doubling New Zealand’s renewable energy capacity is backed by new data showing that clean energy has helped the country reach its lowest annual gross emissions since 1999, Climate Change Minister Simon Watts says. New Zealand’s latest Greenhouse Gas Inventory (1990-2022) published today, shows gross emissions fell ...
The Government is bringing the earthquake-prone building review forward, with work to start immediately, and extending the deadline for remediations by four years, Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk says. “Our Government is focused on rebuilding the economy. A key part of our plan is to cut red tape that ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and his Thai counterpart, Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin, have today agreed that New Zealand and the Kingdom of Thailand will upgrade the bilateral relationship to a Strategic Partnership by 2026. “New Zealand and Thailand have a lot to offer each other. We have a strong mutual desire to build ...
RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop and Transport Minister Simeon Brown have today announced the Coalition Government’s intention to extend port coastal permits for a further 20 years, providing port operators with certainty to continue their operations. “The introduction of the Resource Management Act in 1991 required ports to obtain coastal ...
Today’s announcement that inflation is down to 4 per cent is encouraging news for Kiwis, but there is more work to be done - underlining the importance of the Government’s plan to get the economy back on track, acting Finance Minister Chris Bishop says. “Inflation is now at 4 per ...
Refreshed health guidance released today will help parents and schools make informed decisions about whether their child needs to be in school, addressing one of the key issues affecting school attendance, says Associate Education Minister David Seymour. In recent years, consistently across all school terms, short-term illness or medical reasons ...
Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones is streamlining high-level oceans management while maintaining a focus on supporting the sector’s role in the export-led recovery of the economy. “I am working to realise the untapped potential of our fishing and aquaculture sector. To achieve that we need to be smarter with ...
I was initially resistant to the idea often suggested to me that the Government should deliver an arts strategy. The whole point of the arts and creativity is that people should do whatever the hell they want, unbound by the dictates of politicians in Wellington. Peter Jackson, Kiri Te Kanawa, Eleanor ...
Pacific Media Watch Palestine solidarity protesters today demonstrated at the Auckland headquarters of Television New Zealand, accusing the country’s major TV network of broadcasting “propaganda” backing Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. About 50 protesters targeted the main entrance to the TVNZ building near Sky Tower and also picketed a side ...
Opinion by Lynley Hood. Forty years on from my 1985 Fulbright Grant, my disquiet over the war in Gaza evoked some troubling questions. The answer to my first question – What is the primary purpose of the Fulbright Programme? – was on the Fulbright NZ website. It says: US Senator, ...
The ministers responsible for green-lighting major projects need to be open about potential conflicts of interest, says Transparency International. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anastasia Powell, Professor, Family and Sexual Violence, RMIT University It has been a particularly distressing start to the year. There is little that can ease the current grief of individuals, families and communities who have needlessly lost a loved one to men’s ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Moore, Senior Research Associate, School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, The University of Melbourne Lichen, the first described example of symbiosis.AdeJ Artventure/Shutterstock Once known only to those studying biology, the word symbiosis is now widely used. Symbiosis is the intimate ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kim Hemsley, Head, Childhood Dementia Research Group, Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University Olena Ivanova/Shutterstock “Childhood” and “dementia” are two words we wish we didn’t have to use together. But sadly, around 1,400 ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Whiteford, Professor, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University The government’s Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee has just published its second report. It was set up by Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Minister for Social Services Amanda Rishworth in 2022 to provide: ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne The Queensland state election will be held in October. A YouGov poll for The Courier Mail, conducted April 9–17 from a sample ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amin Naeni, PhD candidate at Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalisation, Deakin University There’s been much talk in recent months about what a possible second Donald Trump presidency in the United States could mean for Europe, Russia’s war in Ukraine, the ...
A brief round-up of submissions on the controversial proposed law. This is an excerpt from our weekly environmental newsletter Future Proof. Sign up here. Last week, submissions on the controversial Fast-track Approvals Bill closed just hours after the government released a list of stakeholder organisations who were sent letters advising how they could ...
A poem from Robin Peace’s new collection Detritus of Empire: feather / grass / rock. Cereal giving I see a woman’s hands, see her curious hands break a stalk as she walks through the tall prairie, the savannah, the steppe, wherever it was. See her idly bite the grass that ...
The only published and available best-selling indie book chart in New Zealand is the top 10 sales list recorded every week at Unity Books’ stores in High St, Auckland, and Willis St, Wellington.AUCKLAND1 Hemingway’s Goblet by Dermot Ross (Mary Egan Publishing, $38)A handsomely produced (debossed cover, lovely ...
The Commissioner's decision validates the longstanding efforts of the local community and ensures that Awataha Marae will be managed to serve the needs of the local community, particularly for hosting tangihanga. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tristan Salles, Associate professor, University of Sydney Examples of Australian landscapes.Unsplash Seventy thousand years ago, the sea level was much lower than today. Australia, along with New Guinea and Tasmania, formed a connected landmass known as Sahul. Around this time – ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Felicity Castagna, Lecturer, Creative Writing, Western Sydney University Day Day Market, ParramattaPhoto: Garry Trinh I live on the edge of Parramatta, Australia’s fastest-growing city, on the kind of old-fashioned suburban street that has 1950s fibros constructed in the post-war housing boom, ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Ryan, Teaching Fellow in Economics, University of Waikato GettyImagesfatido/Getty Images There is an ongoing global debate over whether the high inflation seen in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic can be lowered without a recession. New Zealand is not ...
The ‘Wicked Game’ heartthrob is in his late 60s now. That didn’t stop him putting on a lively, goofy and very sparkly show. Apart from ‘Wicked Game’, which graces a sultry playlist of mine simply called 💋, my last sustained Chris Isaak listening session took place when I was about ...
Analysis - Two ministers were stripped of portfolios in a warning to Cabinet, drama broke out at the Waitangi Tribunal, and the gang patch ban bill ran into opposition. ...
Tara Ward makes an impassioned plea for some vital pop culture merch. In April 1999, I became obsessed with a new reality television show called Popstars. Every Tuesday night, five strangers transformed into music royalty before my very eyes as Joe, Keri, Carly, Erika and Megan were chosen to form ...
PNG Post-Courier In the early hours of ANZAC Day, aerial photographs captured an impressive gathering of Australians and Papua New Guineans at Isurava in the Northern (Oro) Province. The solemn dawn service yesterday was held at a site steeped in history, where some of the fiercest battles of World War ...
The PSA is shocked that Oranga Tamariki has used the cost cutting drive to downgrade its commitment to Te Ao Māori and remove many specialist Māori roles. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Kemish, Adjunct Professor, School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry, The University of Queensland There can be no more powerful symbol of the relationship between Australia and Papua New Guinea than the prime ministers of these neighbouring countries walking together on the ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharon Robinson, Distinguished Professor and Deputy Director of ARC Securing Antarctica’s Environmental Future (SAEF), University of Wollongong, University of Wollongong Andrew Netherwood Over the last 25 years, the ozone hole which forming over Antarctica each spring has started to shrink. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Viktoria Kahui, Senior Lecturer in Environmental Economics, University of Otago Getty Images/Amy Toensing Biodiversity is declining at rates unprecedented in human history. This suggests the ways we currently use to manage our natural environment are failing. One emerging concept focuses on ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Colin Bednall, Associate Professor in Management, Swinburne University of Technology marvent/Shutterstock Finding the best person to fill a position can be tough, from drafting a job ad to producing a shortlist of top interview candidates. Employers typically consider information from ...
Wondering where to host your next BYO? Whether its a small gathering or a massive party, we’ve got some recommendations. I was first introduced to the concept of BYOs at Dunedin’s India Gardens, a legendary but sadly defunct establishment, which purveyed enormous quantities of mango chicken to Aotearoa’s drunkest future ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julien Cooper, Honorary Lecturer, Department of History and Archaeology, Macquarie University Julien Cooper The hyper-arid desert of Eastern Sudan, the Atbai Desert, seems like an unlikely place to find evidence of ancient cattle herders. But in this dry environment, my new ...
The sector says it’s hopeful her replacement Paul Goldsmith will be able to throw it a lifeline, after six months with a minister deemed missing in action, writes Catherine McGregor in this excerpt from The Bulletin, The Spinoff’s morning news round-up. To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign ...
The government can't just rely on axing public sector jobs and has to do more to cut spending, says the chief economist at a free market think tank. ...
Rock The Vote NZ, known for its advocacy for minor party unity and its role within the Freedoms NZ Coalition during the 2023 General Election, celebrates this merger as a strategic enhancement of its operational strength and outreach. ...
Nearly everyone has experienced the frustration of something you use breaking and being difficult or expensive to fix. Proposed legislation could change that. It’s been raining on and off all Sunday afternoon but people are lining up outside a building in a corner of Gribblehirst Park in Sandringham, Auckland. In ...
What does a forever relationship look like when you don’t believe in marriage? And how do you celebrate it? This essay is part of our Sunday Essay series, made possible thanks to the support of Creative New Zealand.I’m going to do it, right now. I’m going to say ...
The Prime Minister has committed to resuming direct flights to Thailand. But it’s not a promise he will be able to deliver on anytime soon. The post Prime Minister jumps the gun in Thailand appeared first on Newsroom. ...
It’s not that long ago Eliza McCartney was seriously wondering if the Paris Olympics would be her pole vaulting swansong. After years of being hounded by injury after injury, the Rio Olympics bronze medallist was still confident she would compete at her second Olympics in Paris in July, unless something ...
FICTION 1 Take Two by Danielle Hawkins (Allen & Unwin, $36.99) There’s commercial fiction, like this book, and then there’s quality fiction, quality writers, quality literature; the forthcoming Auckland Writers Festival is full of quality, and ReadingRoom has two tickets to give away to the following events: Paul Lynch (Dublin ...
Loading…(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){var ql=document.querySelectorAll('A[quiz],DIV[quiz],A[data-quiz],DIV[data-quiz]'); if(ql){if(ql.length){for(var k=0;k<ql.length;k++){ql[k].id='quiz-embed-'+k;ql[k].href="javascript:var i=document.getElementById('quiz-embed-"+k+"');try{qz.startQuiz(i)}catch(e){i.start=1;i.style.cursor='wait';i.style.opacity='0.5'};void(0);"}}};i['QP']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)})(window,document,'script','https://take.quiz-maker.com/3012/CDN/quiz-embed-v1.js','qp'); Got a good quiz question?Send Newsroom your questions. The post Newsroom daily quiz, Friday 26 April appeared first on Newsroom. ...
You can’t have missed the Gallipoli story as the movies, documentaries, essays and books capture what it was like for New Zealand troops in their eight-month campaign on the Peninsula. But this Anzac Day the Auckland War Memorial Museum has published a book that sheds light on a little-known aspect of the ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra In the free-for-all between the Australian government and Big Tech boss Elon Musk this week, the government had to be on a winner. Most people would have little sympathy with Musk’s vociferous opposition to ...
Asia Pacific Report Chief Mandla Mandela, a member of the National Assembly of South Africa and Nelson Mandela’s grandson, has joined the Freedom Flotilla in istanbul as the ships prepare to sail for Gaza, reports Kia Ora Gaza. Mandela is also the ambassador for the Global Campaign to Return to ...
Pacific Media Watch Journalists who report on environmental issues are encountering growing difficulties in many parts of the world, reports Reporters Without Borders. According to the tally kept by RSF, 200 journalists have been subjected to threats and physical violence, including murder, in the past 10 years because they were ...
Analysis by Dr Bryce Edwards, Democracy Project (https://democracyproject.nz)Political scientist, Dr Bryce Edwards. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has surprised everyone with his ruthlessness in sacking two of his ministers from their crucial portfolios. Removing ministers for poor performance after only five months in the job just doesn’t normally happen in ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Senior Lecturer, Canberra School of Politics, Economics and Society, University of Canberra BagzhanSadvakassov/Upsplash, CC BY-SA Australia’s inflation rate has fallen for the fifth successive quarter, and it’s now less than half of what it was back in late 2022. ...
ACT's Rural Communities and Veterans spokesman Mark Cameron responds to cancellations and protests of ANZAC Day commemorations in Wellington. He says, "These pitiful attempts to detract from ANZAC Day are not at all indicative of the feelings of mainstream ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Meighen McCrae, Associate Professor of Strategic & Defence Studies, Australian National University American and Australian stretcher bearers working together near the front line during the Battle of Hamel in 1918.Australian War Memorial While the AUKUS alliance is new, the Australian-American partnership ...
Pōneke based peace activists staged a silent protest at the ANZAC day service to highlight New Zealand’s complicity in war and genocide, and urge the government to take concrete steps to stop the genocide in Palestine. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Magdalena M.E. Bunbury, Postdoctoral Researcher, James Cook University Burial with a horse at the Rákóczifalva site, Hungary (8th century AD).Sándor Hegedűs, Hungarian National Museum, CC BY How do we understand past societies? For centuries, our main sources of information have been ...
Amanda Thompson doesn’t really do Anzac Day. But what she does do is remember the people she knew who had a lifetime to remember stuff they didn’t really want to, because of a war they didn’t ask for. And she does make Anzac biscuits.First published in 2021.All my ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kathryn Willis, Postdoctoral Researcher, CSIRO Xavier Boulenger/Shutterstock In the two decades to 2019, global plastic production doubled. By 2040, plastic manufacturing and processing could consume as much as 20% of global oil production and use up 15% of the annual carbon ...
With our collective remembrance, and steadfast belief in our common humanity, we strengthen our hope and resolve to do what we can to foster dialogue and understanding, and to heal divisions in our pursuit of peace. ...
Principal reasons for the opposition is the loss of the public’s democratic right to have “a fair say” and the vital need for a government free from corruption, said Casey Cravens of Dunedin, president of the New Zealand Federation of Freshwater ...
Never mind the scoreboard – in the 2000 Bledisloe Cup decider, the real trans-Tasman battle was won before kickoff.First published in 2016. The dawn of the new millennium was a dark time for the All Blacks. Their final game pre-Y2K was a 22-18 loss to South Africa in the ...
I’m on the wrong side of 40, I never pursued creative work and now my job is killing my soul. Help! Want Hera’s help? Email your problem to helpme@thespinoff.co.nzDear Hera,May I start with the least original conversation opener you’re likely to hear around the motu at the moment, particularly in Wellington: ...
“Never again - No AUKUS” was the message of the wreath laid at this morning’s national ANZAC Day commemorative service at Pukeahu National War Memorial Park this morning by the Stop AUKUS group. ...
Interesting-the sheep deal has made McCully a liability-the smiling assassin has sent him on his way. Wonder who the Nats have lined up for this plum seat and maybe it will become vulnerable with no McCully and a swing to Labour?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11594246
Wonder no longer, my contacts have assured me its a done deal:
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/PcAVckjtNMK/Prince+William+Visits+New+Zealand+Day+1/KekyxxQA7lT/Richie+Mccaw
*This may or not be completely accurate*
Wasn’t this the seat that Crazy Collin was coveting?
Like a cut snake in the grass.
Thanks for bringing back those best-forgotten images: like this and this.
Of course, the thought that this one is a posed studio shot is fairly disturbing.
Judy.
Bill McKibben on the Koch brother’s new brand
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/03/10/koch-brothers-new-brand/
Oh another Koch Brothers article that will get me pissed off I thought (I’ve read a few), but
Jeezzzuzzzz…. Reading that made me nearly physically ill.
Trigger warning for people who have been subject to the machinations of serial F***in a*se***es.
I reckon,
They are saying the Kocks are pissed that Trumps ahead, because he’s rich and paying his own way, so they cant get their claws in there. But Trump in the Whitehorse? This could put the US back to the days of Hoover, with his attacks on the Muslim Religion, and the other insanities coming out..
More likely it will put the US back to the days of Germany 1933.
That guy also had no economic policy except, “I will make this country great again.” His only election message was anger and outrage because of his country’s fall from power.
and on the same nybooks.com page this…
Tonight 1 out of every 100 US adults will spend the night in prison. More young American men of color are in prison than are in university.
That’s more than “sad.” It’s catastrophic.
A country where more men than women get raped on a night to night basis.
Oh noes! Bill English vs. reality!
Maybe, just maybe, those despised ‘academics’ are right, and the problem is the GINI. Nah! Defund the academics!
Read that article, public service not delivering, can see why the government wants to get private organizations involved.
You’re either being deliberately obtuse or you’re an idiot, arguing from bad faith or stupidity. In other words, it’s a complete waste of time discussing this with you.
The problem is the GINI, and that won’t stop fuckwits like you doing even more harm.
since when have private organisations ever improved anything that reflects or measures social or economic disparity???
From the article
Can see why he’s keen to get iwi and the sallies involved in running the state house system.
Meanwhile, the Sallies have just released a report saying they’re sick of being lied to by the National Party.
The problem is the National Party.
+1
National had a golden chance to lower the rates of domestic violence, lower the number of childhood abuse victims ……….. and lower our prisoner numbers.
It was the Alcohol law review …………..
They had good advice from medical professionals, police officers and others.
But they spent the bulk of their time meeting with liquor company lobbyists ( and political donars ?), and ended up ruling out any changes which would lower alcohol abuse …………….
Our high rates of domestic violence and abuse are Nationals achievement …….and they will use their crisis to give us something that will make us even sicker ……
TPPA ………..Serco to run cyf’s ???????????
but they do absolve the government of any responsibility for anything, which is what Nats like.
A comment on the story says:
I just googled domestic violence prevention programs nz
Looks like there’s lots of options.
The real issue is more about people realizing they’ve got a problem and for those people to take the necessary steps to deal with their anger issues.
How you convince people to do that is where it all gets a bit tricky and I don’t think more money is the answer
more money = (more cops + more social workers) – income related stress
It might no be the answer (as if there could even be a single answer for a complex problem), but it’d be a bloody good start.
Another option could be monitoring guys with high testosterone levels.
http://www.crimetimes.org/95c/w95cp4.htm
You obviously haven’t read enough studies of what happens to animals when you put them in cages.
I seriously doubt that you can extrapolate violence/testoserone levels in men in prison out to the general population. Lots of other criticism of your idea but that will do to start with.
Because monitoring is free? Oh, wait…
It’s almost like he wants to find any solution apart from ones that will work that left have been promoting.
That’s the right’s answer to everything, is that it all comes down to personal responsibility if you’re not a winner in life, blah bla bla, a bloody great scapegoat that one. You don’t have to offer any solutions, its all your own fault.
I have had family involved in several of these as volunteers or professionally. They are largely run on a voluntary basis by groups outside the government, and usually get a slither of funding but are grossly underfunded.
Perhaps you should ask yourself a more basic question – why are there so many ‘options’ and how many of them are effectively defunct. Try using the date filter and see how many of those sites (which is what you were looking at) are dead.
Which is probably part of the problem. People simply don’t know where to go.
People with anger issues usually don’t realise that that they have anger issues. They need to have it pointed out to them which means that we need a proactive organisation doing so.
Such an organisation would be where people who need help from people with anger issues can go to get that help and then that organisation would have the power to force the people with anger issues into dealing with their anger.
BM has let the cat out of the bag ! at 3.1
He says “public service not delivering, can see why the govt wants to get private organisations involved”.
This is THE classic tactic. Run down the public service, deprive it of the necessary funds, then say its not working and the private sector can do it better ….. and hey presto – the private sector comes in with a big financial incentive from the govt.
with a watertight contract that ensures they get the taxpayer dollars even when they fail to deliver the promised results…but hey, its better value ,right(wing)?
“public service not delivering”
. . . which is the fault of the minister in charge of that ministry.
So privatizing is an admission that the National cabinet are crap managers.
That is 1,000% true of the minister in charge of prisons.
And the minister in charge of the Christchurch fiasco.
“Defund the academics”
That’s because they’re all saying “we told you so..” The treasury child can’t handle it.
It’s also a prelude to introducing another useless pet project that when the eventual failure occurs will be blamed the poor not the project.
*on the poor not the project
The point of a new project for Bill, like the traditional commission of enquiry, is to delay a public accounting for his failures, ideally until out past the next election.
+1
read the comments.
there is much love for Aunty Double Dipper from Dipton Bill English, also Finance Minister for our current National led Government.
It must be him admitting that despite cuts to all services in regards to Domestic Violence, nothing was achieved that brings out the love sweet love. His solution? More cuts 🙂
I think he is trying to get his micro surplus up and going 🙂
Weird that the article is categorised as ‘business’
because it is a business. Nothing weird about that. Especially the privatising part of it is business, big business.
I think Pull’s her Benefit calls it ‘sexy business’ the selling of vital services to for profit business…cause you might can’t milk a stone, but you sure can milk a poor person for what their worth, and then off to a private prison they go 🙂
Now that is an A+ response. Poor Bill must be so conflicted that the cost of that private prison business is coming from the budget for which he’s guardian *cough*
Problem is the accademics are not interested in the data because the solution is bleedin obvious. Put more actual money into poverty reduction programs. The governments new fangled data department is (if successful) a cost cutting measure on the other hand. If they dont start getting results soon they will start burying the issues.
Um, which ‘academics’ are you talking about? How will spending more money on poverty reduction address domestic violence in middle and upper income families?
The problem is the GINI: our level of inequality is too high. The notion that it only affects the poor is a common misunderstanding.
So if we made the poor richer, and the rich poorer i.e. reduced our GINI, then the newly worse off middle class households will have less domestic violence?
How does that work?
Again my general point: most money and most effort in our universities is no longer focussed on solving the crisis level problems facing Kiwis and facing the country.
The role of universities as the “critic and conscience of society”? Out the window. University departments up and down the country should have been backing Jane Kelsey up against the TPP. Instead: crickets.
And it is understandable why that is the case: these are areas with limited international and academic prestige, they are areas which are longstanding and easy to neglect through familiarity, they are areas which are politically controversial and hence always a problem for funding, they are areas which are seen as too low brow pragmatic and not conceptually or theoretically challenging enough, etc.
“So if we made the poor richer, and the rich poorer i.e. reduced our GINI, then the newly worse off middle class households will have less domestic violence?”
We need to reduce inequality across the board (not just who is rich and poor economically). When we do that, reducing domestic violence programmes will be more successful. Do both.
Actually domestic violence/family violence has been shown to be across the board in socio economic, race and class groups.
Family violence is not just done by the poor, it is just they get caught more and get more media attention.
Ie The white rich prick is just as likely to be beating up his family as the brown poor prick.
Yes, and for other inequality reasons not just financial ones eg gender inequality.
Is that the only way you can think of reducing inequality? I’m pretty sure that such cak-handed incompetence would cause a backlash, so I suggest we don’t do it your way.
Why do upper salaries have to fall if lower ones are rising? Is it because that was the only white-anting approach you could think up on the spur of the moment?
That of course would be the smarter way to do it, but when Nic the NZer suggested simply giving more income to the poor, you dismissed the suggestion out of hand with your typical clever bullshit reasoning.
Flawed reasoning: see below:
it follows that a sensible approach might actually raise top salaries, just not as quickly as low ones
Fine, so Nic the NZer gets to put more money directly into anti-poverty programmes, and you get to hand over more money to comfortable and high income earners.
Win win all round.
Win win? Doesnt that involve AOB not being the only winner? Doesn’t seem like thats a win win for him.
Yawn. If you feel like engaging with CV’s feeble desire to put words in my mouth, go right ahead. You’re wasting your time though.
Just because something is possible doesn’t mean I consider it a desirable outcome. Knocking down CV’s strawmen is too easy.
If you want a clearer picture of my opinion see the discussion with Weka below:
If everyone else is genuinely doing ok then maybe…
Or you could admit your first paragraph at 3.4.1 was just you mouthing off and poverty reduction programes will likely improve violence measures and GINI measures. (Even if some body else said it)
Do you think it’s ok for some people to earn shit loads of money if everyone else is doing ok?
Well that depends on how you define shit loads.
Australia, for example, has a lower GINI than we do, and a higher average wage, so clearly the “make rich people poorer” approach is nonsense, although I can see why those who specialise in white-anting (whether from the right or the left) fixate upon it.
It is widely acknowledged (among those despised academics at the World Bank, OECD, etc.) that a lower GINI increases a country’s wealth across the board.
So it follows that a sensible approach might actually raise top salaries, just not as quickly as low ones.
“Well that depends on how you define shit loads.”
Yes, and it follows from that you and CV might use the word ‘rich’ differently.
You didn’t answer my question 🙂
I don’t have a strong opinion about it one way or another. Where “earning shit loads” involves environmental degradation, for example, it follows that everyone else isn’t doing ok.
If everyone else is genuinely doing ok then maybe…
I don’t think it’s possible to earn shitloads without damaging the environment and/or social conditions.
Yep. The Left still hasn’t really seriously come to terms with the idea of a steady state economy.
It’s still all about growth growth growth.
While generally very wealthy people develop power to cause mischief somewhat akin to that of states, some enterprises do not intrinsically degrade the environment. JK Rowling’s work wasn’t particularly destructive if you accept that the publishing industry would have printed something else had she been absent.
Seems AOBs reasoning fails on its own merits here however. Or does somebody want to seriously claim that middle and upper income house holds are engaging in domestic violence because they are not paying enough tax?
The main reason to remove wealth from the top to me seems to be so their political power doest reach extremes.
And i would always point out pragmatically you should not put on hold the near term goal of spending on the lower end, to wait for the ability to collect from the top end. Its not an easy task getting wealth off the wealthy and putting poverty reduction on hold is a disservice.
I suppose that incoherent mess translates as the false assumption that I favour redistribution as the way to tackle inequality.
I don’t. I think pre-distribution is a far superior approach.
PS: it would help you grasp the issue if you informed yourself about it, as opposed to these rather hysterical displays of ignorance.
Waiting to hear what you think the top initiatives in pre-distribution for NZ are, and how we would push for them politically.
The Living Wage campaign is a good example. The fact that union members get paid more is another.
Superb. So where’s the disagreement? Raise wages for all (not just union workers, they are only a small minority of wage earners) and implement a universal basic income set at a decent level. No one here would disagree with that.
Next – how are you going to fund it.
how are you going to fund it.
You are mistaken: it results in gains not losses.
You’re still looking at it the wrong way. The UBI and other government spending is what funds the rest of the economy.
DTB – well I know that, the question is, does OAB. Or does he think that we are going to have to tax and borrow to fund his proposals.
So, just to clarify, both you and OAB agree that measures such as a living wage and maybe even a UBI are affordable.
You’re just looking for an argument as to why you both agree.
You really should go back and address wtf you mean leading up to 3.4.1.1.2.1
As far as i can see i suggested pretty sensible plan of funding poverty reduction programs which would help with abuse rates (I believe).
Of course this would also improve GINI statistics if it reduced absolute poverty.
Apparently thats not going to address middle and upper income abuse rates. But you didnt seem to have any plan yourself there (other than demanding GINI rates fall). Whats the plan there? Your going to bring GINI rates down by shouting at them? Will that address middle and upper income abuse rates anyway.
1) boost incomes for the poor. While the corresponding decrease in incomes for the rich will be the same monetary amount, the percentage drop in their income will be much lower than the percentage increase for the poor because that’s how capitalism works.
2) if there is a socioeconomic relationship at all consistent with almost all other forms of violence and harm, the decrease in violence amongst the poor will be quantitively and proportionately many times greater than any corresponding increase amongs the upper and middle classes
3) one could also imagine a socioeconimic mechanism whereby in more equal societies there is less risk associated in leaving an abusive relationship with a rich partner
4) for the rest, other solutions apply such as social workers, support groups, mandatory follow-ups on IPV incidents to make sure the behaviour isn’t continuing, etc etc etc. Money isn’t the sole factor for any problem except poverty, just a major one for many other problems.
the corresponding decrease in incomes for the rich will be the same monetary amount
Not necessarily: as above,
@Nick: already answered above at 9:52 am. Lower GINI, less violence across the board. There’s lots of information about the mechanisms involved at the Equality Trust site previously linked.
Next: timeframe.
Things are at a crisis point so how many years are we going to give ourselves to signficantly reduce GINI? Maybe four or five?
Edit – Helen Clark’s govt did nothing to lower GINI. Levels of GINI during most of Key’s term appear directly comparable to Helen Clark’s day.
What’s the problem again?
“Boost incomes for the poor. While the corresponding decrease in incomes for the rich will be the same”
Its a bit hard to resolve what the exact policy is from comments like this. That may have something to do with missconceptions in economic discussions.
I fully agree with AOB that its good enough if you can get incomes at the bottom to gravitate up maybe with govt subsidies of some form. Better if that reduces some GINI measure. You dont need to collect more tax for that to happen. The left has already tried to push forward policies about taxing wealth more (and paying less to supposedly well off pensioners). The problem is if they are unpopular then the left doesnt get elected and cant do anything. Clearly thats not doing the best for left wing constituants.
“if”
Hmm, yes. What do opinion polls tell us?
I note Warren Buffet’s observations about wealth and 70% taxation.
For those who have forgotten what a GINI is – voila Wikipedia.
The Gini coefficient (also known as the Gini index or Gini ratio) (/dʒini/ jee-nee) is a measure of statistical dispersion intended to represent the income distribution of a nation’s residents, and is the most commonly used measure of inequality.
Gini coefficient – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient
Further explanation:
A Gini coefficient of zero expresses perfect equality, where all values are the same (for example, where everyone has the same income). A Gini coefficient of one (or 100%) expresses maximal inequality among values (for example, where only one person has all the income or consumption, and all others have none).[3][4]
However, a value greater than one may occur if some persons represent negative contribution to the total (for example, having negative income or wealth). For larger groups, values close to or above 1 are very unlikely in practice.
Now you know, or not, as the case may be. Clear as mud.
For the same reason that lower incomes are falling/stagnating while upper incomes are increasing.
nice straw man
With preconspetions like that, who needs an education…
In the article you linked English complains that only the Salvation army is interested in his data.
Probably violence in middle and upper income families is more difficult to address, but its a more prevalent issue for low socio economic groups.
And you take what English says at face value? The Sallies say his party tells lies: perhaps everyone else has noticed that it’s counterproductive dealing with callous deceitful hypocrites.
Sure, if they no longer want their funding.
What’s the point of doing a whole lot of research into lies? You’re not going to get published anywhere reputable, unless you shift focus and do a Poli-Sci analysis of exactly how and why the lies are being told.
I think if academics were in it for the money academia wouldn’t appeal to them.
On the funding note, and on what is smiled upon charity-wise and what is not, I thought it was interesting looking at a 2002 ‘book’ guide on charities
to see the following (which says a lot about government wanting people to be fully informed):
2. Under Advancement of education as a legal charitable purpose, the last entry reads:
Our problem in NZ a government that desires and ensures our ignorance of our polity! (Being a bit ignorant myself, I checked I had the right word –
Google defined it – an organized society; a state as a political entity.)
Not sure what your implying. Are you saying the accademy is very interested in govt data but English doesnt want people to know that?
I’m saying that English is a minister of a government that tells lies, as detailed by the Sallies, and that while academics would no doubt love to get their hands on the data, they can’t, because the National Party has constructed a dishonesty machine.
All this has been detailed in the Sallies’ report: ‘Moving Targets’ – I suggest you familiarise yourself with it.
Which section/pages of that Sallies report describes the National Government;’s “dishonesty machine”, thanks.
Don’t thank me: I haven’t lifted a finger to help you.
Why can’t you give a link One Anonymous Bloke. Always short and sharp you are, and all knowing. Can we gain the background to that info with your help. That’s what we have a left leaning blog for, to assist the spread of useful information and understanding, I thought.
http://www.salvationarmy.org.nz/research-media/social-policy-and-parliamentary-unit/latest-report/moving-targets
The answer to CV’s doubtful leading question can be found in the introduction. The whole introduction, read as a single piece.
I didn’t link to it because it formed the basis of a post right here a few days ago which is still visible on the front page.
you are correct in saying that funds spend on poverty will not eradicate ‘all’ domestic violence, but it will alleviate the worst of it.
I think that to a large extend it depends how one defines ‘domestic violence’ on a private level – violence by family members, and how one defines ‘domestic violence’ on a state / governmental level – violence by a state who simply does not care how its populace survives.
On a private level, one can help by providing funds to schools for a. appropriate and science based sexual education, education about how to prevent being violent oneself, how to speak to someone in authority should one be a victim of domestic violence or sexual assault at home etc etc.
Then funds could be provided to Shelters and Refuge Centers, so that victims of domestic violence and sufferers of abuse have a save place they can go to.
On a state / governmental level funds could be provided to create social housing and / or maintain current social housing stock (aka State Houses) so that children and their parents can live in a decent home that they can afford.
Benefit levels could be reviewed so that Children and their Parents have enough funds to not only pay rent, but also pay electricity and have food.
Benefit levels could be reviewed so that children of poor parents (there is a big growing class of working poor here in NZ) will receive adequate clothing and other needed items for their schooling.
Not eating, not being warm, being bullied at school for being poor are all symptoms of ‘domestic violence’.
Children dying of cold in a government owned and maintained state house?
Not having Police around to patrol the streets and make certain parts of town safer is a part of ‘domestic violence’ and usually it is women who bear the costs. i.e.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/77201968/Police-seek-information-about-Invercargill-assault
Now these are just a very few examples of how to ‘fight’ domestic violence, and all of the examples listed would prolly not cost more than the money that the Double Dipper from Dipton has squandered on ‘Statistics’ to prove that nothing can be done.
What I would like to know is why these guys are actually in government if they believe that the private industry is so much better at governing. It must be that they are so bad that no one would want them in private business.
“Not having Police around to patrol the streets and make certain parts of town safer is a part of ‘domestic violence’ and usually it is women who bear the costs. i.e.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/77201968/Police-seek-information-about-Invercargill-assault”
That’s not domestic violence. The most straightforward solution to that is to put a curfew on men. But ultimately men have to do the anti-violence work or the problem just goes somewhere else. Having police patrol the streets to the degree needed to stop rape in public places is ineffective, inefficient and makes people paranoid.
Who is going to enforce your “curfew on men”, robots???
good idea. Or women police could do it. Or do you think that women aren’t capable and that only men can do such a job?
edit, thinking about it, in some places in NZ police men could probably be trusted with the job, whereas in other places obviously not. I’m sure we could come up with a system that allows us to determine who is trustworthy or not.
There’s an inverse relationship between the GINI and the level of trust in society. Just saying… 😀
I was thinking about what we could do in our ambulance at the bottom of the cliff culture, rather than waiting for the revolution to come.
The Two Ronnies and Diana Dors presented one scenario of bringing men to heel
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZYCPHuRW_0
No, I’m saying your solution of a curfew on men is fucked.
that’s hardly unexpected. Try seeing the context.
Frankly i consider the Idea to put a curfew on Men a bit ‘out there’, and maybe to harsh, as there are also female offenders, and there are also man who get raped. And most rapes happen with someone we know and in areas / homes/ office we live and use, aka our domestic environment.
But, our police force is being harmed by budget cuts, an extension of these budget cuts results in certain areas to loose their cop shops, the loss of presence of cops in the street and loss of community constables etc etc. In such an environment were effectively the state has abandoned its duty to provide safety to all citizens, domestic violence will grow. Mugging, Burglaries, Dairies being robbed, assault and sexual violence are all a consequence of this.
This is not a case of this is someone who will beat the living day light out of his/her partner or child/ren, or if this is someone who will assault someone alone in a park. Both happen because they can.
both are instances of domestic violence, if i consider the Park, the road, the sports fields and the shops were i get my milk and bread an extension of my domestic area of habitat.
I don’t say that police on the streets can prevent all rapes or many, but not having police in the streets will for sure do nothing.
I am not saying that having science based sexual education, education re sexual boundaries, and sexual assault, and sexual consent in schools will prevent pregnancy, std or rape, but not having programmes like will surely not create a better outcome.
So we need to have an approach that works in the intimate area of the family home, and the more open area of the families community and surrounds.
“Frankly i consider the Idea to put a curfew on Men a bit ‘out there’,”
Me too. I’m not actually suggesting we should do that, it’s more a device to get people to think (and to see which regressive men would argue against it 😉 ). If we were serious about ending domestic and other sexual violence we would be looking at the behaviour of men and the control structures in society.
Rape of adults (which is what your link was about) is an act done overwhelmingly by men. Yes women can rape, but most women and men who are raped are raped by men. See, that’s putting the responsibility back on the class of people who do the bad thing.
I agree that police should be better funded and that a presence on the street in a community based way is a good thing. But if we are at the stage of thinking that police patrols are needed to control violent crime after dark then we’ve lost a lot of ground. To have prevented the assault in that link by patrolling would have required a huge police presence. I think there are better ways of using police time.
“if i consider the Park, the road, the sports fields and the shops were i get my milk and bread an extension of my domestic area of habitat.”
Fair point, although we don’t know if that was the case for the woman who was assaulted. I also think there is value in differentiating between sexual assualt that happens at home or by one’s partner/family and that which happens in other contexts. As you say, most rape is done to women by people they know in places they are familiar with.
I don’t base anyting on that case, but it is a standard case. A dark park, as per comments from people that live near the area for some reason Lights have been cut in this park so now its dark, is a good place to mug, rob, beat or rape someone. That is my point.
A neighbourhood with our a presence of police is a good place to mug, rob, beat or rape someone. Taht is my point.
Children who think that Dad beating Mum, Mum beating the kids is normal, will do what if no one tells them that it is not normal.
Children who think that being sexually abused by Dad, Uncle or Cuzzie is normal will do what if no one tells them that it is not normal.
So we need to look at domestic violence as ‘societal violence’ that to an extend is even condoned – Women and Children as chattel to be treated as the owner – Dad – Head of the Family – sees fit, and if he spares the rod he spoils the chattel. This is still a valid thought in the eyes and brains of many hyper religious types of all creeds.
And in a nutshell, this is what Bill English is essentially saying, We can’t do anything about it, so lets stop wasting money on it. These ‘domestic violence’ incidents might be not so violent at all, when one has a religious believe in which a women is helpmeet, subservient to the husband, and ultimatively only does as he pleases. (and a women can have an education and a job and still live by the doctrine that the father or husband will decide what is best for her – after all she is only women).
This is the thinking that kills women and children world wide, by direct violence, by omitted health care on religious grounds http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/18/michigan-catholic-hospital-women-miscarriage-abortion-mercy-health-partners , by lack of education, smaller portions of food, less value to the community etc etc etc .
So really we have to look at domestic violence as something that happens intimately in families all over the country, but also as something that happens with the blessings of the state, that refuses to secure the outdoors for the public, that refuses to educate the young ones on how to build boundaries, keep themselves safe, and on how to report domestic violence and to whom, a state that refuses to assure that everyone has a safe dwelling and a plate full of nutritious food to eat, a state that refuses to keep communities safe by rationing their community constable away. (something i am sure that will only happen in certain neighbourhoods), and we have to see domestic violence that is while not outright condoned by our churches – after all violence is bad – but still tolerated in the name of biblical teachings and christian(insert any other creed in that suits you better) values.
Not disagreeing with anyone here so don’t take this the wrong way but there seems to be a strong theme of religion in your views, its probably just my view (being an atheist) but does religion in NZ still have that strong of a hold outside ethnic minorities?
Generally speaking most of our current laws are based on a system stemming for an age where the church (roman catholic, or protestant or anglican) has very much decided the norms and laws.
Don’t forget that until the seventies a women could not have a bank account without her husbands signature, could not have a cheque book without her husbands signature and could not get a contraceptive without her husbands permission to name just a few. These privileges that men have held were those given to men by the church/law of yesteryears. And if you look at communes like the Brethren, LSD, Evangelic Christians (purity, sexual abstinece,), you will find that christian/judaic/islamic believes are still very much alive and still rule when it comes to the relationships of women vs men there is a certain undertone of man knows best and mum goes with the flow.
And yes, religion in NZ is big, have a look at the mega churches being build, chirstian radio stations, tv channels etc etc.
I do believe that half of domestic violence is simply just people not being able to deal with life and letting someone else pay for their frustrations by controlling / beating / abusing partners, kids or elders, and the other half of domestic violence is simply just people living out their believes, i.e. women have to be submissive and do as the husband wishes, and the same counts for children, and she / he is poor and its their fault for them being lazy and this is why they should live in a hovel and only eat when we (government/state/society) judges that they have suffered enough or jumped through enough hoops (WINZ anyone) to get a food voucher, or a bed voucher.
“A dark park, as per comments from people that live near the area for some reason Lights have been cut in this park so now its dark, is a good place to mug, rob, beat or rape someone. That is my point.”
Agree.
Our planners and park designs are purely functional (often for singular sports) and ignore the myriad uses to which the local community can put them.
In particular, sports fields which are used only in evenings and weekends and make up the majority of easily accessible park spaces for most NZers.
Planners also provide blind alleys in the suburbs, where walkways are surrounded by 2 metre high fences, and follow the back or sides of houses where community eyes are unlikely to be looking. (A solution: allow similar builds to laneway homes on back sections, and you will completely change the atmosphere of current dark and unloved spaces.)
Parks and community spaces need to be designed to encourage multi-use, and multi-generational use. In many European communities the public spaces are considered an extension of your home, and social activities with friends and family utilise those spaces at all times of the day and night. As NZ has not been limited by space or transport when planning, designing and building – this public extension has not been common. But it has benefits, and needs to be encouraged.
Better community social cohesion, and also, better public safety due to that extended use and sense of community ownership.
Better link for alley/laneway houses.
It would be a good initiative programme for some of our currently ignored Auckland suburbs, where family overcrowding is rife.
If you are an owner-occupier of a house, then you should be able to build a small home on the back of your section that both provides affordable living to friends and family (not just an elderly relative) and provides a community benefit of redirecting attention to currently unwatched (and unsafe) public spaces.
Most family violence happens in the home – which is exactly where a curfew would put men. Not a solution.
Yes, I think I made that point (that the violence just shifts elsewhere). My suggestion was to prompt people to think about what is going on when a woman gets sexually assualted at night in a park by three men.
The problem is that most men will think wtf because its just completely out of their scope of understanding whereas the men that do this sort of thing won’t care at all
How to stop I don’t know
You can’t.
I suppose you could if you had millions of cameras in every nook and cranny and every one was chipped.
Every time there was a crime you’d just look at whatever camera caught the incident, over lay that with the stored chip ids and voila, no one would commit crime because you could never get away with it.
go to the source mate – that is where the answers lie
I think you mean “I can’t”, in which case you should get out of the way and let the people who are making a difference do so.
“The problem is that most men will think wtf because its just completely out of their scope of understanding whereas the men that do this sort of thing won’t care at all”
In my lifetime the attitudes of men have changed hugely. Men can be educated and made aware of what the issues are and what is acceptable and what is not. Plus, this conversation is happening in the context of GINI and inequality. Do something about those and many other things become easier to solve.
“How to stop I don’t know”
Listen to and support the people that do know.
“The problem is that most men…”
perhaps PR if you believe it is just individuals rather than a culture – that is men’s culture, masculinity as defined and applauded within our society and so on
most men know exactly what the problem is and a fair few know the answers too imo
one easy way to start is to not laugh when certain man make jokes about rape among their mates or on the radio.
another way is to accept that if a girl does not like her hair pulled and she says no, that she said no, consent was not given, and that the pulling of the hair has to stop and not call that ‘horsing around’ or ‘having a bit of fun’.
Baby steps really.
IF you don’t want to have it happen to your wife/mother/ sister/daughter/cuzzie/coworker etc etc then dont let it happen to someone else, and don’t just go a shucks if it does happen saying nothing can be done.
Agreed and when others start talking about inserting beer bottles where they shouldn’t be or start using swiss balls in ways they weren’t designed we really shouldn’t turn a blind eye
Puckish Rogue …
24 February 2016 at 1:08 pm
Agreed and when others start talking about inserting beer bottles where they shouldn’t be or start using swiss balls in ways they weren’t designed we really shouldn’t turn a blind eye
ouch. and no i don’t even want to know what swiss balls are. But i think it goes without saying that is as equally abhorrent as some bloke on the radio joking about soaps.
and now I need brain bleech and a cute puppie.
http://www.browneggblueegg.com/Story/BroodyHenAdoptsPuppies/BroodyHenAdoptsPuppies.jpg
Exactly.
“What I would like to know is why these guys are actually in government if they believe that the private industry is so much better at governing. It must be that they are so bad that no one would want them in private business.”
Sabine, I believe it goes deeper than that, more complex. These guys, Double Dipper, Paula Benefit and Ann Tolley for example are well paid and receive exceptionally generous superannuation benefits plus perks so they hang in there. They could get jobs outside from directorships etc – but they would never get the freedom and power to exert the control they do without being scrutinised and these punitive cost cutting exercises put pain on vulnerable people and affect morale in State Services Departments – like the police, teachers and nursing staff. Its more a control thing which is very addictive, plus there has to be a streak of sadism/vindictiveness in their psyche to enjoy stretching the rubber band so fine. Control is a big component of family violence as well and it makes the person perpetuating it feel more powerful and its like a dose of “feel good” for them. No normally balanced human being would enjoy cost cutting, to the state that ill and unemployed exist hand to mouth week by week. I suggest that these ministers just love their jobs.
Yes, hence why I call it ‘state sanctioned domestic violence’.
i suggest that these ministers are control freaks that not only love their jobs, but that also love the power that they have and the misery they can inflict.
Marquis de Sade comes to mind ,and most of what the dear Marquis wrote about had nothing to do with sex but all to do with what people that have power do to people that don’t have power.
I knew a kid at school who had way too much fun playing with a magnifying glass and scurrying ants on a sunny day. Wonder if he went into politics.
Otherwise known as psychopaths.
DA Beach was bought 🙂
http://www.stuff.co.nz/travel/themes/beaches/77204688/abel-tasman-beach-offer-accepted
Quote: An offer on the Abel Tasman beach has been accepted.
It’s been a long wait for the thousands of Kiwis who got behind the campaign to buy the beach for New Zealand.
Beach campaigner Duane Major announced the good news on Wednesday morning.”Quote End.
🙂
oh yeah!
Maggie says that the generous Government put in a “modest amount”. Are we as outraged as we were with Gareth? Other bidders put in some dollars as well. Announcements later today.
We were outraged with Gareth? What did i miss?
I am actually just pleased that this bit of land is not going to enter the trophy box of some oversees ‘investors’.
I am pleased it stays owned by NZ.
Gareth Morgan offered to put in a big chunk of money if his family could have a little section for themselves for 15 years or something.
ah, his philanthropist side showed again?
didn’t he come out and say it was a ruse to get ‘ordinary’ kiwis to go hard to beat him and ensure the campaign succeeded – I didn’t buy it of course 🙂
I reckon he was trolling – get your arses into gear and raise the money – or you’ll be gazumped by a rich prick like me.
If so, he was smart, it apparently worked. Can we try something similar for the next election to get what we want for NZ?? We have tried asking nicely, we have thrown a dildo, we’ve pushed in an onion on a stick! (Referring to comedy Rinse the Blood off my Toga.) We’ll do – almost – anything.
re the next election. In the last election I think it could be argued that dotcom did a morgan, albeit inadvertently.
dotcom wanted National to win?
note ‘inadvertently’ – “without knowledge or intent”
Not very good value for money that investment, he’d have done better just giving the money to Labour
well he DID give some money rather than just bogus-big-note-it like your mate key giving his salary to charity.
and not all money given is an ‘investment’ – that is a rightmare
lol
I’d overlooked the line about political donations being “investments”.
If that is indeed the case then that’s quite funny, he’s an infuriating bastard but opinionated people usually are.
“Are we as outraged as we were with Gareth? “
No, because the government (I hope) is not going to, whenever it’s in residence , prevent people walking above the high tide mark (and what a bargain residence that would have been, getting the public to part pay).
I wonder what a modest amount is?
Who will be the eventual legal owner?
The Crown? Which will promptly sell it off to some foreign buyer to help out Bill English’s surplus.
Ahh, i am sure they will hold it for six month and then put it on the market.
That is what is happening in AKL, not that anyone cares. Profit. wait, six month, sell, profit, wait, six month, profit.
Will be under DOC. National Park.
DOC to manage. Will the Crown be the legal owner?
http://www.openspace.org.nz/Site/About_QEII/default.aspx
Are yoy saying that the National Trust is being gifted the title?
I’d say it’s good chance that will happen.
It’s what they’re there for.
Are you basing that on anything in particular?
Why would a tiny slither of land put back into public hands in a National Park be covenanted and have a different legal status? Wouldn’t it make more sense to consolidate it into the park.
I’m asking of the title is being held by the Crown, or if it’s being held by something/someone else but DOC are managing it.
The most interesting part of this is that Maggie Barry said on RNZ this morning that the government is going to buy up other parts of Abel Tasman and merge them into the national park as well. She was expecting to announce this within 3 weeks.
So it seems National is tapping this crowd-funding and cheerful sentiment around it for votes.
Fair enough; but at what cost? Where is the money coming from?
yep they’ve found a seam of gold – smacked the original claim owners over the head and proceeding to take the ‘claim’ over and dig the shit out of it – until it runs dry or their pollsters tell them someone else has some better gold over there.
Hopefully funding for National park extensions would come from fresh funding from the taxpayer. Funding through tax is the ultimate and fully democratically sanctioned original crowd-funding.
does that involve rich people too?
Indeed it does.
Every NZ government does a sort of crowd funding in terms of hospices. Every MP knows hospices save tens of millions in the health budget.
Am I the only one who sees the irony of the public crowd funding to keep a piece of beach, while the government can’t wait to sell as much land off as soon as possible?
no, i think you are in excellent company.
here have a coffee 🙂
imo the measurement is ‘popular’ – after rigorous polling the MOST popular (to middle potential swing Gnat voters) is determined. This is then championed, alluded to, connected to the gnats via maskKey. This then dipilaTories from general popularity into popularity for the gnats. Meanwhile the polling continues 24/7, day and night – else how will the gnats know what to support and push.
Meanwhile the polling continues 24/7, day and night – else how will the gnats know what to support and push.
Up to date relevant data is the key to success.
depends how you define success and how ‘up to date’ and ‘relevant’ the data is or ever can be.
Being able to govern is a pretty decent way of defining succes
Yeah but there are levels within that success.
Caligula was able to govern, but he didn’t do a lot for his country. Like Brownlee, he diverted national resources to ambitious construction projects. Ultimately he was killed by his own security people.
Suppose Key were toppled in a bloody insurrection by a charismatic antipodean Danton – she too would be able to govern.
Mere governance is no achievement at all – there is always someone on top – the trick is to get considerate folk who leave things better than they found them. That doesn’t describe the Gnats at all – they’re wrecking the place.
Exit PR left, pursued by bear.
A fact I have been trying to point out to people but it goes straight over their heads.
I’m a bit ‘meh’ on the whole campaign as well. As mentioned above, National have found another wagon to hitch their “fern” to and will ride it for all its worth.
Gareth wanted the use of the existing bach for 15 years. That upset many folk. I think that under DOC that bach will be demolished as not allowed in a National Park. The bach was I think an old boat dragged up from the beach years ago.
Are DOC still erasing human history from National Parks? They should leave the bach standing and make use of it.
Or demolish it, plant it, and return it to the natural state from whence it came.
Why that rather than preserving the human history? If it was an old pa or kaik site would you want it removed?
In a lot of cases replanting creates a human interpretation of what land should look like, returning land to a “natural original state” is almost impossible. I’ve seen many restoration projects where they don’t even have the care to plant species from that same region. Then there’s the issue of no one being certain of what the land looked like 1,000, 100,000 or a million years ago.
True, although there are also groups that source plants from within the rohe. We don’t have to go back 1,000 years (especially given that there has been localised climate change in that time). If there are still local intact native ecosystems they will tell us a lot. But I take your point, much of the restoration happening is about making it look like something rather than be something.
“The electronic voting machines are owned by private corporations, which are Republican in orientation, generally. And the courts have ruled that the source code on these electronic voting machines is proprietary. So, even the governments that buy or lease these machines have no access to a final verification process.”
“And this year, about 80 percent of the vote nationally will be cast on electronic voting machines. There is no verifiability. In six key swing states—Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Michigan, Iowa and Arizona—you have Republican governors and Republican secretaries of state, and no method of verifying the electronic vote count. At midnight or whenever it is on election night, those two guys can go in there with an IT person and flip the outcome of an electronically counted vote within about 60 seconds.”
http://www.democracynow.org/2016/2/23/could_the_2016_election_be_stolen
Which just tells us that we shouldn’t be using voting machines or proprietary software for online voting.
A humorous short video about how easily 4 University of Michigan undergraduates hacked to pieces a Washington, D.C. election site that used computer voting. The kids had a great time, but no one has learned the lesson they are teaching us.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SGlH1goPA4
Is there any meaning in what the site policy refers to as ‘ reasonably rational debate’ if a ‘debater’ can simply ignore any point that is inconvenient to them?
IMO, the level of ‘genuine debate’ on this blog would be greatly improved if there was a tighter expectation that commenters should engage directly and honestly with ‘reasonable’ discussion points.
At a minimum, If a commenter has willingly engaged in a discussion, and a point is put to them that is: directly relevant to the original post, their own comments, is tightly focused, is based on referenced facts, draws a logical conclusion from those facts, is put politely….
Then it is entirely reasonable that the point should be met in a genuine and direct manner?
Can a discussion actually be ‘debate’ if that minimum level of engagement is not met?
Open Mike is Open Mike for a reason.
Specific posts are more closely moderated.
Some are some aren’t 😉
I think sheep is meaning that he is sick of people giving him shit. Which is fair enough. It’s also fair enough that people are sick of his right wing ideas.
You yourself always attempt to answer points directly and honestly Weka.
If you put a rational fact based point to someone yourself, do you have an expectation of a genuine reply?
And If someone answered your genuinely put rational discussion with an accusation that you fucked pigs, would that bother you?
(On a personal level it doesn’t bother me, as I think that kind of comment says more about the abuser than the abused), but what I would ask is whether or not that kind of approach has any place in a ‘reasonably rational debate’?
And does ‘not liking someones ideas’ justify refusing to engage with reasonable fact based points they make, and simply abusing them?
Does ‘don’t like’ make something untrue and therefore requiring no rational debate?
Just over time, I have noted how small a group of people it is who comment here, and how rare it is for new commenters to join the discussion. Do you think that the quality of ‘debate’ and the ‘abuse’ has something to do with that?
“You yourself always attempt to answer points directly and honestly Weka.
If you put a rational fact based point to someone yourself, do you have an expectation of a genuine reply?”
It depends on the person and the context and whether I’ve been giving that person a hard time recently or given them respect.
“And If someone answered your genuinely put rational discussion with an accusation that you fucked pigs, would that bother you?
(On a personal level it doesn’t bother me, as I think that kind of comment says more about the abuser than the abused), but what I would ask is whether or not that kind of approach has any place in a ‘reasonably rational debate’?”
Pig fucker and rat fucker accusations bother me because I think that animals deserve more respect. Generally that particular insult is aimed at people with right wing ideas. I don’t think anyone has used it at me.
There is a lot of commentary here that isn’t rational debate. The rational response to that is to work with what is, or if one wants to fight it or argue within it, then accept the consequences.
“And does ‘not liking someones ideas’ justify refusing to engage with reasonable fact based points they make, and simply abusing them?
Does ‘don’t like’ make something untrue and therefore requiring no rational debate?”
Depends on the ideas. The rationale I hear for abuse is that the ideas are sufficiently abhorrent as to need ridicule in response. OAB takes it to the extreme and condems all people he perceives as fools before the words have even left their mouth. Most other people engage then give up. The point where they reach their limit varies.
You have to understand too that many people here know you from past exchanges, so they’re going to come down hard on the same kinds of right wing ideas.
“Just over time, I have noted how small a group of people it is who comment here, and how rare it is for new commenters to join the discussion. Do you think that the quality of ‘debate’ and the ‘abuse’ has something to do with that?”
I think stomping on newbies as soon as they arrive like OAB and Lynn do is very counter productive. But I don’t think the robust nature in general is the problem, so much as the lack of moderation around politics. Hence we have few feminist authors here, and while there are more women commenting than there used to be, I’m sure the culture here puts many off. How much of that is the politics and how much the macho stuff I don’t know, I’d say both are a problem.
In general I see the long threads where people end up slagging each other off as tedious. But you take part in those as much as OAB or McFlock or whoever, hence my suggestion that if you don’t like how you are being responded to, talk to different people. There are good commenters here who don’t behave like that. Others of us just like the argument. I have a foot in both camps.
ok I’ve just looked at the thread you are referring to and it’s full of people engaging in genuine debate, a lot of effort put in by people to addressing points and backing their views up with facts. Your complaint seems disingenuous now. This is a robust debate culture. It includes people being rude. But people did respond to your ideas, so what’s the problem?
http://thestandard.org.nz/another-poverty-report-to-ignore/#comment-1136536
What’s the problem?
As you point out Weka, ‘many people are put off commenting here’, such as ‘feminists’.
Given the general left wing ideals of tolerance, respect, open mindedness, inclusion, etc, that many here would claim to uphold don’t you think there is something wrong when this forum’s culture is such that so few people are willing to engage with it?
Ok, so now you don’t want to talk about rudeness and you don’t want to talk about what constitutes reasonable debate, you want to debate whether there should be a robust debate culture on the standard? Lynn replied to you below, why not take it up with him? He’s one of the ones that ultimately controls what happens here.
Ummm. Just because he hasn’t read the whole policy isn’t a reason to say “enter the dread portal, it is totally safe”. It is entrapment of a sucker…
I was running out of patience.
It’s very generous of you to allow he might not have read the whole policy given how long he’s commented here 😉
I hadn’t noticed a shortage of people commenting. I have a overheating machine that says something quite different.
If someone answered your genuinely put rational discussion with an accusation that you fucked pigs
As McFlock and Weka have pointed out, your mendacity is generally intolerable, and ridicule and contempt ensue.
It’s already been explained to you that one of the local vernaculars for a loaded question can be seen in references to homo-porcine miscegenation.
Ask loaded questions, invite references to animal husbandry. That’s how it is.
Hard to comment on that without you giving an example so we know what you mean. But there is no onus on people here to have to talk to anyone, so if you don’t like the kind of responses you are getting, try talking to different people.
The level of engagement is purely up to the people concerned. We deal with the trolling behaviour of bait and run as flame starters or diversion from the post, but what you are describing doesn’t sound like that. It sounds like someone has raised a point, you have answered it and they have ignored your point for whatever reason. That sounds more like a degree of shunning – which in your case sounds more like your methods of presentation than anything else. But moderators generally don’t perform forcing to debate..
There is a particular case that we will enforce replies. That is when someone makes an unsubstantiated assertion of fact without a link or a explanation. Usually someone stating an opinion of a bit of outright bigotry or urban myth as fact. That is a practice that is designed to start flamewars and is for the site legally dangerous. We keep an eye out for those and will force substantiation on the penalty of a long ban because idiots who do that make the moderators lives a lot harder and we can do without them.
But generally we aren’t going to act on complaints from the floor if they don’t point to instances in the comment (yours did not) and an explanation about why we as moderators should be concerned about it for the good of the site (we really couldn’t give a rats arse about why you or anyone else personally thinks it is important).
So if someone makes a claim something is ‘fact’, and ‘facts’ are produced to challenge that statement, there is no kind of expectation that the person who made the original claim should address those facts?
I had wondered whether this part of the policy implied that there was an expectation of a certain level of genuine engagement with a reasonable debate, but it seems it does not?
Typically trolls do not interact with other commentators as they either ignore what others say in reply or write a reply that ignores what they said. In either case it is ignorant, anti-social, annoying to read, and will often result in a banning
can you please link to two specific examples so it’s clear what you mean?
Sure Weka.
Look at the link I give above if you are interested.
Consider the discussion around whether or not the Salvation Army said that Material Hardship was dropping or not.
“Does the report make the following statement based on Perry’s data?
“Table 2 reports estimated changes in material deprivation or hardship measures between 2010 and 2014, and this offers a slightly more positive picture. The number of children estimated to be living in households experiencing levels of material hardship that might be seen as more than moderate is reported to have fallen from 210,000 in 2010 to 145,000 in 2014. This is encouraging.”
Simple eh. Only one possible answer? Would you have a problem accepting that point Weka?
Or the discussion on whether or not the data that backed that assertion was sound or not.
You’ll see I provided the factual evidence that the S.A. considered the data perfectly sound, and a statement from the Author himself that countered OAB’s claim that the data was not valid.
Simple then. We accept the data is sound and the S.A. is making that statement based on it? But no. The answer is a tirade of explicit sexually themed abuse…..
I’m just wondering if ‘debate’ has any credibility at all if no one ever has to concede a point to facts?
See, what you’re rather dishonestly doing is ignoring other parts of the Sally report.
The quote you made referred to “more than moderate material hardship”. You’ve confused it into “Material Hardship”. So the literal “one simple answer” to your question is that there is insufficient data upon which to base a response.
You’ve then ignored other comments in the report that have a wider focus than just one aspect of one estimate of one measure, such as
In that case, the simple answer to your question is “possibly, possibly not, but overall the measures are pretty constant”.
And you argue that “Two examples of these practices are cited in this report” means that measures not included in those examples are considered “perfectly sound”.
Those are a few examples of why I think that time is better spent calling you a fuckwit than actually engaging with your pretence of a debate.
But be sure, the finite and arbitrary number of these examples doesn’t mean that I regard any other comment by you as being perfectly sound. While there is a theoretical possibility that you might end up understanding the implicit messages used in conversational English, the odds are higher that you’ll yet again fail the Turing test worse than an ’80s text adventure computer game.
The quote you made referred to “more than moderate material hardship”. You’ve confused it into “Material Hardship”. So the literal “one simple answer” to your question is that there is insufficient data upon which to base a response.
I agree that anyone who had not read the report might be confused by that. Apologies.
To clarify the data in Table 2 of the report, The number of children living in ‘more than moderate hardship’ (EU standard threshold) in 2010 was 210,000, and in 2014 it was 145,000. The number of Children living in ‘severe’ hardship was 90,000 in 2010, and 80,000 in 2014.
Combined children in hardship figures are 300,000 in 2010, and 225,000 in 2014. (% figures: -30%, -11%, -25%)
1.These figures are correct McFlock?
While the data offers a mixed picture, in total it is difficult to see any meaningful change in rates of child poverty and material hardship since the GFC. It is beginning to appear that this area of social progress is not a political priority at present given that the economy and household income have continued to grow modestly.
In that case, the simple answer to your question is “possibly, possibly not, but overall the measures are pretty constant”.
The Sallies certainly say that. But if you look at the figures above or what they quote for the peak of the GFC, (the % drops being -34%, -23%, -32%. 110,000 less children in hardship),
2. I find it very hard to reconcile those figures with ‘no meaningful change’?
And to go back to my original point, which was that the report was further evidence that the ‘poverty and hardship are increasing meme was false.
3. You will agree that ‘difficult to see any meaningful change’ does at least eliminate an ‘increase’?
And you argue that “Two examples of these practices are cited in this report” means that measures not included in those examples are considered “perfectly sound”.
No. I say that they do not say all data is unsound, and in some areas they explicitly state they have confidence in the data. For Child Poverty they state ‘we have a number of official measures of income adequacy and material deprivation that allow us to create a consistent
and useful picture of poverty trends over time’, and they clearly reference Perry as the source of much of their data. They make definite assertions based on that data.
4. That is correct isn’t it McFlock?
poverty and hardship are increasing meme
Is not a meme. The meme, if you insist, is that poverty and hardship have doubled since 1984 (using median household income as a metric) as a result of neoliberalism and will not improve until neoliberalism is abandoned (I’d like to see it smashed and broken too) in toto.
Please try and stop lying about the meme.
1) I have no way of knowing if those figures are correct. Wasn’t it only a couple of years back that Treasury seriously fucked up the raw data for some of Perry’s work?
2) whoa there, fucko, what happened to “my original point, which was that the report was further evidence that the ‘poverty and hardship are increasing meme was false.” Let’s call that “1b”
1b) from the paragraph above Table 2 in the report:
So, well after the peak of the GFC, the number of children in poverty and hardship seems to be on the increase again. If the figures are accurate. And where the hell did you get “110,000 less children in hardship”?
2) Well, any meaningful increase. But then you need to be clear that you are comparing apples with apples, rather than taking a single measure that happens to suit your data. This is where you keep falling over. But, for example, according to Perry all the income poverty measures had increases from 2013 to 2014. They might not be meaningful, but they are increases.
3) That appears to be the same data source they used in their 2013 report, and the data source turned out to undercount by 20,000. So while it’s correct from a certain point of view, from other points of view its reliability could be regarded as “debatable”.
But bear in mind that this is the best you can do using the peak of the GFC as a starting point. No meaningful change. Not “massive improvement”. Not “continued gains”. Advances in some narrowly-defined measures balanced by regressions in others.
And comparing the rates with 10 years or thirty years ago, the increases are most definitely meaningful.
1) I have no way of knowing if those figures are correct. Wasn’t it only a couple of years back that Treasury seriously fucked up the raw data for some of Perry’s work
Yup. Detected back in 2014 and corrected well before the data the Sallies base their report on.
As I have said several times. The Sallies are happy with the figures…
So, well after the peak of the GFC, the number of children in poverty and hardship seems to be on the increase again. If the figures are accurate.
The number of children in both income poverty and hardship rose by 1% between 13/14, at the same time as the total number of children in moderate or severe hardship dropped by 15%. (see tables 1 and 2)
This reflects an increase in relative income poverty measure, and further illustrates how the linkage between the 2 measures is problematic.
And where the hell did you get “110,000 less children in hardship”?
Table 2. Total number of children in hardship 2011 335,000, in 2014 225,000. That’s 110,000 less by my calculation. (How is that not significant? If it had gone up by that amount it would not be significant?)
2) Well, any meaningful increase.
Agreed. But yes, relative income poverty measures showed a small increase in the year. According to Perry, “On the moving line approach there was a reported rise to 2014, reflecting the sharp rise in the median. ” Again, indicating that Relative poverty can increase at the same time as hardship drops.
And comparing the rates with 10 years or thirty years ago, the increases are most definitely meaningful.
Perry makes very interesting reading on trends since 1980.
In short, Inequality has increased significantly.
Income has risen for 80% of us (bottom quintile stayed flat).
Income based poverty measures have been very mixed over that time, and peaked in the mid 90’s, since when they have been dropping. Currently, depending on the measure used they are roughly between 3-10% above 1980 levels.
On the ‘Constant value’ measure (the closest we have to measuring hardship across 1980 to today, current rates are 13% below 1982 levels.
Between 2011 and 2014 you say! Astonishing. Something must have happened in the meantime to make that big a difference!
Oh, yeah, that’s right, they changed the way they measure it in 2012. I know this because I can remember the last time you tried to make something of it.
Your insincerity is tiresome and cretinous.
Link please?
cf: Data Sources and Methods.
You already knew that though, because you’ve been informed of it before, at length.
🙄
You can say it all you want, but the fact remains that Treasury phoned it in in 2013. You know, less than reliable.
Your numbers are incorrect:
Sally’s report Table 2: Estimates of proportion and number of children facing material hardship EU ‘standard’ threshold:
2011: 220,000
2014: 145,000
75,000 might or might not be significant. But again what you fail to grasp is that we are not dealing with instrument guages. We are looking at a basket of indicators, some of which measure things precisely but are indirect, and others that are estimates of estimates but are slightly more direct. And through it all there’s the filter of political interference that affects at least, but not restricted to, two indicators relating to the wellbeing of children in NZ. Looking at hardship, extreme hardship has bounced up and down in alternate years, while moderate hardship has decreased. Is this meaningful, if the number in extreme hardship remains steady? Meanwhile, income poverty is not even that rosy.
well, until 2007, then they’ve not been dropping. Of course, stating which tables you’re getting this from would be useful, too, given that the Perry report is 229 pages.
you do realise that the Perry report is “Trends in indicators of inequality and hardship 1982 to 2014″
not that fucking mixed, anyway. Always above, never below.
Which table? And have you considered the effect of inflation on constant-value threshholds over decades?
Basically, you are so full of shit it’s not funny. Then you whine when people point this out.
Your numbers are incorrect:
Sally’s report Table 2: Estimates of proportion and number of children facing material hardship EU ‘standard’ threshold: 2011: 220,000, 2014: 145,000
Total number of children in both categories of the table…..2011 335,000, in 2014 225,000…
75,000 (110,000) might or might not be significant.
25-32% might or might not be significant? If it was Auckland house prices it would not be significant, or an increase in unemployment, or inequality? I bet you would be saying it was…
you do realise that the Perry report is “Trends in indicators of inequality and hardship 1982 to 2014″
not that fucking mixed, anyway. Always above, never below.
Page 98. The graph does start at 1980. I agree the trend has been flat since 2007.
Which table? And have you considered the effect of inflation on constant-value threshholds over decades?
Page 86. The Constant Value Threshold does take inflation into account and according to Perry it “reveals whether the incomes of low-income households are rising or falling in real terms.”
But again what you fail to grasp is that we are not dealing with instrument guages. We are looking at a basket of indicators,
I do understand that McFlock, but my point is that we should be willing to look at all those indicators that are credible with an open mind. It seems to me that you and some others here are unwilling to accept any indicator which doesn’t suit your dogma, even when it is from a credible widely accepted source that is being used quite happily by organisations like The Sallies and The Child Poverty Monitor.
@OAB
To quote from that document …
1. There is no on-going ELSI time series, but the MWI series begins from 2012–13. Because items are common to earlier and later datasets, Perry considers there is sufficient commonality to have a ‘good-enough’ index that will show the shape of the trend line from 2006–07 to 2013–14.
Nowhere in the document does it make any suggestion that Perry’s figures as used extensively by themselves and The Sallies are incorrect.
“Incorrect”.
Apart from in the entire introduction, where it casts doubt on anything that comes out of this government. You’ll deny that, and it’s all there in black and white.
what you fail to grasp is that we are not dealing with instrument gauges
..and what McFlock said.
On what basis do you assume that the kids beyond the extreme hardship threshold are not merely a subset of those kids who are below the standard hardship threshold?
Do you understand what the term “threshold” means?
Absolute numbers might or might not be significant, depending on their accuracy. Percentage change in absolute numbers might or might not be significant. Population rates might or might not be significant. Significance depends on things like context, whether the change is within the margin for error of the measurements, and what aspect you’re trying to understand. As a human being, you’d understand all this, of course.
Do you mean graph F.2? Y intercept is 1980. Do you see a fucking data point at the Y intercept?
It’s this sort of sloppy shit from you that fucks people off.
But then graph F.2 relates to all individuals, not children, so you’re doing a multi-dimensional bounce around.
Table and figure E.1, right? Labelled:
“CV threshold set at 60% of the 1998 median expressed as a proportion of the contemporary median (BHC)”
That doesn’t measure the rate of anyone in poverty. It measures the difference between the CV and REL measures. So what table or chart did you use as your basis for your claim “On the ‘Constant value’ measure […], current rates are 13% below 1982 levels.”?
“Quite happily”. Absence of explicit criticism does not always indicate complete satisfaction.
But what fucks me off about you is that you confuse “any indicator” with “any relevant indicator”. You bounce around with what measurements you use, and finding out what your basing your bullshit on is like extracting hens’ teeth. And nine times out of ten, when we do find out what you’re talking about, it turns out that you’re either making massive assumptions or you’re completely delusional. And then you whinge when people call you a stupid fuckwit because of it.
Here’s a thought: if you don’t want abuse, stop being a dickhead. If people ask for evidence, don’t make them hunt through a 220 page document: at least give the table/chart reference. That way we can quickly see “oh, the lost sheep is just being a fucking moron again, they still haven’t grown a brain”.
On what basis do you assume that the kids beyond the extreme hardship threshold are not merely a subset of those kids who are below the standard hardship threshold?
My basis is the figures the tables show and the commentary provided for them. It’s plain enough IMO, but as you and I are not going to agree on it, I’m happy to leave it to any interested party to read it themselves.
Absolute numbers might or might not be significant, depending on their accuracy. Percentage change in absolute numbers might or might not be significant. Population rates might or might not be significant. Significance depends on things like context, whether the change is within the margin for error of the measurements, and what aspect you’re trying to understand.
That is politspeak. You’ve entered the world of smoke and mirrors and I’m not following you in there. I say that a 30% change in any figure is significant, and If it was going the other way you would be claiming it was hugely significant.
But then graph F.2 relates to all individuals, not children, so you’re doing a multi-dimensional bounce around
The data measure across that timeline is based on Household measures. Children do tend to live in households I believe.
That doesn’t measure the rate of anyone in poverty. It measures the difference between the CV and REL measures.
I referred to ‘hardship’ not poverty, but agree it is not an ideal measure. As I have quoted Perry above “it (CV) reveals whether the incomes of low-income households are rising or falling in real terms.” The tables on real income do show a steady increase for all except the lowest quintile…but i will see if I can find more explicit figures for ‘hardship’ across that time.
“Quite happily”. Absence of explicit criticism does not always indicate complete satisfaction
Sorry McFlock, but that is a fallacious ‘argument from ignorance’. Absence of explicit criticism is just that. It is not evidence of anything else at all.
The fact is that Perry is perfectly well accepted as reliable data by the Sallies and Child Poverty Monitor and everyone else. You and OAB do not accept it and that’s fine by me.
It isn’t ‘politispeak’ – not even Physics deals in absolute numbers – your frequent references to ‘proof’ indicate that you don’t really understand this,
Luckily, we have Einstein to explain it:
So, no basis for that assumption. If Perry had meant 350,000, Perry would have said 350,000. Because people with 8 or more criteria by definition meet the threshold for 4 or more criteria.
So a change from three degrees to two degrees is just as significant as a change from thirty degrees to twenty degrees?
Or three cases of measles in one year and two cases the following year is as significant as the same population having 30,000 assault hospitalisations down to 20,000 the following year? No, because the context of the numbers dictates the significance of those numbers.
Not evenly distributed, however. Which is why the data in section H of perry’s report differs from the household data. Again, your assumptions lead to your irrelevance.
So just to clarify, the page 86 chart (E1) comparing CV against REL was irrelevant not just to hardship, but also to child poverty, and your entire case. You fucked up.
So it is not evidence of how “happily” (or grudgingly) research is used in an environment that involves less than straightforward or reliable measures.
I can’t help but notice the continued absence of explicit evidence to support your description of how happy everyone is.
It isn’t ‘politispeak’
It was straight from an episode of Yes Minister.
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
This is an equally pathetic attempt to cast doubt on perfectly credible and accepted data, in order to avoid facing up to facts that contradict your dogma.
So tell me OAB/McFlock, are you going to be consistent in your stance that no data can be really said to be ‘real, certain or significant’?
Or will that just be data you don’t like?
*whoosh*
No, you graceless cretin, it isn’t an attempt to cast doubt.
“Facts” 🙄
@McFlock.
Thinking about the discussion re. the level of ‘debate’ here McFlock, we have made some good progress, thanks, but I’m no longer going to respond to points that would involve both parties in a 3rd repetition of what have obviously become fixed and immovable points.
And I think we’ve reached that state on some of the areas we’ve been discussing.
Happy to continue responding to any point that still has some potential for ‘progression’ in the debate.
“So just to clarify, the page 86 chart (E1) comparing CV against REL was irrelevant not just to hardship, but also to child poverty, and your entire case. You fucked up.”
I’ve already stated 3 times what Perry says the significance of it was. As a general indicator of those factors, it shows a very steady downward curve from 1980…..make of that what you will.
I looked to see if I could find any more direct data on ‘material hardship’ across 1982 – 2015, but the answer seems to be that there is no such comparison available due to lack of credible data pre 1998.
Perry, in The material wellbeing of NZ housejolds etc, page 57 on, explains why it is only scientifically valid to report on trends from 2007 onwards, with very limited reference back to 1998.
The rest of the chapter contains in depth the material that forms the basis of almost all discussion on material deprivation in NZ, including the base material for the reports of The Sallies and C.P.M much discussed in this thread.
You can choose to acccept it or not McFlock, but as all credible organisations do accept it, it doesn’t matter a damn if you don’t.
Page 57/58 also contain the authors full explanation of why OAB’s claim that ‘changes in data measures completely undermine the validity of the conclusions’ is poppycock.
I can’t help but notice the continued absence of explicit evidence to support your description of how happy everyone is.
You are battling against your own strawman McFlock. I have made no such statement.
You are incapable of summarising my argument. Either that or you’re deliberately misrepresenting it.
You are the one expressing confidence in Perry’s conclusions about material hardship. I am saying that you haven’t made your case, and the problems with the data as detailed by the Sallies cannot be ignored.
Is there the remotest chance you could avoid lying about that in the future?
No, you haven’t.
You made a claim
I asked:
And a supplementary question. You responded:
and an explanation about adjustment for inflation.
The only tables and figures on page 86 have nothing to do with either the CV or REL rates of poverty. The proportionate value of CV is 13% below 1982 REL levels.
You might think all this is piddling stuff, but it’s actually a really good example of why people find more value in just calling you a fuckwit. We’ve said a lot, but the debate has gone nowhere because you:
a) Don’t understand that abstract numbers require context to have significance
b) Make assumptions about adding figures together when you might merely be adding a subset with the population from which it was taken
c) Don’t understand labels on a chart, so refer to data from 1980 when no such data is reported
d) Don’t understand how to read the shape of a chart line (“peaked in the mid 90’s, since when they have been dropping” becomes “I agree the trend has been flat since 2007.”, so you actually misrepresented a full third of the shape of the line)
e) Refer people to 200-page documents or entire comment threads rather than actually link to the specific comment or give the actual table or chart number that supports the narrow point you’re misrepresenting
f) Don’t understand how little you actually understand.
This is by no means an exhaustive list: what’s also concerning is that you confuse “best available” with “ideal”, and that you seem to believe that silence equals approval. And then there’s your outright bullshit “Perry, in The material wellbeing of NZ housejolds etc, page 57 on, explains why it is only scientifically valid to report on trends from 2007 onwards, with very limited reference back to 1998.” Where in section G does it even mention the year 1998? Let alone “scientific validity” (don’t use words too big for you to understand).
If this tit-for-tat had all your unsubstantiated bullshit and outright imcompetence removed, there would be almost no discussion remaining. You might call that “good progress”, but it’s not. It’s activity masquerading as utility. That’s why you’re frequently on the receiving end of abuse: you’re a fucking moron who thinks they’re a genius. You never acknowledge imperfection on your part, and therefore any disagreement with you must be incorrect. You’re a pointless waste of space.
Much more productive to just call you a stupid fuckwit. Now go write another comment on open mike about how people are mean. Then run crying to your mummy, she’s waiting for you.
Thanks McFlock, but they are all points that we have batted across the net several times now, and have obviously irreconcilable positions on. I’m not going to restate the same answers a third time.
Besides which, I’m really over this situation where you and OAB on the one hand deny the credibility and/or significance of Perry’s data, while at the same time asking me to answer points based on Perry’s data….
bullshit fucking moron pointless waste of space stupid fuckwit run crying to your mummy, she’s waiting for you.
Mate. I worked for 20 years in freezing works / coal mines / fishing boats / building sites / farms, and after that I can assure you that blank shots fired by an effete intellectual hiding behind the anonymity of a computer screen has absolutely zero effect on me.
Abuse can have gravitas, but IMO, only in a situation where the abuser is in the direct vicinity of the abused, and delivers the abuse in full awareness that they will be personally responsible for it. That can take real balls. But abuse from a position of hiding is just cowardice.
McFlock hasn’t denied the credibility of the data: they’ve pointed out that you don’t understand it, and where you have misrepresented it.
Whereas I pointed out (among other things) that (even if your reading of Perry were correct, which it isn’t) relying on a single study as proof of anything is a mistake, especially under the circumstances outlined by the Sallies.
Is there the remotest chance you could refrain from misrepresenting that in the future?
Restate? Answering even once would be fine. It’s pretty obvious,really: when you said CV rates today were 13% below 1982 levels, you meant that the value of the CV poverty line was 58% of the corresponding REL line in 1982, but is only 45% of the REL value today. But you can’t admit the slightest error, so you keep digging yourself a hole.
You’re the one who brought Perry into this. I’m pointing out that what Perry authored isn’t what you say. I’m also suggesting that people who had to put a full column disclaimer at the top of their website might have experienced a little bit of trepidation at having to rely on the same source in future, rather than being “happy” about it.
lol: besides the confusion between “anonymity” and “pseudonymity”, you just called me a coward from behind a pseudonym. So you’re a hypocrite as well as a fucking moron, even if you’re ever so butch.
But perhaps I didn’t make myself clear: I don’t call you, for example, “a moron so stupid that any of your repeated attempts at pigfucking could well have resulted in your telling an extremely confused zebra to start squealing” because I want you to feel bad. I do it because it provides more opportunity for creativity and catharsis than “debating” statistics and complex issues with someone who can’t even read a single-line chart.
I’m not really too worried about you, your dissonance is strong enough to preserve your ego from even the most accurate criticism. Saying that I’ve trod in horseshit with more brains than you is not expected to have any effect upon your self esteem. I just find it a cleansing experience to describe you as more fucking stupid than Donald Trump’s hairdo.
So suck my balls, I soaked them in Evian rosewater just for you.
@McFlock, I’m pretty sure I’m the zebra in the equation 🙂
lol each to their own 🙂
I’m not going to read a whole day’s worth of debate lost sheep. The onus on you is to give specific examples by linking. If you want to be taken seriously.
eg, here’s the actual quote you just gave in context so people can see that it was part of a comment, not a comment on its own, and that it was part of a very large conversation.
http://thestandard.org.nz/another-poverty-report-to-ignore/#comment-1137279
Again, if you don’t want to be ridiculed, I suggest you don’t pull such disingenuous stunts as you have just done in reply to me. You’ve been here long enough to know how this works.
“Simple eh. Only one possible answer? Would you have a problem accepting that point Weka?”
Only one possible answer if you are a badly programmed AI who doesn’t understand any nuance or context. People did answer you, you just don’t like what they said. You don’t get to dictate how people debate here.
As for the rest, why on earth would you expect me to know what went on in a conversation I wasn’t part of? You give OAB shit for not linking, then you don’t link and then you come here and whine about it. FFS man, if you want to pick a fight with the site, just be more honest about it.
If you want a gentlemen’s club where people abide by the rules that you have had a part in setting up, you are in completely the wrong place.
The reason you attract so much derision is because of how you debate. Today in OM is a classic example, although people seem remarkably restrained given you pull this shit as a matter of course. Me, I’m fucked off at having my time wasted.
I don’t talk to you very often, but my memory is that this is how it always goes. You got a good debate yesterday, so stop complaining about it. No-one here is going to do what you want them to so long as you keep trying to make them behave better than you are.
You didn’t even have to reply to my first comment Weka. I didn’t force you…
Weka’s considerably more tolerant than I: I consider her a role model. Me, I’ve been reading your zombie arguments for too long – thirty years at least, and it’s not like these are academic points of difference.
The only controversy here is political, which is utterly shameful, and you’re all bent out of shape because you think you were called names.
Priorities.
“You didn’t even have to reply to my first comment Weka. I didn’t force you…”
Ok, my summary of your comments in OM today is that you appear to believe you get to control what other people do and you don’t like it when people don’t do what you want. Lol, good luck with that. As Lynn said recently, it’s like trying to herd goats.
Thanks for also reminding me that you are basically incapable of engaging in ways that generate discussion that doesn’t end up in this mess. Which is a shame, because even though I disagree with much of your politics, you do have the ability to raise important issues from a RW perspective to be debated here and we need that. If you can find a way to drop the resentment that people don’t act in the way you want then it would probably go way better.
The other thing I was thinking through this was that although I get frustrated by the regulars who love arguing more than I do, I also know instrinsically that people like McFlock and OAB contribute a huge amount to this site. Maybe look at that way, what is it you want to contribute? At the moment it doesn’t look too flash.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgTKgFDl27Y
Nope. It explains what moderators will look for with fire and forget trolls.
Not getting the conversation you desire under your rules of engagement (which to my reading you read like you are after) isn’t part of that.
I notice that you haven’t said why you think this will be good for the site for months you to try to set the rules of behaviour. Perhaps you should read further into the policy. I am sure I may have noted how we feel about non-existent authors trying to set policy for their own benefit.
I’m not trying to change anything here.
Was simply trying to get clarification on the level of ‘debate’ here, so that I could adjust my expectations accordingly. I’ve shifted them down a notch or three.
Personally, I think that a discussion where neither party has any obligation to meet a fair point squarely is something short of ‘debate’ and definitely of less value, but arguments are more fun.
The best rule of thumb here is to take it as given that a point ignored is a point proven.
In your case, a point ignored should be considered a fortunate piece of bullshit in the target-rich environment you create
…a point ignored…
I note that you have not denied your penchant for animal husbandry: according to your rules that’s proof.
Do you see why they call them “loaded” questions yet?
This pleases me very much, i fucking hate cheese cutters
https://www.nzta.govt.nz/media-releases/new-motorcycle-friendly-safety-rails-a-game-changer/
Quote: nnovative safety rails especially designed to protect motorcyclists if they crash have been installed on New Zealand roads for the first time.
The new rails have been added to existing roadside safety barriers along a 130km state highway route called the Coromandel loop. Popular with riders, it passes through Kopu, Whangamata, Waihi and Paeroa.
Statistics show around four per cent of fatal motorcycle crashes involve collisions with the traditional roadside barriers, which are designed primarily to protect people in cars.”Quote end.
Have they added an extra rail to that one in the photo, is that the difference?
yes,
those legs can and have cut of heads and limbs. scary fucking shit.
cheese cutters.
ah. Good to see they are doing something. Lots of money going into new roading or upgrading roading, so some should be going to this too.
well considering that we pay some of the highest Rego and ACC levies, yes.
Considering also that riding on two wheels uses less space, less engergy/oil etc etc yes.
We had quite a bit of a ruckus at the time when the ACC levies increased and teh Cheese Cutters became the norm.
And yes, every year we loose people to these machinations from hell, and needlessly.
So yes, this pleases me, but only the Coro Loop? I would like to see these extra rails added to the cheese cutters on our motorways and elsewhere.
It’s pretty mindblowing that when safety rails were introduced they didn’t make them safe for all road users.
Rumour always had it that Transit NZ despised motorcyclists.
how come?
Gangs, i heard that some 30 years ago some NZ government went on a crack down on gangs and all male bikies are gang member and all chrome vixens must be gang owned pussies.
And sadly that idea is still prevalent in the minds of many, and also we are a good cash cow to milk. Many of us have a family car, and a bike, so we get to pay ACC on both, even tho we can only drive / ride one at a time.
but heck when the bike hikoi went to Nick Smith, Fuckwit for ACC in Wellington at the time, NZ had no issues giving us shit. right or left, cause bikies…. Never mind that our double triple and quadruple (some have spontaneously multiplying bikes, and cars…..addicts i think would be the right word, and lovers of chrome) ACC donations made for a big fat surplus.
” ACC donations made for a big fat surplus.”
I’m thinking the surplus comes from the failure of ACC to pay out on claims. There are a lot of claimants out there not getting the service they need to get back on their feet.
A systematic move to denigrate the ACC in the minds of the public, before privatisation.
Ahh! I drove over to the beach at Whiritoa today (absolutely magic weather) and saw the new guard-rails up! They went up quickly. Mind you as a motorcyclist from way back ( have just restored my 1957 R50 BMW) I think some of the riders going over that route are just accidents waiting to happen. My bach is right by the road and I see the way they ride – as if they are on a race track. Its a narrow winding road and there can be a lot of traffic during the weekends and logging trucks as well.
Marvellous interview by Steve Braunias and Angus Gillies about the forgotten guerrilla war in 1980s NZ: http://thespinoff.co.nz/23-02-2016/i-had-recurring-nightmares-in-which-i-would-fall-victim-to-the-anger-of-the-rastas-an-interview-with-angus-gillies/
Vis a vis, the ‘common man’ meme.
https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/801549.Sophie_Scholl
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Sophie_Scholl
ahh, Sophie Scholl,
once upon a time when i was about 11 years old I went to find a ‘good german’.
I did not find many, but i did found her and her brother. So much honor, so much humanity, so little fear of living and even less fear of dying. She was made of good stuff this Lady.
I periodically stop to think about what it would be like to be willing to die for what one believed in and how one could do that well. We are so far away from that here*. Finding Sophie Scholl was a gift.
*outside of war, who have we had? The guy who tried to blow up the Whanganui computer comes to mind.
The Government put in $350,000 for the beach. How generous with taxpayers money. I guess my modest donation is very modest.
Imagine that. Spending taxpayers money on something that benefits the taxpayer. I would much rather my tax was spent on a beach than on some academic trougher that after 3 years will tell me that excessive sugar will make me fat.
Waiting for some considered and vote-winning words from Little on this one.
You know what Andrew is like.
He was calling for the Government to jump in wasn’t he?
Now he will be screaming blue murder because the Government did so.
“They didn’t oughta have done it” will be Andy’s call now.
“after 3 years will tell me that excessive sugar will make me fat”.
Really? That seems an amazingly short time to discover that. I thought it would have taken some academic their entire career to work that out?
Aussie housing market about to implode. Video covers mining town first, but about half way through indicates this will happen nationwide.
Youtube comment says that mortgages in Australia are full recourse. Good Lord…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_ktN_h7-J4
Meanwhile in the Bankers Paradise NZ…
“mortgages in Australia are full recourse”.
As are they here. It was only in the US, as far as I know, that it was normal to just be able to walk in to your mortgage holder, drop the keys and simply walk away from any further obligations.
Not a bad system that one.
News producer legend Mark Jennings leaves Newshub/Mediaworks, http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/297334/head-of-news-resigns-from-mediaworks
Uh oh.. job done? Does he know they’re going belly up next month or something….
Jay Kuten: ‘Rent-a-pols’ muddy TPP waters
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wanganui-chronicle/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503423&objectid=11594671
Jay Kuten is not the only one to bag the ISDS.
The investment court ICS was the proposed substitute for the ISDS that was rejected by the EU for being so flawed!
https://www.foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/eu-us_trade_deal/2016/english_version_deutsche_richterbund_opinion_ics_feb2016.pdf
+1
Head of News TV 3 resigns?
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/297334/head-of-news-resigns-from-mediaworks
Qutoe: Mediaworks’ head of news Mark Jennings has resigned from the role.
Mark Jennings had been with Mediaworks since 1989.
Quote:” Jennings joined MediaWorks TV in 1989, and was appointed director of news in 1994. In December 2014, he was appointed to lead the integration of MediaWorks’ TV, radio and digital news operations into an unified news team, which launched as Newshub earlier this month.
Earlier today it was revealed that ninemsn editor-in-chief Hal Crawford had resigned to take on the “chief news officer” role at Mediaworks, and he will join the organisation “in the coming months”.
In a statement released this afternoon, Jennings said the company had become part of his DNA”.Quote End
@Sabine -Ah a sacrificial lamb to the entertainment borg. The fall person. Pity Weldon and Christie are not included.
Perhaps they will offer the job to Garner or Gower. Key would like that.
Jaeezusss – just started looking at the Nevada Republican Caucus coverage on the Huffington Post and it’s a fresh ROFL on every link
KKK turns up…
Dropouts from months ago still on the ballots…
Trump supporters voting twice…
Surely not!
“The latest interim dividend figures from the partially-privatised Mighty River Power, Genesis, and Meridian show that the Crown has forgone $945.14 million in dividends since the asset sales. The National Government spent $96 million on the asset sales programme, including bonus-share sweeteners for investors. Combined, that means the asset sales have a total cost of $1.041 billion to date.”
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1602/S00347/asset-sales-cost-hits-1-billion.htm
t’is is a sexy business selling state assets to mate.