As part of the coalition government, the Green MPs have delivered us up the Zero Carbon Act. A reading of the Act reveals that it has not one single measure to cut GHG emissions, nor any measures at all to keep to the targets set out in it.
I defy anyone to say that it does.
Setting out targets is good, but with no measures to achieve them targets are meaningless.
I could set a target to be a millionaire in ten years.
I could even set down intermediate targets, that to reach my goal I will need to meet a target of a $100,000 a year.
Sorted.
To give myself further excuse not to implement any measures to achieve my target, I could push my millionaire target out to thirty years from now, so that no one can really check whether I achieve it or not.
I defy anyone, who after reading the Zero Carbon Act was to conclude, other than that, the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now.
The political system has limits, no use putting up a bill that doesn't have support, from the electorate or coalition members
The zero carbon bill, and I agree with you , its severely limited, is an illustration of whats possible at the moment (in a time when benign dictators aren't a thing)
James did his best for cross party consensus. Don't blame him, blame the incremental nature of politics, and the resistance of dinosaurs
Get out on the street, encourage and join the kids on climate strike Fridays, build the movement for change,change your own life.
Indeed he has done. This is how politics should be done and kudos for him for achieving this. It would not have been easy.
Don't blame him, blame the incremental nature of politics, and the resistance of dinosaurs
Human social groups, at whatever scale, have a fundamental problem to solve; how to respond to the unknown, the novel and to change. When faced with strangers, or new information and ideas, we have two possible responses. One is to open up and embrace them, the other is to close off and resist them. Crucially both strategies serve a purpose.
Being open means that you get first mover advantage with fresh ideas and can react to changing circumstances more rapidly. The downside is that not all strangers are benign, some will be dangerous and threatening. And not all new ideas are good ones, most in fact will fail … some fatally.
Being closed means that you avoid these risks, and by trusting the 'tried and true' it is more likely you will survive in the short term. This is important, there is no value to investing in a better future decades in the future, if you die this winter because the crops failed. But conversely resisting all innovation and novelty also ensures failure in the long-run; failure to adapt and being out-competed by more agile neighbours.
Obviously the correct solution is some balance between the two; but how? The same person cannot easily be both open and closed at the same time. Humans appear to have evolved a fascinating way to deal with it; some of us are open, some are closed. When faced with something new, we each respond according to our temperament and then we talk about it. We socially argue the case for and against and arrive at some consensus. We try the plan out, see what works and what didn't and repeat. It's quite a smart solution.
With climate change the process got subverted when the big fossil carbon players borrowed a strategy originally devised by the tobacco companies. The basic idea was not to win the argument, but to prevent consensus from being formed by provoking the resistance of the naturally cautious among us. And us more open types attacking them only makes them more cautious and more reactionary. (This too was part of the plan.)
It was only after we went for the tobacco companies themselves, the source of the disinformation, that we reached a consensus and took effective action. The same applies here, but on a larger scale.
We can be closed to social change yet open to economic change and vice versa
We are generally a mixture of fears and conservatism, optimism ,altruism and the whole bleeding mess
The time frame, the imminence of tipping point and collapse probably means that striving for consensus in a democracy just loses us more time .
I still think, lets shift our consciousness first, away from anthrocentrism at all costs, then whatever comes after(technological fixes, new strategies )is coming from an inclusive, sustainable and happier place
“I still think, lets shift our consciousness first, away from anthrocentrism at all costs, then whatever comes after(technological fixes, new strategies )is coming from an inclusive, sustainable and happier place"”
True, but on any given issue we generally take one position at a time. Otherwise you run the risk of being perceived as 'talking out both sides of your mouth'.
The openness personality trait is highly predictive of holding to progressive or left wing political views and I'd wager most of the regulars here at TS are very open types. We have lots of different ideas and we debate them vigorously, but more closed conservative people are either rare or simply don't come here.
Yet in political terms they constitute roughly half the population, and in terms of my outline above … they serve a vital and useful purpose in the debate. Conservatives may frustrate the hell out of us, but in collective terms they usefully keep a society grounded and functioning on a day to day basis.
It's my view that progressives would achieve more if we approached them with this broader understanding and worked with their natures rather than against them. This would be inclusiveness at work, would it not?
The other thing is that putting up a bill destined to fail reminds me of a time I was writing a provisional report on a project, and drafted it "Some _____ refused to participate…". My boss pointed out that this essentially committed those non-participants to their position, and suggested the redraft "Some _____ were reluctant to participate". I learnt a lot from that boss.
The political system has limits, no use putting up a bill that doesn't have support, from the electorate or coalition members
The zero carbon bill, and I agree with you , its severely limited, is an illustration of whats possible at the moment (in a time when benign dictators aren't a thing)
James did his best for cross party consensus….
Why Consensus Stinks!
The Australian term white-anting comes from the action of termites that hollow out and empty something that looks fine on the surface.
The Zero Carbon Bill is an example, white-anting any real action on climate change, looking substantial, but completely hollowed out of any real action.
The argument made for the Zero Carbon Bill by its supporters, is that we have to seek 'Consensus' with the National Party, otherwise when they get back into power they will repeal any concrete legislation we put in place.
Apart from being a weak defeatist position, this argument is actually not proven.
The Nats never repealed the Nuclear Free Legislation. Labour have never repealed the Anadarko Amendment. Phil Goff traveled the Country in a big red bus with "Kill The Bill" (the National Government Bill to increase GST to 15%) before admitting that if he was elected he wouldn't repeal it.
Consensus is not democracy it is an attack on democracy.
As Winston Churchill famously said, Democracy is the worst of all possible systems, except for all those others that have been tried.
Democracy has been described by its detractors as the dictatorship of the majority over the minority.
This is the sound of ideologies crashing, sang Billy Bragg
Consensus is an effort to paper over these differences between ideologies.
And it fits into one of those 'worst ways' Churchill spoke of.
Consensus is not democracy.
Consensus is going for the lowest possible denominator to achieve unanimity.
Consensus is an effort to silence and stifle political debate. To suffocate the sound of ideologies clashing.
The tragedy of Consensus politics is that it robs the electorate of making a clear choice between one way forward and another.
Consensus politics prevents us hearing the arguments between both ways forward, and for making an informed decision with our vote.
Consensus politics murders democracy in back room deals between politicians.
At its core what consensus politics displays, is a lack of faith in the people.
Consensus politics is an abrogation of leadership.
I defy anyone, who after reading the Zero Carbon Act was to conclude, other than that, the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now.
Oh, fuck off. We went through this yesterday. If you don't understand why Labour/Green don't have either the numbers in Parliament or the electoral mandate to implement the policies you want to see, read up on the subject or just don't comment on it. Alleging corruption (even scummier than yesterday's accusation of cynicism) is a grotesque insult to people who had to fight hard to get even this level of legislation on the table and have shown a far greater commitment to doing something about it than you have.
If you want to see your preferred policies implemented, join one of those two parties and put in the hours and the money to help them get more MPs in Parliament. Insulting them from your armchair will just get you more "Fuck off"s.
I wonder if Shaw, Davidson and Ardern would prefer 'useless leaders' rather than 'corrupt'?
One description is acquired by simply failing to do what was promised (i.e. dealing to climate change with the same vigour and commitment as was afforded the nuclear free policy) while the other requires some forethought, planning and cooperation. One is simply passively muddling along while the other is deliberate and active.
The way I see it (from someone who bought the whole Green thing and voted accordingly, in a household where the rest largely voted Labour for the same reasons.) is that none of the above named party leaders have the heft of Winston.
A truly committed and charismatic leader would have been able to bring others along in such numbers that Winston's own caucus would have been putting pressure on him to at least meet L/G more than halfway, and the three could have all contributed to a Bill that we could have been proud of. As it is, we're left with a lilly livered and truly pathetic piece of legislation that condemns our children to a bleak future.
Restoring support services which were defunded and cut completely by the NACT government…support which was provided to many of the most at risk groups in NZ…
Support which is literally priceless…but for which proverbial pennies of funding per year (few millions)…in monetary cost to retain, restore and fund those same priceless services into the future…
Winston First is courting the rural vote and was always going to be a problem. If he can't hold those votes his party is gone. Letting the coalition fold would be a better option for him if the cost of maintaining it was to lose those votes. Where is all the criticism of NZF?
I take it as read that we all know that 'the problem' is Winston….I suspect there are NZF Members who would dearly like to participate more positively in climate change mitigation…but there's Winston….and he doesn't give a shit.
He just gets to sit at the table again, play kingmaker again, handicap real transformative policy implementation again.
His voter base are dying out.
And none too soon.
The leaders of the other two coalition parties need to do much, much better.
As for the 'rural vote', again, the generation of farmers with callous disregard for the environment are a dying breed. Many farmers now see that SSDD (literally) practices are not sustainable and change needs to be sped up. Shaw near breathlessly reassuring us that there is 'no need to reduce stock numbers' when even many farmers know there are plenty of good reasons to was just sad.
I'm not claiming to have the answers, I'm just telling it as I see it. The Zero Carbon Act is a joke if its purpose is to mitigate the effects of climate change. Only true and decisive leaders with definitive policies and messaging will effect change.
We're told repeatedly we are approaching climate change crisis…you'd never believe that going on the response from our government.
I still have no idea what it is that you would have them do. It is irrelevant what Green and Labour policy is if Winston is better off to end the coalition than support it.
Farmers are still the biggest sector opposing meaningful Climate policy. Have you not been paying attention?
Public disagreement that outlines the stumbling blocks would be a good start. Then the discourse is out in the open, and the general public get to decide for themselves who is looking out for future interests and who are looking to protect their positions.
It seems that at the moment, even those who voted for this coalition government are not permitted to critique their performance. And unfortunately criticisms are often valid, and if they are not even acknowledged and used to improve then we have a coalition government that is trending towards the arrogance and disregard of the previous.
The consequences of climate change, insecure housing, appalling child poverty, our health system and inequality do not lie in suspended animation until the next electoral term, they impact on us all now – some much more than others. My impetus as a voter for addressing these issues is not to maintain the employment status of my limited choice of politicians, but to continue to ask for change in these matters.
Politicians should not be so concerned with polling and reelection, that they don't use the opportunity they possess to start public awareness and discussion. This coalition government is not even progressing in that department.
@ solkta. This kind of dismissal is what I am talking about.
The deference shown by Shaw for the farmers concern about methane limits, is not based on science or acknowledgement of what needs to be done. If I was not aware of the issues of climate change, and was not yet informed of the immediacy of need for transition, then seeing James Shaw – leader of the Green Party – on television, downplaying these issues and congratulating this coalition government on coming to an agreement – would have a negative impact, along the lines of:
"Even the Green Party leader is not concerned about methane, or feels that a carbon-zero bill that aspires without consequence to a carbon-free 2050 goal is worth pursuing."
For those in New Zealand whose current knowledge of the issues of climate change are non-existent or slight, this will be one of their main news items on this topic. Disturbingly, it will reassure many that if even the Greens are not concerned, the status quo can continue for the foreseeable future.
Does this explain the disquiet that I share with others on this forum?
OK, how about them? The parties with those policies have 43% of the vote, ie 53 out of 120 MPs in Parliament. Please explain why you believe it would be possible for that minority of MPs to enact those policies as legislation in their entirety. And not just why it would be possible, but why it's so obviously possible that you feel free to berate the parties' leadership for failing to do it.
….Please explain why you believe it would be possible for that minority of MPs to enact those policies as legislation in their entirety. And not just why it would be possible, but why it's so obviously possible that you feel free to berate the parties' leadership for failing to do it.
Hi Psycho,
I could name half a dozen green policies that the Green MPs have refused to champion in government.
The iniquitous Anadarko Amendment to the RMA that makes it illegal to protest deep sea oil drilling. Is one of the things that the Green Party have refused to try and repeal, The law that makes it illegal to raise climate change in consent hearings for new fossil fuel projects is another piece of iniquitous piece of legislation that the Greens are happy to leave in place, for the sake of 'consensus'.
At a time when many voters have trouble telling the political parties apart, the last thing we need is more consensus between them.
Consensus muffles the sound of 'ideologies clashing' making it harder to differentiate between the parties vying for our vote.
Let's have the arguments out, let us hear them.
Consensus turns the political spectrum into one whole amorphous mass.
If all the parties have consensus on climate change why vote for the Greens? Indeed what is the need for a Green Party? We are all in agreement. We have achieved consensus.
One of the key demands of XR is for 'politicians to tell the truth about climate change' papering over the differences between political parties on this issue, is not telling the truth about climate change, it is covering up the truth about climate change.
Do you not realise that many NZF voters are National defectors who can't cope with voting Labour or Green and that if it collapses they will probably go back to National? And then we would have a National government again. This coalition government has to make many compromises, but half a loaf is better than no bread.
The various iterations of the New Zealand Election Study (2008-2014) suggest those swinging to NZF have disproportionately been former Labour voters (& – as with most smaller parties – switchers comprise a significant segment of NZF support).
What's more, NZF voters have chosen Labour as their preferred Coalition partner in 3 out of the last 4 General Elections (including overwhelmingly in 2017).
Winston First is courting the rural vote and was always going to be a problem. If he can't hold those votes his party is gone.
I'd estimate NZF received a little over 60% of its 2017 vote from both Metro & Provincial City seats. So, all things being equal, he probably only needs to hold around a third of his Rural / Small Town vote to be sure of returning.
Your estimate is meaningless until you back it up with some stats. Even if you are right that doesn't mean Winston is prepared to take the risk or have a smaller presence and say no thanks to those votes. As he straddles the centre he needs to appear to both his left and right flanks that he is protecting their interests.
that doesn't mean Winston is prepared to take the risk or have a smaller presence and say no thanks to those votes.
No, it certainly wouldn't be his aim … but I do take issue with the idea that holding / expanding his rural vote is an absolute necessity.
(2)
Your estimate is meaningless until you back it up with some stats. Your estimate is meaningless until you back it up with some stats.
Started by adding the NZF Party-Vote in all Metro (Akld / Wgtn / Chch) & Provincial City seats (ranging in city size from Gisborne (East Coast) up to the two Dunedin & two Hamilton seats).
Then (based on a rough estimation), I subtracted the likely Rural / SmallTown NZF vote in those Provincial City seats that weren't entirely urban … then added the likely Urban NZF vote from the Maori seats (as with the General Roll Provincial Centres, this was according to a broad estimation of what proportion of Maori seats were urban / rural).
Made some allowance for error within my estimation.
Then simply calculated the final result as a proportion of the entire Nationwide NZF Party-Vote in 2017.
Hence, I'd estimate NZF received somewhere between 59%-62% of its 2017 Party-Vote from both Metro & Provincial City seats.
It is possible to be very precise … but that would involve going through every single booth in the Provincial Cities … but, you know, benefits considerably less than the enormous energy invested … law of diminishing returns
(3)
As he straddles the centre he needs to appear to both his left and right flanks that he is protecting their interests.
The various iterations of the New Zealand Election Study (2008-2014) suggest:
– those swinging to NZF have disproportionately been former Labour voters (& – as with most smaller parties – switchers comprise a significant segment of NZF support). Over those 3 consecutive Elections, around two-thirds of switchers to Winston's Party came courtesy of the Left (overwhelmingly former Labour supporters … but also a small segment of former Greens) / one-third from the Right (overwhelmingly former National voters … but also a sizeable minority from ACT / Cons / Maori Party). (my calculations from raw Flow-of-the-Vote stats from the 08-14 NZES).
– NZF voting-base can best be seen as a segment of the morally-conservative Left. Most of the latter group still vote Labour, but a section swung to NZF back in the 90s, while even more have moved in Winston's direction over the last two decades. (Although they haven’t always remained particularly Loyal).
– Which, in turn, explains why (as I pointed out to JanM) NZF voters have chosen Labour as their preferred Coalition partner in 3 out of the last 4 General Elections (including overwhelmingly in 2017).
It is too easy (and convenient) to apportion the lack with Winston, as you note there must also be a willingness to prevaricate on the part of the other parties….and expressions of anger and disappointment are to be expected just as they are frequently on other topics, and rightly so otherwise everyone would have fucked off long ago
The nuclear-free legislation was enacted without any negotian needed, by a Labour government that held 56 of the 95 seats in Parliament. If the Green Party currently held 55% of the seats in Parliament, I expect the Zero Carbon Act would look very different – wouldn't you agree? But they don't hold 55% of the seats in Parliament, they hold 7%. Can you see how that might make a very big difference to their legislative ability?
Re "charismatic leadership," NZ First is a party of provincial conservatism and its fundamental principles are in some respects completely opposed to those of Labour and the Greens. Environmental policy is one of those areas. How do you picture "charismatic leadership" getting a party to go against its fundamental principles? For instance, can you picture a charismatic National leader getting the Green Party to cooperate with it on an extensive programme of privatisation?
Perhaps you should, because that's a terrible summary of events and an unrealistic belief a party not even in a coalition government can set such an agenda.
The only way to get hard green policy is to vote for more green mps.
Hard Green Policy would compromise New Zealand's national security posture. It's standard Green Party Defence policy to cut tier 1 defence assets, frigate, P8 and anything over 50cal. That these defence assets is vital in securing not only New Zealand's natural resources but that of the South Pacific as well means the Greens will not be able to pull the majority to their side.
If there were 30 green mps, they'd have plenty of leverage, and plenty of green policy. You just have to vote for them instead of whining about how useless they are.
And where do you think those extra votes would come from?
The reason being. Last election when Labour dropped to 24% and the Greens were polling at 15% Labour claimed they wouldn't look at forming a Government with Little stating Labour would need a considerably greater share of the vote to form a government. Despite (at 24%) still potentially having the numbers to form a Government.
Therefore, it seems Labour would have rather let National win than be forced to work with a stronger Green party.
Less of the goal post moving and more substance to the point.
If you want more green policy there has to be more green mps. That must be a given. Knowing this, bashing the greens for not doing enough when they don't have the numbers to force legislation is an admission of not understanding how parliament works, or an excuse to put the boot in to suit an agenda… Or both.
Once you admit there needs to be many more green mps in the house, in government, to push through green policy, then we can talk about where they come from.
I'm not bashing the Greens for not having the numbers. I'm bashing them for not using their nous and showing us what work they are actually doing to help achieve more.
I admit if the Greens had the numbers to win an election that (more green policy) would be what one would expect. However, that is highly unlikely on their current and past polling. Moreover, very unlikely on their current performance in this term.
Taking their policy is in general 'radical' for NZ, you've consistently bashed them for watering down or not getting what they sought. No cites needed, it's archived. Even in these exchanges you've bemoaned them for not achieving and doing enough to get elected in greater numbers.
That's incorrect. You've been called out. Therefore, cites are indeed needed.
Furthermore, you initially stated radical Green policy now you are shifting the goal posts by claiming that all their policy is radical. In which case you should have initially stated all Green policy. Therefore, best you stick to cites that reflect your initial assertion which is radical Green policy and not all Green policy which you are now attempting to reach for.
Additionally, me bemoaning them for not doing enough to get elected in greater numbers also doesn't prove your initial assertion.
Nope, no cites needed, as all your anti green comments are archived, as will your efforts from today will be.
If there's a mod call to find posts where you have criticised the greens for not getting that policy through unfettered, then sure I'll list some, but prepared as I am, as they are numerous and no doubt fresh in the minds of most green voters here to gain consensus for my statement, I'm sure that call won't come.
It wasn't that Labour could not work with a stronger Green Party, they had an MOU and lots of policy in common, it was more that Winston wouldn't have been able to deal with the Greens being a bigger partner.
You are as transparent as a transparent thing. A really crap troll.
Labour weren't even prepared to find that out. Therefore, their unwillingness to even have a crack at strongly it suggests it was Labour putting the kibosh on it (working with a stronger Greens).
On those numbers you gave above 24% and 15%, of course there was no way to form a government. How on 39% do you propose they had a chance?
But guaranteed, if that were even remotely possible, with that ratio, you'd have many green ministers and much more real green policy getting legislated. Fact. And you’d still moan about it.
At the time, even with nz1st, it wasn't doable on the numbers, and then if it were, what Solkta wrote above.
Yes, it was. Even Guyon was taken back at Little's/Labour's poisition.
As I said to solkta, Labour weren't even prepared to find that out.
And it was this unwillingness to even have a crack at it that strongly suggests it was Labour putting the kibosh on it (working with a stronger Greens).
It's speculative at best to assume winston would have gone with labour and the greens at that level of support for the green party and accepting a minor position as last cab off the rank, and in playing for more votes, to rule out dealing with nz1st, I can see why Little could have backtracked, but solkta's scenario seems far more plausible.
So you clearly don't know how mmp works in government, and choose to blame the small number of green mps, not even part of the formal coalition, for having to compromise and not being able to effect radical change they want to.
But your position is crap and based on a total bollocks understanding of how much a very small number of green mps can achieve under a confidence and supply arrangement.
My position is based on their dreadful performance to date. And is shared by many. Even within the Greens, they know they have been lacking the fight, made many mistakes, and have swallowed too many dead rats.
You trying to blame this on my misunderstanding is a joke.
See that's where you fall down. You don't accept that in this government they are bit players having to compromise to get anything, and the only way to change that is to have more green mps and get them in a proper coalition.
And I don’t think your misunderstanding is a joke, I think it’s quite deliberate.
Not at all. Those failures mentioned are admitted by the Greens themselves.
Without addressing their weaknesses, achieving more MPs is very unlikely. And merely securing more without addressing their weaknesses is unlikely to improve their performance.
What seems to be deliberate is your failure to see and understand this.
The weakness is they don't have the numbers to roll out their ideas without compromise 🙄
No genuine green voter is going to turn on the party because they aren't pumping out their policies ten to the dozen. They know, just like I do, that you can only do what you can with what you have.
Most greens will be encouraged to push harder in the run up to 2020 and work for the party and it’s ideals, not sit on the sidelines and cry crocodile tear laments.
I'm not denying I go the Greens. Almost everyone knows that. But I have a go at them on valid grounds. Which is why most rebuttals end up being directed at me and not the valid points I've raised.
The weakness is they don't have the numbers to roll out their ideas without compromise
Yes, most understand that. However, that's not the weaknesses I just alluded to above, which the Greens themselves largely admit. And it is these weaknesses that they require to correct to better perform, which will help grow their support and performance going forward.
You can't expect them to substantially grow their vote on their current performance – and their polling largely reflects that.
I don't expect them to be pumping out policies ten to the dozen, that's just you trying to suggest I'm some kind of extremist expecting them to perform beyond reality.
The reality is, they've made a number of costly mistakes, they lack backbone, and failed to gain fair compensation for the dead rats swallowed. Furthermore, they talk a lot about pushing hard for certain issues but show little if anything on the work being done in regards to those issues and the progress being made or setbacks faced.
noted (and taken on board) – but please note that this is in reply to A poster who seems to have lernt a new term “fuck off” and is quite happy to tell people to do so should they dare to say something he/she didn’t like.
I never said that James Shaw was corrupt. I said, (and I quote), "the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now."
Possibly a bad choice of word, I could have said is a 'corrupted attempt'. It is corrupted by the very nature of the process.
James Shaw is trying to solve a political problem, by bureaucratic means. A political problem cannot be solved with bureaucratic means. This just cannot work.
The problem; National Party’s intransigence over climate change. This political problem cannot be solved by pandering to National. In my opinion National's intransigence over climate change must be confronted openly and publicly denounced and demolished, it’s called politics.
History shows that a leader convinced of the rightness of their cause and with the confidence to get up and openly and courageously fight for it, can win over a majority from a minority position.
It's called leadership.
And it does not depend on the size of your majority (or lack of) in the house.
In prewar England the wealthy class and their political representatives, the Conservative Party were riddled with fascist appeasers and fifth columnists and even open fascist sympathisers. Churchill who had been elected into the house as a sole 'independent' MP for his Constitutionalist Party, (You couldn't get a more minority position), did not try to make peace with these appeasers, from his seat in the back benches, he denounced them at every opportunity.
The rest is history.
Another example is over the debate over nuclear ship visits. The Labour Party from the opposition benches through the strength of their argument was able to win over the majority of parliament to support a minority private members bill to ban nuclear ships. Which two National MPs crossed the floor to support.
Again, the rest is history.
This is how political differences are fought out.
In my opinion, in trying to seek common ground with the National Party, James Shaw has not just given up on politics, he has given up on leadership.
Problem is your “How you get there antidote” is about as deep as a puddle on practicality and as a workable solution Are you a secondary school student
Bewildered doesn't attempt a practical answer to anything because '"Everything may be done, but nothing should be done for the first time'. Yes Minister. e&oe
Randomised controlled trials – comparing one action to a different action – are the obvious and proven way to work out how to do things better. Yet somehow, when it comes to some fields, large numbers apparently believe it's immoral to conduct RCTs. WTF?
This makes me curious enough to want to do a small study on how The Standard community interprets data from studies.
Imagine tribbles escape from the South England Spaceport, and their expanding population is nearing womble habitats. The Society for Womble Protection are concerned that wombles sharing their habitat with tribbles will adversely affect them, so they run a trial putting wombles and tribbles together sharing the same spaces.
Wombles are well studied, there are 80 independent tests, measurements etc that are done to measure womble well-being. As is common, p<0.05 is adopted as the significance level for reporting a result suggesting adverse effects (less than 1/20 probability of the observed result happening by chance).
The SWP study checked all 80 markers, and reported they observed the test wombles had more nugs on their nagunoids than normal, and elevated miasmia levels.
These results were of concern to three other groups, who then repeated the study as closely as possible. None observed increased numbers of nugs or increased miasmia, but one group found depressed motivon levels, the second group observed increased hyperchitinism, the third group observed increased thyromia activity and decreased collaberism.
So all up, four groups each studied studied the 80 possible indicators of decreased womble well-being, and there were 6 results suggesting adverse effects outside the normal range.
I'm curious what first impressions The Standard participants get from these results, and what next steps readers think should be taken. Such as, OMG, six demonstrated risks, tribbles must be immediately contained then eradicated to protect wombles. Or, meh, the data looks all good for the wombles to me. Or, the four studies show conflicting results, we need to do more studies. Or, whatever else you come up with.
My first instinctive reaction is that our old friend Bayes is lurking within this data somewhere, but I lacked a justifiable prior to make a case.
Assuming that each of the four studies reported their adverse findings at a p<0.05 level, then the next obvious question is why did all four find significant adverse outcomes, but all found different ones? Clearly like many sociological results we're suffering from a bad lack of replicability here.
On this basis I would conclude that our four studies suggest there something going on, after all none of them found no adverse effect, so they don't support the null hypothesis (ie no adverse effect at all) … but neither do they prove one. We're really no better off than if the studies had not been done at all.
But because we have only one population of wombles, and apparently isolating one randomised, unbiased sample of them from trimbles is not possible … then the gold standard of RCT's looks impossible to implement.
I'm curious to know if there is a way around this problem.
I tried really hard to set it up so that if Bayes came sniffing around I could tell him to fuck right off, it's none of his business.
As far as the randomised controlled trials part of it goes, imagine it has been previously established that wombles suffer no ill-effects from being confined to enclosures by themselves. And that it has been previously established that there are some other critters that wombles can co-exist with in enclosures without suffering ill-effects, while there's some other critters that do cause ill-effects when enclosed with wombles.
I'm getting the impression your base position is that natural systems are so complex that trials inherently oversimplify things and can therefore never produce reliable data. Is that close to being a fair interpretation of your view?
In the case of mammals the size of wobbles, yes. If your scenario revolved around say, bacteria, then there's more chance of a valid result. Wombles are sentient beings, so they may conspire to mislead you; have you taken that into account
Thanks, that covers the question I had in mind at the start of this thread.
But given your position as a councillor that may be called on to make some kind of call on whether to accept or reject something new and how to regulate it, I'm still curious about how you view the numbers. Imagine it was something simple and controlled enough you were comfortable that controlled trials produced useful valid results.
Say, allowing autonomous delivery vehicles to replace posties and couriers.
So of 80 factors examining previous areas where autonomous deliveries were allowed, the first study found increased unemployment, and more cats getting scared away from their homes (p<0.05). The subsequent three studies did not find increased unemployment or more cats going missing. One study found more complaints of residents' driveways getting blocked by the new autonomous vehicles than used to be blocked by human drivers, one study found more problems with junk mail littering the streets, one study found more complaints of misdelivered mail and more complaints of bored dogs barking because posties didn't stop and play with them anymore (ok, I'm reaching).
Do you think these four studies show allowing autonomous delivery vehicles will cause increased problems? What next steps would you want to take?
Really, really sorry for butting in but no way do we want to take humans totally out of the loop. Eisenhower when he coined the term Militray Industrial Complex was warning of the profit motive of war.
Ron Mark Minster of Defence dosnt want full autonomous war fighting. Could you imagine a war fought with all drones. War between drones dosnt have to stop.
So these guys pushing drone technology are flooding the private sector and making up the worlds boardrooms and it's them pushing full autonomous networks for profit and well, we have to be conscious of the military applications at the same time.
At the same time Weaponising drones isn't something that's in New Zealand's control. We've got China and America vying for technological supremacy and apart of that will eventually spill over into robot wars. So there's this double wade sword again of progress and innovation or not being able to keep pace with innovation.
Perhaps we we should be asking whether or not an autonomous network should be privately owned or publicly owned.
It's not just ownership that would be an issue. Companies have personhood. So these robots wouldn't just have the same rights as humans they would have extra rights, for one they don't pay taxes. We can't eat robots so can't hunt them. They will be competing for the same resources and jobs as humans but we won't be able to attack them like an animal because they will have the same rights as a company would have. So no, I don't think auto networks should be privately owned. Whether or not it is a mature technology does not preclude a future government from regulating the industry. Laws lag notoriously far behind tech innovations anyway.
Yes quite. And that is also relevant to the discussion…
Robots however are only one component of a discussion around automation
Private automation co-exists with public automation…
Public or private as a legal construct won't alter that human beings are not in control of present day automation…
And therefore…can't be in control of future automation…
I get you were referencing <em>warfare…</em>
I'm referencing the entirity of automation…which includes human beings as a component of the processes…processes which are rendering our speicies…irrelevant.
Yeah, we killed God when she gave birth to us and AI will kill us when we birth AI. My only hope is transcendencing by uploading my consciousness into a computer. It's the closest humans can possibly get to God like, all knowing and that.
We are just entering the 4th industrial revolution of AI. We don't even know what technologies are installed for humanity but if competition for resources can be controlled by making technology so cheap, technology doesn’t have to be free, just so cheap every one can participate.
It is? I haven't heard of an autonomous network that actually exists. Which one are you referring to, and what's the basis for your belief that it's no longer controllable by humans?
Well I understood what onesies said. To mean a technological paradigm shift. Arguably paradigm shifts are out of the control of humans.
While this may be the inevitable long-term future of society, I see this as nothing but an extremely bad idea.
Then again, I have objections to anything even remotely like Pornhub meets Startrek holodedks the PG version (to hell with centralization), so I'm unfairly biased.
When considering the scientific approach to everything and putting rationality and practicality (apparent) as first and foremost in decision making, I recall the opinion of Aldous Huxley expressed to George Orwell on his book '1984', that the demand for efficiency will ruin our civilisation.
Aldous Huxley – …May I speak instead of the thing with which the book deals — the ultimate revolution? The first hints of a philosophy of the ultimate revolution — the revolution which lies beyond politics and economics, and which aims at total subversion of the individual's psychology and physiology…
My own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power…can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience. In other words, I feel that the nightmare of Nineteen Eighty-Four is destined to modulate into the nightmare of a world having more resemblance to that which I imagined in Brave New World.
The change will be brought about as a result of a felt need for increased efficiency.
So while Random Controlled Trials and other scientific methods are useful in making decisions, the question remains as to which decisions, and who or what do they serve? Is it 'good and cost-efficient government, respectful of the wellbeing of all people and thinking of all sentient and other living things of the earth – now realised as so important ie fungi in the soil? Or is it serving some obsessive need of a group who have divorced themselves from everyday simple living which is all that is needed by human society?
"Do you think these four studies show allowing autonomous delivery vehicles will cause increased problems? "
Each of them shows an increased problem. None were supported by any other study. Overall, no valid statement about increased problems can be made based on those studies, imo.
What next steps would you want to take?"
Introduce the vehicles. Field complaints, compiling data until causation is established, adjust their use until a happy medium, agreed to by most, is reached. It's rough, but hey, why not take a punt
Actually, I'd want to debate the issue with my fellow councillors, hear from our expert staff , hear from the promoters/designers of the technology, invite comment from other councils using the vehicles, then petition the public for their views.
Thanks. FWIW, it's at the better end of what I might hope for from an elected official.
I'm curious, is that response informed by any further education in formal statistics beyond what you had to do in high school, or is it the outcome of a lifetime of trying different things to see what happens?
Well, as a councillor, I follow process when it comes to such decisions but as well I try to influence what gets considered in less formal forums involving councillors and staff.
My first thought when faced with ambiguous data is to ask if Mr Bayes is at work here, but I'll take it as read that this isn't the case here.
The core problem is the lack of replicability. All four studies found statistically significant adverse effects but not the same ones. Not even an overlap.
The next place to look is given there are 80 possible adverse effects we could find, and our definition of 'statistical significant' is a 1/20 probability on each one … what is the probability that we will find at least some adverse effects just by random chance?
At the risk of embarrassing my rusty stats, my first wild arse guess that it could be 20/80 or 1 in 4. Or another way of putting it, any given study will find on average 4 different adverse effects purely by chance.
Ok, since we're both engineers and our reasoning heads down similar paths, can I ask you to pause it here for a while to see what other people's reactions are, untainted by what we've got to say?
"so they run a trial putting wombles and tribbles together sharing the same spaces."
I need to know more about these trials; how closely do the conditions reflect the real-world situation; laboratory conditions need to be very carefully set and results looked at cautiously. Wombles in particular act quite differently when removed from the commons.
See my response to RL at 2.1.1. In short, imagine it has already been established that results from putting wombles in enclosures produces valid results.
My initial reaction would be that, if different people are repeating the same study as closely as possible and each getting a different result, the study isn't telling us anything useful. The method would need some pretty serious review at that point.
Well, where I'm going with this is trying to show that a claimed statistically significant result is actually much less reliable than you might think from the claimed p value. For this example, I'm trying to show that six reported statistically significant results doesn't show there's likely problems, and in fact is more likely to show the opposite on further analysis.
After all, even if the researchers act with perfect integrity using sound methods, publish all their results including all the negative and neutral results, if what's considered statistically significant is p<0.05, then 1 in 20 of all results are just plain wrong.
But when you add in publication bias (negative and neutral results are boring so nobody tries to publish them), and the way it's so very tempting to indulge in data-dredging and p-hacking when you've got a massive pile of data, it's no wonder there's a replication crisis.
Noting your question of Robert Guyton above, "is that response informed by any further education in formal statistics beyond what you had to do in high school," I can boast a C+ achieved in a remedial intro stats course aimed at first-year students who were going to need to understand stats but hadn't done well at it in school (at which point I decided the arts and humanities were going to be a more appropriate arena for my clearly limited talents). So yes, definitely not qualified to be making confident assertions about anything involving statistics.
That said, the ordinary old arts and humanities have given me enough of an education to figure out that it's completely dishonest to comb academic journals for that one line or bad result that supports your irrational beliefs and trumpet the cherry-picked fruits of your search as compelling evidence that irrationalism rules – which I think is where you were also going with this.
That question wasn't intended as an assertion of superiority accruing to those with paper quals; a bullshit detector developed from a lifetime of observation is often more useful in arriving at a sensible position when faced with unclear or even contradictory data. Then there's the problem of paper quals getting pressed into the service of baffling with bullshit, rather than trying to aid understanding.
Looking at the responses, common themes are questioning the methodology of the studies, and raising potential external factors not considered by the studies. Here I'm trying to raise awareness that a lot of what are presented as meaningful results are in fact just cherry-picked instances of random noise that are going to happen even in well-designed honestly conducted studies.
That question wasn't intended as an assertion of superiority accruing to those with paper quals…
I certainly didn't take it that way, just as an opportunity to make clear that any comments I make on social science studies are definitely not based on my expertise in the field of statistics.
These days I kind of wish I'd paid more attention back then because it would come in handy very often, given all the news stories about "new study shows X" that make my bullshit detector clang away but I don't have enough knowledge to go look at the actual study to see where the grift is.
My first impression was why did you link to the pop vox article and not the original one?
Original article: "morally problematic"
Vox: "We even use A/B tests here at Vox. If I have two headlines I really love for a story, I can arrange for different viewers to see different ones — and then I can settle on the one that’s engaging more readers."
Ta daaaa!
Vox headline: "A shocking share of the public thinks randomized trials are immoral"
As for the scenario you present, and being rubbish at stats, my first impression is that we may need to go back to basics and do some RCTs on Womble well-being measurements if four different groups can get very different results. An RCT based on suspect methodology is going to be suspect.
Sorry I'm a bit slow addressing why I linked the Vox piece rather than the original study. The original study report is a bit dry and tl;dr-ish; the Vox piece is quite a lot more readable and links to the original report for anyone that wants. The Vox piece also usefully points to further implications and questions to ponder.
1) What were the size of the RCT? Which gives the related question – what were the power of the hypothesis tests?
2) There needs to be context here. What is the value of the wombles and tribbles? Are wombles native so deserving greater protection? What are the possible unintended consequences? Is the eco-balance between wombles and shelats destroyed as the sehlat population explodes because of the extra tribble food?
Just to add extra factors. What about a different type of thinking? Are the automated vehicles needed? Are they better from APOV than at present? Is capital expenditure on them justified whether public or private – being that they will likely have to be imported?
Is it justified for us to have a permissive society of the type that says that society has to definitely opt out if business or whoever,can just opt in? Will Uber try and take over this initiative and muck it up for any former investors, start-ups?
Say compare the rules of the sex- controlled society to the society that is entirely permissive of new innovations of machines and technology? Would it be better to swap so that we are controlling of this new innovative acceptance of machines, and more permissive of sexuality? I think of the raunchy, rude meaning behind the Beatles song "Why don't we do it in the road"? Sex in the road is regarded as bad because society says so, and it is impractical anyway. But new technology on the road is accepted whether it has entirely practical uses without question, and of course it is now being forced on us on the footpath.
These perspectives would never be considered by engineers. And it indicates how slow we are to understand the great changes being forced on us. These will affect our human lives to becoming subservient to the machines that business corporates, a machine-like management system itself, forces on us. And that we people embrace, because – new, because it is 'better', because they are ubiquitous – better lie down and let machines and machine-thinking roll over you.
Douglas Adams looked at that inevitably approach – the taking of personal assets and commons by authority – when he had Arthur Dent lie in front of roadmaking machines that were going to bulldoze his house so a Council-endorsed road go pass over the land. And slyly, he introduced the method of substitution that is at the base of using derivatives in financial transactions. But that is another matter.
Thank you to everybody that engaged with the actual topic. But I gotta say I'm disappointed that there are some commenters active today that are in the habit of opining definitively and loudly on topics where an understanding of data and statistics is crucial, who have chosen not to engage.
Personally when I need to understand data sets, one of the first things I look for is the underlying natural background incidence of what I'm interested in. Together with some kind of expectation (cue Tommy Bayes asking why I told him to fuck off) of how genuinely significant results might be distinguished from random noise.
In the specific case of examining 80 independent distributions of samples for comparison to controls or a baseline at p<0.05 considered significant, I would actually expect an average of 4 "false positive" results, or 16 "false positives" on average from running 4 lots of 80. The fact that none of the positives from any one of the trials were repeated in any of other trials suggests they are all false positives.
That there were far fewer "positive" results than would be expected from purely random statistical considerations immediately raises the question of whether there is an effect going in the opposite direction to what was originally expected. Might the data actually show that cohabiting with tribbles actually improves wombles' well-being? That would be an immediate quick bit of number-crunching to run, and on the numbers I've used for this made-up scenario, I'd strongly expect that answer to be yes, it certainly appears cohabiting with tribbles is in fact beneficial to wombles.
Then there's the question of doing some kind of meta-analysis, where you combine the results from different studies to try to firm up any conclusions. In this fictional scenario it should be easy, there were four trials, three of them attempting to replicate the first as closely as possible. With any luck, the trial conditions would turn out to be close enough that the data from the different trials could just be combined together to just make a much larger sample size. If that's not feasible, there's all kinds of statistical tests (a lot of them Bayesian) comparing the results of the different trials against each other.
Sorry, Andre, I got a little side-tracked elsewhere …
A very interesting topic. At no stage did you mention effect-size!?
As you are aware, P<0.05 has become somewhat of a curse, especially in biomedical science. For one, it says absolutely nothing about clinical relevance.
TBH, I kinda figured you and some others likely to have significant statistics knowledge saw where I was likely trying to go with this and deliberately stayed out to let it run its course.
The only tweak on that would be if there were some underlying common cause in several of those observations – e.g. motivon, miasma, and nug incidence were all part of the womble's precosian system and might point to a assininus deficiency. Then it might be worth a closer look.
But the main priority would be to 1080 the heck out of southern England to stop the invasive species outbreak.
“This is not the age of reason, this is the age of flummery, and the day of the devious approach. Reason’s gone into the backrooms where it works to devise means by which people can be induced to emote in the desired direction.”
I get nervous about ideas like "the correct answer" when looking for statistical signals in noisy data. To me there's only stronger and weaker suggestions and probabilities and interpretations. All to be monitored on an ongoing basis and subject to revision on receipt of new data.
The US military has opened a twitter post to let sevicepeople express their positive service experience. Only most talk of depression, lost limbs and other serious health issues and los and lots of suicide. The overwhelming trend is heartbreaking loss and anger and violence…
We in New Zealand are shamefully slow in electrifying transport. We could and should be matching China's example, where many cities have a 100% electric urban bus fleet. Rubbish trucks, concrete trucks, delivery vans, basically anything with a stop-start urban work cycle is an absolute natural for electrification.
When it comes to smaller electric vehicles, China is yet again waaay ahead of the rest of the world. Last time I saw a breakdown of the global EV market, more than half the EVs sold worldwide were in China.
I'd guess it's that tolerance of very high charging rates that make them attractive to bus applications.
Which kinda makes me curious how really high power charging stations and their power connections work together – whether they just have a super grunty network connection and rely on the grid to absorb the massive rapid fluctuations in demand or whether the charging stations themselves incorporate batteries and/or supercapacitors to smooth their demand.
Tesla new battery is really just another new design for a solid-state lithium battery that several different places have worked on. The solid state lithium battery is coming one way or another, at the moment we're just trying to figure out who has the best design for the industry to go with, and which one will be the easiest to transition to from lithium ion. Electric powertrain designs are coming to trucks and buses. Question is will people stop buying electric cars.
I've been contemplating reforming a touring company… Electric vehicles, in NZ at least, are a bit naff. Unless I have 100k for a Tesla I can't get anything with decent range, not even to cover only the top half of the North Island. The recharge times are prohibitive for taking others on the road too, the fast charge stations…? It seems the cars here can't charge so well as the charging stations aren't very good? There was nothing to suggest I'd get < several hours to wait to recharge and extend range past 200 miles.
All in all it was a discouraging experience trying to build a green touring model. Trains etc are hopeless I have sound gear to cart around.
Back in the day the government bought rolling stock for trains that could only go half as fast as the engines – making trucks look faster. Is the same trick of light being used on chargers to make EV's unattractive, or are they shit?
Nolan Brewer has been sentenced in an act of vandalism against a synagogue, but court documents are starting to reveal some incredible information.https://t.co/CbBhsz52y7
— Emily of the State (@EmilyGorcenski) May 25, 2019
[…]
Nolan was arrested along with someone who was then reported as a minor. Court documents now reveal it was his then 17-year old wife, Kiyomi, who spent a lot of time in Discord. I wonder what her Discord name was.
[…]
HOLY SHIT.
The defense names BEN SHAPIRO as a motivation for Kiyomi's radical right wing views.
I'm losing track of how many violent white supremacists @benshapiro has helped radicalize.
Thats just a stupid way to communicate. You and Joe90 are debating in bad faith, half truths and fallacious arguments to prove that Jew+RWNJ=Auschwitz.
Its not just stupid calling normal people racist against there own people its villainous. All you are doing is claiming victim status so you can control people and I won't play that bullshit game. Villains use subterfuge and lie to control and I'm not trying to be like that.
Who called Shapiro racist? You sound awfully defensive. Also how am I claiming to be a victim? I’m merely pointing out the type of things Shapiro says. It is the racists that say they’re inspired by him. You’re misrepresenting what’s being said with half-truths and imaginary “fallacious arguments”.
All you are doing is claiming victim status so you can control people and I won’t play that bullshit game. Villains use subterfuge and lie to control and I’m not trying to be like that
You’re not trying to express yourself clearly either.
You are not only playing the victim, youre shit at communicating, you're blaming me for your stupid arguments and again, making out like I'm deficient.
So if you can please provide quotes that Shapiro is rascist against Jews.
Joe90 produced this quote "The defense names BEN SHAPIRO as a motivation for Kiyomi's radical right wing views.
I'm losing track of how many violent white supremacists @benshapiro has helped radicalize."
To which I ask if Joe90 was aware Shapiro is Jewish. It's idiotic to imply that Shapiro is in anyway way involved in rascist attacks against Jews. And Joe90 just shat all over you and took off.
Arkie. I'm finding it difficult to believe that Sam is a sincere person. He expresses himself (herself/itself) in a manner that "sounds" more like an algorithm that a person's genuine views. The modus operandi Sam uses is to make a claim, then lace further replies with insults, cryptically delivered, in order to mask the insincerity of his position and making it impossible to hold him to account for his claims. It feels more like an experiment in creating a "debating programme" than a discussion with a flesh and bone human, in my opinion.
Appeals to the audience doesn't influence the strength of your argument or position. It just goes to show how insecure and weak your ideological reasoning is. We are discussing whether or not it's cool to claim Ben Shapiro is rascist against Jews, got anything to add?
It's likely that my observations about your hypocrisy and inconsistency are accurate and you are employing your trademark caustic strategy in an attempt to dis-hearten your perceived adversary.
I reserve the right to disrespect anyone who can not have a simple conversation. As I keep saying my position is that Jew+RWNJ does not equal Aushwitz. What’s your position Rob?
You may be debating the issue, " that Jew+RWNJ does not equal Aushwitz." but I am not. As I clearly expressed, I'm making comment on your incongruous claims around debating, a discussion that began on another thread, yesterday. This is Open Mike, where a range of topics can be addressed. You have declined to address my claims while at the same times lacing your responses with a variety of put-downs. Regarding your claimed " right to disrespect anyone who can not have a simple conversation.", I presume you are referring to me, and if that's the case, cannot agree that I am unable "to have a simple conversation", in fact, I'm confident that having simple conversations is something I regularly and successfully do. Your "conversations" as evidenced here on TS, are so convoluted, infolded and obscure and caustic that it seems to me you should disrespect yourself, based on your performance so far. Kindly meant and simple expressed of course.
Yeah, I don't just reserve the right to call you a whingy little puss bag, I'll talk smack to any one who try's to act a fool. You, mods, anyone.
Once I feel that my arguments are as strong as and people begin to take the bitch route around instead of taking on my arguments directly I'll just let fire. Sorry not sorry.
TBH Iv got very little idea what you're on about talking about something I said a couple days ago.
Besides that if I do argue the flaws of IQ it would be that IQ tests are frequently used to test army recruits to see if they can gain a few extra meters than Vietnam vets.
On the other hand if I was to argue for IQ testing then I'd argue that testing is best used for high achieving Uni students rather than soilders.
And that you're still to respond to my claim that your claim is hypocritical. So, worthwhile persisting, despite your determined avoidance strategy. At this point, I've lost interest and have more useful things to do, so, see you in the soup, or, in the likely case that Incognito sends you to Coventry, see ya, Sam.
My point is you, Joe and arkie have a problem with Ben Shapiro because he is a conservative and you are biased against him and seek to unjustly smear him as a rascist.
And my problem is you make me and the rest of the left look like fucken chumps.
How convenient for Shapiro that you have absolved him of inspiring racists.
It is my position that a self-identifying racist vandal says they were radicalised by Shapiro. That's less of a position, more a response to your defense of Shapiro based on his religious identity.
Its not convenient at all. In fact it's inconvenient that I am forced to defend Shapiro from a bunch of morons masquerading as lefties trying to smear Shapiro.
I couldn't prove that Shapiro is rascist towards Jews because I believe that Shapiro is a practitioner of the faith. It's also covered in freedom of religion legislation so unless your can prove Shapiro has committed an act of violence or supported an act of violence then you're just a (insert what ever hurts your feelings the most here)
Back in 2007-08 I watched an episode of Law and Order (the courtroom drama) that had a man who murdered a black girl defending himself by saying that the rants of a right wing shock jock whipped him into such a frenzy that he ended up killing her.
Bigtree wore a universal symbol of oppression, hate, and suffering, in an effort to portray himself and his halfwitted followers as victims. Fucking scum.
I don't think you understood what was and still is going on , around that specific issue…do you?
You should be able to explain what you reckon was, and still is going on there…and therefore you understand why you are absolutely wrong to call Bigtree, scum
…but you don’t understand…do you?
Which says you are using the jewish faith to peddle your own ignorance… and I’ll request that you either stop propagating such ignorant and warped views…or at least spend some time learning what is actually going on…before you USE the jewish communities once again…
Because that is what you appear to be doing…using the jewish community …
Are you jewish or direct descendant ?
I'll get you started….fill in the blanks…
Orthodox jewish communities in NY were and are being discriminated against through use of [ ] and/or [ ] for adhering to their right to religion….
Bigtree was illustrating his distain for those who are repeating the past by persecuting those same orthodox jewish communities…
Do take your relentlessly determined dishonesty and shove it.
Instrumentalizing the fate of Jews who were persecuted by hateful antisemitic ideology and murdered in extermination camps like #Auschwitz with poisonous gas in order to argue against vaccination that saves human lives is a symptom of intellectual and moral degeneration.
Leaving the inbuilt and ingrained prejudice aside, gives best opportunity to obtain objectivity…
Then it is simply a question of investing the necessary time to explore all available angles of a subject…not superficially…. as well as seek out the intersections where there is cross over into related topical pathways…
"There was pain on both sides." Noelle McCarthy displays her ignorance of New Zealand history
RNZ National, Saturday 25 May 2019
Anybody who cares about the terrible state of our public broadcasting service will be able to point to one or more really sickening or substandard performances by the people entrusted—and paid good money—to ask intelligent questions on our behalf. I have over more than a decade recorded dozens of disastrous performances, but here are three of the worst interviews that have polluted our airwaves in this century: an under-prepared Kim Hill foolishly reading out Pentagon talking points to, of all people, John Pilger in 2003 [1]; Noelle McCarthy in 2013 allowing a right wing ideologue to excuse the use of torture by U.S. troops [2]; a baffled Jesse Mulligan opining learnedly in 2016 that Russia is "L-L-L-L-LOOKIN' for trouble" [3].
Yesterday morning, we were treated to—actually, inflicted with—not just one, but two really terrible interviews. Both of them were carried out by one Noelle McCarthy.
After the 9 o'clock news, McCarthy's guest was historian Vincent O'Malley. This was well worth listening to when he was speaking; unfortunately, however, McCarthy felt compelled to interpose her own complacent, prejudiced and slanted views. Her comments, as usual, were callow, ill thought out and deeply reactionary, the sort of thing you'd expect from some drooling old Pakeha farmer ranting in the lounge bar in a south Taranaki pub.
"There was pain on both sides…. Can we learn from the way the Americans do it with their Civil War sites?…. politicization of history…. In Ireland the IRA glommed on to various commemorations."
After the 11 o'clock news, she moved from complacent and ignorant to plain nasty. The topic, ominously for anyone who has heard her laughing about the plight of the Palestinians, was Gaza.
Sorry about that, Incognito. I've already deleted the second one, and replaced it with something to show that I do appreciate Ms McCarthy when she is on form.
I wonder how many people bother to check the accuracy of the numbers they use in a debate before making claims that depend on the accuracy of their quotes?
There was a brief letter in the "To the point" section in yesterday's Dom/Post. I can't locate it on-line but it was on page C6 for anyone who wants to see it. It was from someone named Carole who was complaining that teachers were not happy with their pay claim and then she made a claim that is simply in the realm of fantasy. The sentence read "What is even surer is that with the Prime Minister's salary more than tripling in the past few years, the Government will never be disappointed". I take this to be a claim that the Government has paid much larger pay increases to itself than they have offered the teachers.
It seemed rather unlikely to me so I looked at the numbers. Exactly what she means by a "few" is not stated but I will allow it to be 9 years. It can't really be more than that can it?
On today's date in 2010 the PM was paid $393,000. Today the PM is paid $471,049.
And Carole seems to think that this increase, which is in fact 19.86% over what I would regard is somewhat more than a "few" years, is a 300% rise? How can she possibly come to that conclusion? It might be a very large pay packet but it hardly means that MPs cash in while Teachers miss out. does it?
I can see that Sam is being allowed to run free. If the dog is not going to be put on a leash, and be sent to puppy school and so absent for a while, then I Postman Pat will not be delivering any more missives. I apparently am not appreciated so will attend to important personal requirements.
Of course they're going to war. The armageddon-obsessed theocrats are determined to fulfill their end times fantasy.
West Point, N.Y. — Vice President Mike Pence told the most diverse graduating class in the history of the U.S. Military Academy on Saturday that the world is "a dangerous place" and they should expect to see combat. "Some of you will join the fight against radical Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq," he said.
Pence congratulated the West Point graduates on behalf of President Trump, and told them, "As you accept the mantle of leadership I promise you, your commander in chief will always have your back. Mr. Trump is the best friend the men and women of our armed forces will ever have."
The week prior the French assembled for the two soldiers killed in Burksina Faso.
Very moving ceremony with the historical music Marche des soldats de Robert Bruce (which was played by Joan of Arcs scottish soldiers on entering Orleans)
However, even that branch of the PUA tree is wilting away. Many "self-help" style PUA forums like Nextasf and RSDnation are shutting down or have already shut down. In March, Chateau Heartiste, a batshit crazy PUA turned White Nationalist/Alt-Right blog was shut down by WordPress. This week, rape advocate Roosh V (whom you may recall once called yours truly a "Wonkette typist/clown face, would not bang") announced that he was renouncing his PUA ways and devoting himself to Jesus. He explained to the forum he manages that he would no longer be allowing anyone to discuss premarital "fornication."
NEW RULES: Casual sex and hooking up can no longer be discussed on the forum
Due to my recent turn to faith, my sense of morality is becoming based on the Bible. I've stopped a lot of behaviors that I've used to do and am in the process of making other changes. I've also realized that the majority of my published materials and online platforms lead men into sin or enable them to partake in sin. I no longer want this to occur, so I am implementing two new rules on the forum that are effective on June 1, 2019.
Young people transitioning from state care to independence will no longer be cut off from Government support when they turn 18.
"Teenagers leaving care should have the right to expect what any young person would want – knowing there is someone to turn to if they need help; a warm bed to sleep in; some help and encouragement when it is needed.
"This service will provide that, both by allowing young people to stay longer with their caregivers and providing specialised transitions support workers whose job is to help this group."
Oranga Tamariki has been tasked with building the service, which will employ 175 new specialist staff employed and make 60 supported accommodation facilities available by year four.
Trawling my way down here to the bottom of your comment section for 26 I find you footnoters/ idea investigators but nowt as sharp as an arrow point. I recognise youse but when I call I'm not in the mood for milling about. More my fault.
Yoga gurus and cult leaders – I’ve seen a few. Two weeks ago, I unknowingly joined an alleged new-age cult at the Kāpiti coast, together with a giant kraken and some neatly dressed pensioners who would make any book club proud.They were among the two hundred people of all ages ...
The last decade has seen a trend of increasing weapons availability to police. Assault rifles. Tasers on every hip. Guns in cars. And following the march 15 massacre, pistols on every hip, all over the country. At the same time, its also seen an increase in the abuse of force: ...
In the last couple of weeks, I’ve been busy preparing for our summer paper on Science Communication. Looking for something amusing about ‘risk’ in science, I came across this neat xkcd.com cartoon about why so many people come knocking on my door (or phoning me, or emailing me) desperately wanting ...
by John Edmundson The International Socialist Organisation (ISO) have recently reposted a February article, by Romany Tasker-Poland, explaining ISO’s position in the “trans rights” debate. It is available on their website and on their Facebook Page. The article sets out to explain why “socialists support trans rights”. It reads more ...
"Auckland City Mission: 10% of Kiwis experiencing food insecurity", RNZ, 16 October 2019:About half a million people are experiencing food insecurity, according to new research from the Auckland City Mission. Food insecurity, or food poverty, is defined as not having enough appropriate food. The City Mission said over the last ...
Media Statement for Immediate Release 16th October 2019 “Fake News” from Auckland City Council CCOs Board Chairs re pay and performance bonuses for top managers Despite comments from Auckland City Council CCOs Board Chairs re pay and performance bonuses for top managers—Herald Newspaper Tuesday Oct 15th–there is very little evidence ...
Would You Buy A Used Propaganda Video From This Man? Bridges and the National Party’s strategists have discovered that the ideas and attitudes considered acceptable by today’s editors and journalists are no longer enforceable. The rise and rise of the Internet and the social media platforms it spawned means that ...
There is plenty of evidence of the way the business mentality has permeated every level of society since the recrudescence of market liberalism 35 years ago. You only need to think of how citizens in need of help from their government, their state, their country, are now routinely described as ...
John MacCormickOver the last 40 years, New Zealanders – and people in other countries – have experienced big changes in the jobs they do and where they live and work. These changes include: a decline in manufacturing jobs an increase in jobs in ‘information-intensive’ industries (which are better paid ...
Nick Wilson, Leah Grout, Mereana Wilson, Anja Mizdrak, Phil Shoemack, Michael BakerProtecting waterways has the benefits of: (1) protecting water from hazardous microbes; (2) minimising cancer risk and other problems from nitrates in water; (3) avoiding algal blooms that are hazardous to health; (4) protecting mahinga kai uses (cultural ...
by The Council of Disobedient Women In a press release today Massey University announced it has decided to rebrand and reorientate after struggling to be a University for grown-ups. For some time the University has wanted to be a safe play space for wee-woke-misogynists who have been really badly triggered ...
After a brief dalliance with 'hard Revoke' it looks like the Lib Dems are changing ground on on Brexit, with leader Jo Swinson reverting to calling for a second referendum on Johnson's deal.The party has tabled an amendment to the Queen’s speech requesting that any deal brought back from Brussels ...
The government has decided that someone has done Something Bad. But despite their belief, there seems to be no evidence that they have actually broken the law. So the government's solution is to pass a retrospective law allowing them to be punished anyway, on a lower standard of proof. If ...
So, Judith Collins has done a Facebook rant about climate change, peddling the same shit National has been shovelling for the past twenty years: the impacts are overstated, there's no need to do anything about it, and its too hard anyway (oh, and its so unfair that people who peddle ...
Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change.If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nzThere is a lot of discussion on the benefits of ...
I came across this song quite by accident. If it isn't one of Greta Thunberg's favourites - it should be.Video courtesy of YouTube.This post is exclusive to Bowalley Road. ...
Last month, NZDF's shoddy coverup of what it knew about civilian casualties in Operation Burnham began to fall apart, with the revelation that a report on the matter, which NZDF claimed not to have, had been sitting in an NZDF safe for the past nine years. Yesterday, the man responsible ...
While many imagine that countries like the USA and Europe dominate space activities, in fact India is now a major player on this stage. It launches satellites for its own purposes and also commercially, and has constellations orbiting our planet and returning data of vital importance to that nation in ...
Thanks to a report from the Acting Inspector General of Intelligence and Security following a complaint by Nicky Hager, we have come to find out that the SIS illegally spied on Mr. Hager on behalf of the NZDF after publication of Hager’s 2011 book, Other People’s Wars. The NZDF justified ...
COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING MYTH 1: Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate. FACT: The HadCRUT3 surface temperature index, produced by the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office and the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, shows warming to 1878, cooling to 1911, ...
For the past week, Extinction Rebellion has been peacefully protesting in London to demand action on climate change. The British government's response? Ban their protests:Police have banned Extinction Rebellion protests from continuing anywhere in London, as they moved in almost without warning to clear protesters who remained at the movement’s ...
An essay by Judith Collins MP reported on Carbon News yesterday seems to show an alarming shift in attitude within the National Party. Collins argues against the Zero Carbon Bill, the Paris Agreement, and downplays the magnitude of climate impacts. The Paris Agreement was adopted in December 2015 and ratified ...
When they were running for election, Labour promised to overhaul the Employment Relations Act and introduce fair pay agreements to set basic pay and conditions on an industry level, preventing bad employers from undercutting good ones. They followed this up by establishing a working group, which reported back in January ...
A list of indicators of bad science – many of these are found in articles promoted by anti-fluoride activists. Anti-fluoride activists have been pouring money into a scaremongering campaign warning pregnant women not to drink fluoridated water. They claim fluoride will lower the IQ of their future child. Fluoride ...
Nothing Left To Say: Labour's pollster, Stephen Mills, remains swaddled-up in the comforting myths of the 1980s. As if the experience of Roger Douglas’s genuinely radical post-Muldoon policy agenda was literally a once-in-a-lifetime thing – as much as the party could possibly absorb for at least the next 50 years.MEMO ...
The Royal Commission on abuse in care is very significant for the disability community. For many decades last century, thousands of disabled children, and adults who managed to survive, were locked away from families and communities. This was not for anything they had done, but for the perceived threat their ...
With an unfair voting system, uneven electorates and an un-elected upper house, the UK's "democracy" is barely worthy of the name. But now the government wants to make it worse:The government has been accused of suppressing voters’ rights with the potential disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of people after plans ...
Back in the 90's and early 2000's, the building industry was building leaky homes which should never have been granted consent. Now it turns out they've been building dodgy office blocks as well:New imaging technology has revealed hundreds of major buildings nationwide have defective or missing concrete or reinforcing steel. ...
Local body election results were released over the weekend, to joy or despair depending on where you live. In Auckland, Phil Goff trounced John Tamihere, who is muttering darkly about running for Parliament again (but which party would want him?) Wellington is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Weta Workshop, except ...
How could government evolve over the next decades? Reports of democracy’s imminent demise are greatly exaggerated. However, satisfaction with political systems in many countries is low, so there is much to do for governments of all political stripes to improve relevance and trust. Digital technologies are seen as one ...
Two years have now gone by since the Friday afternoon when my university-student son and I headed out of our Barcelona flat to a nearby primary school, designated as a polling station for the vote that was to be held the following Sunday: the referendum on Catalonia’s independence from Spain ...
Overruled: The joint decision of Finance Minister, Grant Robertson (Labour) and his Associate Minister, David Parker (Labour) arguably the two most powerful ministers in Jacinda Ardern’s government, to grant OceanaGold the consents which Land Information Minister, Eugenie Sage (Greens) had earlier denied them, offers bitter proof of how hard fighting ...
More than double the number of people who will vote in this year’s local body elections have tried marijuana or urinated somewhere they shouldn’t have. As local elections look set for the lowest turnout in decades, with many regions falling well short of 40%, the Government is exploring a number ...
A Statement on Abortion Law Reform by the Council of Disobedient Women On the eve of bringing an end to antiquated, anti-women abortion laws Green MP Jan Logie intends to write women out of the Bill. With a stroke of the pen, the woke are aiming for total erasure ...
Musings continue apace about “the experienced businessman!” soon to be taking up a National Party MP position. Or to be more accurate, being parachuted into a seat to shut down their former MP Jamie-Lee Ross, who despite his own shortcomings shed at least some more light on the inner workings ...
The Ugandan government wants to murder gay people:Uganda has announced plans to impose the death penalty on homosexuals. The bill, colloquially known as “Kill the Gays” in Uganda, was nullified five years ago on a technicality, but the government said on Thursday it plans to resurrect it within weeks. The ...
Freedom Of Speech? The Säuberung (cleansing by fire) was the work of the German Student Union which, on 10 May 1933, under the watchful eye of the Nazi Reichminister for Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, consigned 25,000 books to the flames in a ritual exorcism of “un-German thought”. According to the logic of the ...
“There can be no such thing as kaupapa Māori political parties or politics in Aotearoa” (Willie Jackson, Labour Party (2017). Māori TV, General/List Election Special) I begin with that claim because at the time, I was confounded at first that it fell out of Willie Jackson’s mouth, and then ...
New Zealand has prided itself for decades with regard to its lack of pollution, and all will be aware that the ‘100% Pure New Zealand‘ meme is under threat through land, water and air pollution of various causes. There is another type of contamination that the country also faces: light ...
New Zealand’s media is doing its part in Japan, reassuring those in the path of the storm that they won’t miss any rugby while away from their flooded homes. New Zealand sports reporters stationed in Japan for the Rugby World Cup have had the rare and heartwarming opportunity to inform ...
Regional Development Minister Shane Jones is the only Cabinet member in favour of putting it all on green. As Finance Minister Grant Robertson finds himself with an enormous $7.5 billion surplus, the Government has begun intense, at times contentious conversations about whether to put the money on red or black at ...
by Susanne Kemp At the start of September close to 100,000 school teachers went on strike in Jordan. They demanded a 50% pay rise. A pay rise actually agreed to by the regime back in 2014. In early October, however, in the face of government repression and threats, the teachers’ ...
Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change.If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nzWhy do people still think climate change isn’t real?David ...
Back in 2011, journalist Nicky Hager published Other People's Wars, an expose on NZDF's activities over the previous decade of the "war on terror". NZDF didn't like this, and especially didn't like the fact that it was base don leaks from their own. So, they had the SIS investigate him ...
The Zero Carbon Bill is due back from select committee in two weeks, and will likely pass its final stages in November. So naturally, farmers are planning a hate-march against it. But they're not just demanding lower methane targets so they can keep on destroying the planet; they're also demanding ...
Last year, California burned. This year, to stop it happening again (or rather, to stop themselves from being found liable if it happens again), Pacific Gas and Electric is cutting power to half the state for a week:Schools are closed. Traffic lights down. Tunnels dark. Businesses unopened. Hospitals running on ...
The Best Way: Missing from the on-line voting debate is any reference to the voting system that produces turn-out figures ranging from 77 to 93 percent of registered voters. The voting system used to collect and count the votes cast in our parliamentary elections. The system that involves citizens making ...
Among the great new bunch of political friends we have been making recently is the excellent Australian-based Marxist gender-critical site, Freer Lives. So we asked the comrade who set up that blog to write something for Redline on the blog, himself, his analysis of the rise of gender politics and ...
by Don Franks The Auckland City Mission is struggling with a 40 percent increase in demand for food parcels this year. A total of 23,020 were needed by June. Last month Missioner Chris Farrelly told the Herald the “cupboards are bare” and without an emergency food drive, he can’t see ...
by The Council of Disobedient Women Massey Wellington Student Association had a sit-in today. Imagine a sit-in. On a campus. Against a women’s rights meeting. Did the ’60s really happen or did we fucking dream it? They gathered in the student square, an echo chamber. Sitting on soft pillows ...
For some reasons, my post about the mystery message from inside the Downing Street bunker seemed to catch people's attention. Quite a lot of hits from NZ (unsurprisingly) and the USA (a bit more puzzlingly, but hi there, USAians!!) and 76 views from the Ukraine.I've celebrated my Ukrainian readers in ...
First, almost a score of Labour MPs seem to have sent a letter to the EU basically begging them to accept a deal - any deal - just so Britain can get the Heck on with Brexiting instead of being trapped in limbo:
by Phil Duncan In 2016 the National-led government suspended the Parent Visa Category, through which migrants were able to bring their parents into New Zealand. Since then over 5,700 people have been in immigration limbo, stuck on the visa wait list. Labour is now bringing back the scheme. Well, sort ...
The following was released yesterday (Tues, October 8) by the women’s liberation organisation Speak Up for Women. On 23 September Speak Up For Women announced that we would be holding an event at the Massey University Theaterette in Wellington. The event is called Feminism 2020. The intention of the event ...
The government is currently consulting on plans to improve freshwater quality. So naturally, farmers oppose it:South Taranaki farmers are preparing to fight proposed national freshwater changes that some fear will bankrupt them. The Government's proposed National Environment Standard on Freshwater Management, released in September, rated the Waingongoro River as one ...
Yesterday was the last day for (reliably) posting your vote away in local body elections. Turnouts are mostly much lower than the equivalent time last year (Palmerston North is down 2.3%), and so naturally people are pushing their online-voting snake oil again. Because the online census worked so well, lets ...
This essay, on the political legacy of the eugenics movement, by Kenan Malik was originally published in the Observer on 6 October 2019, under the headline ‘The spirit of eugenics is still with us, as immigrants know to their cost’. Birth control. Intelligence tests. Town planning. Immigration controls. It’s striking how ...
Another year, and the government has announced another enormous government "surplus". And just like last year, its nothing of the sort. When we have people homeless and sick and hungry, when we have schools and hospitals still falling down, when we have underpaid public servants and infrastucture unmaintained or unbuilt, ...
James Forsyth at The Spectator (I know, I know) has tapped one of his contacts inside Number Ten for an insight into the Johnson administration's thinking and strategy.It is fascinating, unsettling and quite, quite mad. Some key points:Negotiations have stalled and the Johnson administration are keen to blame the EU: ...
Fatal Contact: With the arrival of captain James Cook in October 1769, the islands of what would become New Zealand ceased to be the preserve of Polynesian navigators and settlers and became a part of both the world’s map and the world’s history.THE MAORI NATIONALIST assault upon the historical meaning ...
Another round of tactical talks about forming a Government of National Unity have come to nothing with the Liberal Democrats still refusing countenance putting Jeremy Corbyn into Downing Street:Opposition talks on Monday made little headway over when to try and vote down Boris Johnson's government and who might succeed him as ...
by Nick Rogers The debate around the meaning of sex and gender made an appearance at this year’s British Labour Party conference in Brighton. Women’s Place UK – an organisation that questions the demand that biological males who self-identify as woman should have access to women’s spaces, to all-women shortlists, ...
Yesterday I went down to Wellington to participate in the Extinction Rebellion protest. Its part of the latest global wave of XR actions, with actions happening all over the world. Some of those protests are massively disruptive: in Canada, XR is blocking major bridges, stopping people from getting to work. ...
The Workshop is a charitable trust for public good. The Workshop undertake research to find ways of communicating that will build support for the solutions that work to solve complex social and environmental problems. See their Report on Talking about Poverty and Welfare Reform below. ...
What is language? We generally assume that it a facility unique to humans, allowing us to share what’s in and on our minds. We can tell of our plans, our past exploits, our knowledge. It also allows us to lie. And yet there are vast numbers of people we can’t ...
Being and Being Bought (Spinifex Press, 2013) by Kajsa Ekis Ekman A synopsis and commentary of Chapters 1-2 by Daphna Whitmore Ekman, a Swedish journalist and critic, brings together a Marxist and feminist analysis of prostitution and surrogacy in this groundbreaking book She opens the discussion with a definition of ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters is predicting a hard Brexit for the United Kingdom, as he believes British Prime Minister Boris Johnson won’t be able to negotiate terms before the October 30 deadline. The Minister, who was one of the first to publicly come out and predict British voters would leave ...
Speaking at the Council of Trade Unions' (CTU) biennial conference, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters told unionists that any future attacks on the Government won't work. "Now, we are being attacked by the union movement in this country. You can have your views but I'm here to say standing ...
We want every New Zealander to be happy, safe, and healthy. To do this, we need to support strong, safe communities, and a robust and efficient health system. ...
Defence Minister Ron Mark has used his powers to overrule a noise complaint ruling against Whenuapai airbase on the grounds of "national security". The Environment Court last month released a ruling in favour of a private developer, declaring the Auckland airbase had to comply with noise restrictions when it performs ...
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has opened fire against "unreconstructed morons" after NZ First MP Shane Jones was photographed on holiday holding an AR-15 rifle. Mr Peters is defending Mr Jones, telling Magic Talk host Peter Williams that his MP was just having fun "like most people do". "The ...
New Zealand First Deputy Leader and Under-Secretary for Regional Economic Development Fletcher Tabuteau was in attendance during the morning blessing of the Rotorua Lakefront development project. Around 60 people gathered on the shores of Lake Rotorua, including city mayor Steve Chadwick and deputy Dave Donaldson. The Lakefront development is a ...
Forestry Minister Shane Jones is considering reining in on conversions of farmland to forestry, and also issued a warning to foreign-owned forestry companies that make up nearly 75 per cent of the industry. He said too many foreign companies had not provided enough access for domestic processors to get timber. ...
Speaking to Radio NZ, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters said the tightening of the parental category visa is a direct result of the Party’s coalition negotiations with the Labour Party. He said the new changes switch the financial onus from the parent moving to New Zealand to the child ...
The Coalition Government is set to cut red tape in the building and construction sector in an effort to allow more houses to be built, including prefabricated houses. The changes will enable the mass factory production of "high quality" buildings, slash the likely number of building inspections for factory produced ...
Since coming into Government, we’ve worked hard to tackle homelessness and make sure everyone has a warm, dry home. And today, on World Homeless Day, we want to report back and update you on our progress so far. ...
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has hit back at National Party leader Simon Bridges who criticized the Coalition Government’s approach to crime, and said that the latter isn't credible in his attack on the Government over gang recruitment. "We've got as massive drug problem in this country. It is ...
New Zealand Mānuka honey exporters have welcomed an initiative by the Coalition Government to help secure the term “mānuka honey” to be used exclusively by Kiwi exporters, ensuring that our multimillion-dollar industry is protected. Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones had recently announced that a Provincial Growth Funding of $5.7 ...
Political commentator Mike Hosking has labelled New Zealand First leader Winston Peters as “the voice of reason in a government soft on drugs”, for the Party’s stance on drug testing at music festivals. “If common sense is worth a vote, Winston Peters is quids in,” Mr Hosking said. The Labour ...
Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Regional Economic Development Fletcher Tabuteau has announced Provincial Growth Funding to ensure work opportunities in Turangi and Whanganui, through its skills and employment programme, Te Ara Mahi. A fund of $500,000 will go to Rafting NZ in Turangi for a 16-week river guide training course to train ...
Treasury has shown that the Coalition Government has a $7.5 billion surplus, which is $4 billion higher than what was expected in the 2019 Budget unveiled last May. It is also $2 billion higher than the actual surplus unveiled this time last year, and at a size that has not ...
Official Information Act figures released to NZME show there were 350 assaults on officers in the year to the end of June, 79 more than the year before. The increase in attacks have sparked calls for more legal protection for first responders to be enacted. The assaults included officers being ...
“Nobody wants to see babies uplifted”, this was the pronouncement of Minister for Children Hon. Tracey Martin as her department, Oranga Tamariki, faces multiple inquiries into the number of babies being taken from their families. “But a baby can die with a single punch, “the Minister continued. “So sometimes, Oranga ...
We're making progress on tackling the long-term challenges: from homelessness, to strengthening border security, to bringing banking back New Zealand's small towns. ...
Associate Transport Minister Shane Jones has backed the ambitious plan to move Auckland’s port to Northport, at Whangarei harbour, which he says will be the “King Kong of infrastructure”. The plan is part of the recommendations of a six-person independent working group, which has recommended the Ports of Auckland be ...
A six-member independent working group selected the option of moving Auckland’s port to Northport, in Whangarei, ahead of other options. In what could be New Zealand’s most ambitious infrastructure project yet, a major expansion of the Marsden Point port could happen within 15 years. The project, officially called the “Upper ...
The final Electricity Price Review recommended prohibiting prompt payment discounts but allowing “reasonable” late fees. The findings of this review was welcomed by the Coalition Government, but they hope companies will follow through with its recommendations without regulations needed to be passed. Meridian Energy had already stopped prompt payment discounts, ...
Fletcher Tabuteau, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Regional Economic Development The Provincial Growth Fund (PGF)through its skills and employment programme, Te Ara Mahi,will invest nearly $600,000 to ensure work opportunities for locals in Turangia and Whanganui, Parliamentary Under Secretary for Regional Economic Development Fletcher Tabuteau announced today. “I’m pleased to announce the PGF ...
An export-led economy is one of New Zealand First’s key principles, and our commitment to achieving this is shown by the continuing skyrocketing demand for our beef and sheep meat exports. Beef + Lamb New Zealand's New Season Outlook 2019-20 report forecasts beef, lamb and mutton prices to lift from ...
Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones announced today in Gisborne an investment of $17.27m into bringing “world-leading” food-growing technology and the creation of more than 100 new jobs in the East Coast city. The funding comes from the Provincial Growth Fund, and included a $15 million loan to LeaderBrand, a ...
Hon Shane Jones, Minister for Regional Economic Development More than 100 people in Tairāwhiti’s Tolaga Bay will benefit from two employment initiatives supported by the Provincial Growth Fund, Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones and Employment Minister Willie Jackson announced today. “Tolaga Bay is an incredibly tight-knit community, but one in ...
Hon Shane Jones, Minister for Regional Economic Development The Provincial Growth Fund (PGF) is supporting Gisborne business Leaderbrand to produce salad vegetables year round and create more jobs in the Tairāwhiti region, Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones announced today. “Our support for Leaderbrand will help them build large greenhouses ...
“Nobody wants to see babies uplifted”, this was the pronouncement of Minister for Children Hon. Tracey Martin as her department, Oranga Tamariki, faces multiple inquiries into the number of babies being taken from their families. “But a baby can die with a single punch, “the Minister continued. “So sometimes, Oranga ...
Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones has praised the promise by New Zealand’s biggest banks not to close any provincial branches while the Coalition Government trials regional banking hubs across the country. The Minister said the announce was the “first sign of hope for regional communities”, many of which have ...
Rt Hon Winston Peters, New Zealand First Leader New Zealand First is proud to have delivered an upgrade of the SuperGold Card website and a new smartphone app, which will help unlock the full benefits of the SuperGold Card for 750,000 New Zealand seniors.Party Leader Rt Hon Winston Peters, ...
Delivering a key election campaign promise, New Zealand First is proud to have accomplished a long overdue upgrade of the SuperGold Card today. At an event in Auckland, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters joined Minister for Seniors Hon. Tracey Martin in unveiling the new website and smartphone app which ...
The Government today announced its support for a project that could substantially reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions from cattle. The announcement was made as part of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s and Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor’s visit to Nelson’s Cawthron Aquaculture Park. The Cawthron Institute will receive $100,000 from the Government’s ...
Social Development Minister Carmel Sepuloni has welcomed the first reading of the New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension Legislation Amendment Bill. “Every New Zealander has a stake in New Zealand Superannuation and Veteran’s Pension,” says Carmel Sepuloni. “They are our most common form of social assistance – nearly 800,000 New ...
Babies in Auckland aged six months and over can receive a free vaccination and children will all have access to vaccines, Associate Minister of Health Julie Anne Genter announced today at Papatoetoe High School. The move comes as part of Government efforts to step up the fight against measles. ...
***Check against delivery*** Good morning. It is a pleasure to be here, and to have the honour of opening this important conference on behalf of the New Zealand Institute of International Affairs. Let us take the opportunity to acknowledge all the people who have helped make today possible, including our special ...
Police Minister Stuart Nash says the safety of frontline officers and members of the public will be the focus of a new trial of specialist Police response teams in three of our largest urban centres. Police have this morning released details of an initiative to be trialled in Counties Manukau, ...
The Minister of Fisheries is calling for entries for a new public award to celebrate innovation in our seafood sector. “I have established the Seafood Sustainability Awards to recognise and celebrate those throughout industry, tangata whenua and communities who demonstrate outstanding dedication and innovation towards the sustainability of New Zealand’s ...
Minister for Women Julie Anne Genter welcomes leaders in the private sector taking action on closing their gender pay gaps to ensure a fairer workplace for all New Zealanders. Ms Genter today launched a new report, Addressing the gender pay gap and driving women’s representation in senior leadership, from the Champions for ...
Government Ministers today welcomed the release of a marine environment report highlighting the four key issues affecting our oceans, estuaries and coastlines. The release underlines the importance of government proposals to combat climate pollution, ensure clean freshwater, protect biodiversity, make land use more sustainable, and reduce waste and plastic. Environment ...
The Government has approved funding for a new acute mental health facility for Waikato which will provide better care and support to people with mental health and addiction issues. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and Health Minister Dr David Clark announced the $100 million project to replace the aging Henry Rongomau ...
The Government is making progress on its goal to integrate te reo Māori into education by 2025, with over 500 teachers and support staff already graduating from Te Ahu o te Reo Māori, Associate Education Minister Kelvin Davis announced today. Kelvin Davis made the announcement at an awards ceremony in Waikanae today, for ...
Statistics Minister James Shaw has welcomed the first release of 2018 Census data. The first release of data today, 23 September, includes key data on population, regional growth, the number of homes and the size of different ethnic groups in New Zealand. Data from the 2018 Census will support the ...
Minister for Statistics James Shaw today announced a public consultation on a proposed algorithm charter for government agencies. The charter has been developed by the Government Chief Data Steward in response to growing calls for more transparency in government use of data. Computer algorithms – procedures or formulas for solving ...
Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor, Climate Change Minister James Shaw and visiting Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte co-hosted a business roundtable in Auckland this morning focused on working together to address climate change. “The Netherlands is an important partner for New Zealand. We share a strong agricultural history. Sustainable agribusiness and ...
The Government is taking action to build an inclusive economy where more of us receive our fair share at work and businesses can compete on great products and services, not undercutting wages and conditions, Immigration and Workplace Relations and Safety Minister Iain Lees-Galloway says. Two consultations launched today seek feedback ...
The future for New Zealand’s threatened indigenous freshwater fish looks brighter with the passing of the Conservation (Indigenous Freshwater Fish) Amendment Bill in Parliament today said Minister of Conservation, Eugenie Sage. “Until now, our freshwater fish legislation has been 20 years out of date. We have lacked effective tools to ...
At 1.30pm tomorrow, hundreds of thousands of Kiwis will join about 65 million people around the globe in ShakeOut, the world’s biggest earthquake drill. The annual drill is to remind people of the right action to take during an earthquake which is to Drop, Cover, Hold, and to practise their ...
Kiwis are benefiting from higher wage growth and low inflation under the Coalition Government. Stats NZ data out today shows the rise in the cost of living remains low, as annual Consumers Price Index (CPI) inflation fell to 1.5% in September from 1.7% in June. “The low inflation comes as ...
New Zealand’s economic strength and resilience has been recognised in a major update on the state of the global economy. The IMF’s latest World Economic Outlook released overnight shows a reduced global growth forecast over the next two years as issues like the US-China trade war and Brexit take hold. ...
Justice Minister Andrew Little has today introduced a new Bill to prevent terrorism and support the de-radicalisation of New Zealanders returning from overseas. The Terrorism Suppression (Control Orders) Bill gives the New Zealand Police the ability to apply to the High Court to impose control orders on New Zealanders who ...
A Bill that proposes targeted changes to simplify the processes for Māori land owners when engaging with the Māori Land Court has had its First Reading today. “The approach taken by the Government is to ensure that the protection of Māori land remains a priority as we seek to improve ...
Let me first thank all the new unionists and members in the room. There is nothing more important to improving people’s working lives than people making the decision to care, to get on board and help, to take up the reins and get involved. Congratulations to you. You bring the ...
Minister of Defence Ron Mark has signed a certificate exempting the activity of engine testing at Whenuapai Airbase from the Resource Management Act 1991. The Act gives the Minister of Defence the power to exempt activities for the purposes of national security. The certificate will mean the recent Environment Court ...
Finance Minister Grant Robertson has announced New Zealand will join the Coalition of Finance Ministers for Climate Action while attending APEC meetings in Chile. The objective of the 39 member Coalition is to share information and promote action to tackle climate change. It was formed in April this year, in ...
Ladies and gentlemen, NZCTU President Richard Wagstaff, members of respective unions – thank you for the invitation to speak to you today. This might be preaching to the choir, but the importance of trade unions in New Zealand’s historical arch is difficult to understate. And it is my belief that ...
"Let’s start by acknowledging that it has been a huge year. " Police Association Annual Conference James Cook Grand Chancellor Hotel Wellington Nau mai, haere mai. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, ka nui te mihi, ki a koutou katoa. President of the Police Association, Chris Cahill; Members of the Association and ...
Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Peters and Minister of Defence Ron Mark have announced the New Zealand Government’s decision to again deploy a Royal New Zealand Air Force P-3K2 (P-3) maritime patrol aircraft to support the implementation of United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions imposing sanctions against North Korea. New ...
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters says New Zealand continues to have serious concerns for peace and stability in north-east Syria. “Recent reports that hundreds of ISIS-affiliated families have fled from a camp are deeply concerning from a humanitarian and security perspective”, Mr Peters says. “While we acknowledge Turkey’s domestic security ...
Biosecurity Minister Damien O’Connor is warning travelling Kiwis to be vigilant as the high-season for the crop-eating brown marmorated stink bug (BMSB) is under way. “We’re on high alert to stop BMSB arriving in NZ. The high season runs until April 30 and we’ve strengthened our measures to stop stink ...
The Government is moving swiftly to change the law to improve the welfare and pastoral care of students living in university halls of residence and other tertiary hostels. Cabinet has agreed to several changes, including creating a new mandatory Code of Practice that sets out the duty of pastoral care ...
The Minister for Conservation Eugenie Sage has launched a new comprehensive trapping guide for community trappers to help them protect our native birds, plants and other wildlife, at Zealandia in Wellington today. ‘A practical guide to trapping’, has been developed by the Department of Conservation (DOC), and was launched during ...
Associate Health Minister Julie Anne Genter welcomes PHARMAC’s move to improve access to long-acting reversible contraception (LARCs). PHARMAC has today announced it will fund the full cost of Mirena and Jaydess for anyone seeking long term contraception, lifting previous restrictions on access to Mirena. “I welcome women having greater choices ...
The Government has approved the next stage of a major redevelopment of Taranaki Base Hospital, which will deliver new and improved facilities for patients. Health Minister Dr David Clark has announced details of a $300 million dollar project to build a new East Wing at the New Plymouth hospital. It ...
Extra funding will allow Rural Support Trusts to help farming families, says Minister for Rural Communities and Agriculture Damien O’Connor. “I know that rural families are worried about some of the challenges facing them, including the ongoing uncertainty created by the Mycoplasma bovis outbreak. “Those concerns sit alongside ongoing worries ...
Thank you for the opportunity to be here to present certificates to the 16 graduates who have completed a beekeeping course delivered by the Howard League. Let us start by acknowledging Auckland Prison’s Deputy Prison Director Tom Sherlock, and Acting Assistant Regional Commissioner of Corrections Northern Region Scott Walker - ...
Finance Minister Grant Robertson leaves this weekend to attend the APEC Finance Ministers meeting in Santiago, Chile. Discussions between APEC Finance Ministers at the meeting will include the effects of the current global economic uncertainty, risks for APEC economies and sustainable development of the region. While at APEC Grant Robertson ...
The Minister for Pacific Peoples Aupito William Sio says for Pacific people, language can be a source of strength. It can help ground us and give us confidence. When we speak them, our languages provide us with an immediate and intimate access to our identity and our story - and ...
The Coalition Government has announced an action plan to improve the wellbeing of disabled New Zealanders by addressing inequalities in play, active recreation and sport. The initiative includes training to develop a workforce that understands the needs of children and young people with a range of impairments, advocacy for fit ...
The construction sector is being freed up to allow more homes to be built more quickly as the Government cuts through some of the red tape of the Building Act. “Every New Zealander deserves a warm, dry, safe home and old inefficiencies in the Building Act make building slow and ...
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has welcomed further details on the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall’s visit to New Zealand next month. Their Royal Highnesses will visit New Zealand from 17-23 November – their third joint visit to New Zealand and first in four years. They arrive in Auckland ...
Minister of State for Trade and Export Growth and Minister of Agriculture, Damien O’Connor, heads to Thailand today to attend the final Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Ministerial meeting, as negotiations enter their final stages. “The RCEP Agreement would anchor New Zealand in a regional agreement that covers 16 countries, ...
Recently the Health Promotion Agency released a report into hazardous drinking in New Zealand. The report shows that Māori who drink alcohol and live in deprived circumstances are less likely to have a harmful relationship with alcohol if they ...
Turkey-US joint-statement on military ops within Syria’s territory.The Turkish Embassy in New Zealand issued Evening Report this unabridged United States of America-Republic of Turkey joint-statement detailing what both sides agreed to regarding Turkey’s military operations within the so-called security zone within Syrian territory near Turkey’s southern border. It is ...
Fisheries Minister Stuart Nash didn’t mention what winners will receive, when he proudly called for entries for a new public award “to celebrate innovation in our seafood sector”. Nor did he mention the cost to taxpayers of this initiative. Point of Order’s checks with the website where more details have ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fiona R Martin, Senior Lecturer in Convergent and Online Media, University of Sydney One of the basic tenets of the ABC Act is independence from government. Yet once again, in contravention to that principle, the federal government is trying to push through ...
A new poem by Auckland poet Lily Holloway.modernity to globalisationwhen I get there as still life and landscape and also portraitureseeking the cacti in small pots who dot the globeslices of pie offer up the vision after the sermonexpressing emotions without coherent narrative supportbecause no artist responded to this callemploying ...
The New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union is calling on Broadcasting Minister Kris Faafoi to rule out any taxpayer-funded purchase or bailout for Mediaworks’s channel Three. Taxpayers’ Union spokesman Louis Houlbrooke says, “For the last few months Mediaworks ...
The Police Commissioner's announcement that squadcars of officers with automatic rifles will patrol New Zealand's streets is dangerous and unnecessary, according to the criminal justice community organisation People Against Prisons Aotearoa. The ...
News broke this morning that Mediaworks is seeking to sell off, and even contemplating closing, its TV division. What might that mean for journalism?For journalism in New Zealand, the loss of Three’s TV division is a devastating blow. It is not yet known whether any of the news properties will ...
In our defence of our coalition Government policy on climate change, we fully support Government plan to use rail funding for rail infrastructure upgrades to promote use rail infrastructure for freight around NZ. ...
The billions of tonnes of plastic in our oceans isn’t going away any time soon, but innovative companies here and abroad are working together to find silver linings to this daunting problem.Fishing boats head out to sea and set their nets. They go back to shore. They head back out, ...
An EveningReport.nz investigation by Kevin ListKiwibank services. Image by Kevin List.Evening Report looks into the separation of Kiwibank from New Zealand Post, and considers the impact on the public’s access to banking services in their communities.Kiwibank. What’s going on? Kiwibank and New Zealand Post are in the ...
Local Government New Zealand today confirmed what many local election commentators have observed; that more of the voting public cast their ballots in favour of women candidates than ever before. ...
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 (this week we totted up the data a day early, on Wednesday, to let our books ed. ...
New Zealand's mineral manufacturing sector is expected to face some testing times, with softer prices, tighter margins and sluggish export markets. ...
Portugal has been painted by pro-cannabis legalisation groups as a model to follow. Yet just last month, the mayor of Porto contradicted his previous pro-harm reduction position and endorsed reintroducing criminal penalties for drug use in public spaces. ...
Chief of Defence Force Air Marshal Kevin Short announced today the inclusion of six Cook Island First World War soldiers in the New Zealand and Commonwealth War Graves Commission’s official rolls of honour. ...
The latest statistics released by the Health Promotion Agency showing a dramatic fall in the numbers of cigarettes being sold in supermarkets, service stations, and liquor stores are being welcomed by the Vaping Trade Association of New Zealand (VTANZ). ...
Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage.New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.Today’s content by Dr Bryce Edwards.NZ First Thomas Coughlan (Stuff): Where to from here? How NZ First will win in ...
Aotearoa Climate Emergency (ACE), a climate change network, will host a conference in Wellington on 11 November (Armistice Day) to promote holding a Citizens Assembly in 2020, as a way of breaking the current political deadlock on treating climate ...
MediaWorks’ owners have called time after years of losses from its TV division. Sources say the company will announce it is for sale – if no buyers emerge, it will close within months.Three is facing the biggest crisis in its three decade history today, as its ownership will soon announce ...
Sam Brooks reviews Amazon Prime’s Modern Love, an anthology series based on the New York Times column dedicated to ‘love in all its forms’. A first date that ends up in the emergency room. A flagging marriage that finds new energy through tennis. The founder of a dating app who doesn’t ...
If we want to grow support for New Zealand’s aid, we need to get better at partnering with the ‘unlike-minded’ as well as the ‘like-minded’, and much better at telling people what we do with the money they give, says Josie Pagani, Executive ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Orsola De Marco, Astrophysicist , Macquarie University If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, send it to curiouskids@theconversation.edu.au.How are stars made? –Zali, age 8, Karkoo, South Australia. How are stars made? Well, stars are not ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gita Mishra, Professor of Life Course Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland All women know to expect the time in life when their periods finish and they reach menopause. Many might even look forward to it. What many women don’t ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul McGreevy, Professor of Animal Behaviour and Animal Welfare Science, University of Sydney Since ancient times, horse behaviour, and the bond between horses and humans, has been a source of intrigue and fascination. The horse-lore that has accumulated over the centuries is ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachael Wallis, Lecturer and Honorary Research Fellow, University of Southern Queensland A move to the country is often presented in popular culture as an idyllic life, a place where you can escape the pressures of the city. It’s in television shows such ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW The just-announced inquiry into Australia’s retirement income system ought to be anything but run-of-the-mill. Taking place 25 years after the introduction of compulsory superannuation, it provides an opportunity to either fix a broken system, or discard ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Allan McCay, Law Lecturer, University of Sydney The rise of artificial intelligence has led to widespread concern about the role of humans in the workplaces of the future. Indeed, Israeli historian, futurist and publishing sensation Yuval Noah Harari warns in his most ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jen Saunders, Phd candidate, University of Wollongong Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains images and names of deceased people. You leave Sydney and head for holidays on the South Coast. You plan to catch a quick surf, ...
Good morning, and welcome to The Bulletin. In today’s edition: Clayton Mitchell denies accusations around a night out, food insecurity on the rise, and UK PM Boris Johnson secures deal with dubious prospects.NZ First MP Clayton Mitchell has got himself in a spot of late night bother in a Tauranga ...
As the rugby world wrestles with the new reality that players can, and will, be dismissed for accidental contact with an opponent’s head it's worth pondering the fate of three All Blacks not selected for the Ireland quarterfinal. ...
A new exhibition in Raetihi offers a rare opportunity to see early, colonialism-focused works by Wellington artist Barbara Strathdee, writes Pat Baskett. ...
Italy's Ambassador to New Zealand Fabrizio Marcelli responds to Newsroom stories - and The Detail podcasts - questioning the price of imported tinned tomatoes in light of reports of slave labour in the industry in his home country. ...
A measles outbreak in Samoa suspected to be responsible for the death of a one-year-old was “inevitable”, according to an expert who thinks NZ could have prevented it. ...
The big shock of the results in the weekend’s local elections was the unseating of Justin Lester as Wellington mayor. We invited him to pen a sort-of-valedictory.My three years as the mayor of Wellington ended on Sunday and I will forever remain grateful for the experience.I’m also acutely aware of ...
We review the entire country and culture of New Zealand, one thing at a time. Today, Alex Braae reviews a night spent on the Intercity overnight sleeper bus getting from Wellington to Auckland.The most important thing to understand about long haul bus travel is that it’s all about getting exactly ...
Britain and the EU have agreed new terms for divorce. But with the Conservatives’ Northern Irish support party unimpressed, can the British prime minister at last put an end to the interminable shitstorm?At last, a deal! A palpable deal! A path out of the endless brain-melt!“Where there is a will, ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Government sources insist shock jock Alan Jones didn’t drive Thursday’s announcement of a cash payment to drought-striken farmers about to be turfed off their household support because they’d reached the four year time limit. They ...
The proposition that global warming driven by greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is a risk that needs to be dealt with has achieved a large measure of agreement among policymakers. The proposition that it has to be dealt with right now and at great cost has no such consensus.One point ...
A bill to improve the pastoral care of students living in halls of residence has flown through its first reading in Parliament, thanks to cross-party support. ...
In this week's MediaRoom column: could MediaWorks close its TV operations altogether? And the Herald restructures its newsroom to remove a layer of management and shake up its investigative team. ...
Twenty-five young people who represent the future of the Asia-New Zealand relationship have been acknowledged as ‘ones to watch’, by the Asia New Zealand Foundation Te Whītau Tūhono. ...
The taboo that surrounds immigration and our refugee qouta, are two issues rising in New Zealand that need to start being given attention to challenge the fruit loops of the far left. ...
Winston Peters has been ordered to answer questions about whether he received a letter from MSD asking him to check details of his living arrangements, three years before discovering he'd been overpaid. ...
To celebrate 10 years since the start of New Zealand’s Next Top Model, our reality TV podcast The Real Pod is going to recap it week by week. Here are 10 of the most incredible revelations from the very first episode. 1) Colin Mathura-Jeffree was an emo kidThis was the moment ...
Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage.New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.Today’s content by Dr Bryce Edwards.Terrorism bill Lydia Lewis and Dan Satherley (Newshub): Security expert backs new terror law proposal ...
Occupiers of the disputed land at Ihumātao have been shut out of talks with the government about finding a resolution, saying they haven’t had any direct contact with ministers in more than a month, writes RNZ‘s Te Aniwa Hurihanganu and Meriana Johnsen.The Māori King announced in September mana whenua had ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bronwyn Fancourt, Adjunct Research Fellow, University of New England Feral cats are wreaking havoc on our native wildlife, eating more than a billion animals across Australia every year. But managing feral cats and reducing their impacts on our threatened species is challenging, ...
Later this month, the national commemoration of the New Zealand Wars, known as Te Pūtake o Te Riri, is to be held in Taranaki. Local community activist Vivian Hutchinson looks at how a history of conflict has shaped our sense of citizenship and describes how some people in Taranaki are ...
New Zealand First MP Clayton Mitchell is demanding an apology from security guards who booted him out of a Tauranga bar on Saturday night, describing them as politically-motivated "buffoons". ...
New Zealand First MP Clayton Mitchell is demanding an apology from security guards who booted him out of a Tauranga bar on Saturday night, describing them as politically-motivated "buffoons". ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jerry Zhou, Lecturer, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, send it to curiouskids@theconversation.edu.au.Does chewing gum stay inside you for years? – Olivia, aged 12, Australia. Great question, Olivia! ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liam Elphick, Adjunct Research Fellow, Law School, University of Western Australia In March last year, Frances McDormand won the Academy Award for Best Actress. In her acceptance speech, she drew attention to the female nominees in the room and left them with ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peggy Kern, Associate professor, University of Melbourne The Portal follows six individuals who undergo a personal transformation from trauma and struggle to calmness, self-acceptance, and compassion towards others. These personal changes are intertwined with contemplations about the broader struggles facing humanity and ...
Many hill country farmers could be locked into low-return agriculture by government policy, with little chance of breaking the cycle, according to the main meat producers' lobby, Beef + Lamb New Zealand. ...
The Southern DHB has apologised and pledged to change practices after a report into a young woman’s complaint about treatment which included being stripped naked and left unattended in seclusion for 12 hours. Here she tells her story.I’d forgotten the Health and Disability Commission was about to publish its report. ...
In the Chief Ombudsman’s latest Annual Report, contacts for advice increased 29 percent, while more use was being made of guidance material, including the 23 new or updated guides that were published in the 2018/19 year. ...
Fletcher's new offsite home manufacturing facility could be producing two homes a day within a couple of years. But for the moment this high-tech factory is underwhelming. ...
Open mike 26/05/2019 
Yoga gurus and cult leaders – I’ve seen a few. Two weeks ago, I unknowingly joined an alleged new-age cult at the Kāpiti coast, together with a giant kraken and some neatly dressed pensioners who would make any book club proud.They were among the two hundred people of all ages ...2 hours ago
The last decade has seen a trend of increasing weapons availability to police. Assault rifles. Tasers on every hip. Guns in cars. And following the march 15 massacre, pistols on every hip, all over the country. At the same time, its also seen an increase in the abuse of force: ...2 hours ago
In the last couple of weeks, I’ve been busy preparing for our summer paper on Science Communication. Looking for something amusing about ‘risk’ in science, I came across this neat xkcd.com cartoon about why so many people come knocking on my door (or phoning me, or emailing me) desperately wanting ...6 hours ago
Jo Swinson is doing even worse at this Being Sensible lark that I'd thought. I've just become aware of the following utterance
Media Statement for Immediate Release 16th October 2019 “Fake News” from Auckland City Council CCOs Board Chairs re pay and performance bonuses for top managers Despite comments from Auckland City Council CCOs Board Chairs re pay and performance bonuses for top managers—Herald Newspaper Tuesday Oct 15th–there is very little evidence ...1 day ago
Would You Buy A Used Propaganda Video From This Man? Bridges and the National Party’s strategists have discovered that the ideas and attitudes considered acceptable by today’s editors and journalists are no longer enforceable. The rise and rise of the Internet and the social media platforms it spawned means that ...1 day ago
Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz There is a lot of discussion on the benefits of ...2 days ago
Thanks to a report from the Acting Inspector General of Intelligence and Security following a complaint by Nicky Hager, we have come to find out that the SIS illegally spied on Mr. Hager on behalf of the NZDF after publication of Hager’s 2011 book, Other People’s Wars. The NZDF justified ...3 days ago
COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING MYTH 1: Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate. FACT: The HadCRUT3 surface temperature index, produced by the Hadley Centre of the UK Met Office and the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, shows warming to 1878, cooling to 1911, ...3 days ago
More than double the number of people who will vote in this year’s local body elections have tried marijuana or urinated somewhere they shouldn’t have. As local elections look set for the lowest turnout in decades, with many regions falling well short of 40%, the Government is exploring a number ...7 days ago
“There can be no such thing as kaupapa Māori political parties or politics in Aotearoa” (Willie Jackson, Labour Party (2017). Māori TV, General/List Election Special) I begin with that claim because at the time, I was confounded at first that it fell out of Willie Jackson’s mouth, and then ...1 week ago
Foreign Minister Winston Peters is predicting a hard Brexit for the United Kingdom, as he believes British Prime Minister Boris Johnson won’t be able to negotiate terms before the October 30 deadline. The Minister, who was one of the first to publicly come out and predict British voters would leave ...2 days ago
We want every New Zealander to be happy, safe, and healthy. To do this, we need to support strong, safe communities, and a robust and efficient health system. ...3 days ago
The Government today announced its support for a project that could substantially reduce agricultural greenhouse gas emissions from cattle. The announcement was made as part of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s and Agriculture Minister Damien O’Connor’s visit to Nelson’s Cawthron Aquaculture Park. The Cawthron Institute will receive $100,000 from the Government’s ...28 mins ago
Recently the Health Promotion Agency released a report into hazardous drinking in New Zealand. The report shows that Māori who drink alcohol and live in deprived circumstances are less likely to have a harmful relationship with alcohol if they ...32 mins ago
A new poem by Auckland poet Lily Holloway.modernity to globalisationwhen I get there as still life and landscape and also portraitureseeking the cacti in small pots who dot the globeslices of pie offer up the vision after the sermonexpressing emotions without coherent narrative supportbecause no artist responded to this callemploying ...59 mins ago
Politicians come crawling back after the holidays to repair some 'bad optics'. James Elliott pulls no punches in his news of the week. ...3 hours ago
New Zealand's mineral manufacturing sector is expected to face some testing times, with softer prices, tighter margins and sluggish export markets. ...3 hours ago
Power Play - It's not you Jacinda, it's me, Winston. Will the coalition government break up before the next election? Jo Moir asks. ...4 hours ago
Environmental groups are urging the government to crack down on commercial industries whose activities are harming the marine environment. ...4 hours ago
Struggling media company MediaWorks is putting its TV business Three on the sale block, after axing and scaling back shows. ...5 hours ago
As the rugby world wrestles with the new reality that players can, and will, be dismissed for accidental contact with an opponent’s head it's worth pondering the fate of three All Blacks not selected for the Ireland quarterfinal. ...9 hours ago
This week's biggest-selling NZ books, as recorded by the Nielsen BookScan NZ bestseller list and described by Steve Braunias. ...9 hours ago
A new exhibition in Raetihi offers a rare opportunity to see early, colonialism-focused works by Wellington artist Barbara Strathdee, writes Pat Baskett. ...9 hours ago
Italy's Ambassador to New Zealand Fabrizio Marcelli responds to Newsroom stories - and The Detail podcasts - questioning the price of imported tinned tomatoes in light of reports of slave labour in the industry in his home country. ...9 hours ago
A measles outbreak in Samoa suspected to be responsible for the death of a one-year-old was “inevitable”, according to an expert who thinks NZ could have prevented it. ...9 hours ago
Plans for Facebook’s proposed “stablecoin”, Libra, appear to be unraveling as awareness about its adverse effects grows. ...9 hours ago
Explosives were used to blast a millions-of-years-old rock overhang in a national park. ...9 hours ago
Medical issues, party leaks and a surprise resignation have taken their toll - but Winston Peters argues his party is as strong as ever. ...9 hours ago
What's different about what Donald Trump did this time to finally snap Democrats into action and launch an impeachment inquiry? ...10 hours ago
Former MediaWorks news chief and Newsroom co-editor Mark Jennings looks at who or what might save Three now it has been put on the block. ...15 hours ago
In this week's MediaRoom column: could MediaWorks close its TV operations altogether? And the Herald restructures its newsroom to remove a layer of management and shake up its investigative team. ...18 hours ago
Judith Collins is filling the blackhole that is National’s climate policy with social media posts appealing to science deniers. ...19 hours ago
A Tom Sainsbury snapchat celebrating the genius of Dan Brown. ...24 hours ago
Many hill country farmers could be locked into low-return agriculture by government policy, with little chance of breaking the cycle, according to the main meat producers' lobby, Beef + Lamb New Zealand. ...1 day ago
Sky Television's shareholders have approved its deal to retain the Sanzaar rugby rights for an undisclosed sum, making it unconditional. ...1 day ago
Fletcher's new offsite home manufacturing facility could be producing two homes a day within a couple of years. But for the moment this high-tech factory is underwhelming. ...1 day ago
As part of the coalition government, the Green MPs have delivered us up the Zero Carbon Act. A reading of the Act reveals that it has not one single measure to cut GHG emissions, nor any measures at all to keep to the targets set out in it.
I defy anyone to say that it does.
Setting out targets is good, but with no measures to achieve them targets are meaningless.
I could set a target to be a millionaire in ten years.
I could even set down intermediate targets, that to reach my goal I will need to meet a target of a $100,000 a year.
Sorted.
To give myself further excuse not to implement any measures to achieve my target, I could push my millionaire target out to thirty years from now, so that no one can really check whether I achieve it or not.
I defy anyone, who after reading the Zero Carbon Act was to conclude, other than that, the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now.
I don't think so Jenny at all.
The political system has limits, no use putting up a bill that doesn't have support, from the electorate or coalition members
The zero carbon bill, and I agree with you , its severely limited, is an illustration of whats possible at the moment (in a time when benign dictators aren't a thing)
James did his best for cross party consensus. Don't blame him, blame the incremental nature of politics, and the resistance of dinosaurs
Get out on the street, encourage and join the kids on climate strike Fridays, build the movement for change,change your own life.
James did his best for cross party consensus.
Indeed he has done. This is how politics should be done and kudos for him for achieving this. It would not have been easy.
Don't blame him, blame the incremental nature of politics, and the resistance of dinosaurs
Human social groups, at whatever scale, have a fundamental problem to solve; how to respond to the unknown, the novel and to change. When faced with strangers, or new information and ideas, we have two possible responses. One is to open up and embrace them, the other is to close off and resist them. Crucially both strategies serve a purpose.
Being open means that you get first mover advantage with fresh ideas and can react to changing circumstances more rapidly. The downside is that not all strangers are benign, some will be dangerous and threatening. And not all new ideas are good ones, most in fact will fail … some fatally.
Being closed means that you avoid these risks, and by trusting the 'tried and true' it is more likely you will survive in the short term. This is important, there is no value to investing in a better future decades in the future, if you die this winter because the crops failed. But conversely resisting all innovation and novelty also ensures failure in the long-run; failure to adapt and being out-competed by more agile neighbours.
Obviously the correct solution is some balance between the two; but how? The same person cannot easily be both open and closed at the same time. Humans appear to have evolved a fascinating way to deal with it; some of us are open, some are closed. When faced with something new, we each respond according to our temperament and then we talk about it. We socially argue the case for and against and arrive at some consensus. We try the plan out, see what works and what didn't and repeat. It's quite a smart solution.
With climate change the process got subverted when the big fossil carbon players borrowed a strategy originally devised by the tobacco companies. The basic idea was not to win the argument, but to prevent consensus from being formed by provoking the resistance of the naturally cautious among us. And us more open types attacking them only makes them more cautious and more reactionary. (This too was part of the plan.)
It was only after we went for the tobacco companies themselves, the source of the disinformation, that we reached a consensus and took effective action. The same applies here, but on a larger scale.
But we are both open and closed aren't we?
We can be closed to social change yet open to economic change and vice versa
We are generally a mixture of fears and conservatism, optimism ,altruism and the whole bleeding mess
The time frame, the imminence of tipping point and collapse probably means that striving for consensus in a democracy just loses us more time .
I still think, lets shift our consciousness first, away from anthrocentrism at all costs, then whatever comes after(technological fixes, new strategies )is coming from an inclusive, sustainable and happier place
“I still think, lets shift our consciousness first, away from anthrocentrism at all costs, then whatever comes after(technological fixes, new strategies )is coming from an inclusive, sustainable and happier place"”
Well put.
But we are both open and closed aren't we?
True, but on any given issue we generally take one position at a time. Otherwise you run the risk of being perceived as 'talking out both sides of your mouth'.
The openness personality trait is highly predictive of holding to progressive or left wing political views and I'd wager most of the regulars here at TS are very open types. We have lots of different ideas and we debate them vigorously, but more closed conservative people are either rare or simply don't come here.
Yet in political terms they constitute roughly half the population, and in terms of my outline above … they serve a vital and useful purpose in the debate. Conservatives may frustrate the hell out of us, but in collective terms they usefully keep a society grounded and functioning on a day to day basis.
It's my view that progressives would achieve more if we approached them with this broader understanding and worked with their natures rather than against them. This would be inclusiveness at work, would it not?
Yes, I'm totally with you there.
actually it seems to be similar to what Jonathan Haidt argues in The Righteous Mind
Ha haaa ! … I recognise the Big Five Psychometrics when I see them.
Agreed.
The other thing is that putting up a bill destined to fail reminds me of a time I was writing a provisional report on a project, and drafted it "Some _____ refused to participate…". My boss pointed out that this essentially committed those non-participants to their position, and suggested the redraft "Some _____ were reluctant to participate". I learnt a lot from that boss.
Why Consensus Stinks!
The Australian term white-anting comes from the action of termites that hollow out and empty something that looks fine on the surface.
The Zero Carbon Bill is an example, white-anting any real action on climate change, looking substantial, but completely hollowed out of any real action.
The argument made for the Zero Carbon Bill by its supporters, is that we have to seek 'Consensus' with the National Party, otherwise when they get back into power they will repeal any concrete legislation we put in place.
Apart from being a weak defeatist position, this argument is actually not proven.
The Nats never repealed the Nuclear Free Legislation. Labour have never repealed the Anadarko Amendment. Phil Goff traveled the Country in a big red bus with "Kill The Bill" (the National Government Bill to increase GST to 15%) before admitting that if he was elected he wouldn't repeal it.
Consensus is not democracy it is an attack on democracy.
As Winston Churchill famously said, Democracy is the worst of all possible systems, except for all those others that have been tried.
Democracy has been described by its detractors as the dictatorship of the majority over the minority.
This is the sound of ideologies crashing, sang Billy Bragg
Consensus is an effort to paper over these differences between ideologies.
And it fits into one of those 'worst ways' Churchill spoke of.
Consensus is not democracy.
Consensus is going for the lowest possible denominator to achieve unanimity.
Consensus is an effort to silence and stifle political debate. To suffocate the sound of ideologies clashing.
The tragedy of Consensus politics is that it robs the electorate of making a clear choice between one way forward and another.
Consensus politics prevents us hearing the arguments between both ways forward, and for making an informed decision with our vote.
Consensus politics murders democracy in back room deals between politicians.
At its core what consensus politics displays, is a lack of faith in the people.
Consensus politics is an abrogation of leadership.
This government hates targets.
They keep showing them up as useless – needing a reset (kiwibuild anyone)
what they say is all fairy dust and aspirations – most of the time I’m sure they know they can’t deliver
Could just as easily be talking about National.
It's not thing unique to Labour… Governments hate measures. People can hold them to account.
I defy anyone, who after reading the Zero Carbon Act was to conclude, other than that, the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now.
Oh, fuck off. We went through this yesterday. If you don't understand why Labour/Green don't have either the numbers in Parliament or the electoral mandate to implement the policies you want to see, read up on the subject or just don't comment on it. Alleging corruption (even scummier than yesterday's accusation of cynicism) is a grotesque insult to people who had to fight hard to get even this level of legislation on the table and have shown a far greater commitment to doing something about it than you have.
If you want to see your preferred policies implemented, join one of those two parties and put in the hours and the money to help them get more MPs in Parliament. Insulting them from your armchair will just get you more "Fuck off"s.
It's a step, which I hope they follow up on soon. This government's actions for the poor are more indictable.
The art of the possible…..and why we fail.
So now Shaw is "corrupt". There is again only one reasonable response to your bile, fuck off.
So now Shaw is "corrupt".
I wonder if Shaw, Davidson and Ardern would prefer 'useless leaders' rather than 'corrupt'?
One description is acquired by simply failing to do what was promised (i.e. dealing to climate change with the same vigour and commitment as was afforded the nuclear free policy) while the other requires some forethought, planning and cooperation. One is simply passively muddling along while the other is deliberate and active.
The way I see it (from someone who bought the whole Green thing and voted accordingly, in a household where the rest largely voted Labour for the same reasons.) is that none of the above named party leaders have the heft of Winston.
A truly committed and charismatic leader would have been able to bring others along in such numbers that Winston's own caucus would have been putting pressure on him to at least meet L/G more than halfway, and the three could have all contributed to a Bill that we could have been proud of. As it is, we're left with a lilly livered and truly pathetic piece of legislation that condemns our children to a bleak future.
A pox on all their houses.
I'll fuck off now.
Breakfast in schools could have been implemented almost immediately, as one example of something useful this government could have done for children.
But they haven’t.
Yep, there are a few other of Hone Harawira's policies they could enact too.
A teacher aid in every class room was another I liked.
Yes, absolutely that too…
Restoring support services which were defunded and cut completely by the NACT government…support which was provided to many of the most at risk groups in NZ…
Support which is literally priceless…but for which proverbial pennies of funding per year (few millions)…in monetary cost to retain, restore and fund those same priceless services into the future…
Winston First is courting the rural vote and was always going to be a problem. If he can't hold those votes his party is gone. Letting the coalition fold would be a better option for him if the cost of maintaining it was to lose those votes. Where is all the criticism of NZF?
Where is all the criticism of NZF?
I take it as read that we all know that 'the problem' is Winston….I suspect there are NZF Members who would dearly like to participate more positively in climate change mitigation…but there's Winston….and he doesn't give a shit.
He just gets to sit at the table again, play kingmaker again, handicap real transformative policy implementation again.
His voter base are dying out.
And none too soon.
The leaders of the other two coalition parties need to do much, much better.
The leaders of the other two coalition parties need to do much, much better.
I still have no idea what it is that you would have them do.
His voter base are dying out.
Winston's old people constituency is starting to die out, that is why he has so much invested in the rural vote.
I still have no idea what it is that you would have them do.
Let's see now….how about…./the-green-party-policy-manifesto-full-costed-and-seriously-progressive/
and….https://www.labour.org.nz/climatechange
As for the 'rural vote', again, the generation of farmers with callous disregard for the environment are a dying breed. Many farmers now see that SSDD (literally) practices are not sustainable and change needs to be sped up. Shaw near breathlessly reassuring us that there is 'no need to reduce stock numbers' when even many farmers know there are plenty of good reasons to was just sad.
I'm not claiming to have the answers, I'm just telling it as I see it. The Zero Carbon Act is a joke if its purpose is to mitigate the effects of climate change. Only true and decisive leaders with definitive policies and messaging will effect change.
We're told repeatedly we are approaching climate change crisis…you'd never believe that going on the response from our government.
I still have no idea what it is that you would have them do. It is irrelevant what Green and Labour policy is if Winston is better off to end the coalition than support it.
Farmers are still the biggest sector opposing meaningful Climate policy. Have you not been paying attention?
Public disagreement that outlines the stumbling blocks would be a good start. Then the discourse is out in the open, and the general public get to decide for themselves who is looking out for future interests and who are looking to protect their positions.
It seems that at the moment, even those who voted for this coalition government are not permitted to critique their performance. And unfortunately criticisms are often valid, and if they are not even acknowledged and used to improve then we have a coalition government that is trending towards the arrogance and disregard of the previous.
The consequences of climate change, insecure housing, appalling child poverty, our health system and inequality do not lie in suspended animation until the next electoral term, they impact on us all now – some much more than others. My impetus as a voter for addressing these issues is not to maintain the employment status of my limited choice of politicians, but to continue to ask for change in these matters.
Politicians should not be so concerned with polling and reelection, that they don't use the opportunity they possess to start public awareness and discussion. This coalition government is not even progressing in that department.
If you don't think that Shaw has been promoting public awareness and facilitating discussion then you are not worthy of a reply.
@ solkta. This kind of dismissal is what I am talking about.
The deference shown by Shaw for the farmers concern about methane limits, is not based on science or acknowledgement of what needs to be done. If I was not aware of the issues of climate change, and was not yet informed of the immediacy of need for transition, then seeing James Shaw – leader of the Green Party – on television, downplaying these issues and congratulating this coalition government on coming to an agreement – would have a negative impact, along the lines of:
"Even the Green Party leader is not concerned about methane, or feels that a carbon-zero bill that aspires without consequence to a carbon-free 2050 goal is worth pursuing."
For those in New Zealand whose current knowledge of the issues of climate change are non-existent or slight, this will be one of their main news items on this topic. Disturbingly, it will reassure many that if even the Greens are not concerned, the status quo can continue for the foreseeable future.
Does this explain the disquiet that I share with others on this forum?
Let's see now….how about…./the-green-party-policy-manifesto-full-costed-and-seriously-progressive/
and….https://www.labour.org.nz/climatechange
OK, how about them? The parties with those policies have 43% of the vote, ie 53 out of 120 MPs in Parliament. Please explain why you believe it would be possible for that minority of MPs to enact those policies as legislation in their entirety. And not just why it would be possible, but why it's so obviously possible that you feel free to berate the parties' leadership for failing to do it.
26 May 2019 at 1:58 pm
….Please explain why you believe it would be possible for that minority of MPs to enact those policies as legislation in their entirety. And not just why it would be possible, but why it's so obviously possible that you feel free to berate the parties' leadership for failing to do it.
Hi Psycho,
I could name half a dozen green policies that the Green MPs have refused to champion in government.
The iniquitous Anadarko Amendment to the RMA that makes it illegal to protest deep sea oil drilling. Is one of the things that the Green Party have refused to try and repeal, The law that makes it illegal to raise climate change in consent hearings for new fossil fuel projects is another piece of iniquitous piece of legislation that the Greens are happy to leave in place, for the sake of 'consensus'.
At a time when many voters have trouble telling the political parties apart, the last thing we need is more consensus between them.
Consensus muffles the sound of 'ideologies clashing' making it harder to differentiate between the parties vying for our vote.
Let's have the arguments out, let us hear them.
Consensus turns the political spectrum into one whole amorphous mass.
If all the parties have consensus on climate change why vote for the Greens? Indeed what is the need for a Green Party? We are all in agreement. We have achieved consensus.
One of the key demands of XR is for 'politicians to tell the truth about climate change' papering over the differences between political parties on this issue, is not telling the truth about climate change, it is covering up the truth about climate change.
Do you not realise that many NZF voters are National defectors who can't cope with voting Labour or Green and that if it collapses they will probably go back to National? And then we would have a National government again. This coalition government has to make many compromises, but half a loaf is better than no bread.
Don't think so.
The various iterations of the New Zealand Election Study (2008-2014) suggest those swinging to NZF have disproportionately been former Labour voters (& – as with most smaller parties – switchers comprise a significant segment of NZF support).
What's more, NZF voters have chosen Labour as their preferred Coalition partner in 3 out of the last 4 General Elections (including overwhelmingly in 2017).
solkta
I'd estimate NZF received a little over 60% of its 2017 vote from both Metro & Provincial City seats. So, all things being equal, he probably only needs to hold around a third of his Rural / Small Town vote to be sure of returning.
Your estimate is meaningless until you back it up with some stats. Even if you are right that doesn't mean Winston is prepared to take the risk or have a smaller presence and say no thanks to those votes. As he straddles the centre he needs to appear to both his left and right flanks that he is protecting their interests.
(1)
No, it certainly wouldn't be his aim … but I do take issue with the idea that holding / expanding his rural vote is an absolute necessity.
(2)
Started by adding the NZF Party-Vote in all Metro (Akld / Wgtn / Chch) & Provincial City seats (ranging in city size from Gisborne (East Coast) up to the two Dunedin & two Hamilton seats).
Then (based on a rough estimation), I subtracted the likely Rural / Small Town NZF vote in those Provincial City seats that weren't entirely urban … then added the likely Urban NZF vote from the Maori seats (as with the General Roll Provincial Centres, this was according to a broad estimation of what proportion of Maori seats were urban / rural).
Made some allowance for error within my estimation.
Then simply calculated the final result as a proportion of the entire Nationwide NZF Party-Vote in 2017.
Hence, I'd estimate NZF received somewhere between 59%-62% of its 2017 Party-Vote from both Metro & Provincial City seats.
It is possible to be very precise … but that would involve going through every single booth in the Provincial Cities … but, you know, benefits considerably less than the enormous energy invested … law of diminishing returns
(3)
The various iterations of the New Zealand Election Study (2008-2014) suggest:
– those swinging to NZF have disproportionately been former Labour voters (& – as with most smaller parties – switchers comprise a significant segment of NZF support). Over those 3 consecutive Elections, around two-thirds of switchers to Winston's Party came courtesy of the Left (overwhelmingly former Labour supporters … but also a small segment of former Greens) / one-third from the Right (overwhelmingly former National voters … but also a sizeable minority from ACT / Cons / Maori Party). (my calculations from raw Flow-of-the-Vote stats from the 08-14 NZES).
– NZF voting-base can best be seen as a segment of the morally-conservative Left. Most of the latter group still vote Labour, but a section swung to NZF back in the 90s, while even more have moved in Winston's direction over the last two decades. (Although they haven’t always remained particularly Loyal).
– Which, in turn, explains why (as I pointed out to JanM) NZF voters have chosen Labour as their preferred Coalition partner in 3 out of the last 4 General Elections (including overwhelmingly in 2017).
So what I'm suggesting at (3), just to be clear, is that the Right-leaning component of NZF's support-base is relatively small.
Yes … Winston's voters do tend toward moral conservatism on the Liberal / Libertarian vs Conservative / Authoritarian Moral spectrum.
But on the other key axis – the classic one – the Left vs Right Economic spectrum … a very large majority of them are on the Left.
Thanks swordfish, I do appreciate your analysis.
Cheers.
It is too easy (and convenient) to apportion the lack with Winston, as you note there must also be a willingness to prevaricate on the part of the other parties….and expressions of anger and disappointment are to be expected just as they are frequently on other topics, and rightly so otherwise everyone would have fucked off long ago
The nuclear-free legislation was enacted without any negotian needed, by a Labour government that held 56 of the 95 seats in Parliament. If the Green Party currently held 55% of the seats in Parliament, I expect the Zero Carbon Act would look very different – wouldn't you agree? But they don't hold 55% of the seats in Parliament, they hold 7%. Can you see how that might make a very big difference to their legislative ability?
Re "charismatic leadership," NZ First is a party of provincial conservatism and its fundamental principles are in some respects completely opposed to those of Labour and the Greens. Environmental policy is one of those areas. How do you picture "charismatic leadership" getting a party to go against its fundamental principles? For instance, can you picture a charismatic National leader getting the Green Party to cooperate with it on an extensive programme of privatisation?
“I’ll fuck off now.”
Perhaps you should, because that's a terrible summary of events and an unrealistic belief a party not even in a coalition government can set such an agenda.
The only way to get hard green policy is to vote for more green mps.
The only way to get hard green policy is to vote for more green mps.
If by Green you mean more of what we have in parliament now claiming such…then maybe not.
Hard Green Policy would compromise New Zealand's national security posture. It's standard Green Party Defence policy to cut tier 1 defence assets, frigate, P8 and anything over 50cal. That these defence assets is vital in securing not only New Zealand's natural resources but that of the South Pacific as well means the Greens will not be able to pull the majority to their side.
Yeah, them, the ones you claim to have voted for.
I hear your frustration and disappointment Rosemary.
Being the eternal optimist, I reckon voting for more Green MPs emboldens the other MPs, provides leadership for the public and direction for business.
But would it really make a difference?
They still wouldn't have king maker leverage.
They've shown they'd prefer to be in the tent than out. So no leverage there.
Thus, they would still end up being the smaller partner of Labour that prefers not to rock the boat.
If there were 30 green mps, they'd have plenty of leverage, and plenty of green policy. You just have to vote for them instead of whining about how useless they are.
And where do you think those extra votes would come from?
The reason being. Last election when Labour dropped to 24% and the Greens were polling at 15% Labour claimed they wouldn't look at forming a Government with Little stating Labour would need a considerably greater share of the vote to form a government. Despite (at 24%) still potentially having the numbers to form a Government.
Therefore, it seems Labour would have rather let National win than be forced to work with a stronger Green party.
Less of the goal post moving and more substance to the point.
If you want more green policy there has to be more green mps. That must be a given. Knowing this, bashing the greens for not doing enough when they don't have the numbers to force legislation is an admission of not understanding how parliament works, or an excuse to put the boot in to suit an agenda… Or both.
Wasn't moving the goal posts, just pointing out Labour's preference when it comes to working with a stronger Greens.
Therefore, even with greater numbers they'd still end up being the smaller partner of Labour that prefers not to rock the boat.
Having leverage without the backbone to use it means little. And the one thing the Greens have shown is they have no spine.
Once you admit there needs to be many more green mps in the house, in government, to push through green policy, then we can talk about where they come from.
Over to you.
I'm not bashing the Greens for not having the numbers. I'm bashing them for not using their nous and showing us what work they are actually doing to help achieve more.
Your bashing them for not getting radical green policy through the house which is because, again, they don't have the numbers to do so.
Do you accept the greens need more mps, and actually in government to enact their preferred legislation?
I admit if the Greens had the numbers to win an election that (more green policy) would be what one would expect. However, that is highly unlikely on their current and past polling. Moreover, very unlikely on their current performance in this term.
That's a start, which kind of puts your unreal expectations of what a minor party can achieve, in some sort of context.
Now lets expand a little and say nz1st weren’t in the picture. You’d expect the greens to get a little more through, right?
No. And now I'm going to call you on your bullshit. Prove it. Where have I bashed them for not not getting radical green policy through the house?
Taking their policy is in general 'radical' for NZ, you've consistently bashed them for watering down or not getting what they sought. No cites needed, it's archived. Even in these exchanges you've bemoaned them for not achieving and doing enough to get elected in greater numbers.
You’re fifth column.
That's incorrect. You've been called out. Therefore, cites are indeed needed.
Furthermore, you initially stated radical Green policy now you are shifting the goal posts by claiming that all their policy is radical. In which case you should have initially stated all Green policy. Therefore, best you stick to cites that reflect your initial assertion which is radical Green policy and not all Green policy which you are now attempting to reach for.
Additionally, me bemoaning them for not doing enough to get elected in greater numbers also doesn't prove your initial assertion.
Nope, no cites needed, as all your anti green comments are archived, as will your efforts from today will be.
If there's a mod call to find posts where you have criticised the greens for not getting that policy through unfettered, then sure I'll list some, but prepared as I am, as they are numerous and no doubt fresh in the minds of most green voters here to gain consensus for my statement, I'm sure that call won't come.
Not from me, it won’t.
Onya
It wasn't that Labour could not work with a stronger Green Party, they had an MOU and lots of policy in common, it was more that Winston wouldn't have been able to deal with the Greens being a bigger partner.
You are as transparent as a transparent thing. A really crap troll.
Labour weren't even prepared to find that out. Therefore, their unwillingness to even have a crack at strongly it suggests it was Labour putting the kibosh on it (working with a stronger Greens).
On those numbers you gave above 24% and 15%, of course there was no way to form a government. How on 39% do you propose they had a chance?
But guaranteed, if that were even remotely possible, with that ratio, you'd have many green ministers and much more real green policy getting legislated. Fact. And you’d still moan about it.
But of course you know under MMP there was a potential to if they were willing to talk to NZF, which Labour wasn't prepared to do.
In fact, Little wasn't even prepared to give a number/percentage on where they would actually consider it (forming a Government).
At the time, even with nz1st, it wasn't doable on the numbers, and then if it were, what Solkta wrote above.
Yes, it was. Even Guyon was taken back at Little's/Labour's poisition.
As I said to solkta, Labour weren't even prepared to find that out.
And it was this unwillingness to even have a crack at it that strongly suggests it was Labour putting the kibosh on it (working with a stronger Greens).
It's speculative at best to assume winston would have gone with labour and the greens at that level of support for the green party and accepting a minor position as last cab off the rank, and in playing for more votes, to rule out dealing with nz1st, I can see why Little could have backtracked, but solkta's scenario seems far more plausible.
Your interpretation seems way off by comparison.
Yes, which is why I said potentially could form a Government.
Nevertheless, you clearly or is that purposely missed the point?
Being, Labour ruled it out from the get go. Therefore, it was never going to get to the negotiation stage.
Which is the point. Labour shut this potential down before even giving it a chance.
You can't blame that on Winston.
I don't blame anyone for hypothetical postulations, just question the motive of those raising them.
I question the notion the Greens are going to get more support on the grounds of their current performance.
And they are quickly running out of time to up their game.
I did vote for them. Which helped them into power only for us to find out how useless they really are.
Therefore, if they continue to remain useless they can't really expect more people to vote for them.
So you clearly don't know how mmp works in government, and choose to blame the small number of green mps, not even part of the formal coalition, for having to compromise and not being able to effect radical change they want to.
No. That is a strawman. My position is stated above.
But your position is crap and based on a total bollocks understanding of how much a very small number of green mps can achieve under a confidence and supply arrangement.
My position is based on their dreadful performance to date. And is shared by many. Even within the Greens, they know they have been lacking the fight, made many mistakes, and have swallowed too many dead rats.
You trying to blame this on my misunderstanding is a joke.
See that's where you fall down. You don't accept that in this government they are bit players having to compromise to get anything, and the only way to change that is to have more green mps and get them in a proper coalition.
And I don’t think your misunderstanding is a joke, I think it’s quite deliberate.
Not at all. Those failures mentioned are admitted by the Greens themselves.
Without addressing their weaknesses, achieving more MPs is very unlikely. And merely securing more without addressing their weaknesses is unlikely to improve their performance.
What seems to be deliberate is your failure to see and understand this.
The weakness is they don't have the numbers to roll out their ideas without compromise 🙄
No genuine green voter is going to turn on the party because they aren't pumping out their policies ten to the dozen. They know, just like I do, that you can only do what you can with what you have.
Most greens will be encouraged to push harder in the run up to 2020 and work for the party and it’s ideals, not sit on the sidelines and cry crocodile tear laments.
I'm not denying I go the Greens. Almost everyone knows that. But I have a go at them on valid grounds. Which is why most rebuttals end up being directed at me and not the valid points I've raised.
Yes, most understand that. However, that's not the weaknesses I just alluded to above, which the Greens themselves largely admit. And it is these weaknesses that they require to correct to better perform, which will help grow their support and performance going forward.
You can't expect them to substantially grow their vote on their current performance – and their polling largely reflects that.
I don't expect them to be pumping out policies ten to the dozen, that's just you trying to suggest I'm some kind of extremist expecting them to perform beyond reality.
The reality is, they've made a number of costly mistakes, they lack backbone, and failed to gain fair compensation for the dead rats swallowed. Furthermore, they talk a lot about pushing hard for certain issues but show little if anything on the work being done in regards to those issues and the progress being made or setbacks faced.
Go on then, what are their self confessed weaknesses they need to correct to better perform and grow their support going forward?
@The Chairman …
26 May 2019 at 3:
speaking if bile – you seem to be full of it of late.
Perhaps you you should try fucking off yourself and come back when you are a little more cherry.
[Hi James, why don’t you try your own recipe? – Incognito]
See my Moderation note @ 12:57 PM.
Would that be the cherry on top of the icing on the cake?
I don't like cherries or icing, just for the record.
Noted.
Seen and noted. Thanks.
noted (and taken on board) – but please note that this is in reply to A poster who seems to have lernt a new term “fuck off” and is quite happy to tell people to do so should they dare to say something he/she didn’t like.
I know, James, I’m reading the same comments as you are. Inflaming is not helpful, and you know this full well, so I shouldn’t have had to warn you.
Putting words in my mouth again Solkta?
I never said that James Shaw was corrupt. I said, (and I quote), "the Zero Carbon Act is a corrupt attempt to put off doing anything about climate change in the here and now."
Possibly a bad choice of word, I could have said is a 'corrupted attempt'. It is corrupted by the very nature of the process.
James Shaw is trying to solve a political problem, by bureaucratic means. A political problem cannot be solved with bureaucratic means. This just cannot work.
The problem; National Party’s intransigence over climate change. This political problem cannot be solved by pandering to National. In my opinion National's intransigence over climate change must be confronted openly and publicly denounced and demolished, it’s called politics.
History shows that a leader convinced of the rightness of their cause and with the confidence to get up and openly and courageously fight for it, can win over a majority from a minority position.
It's called leadership.
And it does not depend on the size of your majority (or lack of) in the house.
In prewar England the wealthy class and their political representatives, the Conservative Party were riddled with fascist appeasers and fifth columnists and even open fascist sympathisers. Churchill who had been elected into the house as a sole 'independent' MP for his Constitutionalist Party, (You couldn't get a more minority position), did not try to make peace with these appeasers, from his seat in the back benches, he denounced them at every opportunity.
The rest is history.
Another example is over the debate over nuclear ship visits. The Labour Party from the opposition benches through the strength of their argument was able to win over the majority of parliament to support a minority private members bill to ban nuclear ships. Which two National MPs crossed the floor to support.
Again, the rest is history.
This is how political differences are fought out.
In my opinion, in trying to seek common ground with the National Party, James Shaw has not just given up on politics, he has given up on leadership.
I watched the introduction of the Zero Carbon bill on Tuesday and observed the Children's strike later that same week.
The kids have got it right – this catastrophe is beyond tinkering.
But I've commented more fully on 'How to get there.'
Problem is your “How you get there antidote” is about as deep as a puddle on practicality and as a workable solution Are you a secondary school student
Bewildered doesn't attempt a practical answer to anything because '"Everything may be done, but nothing should be done for the first time'. Yes Minister. e&oe
Randomised controlled trials – comparing one action to a different action – are the obvious and proven way to work out how to do things better. Yet somehow, when it comes to some fields, large numbers apparently believe it's immoral to conduct RCTs. WTF?
https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/5/25/18637156/randomized-trials-immoral-study
This makes me curious enough to want to do a small study on how The Standard community interprets data from studies.
Imagine tribbles escape from the South England Spaceport, and their expanding population is nearing womble habitats. The Society for Womble Protection are concerned that wombles sharing their habitat with tribbles will adversely affect them, so they run a trial putting wombles and tribbles together sharing the same spaces.
Wombles are well studied, there are 80 independent tests, measurements etc that are done to measure womble well-being. As is common, p<0.05 is adopted as the significance level for reporting a result suggesting adverse effects (less than 1/20 probability of the observed result happening by chance).
The SWP study checked all 80 markers, and reported they observed the test wombles had more nugs on their nagunoids than normal, and elevated miasmia levels.
These results were of concern to three other groups, who then repeated the study as closely as possible. None observed increased numbers of nugs or increased miasmia, but one group found depressed motivon levels, the second group observed increased hyperchitinism, the third group observed increased thyromia activity and decreased collaberism.
So all up, four groups each studied studied the 80 possible indicators of decreased womble well-being, and there were 6 results suggesting adverse effects outside the normal range.
I'm curious what first impressions The Standard participants get from these results, and what next steps readers think should be taken. Such as, OMG, six demonstrated risks, tribbles must be immediately contained then eradicated to protect wombles. Or, meh, the data looks all good for the wombles to me. Or, the four studies show conflicting results, we need to do more studies. Or, whatever else you come up with.
My first instinctive reaction is that our old friend Bayes is lurking within this data somewhere, but I lacked a justifiable prior to make a case.
Assuming that each of the four studies reported their adverse findings at a p<0.05 level, then the next obvious question is why did all four find significant adverse outcomes, but all found different ones? Clearly like many sociological results we're suffering from a bad lack of replicability here.
On this basis I would conclude that our four studies suggest there something going on, after all none of them found no adverse effect, so they don't support the null hypothesis (ie no adverse effect at all) … but neither do they prove one. We're really no better off than if the studies had not been done at all.
But because we have only one population of wombles, and apparently isolating one randomised, unbiased sample of them from trimbles is not possible … then the gold standard of RCT's looks impossible to implement.
I'm curious to know if there is a way around this problem.
I tried really hard to set it up so that if Bayes came sniffing around I could tell him to fuck right off, it's none of his business.
As far as the randomised controlled trials part of it goes, imagine it has been previously established that wombles suffer no ill-effects from being confined to enclosures by themselves. And that it has been previously established that there are some other critters that wombles can co-exist with in enclosures without suffering ill-effects, while there's some other critters that do cause ill-effects when enclosed with wombles.
I would be very suspicious of the findings that purport to show that wobbles,
"suffer no ill-effects from being confined to enclosures by themselves."
For which of God's creatures is that true?
Models for considering should have real "players" as their subjects or you'll end up with findings that don't mirror reality.
I'm getting the impression your base position is that natural systems are so complex that trials inherently oversimplify things and can therefore never produce reliable data. Is that close to being a fair interpretation of your view?
In the case of mammals the size of wobbles, yes. If your scenario revolved around say, bacteria, then there's more chance of a valid result. Wombles are sentient beings, so they may conspire to mislead you; have you taken that into account
Thanks, that covers the question I had in mind at the start of this thread.
But given your position as a councillor that may be called on to make some kind of call on whether to accept or reject something new and how to regulate it, I'm still curious about how you view the numbers. Imagine it was something simple and controlled enough you were comfortable that controlled trials produced useful valid results.
Say, allowing autonomous delivery vehicles to replace posties and couriers.
So of 80 factors examining previous areas where autonomous deliveries were allowed, the first study found increased unemployment, and more cats getting scared away from their homes (p<0.05). The subsequent three studies did not find increased unemployment or more cats going missing. One study found more complaints of residents' driveways getting blocked by the new autonomous vehicles than used to be blocked by human drivers, one study found more problems with junk mail littering the streets, one study found more complaints of misdelivered mail and more complaints of bored dogs barking because posties didn't stop and play with them anymore (ok, I'm reaching).
Do you think these four studies show allowing autonomous delivery vehicles will cause increased problems? What next steps would you want to take?
Really, really sorry for butting in but no way do we want to take humans totally out of the loop. Eisenhower when he coined the term Militray Industrial Complex was warning of the profit motive of war.
Ron Mark Minster of Defence dosnt want full autonomous war fighting. Could you imagine a war fought with all drones. War between drones dosnt have to stop.
So these guys pushing drone technology are flooding the private sector and making up the worlds boardrooms and it's them pushing full autonomous networks for profit and well, we have to be conscious of the military applications at the same time.
At the same time Weaponising drones isn't something that's in New Zealand's control. We've got China and America vying for technological supremacy and apart of that will eventually spill over into robot wars. So there's this double wade sword again of progress and innovation or not being able to keep pace with innovation.
Perhaps we we should be asking whether or not an autonomous network should be privately owned or publicly owned.
Actually the question is…
Will autonomous networks be controllable by human beings…
And the answer is already out there.
No. They won't be. That point, has been passed.
It's not just ownership that would be an issue. Companies have personhood. So these robots wouldn't just have the same rights as humans they would have extra rights, for one they don't pay taxes. We can't eat robots so can't hunt them. They will be competing for the same resources and jobs as humans but we won't be able to attack them like an animal because they will have the same rights as a company would have. So no, I don't think auto networks should be privately owned. Whether or not it is a mature technology does not preclude a future government from regulating the industry. Laws lag notoriously far behind tech innovations anyway.
personhood.
Yes quite. And that is also relevant to the discussion…
Robots however are only one component of a discussion around automation
Private automation co-exists with public automation…
Public or private as a legal construct won't alter that human beings are not in control of present day automation…
And therefore…can't be in control of future automation…
I get you were referencing <em>warfare…</em>
I'm referencing the entirity of automation…which includes human beings as a component of the processes…processes which are rendering our speicies…irrelevant.
Yeah, we killed God when she gave birth to us and AI will kill us when we birth AI. My only hope is transcendencing by uploading my consciousness into a computer. It's the closest humans can possibly get to God like, all knowing and that.
We are just entering the 4th industrial revolution of AI. We don't even know what technologies are installed for humanity but if competition for resources can be controlled by making technology so cheap, technology doesn’t have to be free, just so cheap every one can participate.
And the answer is already out there.
It is? I haven't heard of an autonomous network that actually exists. Which one are you referring to, and what's the basis for your belief that it's no longer controllable by humans?
…AI will kill us when we birth AI. My only hope is transcendencing by uploading my consciousness into a computer.
If the computers intend your death, it hardly seems likely they'd volunteer to host your consciousness.
Well I understood what onesies said. To mean a technological paradigm shift. Arguably paradigm shifts are out of the control of humans.
While this may be the inevitable long-term future of society, I see this as nothing but an extremely bad idea.
Then again, I have objections to anything even remotely like Pornhub meets Startrek holodedks the PG version (to hell with centralization), so I'm unfairly biased.
When considering the scientific approach to everything and putting rationality and practicality (apparent) as first and foremost in decision making, I recall the opinion of Aldous Huxley expressed to George Orwell on his book '1984', that the demand for efficiency will ruin our civilisation.
http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/03/1984-v-brave-new-world.html
Aldous Huxley –
…May I speak instead of the thing with which the book deals — the ultimate revolution? The first hints of a philosophy of the ultimate revolution — the revolution which lies beyond politics and economics, and which aims at total subversion of the individual's psychology and physiology…
My own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power…can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience. In other words, I feel that the nightmare of Nineteen Eighty-Four is destined to modulate into the nightmare of a world having more resemblance to that which I imagined in Brave New World.
The change will be brought about as a result of a felt need for increased efficiency.
So while Random Controlled Trials and other scientific methods are useful in making decisions, the question remains as to which decisions, and who or what do they serve? Is it 'good and cost-efficient government, respectful of the wellbeing of all people and thinking of all sentient and other living things of the earth – now realised as so important ie fungi in the soil? Or is it serving some obsessive need of a group who have divorced themselves from everyday simple living which is all that is needed by human society?
"Do you think these four studies show allowing autonomous delivery vehicles will cause increased problems? "
Each of them shows an increased problem. None were supported by any other study. Overall, no valid statement about increased problems can be made based on those studies, imo.
What next steps would you want to take?"
Introduce the vehicles. Field complaints, compiling data until causation is established, adjust their use until a happy medium, agreed to by most, is reached. It's rough, but hey, why not take a punt
Actually, I'd want to debate the issue with my fellow councillors, hear from our expert staff , hear from the promoters/designers of the technology, invite comment from other councils using the vehicles, then petition the public for their views.
How's that?
Thanks. FWIW, it's at the better end of what I might hope for from an elected official.
I'm curious, is that response informed by any further education in formal statistics beyond what you had to do in high school, or is it the outcome of a lifetime of trying different things to see what happens?
Well, as a councillor, I follow process when it comes to such decisions but as well I try to influence what gets considered in less formal forums involving councillors and staff.
Is this what they call empirical study, trying and seeing?
Dougal and Father Ted calmly cope with some aggrieved bomb planting.
Sorry about the distance of my response from your question.
My first thought when faced with ambiguous data is to ask if Mr Bayes is at work here, but I'll take it as read that this isn't the case here.
The core problem is the lack of replicability. All four studies found statistically significant adverse effects but not the same ones. Not even an overlap.
The next place to look is given there are 80 possible adverse effects we could find, and our definition of 'statistical significant' is a 1/20 probability on each one … what is the probability that we will find at least some adverse effects just by random chance?
At the risk of embarrassing my rusty stats, my first wild arse guess that it could be 20/80 or 1 in 4. Or another way of putting it, any given study will find on average 4 different adverse effects purely by chance.
Ok, since we're both engineers and our reasoning heads down similar paths, can I ask you to pause it here for a while to see what other people's reactions are, untainted by what we've got to say?
"so they run a trial putting wombles and tribbles together sharing the same spaces."
I need to know more about these trials; how closely do the conditions reflect the real-world situation; laboratory conditions need to be very carefully set and results looked at cautiously. Wombles in particular act quite differently when removed from the commons.
See my response to RL at 2.1.1. In short, imagine it has already been established that results from putting wombles in enclosures produces valid results.
My initial reaction would be that, if different people are repeating the same study as closely as possible and each getting a different result, the study isn't telling us anything useful. The method would need some pretty serious review at that point.
I reckon the wombles are pulling Andre's chain
Well, where I'm going with this is trying to show that a claimed statistically significant result is actually much less reliable than you might think from the claimed p value. For this example, I'm trying to show that six reported statistically significant results doesn't show there's likely problems, and in fact is more likely to show the opposite on further analysis.
After all, even if the researchers act with perfect integrity using sound methods, publish all their results including all the negative and neutral results, if what's considered statistically significant is p<0.05, then 1 in 20 of all results are just plain wrong.
But when you add in publication bias (negative and neutral results are boring so nobody tries to publish them), and the way it's so very tempting to indulge in data-dredging and p-hacking when you've got a massive pile of data, it's no wonder there's a replication crisis.
Noting your question of Robert Guyton above, "is that response informed by any further education in formal statistics beyond what you had to do in high school," I can boast a C+ achieved in a remedial intro stats course aimed at first-year students who were going to need to understand stats but hadn't done well at it in school (at which point I decided the arts and humanities were going to be a more appropriate arena for my clearly limited talents). So yes, definitely not qualified to be making confident assertions about anything involving statistics.
That said, the ordinary old arts and humanities have given me enough of an education to figure out that it's completely dishonest to comb academic journals for that one line or bad result that supports your irrational beliefs and trumpet the cherry-picked fruits of your search as compelling evidence that irrationalism rules – which I think is where you were also going with this.
That question wasn't intended as an assertion of superiority accruing to those with paper quals; a bullshit detector developed from a lifetime of observation is often more useful in arriving at a sensible position when faced with unclear or even contradictory data. Then there's the problem of paper quals getting pressed into the service of baffling with bullshit, rather than trying to aid understanding.
Looking at the responses, common themes are questioning the methodology of the studies, and raising potential external factors not considered by the studies. Here I'm trying to raise awareness that a lot of what are presented as meaningful results are in fact just cherry-picked instances of random noise that are going to happen even in well-designed honestly conducted studies.
I knew it!
That question wasn't intended as an assertion of superiority accruing to those with paper quals…
I certainly didn't take it that way, just as an opportunity to make clear that any comments I make on social science studies are definitely not based on my expertise in the field of statistics.
These days I kind of wish I'd paid more attention back then because it would come in handy very often, given all the news stories about "new study shows X" that make my bullshit detector clang away but I don't have enough knowledge to go look at the actual study to see where the grift is.
My first impression was why did you link to the pop vox article and not the original one?
Original article: "morally problematic"
Vox: "We even use A/B tests here at Vox. If I have two headlines I really love for a story, I can arrange for different viewers to see different ones — and then I can settle on the one that’s engaging more readers."
Ta daaaa!
Vox headline: "A shocking share of the public thinks randomized trials are immoral"
As for the scenario you present, and being rubbish at stats, my first impression is that we may need to go back to basics and do some RCTs on Womble well-being measurements if four different groups can get very different results. An RCT based on suspect methodology is going to be suspect.
Sorry I'm a bit slow addressing why I linked the Vox piece rather than the original study. The original study report is a bit dry and tl;dr-ish; the Vox piece is quite a lot more readable and links to the original report for anyone that wants. The Vox piece also usefully points to further implications and questions to ponder.
There are two important things straight off
1) What were the size of the RCT? Which gives the related question – what were the power of the hypothesis tests?
2) There needs to be context here. What is the value of the wombles and tribbles? Are wombles native so deserving greater protection? What are the possible unintended consequences? Is the eco-balance between wombles and shelats destroyed as the sehlat population explodes because of the extra tribble food?
Just to add extra factors. What about a different type of thinking? Are the automated vehicles needed? Are they better from APOV than at present? Is capital expenditure on them justified whether public or private – being that they will likely have to be imported?
Is it justified for us to have a permissive society of the type that says that society has to definitely opt out if business or whoever,can just opt in? Will Uber try and take over this initiative and muck it up for any former investors, start-ups?
Say compare the rules of the sex- controlled society to the society that is entirely permissive of new innovations of machines and technology? Would it be better to swap so that we are controlling of this new innovative acceptance of machines, and more permissive of sexuality? I think of the raunchy, rude meaning behind the Beatles song "Why don't we do it in the road"? Sex in the road is regarded as bad because society says so, and it is impractical anyway. But new technology on the road is accepted whether it has entirely practical uses without question, and of course it is now being forced on us on the footpath.
These perspectives would never be considered by engineers. And it indicates how slow we are to understand the great changes being forced on us. These will affect our human lives to becoming subservient to the machines that business corporates, a machine-like management system itself, forces on us. And that we people embrace, because – new, because it is 'better', because they are ubiquitous – better lie down and let machines and machine-thinking roll over you.
Douglas Adams looked at that inevitably approach – the taking of personal assets and commons by authority – when he had Arthur Dent lie in front of roadmaking machines that were going to bulldoze his house so a Council-endorsed road go pass over the land. And slyly, he introduced the method of substitution that is at the base of using derivatives in financial transactions. But that is another matter.
(Share and enjoy says the automated teamaker.(
Thank you to everybody that engaged with the actual topic. But I gotta say I'm disappointed that there are some commenters active today that are in the habit of opining definitively and loudly on topics where an understanding of data and statistics is crucial, who have chosen not to engage.
Personally when I need to understand data sets, one of the first things I look for is the underlying natural background incidence of what I'm interested in. Together with some kind of expectation (cue Tommy Bayes asking why I told him to fuck off) of how genuinely significant results might be distinguished from random noise.
In the specific case of examining 80 independent distributions of samples for comparison to controls or a baseline at p<0.05 considered significant, I would actually expect an average of 4 "false positive" results, or 16 "false positives" on average from running 4 lots of 80. The fact that none of the positives from any one of the trials were repeated in any of other trials suggests they are all false positives.
That there were far fewer "positive" results than would be expected from purely random statistical considerations immediately raises the question of whether there is an effect going in the opposite direction to what was originally expected. Might the data actually show that cohabiting with tribbles actually improves wombles' well-being? That would be an immediate quick bit of number-crunching to run, and on the numbers I've used for this made-up scenario, I'd strongly expect that answer to be yes, it certainly appears cohabiting with tribbles is in fact beneficial to wombles.
Then there's the question of doing some kind of meta-analysis, where you combine the results from different studies to try to firm up any conclusions. In this fictional scenario it should be easy, there were four trials, three of them attempting to replicate the first as closely as possible. With any luck, the trial conditions would turn out to be close enough that the data from the different trials could just be combined together to just make a much larger sample size. If that's not feasible, there's all kinds of statistical tests (a lot of them Bayesian) comparing the results of the different trials against each other.
Sorry, Andre, I got a little side-tracked elsewhere …
A very interesting topic. At no stage did you mention effect-size!?
As you are aware, P<0.05 has become somewhat of a curse, especially in biomedical science. For one, it says absolutely nothing about clinical relevance.
TBH, I kinda figured you and some others likely to have significant statistics knowledge saw where I was likely trying to go with this and deliberately stayed out to let it run its course.
The only tweak on that would be if there were some underlying common cause in several of those observations – e.g. motivon, miasma, and nug incidence were all part of the womble's precosian system and might point to a assininus deficiency. Then it might be worth a closer look.
But the main priority would be to 1080 the heck out of southern England to stop the invasive species outbreak.
I did say "well-studied" and "independent".
You ever seen tribbles get given 1080? Hoo boy …
So difficult to kill. That's the trouble with those fluffy little buggers.
That's …
The Trouble with Tribbles
So many Trials and Tribble-ations.
Nope trouble with Lichen (John Wyndham)
“This is not the age of reason, this is the age of flummery, and the day of the devious approach. Reason’s gone into the backrooms where it works to devise means by which people can be induced to emote in the desired direction.”
exhibit one.
http://www.math.mcgill.ca/rags/seminar/poli.txt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreasonable_ineffectiveness_of_mathematics
I think this is the citation you're looking for:
In the meantime I've had some fun digging around for the correct answer myself.
Thanks for the thought provoking post.
Phew, I wouldn't want to be boring.
I get nervous about ideas like "the correct answer" when looking for statistical signals in noisy data. To me there's only stronger and weaker suggestions and probabilities and interpretations. All to be monitored on an ongoing basis and subject to revision on receipt of new data.
The US military has opened a twitter post to let sevicepeople express their positive service experience. Only most talk of depression, lost limbs and other serious health issues and los and lots of suicide. The overwhelming trend is heartbreaking loss and anger and violence…
View at Medium.com
We in New Zealand are shamefully slow in electrifying transport. We could and should be matching China's example, where many cities have a 100% electric urban bus fleet. Rubbish trucks, concrete trucks, delivery vans, basically anything with a stop-start urban work cycle is an absolute natural for electrification.
https://thinkprogress.org/electric-buses-outsell-diesel-china/
When it comes to smaller electric vehicles, China is yet again waaay ahead of the rest of the world. Last time I saw a breakdown of the global EV market, more than half the EVs sold worldwide were in China.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/02/china-is-winning-the-electric-vehicle-race/
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/02/24/china-electric-vehicle-sales-jump-175-up-to-4-8-of-auto-market-in-january/
Those LTO cells I've been using have worked incredibly well. We've yet to get anywhere near their limits.
Interestingly their primary market is in fact the electric buses mentioned in your first link.
I'd guess it's that tolerance of very high charging rates that make them attractive to bus applications.
Which kinda makes me curious how really high power charging stations and their power connections work together – whether they just have a super grunty network connection and rely on the grid to absorb the massive rapid fluctuations in demand or whether the charging stations themselves incorporate batteries and/or supercapacitors to smooth their demand.
Tesla new battery is really just another new design for a solid-state lithium battery that several different places have worked on. The solid state lithium battery is coming one way or another, at the moment we're just trying to figure out who has the best design for the industry to go with, and which one will be the easiest to transition to from lithium ion. Electric powertrain designs are coming to trucks and buses. Question is will people stop buying electric cars.
I've been contemplating reforming a touring company… Electric vehicles, in NZ at least, are a bit naff. Unless I have 100k for a Tesla I can't get anything with decent range, not even to cover only the top half of the North Island. The recharge times are prohibitive for taking others on the road too, the fast charge stations…? It seems the cars here can't charge so well as the charging stations aren't very good? There was nothing to suggest I'd get < several hours to wait to recharge and extend range past 200 miles.
All in all it was a discouraging experience trying to build a green touring model. Trains etc are hopeless I have sound gear to cart around.
Back in the day the government bought rolling stock for trains that could only go half as fast as the engines – making trucks look faster. Is the same trick of light being used on chargers to make EV's unattractive, or are they shit?
"I want to talk to you about Julian Assange….Judicial process though, yah?"
Evan Davis smoothly transforms from nice-but-dim to ideological assassin at the 20:44 mark….
Chomsky is very reliable; this was well worth the time to listen to it. Thanks for this.
Fascinating White Island is very active at present.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/390580/swarm-of-almost-200-earthquakes-on-white-island
A bad penny always turns up.
[…]
Nolan was arrested along with someone who was then reported as a minor. Court documents now reveal it was his then 17-year old wife, Kiyomi, who spent a lot of time in Discord. I wonder what her Discord name was.
[…]
HOLY SHIT.
The defense names BEN SHAPIRO as a motivation for Kiyomi's radical right wing views.
I'm losing track of how many violent white supremacists @benshapiro has helped radicalize.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1132210962889678848.html
Joe90. Were you aware before posting that tweet and its content that Ben Shapiro is a practising Jew?
And?
– Ben Shapiro
There needs to be some acknowledgment that Jew + right wing does not equal rascist attacks on Jews.
It's classic woke victimhood that illustrates why it's so dangerous unopposed.
Referring to the left-wing voting habits of "Bad Jews" is a-ok though?
Thats just a stupid way to communicate. You and Joe90 are debating in bad faith, half truths and fallacious arguments to prove that Jew+RWNJ=Auschwitz.
Its not just stupid calling normal people racist against there own people its villainous. All you are doing is claiming victim status so you can control people and I won't play that bullshit game. Villains use subterfuge and lie to control and I'm not trying to be like that.
Who called Shapiro racist? You sound awfully defensive. Also how am I claiming to be a victim? I’m merely pointing out the type of things Shapiro says. It is the racists that say they’re inspired by him. You’re misrepresenting what’s being said with half-truths and imaginary “fallacious arguments”.
You’re not trying to express yourself clearly either.
Are you functionally illiterate?
You are not only playing the victim, youre shit at communicating, you're blaming me for your stupid arguments and again, making out like I'm deficient.
So if you can please provide quotes that Shapiro is rascist against Jews.
Who claimed Shapiro is racist against Jews?
I don't have to "make out" your deficiencies.
Joe90 has left you idiots holding a shit sandwich and you can't tast it.
You can't point out where anyone (other than you) has said this thread is about Shapiro being racist against Jews.
I am convinced that you are a professional liar.
And I'm convinced your invective is almost entirely projection
Now see if you can follow the bouncy ball.
Joe90 produced this quote "The defense names BEN SHAPIRO as a motivation for Kiyomi's radical right wing views.
I'm losing track of how many violent white supremacists @benshapiro has helped radicalize."
To which I ask if Joe90 was aware Shapiro is Jewish. It's idiotic to imply that Shapiro is in anyway way involved in rascist attacks against Jews. And Joe90 just shat all over you and took off.
Arkie. I'm finding it difficult to believe that Sam is a sincere person. He expresses himself (herself/itself) in a manner that "sounds" more like an algorithm that a person's genuine views. The modus operandi Sam uses is to make a claim, then lace further replies with insults, cryptically delivered, in order to mask the insincerity of his position and making it impossible to hold him to account for his claims. It feels more like an experiment in creating a "debating programme" than a discussion with a flesh and bone human, in my opinion.
I also wondered whether TS is sometimes being used as a ‘field trial’ for AI-bots. Lynn may have some insights on this.
Who said (or implied) he was involved? You’re continuing to make shit up.
The wife of the perpetrator of the racist vandalism said they were radicalised by Shapiro.
You understand what radicalisation is, don’t you Sammy?
Muh broz. Y'all need saving from your fathers. Let me be your father. I'll take care of you. Just kiss the ring finger.
Sam said: "You and Joe90 are debating in bad faith".
Yesterday, he claimed he debates with people with the objective of showing that their argument is "low IQ" and "dog-shit".
Ya gotta wonder at that.
Appeals to the audience doesn't influence the strength of your argument or position. It just goes to show how insecure and weak your ideological reasoning is. We are discussing whether or not it's cool to claim Ben Shapiro is rascist against Jews, got anything to add?
Who claimed Ben Shapiro is racist against Jews Sammy?
Again. Are you functionally illiterate?
I must be. Point it out to me where it's been claimed Shapiro is racist against Jews.
2nd quote of the tweet.
So are you functionally illiterate? Because nowhere in the 2nd quote does it say Shapiro is racist against Jews. Your claims and reality are at odds.
.
So what? All you have proven is your abilities and skills of quoting me. Thx I guess my son.
I'm noting your hypocrisy, Sam. If your claims about engaging in debate are inconsistent, your other arguments might well be also.
It's likely that your debating skills consists of avoiding the original point being made and slandering when you realise you're in the wrong.
It's likely that my observations about your hypocrisy and inconsistency are accurate and you are employing your trademark caustic strategy in an attempt to dis-hearten your perceived adversary.
I reserve the right to disrespect anyone who can not have a simple conversation. As I keep saying my position is that Jew+RWNJ does not equal Aushwitz. What’s your position Rob?
You may be debating the issue, " that Jew+RWNJ does not equal Aushwitz." but I am not. As I clearly expressed, I'm making comment on your incongruous claims around debating, a discussion that began on another thread, yesterday. This is Open Mike, where a range of topics can be addressed. You have declined to address my claims while at the same times lacing your responses with a variety of put-downs. Regarding your claimed " right to disrespect anyone who can not have a simple conversation.", I presume you are referring to me, and if that's the case, cannot agree that I am unable "to have a simple conversation", in fact, I'm confident that having simple conversations is something I regularly and successfully do. Your "conversations" as evidenced here on TS, are so convoluted, infolded and obscure and caustic that it seems to me you should disrespect yourself, based on your performance so far. Kindly meant and simple expressed of course.
Yeah, I don't just reserve the right to call you a whingy little puss bag, I'll talk smack to any one who try's to act a fool. You, mods, anyone.
Once I feel that my arguments are as strong as and people begin to take the bitch route around instead of taking on my arguments directly I'll just let fire. Sorry not sorry.
Hi all, may I briefly butt in and ask to not resort to pointless personal attacks and insults?
Maybe it’s time to agree to disagree and walk away without the spray while you still can?
appeal to authority is a logical falsay as well eh, incognito.
If you can read, you can take heed.
So where is your argument addressing my claim re your hypocrisy, as described in my first comment
"Sam said: "You and Joe90 are debating in bad faith".
Yesterday, he claimed he debates with people with the objective of showing that their argument is "low IQ" and "dog-shit"."?
“I’m noting your hypocrisy, Sam. If your claims about engaging in debate are inconsistent, your other arguments might well be also. “
TBH Iv got very little idea what you're on about talking about something I said a couple days ago.
Besides that if I do argue the flaws of IQ it would be that IQ tests are frequently used to test army recruits to see if they can gain a few extra meters than Vietnam vets.
On the other hand if I was to argue for IQ testing then I'd argue that testing is best used for high achieving Uni students rather than soilders.
Still dosnt improve my impression of rob.
Unable to understand my simple conversation, Sam?
Let's see, there was a quote about that just recently…here it is:
Sam said:
26 May 2019 at 2:56 pm
"I reserve the right to disrespect anyone who can not have a simple conversation."
again, so what. All you've done is prove that you can quote me.
And that you're still to respond to my claim that your claim is hypocritical. So, worthwhile persisting, despite your determined avoidance strategy. At this point, I've lost interest and have more useful things to do, so, see you in the soup, or, in the likely case that Incognito sends you to Coventry, see ya, Sam.
Yeah. Now get lost.
So is Alan Dershowitz. So is Binyamin Netanyahu.
What is your point, exactly?
My point is you, Joe and arkie have a problem with Ben Shapiro because he is a conservative and you are biased against him and seek to unjustly smear him as a rascist.
And my problem is you make me and the rest of the left look like fucken chumps.
-Ben Shapiro
I reckon you do you stand up job of looking like a fucken chump without any assistance.
Are you senile? My position is Shapiro isn't rascist towards Jews so can't be held responsible for attacks against Jews. What is your position?
How convenient for Shapiro that you have absolved him of inspiring racists.
It is my position that a self-identifying racist vandal says they were radicalised by Shapiro. That's less of a position, more a response to your defense of Shapiro based on his religious identity.
Its not convenient at all. In fact it's inconvenient that I am forced to defend Shapiro from a bunch of morons masquerading as lefties trying to smear Shapiro.
Where's the smear Sammy? No-one has made any claims about Shapiro's racism except you. The smear is in your head.
Does make me wonder who really is the "moron masquerading as a leftie"
Yeah. You are acting like a fool that dosnt know you are in the wrong and I blame Joe99 for being low cunning
Yeah. I think you're a big-brain Alpha and a pretty cool guy. You can definitely read and doesn't afraid of anything.
Shapiro is one of the filthier critics of liberal Jews. How can you say he is not racist against Jews? You are ignorant.
I couldn't prove that Shapiro is rascist towards Jews because I believe that Shapiro is a practitioner of the faith. It's also covered in freedom of religion legislation so unless your can prove Shapiro has committed an act of violence or supported an act of violence then you're just a (insert what ever hurts your feelings the most here)
Back in 2007-08 I watched an episode of Law and Order (the courtroom drama) that had a man who murdered a black girl defending himself by saying that the rants of a right wing shock jock whipped him into such a frenzy that he ended up killing her.
Looks like life is imitating art.
So as to be clear joe, because you seem to get yourself confused…
Del Bigtree expressed open support for the persecution of jewish communities in NY…
You called Bigtree, scum.
Now, you are performing the exact same cut n paste routine, this time against Ben Shapiro…
Simultaneously for and against those who express support for the jews…
Which is it ?
Bigtree wore a universal symbol of oppression, hate, and suffering, in an effort to portray himself and his halfwitted followers as victims. Fucking scum.
I don't think you understood what was and still is going on , around that specific issue…do you?
You should be able to explain what you reckon was, and still is going on there…and therefore you understand why you are absolutely wrong to call Bigtree, scum
…but you don’t understand…do you?
Which says you are using the jewish faith to peddle your own ignorance… and I’ll request that you either stop propagating such ignorant and warped views…or at least spend some time learning what is actually going on…before you USE the jewish communities once again…
Because that is what you appear to be doing…using the jewish community …
Are you jewish or direct descendant ?
I'll get you started….fill in the blanks…
Orthodox jewish communities in NY were and are being discriminated against through use of [ ] and/or [ ] for adhering to their right to religion….
Bigtree was illustrating his distain for those who are repeating the past by persecuting those same orthodox jewish communities…
Over to you for your version of the events…
Do take your relentlessly determined dishonesty and shove it.
https://www.adl.org/blog/anti-vaccine-protesters-misappropriate-holocaust-era-symbol-to-promote-their-cause
From someone who is part of those communities…
You need to desist from using such material…because you are ignorantly propagating and endorsing further persecution in doing so…
You are so very wrong, and you are extremely misinformed…
That you then used the adl as some sort of protective cover for your repeated attacks on the jewish communities is perverse…
But you wouldn't understand why it is perverse…because you do not know what is actually going on there…
And you need to stop.
You've got yourself some of that special sauce discernment and insight, haven't you?
Nothing special about it, joe…
Leaving the inbuilt and ingrained prejudice aside, gives best opportunity to obtain objectivity…
Then it is simply a question of investing the necessary time to explore all available angles of a subject…not superficially…. as well as seek out the intersections where there is cross over into related topical pathways…
Your desire unfolds into dimensionless acceptance.
Assange Is Indicted for Exposing War Crimes While Trump Considers Pardons for War Criminals
https://www.democracynow.org/2019/5/24/assange_is_indicted_for_exposing_war
Democratic Candidates Speak Out Against Trump’s Moves in the Middle East
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/05/democratic-candidates-trump-iran-saudi-arabia/
Victor Meldrew knew how to handle Tory voters
"There was pain on both sides." Noelle McCarthy displays her ignorance of New Zealand history
RNZ National, Saturday 25 May 2019
Anybody who cares about the terrible state of our public broadcasting service will be able to point to one or more really sickening or substandard performances by the people entrusted—and paid good money—to ask intelligent questions on our behalf. I have over more than a decade recorded dozens of disastrous performances, but here are three of the worst interviews that have polluted our airwaves in this century: an under-prepared Kim Hill foolishly reading out Pentagon talking points to, of all people, John Pilger in 2003 [1]; Noelle McCarthy in 2013 allowing a right wing ideologue to excuse the use of torture by U.S. troops [2]; a baffled Jesse Mulligan opining learnedly in 2016 that Russia is "L-L-L-L-LOOKIN' for trouble" [3].
Yesterday morning, we were treated to—actually, inflicted with—not just one, but two really terrible interviews. Both of them were carried out by one Noelle McCarthy.
After the 9 o'clock news, McCarthy's guest was historian Vincent O'Malley. This was well worth listening to when he was speaking; unfortunately, however, McCarthy felt compelled to interpose her own complacent, prejudiced and slanted views. Her comments, as usual, were callow, ill thought out and deeply reactionary, the sort of thing you'd expect from some drooling old Pakeha farmer ranting in the lounge bar in a south Taranaki pub.
After the 11 o'clock news, she moved from complacent and ignorant to plain nasty. The topic, ominously for anyone who has heard her laughing about the plight of the Palestinians, was Gaza.
End of Part 1 (of 2)
[1] https://www.nzonscreen.com/title/face-to-face-with-kim-hill-john-pilger-2003
[2] https://morrisseybreen.blogspot.com/2018/01/noelle-mccarthys-patsy-interview-with.html
[3] https://morrisseybreen.blogspot.com/2018/01/more-evidence-of-jesse-mulligans.html
The good Noelle
She can be really intelligent, and compassionate, as she shows in this interview with a reprobate.
https://morrisseybreen.blogspot.com/2018/01/noelle-mccarthy-swallowed-vomit-for-15.html
Double comment? Takes up space so I might delete one.
Sorry about that, Incognito. I've already deleted the second one, and replaced it with something to show that I do appreciate Ms McCarthy when she is on form.
All good 😉
I wonder how many people bother to check the accuracy of the numbers they use in a debate before making claims that depend on the accuracy of their quotes?
There was a brief letter in the "To the point" section in yesterday's Dom/Post. I can't locate it on-line but it was on page C6 for anyone who wants to see it. It was from someone named Carole who was complaining that teachers were not happy with their pay claim and then she made a claim that is simply in the realm of fantasy. The sentence read "What is even surer is that with the Prime Minister's salary more than tripling in the past few years, the Government will never be disappointed". I take this to be a claim that the Government has paid much larger pay increases to itself than they have offered the teachers.
It seemed rather unlikely to me so I looked at the numbers. Exactly what she means by a "few" is not stated but I will allow it to be 9 years. It can't really be more than that can it?
On today's date in 2010 the PM was paid $393,000. Today the PM is paid $471,049.
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2009/0340/latest/DLM2508203.html#DLM2508203
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2019/04/where-jacinda-ardern-ranks-among-highest-paid-world-leaders.html
And Carole seems to think that this increase, which is in fact 19.86% over what I would regard is somewhat more than a "few" years, is a 300% rise? How can she possibly come to that conclusion? It might be a very large pay packet but it hardly means that MPs cash in while Teachers miss out. does it?
Housing problems in an unfair and shrinking world.
Pakistani slums – https://borgenproject.org/tag/slums/page/2/
Milkshake truthiness, false flags, and dodgy AF go fund me appeals for milkshake victims. More fuckwittery to come, I'm sure.
https://www.truthorfiction.com/was-a-milkshake-thrown-at-an-elderly-brexit-party-volunteer/
I can see that Sam is being allowed to run free. If the dog is not going to be put on a leash, and be sent to puppy school and so absent for a while, then I Postman Pat will not be delivering any more missives. I apparently am not appreciated so will attend to important personal requirements.
bugger.
"will attend to important personal requirements."
It is the little room down at the end of the corridor. And remember, when you finish, Put the Bloody Toilet Seat Down".
Grey, this is terrible news. We want you and need you here.
For you. Greywarshark
Of course they're going to war. The armageddon-obsessed theocrats are determined to fulfill their end times fantasy.
West Point, N.Y. — Vice President Mike Pence told the most diverse graduating class in the history of the U.S. Military Academy on Saturday that the world is "a dangerous place" and they should expect to see combat. "Some of you will join the fight against radical Islamic terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq," he said.
Pence congratulated the West Point graduates on behalf of President Trump, and told them, "As you accept the mantle of leadership I promise you, your commander in chief will always have your back. Mr. Trump is the best friend the men and women of our armed forces will ever have."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/mike-pence-west-point-graduation-vice-president-says-they-should-expect-to-see-combat-today-2019-05-25/
The week prior the French assembled for the two soldiers killed in Burksina Faso.
Very moving ceremony with the historical music Marche des soldats de Robert Bruce (which was played by Joan of Arcs scottish soldiers on entering Orleans)
Rape promoting PUA boards the tax exempt flock fleecing Yeshua train.
However, even that branch of the PUA tree is wilting away. Many "self-help" style PUA forums like Nextasf and RSDnation are shutting down or have already shut down. In March, Chateau Heartiste, a batshit crazy PUA turned White Nationalist/Alt-Right blog was shut down by WordPress. This week, rape advocate Roosh V (whom you may recall once called yours truly a "Wonkette typist/clown face, would not bang") announced that he was renouncing his PUA ways and devoting himself to Jesus. He explained to the forum he manages that he would no longer be allowing anyone to discuss premarital "fornication."
https://www.wonkette.com/the-week-in-garbage-men-no-country-for-old-pick-up-artists
Forty years ago.
Thanks for that Joe.
Stands the test of time and still scares the shit out of me today. All time great.
If this scheme is half of what it is cracked up to be then well done this government.
This might even count as Good News.
Bugger me.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/390605/150m-package-to-help-youth-transition-from-state-care
Young people transitioning from state care to independence will no longer be cut off from Government support when they turn 18.
"Teenagers leaving care should have the right to expect what any young person would want – knowing there is someone to turn to if they need help; a warm bed to sleep in; some help and encouragement when it is needed.
"This service will provide that, both by allowing young people to stay longer with their caregivers and providing specialised transitions support workers whose job is to help this group."
Oranga Tamariki has been tasked with building the service, which will employ 175 new specialist staff employed and make 60 supported accommodation facilities available by year four.
Trawling my way down here to the bottom of your comment section for 26 I find you footnoters/ idea investigators but nowt as sharp as an arrow point. I recognise youse but when I call I'm not in the mood for milling about. More my fault.