Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
6:00 am, June 26th, 2023 - 90 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
The gift that just keeps giving . . . and giving . . .
https://twitter.com/rugbyintel/status/1672827149664018432
and giving . . .
https://twitter.com/farmgeek/status/1672869051490799616
Imagine – for example – James Shaw saying this about a Green climate change policy. Response: Wacky Greens, economically illiterate!
"Speaking to reporters, Luxon said they did not know how much the policies would cost nor how many more people could be imprisoned due to changes in sentencing, but accepted they would likely lead to an increase in the prison population in the "short term"."
https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/labour-slams-national%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%98crime-wave%E2%80%99-claims-and-prison-plans
Oh, it gets worse. This is not satire, this is a real quote …
"National corrections spokesperson Mark Mitchell said his party would be able to answer those questions if it got into government come October."
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/492584/national-promises-limits-on-judge-discretion-in-sentencing
This is just insane! How are the media not eating this alive.
First- laziness.
Second- not anticipating being in government.
Thirdly- on the morality of an uncosted, unchecked policy that deals with denying people their freedoms.
fourthly- on being the main opposition party and dodging questions by saying we’ll explain later.
fifthly- the 3 strikes law was often pushed in cases by corrupt lawmakers and judges at the behest of the private prison industry in the USA. Do they support private prisons?
Would be laughable if the numbnut wasnt serious. It still is ludicrous..but we must make sure that never happens.
NAct…the real danger for NZ.
Mark Mitchell: "C'mon kids we're going to the beach."
"Can we have an ice cream when we get there."
"Yes, you can have the biggest, bestest ice cream ever. You'll love it."
'Promise?"
"Well, I'll see how much it costs when we get there."
"Are we there yet?"
"Soon…"
Ha.
Well…the idiots were on stage front and centre…At their big Nat conference, In front of NZ, Media et al; and still tripped over their faux jack boots.
Morons.
CLuxon and his ilk don't believe they have to be accountable to others. How dare people question them about their sound bites.
Thank you Tony…Brilliant clips….must be spread far and wide in social media.
The Nats in chaos for their main conference policy announcement.
Luxon had absolutely no idea how much it costs to keep a prisoner in jail and Goldsmith's guess was hopelessly wrong ($100k he said versus $193k actual)
Just so. Let the Nats trip themselves…. down the stairs. Fark !
Those two clips should be included in a labour party election ad….
The group incompetence on display is eye-watering…
That group incompetence is further underlined by the fact that this is their keynote policy…from their annual convention…
And they all just phoned it in…
And their justice spokesperson.. Goldsmith…dosn't even know how much it costs to house a prisoner for a year..( he said a hundred grand..it is actually $193 thousand…so not out by that much..his guess…)
And mark 'the mercenary' mitchell just mumbles some utter drivel ..
Did they make this policy up..last nite…while pissed…?
Russian conformity was on display this weekend:
That's the account given by Prigozhin, the Wagner leader. So the Russian army the rebels encountered had already adopted a total consensus position: they would refuse to fire at the rebels. They all conformed to that stance.
They took another city likewise later, further up the Moscow highway. Such a peaceful response to a rebel invasion seems rather significant. Indeed, live tv coverage screened here showed crowds of locals cheering them. Bet their state television didn't show that!
So how did everyone know what was happening? Perhaps word of mouth via social media enabled it. Normalcy there must now be quite fluid. Wagner's involvement in the Ukraine war will now depend on the collaboration between Prigozhin & Lukashenko – and then include Putin to be effective as regional strategy. That'll take time.
Prigozhin is likely to focus on establishing a new base in exile first. Lukashenko will have to provide land and infrastructure for that. Prigozhin will wait for Putin to shuffle his high command – since he's still gunning for whoever took out 2000 of his fighters with a missile attack. If Putin directed that, he will have to fake accountability by using a scapegoat, which is the traditional method for solving such problems.
So long as Prigozhin avoids cups of tea and windows above the ground floor!
Frankly, he's a dead man walking!
Depends on his relationship with Putin. They've worked together for a very long time. If Putin sees him as an old friend gone rogue, you're quite right. If Putin didn't order the attack on Wagner, and either or both Gerasimov & Shoigu did, Putin will be more likely to see the guilty party as having gone rogue.
In which case he'd understand why the rebel yelled so loud – and why Putin cancelled his instructions for punishment. I reckon Putin needs the Wagner commander.
Poots ain't done with Prighozen.
Tonight on Vladimir Solovyov’s show, Russian MP Andrei Gurulyov says Yevgeny Prigozhin and Dmitry Utkin should be executed. "There’s no other option," he adds.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/14iuxkp/tonight_on_vladimir_solovyovs_show_russian_mp/
But then who would feed the Kremlin?? Eliminating the caterer hardly seems a sensible option:
Interesting angle here: the sidekick is a slav, apparently, meaning trad pagan communism…
“they would refuse to fire at the rebels” How do you know that the Russian military wasn’t under orders not to resist?, please provide a link to confirm that assertion.
I have seen no evidence of 2000 Wagner fighters killed in a Russian air strike…have you? I would be interested to see that link if you have. …pretty sure there will be lots of videos of such an event for you to choose from.
No I haven't seen evidence of 2000 Wagner fighters killed in a Russian air strike. I saw the rebel leader quoted as saying that's what happened – explaining that's why he immediately decided it was necessary to remove Shoigu & Gerasimov.
Seems obvious he was expecting them to try it on again. Taking out 10% of his force in a single strike seemed rather effective in stimulating his response. If they took more bites at that cherry he wouldn't have much Wagner left…
Not sure why you might want to think the Russian Army had been ordered not to resist the rebels – Putin went on tv to command them to do the opposite!
I am not saying I want anything…I am saying I haven't seen Putin or anyone else in Russian high command give (or heard that they gave) the order to engage Wagner…?
So to be clear, you haven't seen any evidence of what would have been the single most destructive airstrike in terms of casualties carried out during this entire conflict…yet you and others here just go right ahead and talk about it as if it where a fact….that is a strange way to conduct a serious discussion on a very serious subject…unless of course, as the case may be, you are not having a serious discussion?
Fair to say I'm as flippant onsite here as I am serious. It may have seemed to you that I was commenting as though the view expressed by P was fact – human nature to jump to that conclusion, no blame…
I suspect we tacitly default to the most likely explanation due to Occam's razor, but that's up to neuroscientists to prove. Until they do, best just to give the notion credit as a plausible theory. Could be he was instructed to attack the military high command by extraterrestrials, but seems simpler to believe it was his response to them attacking him.
"How do you know that the Russian military wasn’t under orders not to resist?, please provide a link to confirm that assertion."
Seems you are asking someone else to prove a negative that you are asserting yourself?
There was a lot of russian telegram commentary throughout the event, no order to the russian regular military not to resist is reported that I've seen. While the russian airforce did resist to some extent (widely reported in russian channels).
"Seems you are asking someone else to prove a negative that you are asserting yourself?"….no I am just saying that a lot of people around here shoot their mouths off with barely even half facts and half truths….and that maybe some should be a little more circumspect occasionally.
Prigozhin is not the Wagner leader. He has no legal standing. He's installed himself as Wagner's 'leader' and spokesperson which he thinks he has a right to because he's contributed funds to Wagner.
This video will give you considerable insight into to Prigozhin's role and the coup he attempted.
Scott Ritter – lovely.
Not really. Looks just like any other bullet-head conservative dork. I suppose being a sex-offender criminal lends him an aura of charisma to some…
Was just thinking that the Belarus army, in terms of the number of well trained, motivated, willing to fight, well equipped, combat ready and / or experienced troops immediately available, would almost certainly be less than 25,000 well equipped, combat hardened and experienced. probably angry mercenaries looking for a fight.
So if that is the case, how easy or difficult would it be for the Wagner mercenaries and their leader (who judging from his videos, seems a little bit excitable let's say) to get a hold of those tactical nukes recently relocated to Belarus??
Or am I missing something or getting worried about something implausible.??
First thing is the number of fighters in the Wagner force with P – mostly rated around 25K as you say but lately I've seen a couple of reports putting it around 8K.
Second, he's only there by agreement of Lukashenko, so a guest. Sometimes a guest will take off with the champagne glasses (well, it was a thing in the old days) but L has been ensconced for nigh-on 30 years so P would be nuts to try it on.
Third, the murk makes it too hard to tell if P has had a falling-out with Putin. Unlikely due to them having collaborated for so long. The fact that Putin withdrew his treason charges as part of the deal suggests he wants to keep P onside.
It's true that the rebellion makes P seem a loose cannon but he keeps saying he's still working for the boss & his targets are the two top military honchos.
Two interesting examples of the same point of views in today's news.
National in government wants to tell judges the extent of their sentencing limits.
A University lecturer wants the government to intervene in university decisions as to cuts in courses and employment.
Both universities and judges are independent.
Just how much does independence mean when people disagree with the actions of the independent?
It's a very slippery slope which does not take us to higher places.
It's a question for us all because all of us will have different views of what independent bodies should do.
A further consideration is where this might all lead. As Pastor Martin Niemoller wrote,
"First they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me."
Who would be our modern equivalents?
Don't even need modern equivalents; history rhymes:
https://wwfor.org/first-they-came-for-the-queer-people/
When the concentration camps and prisons were emptied at the end of the war, the surviving homosexual prisoners were not liberated until they had served their full sentences.
And I would look for better sources than ones that quote the ACLU. They have long since abandoned any consideration of the civil liberties of same sex attracted people.
"When the concentration camps and prisons were emptied ……"
What is your source for this claim? It sounds quite unbelievable.
I did not know this either, alwyn. Unbelievable, but to what hatred, 'othering', bigotry and belief systems can bring us.
The opposite of kindness, compassion, "wokeness"………
"The Nazi-era amendments to Paragraph 175 were maintained for over two decades in West Germany, resulting in the arrest of around 100,000 gay men between 1945 and 1969, with some Holocaust survivors even being forced to carry out their sentences in prison."
https://time.com/5953047/lgbtq-holocaust-stories/
It doesn't sound as if they were kept in the camps until they had finished their Nazi era sentence but that they had been arrested again after the war and convicted on a further charge.
Pretty minor difference though. That was really sick to jail people again for the same thing that the Nazi's had put them in a concentration camp for..
I always thought that one of the best things Eisenhower did was to force German civilians living near to the concentration camps to tour the camps and on many occasions to bury the dead.
It didn't sound like that. I saw the possibility of that, too. So I have now found this.
"At the end of the war, the majority of homosexuals were freed from camps in both parts of divided Germany. However, the homophobia directed against them by the public remained strong. Article 175—the basis for sending thousands of innocent people to concentration camps—remained in force in the DDR until 1967, and in West Germany until 1969. There were some American and British lawyers who demanded that homosexuals convicted under Article 175 serve out their full sentences. For instance, if someone had been sentenced to eight years and served five years of the sentence in prison followed by three years in a concentration camp, the lawyers demanded that the person return to prison to serve out three years. The number of people forced to “complete” their sentences in this way is not known."
This came from the third to last paragraph of this article. https://www.auschwitz.org/en/history/categories-of-prisoners/homosexuals-a-separate-category-of-prisoners/robert-biedron-nazisms-pink-hell/
Note the attitude of British and American lawyers who sought that such prisoners serve their full sentence, as prescribed by Nazi courts!
This is all part of a concerted effort to insert "trans" people into L G B history in places they never were.
Dublin Pride – busted for altering historical photographs to insert trans people.
Thank goodness Fred Sargeant is still alive – he was one of the original Pride founders and spends most of his time saying no to claims that Trans people started the Stonewall riot (they did not), or that they founded Pride (no to that one also).
[image resized – Incognito]
This text is below a photo about the Stonewall Riots, so I guess History.com have a different opinion.
https://www.history.com/topics/gay-rights/the-stonewall-riots#photo-gallery
"Two transgender women of color, Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera (far left) were said to have resisted arrest and were among those who threw bottles (or bricks or stones) at the police. They are pictured at a 1973 rally for gay rights in New York City"
I’m not saying they started it but they were there at the start, so shouldn’t be erased.
There is a fair amount of online revisionist history going on.
It's notable that 5 of the 13 photos in that gallery, directly reference Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera – and none reference those who actually were at Stonewall, nor those that organised and began the Pride movement:
https://twitter.com/Lachlan_Edi/status/1572435687626133504?s=20
None of that is true. Both were gay men who did drag and neither identified as "trans". Malcolm (Marsha) came late to the Bar after the riots had started and Sylvia was not there at all. The action was stared when Storme DeLaverie – a lesbian woman of colour, called out as she was being dragged away – that "someone should do something".
https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/01/28/the-myth-of-marsha-p-johnson/?fbclid=IwAR2fuscCmbfoskFLpnUHyxKuCZhgIRgphMjAx8QWLQajDUHdKCVhU_xuZbU
Take it up with The History Channel if you think they're lying. Making Gay History Podcast has interviews with loads of the activists of the time as well. I'm just grateful to all the Lesbian, Gay and Transgender activists and allies that have fought for my rights and am sad to see the Trans Exclusionary opinions that are going on. Have a lovely privileged day.
So, you consider pointing out the fallacies reported as "Trans Exclusionary opinions" rather than consider they may be accurate.
In fact, you go one step further by not saying they are inaccurate, but they are just Trans Exclusionary.
This is an example of one of the reasons why reinstating accuracy and reality in public dialogue is so difficult.
Google search time tools can be used to find the emergence of the Stonewall, Marsha P Johnson, Sylvia Rivera narrative.
Given that Stonewall occurred in 1969, that more recent explosion of a narrative may give you pause for thought.
You are wishing to exclude Trans People from various places so the term is accurate. Wear it with Pride.
Please link to where I state I wish to "exclude Trans People from various places."
(Or are you referring to including transgender individuals in their actual sex categories for same-sex provisions, data recording and accommodations?)
Else, I will think you are wilfully misrepresenting my position.
Do you believe Georgina Beyer (if she was still alive) and "Transwomen" like her should been allowed to use a woman's Restroom or Chas Bono or “Transmen” like him should be allowed to use a Men's Restroom. If you do agree, then I wholeheartedly acknowledge that you are not Trans Exclusionary.
When there is some way to identify these people in advance – then we can let men into women's spaces. In the meantime, women worked hard for separate facilities in places where they are vulnerable and we are hanging on to them whether you like it or not.
https://reduxx.info/japan-politician-who-supported-gender-identity-bill-sentenced-for-creating-upskirt-porn-in-womens-restroom/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email&fbclid=IwAR2UbBGoTRr9IIsOZ1suCYQFdeKPowUQyFNp1Mu5xh562HvcDldI1w_JQaY
@Red Blooded One
Georgina Beyer and Chas Bono are transsexuals, and were accommodated for in legislation, as permitted to use single-sex provisions for to the opposite sex.
However, that provision was made by politicians who only considered the emotional and social benefit for transsexuals, and did not consider nor ask for consent from women. Consent is not transferrable – and obviously the current situation was not even on the table when these legislative provisions were made.
(Note: There still would have been women that self-excluded from these spaces if they became aware they were being used by men – including transsexuals like Georgina Beyer. It would be interesting to know if those numbers exceeded the number of transsexual men who were accommodated.)
The impact of Chas Bono in men's provisions is different, because the practical and safeguarding aspects are different according to sex. But unless you are totally oblivious, you probably are aware of this.
Now – the expansion of this accommodation of transsexuals to all that fit under the trans umbrella requires a rethink of that previous accommodation.
This however, does not mean exclusion in a discriminatory sense.
For example Lesbians saying No to sexual intimacy with men who identify as lesbians, is currently called exclusion. But that is an emotive term, intended to reinforce a marginalised minority narrative. Lesbians just said No.
Denied inclusion into categories to which you do not belong is a natural consequence of such demands.
In fact, transgender people are included in the expectation that they will use the provisions made for their sex category.
They are still able – like everyone else – to use the facility for the sex category in which they belong. That is not exclusion. What is being asked for – that sex categories do not apply to them – is actually a request for exclusion.
Given the current situation, my priority is to ensure single-sex spaces and provisions are maintained for women and girls (including women and girls with declared gender identities.)
So, at the moment, the well-being of a five-year girl in a communal changing room, takes precedence over the desires of a 60 year old transsexual man who wants to be in that space.
I support third spaces – and or the prioritisation of safety for transidentified men in men's single-sex spaces.
If men wish to accommodate women in their single-sex spaces that have no problem with sharing with men, then a possible solution can be a maintenance of single-sex provisions for women and girls, and an open space for everyone else who wishes to share.
This absence of prioritising the full consent of women and girls – is particularly eye-opening when looking at current "progressive" politics.
The people who were there and who are not preaching Gender Ideology have something to say as well.
"Historian David Carter tells us near the end of his seminal history of the riots that "if we wish to name the group most responsible for the riots, it is the young, homeless homosexuals, and, contrary to the usual characterizations of those on the rebellion's front lines, most were Caucasian; few were Latino; almost none were transvestites or transsexuals; most were effeminate; and a fair number came from middle-class families."
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/fred-sargeant-debunks-the-latest?r=a0bsx&s=r&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&fbclid=IwAR2K6mJZqYOlDz5437Ekz2T9xdoRZOtbg7X3rrSSUQIzknyBxXg00QFI4eE
womanshistory.org on Marsha P Johnson
Bye for today, we'll just go around in circles, wasting yours, mine and anyone else’s time.
This video keeps disappearing from YouTube so it may pay to view now.
Marsha P Johnson referred to himself as a boy in drag – a transvestite. Not a woman.
https://youtube.com/shorts/sYW0Mg1i_wk?feature=share
Sometimes yes. The link I gave, womanshistory.org states …
http://There are many competing stories about what Johnson did during the raid on the Stonewall Inn, but it is clear she was on the front lines. Johnson, like many other transgender women, felt they had nothing to lose
so around and around we go. Take care. Bye
@Red Blooded One
"There are many competing stories about what Johnson did during the raid on the Stonewall Inn, but it is clear she was on the front lines. Johnson, like many other transgender women, felt they had nothing to lose"
You ignore the fact Marsha P Johnson referred to himself as a "boy in drag" – "a transvestite." Not a woman.
Why?
(BTW, an organisation called womenshistory.org that profiles a man is probably as inaccurate in their histories as they are in their definition of women.)
You are still here. What I found interesting is that you give examples of fully transitioned people as those that should be acceptable in opposite sex facilities. You may – or may not, be aware that the vast majority of trans identified people do not undergo such procedures. Any suggestion that surgery, or hormones are required in order to identify as trans is called "gatekeeping" these days and is regarded as being absolutely transphobic!
All that is required these days is for someone to open their mouth and utter the magical incantation "I identify as" and abracadabra – that is what they become!
I said goodbye to you, I didn't say I was going anywhere. Surprisingly enough, you are not the centre of my universe. Sorry to burst your bubble.
Wot red blooded one said…
red blooded one said wot…
Have you found a fully developed argument from RBI that you are agreeing with? Was it written in code or lemon juice because I cannot see any. Just a bit of I said this so it muct be true and bye.
Please link to the RB1 stuff you are 'woting' to.
But both Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera used, and actively preferred she/her pronouns, while Rivera underwent hormonal transition. Seems like your sources are busy annhilating transgender people from the record.
Marsha P Johnson referred to himself as a “boy in drag” – “a transvestite.”
Not a woman.
https://youtube.com/shorts/sYW0Mg1i_wk?feature=share
twiggle, can you please show your source for Johnson using and preferring she/her pronouns? Quote and link please. It's not going to surprise me if Johnson did sometimes, but clearly they also understood they were male and used other terms to describe themselves like transvestite.
The links are in the names
someone on the internet says Johnson used she/her pronouns. That's not evidence that they did or how they did.
Maybe you missed the discussion about, but we know that history is being revised and people transed retrospectively.
tWiggle seems to think being honest about this is akin to "annhilating transgender people from the record."
Meanwhile gender ideologues want to make Joan of Arc a trans man.
All of this has been happening in plain sight. There was a time on wikipedia when they wouldn't let an entry say that a trans person used to be known by a different sex. That seems to have stopped, because obviously an encyclopedia should be about recording reality not affirming people's identity or shifting culture by hiding truth.
So, we know that Johnson thought of themselves as male, there's a link above where he says this in his own words. There's an assertion that Johnson used she/her pronouns. As I said, I think this is possible at least some of the time. It's possible they understood themselves to be male and sometimes like to be referred to as she. Smash the binary and all that. Maybe they liked to be called she when in drag, who knows, because all we have is a bunch of assertions.
What's happening this thread is the culture war. Mildly compared to what is raging out there in places like the US, but we can do better than this. Let's start with what evidence is and go from there.
please explain this to me?
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/christchurch-man-dominic-west-given-85-per-cent-discount-on-sentence-despite-raping-sexually-assaulting-young-girl/SNMTLB7FVVHFTBQ3F2A5OJ2ZSA/
please. Tell us where justice was served. Tell us where the victim is feeling safer now. Tell us where the community in which this dude lives and has made his criming a regular activity is safe.
Please. Just explain that in plain english. The victim gets lifelong memories of being abused, choked, raped, and the rapist gets a year home d, popcorn, porn paid for by Winz.
I have a family member who was raped in the workplace aged 17 by a client she was looking after while working for a community agency in the early 80's.
She still suffers today but at no point would she ever suggest this person should be put into a prison. Completely the wrong place for him given his level of intellectual impairment.
It isn't always as black and white as you might suggest. No charges were laid at all in her case.
When I read shit like this "rapist gets a year home d, popcorn, porn paid for by Winz" I just see a trivialisation of a bad circumstance in which there are no winners. It is likely a circumstance where a judge who has much more information available to them has made a sensible judgement.
In the words of a prison officer I did a criminology course with, the justice and prison systems struggle with punishment and proposed incaceration for these groups (excuse the blunt language)
the mad bad
&
the bad mad.
My feeling is that this offender may fit into the second category where the act of incarceration may be bigger than taking away liberty. He apparently has cognitive issues. But not such as would take away from a seeming ability to participate in restorative justice.
I am having a problem with this part.
What I do think is postive though is that he has at least been charged and at least been found guilty. In the 'olden days' often offenders were not charged if they had a cognitive disability even though this disability may not have stopped them from knowing what is right or wrong.
It is the punishment that may be wanting. And while we may not/should not criticise a Judge and the punishment, it does seem on the lenient/odd side. Perhaps Judges in selecting the punishments could give a summation as to why the punishment slected is apt for the offender.
While we have got the rationale for the light sentence we have not got the rationale for why this particular sentence will be a punishment. Eg offender may have a regular routine of town and around, perhaps peeping/perving? and Home D will put a stop to that. or Home D will enable counselling etc to be easier to arrange.
Good points Sabine.
This is West’s sentence
‘taking the end sentence to 12 months of home detention with 200 hours of community work.
Judge Gilbert ordered West to participate in a sexual harm programme, warning the man he would be resentenced to prison if he didn’t participate in this.
West will also have six months of post-detention conditions and will be judicially monitored. He will not be placed on the child sex offender’s register.”
This is not just about law and order, ACT want the end of the Waitangi Tribunal, the Human Rights Commission and negation of the signing of UNDRIP.
What you need to understand first and foremost about the writer of this poem – his lament about his own actions if you so like – is that he supported the Nazis initially, until he did not – we all have lines that shall not be crossed. He became a dissident when it was too late.
Always, keep that in mind.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Niem%C3%B6ller
Yes, thanks for that. I guess that is what was behind my asking what the modern equivalents are. Of course they include us, but who else would we support the government against? And to what extent?
501s, recidivist youth, gang members, protesters, hate speech mongers, racists, bigots, anti-social behaviourists, immigrants, the old, the young, the sick, the mentally ill, slackers, COs- who is on whose list?
As he lamented, everyone is on that list – you, me everyone, even if we ourself don't believe to be there. The only way to not be on that list is to support what ever government throws at you, lest you get called a 'terf', a 'rightwinger', a 'left winger', a 'capitalist', a 'commie', a 'transphobe', a 'homophobe', an 'empirialist', a 'coloniser' 'white supremacist' and so on and so forth.
His whole poem is about his realisation that he thought he was with the right crowd until they did something that he could not support and then he was on the list to be arrested/killed, and no one was there to help him as he was no there to help all the others before him, and in the end he joined those that got arrested before him. It is a 'mind the purity sprial' type lament. No one is ever safe from it.
Maybe all that needs to be done is to look at the actions, think real hard about he actual implications of these actions and how they affect us and then decide whether one wants to march lockstep or maybe just think for oneself and retain the rights to openly dissent, even if that causes offense.
I think the point is not to be against or to defend government against 'others', but to defend humanity against the overactions of governments. Should socialists have the right to be that? Should communists have the right to be that? Should it be a reason for incarceration and death?
You might not consider yourself a 'hatemonger' today, but someone might does so tomorrow and then will there be anyone left to come to your defense?
I have heard of Sophie Scholl through the Marginal Mennonite Face Book entries honouring her, and Archibald Baxter and Mark Briggs. She reminds me in more ways than one of of Greta Thunberg.
That is a very moving response, Sabine. Thank you. I have just watched a movie chosen by my sister in law, The Railwayman, which also was very moving. Forgiveness and reconciliation……….
there is nothing to compare Greta Thunberg and the Siblings Scholl together. Not a single thing.
Greta risks nothing, the siblings paid the highest price.
Yea…its Central Govts fault. Riiight. How long ..have QLDC known of this ever growing problem? Decades. What have they done? Fuck all.
Any chance they could go and actually enforce their own rules?
As…
That POS slumlord….. is getting away with exploitation. QLDC …action needed? Start there.
If only we had a government with a full majority that campaigned for years on building houses.
And if you think that this is just the only house where that happens, it happens every where. Heck people tent, live in cabins, family have their garage 'remodelled' to put up family, emergency hostels go up in flames, and so on.
Labour had, still has a full majority, and all it got to show for is 25 people squatting at the same place, millions spend on run down motels for emergency housing, and people putting tents and cabins in their yards, and enclosing the sides of decks to make them rooms, and remodelling their garages to put up family that is homeless.
Living in shit condition for top dollar is a rite of passage for Kiwis – go rent a flat in Dunedin as a student or in Wellington, and it is a 'kiwi experience' for migrants. This is as Kiwi/New Zealand/Aotearoa as it gets.
And it is a bi-partisan mess. All parties are involved in that scam.
The housing crisis has resulted in similar stories across regions and across demographics – not just for Queenstown hospitality workers exploited by unregistered boarding house operators. The bylaws of the council should prohibit such overcrowding – so those mechanisms should kick in.
I used to live in Papakura where families congregated together in carparks to sleep – as numbers increased – so did a degree of security. It is better to be one of a group of ten than sitting in a carpark with your children all alone.
I know several families where garage living accommodation is an accepted mode of living in shared households, and has been for decades.
Successive governments have avoided addressing this aspect that has significant impact on poverty, because the escalating house prices have contributed greatly to economic growth. It is not a surprise to read the situation in the article, it is a long foreseeable outcome.
Post-war in the early 50's , my parents lived in a garage conversion in Lyall Bay after they were married for a few years, as the housing market was dire. House numbers were eventually brought up by a govt sponsored building programme. That programme forced developers to build homes at a variety of sizes, to limit build at the top end, something which ended in the 80’s, I think.
Blame Airbnb, blame land-banking, blame high-end only builds for the current rental market situation. If you read Guardian articles about the terrible problems in UK and Aussie housing, their no-fault tenancy laws enable landlords to turf out tenants to get in higher paying ones. That's what NACT want, and will deliver here.
"Blame Airbnb, blame land-banking, blame high-end only builds for the current rental market situation. "
You can add blame reduction in the prioritisation of social and state housing, blame increased immigration in an already overwhelmed housing crisis, blame a belated and not fully excluded overseas investors market, blame a succession of tax policies and regulatory impacts that encouraged speculators to flip houses without paying taxes, blame planning bylaws that encouraged development that has contributed to – not eased – the housing crisis.
"If you read Guardian articles about the terrible problems in UK and Aussie housing, their no-fault tenancy laws enable landlords to turf out tenants to get in higher paying ones. That's what NACT want, and will deliver here."
I don't follow National or Act policies that closely.
Can you link to their policies where this is proposed?
"Today National is announcing that we will also reverse Labour’s removal of no-cause terminations, and the provisions which see fixed-term tenancies roll into periodic tenancies in most cases."
https://www.national.org.nz/tenancy_changes_to_help_ease_rental_housing_crisis
NACT refers to the coalition government. National will do this, as it's an easy win.
The announcement is not wrong in terms of noting that some of the Labour policies have increased pressure on housing accessibility and housing affordability.
I would not like to see a no-cause termination, but I also consider it reasonable – as a renter – to enter into a fixed term agreement that doesn't roll into a periodic tenancy after that period.
As a renter, I didn't have a problem with signing successive fixed term tenancies, which gives assurance to the landlord, who can then manage his letting business more effectively.
If only we had a full majority government that could regulate the market. I mean seriously, if only we had that government.
Oh wait, we do have that government, and its a Labour led government and it has been in power now since 2016.
dang…..diddly doo and they did fuck all.
My neighbor during lockdown, the couple that owned the place, his three kids, her daughter with the grandchild, all in a 2 bedrm unit.
And i have had neighbor in AKL were there were easily about 20 in the property next to the fringe were i rented my shop, sleeping in shifts, staying outside in the yard so that the night workers could sleep during day time.
Nothing has changed. Nothing at all. In fact its gone worse.
Here is NZ after 5+ years of Labour, almost 3 years with a full majority in government.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/wellington/132412795/lonely-cold-hungry-pain-even-hits-middle-income-schools-in-cost-of-living-crisis
Proof of my own theory.
A large chunk of inflation is caused by business greed.
A large chunk of inflation is caused by
businessgreed, and lack of housing.Fixed that for you.
A comparable location in the US has its service workers dossing in cars so be grateful!
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/concern-over-chinese-scholarship-drive-in-pacific?utm_source=Newsroom&utm_campaign=0012316572-Daily_Briefing+26.06.2023&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_71de5c4b35-0012316572-47886425&mc_cid=0012316572&mc_eid=49bcaeb6a5
I would have thought the more students from the Pacific who study in China the better. Getting to understand another culture at close range is invaluable. Let's face it, our culture is so immersed in the American way that any counterpoint would be a good thing.
Sometimes I think the only difference between Aotearoa, and LA is our Maori and Pacific identity,
Stephen D, the more we know each other the better. Exchanges create communication.
Sabine,that is a Queenstown case of Landlord greed. Why do they not have ordinances? Numbers allowed to reside?
Further some Landlords are "doing up" properties and "sitting" waiting with an empty property for a better time to sell. Most hoping they will be helped by their rich mates getting into power.
Sabine, what part of Covid restictions, supply lines and price pressures do you not get? You beat this majority government drum like it is the whole answer. That is silly, in the face of our rich failing in many ways to contribute to the welfare of our nation, making unproductive housing their wealth builder. It is so bad, the small moves made have put us in recession. I think you are willfully blind, and intend to vote in the crowd who caused this situation. Sadly there are some who are willing to "cut their nose off to spite their face".
If the landlord is collecting rent from over 6 individuals (as is reported) he is running a boarding house, and must meet the requirements of that form of tenancy.
https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/starting-a-tenancy/boarding-houses/
So, they can be reported to the Tenancy Tribunal.
On my phone I'm having difficulty accessing the Queenstown District Plan, but it may also have bylaws that are being broken if a consent has not been issued when required, or consent has been obtained but conditions are not being met.
I agree that QDC could close it down, or the Tenancy Tribunal could (potentially) issue fines to the landlord.
However, that isn't going to magically provide accommodation for the people currently living there.
I'm quite sure that, if they had options, they'd already be exercising them.
"I agree that QDC could close it down, or the Tenancy Tribunal could (potentially) issue fines to the landlord."
Which should happen if breaches have occurred.
"However, that isn't going to magically provide accommodation for the people currently living there."
I lived in a similar situation on Hamilton Island many decades ago while in hospitality. Cheaper accommodation was in "dungas" – containers with beds.
It was a practical solution for a place with accommodation mainly for guests HOWEVER all provisions were clean and well maintained. Different options allowed for more permanent staff, while those on working holidays could choose cheap, or communally cheaper.
I'm quite sure that, if they had options, they'd already be exercising them."
There were good basic apartment blocks built for staff. Easier there because the resort had only one owner IIRC, but something for a business association could have considered as the issue became apparent. It seems as though business owners expected the solution to a problem affecting them to come from elsewhere.
Note: We have had extortionate rents collected for emergency housing as well. This is no different because individuals are meeting the cost rather than taxpayers.
It's just another symptom of our housing crisis.
https://www.act.org.nz/housing
The third point in ACT's housing policy is intriguing, and could be a goer. They propose removing council inspection for building sturdy, lasting homes. The theory is that an insurance fee would be paid up front before building could begin, then faults, defects are covered by the policy/insurance company.
ACT would replace this broken system with compulsory 30-year building insurance. The scheme would require builders to purchase insurance for all new dwellings from an insurance company regulated by the Reserve Bank. Insurance companies could choose not to cover a given builder if he used risky materials or was otherwise too risky of a client for them to take on. With no insurer, a builder would not be permitted to build. Similarly, insurers could adopt risk-differentiated premia to account for the different risks imposed by different materials or building techniques."
"Because this insurance would be attached to the house, not the builder, and backed by a reputable and reinsured insurance company, homeowners could be assured of receiving compensation if their home turned out to be poorly-built or use shoddy materials. This is in contrast to the status quo, where builders can use a variety of tactics to avoid liability and leave homeowners bereft of the compensation they deserve."
Possible downsides I can see: