Open mike 26/09/2015

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, September 26th, 2015 - 88 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

openmikeOpen mike is your post.

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

Step up to the mike …

88 comments on “Open mike 26/09/2015 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Esoteric Pineapples 1
    26 September 2015 at 6:51 am

    Really disappointed with the ferociousness of attacks on the Green Party from comments on this site, The Daily Blog and others over Red Peak. It’s as if the level of work the Green Party has put in over the past seven years in fighting this govt counts for nothing. For example a good number of Greens spent many hours collecting signatures for the Keep Our Assets petition. It’s time for a lot of people to take a chill pill on this subject and at least be a little bit less derogatory. We are all in this together and there where things like protecting workers rights where the Greens stand right beside Labour.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 1.1
      26 September 2015 at 7:48 am

      Turning a straw-poll into legislation is at least as stupid as bringing dead fish to Parliament. The derision comes with the territory.

      • savenz 1.1.1
        26 September 2015 at 8:48 am

        I don’t think people are trying to attack the Green party, more their decision to wade in, boots and all and help Key.

        We saw Labour do this on Surveillance, taking a fiasco and antidemocratic law and then, being enabled by Labour to endorse it. In a smaller way Labour and TPP by not saying clearly NO.

        The same is happening here with the Greens. By collaborating in a flawed and stupid process to change the flag they are enabling Key and scaring their voters by thinking OH MY GOD they Greens don’t get it! Why can’t they see they are being manipulated?

        It is a waste of time and effort as the flag will not be changed anyway. So the Greens are just falling into a trap, wasting time and money, instead of focusing on how to collaborate with other opposition and get rid of this corrupt government once and for all and concentrate on REAL things, TPP, zero hour contracts, climate change, our waterways being degraded, our assets sold off, etc

        Thats what we want the Greens to do and Labour NOT get into Nat LIte issues of flag changes and Panda purchases.

    • The Chairman 1.2
      26 September 2015 at 8:32 am

      For every action there is a reaction, Esoteric Pineapples.

      All the Greens represent, relationships fostered and good work done undermined by one action (in the eyes of some).

      An unintended consequence or one that should have been foreseen?

      What is done is done. Can it be put right? Lessons to be learned?

      United we stand, divided we fall.

      • Paul 1.2.1
        26 September 2015 at 8:36 am

        They lost a lot of my respect over this.

        • The Chairman 1.2.1.1
          26 September 2015 at 9:16 am

          They have lost respect from within their own support as well.

          A number will get over it, but some will clearly note it, using the backlash as an example if the Party ever considers to again cross the line.

          The Greens and Labour should have both stayed far away from Key’s desire to change the flag.

          They should have focused on the more important issues we face.

          Instead, they both decided to partake, fueling the fire, resulting in them both being burnt.

          Polls suggest they will both require to work together. This newly created rift negatively impacts on the public perception the two Parties are aligned.

          The ones gaining here is Key and his Party. Thanks to the pair of them, Key’s flag desire has been given far more media hype. While his opposition now distrust and squabble amongst themselves.

          • Paul 1.2.1.1.1
            26 September 2015 at 9:18 am

            +100
            The Greens and Labour should talk about poverty, inequality and climate change.

          • savenz 1.2.1.1.2
            26 September 2015 at 9:47 am

            +1 Chairman

            This can cause people to lose faith in the opposition and NOT VOTE. That is the number 1 goal of rightwing parties to reduce people’s faith in democracy and therefore refuse to vote.

            It is a clear manipulation from National to the Greens and Labour.

            You can’t win all the votes, but you can disable your opposition by undermining them to cause their voters NOT TO VOTE. And get in by default.

            That is the clear strategy of the Natz strategists.

          • Sabine 1.2.1.1.3
            26 September 2015 at 10:51 am

            +1

      • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2.2
        26 September 2015 at 8:36 am

        It hasn’t changed that much: they’re still the worst possible party apart from all the other ones.

    • Thinking Right 1.3
      26 September 2015 at 11:17 am

      It doesn’t help when the petition itself has been shown to be flawed with multiple entries from fictitious people.

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11518994

      When you throw in the latest brouhaha about ‘red peak’ turning into a swastika perhaps the Greens band wagon jumping wasn’t so wise after all.

      Besides if you try and get the Greens and Labour to all publicly hold hands and sing kum bay ya then all it does is push the issues underground where they fester like a plastered wound.

    • Ad 1.4
      26 September 2015 at 3:21 pm

      Strangely i respected them more out of it.

      They played a short term game well.

      Shaw’s political balls just dropped.
      When he gets up to bat again, trust me Labour will be paying attention.

    • Thom Pietersen 1.5
      26 September 2015 at 7:18 pm

      Yes they did all that Esoteric, and got my attention, and then they went and lost the plot on bunch of corporate logos, sorry flags.

      Sorry but it’s the principle, they went and chose backroom deal undemocratic bollocks.

      Back to being loopo crystalogists.

  2. Robert Guyton 2
    26 September 2015 at 7:49 am

    James Shaw said the additional cost of adding the Red Peak flag was not a significant concern and I agree with him. Being the facilitator for the inclusion of an option that was outside of the jacked-up “panel” process is admirable, in my view and the Greens will benefit from showing that they can spot opportunities like that and act on them. Increasing the choices available to the public is a positive action by the Greens. Their brand has been advanced through their proactive, democracy-enhancing action to add another option. The Greens, in my opinion, do not act to disadvantage their partners on any level, despite being the recipients of such treatment on a regular basis. They did not and will not try to slip into the blue tent. They have their own and pitch it where their members and reliable ideological foundation require them to.
    The angst expressed here over their tidy action over Red Peak reflects insecurity that’s not shared by those who have an establ;shed confidence in the Green Party and her trajectory, in my view.

    • JanM 2.1
      26 September 2015 at 8:12 am

      “Spotting opportunities” – I am uneasy 🙁

    • One Anonymous Bloke 2.2
      26 September 2015 at 8:16 am

      How is democracy “enhanced” by adding last-minute clauses to flawed legislation, on the basis of a social media campaign?

      Key is rightly criticised for being poll-driven. Sauce for the Tory goose goes equally well with the Green gander.

      • weka 2.2.1
        26 September 2015 at 1:10 pm

        Despite being unhappy with the GP actions I do feel the need to point out that there is considerable difference between micromanaging messages and one’s actions via obsessive internal polling, and responding to a movement arising out of the people that conventional polling shows is popular.

    • Paul 2.3
      26 September 2015 at 8:23 am

      James Shaw should read Naomi Klein’s ‘This Changes Everything.’
      Capitalism is the problem.

      • maui 2.3.1
        26 September 2015 at 12:35 pm

        Were not going to be able to reform capitalism, but Country Calendar from August 22 does show a viable alternative. Show is ondemand.

    • marty mars 2.4
      26 September 2015 at 8:27 am

      the brand has indeed been advanced – toward the great bland middle – nice one greens. Green + blue + red = black, a hole with sides steep but but at least the greens will get some votes out of it and their advocates, like Hawking radiation, still emit.

      Sorry Robert I know you do good stuff but my keyboard needed to talk 🙂

      • Paul 2.4.1
        26 September 2015 at 8:31 am

        Reading Klein’s book shows there is a need for radical and immediate action if we are to prevent catastrophic climate change.
        The New Zealand Green Party seems to favour just another form of consumerism and capitalism.
        Not good enough.
        Shaw is ruining the Green Party.

        • weka 2.4.1.1
          26 September 2015 at 1:12 pm

          “The New Zealand Green Party seems to favour just another form of consumerism and capitalism.”

          Perhaps you should read actual GP policy and what Shaw really says. To me it looks like you are getting your information about the GP from the MSM.

          “Shaw is ruining the Green Party.”

          The party chose Shaw, not the other way round. Stop and consider why that might be.

        • Ad 2.4.1.2
          26 September 2015 at 3:23 pm

          Call me Consumerist Capitalist Splitter, but I’d vote for him, and donate.

          Hell he can have my baby.

    • Puddleglum 2.5
      26 September 2015 at 4:41 pm

      Hi Robert Guyton,

      “Increasing the choices available to the public is a positive action by the Greens.”

      I don’t think it is (for reasons I’ve posted on other threads about the flag change process).

      The Green Party are undoubtedly a political force for social justice and environmental awareness and action. But that doesn’t mean they should not be criticised for making a bad policy implementation process worse.

      Greater choices available in the referendum was not, and is not, the policy problem that needed solving. There is nothing positive in process terms about having more options available. If anything it just compounds the problems with the process.

      And this criticism applies equally to any Labour MP who advocated for the inclusion of Red Peak in the options.

      I think those who favour ‘Red Peak’ seem to be confusing having something available as an option (the ends) with a proper process (the means). For me – especially when it comes to constitutional symbols of nationhood – the integrity of the means has to take precedence over preferences for particular outcomes (ends).

      After all, I imagine a lot of people wanted something with a fern on it so why would anyone criticise the original four options if the popularity of particular options in the referendum was all that mattered? Yet the Green Party appears to have adopted the position that there was something wrong with the process leading to those four options – despite the fact that at least three of the options would likely have had more than 50,000 people voting for them (if the UMR polls that swordfish references on another thread are any guide).

      This process should have been one that was at least nominally acceptable to as great a proportion of the population as possible. You don’t get that with a highly distorted and unfair process.

      Sticking Red Peak into the process worsens that unfairness and distortion, it does not reduce it.

      People will inevitably lobby for their preferred option in this sort of haphazard and entirely unprincipled flag change process but that lobbying should not then be formalised through ad hoc legislation. At a bare minimum, any lobbying for Red Peak should have been done before the options were decided, not after.

      I say all of this not to support the original four options or process. Quite the opposite. It has been a continuing debacle to the point that I think it would be cause for national shame if we ended up changing the flag as a result of this ‘process’ (and I have no sentimental, or other, attachment to the current flag).

      And frankly I really don’t care how ragingly popular a new flag might be. Even huge popularity of the final choice would in no way vindicate the process – and that is the problem in a nutshell.

      That’s because it is the process of why and how we come to decide – and not the design of the piece of cloth we end up with – that most substantively reflects what we are as a nation.

      • Robert Guyton 2.5.1
        27 September 2015 at 8:06 am

        Ad@3:21 – well said.
        Hi Puddleglum (lovely character, he. Clive Staples created some very memorable ones, scenes too; Mr Tumnus’ ransacked cave, the lilied sea…)
        Behind all of the machinations; the flag, the TPPA, the cancellation of votes for prisoners, oil exploration licenses et al, is a sizeable frustration at being deceived and manipulated. The swift and effective move that put the non-Key option onto the flag-table was hugely encouraging for people who feel desperate for a win of some kind. The grip this government has over the direction and results across the board was weakened by Shaw’s intervention, I believe, and great heart can be taken from that and attributed to the Greens. It’s a small thing, but a big signal. Flag, schmag – it’s the greater game that counts. Parallel moves, out-of-step strategies are needed to break a winning formula. I like Shaw’s move.

  3. Paul 3
    26 September 2015 at 8:08 am

    Parliament wasting more time on this disraction is one cost.

    At the moment, we are being encouraged to talk about the flag and the All Blacks.

    And yet we could we weeks from being tied up by the TPPA.

    It is scary to see how people can be so easily hoodwinked.

  4. half crown 4
    26 September 2015 at 8:17 am

    “Parliament wasting more time on this disraction is one cost.

    At the moment, we are being encouraged to talk about the flag and the All Blacks.

    And yet we could we weeks from being tied up by the TPPA.

    It is scary to see how people can be so easily hoodwinked.”

    +1000%

  5. dv 5
    26 September 2015 at 8:20 am

    Can any one explain HOW adding one line and changing a couple of words on the flag referendum can cost $400,000

    Especially as no printing has been done yet?

    • The Chairman 5.1
      26 September 2015 at 8:29 am

      Taxpayers are being ripped off?

    • savenz 5.2
      26 September 2015 at 8:37 am

      Truth and MSM reporting in this country are not the same thing. Remember headline, headline – anything to make our leader John Key look good and drive a wedge through opposition party co operation is the object.

      If you want to know why John Key is still looking quite popular that is why – lying and misinformation and smearing and negative reporting of the other parties.

      But – the point is, why do the opposition fall for it and make themselves targets by helping Key?

    • dv 5.3
      26 September 2015 at 11:14 am

      Apparently, according to dompost, there has be an amount of supporting material printed already.

  6. marty mars 6
    26 September 2015 at 8:21 am

    the cold blob is a worry and I don’t mean a politician (that’ll be too easy)

    It is, for our home planet, an extremely warm year.

    Indeed, last week we learned from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration that the first eight months of 2015 were the hottest such stretch yet recorded for the globe’s surface land and oceans, based on temperature records going back to 1880. It’s just the latest evidence that we are, indeed, on course for a record-breaking warm year in 2015.

    Yet, if you look closely, there’s one part of the planet that is bucking the trend. In the North Atlantic Ocean south of Greenland and Iceland, the ocean surface has seen very cold temperatures for the past eight months:

    What’s up with that?

    First of all, it’s no error…

    … some scientists suspect that the cooling seen in these maps is no fluke but, rather, part of a process that has been long feared by climate researchers — the slowing of Atlantic Ocean circulation.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/09/24/why-some-scientists-are-worried-about-a-cold-blob-in-the-north-atlantic-ocean/

    another canary has dropped dead

  7. vto 7
    26 September 2015 at 8:29 am

    Some may recall a few days ago a long thread about opinionist Beck Eleven and her rabid anti-old white men views. See http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-22092015/#comment-1073082 and in particular http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/columnists/beck-eleven/8227168/Time-to-ban-the-rants-of-men-aged-over-50

    Today her opinion is going on about her own ageing process (sorry no link yet) which is supremely ironic given her rep for gouging at old white men.

    Maybe she is worried her opinions will become less worthy as she ages (guess what Beck Eleven – wisdom comes with age. You should be aware of that by now).

    Frikkin’ idiot young white woman

    plus ca change

    • JanM 7.1
      26 September 2015 at 8:38 am

      Wisdom does NOT always come with age – a stupid young person usually grows into a stupid old person.

    • marty mars 7.2
      26 September 2015 at 8:38 am

      fuck move on man there is a FLAG fucken debate and we might be getting some fucken PANDAS why can’t you let go and contribute to REAL issues

    • Draco T Bastard 7.3
      26 September 2015 at 12:00 pm

      wisdom comes with age

      Unfortunately, many old people disprove that adage.

      • vto 7.4.1
        26 September 2015 at 12:44 pm

        that is as loaded with intolerance as that about which they complain – just like beck eleven

        fuck the old white men

        fuck tolerance and compassion and understanding

        fuck you

        • Thom Pietersen 7.4.1.1
          26 September 2015 at 7:43 pm

          Yup, those fucken old white pricks.

          What was one of the main reasons we dropped out of the Australian Commonwealth at the last minute over a century ago?

          Racial intolerance? Or concerns over potential Maori treatment?

          That cartoon is basically saying everyone from the 1900’s to 1950’s was a racist prick, is that actually true? Some is, and what about now, all gone? A bit bloody simplistic.

          • katipo 7.4.1.1.1
            26 September 2015 at 8:59 pm

            Chis Rocks thoughts on the state of race relations from New Yorker Interview…

            “When we talk about race relations in America or racial progress, it’s all nonsense. There are no race relations. White people were crazy. Now they’re not as crazy. To say that black people have made progress would be to say they deserve what happened to them before…

            So, to say Obama is progress is saying that he’s the first black person that is qualified to be president. That’s not black progress. That’s white progress. There’s been black people qualified to be president for hundreds of years. If you saw Tina Turner and Ike having a lovely breakfast over there, would you say their relationship’s improved? Some people would. But a smart person would go, “Oh, he stopped punching her in the face.” It’s not up to her. Ike and Tina Turner’s relationship has nothing to do with Tina Turner. Nothing. It just doesn’t. The question is, you know, my kids are smart, educated, beautiful, polite children. There have been smart, educated, beautiful, polite black children for hundreds of years. The advantage that my children have is that my children are encountering the nicest white people that America has ever produced. Let’s hope America keeps producing nicer white people”

  8. Herodotus 8
    26 September 2015 at 9:24 am

    The most expensive mortgage term currently is …. Floating around 6%, which is 0.5% more expensive than fixing for 5 years !!!! With expectations that the OCR is to drop further from its current 2.75% and this will have been included in any yield curves of the banks and partially priced into any mid to long term fixed rate.
    Why is the bank pricing out floating mortgages ?
    http://www.mortgagerates.co.nz/

    • alwyn 8.1
      26 September 2015 at 2:03 pm

      A hypothetical reason would be.
      The bank expects that the OCR will be cut, and that fixed interest rates will drop in the next year or so.
      If that is their belief they would want as many people as possible to convert to long term fixed rates now. Then you are going to be locked into higher rates than might be normal next year.
      The way to encourage you to lock in? Make the floating rate much higher.

      That is purely a hypothetical answer of course. I’m not involved with the mortgage providing part of any bank and I’m not in the market for one so I don’t actually know what they might be planning.

  9. Rodel 9
    26 September 2015 at 9:39 am

    In an ex work place of mine there was a strong union, pro-women and pro-Maori. Wages and conditions were good but a rival union who didn’t like the pro-women, pro-maori parts started up .

    The CEO was delighted and nurtured the new union, eventually giving better conditions to its members.New employees sadly but naturally chose to belong to the union with better conditions. and it grew bigger.

    Now the CEO now presides over a weakened split work force, conditions are deteriorating for all workers and the CEO is laughing all the way on overseas trips.

    Sounds a bit like the simple but effective divide and rule strategy of our current CEO-PM. He’s so good at it. Our opposition frogs don’t seem to realise they’re being boiled.

  10. Rodel 10
    26 September 2015 at 9:44 am

    In an ex work place of mine there was a strong union, pro-women and pro-Maori. Wages and conditions were good but a rival union who didn’t like the pro-women, pro-maori parts started up .

    The CEO was delighted and nurtured the new union, eventually giving better conditions to its members.New employees sadly but naturally chose to belong to the union with better conditions. and it grew bigger.

    Now the CEO now presides over a weakened split work force, conditions are deteriorating for all workers and the CEO is laughing all the way on overseas trips.

    Sounds a bit like the simple but effective divide and rule strategy of our current CEO-PM. He’s so good at it. Our opposition frogs don’t seem to realise they’re being boiled.

    PS ..Just remembered ..At one stage the CEO introduced a new ‘improved’ company logo and encouraged employee debate..but no pandas.

  12. The Chairman 12
    26 September 2015 at 11:41 am

    The Government’s previous stance was that New Zealand would not sign the TPPA if the dairy deal was not a good one.

    Now it’s: the end deal would “hopefully land in the right place,” but would be “the very best we can do,” Key said

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/dairy/72421487/trade-minister-admits-tppa-inadequate-on-dairy

    Unless the best we can do equates to a good deal, it sounds like a softening of position.

    • Draco T Bastard 12.1
      26 September 2015 at 11:46 am

      Key and National were going to sign no matter what. Their job isn’t to do what’s right for NZ but what the corporations, especially US corporations, want them to do which is to sell out NZ for their profit.

      • maui 12.1.1
        26 September 2015 at 12:46 pm

        Serco, Warner Bros, Rio Tinto, Anardarko, Sky City, Solid Energy, Fletchers, the company that owned the Rena, and many more.

        Theres countless others under the radar too like property developers that have profited from National as well.

      • The Chairman 12.1.2
        26 September 2015 at 1:11 pm

        No doubt. However, they have to carefully balance throwing the farming voting block under a bus while also catering to the multinationals.

        Losing support of the farming block could cost the Party the next election.

  13. Draco T Bastard 13
    26 September 2015 at 11:43 am

    When the Last Tree Is Cut Down, the Last Fish Eaten, and the Last Stream Poisoned, You Will Realize That You Cannot Eat Money

    Seen that quote around for awhile now but the history given at the link fills it out quite a bit more.

  14. Morrissey 14
    26 September 2015 at 1:08 pm

    Anne Tolley admitted this morning: “It’s pretty hard to survive on a benefit.”
    But, as usual, Lisa Owen failed to follow up.
    The Nation, TV3, Saturday 26 September 2015

    patsy /ˈpatsi/ n. a person who is easily taken advantage of, swindled, deceived, coerced, persuaded, etc.; sucker.

    This morning Lisa Owen interviewed—or, more accurately, provided a pretty much unobstructed free platform for—the Social Development minister Anne Tolley. Owen asked her whether it was desirable that most of the CYFS-approved foster families were themselves on a benefit. Mustering all the gravitas she could, Mrs Tolley intoned: “It’s pretty hard to survive on a benefit.”

    Sadly, Lisa Owen lacked the nous to press her on that remarkable admission.

    A little later, she asked Mrs Tolley about reports of the Key regime’s plans to “outsource” child welfare services to companies like Serco. Mrs Tolley, who seems to have not been listening to the prime minister or his henchmen lately, was adamant that nothing of the sort was being discussed….

    HON. ANNE TOLLEY: [speaking in as low a tone as possible, in order to convey honesty and seriousness] Let’s put it to rest. This is a state responsibility. There’s been no talk in government about outsourcing. … I’m firmly on the side of the children.

    Again, Lisa Owen, who obviously does little or no research for these interviews, failed to confront her with any recent statements by Key or Steven Joyce or Bill English that directly contradict those words.

    • The Chairman 14.1
      26 September 2015 at 1:32 pm

      Bill English is pushing ahead with big data and predictive analytics, said to play a leading role in the imminent changes to the delivery of care.

      • RedBaronCV 14.1.1
        26 September 2015 at 3:10 pm

        It seems to have passed without more than a murmur, dumped on a day when distractions abound, but the Nacts released the so called results of the study done?.
        From the little I could gather they seem to have taken the 1991-1992 birth cohort and worked out who got NCEA, who ended up on unemployment etc etc. How they did it was all very, very vague but I gained the impression that they had mined every government data base and matched up the data they had on individuals presumably by name & date of birth. If you didn’t immigation & emmigration would flaw the results.

        That or even anything like that would be an horrific gross invasion of privacy for that cohort. Why are there not more questions about it? Not only that but I suspect they picked the youngest cohort they could where most now have an IRD no but are not fully integrated into adult life – so I can speculate that the iRD are involved. I’d like to hear more about this

        • Craig H 14.1.1.2
          26 September 2015 at 5:20 pm

          Fine by me as long as the data is scrubbed before humans get it – to complete this accurately, it only needs a specified range of dates of birth (i.e. all people born in NZ between dates X and Y), not actual dates.

          We’ve been doing a Census for however long, and this is a better tool.

          • RedBaronCV 14.1.1.2.1
            27 September 2015 at 11:48 am

            So essentially spying on a cohort of New Zealanders is okay so long as you only get results with names removed? and the range of birth dates only? People move in and out of the country and you may have only one risk factor attached to each person in the survey so you are going to be looking deeper at the data than that.

            Anyway if this is such a great idea why don’t we model which taxpayers are the most likely to avoid or evade tax over certain dollar amounts and slap some IRD staffers down in their office to monitor them .. now there would be a profitable exercise

    • Ad 14.2
      26 September 2015 at 3:31 pm

      Tolley is turning into a surprisingly compassionate voice in her Cabinet.

      Her interviews are solid, her handling of MSD is good compared to her woeful performance in Education in the previous term.

      Quite astonishing that it’s Roche that’s getting any traction against her, rather than the Labour spokesperson.

      After a month of really good hits against the government in agriculture, corrections, and trade, Ministers below 4 in Cabinet are regathering and re-stabilising. Not good.

    • millsy 14.3
      26 September 2015 at 10:09 pm

      ” Let’s put it to rest. This is a state responsibility. There’s been no talk in government about outsourcing. … I’m firmly on the side of the children.”

      Didn’t someone say something about not believing anything until it has been officially denied?

      • Morrissey 14.3.1
        27 September 2015 at 11:38 am

        Didn’t someone say something about not believing anything until it has been officially denied?

        That was Count Otto von Bismarck originally, although it’s usually credited to the late great Claud Cockburn.

        I fear that Mrs Tolley’s words will eventually be classified along with the following quote by her erstwhile colleague John Banks: “I have nothing to hide and nothing to fear. And never, ever would I ever knowingly sign a false electoral return. Never ever would I ever.”


  15. Morrissey 15
    26 September 2015 at 1:33 pm

    Did John Key get up to the same “swinanigans” as David Cameron?

    I urge anyone interested in the subject of human-porcine relations to click on the following link and look at the comment by a YouTuber who rejoices in the moniker “Flesh”. It was written one year ago, long before last week’s explosive revelations about the British prime minister David “Snooty” Cameron….

    A ‘Grumpy’ John Key On Q & A To Answer To Allegations That He Lied About Knowing Of Kim Dotcom

    • Paul 15.1
      26 September 2015 at 1:44 pm

      Rituals are used by the privileged to ensure their puppets are controlled.
      The puppets know that if they fail to follow their instructions these secrets will be revealed.

      What has Cameron failed to do?
      What are Key’s directives?

      • Morrissey 15.1.1
        26 September 2015 at 1:53 pm

        I don’t think Cameron is being blackmailed over those revelations. It’s something that was beyond his control. Balling* a dead pig is probably one of the more benign activities of the Bullingdon set.

        What’s interesting here is the way these revelations have been handled. On Paul Henry’s godawful television show, a ticker kept referring to “bizarre allegations”. The fools on radio and in print in this country obediently parrot the label “Pig-gate”, which serves to trivialize the issue.

        Just imagine how the commentariat in the U.K. and this country would have reacted if Jeremy Corbyn had been revealed to have “balled” a dead pig.

        * Yes, it’s an appalling Americanism, but I like it!

  16. Ergo Robertina 16
    26 September 2015 at 6:12 pm

    Why factory farming is one of history’s worst crimes:
    http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/sep/25/industrial-farming-one-worst-crimes-history-ethical-question

    For me it’s a timely read following the revelation that weirdo researchers shot pigs for medico legal research as a consequence of our soft touch ethics regime. That had made me reflect that in spite of the obvious obscenity of the unscientific experiment, the pigs will suffer less than most of their contemporaries.
    Another Guardian writer, George Monbiot, has aptly identified our cognitive dissonance on factory farming: ”Even as we search for meaning and purpose, we want to be told that our actions are inconsequential. We seek reassurance that we are significant, but that what we do is not”.
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/19/chicken-welfare-human-health-meat

  17. Draco T Bastard 17
    26 September 2015 at 8:07 pm

    Microcredit has been a disaster for the poorest in South Africa

    This was not microcredit’s intended poverty reduction so much as the intensification of poverty, suffering and deprivation among the very poorest communities forced into informal sector work. Even worse, social tensions were greatly exacerbated thanks to hyper-competition and the aggressive taking of clients away from existing businesses, while ethnically-motivated business turf wars inevitably began to rear their ugly head too.

    Competition comes to…

    …destroy yet another society.

    When are we going to wake up to the fact that competition is bad for our society?

    • Thom Pietersen 17.1
      26 September 2015 at 8:26 pm

      Competition is required at some level, if not just to inspire people.

      Microcredit in its original form was commendable, but from the article – is “commercialisation” the problem?

      “A further intractable problem with microcredit in South Africa is related to the extensive commercialisation that was introduced into the global microcredit industry in order to make it financially self-sustaining.”

      Mmmmm… anyone smell a bankster? And what the fuck does ‘financially self-sustaining’ mean? Totally separate from economically or morally self-sustaining for the end user.

      • Draco T Bastard 17.1.1
        26 September 2015 at 8:58 pm

        Competition is required at some level, if not just to inspire people.

        Nope, not even a little bit. Cooperation wins there too.

        • Rodel 17.1.1.1
          26 September 2015 at 9:53 pm

          DTB- ++ competition inspires in rugby, tennis, golf-even choosing an idiotic flag but never, never, where human needs , food, clothing shelter, safety or kid’s lives are involved- unless of course you are a jungle animal without a developed cerebral cortex…(read..tory ).

          • Clemgeopin 17.1.1.1.1
            27 September 2015 at 12:04 am

            “but never, never, where human needs , food, clothing shelter, safety or kid’s lives are involved- unless of course you are a jungle animal without a developed cerebral cortex…(read..tory )”

            +1

    • Ad 17.2
      26 September 2015 at 10:30 pm

      Great article!
      one in the eye for TearFund, World Vision and other worthies who thought this policy was the breakthrough killer financial app for liberating women.

  18. Mike the Savage One 18
    26 September 2015 at 10:12 pm

    I honestly cannot believe that nobody reading or commenting on TS missed this great opportunity to call the Assistant Minister for Social Development a blatant LIAR and guilty of misleading the House of Representatives:

    Carmel Sepuloni asked this question in the House (17 Sept. 2015):
    http://www.inthehouse.co.nz/video/39670

    She asked about details about the Sole Parent Employment Service and also Mental Health Employment Service, run on a trial basis for over a year now, and where NO real data has been made available about their supposed “success”. She asked for a response to conflicting, worrying details she appears to have received by way of an OIA request.

    As for the answer by Jo Goodhew, Associate Minister, she was LYING and misleading the House!

    First see her details here, on the glossy Parliament website:
    https://www.beehive.govt.nz/minister/jo-goodhew

    She claims there is no obligation for mental health suffering or sole parents to take part in the employment referral programs that MSD now use through outsourced, contracted service providers. The truth is that officially there is no obligation for mental health sufferers on health related benefits to join the MHES, being the Mental Health Employment Service, but there is an obligation for sole parents to participate, as the following shows:
    http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/documents/forms/sole-parent-support-obligations-and-privacy-form.pdf

    There is most clearly an OBLIGATION to take part in such measures, that assist a person that receives the Sole Parent Benefit to get employment. See 2. for part time work obligations!

    “take part in any other activities that Work and Income refer me to, such as attend any job training courses, seminars, work experience or work assessments (including rehabilitation, but not medical treatment) that will improve my work readiness or help me get work”

    So in denying there is an obligation, that it is supposed to be all voluntary is untrue, and hence Jo Goodhew mislead Parliament, which is a serious matter.

    More on this whole BS that continues to go on about welfare and the refusal by MSD to reveal info, even via OIA requests, read this:

    https://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.wordpress.com/2015/04/10/mental-health-and-sole-parent-employment-services-msd-withholds-o-i-a-information-that-may-prove-their-trials-a-failure/

    We are also told endless porkies about the supposed “evidence” justifying the extreme work ability focus now used:

    https://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.wordpress.com/2015/08/09/msd-and-dr-david-bratt-present-misleading-evidence-claiming-worklessness-causes-poor-health/

    Sadly we get endless misinformation, and not even Carmel Sepuloni bothered challenging the Associate Minister for the BS she told Parliament and the public. As for the mental health sufferers, they may be told to have a choice to take part, but there is still and implicit expectation put to them by case managers.

    You will sadly find many links to certain info on relevant websites in those posts disabled now, as MSD and other key vested interest parties seem to be doing all to keep the public misinformed about what really goes on.

    I wish some here would bother following all this up, but beneficiaries do not deserve any much attention these days. On the Nation on TV 3 today, even Ann Tolley admitted in an interview that it was very hard to live off a benefit, when commenting on CYFS care children put into homes of mostly beneficiary foster parents.

    A nation of shame I call NZ now.

    • Mike the Savage One 18.1
      26 September 2015 at 11:24 pm

      The so-called “opposition” in NZ cannot be much of a “force” to reckon with, when they totally miss such opportunities. They do NOT deserve to be a government in waiting if they do not even do their damned homework, I am afraid.

  19. Mike the Savage One 19
    27 September 2015 at 12:10 am

    How “welcoming” and “friendly” are Merkel and Germany really towards refugees, remembering past comments?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdCNmr3XEvg

    They are now cutting per head benefits payments for refugees, if any here may be interested. But most Kiwis are totally disconnected with what goes on outside this country, I fear.

    • Grindlebottom 19.1
      27 September 2015 at 12:28 am

      No wonder we’re disconnected with what goes on outside this country. I don’t know how many people still watch the telly news but it’s incredible how little overseas news we do get, and how brief the few overseas items are.

  20. Mike the Savage One 20
    27 September 2015 at 1:15 am

    i cannot believe the new agenda by the “western nations” to address the middle east crisis, they are incompetent:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhRznfps2W4

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51XDO16Jpzg

    This is what goes on, peace will not be found, something stronger will be needed.