Open mike 28/09/2013

97 comments on “Open mike 28/09/2013 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. karol 1

   28 September 2013 at 7:29 am

   IPPC report now public, and even the MSM can’t ignore it, though expect it to slip off the main pages quickly:

   Stuff:

   It is more certain than ever that human civilisation is the main cause of global warming, putting the world on track for dangerous temperature rises, the latest major UN assessment of climate change science has found.

   The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says it is “extremely likely” that humans are the dominant cause of observed warming since the mid-20th century, with carbon dioxide emissions the main factor.

   If emissions remain high, by 2100 temperatures are likely to rise by more than 2 degrees – and up to 4.8 degrees – breaching a threshold agreed by governments as limiting the worst impacts of climate change.

   Heatwaves will be more frequent and last longer, the report found. Most wet regions will get more rainfall, and most dry regions less.

   Glaciers and ice sheets will continue to shrink, and the sea level will rise more quickly.

   Jamie Morton on NZ Herald:

   Scientists are now almost certain that mankind’s carbon emissions are warming up the planet.

   As the world’s most important climate report was released internationally last night, its New Zealand authors spelt out the outlook for our country and our closest neighbours.

   The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s draft fifth assessment report (AR5) warned that if the world could not rein in carbon emissions to a cap of one trillion tonnes of carbon – a budget already half spent – it would not be able to hold global warming back within 2°C, causing widespread extreme weather, drought and rising sea levels.

   The report says that by the end of this century, the world’s climate would have warmed by at least this level.

   The report says it is a virtual certainty that natural variables alone could not have fuelled changes that since 1950 have warmed the troposphere and warmed the stratosphere.
   […]
   In New Zealand, extreme rainfall events will become more frequent and intense by the end of the century, while drought risk would increase substantially, especially in the east and north of the country.

   Elsewhere in the country, more high temperature extremes and fewer cold extremes were virtually certain to become the norm.

   “Longer observational records, improved models and better understanding tell us that climate change will be on-going this century and beyond and will bring significant changes to New Zealand and to the Pacific,” said Victoria University climate scientist Dr James Renwick, a contributor to the report.

   “The South Pacific Convergence Zone, a major feature of rainfall variability in the tropical Southwest Pacific, may become more variable in its movement and rainfall intensity, which would be associated with increased risk of both floods and droughts for many of our Pacific neighbours.”

   The number of tropical cyclones was not likely to increase, but they would become more powerful.
   • muzza 1.1

     28 September 2013 at 9:29 am

     Don’t worry Karol, the depopulation/eugenics policies will be ramping up to, ‘even more blatant’, soon enough!

     Can’t imagine the IPCC will be too concerned about it!
2. phillip ure 2

   28 September 2013 at 7:39 am

   from my roamings this morn..i have found ‘the guardian’ has the best coverage..

   ..so i wd recommend heading over there..

   ..and i found this one particularly chilling/scary..

   http://www.theguardian.com/environment/interactive/2013/sep/27/climate-change-how-hot-lifetime-interactive

   go on..!..

   key in yr offsprings’ birthdate..and then scroll thru what is going to happen to them/their world..

   ..if we continue to do nothing..

   (and then go and vote for key and the other ‘drill baby! drill!’ bastards..?..eh..?..)

   ..(but hey..!..you will tutt-tutt…then you will probably sit down to bacon and eggs for breakfast..

   ..after you have slipped on yr animal-skin foot/body-coverings..

   ..(after washing/bathing in animal-fat..)

   ..and ask (helplessly/resigned) as you chew:..’but what can i do?’

   ..eh..?

   phillip ure..
3. Belladonna 3

   28 September 2013 at 7:54 am

   You can sit down to veggie bacon, a hash brown, grilled tomato and mushrooms for your breakfast and know you are making a small contribution and it tastes delish as well. Try it people!
   • Colonial Viper 3.1

     28 September 2013 at 9:01 am

     Hash browns full of beef fat? There is no other reason that potato tastes that good.
     • miravox 3.1.1

       28 September 2013 at 9:46 am

       “Hash browns full of beef fat?”

       Wellington cafes, I’m missing you. Ask at the local cafe if they make their own hashbrowns or buy them in – then you can check the ingredients. But, seeing as I love potato so much – home made hash browns with olive oil (although they do taste pretty yummy with butter). However, I prefer potato hash with a poached egg myself…

       The kartoffelpuffer (potato pancake) man is back in town for the autumn/winter seasons in my part of the world – potato street food, I couldn’t believe my luck – cooked in those black drums that are used for roasting chestnuts on the street, then served with salt and/or crushed garlic painted on. Delicious when its minus something horrible degrees. Apparently they serve them with applesauce in Germany – that seems strange to me.
     • joe90 3.1.2

       28 September 2013 at 10:55 am

       There is no other reason that potato tastes that good.

       Sacrilege!, the Irish in me is deeply offended. As any true spuddie fan knows the best hash browns are made with grated cold baked in their skin spuddies formed into a cake, fried in butter and salted before eating. So there!.
   • bad12 3.2

     28 September 2013 at 9:25 am

     Lolz, what is this breakfast thing you speak of, breakfast along with lunch has only ever been on the menu round here when one has been a guest of Her Majesty…
   • QoT 3.3

     28 September 2013 at 10:22 pm

     veggie bacon

     If the veg*n diet is so superior and delish, why do you need to eat fake meat?
     • McFlock 3.3.1

       28 September 2013 at 10:36 pm

       fucking. awesome.

       I’d never picked that Tegel didn’t produce “chicken-based imitation tofu”.
       • QoT 3.3.1.1

         28 September 2013 at 11:16 pm

         Ew. That’s a disgusting thought.

         I have no true hatred of veg*nism in of itself, but fuck I hate preachy wankers trying to convert me while looking like total hypocrites.
         • Rogue Trooper 3.3.1.1.1

           28 September 2013 at 11:20 pm

           that s*ems out of character
     • Belladonna 3.3.2

       29 September 2013 at 12:00 am

       Vegans will eat fake meat because they like the taste but not the cruelty involved in eating meat.
       So why would you put animals through torture when you can buy a substitute that doesnt involve cruelty and tastes the same.
       • McFlock 3.3.2.1

         29 September 2013 at 12:06 am

         Because they don’t and it doesn’t.
4. phillip ure 4

   28 September 2013 at 8:07 am

   also @ guardian:..there is a blueprint for cunnliffe/ labour…

   “..An iron law of politics has been broken.

   The rulebook states clearly that if traditional Labour red meat is gobbled up inside the conference hall –

   – the electorate watching from afar will start to gag.

   For at least three decades that has been the received wisdom –

   – accepted by Labour luminaries along with the rest of the political class:

   – if it tickles Labour’s erogenous zone – then it’s too leftwing for the country.

   But that was before Ed Miliband’s proposed 20-month freeze on energy bills.

   It sent the Brighton conference hall into convulsions of ecstasy of course –

   – but it also received an “off the charts” welcome from the public.

   Indeed – it’s had the Conservatives and their allies reeling in rare confusion – as they head to their own clan gathering in Manchester.

   Usually the Tories can cheerfully brand any Labour move leftward as a doomed journey into electoral Siberia:

   – what should they say now – when Ed’s hint of red is unarguably popular?

   It prompts an intriguing thought: if using the state to rein in the energy behemoths finds favour with the voters –

   – what other left ideas might be popular?

   Can Miliband repeat his success – and craft a populism of the left?

   If populism often comes down to channelling public anger against a perceived elite –

   – there is plenty of rich terrain for Labour to explore..”

   (cont..)

   http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/27/ed-milband-new-populism-energy-prices

   phillip ure..
   • karol 4.1

     28 September 2013 at 8:15 am

     Nationalisation of powercos, re-branding “welfare” as “social security”.

     Actually those are not new moves, not “re-” anything. They are a return to core Labour values.
     • phillip ure 4.1.1

       28 September 2013 at 8:28 am

       going on labour both here and there ..since fucken douglas/prebble/whoever..

       ..i wd submit they are most certainly ‘new moves’..

       ..given the wholesale abandonment of those ‘core-values’ by labour..

       ..the new new labour…should/must be able to look back at that recent history..

       ..with a degree of horror..

       ..and an even higher degree of repudiation..

       ..phillip ure
5. Paul 5

   28 September 2013 at 8:09 am

   The Auckland diocese has divested from fossil fuels.
   Bill mcKibben on his recent speaking tour recommended divestment as a way to hurt the fossils who run fossil fuel industries.
   • Rogue Trooper 5.1

     28 September 2013 at 11:06 pm

     Excellent News
6. Dumrse 6

   28 September 2013 at 8:13 am

   I was also roaming this morning and I still fail to see anything about Paul Findlay. You dudes not talking about your colleagues?
   • karol 6.1

     28 September 2013 at 8:17 am

     How’s that CV padding line going for you guys? What DID John key do at Harvard? Where did Hooton get the idea he is NZ’s leading political commentator?

     Shifting your target to flawed minor players now? Bit of a fail I’d say.
     • andy (the other one) 6.1.1

       28 September 2013 at 8:31 am

       What did Richard Worth do, to have to resign?

       How many tranzrail shares did John Key own?

       Which charity does Key donate his PM salary to?

       How did Arron Gilmore get selected?
       • tc 6.1.1.1

         28 September 2013 at 10:01 am

         You can add smiling sam to that as he stated he was donating one of his salaries to charity when double dipping as a paid akl city counciller.
   • North 6.2

     28 September 2013 at 8:38 am

     Is it really “Worth” it Dumb Arse ?
   • Draco T Bastard 6.3

     28 September 2013 at 1:20 pm

     You plugging for a ban?
7. Sanctuary 7

   28 September 2013 at 8:27 am

   I also read the Guardian piece of Milliband’s power price freeze. After the GFC and failure of neo-liberalism we wallowed along in a vacuum as the previous generation of “left wing” politicians either wouldn’t or couldn’t face the facts about the failure of the central project of their political careers. What is happening, across the English speaking world, is social-democratic politicians are discarding the baggage of Blairism and the distractions of identity and are re-discovering their nerve and socialism. And in the process, they’ve discovered that the apparently iron fortress of neo-liberalism is built on increasingly shakey electoral foundations. There are never any final battles in politics, and the left is coming back again.

   PS I love Millibands line: ” “the rising tide only seems to lift the yachts”.
   • karol 7.1

     28 September 2013 at 8:38 am

     Agree with most of your comment, Sanctuary,

     but this:

     is social-democratic politicians are discarding the baggage of Blairism and the distractions of identity embracing a “Larger world of Freedom” and are re-discovering their nerve and socialism.
     • Bill 7.1.1

       28 September 2013 at 12:01 pm

       I guess we all agree they are finally widening the focus from that which is commonly termed as ‘identity politics’ and putting class back into politics? It’s not and has never been an either/or situation. But until now class has been rendered invisible in political discourse. And that’s fueled a fair bit of perfectly understandable yet regrettable and misdirected resentment from those put aside and left to languish as liberal ‘identity politics’ (ie, class free policies) have been advanced through legislation.
       • Rogue Trooper 7.1.1.1

         28 September 2013 at 11:08 pm

         deep sigh, of relief.
   • kenny 7.2

     28 September 2013 at 10:38 am

     + 1

     It’s time for boldness! Let boldness be your friend (ask Oracle).

     People are crying out for leadership – the leadership of good ideas and equal opportunities; of the common good, of a fair go for all.

     Who cares what the selfish self-interested think! Let them start worrying about tomorrow.
8. bad12 8

   28 September 2013 at 8:31 am

   i usually just call him Slippery, the British press tho waxed wonderfully lyrical over our Prime Ministers exhibition while a guest of the Queen at Balmoral this week allotting Him the grand title of ”the Galloping Colonial Clot”,

   Not to be out done, the Herald’s Clare Trevett, usually found doting over the PM bestowed upon Him the descriptive ”the Antipodean Mouse that roared” after the PM opened His empty suitcase of intellectual rigor for all to see at the UN this week, lambasting the Security Council for failing to find a solution to the Syrian chemical weapons crisis at the very same time as news was breaking that a solution had been agreed…
   • David H 8.1

     28 September 2013 at 9:11 am

     Oh so there is our beloved Leader, opening his mouth really wide, inserting both feet in up to the knees. Then unlocks the Intellectual suitcase to find it’s full of dirty socks.
     So this added to the 300k Grosser wasted, is our attempt at a seat on the security council. They must be pissing themselves in New York.
   • Populuxe1 8.2

     28 September 2013 at 6:03 pm

     If you are seriously trying to pass off a middle market tabloid like the Daily Mail as the entirety of “the British press”, you should be helping Hoots-mon with his CV padding.
9. phillip ure 9

   28 September 2013 at 8:45 am

   would this be a good time to introduce my idea/concept of ‘partial-nationalisation’..?

   ..without banging on and on/in a nutshell..

   ..it involves turning the tory ‘partial-privatisation’ plan on its’ head..

   ..veering away from energy for a mo’..lets look at the food-supply duopoly screwing us blind..(nz-owned..or not..)

   ..partial-nationalisation means the people/state takes 51% of any given entity..

   ..(and those bought out will of course get paid off..over a negotiated period of time..)

   ..so in the case of the supermarket-duopoly..the benefits from economies of scale/purchasing are obvious..and people still have to eat..the market won’t suddenly die..’

   (plus..minimal upfront costs..as that 51% payback to current owners/shareholders comes largely from future profits..)

   ..and i think this what is essentially a marriage of capitalism/socialism has much to appeal..

   ..in that the people will no longer be screwed blind…(in the case of the supermarket-duopoly) healthy food regimes will be so much easier to implement..

   ..but the special beauty of this model i feel is that the commercial nous/operational-skills-base of any operation partially-nationalised will still be retained…

   ..and i wd add this model is especially relevant to the many monopolies that currently are bleeding the people dry..

   ..(and yes..!..of course the ‘sin’-industries are included..gambling/alcohol etc..)

   ..i have tipped this one upside-down/looked at it from all angles..

   ..and can see so much to commend..

   ..and in my eyes…so little to criticise..

   ..phillip ure..
10. BLiP 10

    28 September 2013 at 10:05 am

    ‘

    A class system for internet data . . . no thanks.
    • muzza 10.1

      28 September 2013 at 3:28 pm

      This has been bubbling away for a long time now, it will be interesting to see how this comes to pass.
11. Pasupial 11

    28 September 2013 at 10:16 am

    The robot’s circuitry is overloaded by human contradiction:

    ‘ Ms Collins is concerned about the length of time some judgments take and she is sick of hearing that the best answer to addressing delays is to appoint more judges.

    “If I have heard that once I have heard it 100 times.”

    But with crime rates dropping and fewer people going into court “it cannot be right; it does not compute”. ‘

    Among its new rules:

    ‘ Allow court documents to be filed, held and issued electronically.

    Require use of audio visual link for procedural cases involving prisoners to reduce transportation. ‘

    http://www.odt.co.nz/news/politics/274855/collins-puts-judges-notice
12. greywarbler 12

    28 September 2013 at 11:33 am

    I have just read something about James K. Galbraith economist, son of John K, and it is so damning of our present societal approach. I didn’t realise that such things were being said so strongly in public by leading professionals and academics. I’llput some text from him that I got from Wikipedia because it summarises much of what we have been saying here.

    Today, the signature of modern American capitalism is neither benign competition, nor class struggle, nor an inclusive middle-class utopia. Instead, predation has become the dominant feature — a system wherein the rich have come to feast on decaying systems built for the middle class. The predatory class is not the whole of the wealthy; it may be opposed by many others of similar wealth. But it is the defining feature, the leading force. And its agents are in full control of the government under which we live.[6]

    Galbraith is also highly critical of the Bush administration’s foreign policy apropos of the Iraq invasion:
    There is a reason for the vulnerability of empires. To maintain one against opposition requires war — steady, unrelenting, unending war. And war is ruinous — from a legal, moral and economic point of view. It can ruin the losers, such as Napoleonic France, or Imperial Germany in 1918. And it can ruin the victors, as it did the British and the Soviets in the 20th century. Conversely, Germany and Japan recovered well from World War II, in part because they were spared reparations and did not have to waste national treasure on defense in the aftermath of defeat… The real economic cost of Bush’s empire building is twofold: It diverts attention from pressing economic problems at home and it sets the United States on a long-term imperial path that is economically ruinous.
    • Olwyn 12.1

      28 September 2013 at 12:15 pm

      What a brilliant, concise summary!
    • Draco T Bastard 12.2

      28 September 2013 at 1:34 pm

      The Predator State

      Well worth a read.
      • Rogue Trooper 12.2.1

        28 September 2013 at 11:11 pm

        2009; quite recent.
    • greywarbler 12.3

      28 September 2013 at 4:21 pm

      On radionz this afternoon a USA couple from near the Appalachians were talking about their music. One letter from a music lover was from an Iraqi soldier saying how it reminded him of home. He is over there because he joined the Forces so he could get higher education, and he is not sure why he’s there, what it’s for. Some come home and then commit suicide. It all serves the USA and its imperialist purposes. It won’t bring peace.
13. ak 13

    28 September 2013 at 11:42 am

    Interesting…..Judge Judy takes on the beaks in populist fashion. Can we expect another Key swipe before long? Cracks appearing in the Natsy edifice lads, brace for a barrage of distraction…..
14. srylands 14

    28 September 2013 at 1:05 pm

    “You can’t legislate for revenue.” – Phil Goff

    “”There are huge advantages from being involved with TPP and even bigger disadvantages of being locked out.” – Phil Goff

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11131278

    At last some encouragingly intelligent statements from a Labour shadow Minister. I wonder what will happen to him?
    • bad12 14.1

      28 September 2013 at 1:13 pm

      SSLands,you are proving to be the ever elusive fool, there might be advantages in the proposed TPP, there also might be some very unpalatable disadvantages,

      David Cunliff has rightly said that we all should get to see the text of the agreement and have time to discuss it befor any decision is made on whether to sign it,

      By the way, you still havn’t answered the question, which do you want to buy me, the new fridge or the new washing machine…
      • srylands 14.1.1

        28 September 2013 at 1:22 pm

        As if you would know how to use a washing machine.

        The negotiations should be held in secret. It is impossible to hold multi party negotiations with the uneducated rabble like you baying inanities that get picked up in the MSM. It is a distraction from rational discussion.
        • bad12 14.1.1.1

          28 September 2013 at 1:29 pm

          Ok, i will take that as a yes to you buying me, as per new National Party policy, a brand new fridge/freezer,

          Best tell Slippery to sign the thing befor November 2014 then, or the readers and writers, excluding you, of the Standard will get to have a strong voice on what is in that TPP,

          SSLands is an excellent ‘handle’ for you who does not believe in the democratic process…
        • Draco T Bastard 14.1.1.2

          28 September 2013 at 1:40 pm

          So, you think that we shouldn’t have a say in our own governance? That would make you an authoritarian but that really does come back to my saying:

          Libertarians: Dictators hiding behind Liberal values.
    • Draco T Bastard 14.2

      28 September 2013 at 1:36 pm

      Um, no. That would be a Labour Shadow Minister still believing in the tooth fairy neo-liberal economics – the stuff that just brought the world economy to its knees.
15. The Al1en 15

    28 September 2013 at 2:02 pm

    Not wanting to ruin Weekend social.

    In reply to bad12, who wrote…
    “None of your taxes pay for the treatment of tobacco related illness or death, tobacco taxes have been estimated to be collecting up to a billion dollars a year over and above the cost to the country of tobacco usage…”

    As a grow your own man and by the looks quite proud of it, none of your taxes are going to pay for your health care because you don’t pay any on your smokes. That’s like double dipping, but worse.
    Sort of puts you in context. I could call hypocrite. 😉

    Those taxes used for smoking related illness, wherever they come from ($250m in 2004 and no doubt much higher now) could help alleviate child poverty and provide opportunities to many in need. So much for your points about funding america cup races and other corporate welfare deals.
    Like I said, you go for it, mate, just ’cause you are too obstinate, ignorant or stupid to use the stop smoking incentives to quit is completely up to you.
    I don’t even mind if you don’t say thanks to taxpayers for the care you will get at our expense, but a sorry to the disadvantaged children who’s tax dollar funding you’re stealing should be mandatory for all left wing smokers, not to mention to the nurses on the lung cancer wards and the morgue porters who’ll have to trolley your frigid corpses around.
    I just hope you don’t smoke anywhere near children.
    • bad12 15.1

      28 September 2013 at 3:16 pm

      That’s simply pathetic,the tax dollars smokers currently pay are around a billion dollars over and above the actual cost of smoking and it’s obvious even to the thickest head on the planet that the Government that imposed these taxes have no intention of spending such on impoverished children,

      Do you tax rugby players extra and disburse that among needy children as every weekend 1000’s of them deliberately go out and get injured playing that game,

      Road users, who also cost the country billions above and beyond what tobacco users cost get to pay extra cash to feed the kids most in need do they,

      Considering what you have called me in that comment without answering the salient point which is the spurious claim that tobacco kills 50% of those who use it by means of heart disease and various cancers when 49. something % of people who have never touched tobacco products will die of that very same heart disease and those very same various cancers i would suggest that i am debating with a fucking moron who has a genetic intellectual disability,

      So if we all stopped using tobacco the poor wee nurses on the cancer ward would simply have to follow us over to the other wards where we will still die in the same numbers from heart disease and various cancers coz that’s what kills 50% of us whether we smoke or not,

      Your whole comment above reeks of mental retardation, you should get that seen to…
      • vto 15.1.1

        28 September 2013 at 3:57 pm

        sheesh, just bunged out a long reply for bad12 and alien only to have the lot lost and now it too late on Saturday afternoon. Time for one of those naughty activities….
      • The Al1en 15.1.2

        28 September 2013 at 4:56 pm

        “Your whole comment above reeks of mental retardation”

        Seriously? I don’t see it that way. That $250m spent on dying smokers by the government could, as you posted the other night, lift children out of poverty in a stroke (no pun intended).
        Wherever the tax dollars come from, and clearly it’s not from you, having an extra 1/4 of a billion dollars in the kitty shouldn’t be so easily dismissed.
        I can smell the guilty conscience on your breath as you type, but as a proven double dipper, you have to admit that your free will to smoke comes at a great cost to many deserving causes. That you don’t care, try to deflect the argument and dismiss a common sense point does you little credit at all.

        Your points about taxing rugby players and drivers is avoidance (I’m sensing a theme).
        Your point about percentages is manipulating statistics to support your view, and I believe, and I’m happy to be corrected by the scholars, false logic.

        I’m okay with you smoking, though really you should pay your fair share of taxes or at least (try to) pay privately if you want healthcare down the track, but like a soft touch lefty, concede that you should be treated by the state at the expense of others when your time comes, because that’s what we do in the caring left, even for selfishly stupid people who could have helped themselves, given the encouragement and funding on offer.
        I’m not okay with preventable illnesses costing vast amounts of money and causing social damage, which is why most of us want to stop our families living in sub standard housing, getting third world diseases – Same for smoking. Those kids, mums and dads can’t help themselves, but hard as stopping smoking is, you can.

        I challenge you to quit. Right here, right now, even though it’ll add years to you.
        Three months time when you can breathe and taste food again, you’ll thank me, rather than call me a retard.
        • bad12 15.1.2.1

          28 September 2013 at 5:05 pm

          Sod off with your pathetic rubbish you fool, i have no intentions of quitting, i just had a 4.99 pizza and it tasted just fine, finished off with a good puff on my home grown and a cup of tea,

          Ah life’s great when you can appreciate the small things…

          Ps, if you weren’t such an overcoat changing abusive little twat i would dig out the link to the health department stats that show 50% of those who do not smoke die of heart disease and various cancers so you have as much chance as me of clocking off via those ailments,

          i have posted that same link befor here on the Standard, go fetch…
          • The Al1en 15.1.2.1.1

            28 September 2013 at 5:07 pm

            “Sod off with your pathetic rubbish you fool, i have no intentions of quitting”

            Then you are a leech, a hypocrite and enemy of the poor.
            • bad12 15.1.2.1.1.1

              28 September 2013 at 5:20 pm

              It is then even odds that either one or the both of us will die of cancer or heart disease, i pick yours to be brain cancer based upon the fact that there is obviously something amiss with it at present,

              Me, i reckon heart disease caused by having too much fun will knock me off…
              • The Al1en …

                28 September 2013 at 5:25 pm

                “It is then even odds that either one or the both of us will die of cancer or heart disease, i pick yours to be brain cancer based upon the fact that there is obviously something amiss with it at present,”

                Ouch! 😆
        • vto 15.1.2.2

          28 September 2013 at 5:07 pm

          your problem alien is the dismissal of humankinds desires
          • The Al1en 15.1.2.2.1

            28 September 2013 at 5:08 pm

            “your problem alien is the dismissal of humankinds desire for the wild”

            I don’t think that’s true, but then there’s nothing wild or desirable about tumours 🙂
            • vto 15.1.2.2.1.1

              28 September 2013 at 5:12 pm

              sorry, went and edited post post….

              but I think you do dismiss something that cannot be so dismissed.
              • The Al1en …

                28 September 2013 at 5:16 pm

                I saw your edit and amended my answer to reflect.

                I don’t know what you’re thinking I’m dismissing, but desire and/or call of the wild wouldn’t be on my list if I were.
      • The Al1en 15.1.3

        28 September 2013 at 5:06 pm

        Missed this first time around 😆

        “i would suggest that i am debating with a fucking moron who has a genetic intellectual disability”

        As you now know, you’re not as good at astute as I am 🙂
        • bad12 15.1.3.1

          28 September 2013 at 5:16 pm

          Yes, you missing that the first time round just adds the proof to the assertion…
          • The Al1en 15.1.3.1.1

            28 September 2013 at 5:23 pm

            I think it was because I was desperately trying to find a valid point in the post, I skimmed past the third or fourth insult.
            But interesting to note, given my charitable will to treat you should you be the 1 in 2 to die from smoking, how you respond to someone you view as having a genetic intellectual disability.

            Maybe not just a leech, a hypocrite and enemy of the poor, but also an abuser of the intellectually challenged.
            That’s not a good thing to have on ones record, but there it is in black and white.
            • bad12 15.1.3.1.1.1

              28 September 2013 at 5:42 pm

              Pathetic scum who are you to tell me what i should and should not do, smoking tobacco is perfectly legal as is growing it,

              Do those who grow tomatoes,cabbages and apples in their back-yard get taxed for it, your zealots view show you up for the overcoat changing trash that you really are,

              Perhaps you would like the chance now to deny that you voted for Labour and took the WFF tax credit and then changed your overcoat to vote National and took the tax cuts, something i put to you the other day and you did not deny,

              You claim that i am a proven ‘double dipper’ you and Hooten use the same smear tactics, where exactly am i double dipping you pathetic fool,
              • The Al1en …

                28 September 2013 at 6:06 pm

                ^ 😆

                “Perhaps you would like the chance now to deny that you voted for Labour and took the WFF tax credit and then changed your overcoat to vote National and took the tax cuts, something i put to you the other day and you did not deny,”

                Like I wrote at the time, I’m as red/green as my logos eyes.
                Not that I have to justify myself to some angry prick on the internet, but, I have never voted other than for Labour and the Green party, and can’t foresee a time when I would do otherwise.

                “where exactly am i double dipping you pathetic fool”
                “Do those who grow tomatoes,cabbages and apples in their back-yard get taxed for it”

                Home tomato growers don’t get taxed, but then the tax on the tomato industry, using your argument, doesn’t adequately fund the healthcare and associated societal cost of one in two tomato eaters dying.
                However, you smoking and not paying the taxes on smokes, means unless you have a private health plan, which I doubt, you’ll get your healthcare, should you be the one in two preventable deaths that need a share of the $250m (2004 figure) budget for nothing. Cake and eat it, with a double dose of dipping.

                Shame on you. 😉

                “Pathetic scum who are you to tell me what i should and should not do”

                This site needs a :grrr: smiley or I’ll just use :bad12: as everyone will know what I mean 😆
                • bad12 …

                  28 September 2013 at 6:36 pm

                  Yes exactly, pathetic scum run round sticking their noses into other peoples business that is perfectly legal,

                  The above is why i think you are a fucking moron with some form of brain dysfunction/disease,

                  The 50% death figures for tobacco users is based upon deaths from heart disease and various cancers, correct,

                  The problem with those figures is that 50% of those who have never been near a cigarette will also according to the health statistics die of heart disease and various cancers including YOU,

                  So when that brain cancer inflames ya brain what are you going to blame,

                  As i said above i have posted a link to the figures befor on the Standard, be a good little puppy and go fetch…
                  • The Al1en …

                    28 September 2013 at 7:07 pm

                    Again, false logic bad12.

                    Consider if the smokers who get sick, needing expensive health care and then die from smoking didn’t, how much extra cash would the health service have to treat and prevent non smokers from getting sick and dying? Not to mention extra taxes they’d contribute from not being too sick to work and or dead.

                    Consider the money spent on initiatives, programs and drugs that try, successfully in many cases, except for the very most weak willed, selfish or ignorant, to stop smokers from smoking with the goal of preventing addicts from getting sick and needing expensive health care, instead being diverted to preventing other causes of cancer and heart disease to help people who get sick without the option of choosing to play 50/50 russian roulette.

                    Consider all that extra money being spent on smokers being spent on children in poverty, for example, or education, night classes etc…
                    If only smokers weren’t so addicted and narcissistic to the point of sacrificing the health and well being of others and especially the poor.

                    Again, you argue like a bit of a dimwit, mate, deliberately diverting off in tangents, throwing out a challenge, having it answered, ignoring it and then repeating the same things over and over in a barrage of insults and slurs.
                    You are hard work, for sure.
                    • Not Another Sheep …

                      29 September 2013 at 1:05 am

                      Have been on a staff who ostracized smokers continuously, blah, blah,…yet there were lots of fat bastards who didn’t smoke and sat down at ‘smoko’ to their pies and donuts and whilst putting lashings of butter on their scones would deride their smoking colleagues who were outside as bad role models????

                      *Current tobacco excise revenues in New Zealand amount to approximately $1 billion per year and have been at that level for some years. This is just under 2% of total tax revenues.
                      *Of the approximate $1.6 billion per year retail spending on tobacco products, approximately 70% is accounted for by taxation, including GST as well as tobacco taxes.

                      Smoking has better returns for the Government than a Power Co!

                      If your figure of $250 million is the cost to ‘the country’; I’d say “Smokers- smoke away to your heart’s content.”
                    • bad12 …

                      29 September 2013 at 1:17 am

                      Lolz unbridled stupidity is a joy to read only for the fact of it’s humor content, i actually got my %’s a little wrong above,

                      There’s always a little time for correction tho,

                      Annual death from heart diseases in New Zealand 40% of deaths annually,

                      http://www.heartfoundation.org.nz/know-the-facts/statistics

                      Annual death from cancers in New Zealand 29.4% of deaths annually,

                      http://www.cancernz.org.nz/divisions/about/cancer-statistics

                      You make assumptions,(false), that if only all those smokers would just give up then they would not die of heart diseases nor cancers,

                      69.4% of us all will be snuffed out by one or the other, given that, if everyone quit using tobacco products tomorrow 49.4% of them would still die of cancers or heart diseases,

                      You make another assumption,(again false), that many are aided in giving up the use of tobacco products by aides and interventions which of course your small brain does not allow you to see are paid for from tobacco taxation,

                      The current round of interventions(past 4 years),have according to those who run the quitline and others who have conducted studies only reached 2% of tobacco users and resulted in only 2% of actual success after a 6 month period,

                      In other words, a waste of money, as the uptake among youth is un-measured but likely to out-number the minute numbers of those who quit,

                      Your whining is just that, smokers pay for ALL the money spent upon them in hospital care and in attempts to stop them using the product with hundreds of millions more going into the Governments general accounts,(Treasury says 1 billion dollars),from taxation on the product,

                      If no-one smoked how would this money get to be spent on hungry kids etc etc as you say, perhaps as ex-smokers you would have us taxed even more,

                      Your arguments are pathetic rubbish based upon nothing but your willingness to interfere in others lives and if you actually believe any of the trite bullshit you trot out then its obvious you are retarded by brainwashing…
                    • Not Another Sheep …

                      29 September 2013 at 1:52 am

                      And Paula could be Beneficial to the poor if she gave up some of her breakfast, lunch, multi-course dinner, morning tea, afternoon tea, supper, midnight snacks, office draw munchies, elevensies, high tea, brunch… thus giving her saved expenditure to the health budget; and by ‘slim-lining’ on this austerity she’d potentially not become a heart disease cost.
                    • miravox …

                      29 September 2013 at 3:33 am

                      “You make assumptions,(false), that if only all those smokers would just give up then they would not die of heart diseases nor cancers,”

                      …that if only all those smokers would just give up then they would not die of heart diseases nor cancers earlier than non-smokers do (generally speaking).

                      Not that I’m saying you shouldn’t smoke – I only tell my kids that. Tis just that is more years are lost through earlier death, is all.
                    • The Al1en …

                      29 September 2013 at 9:53 am

                      NAS, your figures are wrong, but I agree with what you’re saying that fatties who smoke are the worst of all.
                    • The Al1en …

                      29 September 2013 at 10:02 am

                      bad12 …
                      29 September 2013 at 1:17 am

                      Or you could just read the info on the smokefree website. It has gems like…

                      COSTS OF SMOKING
                      http://smokefree.org.nz/costs-smoking

                      “Of the approximate $1.6 billion per year retail spending on tobacco products, approximately 70% is accounted for by taxation, including GST as well as tobacco taxes.”
                      “The New Zealand government collected a total of $842 million in tobacco excise tax in 2005.”
                      “The tangible costs of smoking to New Zealand in 2005 were around NZ$1.7 billion, or about 1.1 percent of Gross Domestic Product. This includes costs incurred because of lost production due to early death, lost production due to smoking-caused illness, and smoking-related health-care costs.”

                      And…

                      HEALTH EFFECTS
                      http://smokefree.org.nz/health-effects

                      “It is estimated that many deaths due to various diseases could be prevented if smoking was eliminated, including:
                      68% of female deaths and 82% of male deaths due to lung cancer
                      65% of female deaths and 79% of male deaths due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
                      11% of female deaths and 18% of male deaths due to heart disease
                      8% of female deaths and 15% of male deaths due to stroke.

                      And…

                      One-half of smokers who do not quit smoking will die early from a smoking-related disease.
                      http://smokefree.org.nz/sites/default/files/Fact_One_in_two_smokers-fnl-081003_0.pdf

                      Smoking kills 5,000 New Zealanders every year
                      http://smokefree.org.nz/sites/default/files/Fact_5000_NZers-fnl-081003_0_0.pdf

                      Smokers who die from a smoking-related disease
                      lose, on average, 15 years of life
                      http://smokefree.org.nz/sites/default/files/Fact_15years-fnl-081003_0.pdf

                      Roll-your-own cigarettes are not safer to smoke than
                      tailor-made cigarettes
                      http://smokefree.org.nz/sites/default/files/Fact_Rollies-fnl-081003.pdf

                      Now you can be in denial all you like, but the $ shortfall in from the cost of smoking compared to revenue gained by smoking is huge, double by those figures. Imagine those extra $800m dollars getting kids out of poverty.
                      Every time you puff on a fag, you think how you’re taking food out of a poor kids belly, or sending that kid to school in shoes and an overcoat in winter.
                      If you enjoy the drag, then you are what I’ve called you, a leech, a hypocrite and enemy of the poor.
                • McFlock …

                  28 September 2013 at 6:53 pm

                  Right:

                  Accounting for the direct treatment of smoking-related illnesses assumes that those people will never get cancer, heart disease, nor any other condition that requires palliative care towards the end of life. In short, it assumes that every smoker would suddenly drop dead without warning at a ripe old age if only they did not smoke.

                  Secondly, assuming 20-odd years of lost life for one in two smokers, that period involves about 12 years of pensions paid by society saved by those smokers who die early.

                  Thirdly, the “lost economic activity” is only valid if it involves new production – again, not in retirement years. The deceased’s estate is distributed and spent by their inheritors – the economic activity is not lost.

                  Basically, all you’ve got is the smoking industry’s lies about addiction, and passive smoking. One hasn’t been valid in NZ for thirty-odd years, the other is negligible in current smokefree laws, barring the personal risk choices of relatives.
                  • The Al1en …

                    28 September 2013 at 7:14 pm

                    “Right”

                    Like your all authoritative 😆
                    • McFlock …

                      28 September 2013 at 10:34 pm

                      lol

                      It was more where to get started after going through the latest debate on the issue 🙂
16. amirite 16

    28 September 2013 at 3:13 pm

    It seems that the National voters and the middle class have grown disillusioned with PinoKeyo, Blinglish and their government.
    Well serves you right, were you stupid or what?

    http://a-working-mans-opinion.blogspot.co.nz/2013/09/dear-john-this-is-break-up-letter.html
    • infused 16.1

      28 September 2013 at 11:11 pm

      What a stupid blog entry.
17. Tracey 17

    28 September 2013 at 4:28 pm

    It is not akin to a corporate negotiation unkess it is true that it kowtows to corporate interests. Tppa is between countries and negotiations began in 2008. In any event its what the usa wants that will be driving this. Negotiate in private ratify in public.

    watch murdochs machinary damn the climate report.
    • Populuxe1 17.1

      28 September 2013 at 6:06 pm

      This would be the TPPA that Labour supports, yes?
18. joe90 18

    28 September 2013 at 5:05 pm

    Some of the lowest paid people on the planet, Bangladeshi garment workers, have had paramilitary troops set upon them – yay globalisation.
    //

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-26/bangladesh-deploys-paramilitary-in-garment-zone-after-protests.html
19. phillip ure 19

    28 September 2013 at 5:30 pm

    were our soldiers in afghanistan given larium..?…(a malaria preventitive..)

    ..british soldiers were…

    ..and it is known as ‘the suicide drug’..

    ..phillip ure..
    • joe90 19.1

      28 September 2013 at 5:42 pm

      A quick google – doxycycline.

      Feb 7, 2003 – Commander Joint Forces New Zealand. Each Service has a …… by NZDF personnel in East Timor is Doxycycline (100 milligrams per day).
20. Rhinocrates 20

    28 September 2013 at 11:12 pm

    Jesus tap-dancing Christ in a sidecar on a pogo stick. The misogyny of the pigs in blue knows no bounds. A senior cop thinks that a ten year old girl asked to be raped:

    http://news.msn.co.nz/nationalnews/8730373/cop-sorry-for-calling-rape-victim-willing

    I repeat that: a TEN YEAR OLD GIRL was supposedly ASKING FOR IT.

    That disgusting sack of shit thinks that a little girl wanted to be raped. These are the sort of people (I use the term loosely) decide to promote to senior positions.

    Look at that swine’s “apology” – all the usual “I’m sorry if I MIGHT have…”

    The most generous thing I can say is that Central District Commander Russell Gibson is a very, very sick man who needs some intensive psychiatric treatment… but I know that he’ll get a slap across the wrist with a wet bus ticket.
    • QoT 20.1

      28 September 2013 at 11:19 pm

      What an utter shit.

      That being said, I disagree that he needs “intensive psychiatric treatment”. Mental illness doesn’t make people misogynist douchebags. Society makes normal people into misogynist douchebags quite happily.

      (There’s a term for it, and it rhymes with “shmape culture”, but mentioning that would probably just be me being a nasty academic feminist or something)
      • Rhinocrates 20.1.1

        28 September 2013 at 11:33 pm

        That being said, I disagree that he needs “intensive psychiatric treatment”

        Ah well, QoT, I was gritting my teeth over that. I have a mental illness – anxiety crossed with depression – and all my best friends have their own variants.

        I was choking back what I really think and what he really deserves shouldn’t be mentioned here.

        Anyway, yes, we see in that shitbag, and the people who promoted him to a position of authority, are rape culture embodied, and don’t let anyone deny that it exists.
        • miravox 20.1.1.1

          29 September 2013 at 12:04 am

          Although it’s rape culture, the phrase sort of shortcuts what is going on here, and yeah, is dismissed as some academic, feminist rant thing. So just to spell it out…

          This was a crime of child abuse, rape, abuse of trust (of child and her parents), abuse of power and a police officer’s complete misunderstanding of what grooming children means. Add to that it’s the absolving an adult, who is fully aware of what he’s doing, of responsibility for his crime for no justifiable reason.

          Clearly he’s had a bit of a lesson and is repentant (the officer, that is) but is shows how easily this stuff gets embedded in people’s heads and how hard it is to remove when even the apologies are qualified with ‘may have re-victimised’ the child with a poor choice “of language” (?!)

          No wonder that even if kids know what is happening to them is a crime and they’re in a position to report it, they don’t.
          • Rhinocrates 20.1.1.1.1

            29 September 2013 at 12:48 am

            Clearly he’s had a bit of a lesson and is repentant (the officer, that is)

            The pig isn’t repentant at all – he’s still making excuses – “I might have”, “people may have” “I made a poor choice of words” – that’s all diversionary bullshit by a coward.

            Enough of this “may” and “might”.

            “I am a complete and utter shitbag” is the only honest thing he can say, instead he tries to suggest that he’s being persecuted because other people have chosen to be offended.

            Worse still, there are people who put this pig in a position of authority. Who are they? We must name them.
    • Rhinocrates 20.2

      28 September 2013 at 11:28 pm

      Just to add to that – we really have to ask ourselves some serious questions about the police. Their misogyny, their violence, the propensity for rape and corruption of justice has been well documented. Are they the enemy within now?
      • Murray Olsen 20.2.1

        29 September 2013 at 12:12 am

        They’ve been the biggest gang in the country for as long as I can remember. Sure, sometimes they’ll deny that they’re a criminal organisation and say that while some individuals might commit offences, it’s not overall policy. They’ll try and tell us that they hang out together because they have a love of white cars and bright lights, plus blue uniforms, and they shouldn’t be judged by their propensity to use tasers. They say people ask for it and what can they do? Now and then they even do some good acts, such as rescue kittens, but that’s only to get public sympathy.
        • Rhinocrates 20.2.1.1

          29 September 2013 at 12:56 am

          The question you have to ask every pig is this: Who do you serve? The rich, yourselves or both?

          And oh yeah, all those “good cops”: what are you, personally, doing to stop the rapists and thugs in your own force?

          Nothing, right?
          • Murray Olsen 20.2.1.1.1

            29 September 2013 at 6:07 pm

            I’ve known the odd one who has tried to do something. They quickly find their lives become unbearable and generally leave.
21. Jon 21

    29 September 2013 at 4:54 am

    Is Cunliffe going to follow through and discipline Goff for his Neoliberal positioning around the TPPA (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11131278), that has totally distorted the Labour Party position (http://thestandard.org.nz/cunliffe-declares-war-national-tppa/), and contradicted Cunliffe’s framing?
    • Murray Olsen 21.1

      29 September 2013 at 6:12 pm

      Goff should take a seat beside Banks and make his ACT membership official.
    • Bill 21.2

      29 September 2013 at 6:54 pm

      I dunno Jon. Not saying you’re wrong to read the article in the way you have. We know Goff is right-wing.

      But when I read the article I bore in mind both the author and the fact that Tory sympathisers like her have been somewhat desperately casting around for divisions to leverage. And I’m aware that where none exist, attempts will be made to manufacture them.

      Then I reflected that almost the entire article is O’Sullivan’s interpretation/opinion. There is only one quote of substance. And it contains a note of hesitancy, which given Goff’s neo-liberal pedigree is, at least, something – and maybe indicative of Goff pushing the bounds of the narrative rather than breaking it.

      The quote runs:-

      “There are huge advantages from being involved with TPP and even bigger disadvantages of being locked out. But there are defensive issues where we need to fight tooth and nail to protect interests.”

      I disagree with his take, but at least he is not being unabashedly pro-free trade, eh?
22. red blooded 22

    29 September 2013 at 10:37 pm

    This comment is for QoT (sorry folks, the phone doesn’t seem to let me insert a reply once the chain of discussion has moved on).

    I’m seriously offended by your jibes about vegans. I and other vegans are committed enough to LIVE our politics, not just snipe away at others. You don’t have to agree with my values, but guess what, mate – I have never preached them at you or anyone else on this site, you seem to be the “preachy wanker trying to convert” me and others and if you give it more than a millisecond’s thought (a challenge I know, but try) you’ll see that in a discussion line that was up until then about global warming it is you who “look(s) like (a) total hypocrite”. Try going a bit of research into basic issues like carbon release vs oxygenation, or demands on land and water resources, then come on back and argue that it is we vegans who are the total hypocrites.

    I’m also really disappointed that only one other person replied to this unprovoked rant.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS