Open mike 29/06/2013

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, June 29th, 2013 - 157 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post. For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

157 comments on “Open mike 29/06/2013 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Ad 1
    29 June 2013 at 6:57 am

    John Key has just put a huge challenge don for David Shearer: I am going to take Auckland away from you, for good.

    Aucklanders voted with their cars in 1946, and with that motorway-shaped vision have dominated New Zealand’s direction and its politics for 70 years.

    Auckland has got more and more National-dominant in its electorate seats since the 1980s. Those seats Labour held dear are now seemingly irretrievably lost. Remember Central Auckland? What used to be Mt Eden and One Tree Hill? Which way have all the new electorates gone since the 1990s?

    The metropolitan centers were Labour’s last great holdout – and of course tides come back in again to a degree. But Auckland now has National and Council in lock step in its top Auckland Plan transport priorities. Auckland now has National and Council lock step in its housing and growth. Inside 3 months Key has removed Auckland off the strategic board in two great strokes.

    Auckland Council should have been the great growth engine of Labour political apprenticeship. But National have simultaneously sucked the political oxygen out of transport, tamed Mayor Brown, and shut down Auckland as a discursive contest.

    Meanwhile, back in Labour’s caucus, Labour had no alternative speech or conference ready. No alternative plan. No opposition organized. No unity with the Greens or anyone else for the day. It’s nt like Key made the speech a secret. We just had Twyford sputtering about how he likes it and hates it.

    – It was a day for Labour’s leader to go toe to toe on Campbell Live about the future of Auckland, because it is the future of New Zealand. And to win. Imagine Shearer or Robertson even trying.

    – It was a day for the south to be mobilised to attack motorways generating further transport poverty.

    – It was a day for commentators and unions to be lined up promoting a job-rich and innovation-rich Auckland instead of yet another sugar-rush construction phase from roading pushing yet another cheap housing boom in the south. “Let’s take $10billion and do some good, starting with …”

    Does anyone think David Shearer or Beltway Grant could be imagined pulling this off?

    Taking out Auckland’s game, and continuing to take out its electorates, is the accelerated death of Labour. Wish it weren’t so, but it’s a third of the seats and will shortly be 40% of the seats in Parliament. Winning Christchurch or a Maori seat unfortunately means nothing compared to winning Auckland.

    We need leadership of Labour that can pull this off. Who is understood by the professional elites, by Auckland’s hard core party loyalist activists, is supported by unions, who can out-strategise National, and – so vitally – who could beat John Key on tv.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.1
      29 June 2013 at 7:52 am

      Labour isn’t doing themselves any favours but neither is National. People will see National’s sudden change as cynical maneuvering rather than properly considered policies.

      • gsays 1.1.1
        29 June 2013 at 2:44 pm

        however regardless of what they see, recent history tells us that they will vote for what gets them a bigger share at the trough.

        eg tax cuts, they know that it means less for the poor but i get an extra $65 a week!

    • Boadicea 1.2
      29 June 2013 at 8:03 am

      Beltway Grant and the coterie in the wheelhouse of Labour are Wellington centric. They are truly Absolutely Positively Wellington in their pre-occupations. The gobsmacking thing about that is the continual decline in the Labour vote of the Wellington Hutt ABC group. Their performances over the past three elections has been the worse in the whole country.
      Yet they have time to spend weekends in Auckland as guests of Skycity.

    • karol 1.3
      29 June 2013 at 8:34 am

      I think it was a smart move by Key, but I don’t think he has owned Auckland as much as you think, Ad.

      Certainly not out here in the West where SkyCity is removed from daily life, while transport and housing loom as big issues that are part of daily life.

      The reason Mt Eden etc have shifted to National is the gentrification, and colonisation of those areas by the relatively wealthy. I grew up in Mt Eden, in a mixed class neighbourhood. I can no longer afford to live there.

      This has a lot to do with the changing economic landscape as anything: a central city area built of entertainment and consumer society commerce.

      Meanwhile, out west here are many of the people who don’t give a toss for SkyCity, or fancy RONS, but want affordable houses, jobs near were they live, living incomes, and decent infrastructure, including public transport.

      Who will step up and lead in this direction?

      I’ve come to the conclusion, overnight, that the Labour caucus needs to step up and make peace with Cunlifffe. He has been involved in Auckland issues, and particularly the development of New Lynn for many years. He also has been involved in policies of nation-wide and international scope.

      Labour’s caucus don’t have a lot of choices to turn things around. Cunliffe’s not perfect, is fairly centrist, and he’s shown he can eat humble pie and take a back seat when it was required.

      • Lefty 1.3.1
        29 June 2013 at 9:05 am

        Key may not own Auckland but he certainly owns Len Brown and most of the Auckland Council now.
        The pressure will really be on them to sell water, ports and anything else that can bring in a dollar to pay for the transport plans.
        A few (although there is only three that could be counted on) Councillors will resist, but most will succumb to either selling assets or some other form of making the poorest people they can find pay the bill.
        The middle class Greens will be pretty happy, even if some of them pretend not to be in that bob each way political game they play.
        Labour doesn’t really care about anything but protecting priviliged existance of a handful of worn out party hacks.
        It will be left to the ragtag Mana bunch to form the resistance to the looting that will pay for this transport plan.
        In the long term this is probably all for the good because the momentum for real change and the building of socialist political organisations will grow as the hapless social democrats are swept to the sidelines in a torrent of their own bullshit.

        • muzza 1.3.1.1
          29 June 2013 at 9:44 am

          Key may not own Auckland but he certainly owns Len Brown and most of the Auckland Council now.

          Auckland is owned alright, but not by the politicians!

          The pressure will really be on them to sell water, ports and anything else that can bring in a dollar to pay for the transport plans.

          The plan always was, and will remain to, *get the assets*, strpping the assets away from the people, hollow out the public services, at the same time, slash the head count, while having the consultants, all over the place, and the services outsourced!

          Its already well in flight, with departments being completely overrun, by 500k-1m/PY *independent contractors*, who do not show on the public numbers, and where the financial management is way beyond fraudulant.

          Problem is, it goes to the top, so there is little which is going to stop it!

          The sick joke is, the people are paying the bill, and the books are ,CLOSED!

      • Ad 1.3.2
        29 June 2013 at 9:09 am

        New Lynn was an interesting set of deals when you are comparing to the gentrification of Mt Eden.

        New Lynn is gentrifying in no small part so fast because of the smart transport interventions by both central and local government, and for the way they involved the private sector into the new development both completed and underway.

        Those were Labour deals.

        New Lynn shows Labour can really “do” Auckland, and deliver for citizens who need places to live, fantastic health services, jobs in New Lynn’s accelerating services sector – and all of it built around public transit.

        All the while growing local developers and local capital.

        Imagine that as a set of plans rolled across Auckland. Imagine that called Labour policy, as an alternative to national’s launched today. And yes, it’s no accident which MP was in the middle of all of those deals, and it wasn’t David Shearer, Grant Robertson, or indeed Phil Goff.

        • karol 1.3.2.1
          29 June 2013 at 9:19 am

          Yep. Cunliffe got Clark’s government on board with the Waitakere City Council to start the development of the New Lynn Rail Trench. Now of course, Key’s lot are claiming it, as the development was finished under their watch.

          Yes, the gentrification of New Lynn is a concern as well.

          • Bill (I Did NOT enjoy the Sky Box) 1.3.2.1.1
            29 June 2013 at 9:47 am

            Gentrification.Urban gentrification often involves population migration as poor residents of a neighborhood are displaced. In a community undergoing gentrification, the average income increases and average family size decreases. This generally results in the displacement of the poorer, pre-gentrification residents, who are unable to pay increased rents, and property taxes, or afford real estate (Wiki)

            I’m wary of your concern of “gentrification” Karol.

            1. Labour wants the people of New Lynn or any changing areas to have increased incomes and quality of life. Labour should be relevant to middle classes also. Under Clark we had the majority of nealrly every socio -economic group at one stage.

            2. Labour can return to being the party of the Liberals, The Environmentalists, The Avante-garde, the Arty-crafty, the 3rd Level students and more. Being passionate champion of the poor, the consumer, the worker, the retired, the alienated and the infirm does not preclude Labour from winning support among the enlightened and the caring middle classes.

            • Rogue Trooper 1.3.2.1.1.1
              29 June 2013 at 12:38 pm

              Professor Robert Wade, Political Economist, LSE, might question the compatibilty of the aspirations of the middle classes, caring, or enlightened, with the other sectors you identify Bill; Middle-class anxiety in the west is on the increase.( with enlightenment comes awareness, awareness of climate change, surveillance, health risks, relative status, prospects for their children, etc).

          • Ad 1.3.2.1.2
            29 June 2013 at 9:57 am

            Gentrification can be good. New Lynn prior to those set of interventions was a wreck. There are plenty of counterfactual town centres across Auckland with no plan for years – Avondale and Otahuhu being the standouts. Otahuhu, like New Lynn, lost much of its blue-collar manufacturing in the last two decades, and there has been no alternative plan.

            What New Lynn has now is huge percentages of immigrants with huge desire for work, huge desire for upward mobility including education and healthcare – and needs homes to put these new migrants in.

            We need Labour to show that it can take the nation-building mantle back off National. Labour – together of course with Seddon – used to own that. Now, with Christchurch City locked into a long term funding agreement, and Auckland locked into an agreed direction with government, Labour have lost that in the course of a week.

            Whether Labour have lost it for good is for Labour’s leadership to stand up and determine.

            But apparently none of Labour’s caucus majority that have ruled since Helen’s departure can see that, let alone plan the fight to get it back.

            Labour needs the leadership that can take the fight on a strategic scale, and win.

            • Just do It 1.3.2.1.2.1
              29 June 2013 at 11:37 am

              “Whether Labour have lost it for good is for Labour’s leadership to stand up and determine.
              But apparently none of Labour’s caucus majority that have ruled since Helen’s departure can see that, let alone plan the fight to get it back.
              Labour needs the leadership that can take the fight on a strategic scale, and win.”

              You captured our frustrations and hopes of the Labour membership in one piece there Ad.

              Out of the 34 MPs there must be 18 who see that we cannot continues this backward slide.

              As members we must make our feelings be know to our MPs. However it is up to the MPs to swallow their pride. They must accept that we need to rally around a Leader who can the vision and skill to help the WHOLE team realise their potential.
              We cannot put another back office professional bureaucrat into the leadership role again.

              It is time for Cunliffe.

              • Colonial Viper …
                29 June 2013 at 4:42 pm

                Out of the 34 MPs there must be 18 who see that we cannot continues this backward slide.

                Is the constitutional threshold 50% at the moment?

      • Rosetinted 1.3.3
        29 June 2013 at 10:08 am

        karol
        I listened to Professor Robert Wade this morning – and put some comments on Open Mike at 11.
        I think he makes relevant points about your points in 1.3.
        Get audio on http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/saturday.

    • marty mars 1.4
      29 June 2013 at 8:37 am

      + 1 Good analysis Ad.

    • tc 1.5
      29 June 2013 at 9:05 am

      Well said but dont hold your breath on that one. With candidates like beaumont and adern who did SFA and allowed the harder work ethic of kaye and lotu and didnt counter the BS at public debates I cannot see inroads being made.

      Beaumont was particularly weak and probably explains the ineffective organisation in the seat who didnt even supply enough flyers to be delivered by volunteers, simply pathetic like the labour caucus.

      • Ant 1.5.1
        29 June 2013 at 11:02 am

        Yep Arden is invisible in the electorate, even at certain events which you think would be bread and butter for a Labour MP you see Kaye and not Arden.

        • Colonial Viper 1.5.1.1
          29 June 2013 at 11:49 am

          I think Kaye has the seat locked down hard.

          • Rogue Trooper 1.5.1.1.1
            29 June 2013 at 12:40 pm

            she has “Auckland Appeal”.

          • muzza 1.5.1.1.2
            29 June 2013 at 1:05 pm

            A well run independent campaign, would go a long way to removing NK from the electorate seat.

            The “AKL Appeal*, as RT puts it, is true, but NK does not have such appeal, which could not be rather easily unpicked, with a well targetted effort, aimed squarely at her voting record!

    • David H 1.6
      29 June 2013 at 11:09 am

      “We need leadership of Labour that can pull this off.” How about having a front bench politician who can do his job, even minimally, because at the moment they are not even trying. I hope they lose Ikaroa Rawhiti It would show them how fucking useless they have become!

    • RedLogix 1.7
      29 June 2013 at 11:19 am

      Of course Key has done nothing.

      2020 is at three more elections away and almost certainly his government will never be around to deliver on this.

      However John Armstrong is right, Key has totally outmaneuvered a completely impotent Labour Party, and in doing so almost certainly set the stage to win the next election… and it cost him absolutely nothing. He’s humiliated Len Brown and David Shearer totally. It’s Key at his most brilliant and most corrupt at the same time.

      The sooner this pathetic cabal controlling the Labour Party is completely dismantled the better. Their failure could not be more complete.

    • Rogue Trooper 1.8
      29 June 2013 at 11:30 am

      sigh, Ad.

    • Seti 1.9
      29 June 2013 at 12:02 pm

      It’s possible the Nats have developed a taste for crow and could unashamedly borrow more Labour policies. I wouldn’t rule out a CGT in which case they could see 50%+ in 2014. No need for Luigi, the Hair, Maori or Colin Craig .

      • Colonial Viper 1.9.1
        29 June 2013 at 12:22 pm

        Yes, the Nats would bring in a gutless CGT, and even cooked breakfasts in schools, if it allowed them to sell off all the power assets.

  2. Saarbo 2
    29 June 2013 at 7:05 am

    Once Labour dump Shearer as Leader they need to desperately sort out their factions and create some cohesion. Not only to win in 2014 but also to ensure that they can run an effective government!

    • chris73 2.1
      29 June 2013 at 7:47 am

      Its deja vu all over again except the man in charge is Shearer not Goff, my advice is to concede 2014 to National (I mean pretend you’re going to contest just don’t waste major money on it)

      Then you’ll have a few years to sort Labour out, sort the leadership out, reconnect with your supporters and hopefully have some money for 2017, which you’ll have a good chance of winning because John Key will have retired by then

      • millsy 2.1.1
        29 June 2013 at 11:28 am

        National would have done a lot more damage by the time 2017 rolls round.

        Shipley and Richardson (along with Upton) tried to shrink the state radically after 1990, Key, English and Bennett might just succeed if Labour doesnt get its shit together.

        The public provision of services and infrastructure is more or less despised by this government.

        Labour need to act and act quickly. They have nothing to lose by installing Cunliffe, and then pensioning off the old guard.

        Plus they need innovative new policies. Not just variations to the same old neo-liberal crap, but something decent.

    • Draco T Bastard 2.2
      29 June 2013 at 7:54 am

      Labour needs to do more than dump Shearer – there’s a whole group of them that need to be removed from Labour’s neck and the only way that’s going to happen is if the membership remove them.

  3. Draco T Bastard 3
    29 June 2013 at 8:01 am

    I seem to have jumped into auto-moderation for some reason.

    EDIT: This comment didn’t but the other two have.

  4. joe90 4
    29 June 2013 at 8:05 am

    Things aren’t looking too flash for Snowdon.

    Officials on Thursday acknowledged that the Ecuadorean Embassy in London had issued a June 22 letter of safe passage for Snowden that calls on other countries to allow him to travel to asylum in Ecuador. But Ecuador’s secretary of political management, Betty Tola, said the letter was invalid because it was issued without the approval of the government in the capital, Quito.

    She also threatened legal action against whoever leaked the document, which she said “has no validity and is the exclusive responsibility of the person who issued it.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/ecuador-says-letter-of-safe-conduct-for-snowden-is-real-but-unauthorized-and-invalid/2013/06/27/fe72008e-df2d-11e2-8cf3-35c1113cfcc5_print.html

  5. phillip ure 5
    29 June 2013 at 8:29 am

    i did a drug-rant last night..after a snippet of news that would have passed most by..had me clawing at the walls/howling at the moon..

    http://whoar.co.nz/2013/commentwhoar-ed-are-you-fucken-kidding-me-it-this-govthealth-dept-getting-people-who-have-meth-problems-hooked-on-fucken-methadone-that-vilestmost-addictive-of-all-drugs/

    (excerpt..)

    “..(ed:..this is an (ultimately-fatal) horror story of a baby born hooked on methadone – after the govt got her mother hooked on methadone..becauuse she was using speed/meth..(!)..)..”

    ..i really wish the mainstream media would turn a light on the insane/so-so wrong getting people addicted to methadone method of treating issues with any other drug..

    ..i repeat..methadone is much more addictive than heroin..is harder to ‘kick’ than heroin..

    ..and unlike heroin..cold-turkey withdrawals from methadone can kill you..

    ..could we describe methadone as the drug-cure you have – when you aren’t having a drug-cure..?

    …phillip ure..

    • Tim 5.1
      29 June 2013 at 9:11 am

      Yes its true Phillip. It’s the most ridiculous situation that could possibly be. It’s “harm reduction” madness gone wild.
      The idea seems to have just that (Harm Minimisation) RATHER than a combination of that and any attempt at rehabilitation.
      How one believes that putting a P Freak on Methadone will eventually cure their problem is utterly beyond me.
      Could be a case of TINA though I guess – given that most rehab centres (a la Hanmer, Marton, et al) have been shut down. (Just anaesthetise then all)

      • millsy 5.1.1
        29 June 2013 at 11:31 am

        Ironically the money saved from the closure of those centres would have just gone into the prison system, or on sickness/invalids benefits…

        • David H 5.1.1.1
          29 June 2013 at 1:00 pm

          Millsy said ” or on sickness/invalids benefits…”

          How can the money go on something that the Nats have canned ?? There is No sickness benefit No Invalids it’s all job seeker shit now.

          • weka 5.1.1.1.1
            29 June 2013 at 1:16 pm

            That’s not true. Sickness has been merged with the dole to become job seeker, and IB has been renamed Supported Living or something like that. Even within the job seeker category, it will still be possible for unwell people to be treated like sickness beneficiaries – their job seeker status has to take into account medical assessment.

            • David H 5.1.1.1.1.1
              29 June 2013 at 6:01 pm

              Well as a Sickness beneficiary, I have had all the ‘jobseeker’ bullshit, and in my yearly review ( I should be on Invalids but some faceless doctor whom I had NEVER seen denied me without the courtesy of a consultation) And ALL they were interested in (at my review) was how they can get me out to work. Nothing about what they might be able to do to help me live a little better. But they still did manage to cut my Benefit by 10 bucks a week. We don’t smoke, don’t drink, been 5 years since I played a pokie machine, Lotto tickets are a dream. I need sky for TV (I have children). I need Internet for Teens education and my sanity. So I have no money to waste but I will have to find a saving somewhere.

              • weka …
                29 June 2013 at 6:16 pm

                Sorry to hear that David. Have you had support from a beneficiary advocate? if you are not getting your full DA entitlements, they can help with that.

                “( I should be on Invalids but some faceless doctor whom I had NEVER seen denied me without the courtesy of a consultation)”

                Again, get an advocate involved. I can’t think what the process would be that WINZ would decline IB without you being assessed face to face, but they do turn down applications within the dept I think, and that decision would be reviewable. It’s a major pain in the arse, but worth it if you can get on IB.

    • Rogue Trooper 5.2
      29 June 2013 at 11:32 am

      applying the ‘liquid handcuffs’; chained to the Pharmacist.

    • Treetop 5.3
      29 June 2013 at 4:05 pm

      What I find to be the most negligent is that the baby was sent home with the mother who needed to be looked after herself. In such a situation for the sake of a vulnerable/addicted 3 kg baby (if that) the carer should need to prove that the baby will have the best chance of survival and the necessary treatment/care that is required.

  6. Boadicea 6
    29 June 2013 at 8:51 am

    There is a Labour Leadership E-poll on Stuff. Cunliffe ahead.

    • bad12 6.1
      29 June 2013 at 10:07 am

      Is that bloke ‘Someone else’ still coming second???, looks like a piece of Tory pot-stirring to me…

      • Colonial Viper 6.1.1
        29 June 2013 at 11:54 am

        Who didn’t see these circumstances coming together 12 months ago, dear Standardistas? Apparently, a whole lot of Labour MPs in Wellington. You have to question the political antennae on the party at the moment.

    • weka 6.2
      29 June 2013 at 11:55 am

      Only 80 people voted so far, might be a bit soon to get excited 😉

      Stuff engaging in some fortuning telling polling by asking who ‘will’ be leading Labour at the next election, rather than who should be.

  7. Polish Pride 7
    29 June 2013 at 9:01 am

    Its all finally coming out: Please watch this is big. Wistle blower reveals extent of corruption at World Bank

    • muzza 7.1
      29 June 2013 at 1:11 pm

      And where has the RBNZ Gov, spent his career time, prior to the appointment here in NZ, you guessed it!

      Stitched, right up!

      • phillip ure 7.1.1
        29 June 2013 at 1:45 pm

        then of course..mike moore ran the place for awhile..eh..?

        ..yoo..!..hoo..!..mike..!..a few questions..?

        phillip ure..

        • muzza 7.1.1.1
          29 June 2013 at 2:09 pm

          Mike Moore

          George Soros, referred to MM, as the, Human Face of Globalization!

          Does anyone seriously believe Mike Moore was allowed to be the head of the WTO, without having sold NZ out, you can apply the same to Helen Clark!

          These top level positions , are not *available*, they come with a price, and the higher up you are, the bigger the sacrifice you have offered up, or the bigger the crimes you have covered/committed!

  8. North 8
    29 June 2013 at 9:05 am

    Right now, fascinating interview Kim Hill with London School of Economics professor of political economy Robert Wade (?). I think I have the name right. Paraphrasing……..austerity is a destructive vehicle directed by the politically empowered elite to advance themselves. Above all else. Thus compounding inequality. Call it greed, surely ? Sin. On a biblical scale.

    Sounds like a recipe for continuing failure and ultimate implosion.

    The stuff at which ShonKey Python simply shrugs and asserts – “I disagree”. Astonishing.

    • Tim 8.1
      29 June 2013 at 9:18 am

      …particularly interesting is how the ‘wealthy’ come to believe their disposition is completely their own doing, whilst the indigent have only themselves to blame (The Bennet Syndrome)

      • Olwyn 8.1.1
        29 June 2013 at 10:33 am

        Yes, I was particularly interested in a couple of things – firstly his distinction between pre-distribution and redistribution. His idea was that the wealthy and powerful, through lobbying, get to control the flow of wealth toward themselves. so that it becomes “their money.” Then they baulk at its being redistributed, as in “yeah, yeah, tax and spend.” Hence for some level of economic balance to occur it needs to kick in at the pre-distribution stage.

        The other related thing was his pointing to the replacement of the establishment with an oligarchy, which of course follows from putting too much wealth and power into too few hands.

        • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1
          29 June 2013 at 11:57 am

          Ownership of the income earning asset base of a country is crucial in controlling the pre-distribution stage. That means things like banks, power stations and land. The right wing aren’t silly, they know exactly what they are doing.

          • Olwyn 8.1.1.1.1
            29 June 2013 at 12:22 pm

            Well they are silly in the long term sense, since by acting as they do, as people with maximal power and minimal social responsibility, they create the preconditions for reckless, untested “saviours” to gain an audience, coming up from the outside of their carefully controlled political systems. I do not think that you can blame politicians too much prior to 2008, since until then it was still possible for them to believe that the market economy would mature and stabilise. But the curtain has since been torn from that belief, and failure to acknowledge the fact looks more and more like wilful blindness.

            • Olwyn 8.1.1.1.1.1
              29 June 2013 at 12:23 pm

              My answer to CV is in moderation.

              • Colonial Viper …
                29 June 2013 at 1:12 pm

                You’re being far too generous to the pollies IMO re: your 2008 timeframe.

                It was clear to most people by the end of Thatcher, and also by the end of Rogernomics, that free market neoliberalism was a dangerous and destructive political economic dogma with only a few redeeming features.

                Should we give pollies another 15-20 years grace after that point to figure it out: no, I wouldn’t.

                • Olwyn …
                  29 June 2013 at 2:01 pm

                  You do not get much chance to look at the overview when you are in the thick of things, goaded on by threats, promises and crises. Lange tried to contain Douglas and ended up resigning himself, Bolger tried to divest himself of Richardson, and sought moderation in coalition with Winston, but got rolled. After all this, Clark’s government trod carefully, still harbouring a few remaining neo-libs and aware that they could do nothing if driven out of office by constant vilification. Before the 2008 election, their policies reflected Krugman’s advice on the crisis – ensure that people stay employed, build infrastructure and address the housing bubble. Huge money and effort went into getting rid of them and ensuring that Winston would not be around to get them over the line.

                  So, while I am disappointed at the way things have gone, I do not entirely blame them. However, since 2008 there are no further excuses for failing to take a stand. Most particularly, you can no longer claim to be saving your country by following prescribed neo-liberal measures.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    29 June 2013 at 2:14 pm

                    Therefore…expect the levels of external coercion and pressure to go up on our politicians. To my mind that is what TPPA, ‘PRISM’, credit agency downgrades etc. is all about. Also filling up your public sector with free market idealogues so that even if a true left wing govt is voted in, they are stymied and delayed for years.

                    • Olwyn …
                      29 June 2013 at 3:40 pm

                      I agree. All of the things you list seem intended to lock in neo-liberalism and to ensure that its overthrow is very difficult to achieve.

          • Tim 8.1.1.1.2
            29 June 2013 at 12:28 pm

            The right wing aren’t silly – that’s true from the point of view of maintaining their wealth and implementing any and every mechanism to try and ensure that remains so.

            Where they’re complete fucking idiots though, is to assume it’s all going to end well.

            It’s a recipe for revolution, and unfortunately the more the oppression, the more likely it is to be violent. There are exceptions of course (like maybe velvet revolutions), but times have changed: the distribution of ‘illegal’ weaponry, the increase in escapist activity such as alcohol, go-fast and ‘wired-up’ people, the absolutism in various forms of alienation we see, the emphasis on matters economic & excessive competition (we discussed on another thread somewhere) and the increasing resentment that promotes, etc.

    • Veutoviper 8.2
      29 June 2013 at 12:26 pm

      Here is the link to the Robert Wade interview – it really was well worth listening to. IMO one of the best interviews I have heard on Kim’s excellent programme which I do not miss most Sat mornings.

      http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/saturday/audio/2560376/robert-wade-inequality.asx

      Also, here is Wade’s bio from the programme Show Notes.

      http://www.lse.ac.uk/internationalDevelopment/whosWho/wader.aspx

      I have quickly googled him, and there are links to a number of other articles etc by him which are now on my Must Read list.

      Wade is originally a NZer – and I am wondering whether, if my memory is correct, he went to Wellington College and was dux in (wait for it!) about 1960.

  9. Ad 9
    29 June 2013 at 9:12 am

    Why is my comment of 9.09 in moderation?

    • lprent 9.1
      29 June 2013 at 9:44 am

      I have more words in moderation on election days – especially by elections. Most likely party or candidate names.

      Ummm.. Toned it down a little

  10. Te Reo Putake 10
    29 June 2013 at 9:30 am

    Aspiration, then and now:

    We choose to go to the moon in this decade:

    We choose to go to Takapuna about when Max is ready to run:

    http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/john-key-announces-second-auckland-harbour-crossing-video-5479435

    (hat tip to Hauraki’s Matt Heath.)

    • Rogue Trooper 10.1
      29 June 2013 at 11:36 am

      “Men of good fortune
      very often can’t do a thing
      While men of poor beginnings
      often can do anything.”

  11. Rosetinted 11
    29 June 2013 at 9:42 am

    North
    Yes good and illuminating interview. Some memories dredged up – in 2010 the top 1% in USA gained 93% of the Increase in GDP that year – left for the rest of the people 99% was the remaining 7%. (Possible small percentage adjustment necessary, it is still a demonstration of the points made in the interview.)

    Professor Robert Wade – http://www.lse.ac.uk/internationalDevelopment/whosWho/wader.aspx
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/saturday/20130629 (audio isn’t up yet, may be subject to copyright)
    8:15 Robert Wade
    Robert Wade is a New Zealander who has lived and worked in Britain and the US for the past four decades. He is Professor of Political Economy and Development at the Development Studies Institute, London School of Economics, and a member of the Economists’ Forum, a group described by the Financial Times as “50 of the world’s most influential economists”. Professor Wade is a contributor to a new book edited by Max Rashbrooke, Inequality: a New Zealand Crisis (Bridget Williams Books, ISBN: 978-1-927131-51-0), and returns to New Zealand next month to present a free public lecture, Inequality and the West: Capitalism at a Tipping Point, in Auckland (8 July), Dunedin (11 July), Christchurch (12 July), and Wellington (16 July). He will also speak at an Inequality Conference hosted by the Institute for Governance and Policy Studies, Victoria University in Wellington on 18 July.

    I’ve put some of his discussion from memory. He says that establishment governments concerning themselves with the whole nation’s welfare have since Reagan and Thatcher increasingly acted to assist the process of money and benefits flowing to the well-off. Establishment governments in the ‘West” have changed to oligarchies. In Western Europe, Germany, Scandinavia they have managed their polity in a different way that he doesn’t seem to have studied yet, and they have not gone down the oligarchy route.

    The capture of political parties by necessary funding only being available from the wealthy, and their willingness to fund and demand political processes and policy that favour them, is very dangerous for democracy as we have known it and the majority need to have it. The policies from these captured political parties are shaped to siphon money to their wealthy backers.
    Right!

    He comments on the ‘West’ which is basically the English speaking countries being caught up in a downward movement for living standards and constant poverty but also with an excess of wealth driving bubbles in stock exchanges, housing etc. which does not invest money where most people need it, and is inefficient economically. And money that should have gone to the ordinary people so they can run their lives at a modern level of living, is wasted, and the economy suffers further because there is reduced consumption.

    The middle class attitudes are biased against redistribution, because they feel uncertain about the stability of their own position and resent giving more of their taxes to the growing number in poverty. The governments have not used judicious spending on projects along with quantitative easing which would have been healthier for the economy and reduced unemployment.

    He talks abut pre-distribution as being an area that is largely ignored when looking at what governments do that affects the economy – patents for instance. They are an important guard for the inventor and innovator. But have become onerous, and another method for large entities already wealthy to siphon more wealth to themselves.

    • Rogue Trooper 11.1
      29 June 2013 at 10:32 am

      -Higher levels of inequality impose higher costs on a society- US, UK and New Zealand.
      -the financial ‘collapse’ in the UK is = / > to The Great Depression
      -Professor Wade’s work confirms the theses of The Spirit Level.
      -greater inequality leads to greater social malaise, evident in trends of teenage pregnancy, imprisonment, drug taking.
      -low income families may invest less capital in childrens education

      High-income people effect a self-serving influence on politics, particularly via their funding of political parties.
      A breadth of research by psychologists has found people who have more money tend to have less empathy- The Money – Empathy Gap.

      The research findings are consistent from a range of research.

      The establishment elite have morphed into an oligarchic elite.Government intervention in the ‘free- market’ favours ‘conservatives’.
      Yes, Rosetinted, policy settings are necessary that influence ‘pre-distribution’ rather than ‘re-distribution’ However, there is “great anxiety amongst the middle-classes of the west over the shrinking employment prospects for their off-spring etc, and thus antipathy from them to redistribution of wealth, via taxes for example, from the top to the bottom.

      In the US, 93% of growth in national income went to 1%, the remaining 7% to the rest of the population.

    • Rogue Trooper 11.2
      29 June 2013 at 10:41 am

      -Higher levels of inequality impose higher costs on a society- US, UK and New Zealand.
      -the financial ‘collapse’ in the UK is = / > to The Great Depression
      -Professor Wade’s work confirms the theses of The Spirit Level.
      -greater inequality leads to greater social malaise, evident in trends of teenage pregnancy, imprisonment, drug taking.
      -low income families may invest less capital in childrens education

      High-income people effect a self-serving influence on politics, particularly via their funding of political parties.
      A breadth of research by psychologists has found people who have more money tend to have less empathy- The Money – Empathy Gap.

      The research findings are consistent from a range of research.

      The establishment elite have morphed into an oligarchic elite.Government intervention in the ‘free- market’ favours ‘conservatives’.
      Yes, Rosetinted, policy settings are necessary that influence ‘pre-distribution’ rather than ‘re-distribution’ However, there is “great anxiety amongst the middle-classes of the west over the shrinking employment prospects for their off-spring etc, and thus antipathy from them to redistribution of wealth, via taxes for example, from the top to the bottom.

      In the US, 93% of growth in national income went to 1%, the remaining 7% to the rest of the population.

      Inequality : A New Zealand Crisis

  12. Rosetinted 12
    29 June 2013 at 10:00 am

    I was in moderation before and wrote another comment noting that and when I went to send it
    I got a blank screen and then the message came up – ‘The HTTP request method was not accepted by the server’.

    Is the GCSB hanging out here. There seem to be ha-has being set up around the site lately.
    (The barrier type.)

    • lprent 12.1
      29 June 2013 at 11:37 am

      Interesting. I will have a look at the logs. We have been hammered by bots over the last weeks. That sounds like the number of allowed connections got touched.

      • Rosetinted 12.1.1
        29 June 2013 at 12:45 pm

        lprent
        Also quite often doubling up comments showing up such as Rogues comment above appears
        at 11.1 and 11.2. The second one has had a link added but the first still appears.

  13. Rogue Trooper 13
    29 June 2013 at 11:02 am

    just a short note on “Understanding al1en belief sysyems” :
    In so far as sociology attempts to arrive at propositions which have general validity, comparative study of cultures is a necessary feature of sociological research. While some sociologists have adopted a ‘Relativism’, most sociologists argue that valid knowledge of other cultures is in principle possible, despite the methodological problems which such knowledge involves. The problems of comparative understanding can be illustrated by two issues. (1) How can we know what counts as X (honour, religion, madness, etc) in our culture also counts as X in some other culture? (2) How can we know that a sociological explanation of X in our culture will be valid for another culture? Cross-cultural comparisons involve difficulties of identification and explanation.
    Followers of philosophers like L. Wittgenstein and P.Winch have argued that understanding X in terms of the actor ‘Own definition of the situation’ is the best way of avoiding misidentification, since we no longer impose our categories on their behaviour. However, this procedure can be criticized on two grounds : (1) it involves ‘contextual charity’ to such an extent that no behaviour or belief in another culture could ever be regarded as irrational once it is located in it’s appropriate cultural context; (2) sociologists and anthropologists often, regardless of their intentions, inherit frameworks (discourses) which organize culture in such a way as to rule out any genuine understanding of the subjective experience of actors in other cultures.
    Good intentions not to impose alien categories are never in themselves sufficient to rule out bias.
    Peel (1969b); Rogue (Saturday).

    • Rosetinted 13.1
      29 June 2013 at 12:40 pm

      Thanks Rogue – I wonder what would be an effective way of establishing some shared ground to start from? Then establish just what differences like on certain set matters.

  14. Chooky 14
    29 June 2013 at 11:20 am

    Yes the other day I wasnt allowed on….the machine said it thought I was a bot ( I am not, I am a chook)…..and wanted me to copy in some letters….I tried….the first letter came up OK…but it would not allow me to copy in the second letter, no matter how hard i tried….so much for these smart ‘bot detecting’ machines I thought…..this missive of mine could have changed the world on charter schools and fundamentalism and fermenting social unrest, where there isnt any ….and then i thought John Key( and Banks and the GCSB) might have been on to me….and sent out a false bot …..BUGS, I thought….squawk!!!!

    • Rosetinted 14.1
      29 June 2013 at 12:37 pm

      Chooky
      Don’t get upset, the cold weather does affect egg laying I am told. Remember the world love chickens. Stay with us, doo.

  15. Matthew Hooton 15
    29 June 2013 at 11:30 am

    Some commentators here are suspicious of most post 2011 election party so I have written about it in NBR to finally clear things up. I also argue it is time for Labour to give David Cunliffe a go: http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/sorry-david-its-time-you-left-ck-142206

    • Rogue Trooper 15.1
      29 June 2013 at 11:42 am

      “big fall in unemployment” post- Budget???
      “intelligence” or cunning.
      and yes Matthew, strategic, opportunistic, “forgetfulness”. (Are Rogues invited? we do like to slum it with the best, don’t you know). 😎

    • bad12 15.2
      29 June 2013 at 2:02 pm

      Hmmm weigh up list of things that need doing against reading anything written by a shill of the right and bottom of the list ‘pick my nose’ tips the scales in favor of not bothering…

    • Mary 15.3
      29 June 2013 at 4:02 pm

      To clear things up? Cactus Kate was pretty quick to debunk your version of events, a version that most people would have been suspicious of anyway. Rather than clearing them up I think your piece confirms the suspicions you refer to some people having.

      Does your support for Cunliffe come more from a sense that the left’s pretty much over David Shearer so his incompetence has pretty much been milked making it time to change tack and take advantage of a new kind of unrest within Labour that Cunliffe as leader may bring?

      • Matthew Hooton 15.3.1
        29 June 2013 at 6:48 pm

        She was so hung over from the night before she didn’t arive till mid afternoon. I don’t think you can rely too much on what the old lush has to say.

        • gobsmacked 15.3.1.1
          29 June 2013 at 9:08 pm

          However, I was stone cold sober when listening to Radio Live a few days ago.

          “Stick with Shearer! Stick with Shearer!” (M. Hooton, on Willie and JT show).

          Of course, people can change their minds. It’s just that Matthew’s seems to change every week.

          • Matthew Hooton 15.3.1.1.1
            30 June 2013 at 1:10 pm

            Can’t have been me. Haven’t been on RadioLIVE since 20 June, before Herald poll.

            • Mary 15.3.1.1.1.1
              30 June 2013 at 6:15 pm

              Maybe you said it on 20 June, then? Instead of trying to split hairs over what “a few days ago” means why don’t you just tell us that you didn’t say that on Radiolive on 20 June? You’re more of a wormtongue than Pete George. It’s no wonder so many people don’t respect you.

        • felix 15.3.1.2
          30 June 2013 at 11:53 pm

          “She was so hung over from the night before she didn’t arive till mid afternoon. I don’t think you can rely too much on what the old lush has to say.”

          Yet we’re expected to rely on what you say, having been on the piss for 5 hours and being a paid liar.

          Whatevs.

          Kate may have many faults but unlike you, when she makes a dick of herself it’s usually by being honest.

  16. Chooky 16
    29 June 2013 at 11:38 am

    ….also to get in again this time I had to repeat my email address and name …like I am persona non grata…exiled with no name to Siberia…..I am just a chooky…you cant exile a chooky

  17. Colonial Viper 17
    29 June 2013 at 12:25 pm

    Why centralisation leads to collapse

    A very good read and worth applying in many different areas of NZ.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/node/475826

    • Rogue Trooper 17.1
      29 June 2013 at 3:58 pm

      There’ll be “redundancy” alright, just not of the corrective kind.
      “dissent IS information”
      otherwise, can’t see the forest for the fire.

    • Rosetinted 17.2
      29 June 2013 at 6:42 pm

      Nassim Taleb is quoted in that link. Have you seen him talking on screen. His thoughts are so fast, and he explains things so well, that I almost can understand what he’s discussing. Well worth paying attention to. He was talking about fragility when I heard him last.
      He has written book “Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder”.

  18. Pascal's bookie 18
    29 June 2013 at 12:27 pm

    Great piece here, on Snowden, Greenwald, Putin, Russia, the media, and the shit people say:

    https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/half-baked-revolution/7b5f035a42de86aae920c56db7efdf0784848f6e/

    You’ll have to get in quick, it’ll be behind a paywall by tomorrow.

  19. Penny Bright 19
    29 June 2013 at 12:42 pm

    IS the ‘science’ settled on the issue of fluoridation of public water supplies?

    If YES – then how come a number of DOCTORS will be speaking out in Auckland tonight against fluoridation at a Public Meeting – to which you are all invited?

    FYI
    ____________________________________________________________________________

    Auckland Mayoral candidate Penny Bright supports this Public Meeting Saturday 29 June 7 – 9pm: “Doctors present the case to end fluoridation”.

    “As an Auckland Mayoral candidate – I am opposed to the fluoridation of public drinking water supplies, and encourage folks to come tonight, and hear for themselves, doctors who will present the case to end fluoridation.”

    https://www.facebook.com/events/393600607426474/permalink/404700832983118/

    DOCTORS PRESENT THE CASE TO END FLUORIDATION
    – Sat 29th June 7pm – 9pm
    Freemans Bay Community Centre
    52 Hepburn St
    Freemans Bay

    http://www.eventfinder.co.nz/venue/auckland-freemans-bay-community-hall

    “It really concerns me that those who have considered opinions opposing the fluoridation of public drinking water supplies based on FACTS and EVIDENCE – are being dismissed as ‘anti-fluoride nutters’, by others who cannot provide the ‘science’ to support their ‘pro-fluoride’ views.”

    “IS the ‘science’ settled on the issue of fluoridation of public drinking water supplies?”

    “The popular myth and legend is that fluoridation of public drinking water supplies, helps to protect the teeth of poorer people who can’t afford dental care.

    Is this true?

    Does the fluoridation of public drinking water supplies help protect ‘public health’?

    Or not?

    Can the stated opinions Ministry of Health, and District Health Boards be trusted, regarding the fluoridation of public drinking water supplies?”

    “FYI – I have previously done some some hundreds of hours of research on the use of the Waikato river as a ‘raw’ source of drinking water for the Auckland region.

    During this process, I discovered some alarming FACTS and EVIDENCE that caused me to question just how much the both the Ministry of Health, and Watercare Services can be trusted when it comes to safeguarding public health, and public drinking water supplies.

    If you want to read this research yourself – it’s available here:

    (If you dare).

    It’s a SHOCKER! ”

    http://www.occupyaucklandvsaucklandcouncilappeal.org.nz/?page_id=152

    Penny Bright
    ‘Anti-corruption / anti-privatisation’ campaigner
    2013 Auckland Mayoral candidate

    • Colonial Viper 19.1
      29 June 2013 at 12:47 pm

      Are these NZ registered medical practitioners?

    • bad12 19.2
      29 June 2013 at 1:57 pm

      You only need look at the data from the Canterbury DHB to know that ‘the Prime Minister’s science adviser’ is talking effluent when claiming ‘science’ backs the fluoridation of water supplies,

      Christchurch has never added fluoride to it’s water,and, it does not appear to have had an ongoing detrimental effect upon their dental out-comes,

      http://www.healthchristchurch.org.nz/media/…childadolescenthealth.PDF

      • Colonial Viper 19.2.1
        29 June 2013 at 2:09 pm

        According to McFlock that’s probably because of just about everything else and absolutely nothing to do with the weak effects of fluoridation.

        • McFlock 19.2.1.1
          30 June 2013 at 4:54 pm

          bzzzt – another fail.
          I don’t regard 36,000 kids with all their teeth in perfect condition, and tens or hundreds of thousands with improved dental health, to be a “weak effect”.

          • Colonial Viper 19.2.1.1.1
            1 July 2013 at 12:19 am

            But I do. Especially when you are medicating 4,400,000 people to get there, and cities like Christchurch show that you can have good dental health with zero water fluoridation.

            • McFlock 19.2.1.1.1.1
              1 July 2013 at 12:50 am

              But I do.

              My point exactly.
              “According to McFlock“? Really? You’re as good at mindreading as you are at math.

            • McFlock 19.2.1.1.1.2
              1 July 2013 at 1:06 am

              Oh, by the way – the otago caries-free rate is similar to canterbury’s – but only in unfluoridated areas.
              In fluoridated areas, otago has a significantly higher cares-free rate than canterbury.
              But you wouldn’t give a shit about that.

  20. Chooky 20
    29 June 2013 at 12:45 pm

    Rosetinted

    Thanks . I will….just so long as those rats don’t roll away and steal my eggs

  21. David H 21
    29 June 2013 at 3:08 pm

    Nice to see that Public education funding is even right across the board.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/8858466/Wealthy-schools-get-1000-a-pupil-more-than-poor

  22. Rogue Trooper 22
    29 June 2013 at 4:49 pm

    oooh, “Blame society (consumers, not leadership) for Pike River and the Gulf of Mexico disasters”.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10893769
    How about that for a shift of the gaze! What next, kick the dog? Charge them with the Rena?
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10893642

    for not paying large enough donations for supposedly “free education”?
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10893670

    • Draco T Bastard 22.1
      29 June 2013 at 10:31 pm

      “Blame society (consumers, not leadership) for Pike River and the Gulf of Mexico disasters”.

      Yep, we should. You cannot get anything for less than what it costs but the consumers aren’t willing to pay that amount. It’s why we have suicidal Chinese workers in the Apple factories. If the consumers were willing to pay what it actually costs then those factories would be in NZ with the workers having high working and living standards (well, that would have been true before the Rogernomics revolution).

      And the researchers says that society needs to take some of the blame, not all of it. They still put most of the blame on the businesses and the drive for profit.

  23. Posssion 23
    29 June 2013 at 5:00 pm

    Reasonable chance of Auroras in the southern lats over the next few nights.

    http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/pmap/gif/pmapS.gif

  24. Rogue Trooper 24
    29 June 2013 at 5:19 pm

    Orwellian Backlash

    • Rosetinted 24.1
      29 June 2013 at 6:06 pm

      Paul Thomas writes good crime books, good sports comment. Nothing to worry about politically there. It is easier to sit on the sidelines taking the high line when not running up against the strength of realpolitik. The Tuhoe raid has left lasting trauma in those people’s minds. Snowden and Assange have stepped off the primrose path into the bog and need what help they can get.

    • Colonial Viper 24.2
      29 June 2013 at 6:09 pm

      Paul Thomas is a FUCKING FOOL. He doesn’t understand SHIT. Listen to Paul Thomas’ whiny crap:

      (Orwell) would surely dwell on the hypocrisy of Snowden and fellow whistleblower Julian Assange claiming to be fighting the good fight on behalf of freedom of the press and open government while seeking and accepting assistance from the Chinese and Russian Governments which are fundamentally hostile to those principles.

      Given that the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin provided the totalitarian model for both 1984 and Animal Farm, Orwell would have appreciated the irony of Snowden hiding behind the coat-tails of Russian leader Vladimir Putin…

      Here is the REAL IRONY, which Thomas in his ignorance, skipped straight over without noticing:

      that Snowden has been FORCED to seek help from Russia, from China, from Ecuador, because the United States of America, that bulwark of “free speech” and “freedom” will offer him no help, and is now one of the most dangerous places for a whistle blower and political dissident of conscience.

      • Rogue Trooper 24.2.1
        29 June 2013 at 6:12 pm

        see ‘dossier’ updates below 😎

      • Poission 24.2.2
        29 June 2013 at 6:56 pm

        The irony is the dystopian forerunner to 1984 the Russian novel WE also addressed the problems with the one state based on the authors observations of work practices in UK shipyards such as Taylorism.eg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Winslow_Taylor

        We is generally considered to be the grandfather of the satirical futuristic dystopia genre. It takes the totalitarian and conformative aspects of modern industrial society to an extreme conclusion, depicting a state that believes that free will is the cause of unhappiness, and that citizens’ lives should be controlled with mathematical precision based on the system of industrial efficiency created by Frederick Winslow Taylor

        There is also analogies to the problems formed by the oligarchs such as seen in the IRON HEEL and the control they exert,that they can evade prosecution (read big banks today) and control and manipulate markets.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_%28novel%29

      • Populuxe1 24.2.3
        30 June 2013 at 7:40 pm

        Nobody forced Snowden to sign the secrecy agreement, nor did anyone force him to violate it and thus breaking US federal law just to tell us what anyone who’d thought about it for ten minutes would have already guessed. No one (as far as we know) forced him to give taunting addresses to the Chinese media or fritter his (? or somebody’s) money away in an expensive luxury Hong Kong hotel. No one forced him to seek out help from the oppressive Chinese and Russian regimes (presumably in return for more US intel, ie more treason) when he could just as easily flown straight to Ecuador, or Switzerland, or any one of a number of non-aligned countries. It all boils down to the decision he made, and if you are going to make a martyr of yourself you should expect the consequences gracefully.

        • Morrissey 24.2.3.1
          30 June 2013 at 7:43 pm

          The issue is not Snowden, the issue is the criminal activities of the U.S. government.

          • Populuxe1 24.2.3.1.1
            30 June 2013 at 8:09 pm

            Technically they’re not criminal – they are covered by US law. By all means call them immoral, unethical, and quite possibly fattening, but illegal they are not.

            • Morrissey 24.2.3.1.1.1
              30 June 2013 at 8:36 pm

              …they are covered by US law

              Snooping on U.S. citizens is illegal.

              • McFlock …
                30 June 2013 at 9:20 pm

                apparently not. Got a citation?

                • Pascal's bookie …
                  30 June 2013 at 9:44 pm

                  4th amendment.

                  Where’s the cite to say it’s legal?

                  AFAIA the admin is claiming it has a legal theory to get around the 4th, but it’s classified and they aren’t prepared to show it to anyone. It hasn’t been tested in court.

                  If you and Pop1 know what it is, there are dozens of journos who have been on this beat for a decade who would love to hear from you.

                  • McFlock …
                    30 June 2013 at 10:15 pm

                    Well, the applicable judgment seems to suggest that the 4th amendment requires a “reasonable expectation of privacy“. Just an RT link I know, but my expertise in U.S, lawis limited. But it does seem to suggest that anything that is broadcast to a network is fair game.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    30 June 2013 at 10:38 pm

                    This conversation re: legal/illegal is an academic luxury.

                    The US gov wants a historically complete 360 degree profile of the electronic life of every person on the planet, including all their relationships and communications with others, private or public.

                    Whether you are a judge, an MP, head of a regulator, political activist or a trade unionist, diplomat or corporate executive, they have the systems and the technology to completely record and view your digital life and work correspondence, in real time if necessary.

                    There are a thousand quite disturbing implications from this – let’s just start with the fact that our TPPA negotiations are likely to be fatally compromised, and that the balance of support for or against David Shearer in the Labour caucus is likely to be completely transparent to a foreign power, even more so than to the Labour caucus itself.

                    Legal/illegal, constitutional/unconstitutional? Who gives a damn.

                    • McFlock …
                      30 June 2013 at 11:01 pm

                      Al Capone was done for tax evasion.
                      Bits of paper matter.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      30 June 2013 at 11:16 pm

                      We may never know all the details of the mass surveillance programs, but we know this: The administration has justified them through abuse of language, intentional evasion of statutory protections, secret, unreviewable investigative procedures and constitutional arguments that make a mockery of the government’s professed concern with protecting Americans’ privacy. It’s time to call the N.S.A.’s mass surveillance programs what they are: criminal.

                      Authors: “Jennifer Stisa Granick is the director of civil liberties at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society. Christopher Jon Sprigman is a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law.”

                      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/28/opinion/the-criminal-nsa.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      30 June 2013 at 11:20 pm

                      Al Capone was done for tax evasion.
                      Bits of paper matter.

                      OK, I’ll just wait for the Department of Justice to launch an investigation into the activities of the NSA.

                      The surveillance apparatus is a government sponsored hundred billion dollar industry. My guess is that no one is getting done, apart from Snowden and Assange.

                    • McFlock …
                      30 June 2013 at 11:31 pm

                      On the balance of probabilities, not far off. But still more likely than an “American Spring”. And note I didn’t say “successful American Spring”.

                    • Populuxe1 …
                      1 July 2013 at 7:20 am

                      Yeah, they should have just gone straight to Google who have already been doing much the same for a few years now. The Fourth Amendment suddenly becomes very flexible when dealing with information conveyed by third parties and how that relates to expectation of privacy. Emails and phone calls aren’t covered by the same legal protections as snail mail – of course perhaps that’s one reason the US government seems keen to break up the federal postal service and hand its dutues over to private companies.

                • Morrissey …
                  1 July 2013 at 7:04 am

                  apparently not.

                  And your authority is…. the U.S. president and his cast of criminals.

                  Got a citation?

                  Ha! We’re back with this tactic, are we? Are you really trying to waste everybody’s time by demanding we run after evidence for what we all know is true? You know and everybody else knows that the U.S. has been exposed, yet again, as a violent, anti-democratic and criminal regime.

                  That’s why they are ramping up their war of rhetoric against Edward Snowden and any other dissenters and men (and women) of conscience.

        • Colonial Viper 24.2.3.2
          30 June 2013 at 9:55 pm

          It all boils down to the decision he made, and if you are going to make a martyr of yourself you should expect the consequences gracefully.

          Pop1: nah mate, make it as hard for the pricks as possible.

          No one forced him to seek out help from the oppressive Chinese and Russian regimes (presumably in return for more US intel, ie more treason)

          Yeah bullshit to you mate. Snowden isn’t a “traitor”, he is a whistleblower, and as you already stated, he hasn’t told China or Russia anything that they didn’t already know.

          • Populuxe1 24.2.3.2.1
            1 July 2013 at 7:15 am

            He was a whistle blower whilst revealing the extent of domestic spying – though anyone who had thought about it for a second could probably have come to that conclusion on their own based on reading the 2001 Patriot Act, the Protect America Act of 2007, and the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. The moment he started revealing things to foreign powers it became treason, nor is there any point in pretending that every country in the world is spying on every other country in the world to the best of their ability.

  25. Rogue Trooper 25
    29 June 2013 at 5:48 pm

    Post-Snowden
    http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/world/terrorists-harder-to-track-after-snowdens-leaks-officials-say-693593/?
    “Terrorists harder to track”

    Get in, before they get you (or traffic slows)
    http://www.eweek.com/security/microsoft-wants-to-disclose-fisa-data-too/?
    Microsoft (like Google) want to disclose FISA data.

    ahhhh, the wonders of cloud computing data storage (unless lprent is the sysop) 😉
    http://gigaom.com/2013/06/28/if-prism-doesnt-freak-you-out-about-cloud-computing-maybe-it-should-says-privacy-expert/?

    NSA- “we don’t need no steenkeen warrant hombre’s”
    http://www.naturalnews.com/040982_NSA_spy_data_Fourth_Amendment.html?

    US Army blocks access to The Guardian for personnel
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/28/us-army-blocks-guardian-website-access?
    (to maintain ‘network hygiene’ don’t you know)

    • Colonial Viper 25.1
      29 June 2013 at 6:20 pm

      US Senators complain that the US gov is relying on “secret law” to collect massive data. One step away from an irresistable, impossible to overcome, turn key totalitarian state.

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/28/senators-james-clapper-nsa-data-collection

      • Rogue Trooper 25.1.1
        29 June 2013 at 6:24 pm

        QE 99 ‘kicking the can” all the way to Moonbase Alpha?

      • muzza 25.1.2
        29 June 2013 at 6:44 pm

        The world is being stolen in front of the eyes of humanity, *secret law*, and the mesh of deceit, which hold the *hidden law* in place, is global, and at work right here in NZ!

        • RedLogix 25.1.2.1
          29 June 2013 at 6:54 pm

          One way or another you have to answer to someone muzza.

          • muzza 25.1.2.1.1
            30 June 2013 at 9:58 am

            Hi Red,

            Sure, but for me, its not human.

            Anyone who considers another human being, to be above, or below themself, is being distracted, and those who bow down to perceived authority, of the man made law, need to accept their role in the deterioration of humanity!

            People have become the, *public servants* of today, this is what the *law*, supported by other, seemingly innocuous industry. has manufactured!

            • Populuxe1 25.1.2.1.1.1
              30 June 2013 at 7:10 pm

              So often say the mediocre. Do you not consider a Shakespeare, an Einstein, a Mozart or a Michelangelo to be above you?

  26. Anne 26
    29 June 2013 at 6:56 pm

    Here is yet another example of illicit interference designed to influence the outcome of a court case by Judith Collins.

    I am no expert nor do I care about legal technicalities. As far as I’m concerned Collins is not even fit to be in parliament let alone the Minister of Justice. She is a prejudiced and spiteful woman who will go to any length to get her own way. God help this country if she ever became PM!

    • RedLogix 26.1
      29 June 2013 at 8:33 pm

      God help this country if she ever became PM!

      No she wouldn’t last 10 minutes. She utterly lacks Key’s brilliant salesmanship.

      And yes her involvement in the case like this is extraordinary. In an earlier age she would have instantly lost her job for this. Under this PM there will be a few malcontents grumbling, maybe a lawyerly type or two whinging. And then it will be back to Business As Usual.

    • muzza 26.2
      30 June 2013 at 10:38 am

      Anne, your description of Collins, while mild, is why she is in the position, that she is in!

      It oozes from every pore!

  27. weka 27
    29 June 2013 at 8:10 pm

    whoohoo, we’re back. Was that you r0b 😉

  28. Colonial Viper 28
    29 June 2013 at 10:21 pm

    Glen Greenwald of the Guardian UK. You need to watch this.

    I will repost this tomorrow.

  29. Chooky 29
    30 June 2013 at 1:47 pm

    CV…thanks for that link!…..Wow brave guys!!!!….

    Reminds me of ‘Kohlberg’s Theory – Hierarchy of Moral Development’ …..principled moral thinking vs conventional moral thinking and pre-conventional moral thinking….Important theory for journalists and all of us!…( shades of decisions that had to be faced in the late 1930s re fascism/ totalitarianism.

    Thanx also Rosetinted for ref to Nassim Taleb and the ‘theory of antifragile’……fascinating stuff!

    • Colonial Viper 29.1
      30 June 2013 at 2:05 pm

      Welcome, Chooky. I also posted a different presentation of Greenwald’s on the OM of 30 June. Also very worthwhile.