Open mike 29/11/2011

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, November 29th, 2011 - 162 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…

162 comments on “Open mike 29/11/2011 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. mickysavage 1
    29 November 2011 at 6:35 am

    I have been doing a bit of number crunching on the election night results to see what happened in the cities.

    In Auckland the swing against Labour was coincidentally the same as the swing to the Greens (3.15%). In South Auckland the swing was towards Labour. Mangere was the best with a 10% swing. The other Labour strongholds or marginals preformed reasonably well. The worst swings occurred in National strongholds.

    IN Wellington the swing against Labour was 7.44%.

    Christchurch was disastrous. I thought that the earthquake was responsible for the 10.63% swing.

    But Dunedin was even worse. The swing against Labour was 11.4%.

    These figures should improve on specials. But obviously some thought needs to go into what happened.

    • Pete George 1.1
      29 November 2011 at 6:57 am

      Dunedin feels politically neglected. Labour have had an automatic two electorates here and have taken them for granted. If Labour doesn’t listen too and work with and for Dunedin constituents far better it will lose another provincial area.

      It would be interesting to analyse the reaction of the whole of South Island to Labour.

      • mickysavage 1.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 7:52 am

        I thought you would comment Pete. I wondered if the UF surge in Dunedin may have been the cause but the party did not do so well there.

        • Pete George 1.1.1.1
          29 November 2011 at 8:02 am

          Things haven’t changed for UF in Dunedin. They have changed markedly for Labour. Who should be concerned? I’m not in denial and I’m not blaming everyone and everything else.

          Maybe like Banks Labour wants to rename and rebrand. The South Auckland Party?

          • Colonial Viper 1.1.1.1.1
            29 November 2011 at 8:37 am

            Meh. Dunedin North’s David Clark is a good guy but he’s not going to get Pete Hodgson’s 20 years worth of long built popularity overnight. To expect otherwise is not realistic.

            This is not about you Pete George, nor is it about your stupid facile observations.

            • Pete George 1.1.1.1.1.1
              29 November 2011 at 9:02 am

              You sound a bit grumpy. Did your tolerance lose the election?

              If you look at the Dunedin North electorate vote on it’s own you might have a point, but coupled with National closing right up on Labour’s party vote, National soundly beating Labour for the party vote in Dunedin South and Curran’s diminishing majority and then Labour’s problems here are obvious.

              • mickysavage …
                29 November 2011 at 9:17 am

                Um no it is not Pete.

                Frinstance in Auckland Labour’s loss was the Green’s gain. The net effect on support for National was neutral. If you add NZFirst’s late surge it appears that National went backward in Auckland. Got an explanation for that?

                This is thankfully an MMP system. What matters is the support for each of the parties. Measuring one against another is artificial in the extreme.

                And there is also the very low turnout and the effect this had.

                • Pete George …
                  29 November 2011 at 9:27 am

                  I’m not talking about Auckland, I’m talking about Dunedin, this isn’t excuse city.

                  If Labour were in as much denial here as you are they would be in real trouble.

                  • mickysavage …
                    29 November 2011 at 11:48 am

                    Pete you keep throwing around “denial”. You should try something doing something else. It is called “analysis”.

                    • McFlock …
                      29 November 2011 at 2:10 pm

                      “Analysis” might accidentally lead to a “conclusion”, which would then require a specific “action”.
                       
                      That scares the shit out of pete.

                      And his opinion on dunedin counts for nothing – if he was at all in touch with his electorate, he would have received more than the second lowest candidate vote, coincidentally beating the candidate for national’s other coalition partner, ACT.
                       

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      30 November 2011 at 1:16 am

                      ouch.

      • millsy 1.1.2
        29 November 2011 at 6:54 pm

        Where are your 4 MP’s Pete? I think you need to look in the mirror.

    • Lanthanide 1.2
      29 November 2011 at 9:24 am

      Re-do your figures compared to 2005. The swings in South Auckland etc may just have been a correction to the low 2008 figures.

    • Deadly_NZ 1.3
      29 November 2011 at 10:41 pm

      How about finding a way to get through to the Million who didn’t vote. They couldn’t be bothered or why should they vote for some old guy who will just ignore them. These are the ones we need to get motivated.

  2. logie97 2
    29 November 2011 at 6:57 am

    Are we about to see a record for “Waka jumping”.

    Henare made it an art-form. Dunne a close second.

    But Banks has to take the cake. Six months ago he was a Nat and joined ACT.
    Within 36 hours of being elected he is talking about joining the Conservatives saying that ACT was “damaged goods” – and who was responsible for that?

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6051391/John-Banks-looks-to-Conservatives

    One thing appears certain – living in Epsom there might be a lot of wealthy
    professionals, but not much intelligence.
    What sort of person have they elected to represent them?
    We have to give the PM some credit.
    He says he voted for the National candidate…

    • Uturn 2.1
      29 November 2011 at 7:05 am

      I don’t think even the Nats thought that they could wipe out Banks, ACT and now potentially the conservatives all with one cup of tea.

    • Carol 2.2
      29 November 2011 at 7:26 am

      My impression, on hearing Banks talking on Checkpoint last night, was that Banks decided that Act needed a name change and re-branding after talking to Jonkey about confidence and supply arrangements.

      This was followed by an interview with Act member (#3 on the list) who had not heard about a move to change the name, and wasn’t really in agreement with it. He was more for re-branding.

      I can’t remember who raised the notion of joining with the Conservatives. It might have been the interviewer.

      But really, this idea do waka jump and ditch Act smells of National Party manipulations.

      From the Stuff article linked above:

      National’s lack of viable coalition allies is understood to have been canvassed during a meeting of the caretaker cabinet yesterday morning and sources have noted how well-aligned Mr Banks is to the Conservatives’ more interventionist economic agenda.

      After an hour-long meeting with Mr Key yesterday, Mr Banks said: “Given our result on Saturday, we need to talk to as many people as we can about our future, because I want to make sure we are alive and well in 2014.

      “Colin Craig is a class New Zealander. His youthful enthusiasm is what the ACT Party needs going forward.”

      I also recall that Winston Peters said on TV recently that he has done research and it is clear to him that the Conservative Party was set up by National.

  3. Jenny 3
    29 November 2011 at 7:01 am

    I am worried.

    With the return of a conservative government, why was the impending climate disaster, never properly addressed throughout the election campaign by any of the main political contenders?

    (and barely touched on by the political minnows either?)

    “CLIMATE CHANGE ISN’T THE ISSUE” , Chris Horner, Climate Denier and Senior Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

    Naomi Klein: Capitalism vs. the Climate

    Naomi Kline:

    “The deniers did not decide that climate change is a left-wing conspiracy by uncovering some covert socialist plot. They arrived at this analysis by taking a hard look at what it would take to lower global emissions as drastically and as rapidly as climate science demands. They have concluded that this can be done only by radically reordering our economic and political systems in ways antithetical to their “free market” belief system.

    When you challenge a person’s position on an issue core to his or her identity, facts and arguments are seen as attacks, and so are ignored or deflected often in a hostile manner:

    “You can believe this is about the climate, and many people do, but it’s not a reasonable belief.”
    “The issue isn’t the issue.” The issue, is that “no free society would do to itself what this agenda requires….

    Chris Horner

    (Chris Horner, is a professional climate change denier at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Horner’s job as a “Senior Fellow” at the Institute involves harassing climate scientists with nuisance lawsuits and Freedom of Information fishing expeditions.)

    Environmentalists are like Aztec priests, sacrificing countless people to appease the gods and change the weather.

    Marc Morano, editor of the denialists’ go-to website, ClimateDepot.com

    Policies to combat global warming are “an attack on middle-class American capitalism.”

    “To what extent is this entire movement simply a green Trojan horse, whose belly is full with red Marxist socioeconomic doctrine?”

    Richard Rothschild

    And finally:

    Climate change is “a stalking horse for National Socialism”

    Harrison Schmitt Former Republican Senator

    As the denialists say: “The issue.” In fact, it isn’t an issue at all.

    Climate change is a message, one that is telling us that many of our culture’s most cherished ideas are no longer viable.

    Responding to the climate threat requires strong government action at all levels.

    Mainstream political parties like Labour and National (and even the Greens), When it comes to Climate Change, pose the question this way:

    How can we reduce emissions while maintaining robust GDP growth?

    But……. There is a growing body of economic research on the conflict between economic growth and sound climate policy:

    Studies by ecological economist Herman Daly at the University of Maryland, Peter Victor at York University, Tim Jackson of the University of Surrey and environmental law and policy expert Gus Speth.

    All raise serious questions about the feasibility of industrialized countries meeting the deep emissions cuts demanded by science (at least 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050) while continuing to grow their economies at even today’s sluggish rates.

    Growth should be reserved only for parts of the world still pulling themselves out of poverty. Meanwhile, in the industrialized world, those sectors that are not governed by the drive for increased yearly profit (the public sector, co-ops, local businesses, nonprofits) should expand their share of overall economic activity, as should those sectors with minimal ecological impacts (such as the caregiving professions). A great many jobs could be created this way. But the role of the corporate sector, with its structural demand for increased sales and profits, has to contract and be rolled back.

    When deniers react to evidence of human-induced climate change as if capitalism itself were coming under threat, it’s not because they are paranoid. It’s because they are paying attention.

    Responding to climate change requires that we break every rule in the free-market playbook and that we do so with great urgency.

    We will need to rebuild the public sphere, reverse privatizations, relocalize large parts of economies, scale back overconsumption, bring back long-term planning, heavily regulate and tax corporations, maybe even nationalize some of them, cut military spending and recognize our debts to the global South.

    None of this has a hope in hell of happening unless it is accompanied by a massive, broad-based effort to radically reduce the influence that corporations have over the political process.

    In short, climate change supercharges the pre-existing case for virtually every progressive demand on the books, binding them into a coherent agenda based on a clear scientific imperative.

    It is not opposition to the scientific facts of climate change that drives denialists but rather opposition to the real-world implications of those facts.

    There is simply no way to square a belief system that vilifies collective action and venerates total market freedom with a problem that demands collective action on an unprecedented scale and a dramatic reining in of the market forces that are creating and deepening the crisis.

    This is the nub of the problem: Mainstream political parties that pay homage to the market economy continue to avoid it (if they can), even discussing climate change. Further in fear of the powerful defenders of the market our political leaders will not progress the concrete measures required to halt climate change.

    The only wild card is whether some countervailing popular movement will step up to provide a viable alternative to this grim future.

    That means not just an alternative set of policy proposals but an alternative worldview to rival the one at the heart of the ecological crisis—this time, embedded in interdependence rather than hyper-individualism, reciprocity rather than dominance and cooperation rather than hierarchy.

    Meanwhile:

    Auckland Occupation under attack

    • Carol 3.1
      29 November 2011 at 7:18 am

      The only wild card is whether some countervailing popular movement will step up to provide a viable alternative to this grim future.

      Yes, there needs to be the development of a new narrative that replaces TINA…. still largely underlying most people’s thinking. It’s not possible to introduce such a scary narrative into an election campaign. The narrative needs to be built up over a year or two, and I can’t see any mainstream political party doing this.

      Most people come into contact with, even the lefties, seem oblivious to the global crises developing. They act as if life will go on the way it is indefinitely. So we get these disconnects: the people producing evidence of the collapsing environment, resources and global financial system, while many are talking with awe about the expected new electronic gadets and systems that will be on the market in the near future.

      Too many people still have their eyes on the latest shiny consumerist stuff, and are avoiding focusing on reality.

    • Bill 3.2
      29 November 2011 at 8:55 am

      Responding to climate change requires that we break every rule in the free-market playbook and that we do so with great urgency.

      That just won’t cut it.

      ‘Every’ rule in the ‘free-market’ rule book could be broken, ie regulated to hell. And the spectre of a command economy arising from that suggestion aside – the dominating factors of profit motive allied with the ‘winner takes all’ competitive nature of the market would ensure that things didn’t drift too far from what we do now….or that they reasserted their dominance over time.

      The market needs to be abolished and it’s ‘rule book’ trashed. In doing so, it’s absolutely crucial that we don’t create a command economy in its stead as that means an almost complete loss of political freedoms.

      The only way forward that would protect our freedoms and our environment while allowing us to continue to produce and distribute goods and services to any meaningful degree is democracy. But the most basic (and all pervasive) structures that we presently use to organise ourselves and our activities are most assuredly anti-democratic – ie, they thwart and stymie democratic aspirations.

      So two things (unless we accept either the prospect life under the dictatorship that would inevitably accompany a command economy, or simply diminishing in tandem with our environment) – abolish the market and act together to create genuinely democratic systems/structures of governance for our societies and the economy.

    • Draco T Bastard 3.3
      29 November 2011 at 10:17 am

      +1

      Well said. Not much I can add really. Our present socio-economic system (Capitalism) is failing badly and we have the evidence to show it and yet the rich and the corporates manage to stand in our way of doing something about it. It doesn’t help that the politicians listen to the rich and the corporates rather than the scientists.

  4. tc 4
    29 November 2011 at 7:21 am

    We need to be watching sideshow and his dealing room very carefully over the next few months, the MSM have checked out and wasting time now on irrelevant shit.

    the most important issues is our assets being flogged by a party with less than a third of the eligible vote calling it a mandate.

    The MP are already showing their lack of morality with the ‘we want to be there but not support asset sales’ WTF it only works one way or the other so cross back to the dark side or be in opposition you chumps. Julian cut sharples up in native affairs on this, what a pathetic sell out he is and lucky to have his seat.

    • Afewknowthetruth 4.1
      29 November 2011 at 8:43 am

      tc.

      ‘the most important issues is our assets being flogged by a party with less than a third of the eligible vote calling it a mandate’

      That may superficially seem to be the most important issue but actually the most important issue is preparing for a reduced global oil supply, preparing for hyperinflation or collapse of fiat currencies, and doing something to keep the Earth habitable for humans 40 years from now… all the things politicians continually shy away from.

      It’s not as if these are newly discovered predicaments. The warnings go back half a century.

      1957 Admiral Rickover:

      ‘The earth is finite. Fossil fuels are not renewable. In this respect our energy base differs from that of all earlier civilizations. They could have maintained their energy supply by careful cultivation. We cannot. Fuel that has been burned is gone forever. Fuel is even more evanescent than metals. Metals, too, are non-renewable resources threatened with ultimate extinction, but something can be salvaged from scrap. Fuel leaves no scrap and there is nothing man can do to rebuild exhausted fossil fuel reserves. They were created by solar energy 500 million years ago and took eons to grow to their present volume.

      In the face of the basic fact that fossil fuel reserves are finite, the exact length of time these reserves will last is important in only one respect: the longer they last, the more time do we have, to invent ways of living off renewable or substitute energy sources and to adjust our economy to the vast changes which we can expect from such a shift.

      Fossil fuels resemble capital in the bank. A prudent and responsible parent will use his capital sparingly in order to pass on to his children as much as possible of his inheritance. A selfish and irresponsible parent will squander it in riotous living and care not one whit how his offspring will fare.’

      So, how does half a century of near total irrelsponsibilty on behalf of politiclasn and business leaders sit with the next generation?

      How impressed with disaster-as-usual politics will the children of this nation be 5 years from now, when it has ‘all turned to custard’?

      • tc 4.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 9:12 am

        That’s why we must preserve our sustainable hydro power generation and not let the bankers and investors profit from it…..most people don’t buy the peak oil/ climate change argument but they understand their power bill.

        • mickysavage 4.1.1.1
          29 November 2011 at 9:22 am

          Aye TC.

          I think that a slight reframing of the argument helps. As soon as you say “peak oil” many people turn off because the thought and implications are too terrifying.

          But if you say that Oil is going to go up in price considerably then you hit their pocket and it tends to get their attention.

          And if you say that because of this hydro power is going to be more and more strategically important and we don’t want to have it controlled by Australia or Asia or America then they would have to be an idiot not to agree with you.

          I appreciate AFKTT’s comments and agree with him but the framing will lose the argument every time with swing voters.

          • AAMC 4.1.1.1.1
            29 November 2011 at 10:32 am

            But unless the Left start to inform the populace about reality, and build a unified movement, however you frame it, the swing voters will side with the individualist case, cause they dominate the argument.

            The Left needs to take very careful notice of the Occupy movement, because they are teaching and informing and building and will increasingly gain the support of those of us who see those who are engaged in the political “game” as being blinded by strategy and so prepared to neglect truth in fear of the focus group,

            Lead! Teach! Be truthful! Capitalize on the platform this unrest is giving you!

            My fear is the Left once again moving to the Right in order to try to capture territory from the Right, rather than seeing that there is massive support for a unified and modern Left that puts aside the Cold War narrative and captures the current issues of inequality, financial terrorism and the environment.

            Unfortunately, I have no faith….

  5. logie97 5
    29 November 2011 at 7:30 am

    A message to Phil Goff.
    Show New Zealand one further quality. Show them you can be flexible.
    You have just suffered a humiliating defeat, but you also built an image across New Zealand that a lot of people actually liked. Do not resign your leadership, but build on what you have achieved.
    (Your predecessor suffered two election defeats in that building process.)

    • kriswgtn 5.1
      29 November 2011 at 7:39 am

      if yur on facebook- leave Phil a message on his wall saying exactly this 🙂 0 well off the mine i go 😛

      • Vicky32 5.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 6:38 pm

        if yur on facebook- leave Phil a message on his wall saying exactly this

        I did. I come home from work to find that Phil has caved… I am shocked, and disappointed. Just yesterday, I was assuring my son that PG and AK would not do the predicted thing – but they have! I am very sad.

    • Chris Oden 5.2
      29 November 2011 at 8:41 am

      Hear hear I think Phil should stay. Key is scared of him and he now has the knowledge of how to intimidate him. Also has higher in telligence integrity,empathy and honesty. Everything that Key does not have Phil had a great campaign under extremely trying circumstances and came out strong. STAY! If he does not stay please do not inflict Cunliffe on us. He has already showed his absol lute lack of loyalty

      • tc 5.2.1
        29 November 2011 at 9:15 am

        Cunliffe’s been loyal, you’ve just fallen into the CT MSM trap that he wasn’t propagated by the like of codrington etc.

        They’re lining up the attack lines before he’s even got the gig, if he gets it which means they fear him.

  6. Afewknowthetruth 6
    29 November 2011 at 7:44 am

    In New Plymouth: Young 16,550, Little 12,420:.

    What was a marginal seat that National only just managed to clinch from Harry ‘Do-nothing’ in 2008 is now firmly blue.

    In view of all the flags and banners and billboards that were plastered all around the city it goes to show that people were not impressed by Little’s repeated failure to come up with the right answers when questioned. Some people were particularly irritated by his arrogance and talking down to them. New Plymouth has just fought a successful battle to get rid of fluoride in the water. Little’s suggestion that it could be re-imposed by central government if Labour got in went down like a lead balloon, as did his put down of those concerned about takeover of the natural food supply by global corporqations.

    I was particualrly unimpressed by the local union representative who refused to accept anything that I said to him about the real world. Even as the Japanese economy continues to implode he told me that NZ needed to be ‘developed’ using funds derived from Japanese investors. There are just too many uninformed fuckwits and people who are ‘away with the fairies’ in the Labour movement at the moment.

    Little’s task was made doubly hard by having a leader whom the right rejected on principle and the left remembered as being closely associated with corporate looting, free trade deals etc.

    And Labour supporters should never forget that Key gained power in 2008 because so many people were thoroughly sick of the arrogantce of the hypocritical and dicatatorial government of Helen Clark.

    My parents voted Labour all their lives, and I should be a Labour supporter. But I’m not because Labour stands for and promotes so much that is wrong with our society.

    And I cannot possibly have any respect for anyone who was in power between 2000 and 2008 who IGNORED all the repeated warnings about peak oil and the dire consequences of doing nothing to prepare for it. The NZ economy is nearly 100% dependent on oil, most of which is imported. We are about to become completely ‘screwed’ because the last Labour government was DISHONEST. Had it come clean on the crucial issues of the time when it was firmly in power and commenced strategies to deal with them ‘the cat would be out of the bag’ and could not be put back in by any subsequent government. And we would not be in the mess we are in now.

    Labour is presently paying the price for its history of failure to listen and failure to act appropriately, which go right back to the mid-1980s.

    National, on the other hand, is just a ‘circus’ run by opportunists who know how ot manipulate the masses.

    • Colonial Viper 6.1
      29 November 2011 at 8:53 am

      A very interesting outlook.

      If I read you right, you are condemning Labour more harshly because Labour could’ve and should’ve known better, and acted more wisely.

      While National are just a bunch of manipulative fuckwits who cause massive damage and harm but thats what they do anyways regardless of the decade or the situation.

      Your proposition, if I have rendered it correctly, actually makes some kind of sickening sense.

      • Afewknowthetruth 6.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 9:12 am

        CV,

        Yes. That is pretty much what I am saying.

        Yes, it is sickening.

        However, we do live in a sick world which is geting sicker by the day. The crux of the problem is that rather than acknowledging that sickness, Labour just wants to perpetuate the system that is making us all sicker by the day. (As do the Greens, of course,)

        • William Joyce 6.1.1.1
          29 November 2011 at 9:57 am

          Labour (for good or bad) has traditionally been a reforming party. They went some way towards this by fronting up with CGT.
          However, it’s not enough. We need centrally planned, national initiatives to prepare NZ for the future – eg, no more oil & pubic transport, radically changing our money system (stop producing fiat money and use the issuing of currency to fund some future proofing projects).

          • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1.1.1
            29 November 2011 at 10:59 am

            (stop producing fiat money and use the issuing of currency to fund some future proofing projects)

            fiat currency is money that is valid by government decree. Issuing of currency by government would still be fiat currency.

            It’s not fiat currency that is the problem but the fractional reserve banking system which lets private banks print money essentially without limit – and then charge interest on it.

            • William Joyce 6.1.1.1.1.1
              29 November 2011 at 11:16 am

              Point taken. When I was typing it I had in mind the ability of banks to create money (fractional reserve as you point out).

              • Colonial Viper …
                29 November 2011 at 9:45 pm

                Converting these banking institutions into old fashioned ‘savings and loans’ outfits will sort out the problem.

                That and increasing the supply of interest free government produced money to about 25%.

        • tc 6.1.1.2
          29 November 2011 at 11:41 am

          Yup, spot on.

          You win the game by playing to the paradigms that are in front of you no matter how tasteless or against your values they may be so if you wanna win learn style over substance Labour and master the catchy soundbite no more blah blah blah as the swingers aint listening.

          Less is more in a tweety world attention span.

      • In Vino Veritas 6.1.2
        29 November 2011 at 1:26 pm

        “While National are just a bunch of manipulative fuckwits who cause massive damage and harm but thats what they do anyways regardless of the decade or the situation.”

        Manipulative? In what sense? Cause massive damage and harm? Where and when? Colonial, at least take the time to back up your sweeping statements with some facts, else you’ll just appear to be a ranting nut job.

        • McFlock 6.1.2.1
          29 November 2011 at 8:47 pm

          Manipulative? In what sense? Cause massive damage and harm?

          Learn english, dickhead.
          Although, rather humourously, nats did and do “cause massive damage and harm” to the unemployed, the poor, children, and every combination thereof via their policies. Not to mention the environment, what with the recent mining announcement and attitudes to “100% pure”..
           
           

          • In Vino Veritas 6.1.2.1.1
            30 November 2011 at 8:42 am

            McFlock, another name caller with little of import to say and even less with regards to fact to back it up. My English is just fine thanks.

        • Colonial Viper 6.1.2.2
          29 November 2011 at 9:42 pm

          Colonial, at least take the time to back up your sweeping statements with some facts, else you’ll just appear to be a ranting nut job.

          Thing is I dont care about what you think, my purpose is to get Key and English out of power come 2014.

          • In Vino Veritas 6.1.2.2.1
            30 November 2011 at 8:44 am

            Colonial, you are therefore arguing that by just saying a whole lot of stuff, much of it plucked from thin air with no basis of fact, Key and English will be removed? Goff and his people tried that, and copped a hiding, so you propose that by doing the same thing again, the result will be different?

  7. Afewknowthetruth 7
    29 November 2011 at 8:18 am

    Jenny, Carol.

    This planet is run by money-lenders for the benefit of money-lenders. Acnowledging the reality of climate change (we are on track for a largely uninhabitbale Earth by mid-century) would ruin their financial Ponzi scheme, which is predicated on perpetual growth and perpetual increases in emissions.

    Also, corporations have a huge say in how the world is managed (some would say a greater say that most governments). Corporations have few major imperitives, one of the most important being to maximise profits for shareholders. That can only be achieved by economic growth which requires ever increasing use of fossil fuels.

    The fact that fossil fuels necessary for global economic growth are no longer available or that catastrophic climate change is on the way is of no interest to investment bankers, the vast majority of whom are scientifically illiterate (as are most elected representatives).

    Right now the only imperitive is to prevent the house of cards economic system falling to pieces immediately by using any means possible; energetically that means by deep water drilling, fracking, tar sands, coal-to-liquid-fuels, starving millions of people to death via the use of food-to-fuel schems etc. and financially it means by bailouts, ‘quantitavie easing’, ‘special drawing rights’, ‘stabilty funds’ or whatever euphemism is in vogue this particular month to decsribe creating money out of thin air.

    The fact that marlets have risen overnight is no indication that the system has a future. And every day the system continues te operate reduces the life expectancy and quality of life of children living now.

    Practically everything you need to know to understand the big picture is here:

    http://www.publishme.co.nz/shop/theeasyway-p-684.html

    • Annette 7.1
      29 November 2011 at 8:59 am

      AFKTT – I think the earth will be OK mid-century. The climate is always changing. CO2 levels are already very low (if they go below 200 ppm, plants die) and the “greenhouse effect” is misnamed. Climate science is in a parlous state, based on lies and misinformation.

      Check here – http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2011/11/booker-global-warming-greatest-delusion-in-history/#more-11986 – or read Willis Eschenbach’s letter to Phil Jones that I posted a link to yesterday.

      There are real problems to worry about – but so-called climate change is not one of them, neither is concern over a trace, beneficial gas in the atmosphere.

      • Afewknowthetruth 7.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 9:33 am

        Annette.

        I don’t know how old you are but most under the age of 70 are going to face catastrophe within their natural lifespan. (The ones that won’t will have died.)

        If that so-called article is the best you can come up with, we truly are ‘screwed’. Not only does the item simply pose a question but it also makes no mention of climate science! What else would we expect from a corporate source of ‘information’?

        I suggest you thoroughly check the following, and related articles on the same site, if you actually want to become informed.

        On the other hand, if you prefer to remain in your state of delusional ignorance and want to perish, don’t bother.

        ‘To borrow a line from Pete Seeger, “When will we ever learn?” If Karl Marx were alive today he would quickly see that television has become the opium of the people, dulling our senses and keeping our minds focused on trivial matters even as the world around us careens further out of control every day. What passes for national news media today is all corporate owned and dedicated to telling us as little as possible, placing virtually nothing in context, and talking to “experts” in thirty second sound bites. What they don’t tell us is often the stuff we really need to know.

        http://guymcpherson.com/2011/11/global-warming-population-growth-and-food-supplies-when-will-americans-finally-get-it/

      • joe90 7.1.2
        29 November 2011 at 10:16 am

        Hi Annette, you’re back pimping your denier claptrap. Pass the salt.

      • AAMC 7.1.3
        29 November 2011 at 10:55 am

        Annette..

        Subscriber to Koch Bros funded Heartland Institute perhaps?

      • freedom 7.1.4
        29 November 2011 at 2:39 pm

        Annette you said “I think the earth will be OK mid-century” your words seem sincere but i must ask if you are aware that there is a lot more to this topic than the very real although largely distractionary tactics of Oil consumption and Carbon emissions. Please remember the hard facts . . .

        US State and Fedral funding is being funnelled into programmes that officially deny they have anything to do with weather manipulation despite State, Federal, Congessional and Senate documentation stating in plain english these programmes exist for the purpose of weather modification and climate adjustment.

        It is a fact being hidden from the World in plain sight. There are seventeen sites known of globally, including one in Australia. Read the literature, watch the videos, chat with the large numbers of informed people working very hard to help everyday people like you and me to understand the implications of the sciences involved. If you prefer the FastFood media watch Jesse Ventura’s Conspiracy Theory show as a credible low impact introduction.

        Most importantly look at the volumes of declassified and discovered documentation from the US Government that references the use of HAARP in the study and application of technology for weather manipulation, climate control and other purposes. It is out there, in black and white.

        There are encampments of reality all over the place if you choose to read the tracks. I am not here to give co-ordinates to a grand view or dictate what constitues a landmark on your journey.
        The walls may be high but here is a gate opened by others, for the first few steps of your journey

        google: haarp study weather modification documents

      • Vicky32 7.1.5
        29 November 2011 at 6:48 pm

        Wow Annette, you are so going to get attacked! I dared to say something similar once, (along with expressing a pro-life view) and I am still be insulted, attacked and sworn at months later. It’s all about conformity here… 🙁

        • The Voice of Reason 7.1.5.1
          29 November 2011 at 7:20 pm

          Are you sure the response wasn’t about your bigotry?
           
          Climate change deniers like Annette rightly get flak on this site, just like every other self centred sub-species of rightie who turns up here. But, mainly, it will be her deluded ideas that get attacked, not her.
           
          And, by the way, comments like this don’t help your rep, either. Garner’s not fat and even if he was, it does not alter his ability to do the job he is paid for. And being blonde is not an indicator of a woman’s capacity to do a similar job. It’s actually not about conformity, it’s about respect. If you don’t respect people, don’t expect to them to respect you.

          • Vicky32 7.1.5.1.1
            29 November 2011 at 7:44 pm

            Are you sure the response wasn’t about your bigotry?

            Hilarious. My bigotry is in your head (it’s one of your obsessions.)

            Climate change deniers like Annette rightly get flak on this site, just like every other self centred sub-species of rightie who turns up here. But, mainly, it will be her deluded ideas that get attacked, not her.

            Not as far as I’ve seen so far…

              Garner’s not fat and even if he was, it does not alter his ability to do the job he is paid for.

            You do keep banging on testerically about my calling people fat, don’t you? Got weight issues yourself? He was bordering on obese when I last saw him (you don’t seem to get that I don’t see TV news, I hear it.)

             
            And being blonde is not an indicator of a woman’s capacity to do a similar job.

            No, it’s not. But what would you like me to have called her? A moron? I don’t even know if she’s blonde. She certainly sounds it. I’ll say it slowly for the hard-of-thinking – I  used  the  term  “dumb  blonde”   f-i-g-u-r-a-t-i-v-e- l-y…

            It’s actually not about conformity, it’s about respect. If you don’t respect people, don’t expect to them to respect you.
             

            Oh this is your best line yet! Considering the nice line in insults that has been dished out to me for alleged “bigotry” you have the chutzpah of an IDF colonel to bang on about respect! Respect has to be earned, man and I will never respect a hypocritical sneering slimeball like you.

            • The Voice of Reason 7.1.5.1.1.1
              29 November 2011 at 7:55 pm

              Your bigotry is real, and you’ve confirmed it, remember? Teh gays? Ring any bells?
               
              “He was bordering on obese when I last saw him (you don’t seem to get that I don’t see TV news, I hear it.”
               
              What does the latter part of that sentence mean? Why would I ‘get’ anything about your viewing habits? And if you don’t ‘see’ TV, how do you know Garner is bordering on obese or that another journo is blonde?

              • Vicky32 …
                30 November 2011 at 5:15 pm

                Your bigotry is real, and you’ve confirmed it, remember? Teh gays? Ring any bells?
                 
                Give it up and accept that I am never going to love teh gays, or say that they’re perfect people. That makes me a bigot only to teh gays themselves. It does not mean that I want to oppress gays! Hang it all, I want to ignore them, not have their sexuality constantly brought up to me as the most important thing about them! I don’t care who has sex with whom, whereas teh gays themselves can’t seem to keep from telling everyone. “Wah, you only disagree with me because I am a poor oppressed gay boy.” My thought – no, I disagree with you, because you’re wrong! 😀 )

                What does the latter part of that sentence mean? Why would I ‘get’ anything about your viewing habits? And if you don’t ‘see’ TV, how do you know Garner is bordering on obese or that another journo is blonde?
                 

                Do you not bother to read what I say? Do you, as another man admitted on another site only skim what I say? I’ve said often enough that I heard something on the TV news… That should have been a stonking great clue… You’re ignoring (quite deliberately) that I said right above that Garner was bordering on obese when I last saw him and also that I didn’t know whether the girl was blonde, I simply was using the term ‘dumb blonde’ f-i-g-u-r-a-t-i-v-e-l-y. Do learn to read.

        • freedom 7.1.5.2
          29 November 2011 at 8:02 pm

          Vicky, i would like to say if this site was all about conformity i would have been banned long ago.

          IMHO The Standard is a fair, stable environment where information and ideas are shared in a balanced if not always passive manner. What I personally appreciate about the Standard is how when you say something that is fundamentally incorrect, there are usually helpful people who are more than willing to offer you alternatives to your point of view. I have been on both sides of that situation and I for one hope it never changes.

          People today are so hungry for the self-assurance of their own beliefs being ‘more right’ than another’s, that full comprehension of any position is all too often sacrificed by attitudes that can only be ascribed to bigotry and ignorance. This is rarely the fault of the person presenting the view.
          It is more likely to be the foundation of the information they were exposed to.

          • Vicky32 7.1.5.2.1
            30 November 2011 at 5:23 pm

            What I personally appreciate about the Standard is how when you say something that is fundamentally incorrect, there are usually helpful people who are more than willing to offer you alternatives to your point of view.

            Dear Freedom, please don’t be so patronising. Thanks in advance… Obviously, I don’t want people “who are more than willing” offering me alternatives to my  point of view, as I don’t agree with them that I am wrong! IMO, VoR is banging his usual drum about how much he hates and despises me, because of what he sees as bigotry, because I seriously don’t want to have to imagine S&M, cock rings and posing pouches before I know if it’s worth the risk of disagreeing with some people… who are so precious that their genitals hurt when they’re contradicted! 😀

            • McFlock 7.1.5.2.1.1
              30 November 2011 at 5:29 pm

              This from the person who accuses almost everyone who disagrees with her of being misogynistic, homosexual, middle-aged males who fantasise that some young women possibly have sex for the fun of it (or some combination of a majority of the descriptors).

              • Vicky32 …
                30 November 2011 at 5:55 pm

                This from the person who accuses almost everyone who disagrees with her of being misogynistic, homosexual, middle-aged males who fantasise that some young women possibly have sex for the fun of it (or some combination of a majority of the descriptors).

                I spend my working day trying to make sense of essays written by learners of English as a second language. The sentences they write generally make more sense than the above. Homosexual men are misogynists, it goes with the territory. That being said, what are you saying about young women – that I say they have sex for fun, or that other people do? It’s a fact that some young women have sex for fun – so what? Why does that bother you?

                • McFlock …
                  30 November 2011 at 6:09 pm

                  “Homosexual men are misogynists, it goes with the territory.”
                   
                  Yep, that’s the stuff right there – a nice wee bit of bigotry from your stunningly planked worldview.

                   
                  ” It’s a fact that some young women have sex for fun – so what? Why does that bother you?”
                    
                  I was referring to a previous discussion where you asserted that anyone who claimed that (any women enjoyed one night stands for the fun of one night stands) were simply middle-aged men indulging in a fantasy, or words to that effect. I would look it up, but I don’t give a flying fuck.

                  You’re about due to play the victim because people refuse to tolerate your own intolerance, so bye bye.

                  • Vicky32 …
                    30 November 2011 at 6:16 pm

                    I was referring to a previous discussion where you asserted that anyone who claimed that (any women enjoyed one night stands for the fun of one night stands) were simply middle-aged men indulging in a fantasy, or words to that effect. I would look it up, but I don’t give a flying fuck.
                    You’re about due to play the victim because people refuse to tolerate your own intolerance, so bye bye.

                    ????????????????????????????????????????????????
                    Obviously you do give a flying fuck, or you wouldn’t keep ranting! I suggest you do in fact look up the discussion you’re talking about, because I don’t remember any such thing! 
                    As for your last sentence, I have no clue what you mean. I am not sure you do. But it would be very good if you’d stop clogging the thread with irrelevancies, ‘kay? Thanks. Bye! 🙂

                    • McFlock …
                      30 November 2011 at 10:44 pm

                      Seriously? You were arguing [badly] with several individuals and being massively condescending withastonishingly little basis – no recollection? I guess it all just mixed in with the rest.

        • lprent 7.1.5.3
          29 November 2011 at 8:51 pm

          Not really, it is however pretty damn opinionated and you tend to get some robust argument with a considerable memory. But I seem to remember you held your end up well enough that I didn’t feel the need to intervene.

          The only real conformity is that which I and the moderators apply. It concentrates on behavior, is very very heavy handed when I do it (sarcastic if the sprout does it, and very very sudden when Irish does it’ and the others are rather nice), and focuses on newbies to the site or people released from bans. Mostly that concentrates on making sure that people know exactly who runs the site (not them) and that we are intolerant to anything that we think makes the comment section worse (mostly stupid assertions, trolling, and pointless abuse).

          There is quite a lot right now because I amnesty many people after the election, the news is about the left parties, and here are few stupid gloaters around – who I rather enjoy being a education to.

          • Vicky32 7.1.5.3.1
            30 November 2011 at 5:29 pm

            I see your point, but even so, you do have to admit that some sins are regarded as unforgiveable here – such as being witty at the expense of some people’s precious ideas about their sex lives! Or, advocating pro-life views – I remember a young woman called something like Bonnie being hounded away, because she dared to express pro-life opinions… That was just shameful! I’d like to point out to the attackers who will be lining up with acid to fling, that being pro-life for me, means opposing abortion, euthanasia, war and capital punishment as well! Which reminds me that when I submitted a guest post on capital punishment, it fell into the event horizon of a black hole. What, opposing capital punishment is not a left idea any more? 🙁

            • lprent 7.1.5.3.1.1
              30 November 2011 at 5:54 pm

              Depends who you wind up in an discussion with – for instance I have very strong views on the opposite side of the fence to you on abortion. But I can’t recall ever having ever expressed them here. I have quite strong views on the use of military force which would probably upset around two thirds of the commentators here. I can remember expressing them once or twice. What I am saying is that on most topics you only get a few people commenting, and they are frequently commenting strongly from several angles. Not worth getting wound up about whoever you are arguing with. Just concentrate on the much larger group of people watching because they will be the ones who are less committed and may be convinced.

              We don’t tend to moderate discussions that are arguing about something even if it is getting heated. We’d just step in if we saw a behavioral problem like pointless abuse (which has quite a specific meaning the way that the moderators use it).

              Guest posts get pulled and posted when a editor reads one that that they personally like and when the queue isn’t already chocka. Who is puts up the contributions depends on who has time to read it, likes it, copies it into a post, finds a graphic to add, writes an excerpt for the front page, and schedules it. On many days regardless of how good the writing is, no-one will have time. For instance today would be a good day for guest posts – but I haven’t looked at the mail since this morning because of the type of code I’m writing.

              Putting up guest posts is quite labour intensive especially if you have to go through all of the steps (that is a broad hint to tell you that it is more likely to happen if most of those steps are done before we read the post). Personally my priority is the stability of the site and moderation. After I run through the moderation these days, answering or writing a few comments or notes, I’m usually on negative time for work. So I often don’t even read contributed posts – especially when I’m cracking through the end of a software project or involved in an election. I guess that others have similar time issues.

  8. vto 8
    29 November 2011 at 8:39 am

    So what happens now that the slithery ones are back in the driving seat? Resist and protest? Or succumb and join the party?

    • Colonial Viper 8.1
      29 November 2011 at 8:47 am

      Plan B mate, plan B. Which for me is staying in NZ and tackling the issues on other fronts for the next couple of years. Then roll on 2014.

      • neoleftie 8.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 8:36 pm

        actaully plan A was economy crashed and burning would align the people with labour.
        Plan B is the far to cunning Key / Joyce crew have abided there time and will now unleash their radical right agenda with there so called mandate…bennies bashed, state assets kissed good bye, more concession and opportunity to the wealthy to get wealthier, look to state sector getting knifed, unions and free worker burnt at the stake to raise company profits, freeing up of resources, selling infrastructure, water and anything not nailed down…3 year before the cycle runs out so the Tories must act and act fast and fuck the peasants, the slaves and anyone not of the elite class..
        The Tories have bought out the MP, solidified the right voting block and have great organisation on the ground.
        The Fight is not for the left votig block but of the middle voting block that has been captured by smile and wave and ‘trust me’ ‘trust me’ in these tough economic times.

        • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1
          29 November 2011 at 8:46 pm

          Yeah I know what you are saying but imo screw the mythical middle.

          We need to get people living on less than $40,000 pa to get off their asses and vote for Labour. And given that is some 60% of the country I fail to see what the problem for Labour is. Greens and NZ1 can have some of the aspirational middle class vote, fine.

          Only 5% of the country earn $90K pa and over. They are the only people who should be voting National.

          But how do you solve stupidity? Wellington residents know that massive public sector cuts are coming under National. But they swung to the NATs anyway.

          If people really want to vote against their own interests, who are we to stop them?

          • neoleftie 8.1.1.1.1
            29 November 2011 at 8:56 pm

            wellington central went to grant by heaps, good old grant increased his majority but the party vote went westward due to what…poor campaign strategy on not going after the party vote.

            • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1.1.1
              29 November 2011 at 9:38 pm

              you’re saying that people needed to be told to party vote Labour? And in the absence of that voters in Wellington Central conveniently forgot that National has been slashing and burning the public sector and that there is far more to come from the NATs?

              Not likely. They liked Grant as an MP, they didn’t want back Labour to be in power, full stop.

    • Afewknowthetruth 8.2
      29 November 2011 at 8:56 am

      vto.

      My suggestion is to disengage as much as possible. Know where you can get drinkable water. Prepare to produce your own food or be prepared to adopt a hunter-gatherer lifesyle. Be psychologically prepared for the mayhem that will come when oil depletion reaches the critical point of demolishing the global economic system (2013-15?).

      I see NWS has been hit hard again. There will soon come a time when the hits come harder and faster than repairs can be organised and the energy needed to carry out repairs won’t be available.

      • vto 8.2.1
        29 November 2011 at 9:04 am

        And don’t own a farm within 100km of a large population, lest it be ransacked and pillaged..

        What’s NWS?

        • William Joyce 8.2.1.1
          29 November 2011 at 9:46 am

          NSW I guess – hit by floods

        • johnm 8.2.1.2
          29 November 2011 at 9:52 am

          Hi VTO I think AFKTT is referring to New South Wales which has gotten some more flooding again.

        • Afewknowthetruth 8.2.1.3
          29 November 2011 at 9:56 am

          vto.

          Apologies. Typing too fast; letters out of order.

          NSW.

          http://www.ses.nsw.gov.au/news/2011/monday_morning_flood_update

          • Jackal 8.2.1.3.1
            29 November 2011 at 10:16 am

            Personally I think the time to peacefully resist has come to an end. However I’m hopeful that I’m wrong and that the right wing will start to wake up before it’s too late. The signs aren’t looking all that good though.

            Disengaging from supporting the defunct and destructive system is a good idea, but there needs to be more resistance politically.

            • AAMC 8.2.1.3.1.1
              29 November 2011 at 10:59 am

              +1

              This election win, Greens move to mainstream, Labours inevitable ratchet to the Right all lead to the conclusion that there are going to have to be bodies in front of bulldozers!

              Two party Democracy, which is essentially where the majority mindset sits – even in our MMP environment – make Politics impotent. Citizens need to stand up or continue to watch the progress of Totalitarianism and Environmental collapse.

            • Draco T Bastard 8.2.1.3.1.2
              29 November 2011 at 11:08 am

              The RWNJs will never wake up – they live in a constant state of denial of reality.

        • Colonial Viper 8.2.1.4
          30 November 2011 at 12:11 am

          And don’t own a farm within 100km of a large population, lest it be ransacked and pillaged..

          If this shit goes down (not so bad here cf the US) being stuck a 100km in the middle of nowhere with just a couple of people on a farm is NOT a good idea. You actually want a farm near a hamlet or small town dependent on it. (Your point on being away from very large population centres is valid however).

          That way locals will help protect you and your property from marauders and bandits.

    • vto 9.1
      29 November 2011 at 9:28 am

      money lenders = drug dealers

      these governments should default. or rather, they should pull the same trick as the money printers and simply write new laws to allow them to repay when able to, subject to satisfying their citizens needs first.

      the money printers / lenders can just wait in line. near the back.

      • travellerev 9.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 9:56 am

        You know our opinions have grown a lot closer over the years haven’t they?:-)

      • AAMC 9.1.2
        29 November 2011 at 11:01 am

        From David Graeber’s “Debt”

        “But in a way 2008 let the cat out of the bag. We realize now that if money is owed by really important players, even trillions in debts can be made to disappear or renegotiated away. Money is just a social arrangement, a set of promises or IOUs”

        http://janelanaweb.com/trends/david-graeber-the-american-empire-collapse-is-effectively-being-negotiated-both-internationally-and-within/

        • Draco T Bastard 9.1.2.2
          29 November 2011 at 11:29 am

          Quoteing article:-

          In this period debt has two special characteristics: first, sovereign debt from countries with a geopolitical privilege is not to be repaid, but to be continually rolled over;

          That’s a realisation I had a few years back. Government debt isn’t there because it has to be but because it allows a permanent guaranteed income for a few from the many. A lot of rich people would have been very upset that NZ was paying down its debt from 2000 to 2008 but very happy that the present NAct government massively increased our deficits for no purpose.

      • Draco T Bastard 9.1.3
        29 November 2011 at 11:17 am

        The governments defaulting and writing off the external private debt is actually the only rational move. They won’t be allowed to do this by the banksters though. The only way to get it done would be a revolution by the people against the banks.

        • AAMC 9.1.3.1
          29 November 2011 at 11:41 am

          But the likes of David Graeber and Seteve Keen are suddenly all over the mainstream media debating the idea of Debt forgiveness and showing historical precedent for it, but we need the dialogue to broaden, we need to continue to educate and inform and learn and we need to push this outside of the closed loop of the blogosphere and out to the public.

          Information / propaganda is where the real battle is fought, the Left need to unite, put aside the cold war narrative which weakens them, and inform a populace which will be increasingly looking for answers as the economic crisis deepens.

  10. William Joyce 10
    29 November 2011 at 9:43 am

    Superb decision by US judge.
    Too many cases brought by government regulators against finance institutions have been resolved by way of settlement in which the finance institution pays a settlement on condition that they did not admit any wrong doing or accepting any liability. But here “come da judge”……

    Judge Jed S. Rakoff threw out a $285 million settlement deal between the S.E.C. and Citigroup in which the bank would not admit nor deny wrongdoing in a mortgage derivatives deal.
    Rakoff said he would not OK the settlement because he did not know the facts of the case and it was “neither fair, nor reasonable, nor adequate, nor in the public interest” for him to do so. – NPR
    The S.E.C.’s policy — “hallowed by history, but not by reason,” Judge Rakoff wrote — creates substantial potential for abuse, the judge said, because “it asks the court to employ its power and assert its authority when it does not know the facts.”
    Judge Rakoff also refers at one point to Citigroup as “a recidivist,” or repeat offender, which has violated the antifraud provisions of the nation’s securities laws many times. The company knew that the S.E.C.’s proposed judgment – that it cease and desist from violating the antifraud laws – had not been enforced in at least 10 years, the judge wrote.
    “An application of judicial power that does not rest on facts is worse than mindless, it is inherently dangerous,” Judge Rakoff wrote in the case, S.E.C. v. Citigroup Global Markets. “In any case like this that touches on the transparency of financial markets whose gyrations have so depressed our economy and debilitated our lives, there is an overriding public interest in knowing the truth.” – NY Times
     

  11. Draco T Bastard 11
    29 November 2011 at 9:54 am

    It seems that we’ve been advancing technology despite capitalism rather than because of it.

    Also in the late 1980s, we saw the complete flop of the Digital Audio Tape (DAT). A lot of this can be ascribed to the fact that the copyright industry had been allowed to put its politics into the design: the cassette, although technically superior to the analog Compact Cassette, was so deliberately unusable for copying music that people rejected it flat outright. This is an example of a technology that the copyright industry succeeded in killing, even though I doubt it was intentional: they just got their wishes as to how it should work to not disrupt the status quo.

    • felix 11.1
      29 November 2011 at 11:51 am

      ???

      DAT was widely used in the industry for years precisely because it was the best and easiest way to write and rewrite high quality digital audio. It only fell out of favour when powerful processors, large amounts of RAM and bigger hard drives rendered it obsolete as a recording medium in the late 90s.

      Even then it was favoured by many as an archival medium and for reliable playback of backing tracks in live settings.

      Hardly a flop.

  12. vto 12
    29 November 2011 at 9:55 am

    I see new Roundtable head Roger Partridge is spouting the same inanities as Kerr before him. These people don’t even seem to think. They just spout.

    Partridge blithely kept stating, in a Press piece today, that regulation should be reduced. He gave no explanation as to why this is helpful to people, nor did he provide any evidence as to how this works, or has worked in the past. But here is some evidence for you Partridge…

    Deregulation of the finance sector – led directly to people losing their life savings.

    Deregulation of the building sector – led directly to people’s homes rotting and falling apart.

    Deregulation of the mining safety sector – led directly to the killing of 29 men at Pike River.

    Good one Partridge – you’re onto it ….

    • William Joyce 12.1
      29 November 2011 at 10:00 am

      Banks was saying the same thing yesterday. Yet, we are the third easiest country in the world in which to do business. How can that be if we are so bogged down by regulation? Could it be that when business isn’t thriving it’s time to blame the government? Could it be that they don’t know what else to say? They have no other answers!

      • Draco T Bastard 12.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 12:03 pm

        It’s part of the RWNJ psyche – when something is going wrong it’s someone else’s fault and not them or anything they said or did.

        • McFlock 12.1.1.1
          29 November 2011 at 10:32 pm

          Business lobbyists whinge like farmers. We could have the least regulated, lowest taxed nation on the planet and they’d still whinge.
            
          I say fuck ’em. Farmers need to be regulated or we end up with cowshit in the drinking water, businesses need to be regulated or we end up as serfs, with lead in the toothpaste and arsenic in the underpants.

  13. Jackal 13
    29 November 2011 at 9:56 am

    Low voter turnout

    It is highly undemocratic to work to remove people’s right to vote and disincentives the poor from participating in politics. National know that the poor are more likely to disengage and actively work to exploit this dynamic…

  14. freedom 14
    29 November 2011 at 10:01 am

    National don’t waste time getting the news out to those they like!
    Do not recall seeing this on the MSM yesterday, or, come to think of it, in their main Policy docs either
    http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/80-starting-out-wage-way-ck-105234

  15. ianmac 15
    29 November 2011 at 10:31 am

    I watched the two hours of Native Affairs on Maori TV last night. Brilliant. Format and Julian the reason that it runs circles around all other free to air TV. I think that it was the best review of the election I have seen or read or heard and it went well beyond the Maori perspective. Interviews with:
    Peta Sharples: grumpy
    Hone: Optimistic
    Winston: emphatic and dangerous for National
    Materia: Succinct and clever
    Shane: Best appraisal of Labour now and future
    Kelvin: Stiff upper lip
    Simon Bridges: Believed to be a future National Leader.
    Panel: Mike King surprisingly perceptive, Matt McCartney good points, Sandra Lee explores the angles.
    Tried to get a link but can’t. Reruns on Sunday evening?
     

  16. freedom 16
    29 November 2011 at 11:22 am

    two little things that have bugged the hell out of me the last 24 hours
    1: NZ Herald stating in its map that 100% of the vote has been counted,
    2: “If this was First Past the Post and there were 100 MPs, there would be roughly 65 National seats and 35 Labour, ” Mr Key, we are not a two party state despite your wet dreams of being America’s President

  18. felix 18
    29 November 2011 at 11:54 am

    Is it just me or does it seem a bit weird that the two parties with the least mandate to be in parliament are the ones Key will give ministerial portfolios to?

    • Frida 18.1
      29 November 2011 at 6:28 pm

      Yes Felix I had a little rant to myself this morning about this very issue. Banks speaks for 1% of the population yet he’s a Minister of the Crown?! There’s something not right about that.

  19. Colonial Viper 19
    29 November 2011 at 11:59 am

    Polling affects election outcomes

    http://www.3news.co.nz/Did-opinion-polls-influence-the-election/tabid/370/articleID/234528/Default.aspx

    Ban media polling and media polling discussion in the immediate run up to election day, I say.

    • freedom 19.1
      29 November 2011 at 12:24 pm

      or, if they insist on using them they must be obligated to publish the whole poll, including but not limited to;
      : the methodology of the poll
      : the number of people polled
      : the numbers who hang up
      : the numbers who choose not to answer a particular question
      : the don’t knows for each question
      : the areas polled
      and most importantly,

      : a full and specific list of questions asked

      basically they should be regulated to publish the poll and not the spin

      • Colonial Viper 19.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 12:28 pm

        Yep have that in place for the entire of the regulated period, with a full ban on media polls and media polls discussion for the 24 hours before E-Day.

    • Draco T Bastard 19.2
      29 November 2011 at 3:29 pm

      I actually think I preferred my suggestion yesterday. Have them poll the policies and not the party, candidates or preferred PM. Then have them link those policies back to the parties that way we might have an informed populace voting rather than a led populace voting.

      • freedom 19.2.1
        29 November 2011 at 8:12 pm

        “I actually think I preferred my suggestion yesterday. Have them poll the policies and not the party, ”

        Draco, I would like to point out that my comment above in no way stipulates the poll’s subject
        it simply asks for some legitimacy to the public dissemination of the results

        • Draco T Bastard 19.2.1.1
          29 November 2011 at 10:09 pm

          Yes, I realised that. That’s why I responded to CV’s post of outright banning. Having it so that they poll on the policies they would then be forced to discuss the policies rather than the parties (hopefully, although I’m sure that they could find some way around it). Your suggestion would complement mine.

          • freedom 19.2.1.1.1
            30 November 2011 at 8:48 am

            oops , i will pay more attention to the post-number thingys 🙂 (shuffles away quietly)

  20. Jackal 20
    29 November 2011 at 12:09 pm

    Corporate Media

    Unfortunately factual reporting has been declining worldwide over the last few years… and especially in New Zealand. The continued underreporting of many important issues just one indicator that New Zealand’s mainstream media and their watchdogs are biased.

  21. randal 21
    29 November 2011 at 12:13 pm

    so did kweewee have a two term agreement in his contract with national?

    • freedom 21.1
      29 November 2011 at 12:25 pm

      i have a bet on that he will step down for personal/family reasons within twelve weeks of the election date

  22. randal 22
    29 November 2011 at 12:15 pm

    and labour must invest in micropulse radio stations so that they can have their own broadcasting outlet.
    relying on radio skwawkbak and the hair and teeth jobs on teeveennzzzz will never be enough when they are beholden to the money masters.

  23. prism 23
    29 November 2011 at 12:54 pm

    I heard Banks or Brash describe themselves as Centre Right. Is that right? What would Far Right look like? How far can you lean to the Right before you fall over?

    • Jenny 23.1
      1 December 2011 at 5:52 pm

      Banks actually described himself and Paul Goldsmith as “Centre Right” telling the electorate of Epsom that a vote for himself would return “Two Centre Right MPs” to government.

      He neglected to tell the people of Epsom, that the purpose of his standing was to return the extreme right leader of ACT to parliament.

  24. William Joyce 24
    29 November 2011 at 12:57 pm

    Fitch upgrades Australia to AAA
     
    Avg Australian wages up by 4%

  25. AAMC 25
    29 November 2011 at 1:14 pm

    Kisckstarter, No – Space NYC

    http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/naa/nospace

    looks like they do great work

  26. AAMC 26
    29 November 2011 at 2:22 pm

    94 yr old Stéphane Hessel on Occupy Wall Street, lessons from the French resistance, democracy, Middle East, Security: Find the Time for Outrage When Your Values Are Not Respected

    http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2011/10/10/stphane_hessel_on_occupy_wall_street_find_the_time_for_outrage_when_your_values_are_not_respected

  27. In Vino Veritas 27
    29 November 2011 at 4:14 pm

    Thought for the day:

    “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” – Winston Churchill

    • Draco T Bastard 27.1
      29 November 2011 at 5:02 pm

      Well, that just proves that Churchill was an idiot – just like all other RWNJs.

    • millsy 27.2
      29 November 2011 at 6:58 pm

      I seem to recall that Churchill didnt unpick the NHS when returned to power in 1951.

      • Tiger Mountain 27.2.1
        29 November 2011 at 8:04 pm

        Exactly, just like ShonKey won’t dispatch what he called in parliament “communism by stealth” the in work tax credit, or Working For Families middle class welfare payment.

  28. Draco T Bastard 28
    29 November 2011 at 5:01 pm

    Well, that didn’t take long.

    Forest & Bird Conservation Advocate Nicola Vallance said the government was taking a closed-door approach with an open-cast coal mine at Denniston. “This will allow Australian-owned Bathurst Resources to dig up over 160 hectares of the Denniston Plateau without an opportunity for the public to have a say about conservation concerns. This would be the biggest open-cast coal mine on New Zealand’s conservation estate,” she said.

    More here

    NAct, back to destroying our children’s future.

    • Colonial Viper 28.1
      29 November 2011 at 5:43 pm

      NAct knew about this months ago.

    • In Vino Veritas 28.2
      30 November 2011 at 8:38 am

      I’d imagine, Draco, that the miners would far rather have an open cast mine that go for say, a 2.5km tunnel that goes through a fault line, and cannot be used as an escape route should their be for argument’s sake, a methane explosion. You might recall this example, signed off by the Labour Party. It cost people their lives.

      • Draco T Bastard 28.2.1
        30 November 2011 at 9:44 am

        I’d imagine that you’re an idiot. Labour didn’t design and administer Pike River, that was left to the free-market.

        Oh, and I’d prefer it if the coal was left in the ground. We (NZ) don’t need to use it just yet but it may become useful in another century or so.

  29. ianmac 29
    29 November 2011 at 5:14 pm

    Further to my post at No 15.
    Native Affairs is now available online: “Kowhiri Post Election”
    http://www.maoritelevision.com/Default.aspx?tabid=683&pid=12340
    The interviews in the first hour are excellent and cast more light that most commentaries.

  30. Jackal 30
    29 November 2011 at 5:37 pm

    Chevron, Pay For The Damage You Caused to Brazil’s Beaches!

    Big oil continues to betray its fundamental disregard for marine wildlife and the many holiday industries that rely on clean beaches and pristine oceanic shelves. Most recently, Chevron released more than 110,000 gallons of oil near Brazilian beaches.

    And Brazil’s environmental secretary says the accident was completely avoidable. It seems Chevron “underestimated the pressure” of an underwater reservoir.

    Only an accident of the current carried the oil slick away from Brazil’s famed vacation getaways instead of right smack into them. Many Brazilians are outraged.

    Brazilian State Environmental Secretary Carlos Minc is saying Chevron should pay $28 million in fines, according to a recent article in the Houston Chronicle. Minc charges Chevron with failing to take appropriate action for nearly ten days after the leak was spotted.

    Tell Chevron to pay up and to stop irresponsible drilling in Brazil and everywhere else!

  31. Vicky32 31
    29 November 2011 at 6:08 pm

    So, Phil Goff and Annette King have in fact gone. A dumb blonde  on TV3 (one Rebecca Wright) says “they’ve gotten (sic) the message loud and clear that their time is over”.. 
    I am completely disgusted. Why did Phil satisfy the yapping media by this action? Why (for once) didn’t Labour do the right thing instead of the expected thing? Fatty Garner is as overjoyed as the Wright idiot is gormless, imagining bloodbaths etc. He’s so excited he’s gabbling like a race caller. Yet a another one of his nasty gittish predictions has come true. By contrast National’s bulging caucus room was all sweetness and light and joy he says. Shame.

    • Jackal 31.1
      29 November 2011 at 7:04 pm

      Duncan Garner was going on like Labour is already having a fight… is he related to Cameron Slater by any chance? I mean both National hacks look similar… or is that just what happens when you talk too much shit?

      • kriswgtn 31.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 9:17 pm

        lol yeah Garner has def packed the tonnes on. Like this big>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

        Seen it sideways on tv and fuk hes pregnant with Keys kid
        😛

    • Frida 31.2
      29 November 2011 at 9:51 pm

      Hi there. Not sure who you are Vicky32 but I can assure you that Rebecca Wright is no ‘dumb blonde’. Naturally blonde, yes, but so what? Misogynist insults like yours serve no purpose. Dumb? Definitely not. She went after Banks like a Rottweiler over the tea tapes.

      And no, I’m not her. But I do know her wonderful family and I found your insults quite offensive.

      Cheers

      • Jackal 31.2.1
        29 November 2011 at 11:10 pm

        I particularly liked it how Patrick Gower came to her rescue after Banks made a complete fool of himself going on about suppositions Rebecca Wright was fantasizing about. LOL I wonder how many woman voted for Act?

      • kriswgtn 31.2.2
        30 November 2011 at 6:40 am

        toughshit
        the gloves are off on the whole lot of them

        cant DEeal tell the cow to stfu or dont dish it out

      • Vicky32 31.2.3
        30 November 2011 at 5:31 pm

        Hi there. Not sure who you are Vicky32 but I can assure you that Rebecca Wright is no ‘dumb blonde’. Naturally blonde, yes, but so what? Misogynist insults like yours serve no purpose. Dumb? Definitely not. She went after Banks like a Rottweiler over the tea tapes.

        Frida, I apologise. I am sorry, I should not have said the things about her that I did.

        • Frida 31.2.3.1
          30 November 2011 at 9:29 pm

          Cheers for the apology Vicky. I totally get your feelings about the MSM. I share them, but let’s not get personal eh? We’re just lowering ourselves to their level. And Rebecca really isn’t one of the problematic ones 🙂

          Peace

    • Draco T Bastard 32.1
      29 November 2011 at 8:28 pm

      Tupac Amaru created its own brick and steelwork factories, making the construction process that much more efficient.

      Ah, that inefficient socialism strikes again…

      Oh, wait.

  33. William Joyce 33
    29 November 2011 at 7:48 pm

    It’s worse than we thought. While the big boys of Wall Street, the ones we thought were not in danger (JP Morgan and others), were secretly borrowing $1.2 trillion from the Fed.

    The Fed didn’t tell anyone which banks were in trouble so deep they required a combined $1.2 trillion on Dec. 5, 2008, their single neediest day. Bankers didn’t mention that they took tens of billions of dollars in emergency loans at the same time they were assuring investors their firms were healthy. And no one calculated until now that banks reaped an estimated $13 billion of income by taking advantage of the Fed’s below-market rates, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its January issue.
    Saved by the bailout, bankers lobbied against government regulations, a job made easier by the Fed, which never disclosed the details of the rescue to lawmakers even as Congress doled out more money and debated new rules aimed at preventing the next collapse……..
    The U.S. jobless rate hasn’t dipped below 8.8 percent since March 2009, 3.6 million homes have been foreclosed since August 2007, according to data provider RealtyTrac Inc., and police have clashed with Occupy Wall Street protesters, who say government policies favor the wealthiest citizens, in New York, Boston, Seattle and Oakland, California.
    – Bloomberg

    • RedLogix 33.1
      29 November 2011 at 8:44 pm

      Yes I heard Kathryn Ryan’s US correspondent detailing some of this story just before 10:00am this morning. I had seen some clues around this months ago, but this is now the official confirmation.

      BTW the total sum involved is at least $7.7Trillion. .. almost 50% of the entire US annual GDP.

      Let’s put this in a NZ context… it’s more or less the equivalent of the Reserve Bank giving NZ$100b to the four big Australian banks at an interest rate of 0.1%… and not telling anyone.

    • joe90 33.2
      29 November 2011 at 9:24 pm

      Habermas, the Last European

      Jürgen Habermas has had enough. The philosopher is doing all he can these days to call attention to what he sees as the demise of the European ideal. He hopes he can help save it — from inept politicians and the dark forces of the market.

      [—]

      And then he’s really angry again: “I condemn the political parties. Our politicians have long been incapable of aspiring to anything whatsoever other than being re-elected. They have no political substance whatsoever, no convictions.”

  34. joe90 34
    29 November 2011 at 9:53 pm

    And they’re off. On demand webcasts of the UN Climate change conference in Durban.

  35. Bob 35
    29 November 2011 at 10:19 pm

    The job market is constantly shifting…I would call it musical chairs, or a merry-go-round. People retire, move to a different job or role, new jobs are created, seasonal work becomes available, people leave for personal reaons etc. It is easy to point to the number of unemployed, and say “there are no jobs!” as if the job ‘market’ – for want of a better term – was a fixed and imovable position instead of endlessly fluid. The job market is not a solid concrete wall, it is porous and shifting.

    The benefit system provides a safety net for people who find themselves unemployed; a safety net that ensures that they are covered until they can jump back on the carousel. It’s a bus stop until the next bus comes along. Often quite a lot of people will be at the bust stop at any one time, but they are always in preperation for the next bus, and then they catch and it’s someone else’s turn to wait at the bus stop….temporarily.

    It is not meant to be a lifestyle choice. Anyone remaining on a benefit for a considerably lengthy period of time is going to suffer as a direct result because they are going to suffer an erosion of their self esteem. Which is why I don’t understand why long-term beneficiaries are seemingly unable to take their turn on the work carousel, but are content to milk the taxpayer while at the same time subsiding into a life missing (the) dignity (that work provides). Labour, as the party of work and workers, should understand this.

    There was a question during one of the leaders debates from a person who (apparently) had a degree, but had been unemployed for 2 years, unable to find employment. If I was to be out of job next week, I would back myself to have another one within 2 weeks, and I don’t have a degree. I would take a vacant spot on the carousel. The reality is: there are people who can’t or won’t take a turn themselves – no matter what the disasterous consequences are for themselves. Either they don’t want to work, or there is something about them that ensures that they don’t get past the interview process, or they consider themselves above many different types of work.

    What many cannot comprehend, yet try to, is the constant defence by the left of the dug-in, firmly entrenched long term beneficiary who dances down a path that leads eventually to inter-generational welfare depenendance and ‘rogue feral’ status. After all, Labour is the party of state intervention, yet they will not intervene to help those most in need get employed. A carrot and stick approach is needed to save lives, otherwise we are going to see an epedemic of Kahui type scenario’s – if we are not already. The days of 100% employment are gone, but so to should the days of “I can’t get a job, year upon year, decade upon decade”.

    [lprent: out of context to the post and the surrounding comment. Moved to OpenMike. ]

    • Draco T Bastard 35.1
      29 November 2011 at 10:39 pm

      There is no need for unemployment but having full employment degrades profits which is why John Key promised to lower wages and why Bill English said that you couldn’t have less than 6% unemployment.

      What many cannot comprehend, yet try to, is the constant defence by the left of the dug-in, firmly entrenched long term beneficiary…

      We don’t defend them, we try to help them to find their way and also accept that, no matter what we do, there will always be some who cannot be helped. NAct, on the other hand, just rant and rave at people and then punish them for things that aren’t their fault.

      • McFlock 35.1.1
        29 November 2011 at 11:30 pm

        snap.
         
        I’ll just add that I know a couple of people who “backed themselves” to be back in work within a couple of weeks after being laid off. It didn’t always work out that way, even though they were skilled workers with excellent references – but then the average tory seems to have an inflated sense of their own productive worth, whatever the economy is like.
         

  36. Jackal 36
    29 November 2011 at 10:48 pm

    Post election rant

    All the while the right continue to profess their ignorant rhetoric like it’s a mantra that will stop National taking even more taxes from them and distributing it to their already wealthy mates… a position that most right wing supporters will never attain…

  38. Draco T Bastard 38
    30 November 2011 at 12:05 am

    DIY search engine takes on Google

    Backed by free software activists, YaCy aims to literally put search into the hands of users by distributing its indexing engine around the net.

    Could this be the begging of the end of massive centralised search engine sever farms?

    • lprent 38.1
      30 November 2011 at 5:44 am

      It is unlikely. The logistics of updating numerous systems wih spider updates will massively favor centralized hubs compared with dispersed ones. I’ve written and maintained both. In fact this site operates dispersed.

  39. randal 39
    30 November 2011 at 6:22 am

    If garenr is pregnant its more likely to be the offspring of fatboy farrar.
    you can see why parlaiament wont do anything about fatty foods when garner and farrar live on a diet of sausage rolls and rubber chickens.

  40. John 40
    30 November 2011 at 9:36 pm

    Aucklands vote is blue because all these new aspirationals hanging on to plummeting mainstreet real estate prices. The banks aren’t lending to mainstreet.

    Someone needs to get real on poor fools who bought rental property thinking that it would be their meal ticket after ten years of work. Housing prices needs to plummet to meet the real new couple/ family market, that’s life

  41. John 41
    30 November 2011 at 9:42 pm

    Someone needs to get real on poor fools who bought rental property thinking that it would be their meal ticket after ten years of work. Housing prices needs to plummet to meet the real new couple/ family market, that’s life.

    The poor can’t do modern mortgages. Working and non-working and we shaw as hell don’t want to make you and your kids fat paying off a dumb- ass high rent.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.