Open Mike 30/12/2016

164 comments on “Open Mike 30/12/2016 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. North 1

   30 December 2016 at 7:21 am

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11774448

   Bruce Logan in the Herald promotes the “dangerous fantasy” of Israeli Zionist exceptionalism. Which holds that the calculated, systematic dehumanisation of Palestinians is of course quite the right approach. A curse on your apartheid Logan.
   • Carolyn_nth 1.1

     30 December 2016 at 7:35 am

     Because (to Logan) all Muslims (Palestinians, people of West bank/Gaza) are murderous terrorists – too much time wasted trying to “appease the unappeasable” Palestinians.

     trying to “appease the unappeasable” Palestinians. Zionists.

     FIFLogan
   • Cinny 1.2

     30 December 2016 at 7:56 am

     That opinion piece was crazy.

     Maybe Logan is with the ‘Flaxmere Christian Fellowship’ whom are marching on Parliament today, calling on the outgoing government to reject Muzzas decision.

     I guess they all forgot about the genocide of thousands of Palestinians by Israel, the control of any building supplies, food, medicine, water etc going into Gaza. Effectively starving the citizens and preventing them from rebuilding their lives after Israel bombed their hospitals, schools, homes etc in the conflict a few years back.

     Sounds like the 70 people marching today are just fine with murder, selective Christians they are, obviously ignorant of the ten commandments that they claim to live by. Do not murder, but it’s just fine to support Israel murdering Palestinians.

     It’s simply incredible how much death religion has caused, and even more concerning that some cannot see through the facade.
     • North 1.2.1

       30 December 2016 at 8:16 am

       That’s Israeli Zionist exceptionalism for you Cinny. It can paint a blowfly as a butterfly. Who the hell is Apartheid Logan anyway ? This person ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Logan

       If so, why does the Herald conceal the Old Testament credentials of its writer ? Just so that, you know, the reader might ‘understand’.
       • Cinny 1.2.1.1

         30 December 2016 at 9:02 am

         Dang, Bruce Logan is almost 80, and appears to be a writer of religious opinionated propaganda.

         It should be law to disclose the political, religious views etc on any opinion article, maybe a link to the authors bio as well. But in this case there is nothing, nada and the Herald does not allow comment, that creates concealed censorship.
         • alwyn 1.2.1.1.1

           30 December 2016 at 10:04 am

           “It should be law to disclose the political, religious views etc on any opinion article, maybe a link to the authors bio as well”.

           Do you really mean this?
           If so why should it apply only to articles in a newspaper? The better read blogs get nearly as many views as some of the newspapers and could be nearly as influential.

           After all, it is an opinion you are expressing there isn’t it?
           Do you plan to start putting your full name, and a disclaimer giving details of your beliefs when you put any comments on this blog?
           If this was required I suspect that 99% of the comments on this, and most other blogs would vanish instantly. Most commenters appear to value their anonymity.
           • Cinny 1.2.1.1.1.1

             30 December 2016 at 11:29 am

             Yup, if there is no way to comment, then a disclaimer would be appropriate. Many news agencies do so already, such as bio’s on their reporters, or a sentence about the reporter by their name on the article.

             For example so and so is a Professor at Massey etc etc

             By in this instance, it’s just simply
             By Bruce Logan.

             Alwyn I’m not talking about disclosure of comment makers on blogs, such as you and I.

             I’m talking about disclosure of authors of opinion pieces loosely disguised as articles published in nation wide news papers especially if comments are disabled, some call that transparency.
             • Red Hand …

               30 December 2016 at 11:42 am

               Transparency has a dark side too

               http://www.sup.org/books/title/?id=25832
               • Morrissey …

                 30 December 2016 at 11:53 am

                 Byung-Chul Han seems to be confused about the difference between transparency, as in open and democratic government, and privacy.

                 We citizens have every right to inspect and criticise what governments are doing.

                 The reverse situation does not apply.
                 • Red Hand …

                   30 December 2016 at 1:04 pm

                   The reverse situation applies because government keeps an eye on citizens

                   http://www.nzsis.govt.nz/our-work/

                   And criticises what citizens do and say

                   https://www.hrc.co.nz/your-rights/race-relations-and-diversity/

                   https://www.dia.govt.nz/Censorship-in-New-Zealand
     • JanM 1.2.2

       30 December 2016 at 8:41 am

       Mmm – does describing yourself as a Christian mean you hold a certain set of beliefs about God, etc., or does it imply that you try to live an ethical life? As the daughter of a Methodist minister I used to get quite exercised about this. In my teenage years I used to tell my parents that I knew more ‘Christians’ at school who had never darkened the doors of a church than I ever found in the church congregation
       • Cinny 1.2.2.1

         30 December 2016 at 8:22 pm

         I feel that if you are willing to label oneself one should walk the talk as well, otherwise it really is just superficial to satisfy someone elses ideals.
         Such as calling oneself a Muslim, Buddist, Christian etc but not living the life of one. It’s interesting how many people say what others want to hear to simply avoid any drama. And then again there is much wisdom in choosing ones battles. Everyone is different as are their ideals and ideas, knowledge and such.

         Personally we just live by one rule at ours… simple and ancient it is..
         Ye harm none do what ye will (that includes harming oneself)

         In an earlier opinion piece on Israel in the Herald they printed a few words about the author;
         
         • Hagai El-Ad is executive director for B’Tselem, an Israeli organisation for human rights in the occupied territories.

         But in the piece by Bruce Logan, there is nothing but his name, I wonder why that is?
   • marty mars 1.3

     30 December 2016 at 9:17 am

     Yuck. Coincidentally a friend started spouting anti Islamic rethoric to me yesterday. Of the Dr bill Warner type – so I watched warners video and most of brigette gabriel vid too.

     Hate speech is so off especially when facts are used to bolster the narrative not as the narrative. Bigotry is just so yuck.

     But it is important to know what they think to counter it – the lies, the hated, and their real motivation – FEAR.
2. Wyndham 2

   30 December 2016 at 8:12 am

   Logan is a right wing christian bigot. First director of the Maxim Institute.
   Say no more.
   • Morrissey 2.1

     30 December 2016 at 8:53 am

     In 1986, Bruce Logan tried to have the book The Color Purple by Alice Walker banned. He’s not simply a bigot, he’s a loon.

     To make matters worse, he was actually working as an English teacher at the time.
3. North 3

   30 December 2016 at 8:23 am

   Let’s be charitable Wyndham.

   Apartheid Logan’s motivation is good – ‘Maxim Institute’s mission statement is “to foster ideas and leadership that enable freedom, justice and compassion to flourish in New Zealand” ‘

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxim_Institute
4. Morrissey 4

   30 December 2016 at 9:00 am

   Noam Chomsky: Israel’s Response to the United
   Nations Resolution on Palestine Is ‘Hysterical’
   A victory for the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement.
   By Ken Klippenstein / AlterNet December 28, 2016

   The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) passed a resolution 14-0 condemning all Israeli settlements on Palestinian land as having “no legal validity” and amounting to “a flagrant violation under international law.” The resolution goes on to note that Israeli settlements pose “a major obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and security.”

   This represents the first UNSC resolution in almost eight years concerning Israel and Palestine, and the first in over 35 years regarding the issue of Israeli settlements. Typically the U.S. would veto resolutions critical of Israel, but in this case, the Obama administration opted to abstain, in effect allowing the resolution to pass.

   For comment, AlterNet contacted Noam Chomsky, famed linguist, dissident and professor emeritus of MIT. Chomsky said of the resolution, “The UNSC resolution is essentially the same as UNSC 446, March 1979, passed 12-0-3. The main difference is that then two countries joined the U.S. in abstaining. Now the U.S. stands against the world; and under Trump, in even more splendid isolation, on much more crucial matters as well.”

   Following the UNSC resolution, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quickly responded by announcing a halt to his government’s funding contributions to numerous U.N. institutions. Netanyahu called the resolution “a disgraceful anti-Israel maneuver” and blamed it on an “old-world bias against Israel.” Furthermore, he vowed to exact a “diplomatic and economic price” from the countries that supported it.

   Shortly thereafter, Netanyahu made good on his threats by personally refusing to meet with the foreign ministers of the 12 UNSC members that voted for the resolution and ordering his Foreign Ministry to limit all working ties with the embassies of those 12 nations. He also summoned the ambassadors to the Foreign Ministry for a personal reprimand over the vote—including, in a highly unusual move, the U.S. ambassador.

   Asked about Netanyahu’s response, Chomsky told AlterNet, “The hysterical reaction in Israel and in Congress (bipartisan) reflects their sharp shift to the right in the years since, and the whole incident illustrates quite interesting shifts in world order.”

   Palestinian rights advocates have quipped that Israel’s suspension of relations with the UNSC member nations that voted for the resolution—powerful countries including the U.K. and France—has effectively realized a goal of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement. AlterNet contacted Omar Barghouti, one of the founders of the BDS movement, to see what he thought of this assessment. Barghouti replied, “This unanimous resolution, despite its many flaws in addressing basic Palestinian rights, has dealt Israel’s colonial designs a serious blow that will inadvertently, yet significantly, enhance the impact of the BDS movement in isolating Israel academically, culturally, economically and otherwise.”

   “Israel’s delusional hubris and surreal threats to punish the U.N. and the world indicate above everything else how deeply alarmed it is at fast becoming an international pariah, as apartheid South Africa once was.”

   Ali Abunimah, the Palestinian-American founder of the Electronic Intifada, told AlterNet that Israel’s use of diplomatic sanctions against the UNSC member states contradicted its vocal opposition to sanctions advocated by the BDS movement. Abunimah said, “It’s sort of amusing to Israel try to impose sanctions and punish the whole world for this decision…Israel claims that sanctions are illegitimate as a tool except of course when Israel is the one wielding them, whether it’s against Iran or whether against the countries that displeased it.”

   …….

   Read more…
   http://www.alternet.org/world/chomsky-israels-response-unsc-hysterical
5. Cinny 5

   30 December 2016 at 9:06 am

   DANG ! BREAKING NEWS… it’s all on like Donkey Kong, Obama sure is making his exit known, once again this changes everything.

   US expels Russian diplomats over cyber attacks

   RT report for contrast
   • Pat 5.1

     30 December 2016 at 9:17 am

     first the Israelis and now the Russians…….keep Trump too busy with international disputes for him to unleash on the domestic front perhaps
     • Anne 5.1.1

       30 December 2016 at 10:16 am

       …keep Trump too busy with international disputes for him to unleash on the domestic front…

       Sounds like an eminently sensible idea.

       Btw, the story goes… it was the UK who encouraged NZ to sponser the UN resolution just passed. Looks like UK/US/Aussie/Canada/various European countries and maybe others are collaborating on the vexed question of the two recalcitrant leaders, Putin and Trump.

       I wish them every success.

       Edit: Add Netanyahu to the list.
       • Anne 5.1.1.1

         30 December 2016 at 10:33 am

         Ooops… Australia has announced it does not support the UN resolution. That figures. They’ve elected the most right wing govt. in their history.

         http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/world/321462/australia-doesn't-back-un's-israel-action

         Typical. They want it both ways.
         • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.1.1

           30 December 2016 at 10:50 am

           Both the Australian Coalition and Labor Parties have been thoroughly compromised by the pro-Zionist lobby.
           • North 5.1.1.1.1.1

             30 December 2016 at 4:30 pm

             CV…..Kia Ora Koe !
             Yes and it’s a powerful lobby. Golda Meir went to the US either near the end of WW2 or not long
             after. Raised $US39 mill’
             in around a month. Apartheid Logan’s Loon Tune is grist for its mill.
         • Morrissey 5.1.1.1.2

           30 December 2016 at 11:13 am

           Is it a surprise? The Australian government’s attitude to Australia’s indigenous population is not a lot different than that of the Israeli government’s attitude to its indigenous population.
           • Macro 5.1.1.1.2.1

             30 December 2016 at 11:20 am

             “The Australian government’s attitude to Australia’s indigenous population” (or any one else for that matter) ” is not a lot different than that of the Israeli government’s attitude to its indigenous population.”
             FIFY
             🙂
             • Anne …

               30 December 2016 at 11:33 am

               My ‘ooops’ was related to the fact I had included Aussie as part of the conspiracy, and then included Netanyahu on the undesirable list of leaders. Aussie clearly were not part of the conspiratorial UN/Israel affair.

               Apart from that yes, their track record concerning their own indigenous race is appalling. Perhaps that is one of the reasons why they’re keeping out of the argument.
             • Morrissey …

               30 December 2016 at 11:42 am

               Thanks, Macro. I hadn’t forgotten Australia’s shameful treatment of refugees, but had just restricted my focus for that one comment.
       • Gabby 5.1.1.2

         30 December 2016 at 3:11 pm

         The UK you say? Must be on the verge of a big arms deal.
     • GregJ 5.1.2

       2 January 2017 at 6:40 pm

       keep Trump too busy with international disputes for him to unleash on the domestic front perhaps

       Trump will have a Republican Congress to take care of domestic matters for him. Actually I would say it is more likely that Trump will permit Congress quite a lot of rope to do what they like as long as they don’t encroach on things he values, or things he wants personally to oversee or to harm his re-election.

       The danger of Obama’s moves in these areas is that it cuts both ways – at some stage in the future there will be a Democrat again about to enter the White House and as Obama appears to have ignored the unspoken conventions around the transition between US administrations then I’m sure Trump (& the Republicans) will now not feel obligated in their turn (not that I think Trump will be feel particularly bound by conventions anyway).
       • Pat 5.1.2.1

         2 January 2017 at 7:16 pm

         I doubt Obama fears the GOP controlled Congress in the same way he (and the establishment) fear what Trump may attempt….they are after all the same players he has been dealing with for the past 8 years and they understand the rules of the game….unlike Trump, as he has already amply demonstrated.

         a loose political cannon.
   • alwyn 5.2

     30 December 2016 at 10:07 am

     Anyone willing to bet that there will be 35 US diplomats expelled from Russia by Monday?
     • Anne 5.2.1

       30 December 2016 at 10:18 am

       I expect they have their bags packed already…
     • Macro 5.2.2

       30 December 2016 at 11:22 am

       Why spoil a good relationship?
       The Chump will overturn the expulsions in a few weeks so it’ll be all sweet.
       • One Two 5.2.2.1

         30 December 2016 at 1:45 pm

         Do you refer to Obama as ‘The Chimp’?

         You’ve made claims of holding ‘senior positions’, yet write your thoughts in a juvenile manner
         • Macro 5.2.2.1.1

           30 December 2016 at 2:04 pm

           And why would I want to be a racist bigot?
           However, I reserve the right to call a fool, a fool, when I see one.
           I can assure your most esteemed personage, that when drafting papers for Cabinet, I somehow managed to write in a suitably mature and respectful manner.
           • North 5.2.2.1.1.1

             30 December 2016 at 4:51 pm

             Response !!!!! Macro. I take it that was the cabinet of ’36…….
           • Colonial Viper 5.2.2.1.1.2

             30 December 2016 at 5:22 pm

             Trump’s not a “fool.” You may not like his personality, you may not like his manners, you may not like his style, you may not like his politics, but none of that makes him a “fool.”
             • marty mars …

               30 December 2016 at 5:26 pm

               What he says and does, does remind quite a few that he is a fool imo.
               • Colonial Viper …

                 30 December 2016 at 5:35 pm

                 He’s forced the CEOs of Lockheed Martin and Boeing to publicly announce that they will slash the cost of major procurement projects (the F-35 and Air Force One projects).

                 He’s lined up foreign investors and CEOs to say that they will create, protect or bring back thousands of jobs to the USA.

                 And now, US consumer confidence has hit its highest level in fifteen years.

                 So as I said, I understand that you may not like his manners, style or politics, but Trump is no “fool.”
                 • Macro …

                   30 December 2016 at 5:56 pm

                   🙄
                   Gezz! You really have swallowed the magic juice. CV – I’m sorry for you.
                   So Business confidence is up – whoop de doo!
                   But what of the appointment of a fool to his cabinet who wants to see even the most crappy wage they now get in the states go even lower? No body will be able to buy anything anyway. Yeah I guess the businesses will all be rubbing their hands waiting to drop wages to slave levels – but it will come back to bite them very hard on the bum.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     30 December 2016 at 6:20 pm

                     So Business confidence is up – whoop de doo!

                     Consumer confidence is up to the highest level in 15 years.

                     That’s what the Trump election has done.

                     But what of the appointment of a fool to his cabinet who wants to see even the most crappy wage they now get in the states go even lower?

                     (You seem to like the term “fool”.)

                     You have to ask yourself a very simple question. Will Trump’s appointees run their own typical corporatist Republican agenda?

                     Or will they do what they have been appointed for: run the populist Trump Agenda.

                     Yes, it is yet to be seen but I am betting that they will run the Trump Agenda. Or be fired.
             • Macro …

               30 December 2016 at 5:45 pm

               If he thinks that he can run the most powerful country in the world by twitter at 3 am in the morning, (without advice from more experienced and knowledgeable people) and not cause a war or serious diplomatic muddle in the process, then he is a stupid idiot.
               As for his appointed cabinet – the less said about that bunch of cronies and non-science dull brains the better.
               He surrounds himself with ignorance and incompetence in public governance – (running a company – however successfully or not – is not the same as running a country).
               If he had any sense, or intelligence, he would not have chosen the pack of incompetents he has.
               Nothing is going to end well out of the Chump “presidency”
               • Colonial Viper …

                 30 December 2016 at 6:25 pm

                 The Democratic Party will under estimate Trump at their own peril.

                 It already cost them the election.

                 If he thinks that he can run the most powerful country in the world by twitter at 3 am in the morning, (without advice from more experienced and knowledgeable people) and not cause a war or serious diplomatic muddle in the process, then he is a stupid idiot.

                 Unless you understand *why* he is tweeting how can you possibly understand the implications of *what* he is tweeting?

                 You don’t seem to understand that the states chose change.

                 That by definition, means doing things differently. Get up to speed. Russia, China and Iran are. I believe they will work it out fine.

                 NZ will have to as well.
                 • Macro …

                   30 December 2016 at 7:25 pm

                   Unless you understand *why* he is tweeting how can you possibly understand the implications of *what* he is tweeting?

                   Oh I know why he is tweeting.. and I fully understand the implications. – And so do his “advisors”. The problem is – he doesn’t understand the implications!.

                   We have a situation brewing at the moment where China is just biding its time until after the 20th Jan.

                   Instead of spending all your time reading RT – I suggest you read some of the editorials in China’s “Global Times”. The central Govt sponsored newspaper.

                   China has so far practiced restraint at Trump’s provocations as he’s yet to enter the White House…. But this attitude won’t last too long after he officially becomes the U.S. president, were he still to treat China in the manner he tweeted today.

                   and

                   We shall harbor no illusions, and get ready to wrist-fight with Trump.

                   and
                   Foreign Minister Wang Yi, without mentioning Trump’s name, said that whoever tries to destroy China’s core interests would shoot themselves in the foot.
                   I don’t see that is all pally wally and the snubbing his of nose at the One China policy has certainly angered Beijing. They may well decide that Taiwan is to be annexed forthwith. I don’t see that as a peaceful outcome.
                   So forgive me if I don’t wear your rose coloured glasses when it comes to viewing the “brilliance” of D Trump.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     30 December 2016 at 10:09 pm

                     You didn’t note the multiple confrontations between US and Chinese military forces under Obama?

                     And the rising rhetoric China has been using against Obama’s actions?

                     Trump hasn’t been sending bombers and destroyers to harass what China sees as its own territory. Obama has though.

                     Why so nervous now?

                     Oh I know why he is tweeting.. and I fully understand the implications. – And so do his “advisors”. The problem is – he doesn’t understand the implications!.

                     How is it that you know any of this?
                   • Macro …

                     30 December 2016 at 11:07 pm

                     Trump believes he is the big “I Am”.
                     He is nothing but a spoilt brat, who loves to shoot his mouth off, and show he is “The Boss”. Just look at the way he behaved to those on “The Apprentice” and how he loved to say “You’re Fired!” Throwing his weight about, is what he loves best. Hence his ill conceived tweets whenever something is not to his liking – he reacts without thinking, and seldom rationally. I’m not the only one to notice this – there are the reports of psychiatrists who also note this inconsistent and reactionary behaviour and are concerned enough to go public on the matter.
                     And yes I fully understand what the implications of some of these tweets may be. I doubt that he does. Bullies seldom have any idea of the damage they do to others lives. Even his own advisors are having difficulty trying to keep up and rationalise his behaviour. As for the the down stream consequences we shall just have to wait and see. He has not shown any appreciation to date, that the task of being responsible for the lives of 320 million people is a somewhat different to running a fleet of Hotels.
                     As for the growing tension in the South China Sea – the acts of aggression are not of the US but from China, and they are becoming more blatant in their show of force by the day. The US on the other hand, has in fact withdrawn bases from the area.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     30 December 2016 at 11:26 pm

                     As for the growing tension in the South China Sea – the acts of aggression are not of the US but from China, and they are becoming more blatant in their show of force by the day. The US on the other hand, has in fact withdrawn bases from the area.

                     If you are correct in your perspective then the Obama/Clinton “pivot to Asia” has proven to be a failure and Trump inherits the emboldened China and foreign policy mess that the Obama White House created.

                     Trump believes he is the big “I Am”.
                     He is nothing but a spoilt brat, who loves to shoot his mouth off, and show he is “The Boss”.

                     Your analysis is not far short of two dimensional amateur armchair psychotherapy.

                     As for having a big ego and a big mouth. That’s what the electorate wanted and that’s what they have got. And they are common politicians’ traits, after all.

                     I have said elsewhere – you may not like his style, his manners or his politics, but don’t let that fool you into thinking he is not highly capable in many different dimensions.
                   • McFlock …

                     30 December 2016 at 11:45 pm

                     That showed you, macro. 🙂

                     The president-elect oompah-loompah who used a presidential primary debate to reassure voters that his penis size was acceptable was merely being “highly capable” when he reversed 40-odd years of delicate prc-us-taiwan diplomatic waltzes by accepting a single phone call.

                     The South China Sea dance has been going on for decades: China pushes its boundaries out into international sea and air corridors, someone pushes back with a flight or a ship. China then sends planes or ships out to push back against the pushback. Sometimes there’s a collision, but that’s expected and handled. Fuck, they even make each other’s airfields available for emergency landings. And if things get too hot, they plug a trade discount or whatever and everybody acts a bit casual, because nobody wants a war.

                     But challenging the one china policy in regards to Taiwan is like trying to touch China’s balls. It’s a really sensitive area, and well outside the regular diplomatic shoving match. That’s why only idiots do it. Or multi-dimensional capables, of course.
                   • Colonial Viper …

                     30 December 2016 at 11:59 pm

                     Trump plays 7D chess. You’re not expected to keep up
                   • McFlock …

                     31 December 2016 at 12:21 am

                     Everyone else at the table is playing poker. And they’re all armed.
     • alwyn 5.2.3

       31 December 2016 at 10:29 am

       I’m glad no one offered to take me up on the bet.
6. marty mars 6

   30 December 2016 at 9:49 am

   Getting caught in moderation bummer – everything in moderation especially moderation.
7. Colonial Viper 7

   30 December 2016 at 10:48 am

   Lionel Nation: how to be a truth warrior
8. greywarshark 8

   30 December 2016 at 12:51 pm

   The tenth day around Christmas – quotes about friendship.

   I am treating you as my friend, asking you share my present minuses
   in the hope
   that I can ask you to share my future pluses.
   Katherine Mansfield
9. fisiani 9

   30 December 2016 at 1:56 pm

   I predict that there will be a political landslide next year. The social justice principles of a Bill English led government will resonate in South Auckland and far beyond. Trying to demonise the PM did not work for the last eight years and certainly will not work next year. National are aiming for 60% at the election but may have to settle for less this time. Already there is talk about what Bill would offer the few sensible Greens. Winston is deteriorating even more rapidly and he and both his likely possible successors could comfortably unite with a Bill English led National. Winston may reach election 2017 but has no chance of reaching 2020.
   This could lead to to a major realignment of politics and my pick is a Multi-Party Government comprising National (above50%), NZF, Greens, MP, UF and ACT comprising 75% of cast votes.
   • The Other Mike 9.1

     30 December 2016 at 2:17 pm

     *YAWN*
   • Robert Guyton 9.2

     30 December 2016 at 2:31 pm

     I predict that fisiani’s comment, having the depth of a cigarette paper, the substance of halitosis and interest value of belly button lint, will fade from the consciousness of any reader unfortunate enough to have looked at it, even before that reader can produce a sigh of resignation at the thought that fisiani feels driven to publish vacuous comments like this, even during the holiday season, when most others let rest their particular disfunctions. Give it a rest, fis.
     • fisiani 9.2.1

       30 December 2016 at 5:57 pm

       Stop the ad hominems that clearly breach policy and try to explain what is actually wrong with my sensible post.
       • Andrea 9.2.1.1

         30 December 2016 at 7:59 pm

         “what is actually wrong with my sensible post” –

         In such an event where is the mechanism to turf this cozy coalition out, at need? Which legislation applies?

         Is this the start of yet another 1000 year reign?

         Is NZ, so nostalgically in love with FPP, going to tolerate so fuzzy an arrangement?

         The details, fisiani – are notably absent from your sensible post.

         However, dreams are still free.

         Please enjoy the coming year.
   • Muttonbird 9.3

     30 December 2016 at 2:32 pm

     You hear a lot about this so called social investment approach by Bill English as if it is an item marketed to the public by the National Party. This is a strategy to paint Bill as soft and caring. In reality English has presided over some alarming increases of statistics around social harm since the mid 1990s. His social investment approach nothing but a further redistribution of increasingly scarce resources earmarked for public spending. There’s certainly no evidence to show it is working on any other level.

     I think the people of South Auckland see that, and with the withdrawal of National from campaigning in Auckland, their dumping of the housing portfolio, the appointment of Bennett as Auckland issues minister, and their admission of defeat in tackling the problems faced by Aucklanders, I predict the city will fall to Labour in a big way in 2017.

     This re-branding of Bill English is interesting and certainly seems to have taken a few people in like yourself, and Jarrod Gilbert who seems to be enthralled by Bill English even though more of his mates are locked up than ever before.

     Gilbert’s latest puff piece on Bill’s approach (can’t be bothered finding it) admits but skirts around the huge increase in the prison muster under this government and the equally huge spend on new prisons. Quite how incarcerating more and more disadvantaged people equates to social investment I do not know, and it seems the media doesn’t care to ask.
     • wellfedweta 9.3.1

       30 December 2016 at 3:03 pm

       If you want to understand the SI approach, this is an excellent resource https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/nz/Documents/public-sector/What-is-social-investment-nz.pdf. That material shows that the SI approach is a conversation this country has been having since 1997.

       NZ has a staggering welfare dependency problem, and our entire approach towards welfare has to change. Too many NZ’ers are trapped in long term welfare dependency, and social spending has to be directed towards addressing that.
       • One Anonymous Bloke 9.3.1.1

         30 December 2016 at 3:10 pm

         First you need to demonstrate that welfare dependency exists, because you are a racist parrot with zero credibility.
         • Wellfedweta 9.3.1.1.1

           30 December 2016 at 4:04 pm

           Stupid Racist denies welfare dependency.

           http://igps.victoria.ac.nz/WelfareWorkingGroup/Downloads/Final%20Report/WWG-Final-Recommendations-Report-22-February-2011.pdf

           http://www.nzcpr.com/understanding-welfare-dependency/

           http://ips.ac.nz/publications/files/e3b5e3549a1.pdf

           http://www.ssc.govt.nz/bps-reducing-dependence
           • One Anonymous Bloke 9.3.1.1.1.1

             30 December 2016 at 5:23 pm

             Lots of people assert that it exists, otherwise there’d be nothing on the spoon that feeds you.

             What they have failed to do is demonstrate that it exists, and is not yet another racist rear-guard action that attempts to resuscitate the notion of the “undeserving” poor. Or yet another artifact of right wing hate speech. As the reference I provided finds: ‘the welfare rolls are not filled with the chronically dependent”.

             In the NZ context, Gordon Campbell points out that:

             Looking across all forms of benefits, 61.4 % of recipients are benefit dependent for four years or less. Only 14.3 % are on benefits for more than ten years – and since those figures include people with chronic physical and mental disabilities, the ratio of those staying on benefits because it is a “lifetime, lifestyle choice’ is lower again.

             In short, it exists to divert attention from the causes of poverty and inequality, so that right wingers don’t ever have to face their personal responsibility for the victims of your racism and bigotry.

             I think you are racist scum with no original thoughts of your own. Let’s agree to disagree.
             • wellfedweta …

               31 December 2016 at 3:55 pm

               ” the ratio of those staying on benefits because it is a “lifetime, lifestyle choice’ is lower again.”

               So even your own quote agrees that it exists. Well done Bloke. Another time you have been proven wrong. The number is mounting.
               • One Anonymous Bloke …

                 1 January 2017 at 11:21 am

                 Zero is lower than 14.3. You have no basis other than hate-speech for your assertion that the number is mounting.

                 You are a racist lying parrot with nothing of value or originality to say. If I wanted to read National Party lies I’d go to their website. Let’s agree to disagree.
                 • wellfedweta …

                   1 January 2017 at 2:22 pm

                   “Zero is lower than 14.3. You have no basis other than hate-speech for your assertion that the number is mounting.”

                   The number that is mounting is the number of times I’ve caught you out.

                   Here’s a summary of your latest gaffe:

                   “What they have failed to do is demonstrate that it exists, ”

                   “the ratio of those staying on benefits because it is a “lifetime, lifestyle choice’ is lower again.”

                   Talk about foot in mouth.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     1 January 2017 at 2:34 pm

                     Yawn. I disagree with the propaganda you were spoon-fed.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     1 January 2017 at 2:44 pm

                     ” I disagree with the propaganda you were spoon-fed.”

                     There was no propaganda. Just you contradicting your self.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     1 January 2017 at 3:00 pm

                     In your mind: Campbell provides no statistics for the alleged dependents. Lower than 14.3 can be anything from zero to 14.2. It is not evidence, no matter how hard you want it to be.

                     Maninthemiddle demonstrating basic innumeracy again.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 5:41 pm

                     “Lower than 14.3 can be anything from zero to 14.2.”

                     You making shit up again. If it was zero, he would have said zero, or not even mentioned the category. Instead he said ‘lower again’. Even your own references make you look like an idiot.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 5:48 pm

                     If he couldn’t measure it because there aren’t any figures he’d say “lower than”. If he could measure it he’d give the figure.

                     You’re the one asserting that welfare dependency exists. It’s up to you to prove it does. The fact that various people also think it does is evidence of nothing.

                     Personally, I think you fixate on it and the other right wing lies Gordon Campbell lists because you can’t handle your personal responsibility for the effects of your witless beliefs.

                     Everything you write here confirms that.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 5:55 pm

                     ” If he could measure it he’d give the figure.”

                     Not necessarily. But if the figure was zero, it is most likely he wouldn’t have even mentioned it, or would have said it was ‘zero’. Personally I think you posted something that you thought supported your argument without understanding what it actually said.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 5:59 pm

                     There’s a big clue in the fact that Campbell describes them as “myths”. Do you know what a myth is? After all, your mind is crippled by them.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:05 pm

                     “There’s a big clue in the fact that Campbell describes them as “myths”. ”

                     Now you’re evading. That’s not what Campbell says in the point we’re discussing, and it’s not what Campbell says in his commentary. You’re clearly struggling to keep up.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:24 pm

                     It’s only the headline. I think you’re full of shit and hate, and everything you write confirms it.

                     Get over it.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:27 pm

                     “It’s only the headline.”

                     No it’s not. A few days ago you denied welfare dependency even existed. Your credibility is shot.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:30 pm

                     If you ‘click’ (that’s something you can do with your ‘mouse’) on the word in blue – “myths” – in my comment it will take you to the article. Then ‘read’ the ‘headline’.

                     Oh, and don’t forget that reading is a skill you struggle with. Read it a few times.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:45 pm

                     I’m going to reset, Bloke, because you’re being slippery.

                     In your first reference in this discussion, you quoted this:

                     “Looking across all forms of benefits, 61.4 % of recipients are benefit dependent for four years or less. Only 14.3 % are on benefits for more than ten years – and since those figures include people with chronic physical and mental disabilities, the ratio of those staying on benefits because it is a “lifetime, lifestyle choice’ is lower again.”

                     I note you gave no link. Leaving that side, you quoted this in support of your denial of welfare dependency. Yet your own quote states that 14.3% are on benefits for more than 10 years, and that there is a further group who are on benefits as a “lifetime, lifestyle choice”.

                     Those comments directly contradict you seeming ignorance of welfare dependency.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:59 pm

                     Notice the ” quote marks around the phrase “lifetime, lifestyle choice”.

                     Do you know what they mean? I doubt it. After all, English comprehension isn’t your strong-point.

                     They mean the author thinks they (the alleged dependents that you can provide no evidence of) might be apocryphal. Myths, even.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     4 January 2017 at 1:04 pm

                     “They mean the author thinks they (the alleged dependents that you can provide no evidence of) might be apocryphal. Myths, even.”

                     Perhaps, perhaps not. Perhaps the author is using phrases commonly used without actually passing judgement. It’s irrelevant to your evasion. The author acknowledges there is welfare dependency. Your own reference.
       • Whispering Kate 9.3.1.2

         30 December 2016 at 4:23 pm

         The Social Investment strategy has gone too far when they are put severe pressure on people with mental health issues into employment. Even the most ordinary job will put extraordinary strain on these people and they will end up with worse health issues than ever before. Who is going to help them when they are either sacked or have to quit. Blinglish only ever sees money when he quantifies human beings, everybody has a price tag, his strategy to dig deep into the the well of people who are on benefits is poor judgment and ill advised. We will end up with very ill people out of work and without money and support. Shame on Blinglish for his disgraceful attitude towards the unwell.
         • wellfedweta 9.3.1.2.1

           30 December 2016 at 5:16 pm

           I’m not sure what you describe would be part of a SI approach. Do you have an example?
           • One Anonymous Bloke 9.3.1.2.1.1

             30 December 2016 at 5:29 pm

             Racists like you need government sponsored amygdalectomies. That would be a social investment that would return dividends galore.
             • Wellfedweta …

               31 December 2016 at 3:16 pm

               Anti-Semites like you should get back on your meds.
               • One Anonymous Bloke …

                 1 January 2017 at 11:23 am

                 🙄
       • RedBaronCV 9.3.1.3

         30 December 2016 at 7:03 pm

         Absolutely typical – an 18 page double spaced booklet with more pictures than words to solve all the nation’s social problems – get real- this is a pile of rubbish with discernible internal faults. (quite apart from the external ones) The time line shows only Nact governments giving this any space but the text implies that Labour wanted this too…

         And it is essentially rubbish. Nact governments and their policies have caused a great number of these problems,
         getting rid of unions dumbed wages down,
         only funding rent support payments to private landlords instead of mixing this with state owned housing
         etc etc

         The real dependency problem is corporations that depend on governments to collect taxes and throw them at lousy private sector schemes “to replace government”
         • Wellfedweta 9.3.1.3.1

           31 December 2016 at 3:16 pm

           Obviously you didn’t even read it.
           • RedBaronCV 9.3.1.3.1.1

             1 January 2017 at 11:03 am

             There was sod all to read but there were pictures as well – to simplify the issues for the right of centre individuals no doubt.
             Still the point is – the dire circumstances of many individuals is the result of Right Wing policy settings not individual failure.

             But with so many corporates and right wing individuals trapped by government dependency (whether it’s a high paying government appointment or a favourable contract for public services) we could use the social investment approach to assess their level of social harm and charge them accordingly.
             • wellfedweta …

               1 January 2017 at 2:18 pm

               ” the dire circumstances of many individuals is the result of Right Wing policy settings not individual failure.”

               Evidence?
               • One Anonymous Bloke …

                 1 January 2017 at 2:44 pm

                 The fact that all the right wing propaganda on the subject is based on the self-attribution fallacy.
                 • Paul …

                   1 January 2017 at 2:47 pm

                   May I suggest we don’t feed the rwnj trolls in 2017.
                 • wellfedweta …

                   1 January 2017 at 2:47 pm

                   Evidence?
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     1 January 2017 at 2:50 pm

                     Evidence.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 5:38 pm

                     ” the dire circumstances of many individuals is the result of Right Wing policy settings not individual failure.”

                     Evidence?
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 5:42 pm

                     Yes: the self-attribution fallacy is a well-known phenomenon that accounts for the things right wingers believe about individual success and failure.

                     Read about it and discover the evidence for yourself.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 5:51 pm

                     “Read about it and discover the evidence for yourself.”

                     I’m really not interested in the inner workings of your imagination. I am asking for evidence for RedBaron’s claim.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 5:55 pm

                     The evidence for Redbaron’s claim is obvious once you understand what the self-attribution fallacy is. I know you cannot understand how or why, so pretend it doesn’t exist or doesn’t count.

                     You probably deny climate physics too.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:03 pm

                     “The evidence for Redbaron’s claim is obvious once you understand what the self-attribution fallacy is.”

                     No, that’s not good enough. The claim ” the dire circumstances of many individuals is the result of Right Wing policy settings not individual failure” is not my claim, and it is very specific. I would expect there be some evidence. The SAF is not evidence; it is a theory which has it’s own limitations.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:09 pm

                     The doubling of child poverty between 1984 and today, for example. Wayne Mapp tells us that the 1990s National Party he was a member of increased inequality deliberately.

                     Whereas you wail your ignorance and denial on a blog.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:14 pm

                     “The doubling of child poverty between 1984 and today, for example. ”

                     Setting side the validity of the data you have to use to justify that claim, that isn’t evidence. Child poverty has, for example, increased in Sweden, which is the sort of social democratic country I have seen you and others praise.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:18 pm

                     Did right wing scum in Sweden do it deliberately?
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:22 pm

                     “Did right wing scum in Sweden do it deliberately?”

                     Now you’re just being silly.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:26 pm

                     The reason I ask is Mapp’s confession that it was done deliberately by the National Party he was a member of.

                     So I was thinking that Sweden probably has scum like you and him too.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:30 pm

                     “The reason I ask is Mapp’s confession that it was done deliberately by the National Party he was a member of.”

                     Even you’re telling the truth (which is always questionable), even if Mapp is telling the truth, how do you explain the fact that Mapp was only in government for 6 of the last 32 years?
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 8:10 pm

                     He was a member of the 1996 government and is in a better position to know than you are.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     4 January 2017 at 1:05 pm

                     “He was a member of the 1996 government and is in a better position to know than you are.”

                     He was in government for 6 of the last 32 years. Hardly significant.
       • Gabby 9.3.1.4

         30 December 2016 at 10:08 pm

         Oh? I thought we had record low unemployment etc etc.
         • Wellfedweta 9.3.1.4.1

           31 December 2016 at 3:27 pm

           Record high employment.
           • One Anonymous Bloke 9.3.1.4.1.1

             1 January 2017 at 2:55 pm

             The inevitable consequence of population growth.
             • wellfedweta …

               2 January 2017 at 5:39 pm

               Not if jobs aren’t being created. And with unemployment dropping, your petty little argument collapses.
               • One Anonymous Bloke …

                 2 January 2017 at 5:44 pm

                 The official unemployment statistic fell earlier this year as a result of the way it is measured. This is well-documented. It’s sad that you believe that changes anything on the ground.
                 • wellfedweta …

                   2 January 2017 at 5:53 pm

                   Unemployment has been dropping for some time. That is based on official data. If all you have left is arguing over the data, you’ve lost. With unemployment falling, and employment rising, the population growth argument you’ve put up is bollocks.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:03 pm

                     If all you have is claiming credit for a change from inches to millimetres it’s no wonder you vote for incompetence and cruelty. I disagree with the lies you were spoon-fed.

                     Get over it.
                   • wellfedweta …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:08 pm

                     It isn’t a change from inches to millimetres. The way we measure unemployment is based on an international standard. If you don;t like it, tough.
                   • One Anonymous Bloke …

                     2 January 2017 at 6:17 pm

                     Yes, I know you believe that very very hard. I don’t: get over it.
   • North 9.4

     30 December 2016 at 4:41 pm

     I love it I love it ! FizzyUnis. Or as says a Saudi person I know ……….”I Lick It Alot!”
     You’re still licking it I see Fez.
   • Colonial Viper 9.5

     30 December 2016 at 5:26 pm

     Am current rating the chances of a National Government at the end of next year at 3:2. This is well down on my previous estimates.

     However, if National play the shell game that I expect, Labour will have nothing to respond with and National’s odds will go up to 3:1 for.

     Also, Greens to have near zero possibility of reaching 14%.
10. The Other Mike 10

    30 December 2016 at 2:20 pm

    USA is leading here:
    ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — It will be a happy New Year indeed for millions of the lowest-paid U.S. workers. Nineteen states, including New York and California, will ring in the year with an increase in the minimum wage.

    Massachusetts and Washington state will have the highest new minimum wages in the country, at $11 per hour.

    California will raise its wage to $10.50 for businesses with 26 or more employees. New York state is taking a regional approach, with the wage rising to $11 in New York City, to $10.50 for small businesses in the city, $10 in its downstate suburbs and $9.70 elsewhere. Some specific businesses — fast-food restaurants and the smallest New York City businesses — will have slightly different wage requirements.

    “This $1.50 increase, I cannot even comprehend or tell you how important this will be,” said Alvin Major, a New York City fast-food worker. The 51-year-old father of four helped lead the fight for the increase in his state, one of several successful efforts by fast-food workers and other low wage workers around the country. “The price of food has gone up. Rent has gone up. Everything has gone up. … This will make a difference for so many people.”

    http://www.chron.com/news/us/article/Pay-to-rise-for-millions-as-19-states-increase-10825088.php
    Take note Bill….
    • Wayne 10.1

      30 December 2016 at 2:55 pm

      New Zealand has a higher minimum wage than any of these US states. In fact as a percentage of average wages NZ is one the highest in the OECD.

      Since 2008 the minimum wage has gone up at nearly three times the inflation rate.

      However as a gesture in election year it could go from $15.25 to $16.00, rather than say $15.75.

      Presumably Labour is going to go for at least $18.00 as part of their campaign strategy. Or if they want a different number at the front, $20.00. That would certainly have people taking notice. But it has risks. A 30% increase in the minimum wage might be seen as economically reckless. But since Standardnistas want a more left wing Labour Party, surely $20.00 for the minimum wage would be proof of that.
      • wellfedweta 10.1.1

        30 December 2016 at 3:14 pm

        There is another ‘fish-hook’ with the minimum wage in the US. I was recently in the US, and I was told by service workers (restaurant waiters) that their minimum wage was actually under $3, but was topped up by tips. The employee had to pay any shortfall between their hourly wage + tip and the MW, but this meant they didn’t effectively earn the MW + tips. When I first heard this I couldn;t believe it, so I checked with several staff and they all confirmed this was the case.

        A gradual increases in the MW, as NZ has been doing, is sensible, but the evidence linking increases in MW rates to job losses is powerful. http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-evidence-is-piling-up-that-higher-minimum-wages-kill-jobs-1450220824.
        • One Anonymous Bloke 10.1.1.1

          30 December 2016 at 7:37 pm

          Powerful enough for Treasury to point out that it doesn’t exist.

          The difference between you and them is that you are a racist Quisling wailing your denial on a blog.
          • wellfedweta 10.1.1.1.1

            31 December 2016 at 4:05 pm

            Since when did you prostrate yourself at the feet of Treasury? And did you see in your own link that the Department of Labour point out that an increase DOES cost jobs. Second time today your own link has contradicted your own opinion, Bloke. Well done.

            Oh, and here’s more:

            http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/03/22/proof-perfect-that-the-minimum-wage-costs-jobs-from-new-york/#71f6eab816a0

            http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/04/01/higher-minimum-wages-cost-jobs-shrink-the-economy-and-make-everyone-poorer/#2f879ad2694b
            • One Anonymous Bloke 10.1.1.1.1.1

              1 January 2017 at 11:26 am

              Yawn. Right wing lies aren’t evidence of anything. Treasury is but one of many sources saying the same thing.

              You are a racist lying parrot with nothing of value or originality to contribute. If I wanted to read National Party lies I’d go to their website.

              Let’s agree to disagree.
              • wellfedweta …

                1 January 2017 at 2:23 pm

                Treasury say no, DoL say yes. As do many other sources.
                • One Anonymous Bloke …

                  1 January 2017 at 2:38 pm

                  But the reason you believe it is that you uncritically swallow any right wing lie you’re spoon-fed.
                  • wellfedweta …

                    1 January 2017 at 2:46 pm

                    The reason I believe what I believe is because I trust my sources. And I don’t contradict myself of make shit up, like you do.
                    • One Anonymous Bloke …

                      1 January 2017 at 2:48 pm

                      In your mind.

                      Thanks for confirming my estimation of your critical faculties.
                    • wellfedweta …

                      2 January 2017 at 5:37 pm

                      “In your mind.”

                      No, in writing. Here on this blog. You make shit up Bloke.
                    • One Anonymous Bloke …

                      2 January 2017 at 5:51 pm

                      That would be you using “pwned” arguments in direct violation of site policy. It means nothing.
                    • wellfedweta …

                      2 January 2017 at 5:57 pm

                      “That would be you using “pwned” arguments in direct violation of site policy. ”

                      Not at all. I can prove you make up shit. Your claim recently about Likud is one example.
                    • One Anonymous Bloke …

                      2 January 2017 at 6:01 pm

                      The fact that you cannot understand why saying “if you do that it will be a declaration of war” is a threat is on you. Own it.
                    • wellfedweta …

                      2 January 2017 at 6:07 pm

                      “The fact that you cannot understand why saying “if you do that it will be a declaration of war” is a threat is on you.”

                      The fact that you can’t understand that Netanyahu’s words referred to NZ’s actions, not Likud’s is on you.
                    • One Anonymous Bloke …

                      2 January 2017 at 6:21 pm

                      😆

                      Thank you for confirming that you cannot understand the point.
                    • wellfedweta …

                      2 January 2017 at 6:25 pm

                      “Thank you for confirming that you cannot understand the point.”

                      I’ll leave that to others. Frankly it seems clear to me you over reached, and then didn’t have the intelligence to realise it, or the grace to admit it.
      • The Other Mike 10.1.2

        30 December 2016 at 3:30 pm

        You can’t compare us with the USA as their tax(es) regime is totally different.

        If the minimum wage is that good, how come 40% of those in poverty are actuall WORKING? (These are called the “working poor”.)

        Get e clue, Wayne, starting here:
        http://www.inequality.org.nz/understand/
        http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/307458/10-percent-richest-kiwis-own-60-percent-of-nz's-wealth
        http://www.closingthegap.org.nz/
        http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/68600911/income-inequality-how-nz-is-one-of-the-worst-in-the-world

        There is a good reason it’s called a “Living Wage”:
        http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/money/77378686/New-Zealand-living-wage-rate-of-19-80-to-kick-in-July-1

        Hell, try te Google… here ya go, fixed it for ya https://www.google.co.nz/?gws_rd=ssl#q=inequality+in+New+Zealand

        What fairy-tale right wing conservative all white country do you live in?
        • wellfedweta 10.1.2.1

          30 December 2016 at 5:17 pm

          You equate inequality with poverty. The two are not necessarily mutually entangled.
          • The Other Mike 10.1.2.1.1

            30 December 2016 at 10:27 pm

            They are both caused by inadequate income. That close enough for you?
            • Wellfedweta 10.1.2.1.1.1

              31 December 2016 at 3:14 pm

              Wrong. Two people can have different incomes yet both be on adequate incomes. This is something that the left just cannot grasp.
              • One Anonymous Bloke …

                1 January 2017 at 11:32 am

                A flaccid response that utterly fails to address the point. You need to do more homework, Go read National’s website and regurgitate it all over yourself some more.
                • wellfedweta …

                  1 January 2017 at 2:17 pm

                  Let’s get this straight. Are you suggesting the only acceptable society to you is one where everyone receives the same incomes?
                  • One Anonymous Bloke …

                    1 January 2017 at 2:32 pm

                    No. What kind of complete fuckwit would think that.
                    • wellfedweta …

                      1 January 2017 at 2:43 pm

                      So, which part of this statement do you no agree with:

                      ” Two people can have different incomes yet both be on adequate incomes. “
                    • One Anonymous Bloke …

                      1 January 2017 at 2:46 pm

                      There is a third category: those who don’t have adequate income. Homeless working families, for example.

                      That, and the obvious fact that you don’t understand how inequality works. No, I’m not going to do your homework for you. Google it.
      • McFlock 10.1.3

        30 December 2016 at 3:49 pm

        That depends entirely on the level of the living wage, not some arbitrary increase to the minimum wage.

        As soon as you let go of why we have a minimum wage, you get into the “why not make it a gazillion dollars” bullshit.

        A left wing government would put the minimum wage at a living wage level, whatever that might be.
        • Wayne 10.1.3.1

          30 December 2016 at 5:04 pm

          McFlock,

          I chose $20.000 because it is close to the “living wage” (very slightly higher) but with the advantage that it is a memorable figure.

          Just campaigning on the “living wage” will not get cut through. Voters have to ask the question, what does it mean? As a general rule if you have to explain the policy, you have lost much of your audience. If the slogan was “$20, the living wage” then in four words the policy is fully explained. Whats not to like about simplicity?

          If Labour wants to campaign on the “living wage” as the minimum, then they should go for it. The voters will judge.
          • McFlock 10.1.3.1.1

            30 December 2016 at 11:27 pm

            Thanks for your concern.
11. Ethica 11

    30 December 2016 at 2:38 pm

    Australia’s Get Up Movement has been very effective this year. It’s a great model of mobilising ordinary citizens

    https://www.getup.org.au/campaigns/core-member-2016/2016-reportback/2016-s-most-memorable-moments?t=XnYqZiw07&utm_content=16427&utm_campaign=Our_movement_in_action&utm_source=blast&utm_medium=email
12. Ovid 12

    30 December 2016 at 2:51 pm
13. The PInk Postman 13

    30 December 2016 at 4:21 pm

    Be prepared to have the Paula Bennett solo -mum sob story to be mentioned at every possible chance.Also get ready for Sir John in the new years honors list.
    • fisiani 13.1

      30 December 2016 at 5:13 pm

      It’s election year.
      Dependable Southlander, Solo mother, Not Sir John but more likely Saint John, Refreshed Cabinet, Housing boom, homelessness cured, poverty abolished, rising prosperity and all conquering all Blacks.
      Then there’s Angry Andy lumbered with the nutty Greens. Could be a landslide.
      • wellfedweta 13.1.1

        30 December 2016 at 5:19 pm

        …and you haven’t even mentioned our German friends latest noises about playing sugar daddy to anyone stupid enough to take his cash.
        • mpledger 13.1.1.1

          30 December 2016 at 7:18 pm

          At least he gives openly rather than all the RWNJ who fund the National party in secret.
          • alwyn 13.1.1.1.1

            30 December 2016 at 8:21 pm

            “fund the National party in secret”
            You have any evidence at all for this wild claim?
            Something in the last 5 years will do.
            Thought not. Just wild accusations with nothing at all to back them up.
            • Cinny 13.1.1.1.1.1

              30 December 2016 at 8:51 pm

              Ummm Alwyn here is the proof that some fund the National party in secret
              There is such a thing as Donations Protected from Disclosure. Seems RWNJs love to do it with both ACT and the outgoing government. MPledger was correct.
              http://www.elections.org.nz/sites/default/files/bulk-upload/documents/donations_protected_from_disclosure_-_general_election_2014.pdf

              Donations Protected from Disclosure Paid Out
              –
              July 2012 to June 2015
              ACT New Zealand
              26 March 2014
              $43,350

              The New Zealand National Party
              26 March 2014
              $43,350

              The New Zealand National Party
              30 May 2014
              $86,350

              Conservative Party
              30 May 2014
              $10,000

              ACT New Zealand
              27 June 2014
              $43,000

              http://www.elections.org.nz/parties-candidates/registered-political-parties/party-donations/donations-protected-disclosure
              Some more spreadsheets for you

              Kisses Cinny xxx
              • fisiani …

                30 December 2016 at 11:46 pm

                Chump change compared with the massive sums spent by unions against the wishes of their members.
                • Cinny …

                  31 December 2016 at 1:32 am

                  Try and spin it anyway you can Fisiani but ….

                  Unions endorse the political parties that best support the workers rights. They are a voice for working people and their families.
                  http://www.union.org.nz/

                  If ACT or National are upset about that, maybe they should support our workers a bit better?

                  There sure are a few corporates on the outgoing governments party donation lists, so much more becomes clear as one reads certain names.

                  http://www.elections.org.nz/sites/default/files/bulk-upload/documents/national_return_of_donations_and_loans_2014.pdf
                • Wensleydale …

                  31 December 2016 at 3:02 am

                  That’s so wrong as to be utterly laughable. Much like most of what you post.
          • wellfedweta 13.1.1.1.2

            31 December 2016 at 3:52 pm

            Oh I have no problem with him giving. It’s the ones who will prostitute themselves for the wealth of a rich criminal that I despise.
      • Sabine 13.1.2

        30 December 2016 at 8:16 pm

        dependable southlander or westie chick in cheap leopard print

        solo mother – or in Mike hoskins speak silly women who could not keep that aspirin between her legs with useless parents resulting in her having a child she could not afford – thus domestic purpose benefit dole bludger

        student – or domestic purpose benefit dole bludger studying some liberal social degree on some tax payer funded trinket to keep her welfed.

        home owner – or doestic purpose benefit dole bludger studying some liberal social degree who buys a home with a taxpayer funded goverment hand out

        Minister – who did nothing ever other then help dismantle the widowers benefit (the one that kept John Keys mother in bread and butter), dismantle the domestic purpose benefit into something called the solo parent benefit (now with work requirements at age 3 of the child – something no one ever asked of the dole bludger), dismantle the study aid that she received to study a social liberal degree, dismantle any government aid to buy a house, dismantle state housing one house at a time, dismantle the sick benefit – now people who used to be on the widowers benefit or the sick benefit must be on a job seekers benefit.
        yeah, she is gonna be loved, and her story as a single mother who made herself without the help of anyone is gonna wash down lovely with the masses.

        the best that women can do is stay in wellington and collect some more tax payer funded largesse while she can.
14. AsleepWhileWalking 14

    30 December 2016 at 5:23 pm

    Alex Jones finally snaps (who would have thought he’d last this long?). The Gloves Come Off: Media Tycoon Alex Jones to Sue Facebook and Wash Post

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/12/no_author/no-mr-nice-jones/
15. Sabine 15

    30 December 2016 at 8:19 pm

    this is funny.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/petition-mormon-tabernacle-choir-trump-inauguration_us_5865b505e4b0de3a08f7ded4

    Quote” A Mormon who said his “heart sank” when he heard that the church’s beloved Tabernacle Choir will perform at Donald Trump’s inauguration has launched a petition to urge the group not to go to Washington, D.C.

    “I love the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. The thought of this choir and Mormonism being forever associated with a man who disparages minorities, brags about his sexual control of women, encourages intolerance and traffics in hate speech and bullying, was unacceptable,” Randall Thacker said in a statement. “I immediately knew there were probably thousands of people who felt the same way, so I created the space on Change.org for like-minded Mormons and their friends to share their feelings.”

    About 215 of the choir’s 360 members are expected to perform at the inauguration, church officials have told The Salt Lake City Tribune.

    By Thursday evening, nearly 19,000 people had signed the petition, which is seeking 25,000 signatures. The petition urges the Mormon Tabernacle Choir not to perform for an “incoming president who has demonstrated sexist, racist, misogynistic, and xenophobic behavior that does not align with the principles and teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”

    Most of the signatures are from LDS members around the world, according to Thacker, a lifelong member of the church.

    The petition also encourages people to call and write the church to give their reasons for signing. Several mention that Trump’s values are incompatible with Mormonism or that the church should never become associated with politics. One quips: Conservative rocker “Ted Nugent and the choir? I don’t think so!” Another writes: “Horrible values. Separation of church and state. Pay your taxes.” Quote End.
16. Paul 16

    30 December 2016 at 9:47 pm

    The rich just keep getting richer.

    http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11774884
    • Naki man 16.1

      30 December 2016 at 10:39 pm

      Thats what happens when you have investments Paul.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS