Posts by Sacha
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Phoebe at Tumeke notes the apparent lineage of the "Bug Luddle City" advert - Tim Burton.
The inclusion of this stylistic nod means that Auckland is reterritorialised as fairytale America and the assertion of locality is largely not through landscape but through the cameos of local celebrities who supposedly embody Auckland: Denise L'Estrange-Corbet, Bic Runga and Peter Gordon.
Auckland is presented as if it could be interchangeable with any other continental city, including prominent placement of Gucci and Chanel's concept stores. The styling as Americana is evident in the bike our elderly guide rides, the costuming of the flowergirl and fedora-topped business man as 1950s, the traditionally dressed maid and the use of the carnivalesque - a mode that is more asociated with the US than anywhere in NZ.
Internationally, the phrase "big little city" is already associated with more Americana...
-
it's hard to imagine why there isn't more difference represented at the national level
Or local, for that matter. I'd bet on lack of social and financial capital combined with offputtingly monocultural institutions.
That "Heart" of Auckland advert is bloody typical - could be anywhere in the world rather than confidently planted in the planet's largest polynesian city.
-
Finding the right thread to jack is an art. Bravo on both counts, Paul.
-
And Cory Doctorow's mom (who happens to be an ECE specialist) points us to the Educational Origami wiki to discuss questions like:
"What does teaching and learning look like in the 21st Century? What about 21st Century learning spaces? How can Bloom's Taxonomy be applied to the Digital world?
-
For exposing us to untranslated French, or Arnie's stellar acting skills?
Disabled embedding can be a mercy (although I tend to think of it as political strategy, funnily enough).
-
And your point is?
-
Oh, and a tidbit from Fran O'Sullivan.
But English's most intriguing admission was that he had appointed former Treasury boss Graham Scott - and a panel of economists - to work on a new economic strategy.
This is either a shocking admission that English doesn't know what to do next, or a signal that the National Government intends to bypass the Treasury and get serious about fundamental change.
-
Budget, you say. NZ Institute says not good enough by half.
But like just one chopstick without its mate, avoiding a ratings downgrade was necessary (and welcome) but insufficient. To fuel New Zealand’s economic growth and make it stronger coming out of the recession than before, the Budget also needed to take bold measures to address New Zealand’s poor growth performance.
John Armstrong touches on the inter-generational effect of stopping the pre-funding of superannuation.
The impact of Thursday's Budget is to cut the burden of superannuation for baby boomers. Those aged between 56 and 64 will have retired before contributions resume to the Cullen fund. The burden will consequently fall more heavily on those 55 and under.
They will be grumpy - and Labour will reinforce the message - that they will be paying twice, first for themselves and second for those retired or about to retire.
Union economist Peter Conway unsurprisingly notes that jobs lost out.
John Roughan reckons the Nats missed their chance to make more brutal cuts now and lack the will to do it later.
Roger Douglas all but calls them nancies for not privatising health, education and welfare.
-
I was thinking of a local equivalent to this EFF resource for teachers (ta, #danjite).
-
Thanks, Scott. That's kind of what I was saying - fairness to some people can be about the state/society "not interfering" with the individual's own responsibilities which are paramount.
In that worldview, public intervention may be immoral if it distorts or thwarts that prime motivation. However, only the most loony fringes of our Right are inclined to apply that principle consistently. The rest seem happy to distort away in favour of their mates, much as the centre left will apply their own conception of fairness inconsistently.
But no one owns the word, and the outgoing government usually re-positions it for some time into the new one's term - hence Labour in 1999 not reinstating benefit levels or changing fiscal underpinnings like the Reserve Bank Act, and National last year retaining Working For Families and state owned enterprises - for now.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 1701 1702 1703 1704 1705 … 1971 Older→ First