Posts by izogi
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Polity: Too much to swallow on the TPP, in reply to Alfie,
Pure Yes Minister – apart from the fact that it’s not funny.
Here it is in glorious televisual action. Some of the MPs in the background, behind Steven Joyce, were certainly laughing.
-
Polity: Too much to swallow on the TPP, in reply to Sacha,
Longer patent periods mean more NZ Health funding going into big pharma’s pockets.
That's okay! It's only "a little bit longer".
-
Polity: Too much to swallow on the TPP, in reply to Bart Janssen,
And while your noting history maybe you should highlight Labour’s role in starting this debacle and tell us why we should think the same people who started us down the road to the TPP should now be trusted to stop it.
I've seen comments from various places that the TPPA wouldn't be nearly so freaky if it weren't for the imposition of the USA which, at least according to a random person who edited Wikipedia, only started getting involved near the end of Labour's reign and prior to which the TPPA was much smaller.
Is this a reasonable claim that it's mostly incompatible demands by the USA which are the problem?
-
Hard News: Political palatability and…, in reply to David MacGregor,
Though, perhaps that analogy collapses in that at least homeopathy is harmless superstition and its infliction causes little real harm to its victims.
Not entirely when considering that homeopathy can lure people away from other treatments which might actually make a measurable and significant difference.
I think homeopathy bothers me less, though, if only because I'm more familiar with people inflicting it upon themselves instead of others. But that complaint will slide past anyone who's already arguing it's their fundamental right to decide what's best for their kids.
-
OnPoint: My last name sounds Chinese, in reply to Seriatim,
If this initiative pressures the Nats into finally setting up a buyers’ register – success. It doesn’t matter what it reveals, just as long as we finally have hard data to base some effective policy on.
I think this whole episode is a clear example of why it's not in the government's political interests to set up a register at all, and this seems to be a government which is highly driven by political interests. Why start measuring things when you can watch your opposition blindly make up numbers to support their conclusions, then point and laugh? Being able to accuse them of racism because of how the numbers are made up is just another bonus.
It'd be nice to see some opposition parties making a clear and vocal commitment to measuring foreign buyers properly, then presenting clear policy on how they'll react depending on the results. At worst (best?) it'll result in National's internal polling convicing National to do it anyway and claim it was always going to, but at least that results in something earlier, even if it's a poor substitute for what's really needed. If that doesn't happen, voters at least have an opportunity to force things at the next election. Either way there are eventually some real numbers to talk about.
-
As long as we’re discussing credibility of National’s governance and the world’s eyes seem to be staring towards Greece, is today’s news about the apparently very big stockmarket problems in China likely to have much of an impact on New Zealand?
-
Speaker: Honest Bastards & Dishonest Cowards, in reply to BenWilson,
We've become quite good at spotting what's wrong with Labour, but not very good at agreeing on what they should do now.
Another more radical view (and I'm trying to play devil's advocate here) might be that Labour is simply past its time, at the very least in its current form.
It's necessary to go back to the early 1930s to find a time when Labour and National weren't the two dominant political parties. That's 80 years ago, so an election and parliament that's not dominated by Blue versus Red opposing each other is beyond living memory for nearly everyone, but that doesn't mean things can't change again. Is it possible that we're just all too tied down to thinking that Labour has to succeed or there's no hope of challenging the government?
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to Rob Stowell,
I don’t think it’s a coincidence – we all tend to absorb some of the attitudes of the circles we move in.
This recent discussion's caused me to think back to secondary school in the mid-90s, which for better or worse was a Wellington public school which some parents buy houses and shift their families to get their kids into. I'll stop short of writing out the name.
The whole thing was a mixed experience but what stood out to me was a particular teacher, from China, who was largely a target of many of the kids. Big parts of the classes actively aimed to prevent her from teaching them anything, which mightn't have been completely noteworthy except that the rowdiness was full of overtly racist remarks. Then they'd repeatedly complain to parents about her being impossible to understand (which was rubbish) and an ineffective teacher (sure, if you take their own attitudes into account), and get the parents to relay complaints back to the school, sometimes seriously and forcefully from what I understood.
In hindsight, especially after browsing a few Stuff comment threads and similar, I figure that at least some of these kids were probably reflections of their parents and the homes they were growing up in. It really enlightened me as to how vicious and polarised some of the attitudes out there can be.
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
Ah okay, fair enough. I realise there is a bigger picture of people not understanding each other. As far as I can tell it probably cycles through generations, and that’s more important.
I am still queasy about the tone of her apology, though, just as yet another symptom of all this. JK did apologise (eg, to waitress), but in a way that continued to deflect blame on the victim and others for taking offence at his supposedly superior and charming attitude. As I read Ms Hooper’s apology, it doesn’t seem too different to me. She didn’t retract the accusation of parental neglect. She only said she’d worded it badly. If she wants to raise the issue of parental neglect then fine, but as far as I'm concerned it continues to be cruel to let it be connected to this incident unless she’s prepared to offer some clear evidence and reasoning, which doesn’t seem to be forthcoming.
But at least she’s said something, as you say. Maybe if she hadn’t been silenced by the reaction, she might have amended it. I have no idea.
Sofie with an F
Sorry! A stupid lapse on my part.
-
Hard News: About Campbell Live, in reply to Joe Wylie,
Hi Sophie. I appreciate what you're saying, but I agree that...
This is an adult woman in her mid-20s.
At some point the angry lynch mob calls for individuals to take responsibility need to go both ways. Pointing and shouting at any kids who die and screaming "obvious neglect from useless parents" simply isn't helpful, whatever the upbringing of the speaker.