Helen Clark reminded us, in her recent Reeves Lecture, that we also need to work towards peace within Syria. There are so many still in the country who deserve better and who would overwhelm us if forced to flee.
I liked her language of investing in peace, which we seem rarely to do. I was also impressed that UNDP is able to do anything inside the country at this time.
You seem to have read the actual text, which is more than I did. Having only caught the news yesterday, and seen that the online submission form was still open, I dashed off a few thoughts based on the introductory notes.
That online form is very handy for short comments. No need to worry about correct addressing or who to send it to--just scratch out a few quick thoughts.
Indeed, personally, I begin slowing down automatically that I even see a car at all in that exact situation, just on the presumption that they might pull out for whatever reason. I have my eye pretty much fixed on that car as the most likely danger, and my foot is already on the brake.
I wish the ad every success in fostering that attitude. I do think that so many rely on everything going to plan, whether from naive optimism, arrogant entitlement, or whatever. Yesterday I saw the latter in a bike-on-bike accident on K Road.
This guy passed me at speed then proceeded past an older gent who chose that moment to drift right. The passing cyclist adjusted his line somewhat, but only minimally, then cut back in too early and both ended on the ground. The speedster had time to brake and room to go wider, but held tenaciously to his original plan.
The problem wasn't so much his speed but his attitude, exemplified by chewing out the old chap whom he had just cut down from behind!
perhaps it might be worth considering the cultural and social value of travel
Indeed. But what do I weigh it up against?
At present we pay for flying like we pay for 7/8ths of our lifestyle - we steal it from the future. Only in extreme cases would I steal cash to fly somewhere, but my carbon 'budget' lacks the same conceptual hold. To start with it doesn't even feed me, and on the other hand my cheques never bounce.
This uncertainly makes it hard to either justify my choices or challenge my unconcerned friends.
Back in the day, you said final goodbyes to your family when you went overseas. If you did travel, and wanted to marry a foreigner, you faced very hard questions. I can see us going back that way, albeit with Skype to prolong the agony of parting.
In the present day, the moral picture is clouded. So many families (including yours and mine) have spread across the world in the expectation that those decisions belonged to a bygone era.
I don't mean to draw a line, so much as to recognise that I have something in common with all those dairy farmers whose business model has become more problematic.
give up all non-essential air travel
What constitutes essential air travel? Perhaps asylum seekers? Bomber pilots too, if we're going to have them. Maybe medevac flights.
I still travel for work, on the argument that I'm spending their karma, and budget one domestic flight every three years for personal travel. I am increasingly uncertain that this is morally defensible, even though I feel that a globally equitable carbon-neutral world may still permit some flying.
Telling work that I am no longer available to travel feels big.
somehow every year I donate to NZ deductable groups and every year can’t find anyone in NZ willing to claim the deductions)
I am well disposed to claiming anybody's deductions and re-gift them to charity. Does anybody know if there are legal hurdles? (e.g. Do the donations have to have been given in my name?)
is there a better way of talking about this?
Have you heard of Psychology for a Better World, by Niki Harré from the University of Auckland? My wife recently recommended it to me as a book that is reshaping how she presents issues. (Free pdf, even.)
For my 2c, PAS as a community could help each other to understand why so many people are opposing or dragging their feet. I firmly believe that most people are not very cynical, and we've got some bright sparks here with ample connections outside our own right-thinking bubble, so we ought to be capable of finding some ideas with traction.
My figs take forever to ripen, each one randomly appearing after I've given up hope. Perhaps an adaptation to human cultivation, which increases the likelihood of a bird getting there first?
In contrast, I bottled a full bucketload of guavas yesterday and hope to make pâté/jubes on the weekend. What a pleasant surprise to discover what those scraggly trees half-under the carport were.
I didn't read the entire previous discussion, but did any of the historical analyses of polling account for the 5% threshold?
If Winston polls 4.9% then I would pick NZF to be in, based on how many people I heard last time saying they might throw him a vote to nudge him over. Possibly they learned something by how big a nudge he got, but there will be new suckers who hate to see other people disenfranchised.
My main gripe is that you can't run your numbers as if the public were ignorant of the 5% line. That's like ignoring the electoral college in the US presidential elections.