"The Hollowmen", an Australian TV satire about politicians opened with a Bats track. I wondered at the time whether that was part of the satire, as well as thinking "that would have paid them a decent amount".
Hmm, new laptop running Ubuntu is not as offended by bandcamp as my usual windows setup. Hopefully I that will work for me.
I suspect I'm pretty typical of my age cohort - I spend about $NZ1000/year buying digital downloads, and I torrent maybe 3-4 albums a month as well. I try to pay the musicians I like, and usually succeed, but some of them make it bloody difficult.
I see Amazon is trying to impose the music streaming on authors. That could be fun, given the number of authors who explicitly say "you can't buy my books when you see them advertised, and I refuse to accept donations for pirated copies on principle". Ok, no money for you.
Being subjected to extreme bullying is probably not going to help.
Perhaps it would be more useful to identify the people who would be helped by extreme bullying and discuss them separately.
When I read this, I couldn't not make a comparison with the well-funded change-the-flag roadshow. It really is about what those in power want discussed.
And how much they're willing to spend to distract people.
Have submitted (so to speak). Was polite, but it took a lot of effort to edit polite into what I wanted to say. They emailed me a copy of it, 900 words, which is kinda scary for a basically "give the locals control" submission.
The council needs more power to override central government inertia.
I suggest flipping most of the powers, and allow the council to take action against the minister when he doesn't carry out his duties appropriately. When a plan is made the council should be able to influence the plan, and once it's committed to they should be able to force the minister to implement it. They should also be able to force the minister to come up with a plan when he doesn't do so, and the alternative should be that the council can implement their plan using the minister's budget. Simply saying "council can complain about ministerial inaction" hasn't worked.
unlawful breaches of our human rights protections in New Zealand – we have a Government who refuses to acknowledge such breaches
Yes, but the choice is not purely between "vote National" and "vote Labour", so it's entirely possible (and reasonable under MMP) to write them both off as hopeless.
I'm still hoping that we can get from "the only data available is racist" to "here's good data", but I don't think that's likely. I think Labour tried to do something very difficult in one of the few ways they could, and it had an entirely predictable outcome. National, OTOH, are trying to do something fundamentally evil and succeeding very well, aided by people like Tze Ming Mok and Keith Ng. Their path is not easy either, but I think they're getting away with pretending they're not actively helping National. Which is pretty poor, given the usually wide-awake PA audience.
It is very, very John Key: start a commotion then stand back looking calm and measured while other people get all worked up about it. In this case it doesn't look as though they had to do more than agree that the data from Labour is racist.
Golden Scroll that went to my dad, Corben Simpson back in 1975 for the song of the decade. There is nothing there, like it never happened.
That's pretty shit. I'd like to think "song of the decade" was actually important, more so than the (mere?) song of the year. Especially since they either have hidden the later songs of the decade or haven't re-issued the award.
It does look as though they were very slow to get on the whole internet bandwagon, with a domain like http://apraamcos.com.au you can see that they weren't exactly first in the queue. And search optimisation is not their thing. Their own search and Google both find exactly one mention of Shona Laing, for example, as an "also given an award in the past" when talking about the 2014 awards. It may be that they don't do history at all, they are strictly "since we discovered the internet in 2010".
The young people don't write political songs anymore...
I thought that was ironic, given the inclusion of a protest song in Russel's piece.But maybe it was unintentional irony.
To some extent I have the other problem... a lot of the music I am given is protest stuff, and some of it is more political than musical. My taste these days is definitely tending more towards easy listening than angry young people, so there's a bit of a clash.
(to be clear "easy listening" in the sense of Karl Jenkins and Sky'High rather than the official genre). Here's one from 2012, admittedly:
who are the ignored artists of 2015 who will end up as beloved icons of NZ music in 2050.
Isn't that what "hall of fame" nominations are supposed to be about? Not strictly "oops we ignored these people" but nonetheless "looking back this was amazing". I thought the list of winners was interesting, and there was a definite transition for me at the NDTs entry where suddenly I can see why they'd reward the song. "I can't sing very well" kinda sums up my impression of the previous winners.
They've [Oz] just begun a crackdown after acknowledging they have huge avoidance problems.
But a fair bit of the avoidance is lawful, which makes it difficult. The two big holes you can drive a truckload of cash through are that residents can buy existing houses, and that no-one is actually required to track this stuff to enable enforcement.
All those foreign students can, and many do. I've been to a few inspections where there was a student arguing with parents that the house was too far from where they would be studying. Not many, because we were not looking for the sort of house that buy'n'hold investors find attractive (property developers, OTOH, we saw a lot of).
The enforcement is as much of an issue. There's no point in the process where you have to prove anything more complex than "I have the money", and if you have it in the bank the whole deal could be done by writing two cheques (possibly one, if you got your solicitor to handle all the paperwork). If real estate agents had to see proof of residence at some point that might help, but when we bought that was not the case.
What scares me here is not so much "they're buying our houses!" but "they might en masse sell our houses". If/when the Chinese sharemarket corrects/crashes there will probably be a lot of people needing to liquidate those investments very quickly, and the Chinese government will probably be very keen to help them. In a staring contest between the NZ government and the Chinese one on the question of currency controls or "will we let the Chinese government buy 5% of NZ's houses this weekend", I'm not betting on the locals.
Just as bad from my PoV would be to have those houses/apartments actually dumped on the market. Seeing the asset behind my mortgage halve in value would be somewhat tricky for me, and catastrophic for all the smug *ankers who came through the GFC so well. Watching a major Australian bank after its mortgage portfolio went significantly underwater would be scary. Watching them all do it at the same time would be terrifying.