Posts by Rob Stowell
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Repeatedly referring to electoral MPs ‘sneaking back into parliament on the list’ when they’d been legally elected in fair, very public elections was a cheap concerted attempt to smear MMP.
I’d like to know who is doing the PR for the supposedly grassroots “Vote for Change”, what their PR budget is and who is funding it.
The campaign manager is Simon Lusk, of Hollow Men ‘fame’.
These are theFounding Members
Here is a selection of the Kiwis that are already members of Vote for Change Society Incorporated.
Peter Shirtcliffe
Bob Harvey
Michael Bassett
Annabel Young
Roger Kerr
Ralph Norris
Sir Christpher Harris
Christopher Parkin
Anna Hamilton-Manns
Rod Fabish
Emma Daken
Nikos Skeptaris
Jeremy Smith
Alex Fogerty
Christian Lambert
Steve ZhaoSo the usual suspects, and ‘funded by its supporters’ which means it’ll be well cashed up. Expect a slick campaign, and lots of carefully planned smearing of MMP.
-
Revelatory stuff Joel, much appreciated
+1
Heard about the 1880s, but the 1901 Cheviot 'quake sounds dreadful. -
Next up is those who profit from this traumatic event.It ain’t gonna be just the reinsurers.
No. This really worries me.
A disproportionate number of NZ's wealthy are property developers. With high returns, if it comes off (and hey, it's probably not their money if it fails), no capital gains tax, and significant advantages to larger players (it's much easier to get planning consent if you have a team of legal experts, planning consultants, and graphic designers, to show just how legitimate, necessary and darn pretty your development will be) it's not hard to see why.
Now we're hearing that new sections in 'greenfields' developments will cost about $200,000. This seems outrageous. (Any idea where one could find a clear break-down of all the costs (and who and where profit is taken) for sections at this price?)
Surely if 30 or so residents of a street or area got together, they'd be able to buy 4-6 acres of suitable land, subdivide it (or negotiate a collective ownership) and add amenities (and a park/playgound) for less than $6m.
Already the interests of demolition companies apparently trump any sentimental attachment you may have to your house; the government that is forcibly evacuating the red zone may re-mediate the land and sell it for a profit; and construction companies are gearing up for big profits.
Capitalism has its uses, but preying on the stricken should not be one of them. -
So that's why .nz domain names are $35-40 a year, while .net .org or .com names are only $15-20.
Hm.
Good information. It should be clear to people what they're paying for. -
Horrible. Hope Tower can be convinced to change its mind. If it has one.
-
That doesn’t reduce the cruelty of politicians dropping hints along the way.
yeah. 'we know- but we're not gonna tell you' is pure ass-holery. JK- still giving prats a bad name.
-
thus we discover again the PAS rule that all threads lead to copyright ;-)
Yeah.
Lilith ask how a photographer might find value and create new business models. I gave her an answer.
Coffee cups. Please.
There's nothing here that sez people will stop needing professional photographers in all the usual places:weddings, ads, magazines and newspapers. People hire professionals cos they get a job done at least competently- and usually, done well, and with a bit of flair.
The CEO and the copy-writer's niece may both have cameras that will take a terrific image. But you probably won't find the marketing dept organise a photo-shoot and just ask them to turn up and take snaps.At the risk of starting yet another shitfight about copyright
Nah, ya love it :)
-
whether I spend my salary on tithes, a 52” plasma TV, my mortgage or the Battersea Dogs Home is up to me and not my employer.
Well, it should be. But if your employer is the destiny church, they might consider it is up to them. Up to the point, as suggested, of hiring you on the basis you're a member, and hence signed up to be tithed.
Putting it another way: would you think it ok if the Battersea Dog's Home or the NZ Govt hired you on the basis of your willingness to give them back 10% of your gross pay? -
If you ride as if you are invisible you become much much safer
Up to a point, totally. But please: hand signals, indicate indicate indicate. Sometimes we can see you, sometimes we are happy to share the road- but almost never can we read your minds :)
-
My own theory is that it’s not something that changes slowly, but can actually switch around on public mood, and certain ideas that make traffic better or worse can spread virally in feedback loops. It only takes a few people being rude to you, and you’re much more likely to be rude to someone else. Similarly, if a few people let you in here or there, you feel more inclined to give back. A small amount of constant pressure in the right direction can make a massive difference, turns a vicious cycle into a virtuous one.
This is exactly my hypothesis on the subject! (You may or may not be pleased to hear this)
Which is itself a good thing to promulgate- that every small courtesy on the road counts. Let's keep up- and increase- our own good behaviour :)