Posts by Rob Stowell
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
National- and all the 'budget-cutting' govts- always seem to seriously under-estimate (or completely ignore) the compounding effects cutting govt spending has on the over-all economy.
Back when ruthless Ruth was at the helm, I remember seeing a break-down of some of the cuts- and for every dollar of govt spending cut, after calculating lost tax revenue and lost economic activity, it 'saved' the govt (at best) about 25c (in some cases, it had an over-all negative impact on the govt books, where job losses took people from tax-payers to beneficiaries.)
I suspect this will be a zero-growth budget- clearly accompanied by forecasts of growth plucked out of the air. Zero-to-negative growth, with a big serving of no-ideas-at-all.
And that's just from what National have already said. -
*
-
+1 for Adam Curtis.
-
I think this clip gets to the kitchen in question? The one with the dog-sized rat in the oven!
-
My mind, I think, resembles Gormenghast.
Don't go in the kitchen :)
-
The comparison to Te Kooti seems particularly inapt
Te Kooti wasn’t always polite to women and children either.
Just worth noting. -
Yeah. The last two elections Labour has shown itself woefully, embarrassingly behind in advertising and campaign strategy. Unions (apart from Unite) also lack an effective media team.
This worries me.
Is it simply a lack of money? Probably a factor, but I'm not convinced. Good simple ideas can be effective without great cost. Clunkers in prime-time are inexcusable.
What can one do? Any ideas? -
I had a friend and flatmate with a huge record collection. Never did the dishes, but he used to come into the kitchen and wash his records. Always cracked me up, seeing this big stack of records lined up like plates in the drying rack.
Works quite well on dirty dvds/cds too. -
What was (also) lost: Diana Wynn Jones. :-(
(also a good article about Chch in the latest Werewolf- thanks Gordon Campbell) -
Busytown: What was lost, in reply to Creon Upton,
Completely expectedly, the New Yorker has an interesting and varied round-up of its writers’ reactions.
You might be curious about how US law interprets the ’rules of engagement’ (bin Laden was apparently classed as an enemy combatant).
Comments following are less-than-convinced.
There’s so much more that could- and no doubt will- be said about the symbolism. But thank goodness: no photos.