Posts by Mikaere Curtis
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I think that would guarantee the emergence of a black market
Yes, I think it's unavoidable. But it should prevent routine undermining of the intentions of the system by entities that have lots of cash.
A bit like when developers pay a small fine for wrecking something valuable (e.g. an old tree or a protected building), but stand to make killing in the process. That kind of trade-off would largely disappear.
-
It''s not quite the same thing as an economy that makes things and sustains billions of people.
I think a case can be made that climate change is a direct result of capitalism. Capitalism is beleaguered by short-term, narrow thinking that results in some very bad outcomes.
I agree with Chomsky's comments that large corporations are "unaccountable private tyrannies" that are "pathological" in their behaviour.
When considering what to do about the injustices that are direct result of capitalist activities, it can be pretty tempting to simply ban capitalism outright and implement whatever scheme you want. Revolutions are expensive and certainly not worth the risk, IMO. Evolution is a better approach.
The problem with capitalism is not that it doesn't work, it's just that the parameters in which it operates enable it to engage in some negative practices without direct accountability. Capitalism values activity using our currency i.e. money. It is perhaps the best mechanism we have for doing this. The problem is that money is not a measure of all things, and anything that does not fit is not counted. There is no automatic feedback loop for the negative consequences of capital activity. Sure, you can have regulations etc, but it is often the case that lobbying is seen as more cost-effective than compliance.
The solution is to change the parameters in such a way that they are part of the system of capitalism, and not simply removable add-ons.
My proposal would be to extend our currency system to have three currencies instead of one. There would be three measures of value in any transaction; Capital value (i.e. money as we now know it), Social value and Environmental value aka blue, red and green $$.
Leave the market to setting blue$, as it is now. We would need different mechanisms for setting red$ and green$ values (and I would be inclined to initially disqualify non-natural entities from assisting to set the values). Exchange between the currencies would be illegal and it is assumed that a black market would therefore kept small enough to be manageable.
There is considerable scope for tailoring values to specific local considerations.
This system would mean that every single economic transaction would incorporate social and environmental considerations. Moreover, innovation would find ways to minimise theses costs, which means, in effect, the market would seek positive outcomes for all capital, social and/or environmental activities.
The downside is that this system requires some pretty significant IT infrastructure to make it seamless integrate across the entire economy, but I do not expect this to be by any means prohibitive.
This approach is less Smash-The-State anarchism, more a Tame-The-State anarchism.
Also, you could still be very wealthy in this system, but you won't be able to do it by wrecking stuff.
-
From soundbite to policy
Great title, both accurate and scary.
There seems to be a sense of entitlement emanating from the National government driving their arrogant disdain for proper democratic process for bills that will actually have significant impact on peoples' lives.
If their bills are so awesome, wouldn't public discussion generate support for them ?
Perhaps the abuse of urgency has an upside, though, because National will not be able to defend themselves against criticism that they are doctrinaire and arrogant (which, ironically, is probably what caused Labour to lose office in the first place)
-
pretty hard to design a large capcity venue that caters to all event styles, but more likely these venue designers don't appear to even try.
Well, it would certainly be easier to design a music-oriented venue if it didn't have to double as a sometime sports venue.
I've long griped about the Vector Arena being a horrible compromise re music vs sports. I mean, it's laid out as a basketball/netball venue, but the events there have been something like gig-gig-gig-gig-gig-gig-gig-gig-gig-sports-gig-gig-gig-gig-gig-gig-sports-gig-gig-gig-gig-gig....
On the sound quality side, I went to Steely Dan last year and the sound was simply awesome. I was right at the back, and elevated. I caught the Pumpkins at CHC Arena and the sound was pretty good (again, I was elevated).
In comparison, the sound at the recent Headless Chickens gig at the Power Station was a shocker. Then again, I was on the floor for that gig, so maybe that's a factor (not the first time I;ve wondered what exactly is going on with their sound).
-
But paying $140? That's top money for a concert, and for that I'd want to see something pretty special.
Led Zeppelin or something.
As a steer, I paid $199 for category C for Roger Waters last year. The best seats were $399 (and you got the full quadrophonic experience for that). Change the currency to sterling, and you might be in luck...
I think the reason that some many people hate Kylie is that her pop era was pretty bland. It's her house/disco stuff from the mid-90s on that made me think she was onto something.
I'm not a fan or anything, but I can tell she knows how to put on a good show and if someone had given me tickets, I'd be there. Otherwise, I'm eying up Iron Maiden's stadium extravaganza as a possible way to relieve myself of $130 in February.
-
The Green candidate, Denise Roche, was reportedly in tears on Saturday night about the 3695 electorate votes she received when she was only campaigning for the party vote.
It's certainly one of the risks when standing in a non-safe seat. We were lucky in the Maori seats, our candidate votes did not factor in Ikaroa-Rawhiti, and even though our candidate got lots of votes, the Maori Party still won Te Tai Tonga.
I also note that the vote to the Green candidate in Ohariu got more votes than the gap between Labour's candidate and Peter Dunne. I'd be up for standing no candidate there if it meant we would finally be done with Dunne.
a fresh Labour candidate would have a rather good chance in the electorate in 2011.
Quite. As one of my friends put it, she's not best pleased to be suddenly living in Blue Lynn.
-
I don't know the details of what's on the table for the Maori Party, but if hui after hui are supporting it (Hone Harawira reckons 98% support), then it is possible that - assuming they deliver over the next 3 years - support might actually go up at the next election.
I agree that Goff has come across as patronising. Then again, this is the man who's style in the 80s was modelled after that paragon of officiousness - the traffic cop.
John key seems to be interested in consulting widely, which is very good to see. Does anyone think we would have seen this in the first week after an election won by Don Brash ?
-
I really think it discourages people from running a little campaign unless they are professional politcals.
I think the opponents of the EFA managed to create an atmosphere of doubt over whether you could engage in good faith campaigning without fear of prosecution.
I might have missed it, but did any court actions take place at the behest on anyone who was for the EFA ? Seems to me that the ones who spoke out loudest about it restricting freedom of expression were precisely the ones who used it to do exactly that.
-
Mikaere, like Labour in 1996? I don't mean to be provocative, but I'm sorry Nandor's no longer in the party. Please don't feel the need to respond or divulge any deep-dark-party-secrets, I simply think he was a great voice for a particular constituency.
Maybe, I was on my OE back then and "teh internets" hadn't really kicked in. I didn't even know there was a Hard News email subscription service. So my experience of the 1996 campaign was to read a policy overview of the major parties at NZ House in Haymarket and then cast a special vote.
I do not think it is provocative to point out that Nandor had a special constituency. He was a great MP and was able to communicate with people that most MPs would prefer to ignore.
No dark secrets, he decided of his own accord to unshackle himself from "the prison we make of Time" and get back to a non-parliamentary lifestyle.
I remember one time we were protesting outside the French Embassy when they were conducting tests at Mururoa Atoll, when Nandor happened to be riding past. He stopped to lend support, and ended up giving the protest organisers a 101 on how to conduct campaigns. I was duly impressed. In retrospect, it seems a fully Nandor thing to happen. He's a natural leader.
-
Oh and Mikaere, congrats on your part in running a great campaign.
Cheers. In some ways, the Green campaign was as much internal as it was external, in that it seemed to develop an increased sense of cohesiveness.
On reflection the EFA didn't have much that much impact on my campaign. All our material had to have authorisation, which meant a slightly slower process for getting things signed off.
Plus, I had to wear an authorisation badge if I wanted to wear my Green Party Tee Shirt from the 2005 campaign.
What I find interesting is Goff is now saying that any modifications to the EFA should be done with cross-party support.