Posts by Mikaere Curtis
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Can you shed any light on that Russell (or any other Chevites)
The Mt Albert exchange got upgraded to ADSL 2.0 recently (late last year I think), which could explain why you've noticed a better service.
-
I think there needs to be some pressure put on National before the election for an undertaking that it won't put away the regulatory stick and try and pretend it's the 90s again. I wouldn't put it past Maurice.
Neither would I. In 1995 I represented the Greens at a panel discussion on IT (Nandor couldn't make it). On the unbundling issue, Maurice said they he didn't see the need to split Telecom into two separate entities when some kind of "chinese wall" (his words) would suffice.
His main objection seemed to be the forced appropriation of property rights. I doubt he's changed his mind.
Interestingly, I found out he was a C++ programmer. Whodathunk ?
-
That youtube clip did not impress me at all. Firstly, he points out that Tibet has been independent quite a bit in the last millennium. And the sky didn't fall and China did not disintegrate, which basically defeats his main argument.
As for the multicultural thing, sure it is multi-ethnic, but 55 of those 56 ethnicities are dominated by a single one.
As for the "look how much we've invested in Tibet" thing, it's very similar to what some Pakeha say about Maori self-determination in Aotearoa. i.e. aren't you lucky we built all this stuff, now please sit down.
I've been to Nepal and have spoken with Tibetans over there. The basic message is repeated time and again with respect to Chinese rule: "It's not their country."
-
What Keith Locke is saying is entirely consonant with the Green Party charter principles. He's batting from a position of principle.
The government, including the Prime Minister, are not. The have cleverly espoused the meme that it's OK to trade with partners who have less-than-perfect human rights records, because with have very few options otherwise.
I can see the practicality of that, but how come we can't expect our trade partners to still trade with us even if we raise serious issues about their human rights abuses ? It's not like their economies depend on human rights abuses in order to trade with us.
On the local produce discussion, it's really about making choices that lower the overall environmental footprint, as well as support the local community.
Choose local when you can, choose organic when you can. For instance, I bought some coconut cream in the weekend. Ceteris paribus , I chose the Samoan tin over the Thai one even though it was more expensive. Lower food miles & support your neighbors/cousins and all that.
-
I've always thought it would be better to get a local jewellery designer to create a ring for you than to just buy some generic bling.
Agreed. I did a basic design and took it to the local jeweler in Kingsland. That way the engagement and wedding rings could be designed to interlock in a nice funky way. And no diamonds for my honey, it was a moonstone and a small tanzanite.
I had planned to make my wedding ring out of palladium, which was half the price of platinum. When I commission the ring, someone had found an industrial use for it and the price had gone up 300%. Ouch !
-
Rather than a blanket ban on demolition, how about trying to ensure that if they are demolished, they get replaced with good modern architecture? And what about protecting beautiful post-1940s home? There must be some significant Group houses (among others) in Auckland that would not be any better protected under that.
To be fair, it appears Mayor Banks didn't have much room to move when this thing blew up yesterday (congratulations must go to the Herald for doing some active journalism and alert Banks to what was going on). He could have let the existing rules be ignored or applied, and he did the latter.
While it's hard to determine exactly what motivates him at the moment, from memory he's usually a straight shooter in as far as I think he believes what he says. Sure, he takes credit for things he was only peripherally involved in but I haven't noticed that he says one thing and does another (unlike those rodents in the CitRat council seats).
So, I think the prima facie case that he hates developers and doesn't want them wrecking Auckland suburbs may well be the reason behind his move.
And like Russell, my estimation has gone up considerably. When he got back in, I consoled myself that he actually did bugger all in his last tenure.
Well bugger me, could it be that John Banks is going to use his obnoxiousness for good instead of evil ?
-
Anyone provide the link to this information? Interested in how long the fund will be around for/how often it will be topped up if it's designed to provide more than it earns...
It's in the Morning Report item, starting at the 3 minute point. She says that the fund will expire in 10 - 15 years which is a bit vague.
Also, it looks like John Banks has actually done something. While I didn't vote for him, I did keep my fingers crossed that he would stand up to the CitRats when it counted.
-
Which private-sector companies are most likely to pony up matching funds?
According to Morning Report, Fonterra, Zespri and PGG Wrightson have already signed up.
Craig, if Helen Clark had all the details worked out at this time, I suspect you would be tempted to criticise her for for being a control freak.
Interestingly, John Key has got his facts wrong again (thinks the fund will provide funding from interest only - it will actually provide funding from interest and principal) and has called it a "gimmick". I expect a National to backflip and come out with grudging support once they figure out that this is actually a very popular move by the government.
-
Lots of assets are hugely important economically. What about Trade Me? Yet that is foreign owned.
If TradeMe's owners decided to run it into the ground like our railways were, we could build an alternative pretty quickly and cheaply. ie. there are alternatives.
As Keith points out, there are no realistic alternatives to AIA.
Race based seats should go: Maori and the general seats.
I'd trade the Maori seats for what you suggest plus an upper house that is based on the Treaty partnership principles. I predict such an upper house would have positive moderative effects on both Labour and National governments. The FS&SB saga would have been very different, as would state asset selloff programmes of the 90s.
As long as Maori are over-represented in the bad stats, and underrepresented in the good ones, I'm not at all keen to reduce our political representation.
-
I don't see why all politicians can't be given a bit of the benefit of the doubt when some reported statement seems to be in marked contrast to their policy and/or practice.
Thomas, how do you square the above comment with RB's observation below ?
Key has given a variety of explanations for the comment -- he can't recall, it never happened, he was talking about Australian wages, it was just a joke -- and questioned the professionalism of the reporter (or "young guy taking notes") who was present.