Posts by Rich of Observationz
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Air NZ is no worse than average. Certainly better than most low-cost and much better than US carriers (worse than low-cost).
The Koru Club is much, much nicer than equivalent Star Alliance facilities anywhere else I've been (haven't checked Singapore out yet). United Airlines have a cash bar (with an oh so generous two free drinks if you're flying international) and nothing more substantial than a chip. Lufthansa is slightly better in giving you draught German beer, but it's chokka and again no food.
I think that's because its subscription / frequent flyer / premium passenger, unlike the rest of the world which is FF / premium only. They need to offer something decent to make people fork out NZD500 a year or whatever (unless your in one of the categories that gets comped: MPs, journos? not government policy advisers - obviously!)
-
There doesn't seem to be a technical reason to set a low bar for content's relevance. I mean, they must have heaps of disk space, so what's wrong with having *one* article for every company, every band, every event no matter how obscure. Issues only occur when you can't find what you want because of spam.
I guess if they keep on like that someone will create an alt.pedia with a lower bar for content.
On the other hand, I guess a line has to be drawn, otherwise people will have wikipedia articles for dinner parties.
-
Apropos of flag confusion, I've always wondered why there are so many Germans in the Waikato?
I'm surprised that Waikato's use of red, yellow and black colours survived WW2.
-
"...chose to come here and live under the rule of the Crown, like all other migrants"
I came here to live in a democracy ruled by popular consent, which was my impression of how NZ is run. Or is the election just an elaborate charade and all the MPs are actually quietly appointed by Brenda? Referring to the government of NZ as "the Crown" is about as accurate as calling the rulers of China "communists".
On the subject of the Malone flag: doesn't it rather diss the Scots by removing the St Andrews Cross (diagonal blue lines) - after all rather a lot of New Zealanders are of Scottish heritage.
Personally, I think we should not have a flag at all, but wave pois instead. This would:
- be uniquely NZ
- look much cooler
- really annoy the Aussie cricket authorities, especially if fire pois were involved
- rather make "flag burning" laws irrelevant - what else you gonna do with a poi! -
I've heard it said that the most dangerous people in business are those with charm, charisma and bad decision making abilities. Because they're usually wrong, and use that charm and charisma to covince others to go along with their dumb ideas. CDMA, AAPT and deciding to try and staunch it out with the NZ Government on regulation do spring to mind.
On the "turning a 10mln company to a 50mln one" point, it does remind me of the jibe that was current in Australia in the 80s:
"How does a New Zealander start a small business?
Buys a large one!" -
I'd just make one comment:
It would be really helpful if we'd abolish the term "Crown" and replace it with the contemporarily accurate "Government and People of New Zealand" or some less clumsy formulation (the Aussies use "Commonwealth").
Because in 1840, the "Crown" was the elected (by a limited franchise) British Government and by the early 20th century it had become the fully elected New Zealand government - representing the people of Aotearoa.
It's *never* been a nice/nasty person in a castle in Britain - which is what the term evokes.
Of course, as and when we become a republic we'll have to ditch "crown" and use "republic" to refer to the legal person of the state.
-
To me (as a recent arrival) I think a lot of rural areas in NZ are scarier than the cities. Most of the smart people leave at 18 to go to college and work, there are few decent jobs, there's a culture of violence that isn't really challenged...
Or are the scary looking people in towns like Paeroa or Huntly really harmless and I've been reading too many Craig Marriner books?
-
I'm all for community based schemes.
But they'd have to be voluntary - otherwise, how would you avoid discriminating between someone who belonged to a community with an employment programme (and had to join it or lose their dole) and someone else who didn't belong to such a community and could sit at home with impugnity?
You wouldn't want people disavowing their community just to avoid being forced into a WFD scheme?
Which brings me back to the benefit of a UBI - people would be able to transition into employment *without*losing their benefits. Which is empowering people to take control of their lives rather than forcing them to do what the state tells them.
-
"he's definitely a pragmatist rather than a politican"
Of course he's a politician - running for election makes you a politician straight away. Any one who says they aren't, be they Bob the Bollox or George Bush is full of it. Plus, on the evidence of his policies, he's a rather right-wing politician.
I wouldn't vote for a right-wing "Recent English Immigrants" party even if they promised to make our cricket team win something.. I don't quite see why Maori need to feel obliged to vote for the Maori Party against their political judgment. Metiria Turei is Maori and has much better and more thought out policies, IMHO.
-
Sharples is assuming that the long term unemployed will actually attend the makework schemes and get their dole - as opposed to begging, drug-dealing, stealing and other renumerative activities.
The fact is, a lot of people on the dole *do* work - they just don't declare it - benefits aren't enough to live on so people supplant them in the informal economy. Often, they'd lose out if they tried to sign off and get an official job because they can't earn enough to match the income from dole + casual jobs.
The answer to this which recognises how people *actually* live is a Universal Basic Income - which is quite the opposite of makework schemes.