from yesterday’s Waikato Times
The accommodation industry he said is "blinded to who methamphetamine users are".
"One motelier rejected my approach saying, 'we don't allow those types of people to stay in their premises'," he said.
"My question is, describe a meth user?
"Statistics show they are business people in their suits to the not-so-well groomed.
Once you've cast out your first demon you start spotting them everywhere. Why only last week there were two ahead of me in the checkout queue at Pak 'n Save....
According to Vernon Small, "Make no mistake, Jackson is a great recruit for Labour.
He is the equivalent of the proverbial 14 point intercept try; he will attract the votes of young urban Maori and "Shane Jones Maori" to the party while denying the Maori Party one of its flagship hopes."
Perhaps Small really is as down with the various subspecies of Maori voter as his confidence would indicate. Then again, after Gordon Campbell's breezy prediction that the kids would turn out in droves for the Internet Party because of Dotcom's alleged "music", I'm more than a little wary of this kind of easy punditry.
"You see, Mr President, I have nothing to hide from you."
Churchill's one previous meeting with Roosevelt, held in virtual secrecy in August of 1941 at the interestingly named Placentia Bay, Newfoundland, was rather less the stuff of hagiography. After braving the u-boat infested North Atlantic aboard the HMS Prince of Wales, which was later sunk by Japanese bombers two days after the attack on Pearl Harbour, Churchill was very much the supplicant, sounding out the US in "neutral" territory on its then hypothetical terms for entering WW2.
Roosevelt drove a hard bargain, demanding that Britain guarantee to divest itself of its colonies once the war had been won. Naturally that was a hard call for a diehard Tory like Churchill, but Roosevelt had him over a barrel and was determined to press the advantage. While the eventual agreement was couched in the noblest of terms, the reality was that Britain effectively ceded its remaining great power status to the US's advantage. No doubt that was on Churchill's mind as he delivered dictation in the nuddy.
TV One News invented a new word last night 'expediate' !
(in lieu of expedite)
You're too kind.
...the US economy crumble to the point its citizens resort to grubbing for worms.
These rankings invite complacency and self-congratulation. We have little reason to be complacent.
Too true. It's more than a little reminiscent of that brief fool's paradise atmosphere that existed following the Christchurch quake of September 2010, when NZ's "first world" regulatory standards were touted as having saved us from the kind of carnage that had happened in Haiti.
Great links, many thanks.
Nice quote from the last (Bike Auckland) article: "Let’s not damage a good thing growing here (more people on bikes) by wrapping it up in red tape."
Since mid-2015 NZ's declining dollar has seen e-bike prices increase by close to 25%. A basic quality hub motor bike with pedal assist, hand throttle, and an effective mechanical front wheel disk brake could be had then for as little as $1499. Similar models currently leave little change out of $2000. Extra compliance costs such as requiring universal registration only shut more people out of the lower end of the market.
Yes, that's the law, but I think proving an e-bike was over 300 watts would be quite difficult for an officer on the side of the road.
Definitely. I've seen a home built lithium ion bike of around 500 watts hyped on TradeMe as being good to go without rego, because the seller claimed that an off duty cop had assured them that the law routinely turned a blind eye to such things. The one high-powered e-bike tragedy that I'm aware of doesn't seem to have prompted any suggestion of a real crackdown.
Mopeds are literally the petrol analog to e-bikes. Putting a little petrol engine on is something that's been done for as long as there have been motorbikes....Police have basically no tolerance for anyone they see riding one of these, even though at the low end they are effectively the same as e-bikes, just noisier, and with effectively unlimited range, since you can buy the $5 of petrol to fill them up at a servo.
Perhaps the annoying noise factor of some of those conversions has something to do with the law taking an interest. Getting around on a mountain bike with a rowdy Chinese engine probably fits the profile of someone who's lost their license.
With e-bikes now allowing travel at higher (and, as noted above, more dangerous) speeds, and having a higher monetary value, are we likely to see any regulatory changes to introduce user licensing and/or vehicle registration regimes for e-bikes similar to those for other powered vehicles? And would such moves be desirable?
Currently e-bikes don't require registering if they're rated at 300 watts or less. If you wanted to go faster you'd need a more powerful bike which, at over 300 watts, would be subject to the same registration rules as a motorcycle. I know of at least one e-bike sale where not having to register a second vehicle made it a more attractive choice than a scooter.
As for "higher monetary values", i.e. lifestyle bikes, influencing law changes, nah. Sounds like socialising the risks of a private benefit. Gentrification may have its upsides, but if you're spending up large you can presumably afford insurance, or move to a gated community.