Open Forum – Monday

18 December 2017

Forum

This post is open to anyone to comment on any topic that isn’t spam, illegal or offensive. All Your NZ posts are open but this one is for you to raise topics that interest you. 

If providing opinions on or summaries of other information also provide a link to that information. Bloggers are welcome to summarise and link to their posts.

Comments worth more exposure may be repeated as posts.Comments from other forums can be repeated here, cut and paste is fine.

Your NZ is a mostly political and social issues blog but not limited to that, and views from anywhere on the political spectrum are welcome. Some ground rules:

  • If possible support arguments, news, points or opinions with links to sources and facts.
  • Please don’t post anything illegal, potentially defamatory or abusive.

FIRST TIME COMMENTERS: Due to abuse by a few first comments under any ID will park in moderation until released (as soon as possible but it can sometimes take a while).

Sometimes comments will go into moderation or spam automatically due to mistyped ID, too many links (>4), or trigger text or other at risk criteria.

Free speech is an important principle here but some people who might pose a risk to the site will have to keep going through moderation due to abuses by a small number of malicious people.

94 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  December 18, 2017

    Here come our blundering Lefty idiots in Government creating unintended consequences and individual hardships for no purpose other than political posturing:
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11961504

    • NOEL

       /  December 18, 2017

      Aw gee if my reading is correct their major concerns are around the oversight authority not having enough resources to quickly process applications. Join the club, plenty of examples within other Government Departments.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  December 18, 2017

        Your reading is incorrect. The new regulations will do nothing to improve housing affordability but will create blockages, delays and costs to NZ residents affected by it and potentially some severe hardships.

  2. PartisanZ

     /  December 18, 2017

    “Unfortunately, “holistic” approaches are no different, as long as they deny the wisdom of the body’s rebellion.” – Charles Eisenstein, ‘Mutiny of the Soul’.

    https://charleseisenstein.net/essays/mutiny/

    ” … if you are unaware of the destruction of forests, oceans, wetlands, cultures, soil, health, beauty, dignity, and spirit that underlies the System we live in, then I have nothing to say to you. I am only speaking to you if you do believe that there is something deeply wrong with the way we are living on this planet … So if you suffer from anxiety, maybe you don’t have a “disorder” at all — maybe the house is on fire?”

  3. Alan Wilkinson

     /  December 18, 2017

    More idiot Lefty bureaucratic interventions:
    a) Reduced speed limits counter productive – produce more accidents:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/17/20mph-limit-dangerous-costly-reverse-council-admits/

    b) Politician crusading against fossil fuels owns eight vehicles that burn them:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/17/french-environment-minister-crusade-against-fossil-fuels-six/

    • Gezza

       /  December 18, 2017

      Re (a) You’re not portraying the situation accurately there. Did you note:
      A nationwide review of 20mph limits published by the The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) last month concluded: “A large number of evaluation studies have demonstrated a link between the introduction of 20mph zones and a subsequent reduction in casualties. The size of the reductions and the consistency of results over a wide number of areas are further evidence for this link.”

      However, their review pointed out that 20mph zones in which other traffic calming measures were introduced alongside the reduction in limit were much more effective.

      In Bath and North East Somerset they brought in the changes with a speed reduction and signs to indicate it only.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  December 18, 2017

        In other words reduction in speed limits only “works” if other things that actually work are done too?

        And: “The review of the traffic control measures warns that this is a problem nationally” does not square with the RoSPA claim which contradicts itself:

        The size of the reductions and the consistency of results over a wide number of areas are further evidence for this link. However, their review pointed out that 20mph zones in which other traffic calming measures were introduced alongside the reduction in limit were much more effective.

        So the results were not consistent and required invocation of additional explanatory factors. Statistical crap detector is flashing. Moreover the “reversion to the norm” factor often gives false comfort when changes are made in response to spikes in accident rates.

        A common sense analysis gives a rational explanation. Drivers tend to drive at a speed they perceive to be safe for the conditions. Changing the speed limit doesn’t make much difference to that actual speed. However, it may make some pedestrians behave differently and expose themselves to greater risks thereby increasing the accident rate. So if you are going to reduce the speed limit you have to do other things that modify the drivers’ perception of the actual safe speed.

        • Gezza

           /  December 18, 2017

          Burble, Sir Alan. Too late. Caught you out not reading the whole article.
          Everybody knows.
          I win again.
          Sir Gerald

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  December 18, 2017

            My apologies for exposing you to common sense, Sir Gerald.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 18, 2017

              Are there widespread plans to reduce the speed limit to 32.1896 kph around NZ Alan?

              Or is this about NOT RAISING the speed limit to 110 or 120 kph on the outside lane of motorways?

              I’m finding it difficult to perceive a scientific correlation with anything I’ve heard about in NZ, although I am fairly reliably informed the speed limit on secondary roads in the Far North, and probably nationwide, ie off of main highways, will reduce to 80kph in the not-too-distant future … and GOOD f*#ken JOB!

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 18, 2017

              Speed limits are irrelevant on our back roads. The limit is whatever you can safely negotiate the road/bend/bridge/wildlife/hazards at in whatever you are driving or riding. Tourists and drunk/drugged locals will continue to be pulled out of gullies, dead or alive.

              Currently engaged with FNDC re visibility at a T intersection on the hill road to Tapeka. The standard for driveways requires 85m visibility for a 70km/h zone. This intersection has about half that – less when they don’t cut the gorse back. They are refusing to put in a mirror to help see what is coming downhill around the bend. Changing the speed limit will do nothing because drivers will continue to judge their own safe speed with just bush on either side.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  December 18, 2017

              I don’t suppose that many drivers believe that they are driving dangerously enough to kill or injure themselves or other people, or they wouldn’t do it. That plonker, Lou Girardin, used to write into the Listener and elesewhere claiming that he was such a good driver that he should be let to set his own speed limit and alcohol limit.

              I don’t suppose that the drunk driver who killed the son of a late friend, the son’s partner and a friend as well as himself thought that he was a dangerous driver even though he came around a bend in the road on the wrong side and went into three motorcyclists.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 18, 2017

              However on our roads you do have to judge your own speed (and sobriety) because the safe speed is often, or even mostly, well below the speed limit. And it depends on conditions: wet/dry, busy/deserted, light/dark, fresh/tired, clear/foggy, fast car/slow truck, healthy/sick, fresh/tired, etc.

              Drivers are expected to judge the safe speed when it is below the speed limit but are suddenly unable to judge it when it is above the speed limit? There is too much focus on rigid speed limit enforcement and not enough on bad roads and bad driving.

  4. Gezza

     /  December 18, 2017

    YNZ POSTER SURVEY

    In your opinion, does Jacinda Ardern really actually look like this?

    Yes – uptick

    No, worst case of blatant tarting up of a photo I’ve seen in ages – downtick

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  December 18, 2017

      Sometimes. Depends on whether she is on holiday with fresh make-up or stressed out dealing with political fall-outs. And on whether she is being portrayed by friends or enemies.

    • High Flying Duck

       /  December 18, 2017

      Absolutely she does – just like Helen Clark looks like this:

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  December 18, 2017

        Makeup and lighting can do wonders without photoshopping being needed. It’s called glamour photography.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  December 18, 2017

          And that photo was taken how many years ago ?

          • PDB

             /  December 18, 2017

            This one from 2008 seems identical to real life?

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  December 18, 2017

              I would guess that it was taken by a good glamour photographer. You wouldn’t believe what can be done with makeup and lights. Just as fluorescent lighting does nothing for anyone…I have read that a big factor in the election where Nixon and Kennedy were standing was that Nixon refused to be made up for television and the glaring lights made him look old, pale and tired. Kennedy took advice and was made up, so looked healthy and young.

        • High Flying Duck

           /  December 19, 2017

          That photo was airbrushed, and her teeth straightened and whitened.

          • Blazer

             /  December 19, 2017

            People love veneers. They say the secret of success is sincerity. ..fake that. .and you’ve got it. .made. John Key. ..living proof.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  December 19, 2017

            Were you there when it was done ?

    • patupaiarehe

       /  December 18, 2017

      Grow up G. How she looks is irrelevant, I pay little attention to the MSM, so my opinion of her is solely based upon what two of my friends, who have actually met her say. And both of them opine, that she is one of the nicest people that they have ever met.

      • Gezza

         /  December 18, 2017

        It’s not from the msm, youngster. And I didn’t make any comment about her personality.
        So now come up for air.

        • patupaiarehe

           /  December 18, 2017

          Stop being rude to me, young fella. People are rude to me all day, & I come here to escape from it…
          ‘Jaz’ is a true honest representative, of both the ‘working classes’, & the people who own the business. Both need each other, and she has experience of both worlds

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  December 18, 2017

            What is her experience of people who own the business, patu? Genuine question, not trying to be rude.

            • patupaiarehe

               /  December 18, 2017

              I don’t know, Alan. Perhaps you should ask her.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 18, 2017

              Perhaps she should tell wikipedia. Nothing obvious there:

              After graduating from university, she spent time working in the offices of Phil Goff and of Helen Clark as a researcher. After a period of time volunteering in a soup kitchen in New York, Ardern went to London to work as a senior policy advisor in an 80-person policy unit of then British Prime Minister Tony Blair. She was also seconded to the Home Office to help with a review of policing in England and Wales. In early 2008 she won election as the President of the International Union of Socialist Youth, a role which saw her spend time in countries such as Jordan, Israel, Algeria and China.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 18, 2017

              Oh Jeeez, now we expect every politician to have personal experience in every area of life they might conceivably have jurisdiction over …

              AND … presumably … not to have even the remotest ideological commitment to their own political party …

              That’ll be because no National or ACT politician carries or has ever carried any ideological baggage at all. None!

              “Genuine question” my arse. It was a set-up question pure and SIMPLE.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 19, 2017

              Leaving your arse and bad temper out of it, patu said she had experience which wasn’t my understanding so I asked about it. Why is that a set up?

            • patupaiarehe

               /  December 19, 2017

              @Alan
              She grew up on a farm

            • Gezza

               /  December 19, 2017

              That only seems to have qualified her to crash a tractor? 🤔

          • Gezza

             /  December 18, 2017

            Given your opening sentence, I’ve got an inkling as maybe why people are rude to you all day?

            • patupaiarehe

               /  December 18, 2017

              People are ‘rude’ to me all day, G, simply because I take the ‘shit’ that is thrown at me, in the spirit it is intended…
              “You’re a cunt, Patu!”
              “At least a cunt is useful!”
              “Not when it is as big as you are!”
              “You obviously have a small penis!”
              “Fuck you Patu (laughing)”

  5. PartisanZ

     /  December 18, 2017

    “… globalization appears to be unfolding across three stages. The first phase is cultural globalization, the second economic, and the third political. The first and second stages are largely complete … The final stage has proven to be the most difficult; nation-states are incredibly hesitant to give up sovereignty.

    But the dissolution of borders may be an inexorable trend that underlies civilizational development …”

    https://io9.gizmodo.com/12-futuristic-forms-of-government-that-could-one-day-ru-1589833046?IR=T

    Bitta fun!

    # 11 ‘neoreactionaries’ best describes what I call Righties or ‘The Right Brigade’ I reckon.

    I disagree that “the first and second stages are largely complete”. I’d say cultural globalization is in its early-mid adolescence, while economic globalization is at best pre-teen or tween.

    In the greater scheme of human history, political globalization was born about 9 seconds ago with the League of Nations … and now exists as the squealing infant United Nations, stumbling around leaning on outmoded nation-state ideological ‘furniture’, still barely toilet-trained …

    The final stage is proving difficult and will remain essentially impossible until the second stage, economic globalization, is sufficiently rationalized, including the very necessary place of certain “protections” …

    This in turn requires the currently elitist, pseudo-scientific, dehumanized baloney of economics itself to be compassion-rationalized …

    • PartisanZ

       /  December 18, 2017

      Example: You want global markets, you accept global regulations …

      • Gezza

         /  December 18, 2017

        Nation states are made by people sharing a common language and / or a common identity, history & purpose. Nation states won’t disappear. That process is still young & ongoing. Parts of the US may one day become Spanish speaking separate states.

        • PartisanZ

           /  December 18, 2017

          Yes of course by “sovereignty” I must have meant “complete and absolute sovereignty” and now we can debate whether nation-states will disappear or not rather than the various, intelligently presented, incisive ‘possibilities’ of future forms of governance outlined in the article I cited written by SOMEONE ELSE …

          And while we’re debating, the chances of that future being # 12 ‘Post-Apocolyptic Hunter-Gatherers’ creeps a little closer each minute …

          There’s even a very interesting possibility in there for “common language and/or a common identity, history & purpose”, # 5 ‘Polystate’, which “speculates about what governments would look like if they didn’t rule over geographic locations, but instead ruled over minds …

          … each “state” consists of citizens who have agreed to the laws of a single non-geographic state; typical … nations … would be replaced by “polystates”, which are collections of “anthrostates”.

          So it’s not a particular form of government, but a meta-government in which each person is free to choose a new constitution on a semi-regular basis without having to physically relocate” …

          How’s that for ‘freedom’ Alan?

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  December 18, 2017

            I suspect polystates could only exist in virtual reality. In physical space proximity and location matter too much.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 18, 2017

              There are a few examples of them not mattering all that much … eg San Marino within Italy …

              And IMHO we already have them here in Aotearoa New Zealand. Maori spread all around the country and the world might consider themselves citizens of their hapu and/or iwi before NZ?

              There’s heaps of Tongans in the USA apparently …

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 18, 2017

              I expect people in physical proximity to me to obey the same behavioural laws as I do. I don’t want to have to call police from Venezuela when I get assaulted or discover they drive on the right while I am on the left.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 18, 2017

              You must be really happy with things the way they are Alan?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 18, 2017

              Making things drastically worse isn’t a big draw-card, PZ. I’m very happy to live in this country and as far from bureaucracy as practical. There are roles for global links and affiliations but I don’t see them supplanting local autonomy, nor do I want to.

          • Gezza

             /  December 18, 2017

            I hope there’s not a note of scathing overblown & unnecessary sarcasm creeping into your comms with me, Parti?

            When you’ve got an plan for how this wonderful new system is all going to come about & actually work for everyone & be all wonderful across the whole world where everybody thinks the same way as you will be a good time for me to discuss it in more detail, I reckon.

            Meantime, I guess there’s no harm in reading lots of jargonny words like “anthrostates” that don’t actually mean anything worthwhile. (You might be amused, given your musings tho, to know that my iPad just tried to correct that word to
            “ant hostages” 🐜🐜🐜🏃🏽🐜🐜🐜)

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 18, 2017

              Well, nothing’s going to “actually work for everyone & be all wonderful across the whole world” – or come anywhere near it – if no-one even considers the ideas, or shares their thoughts on them, or tries to adapt and evolve things but instead just goes for *instant debunk* …

              Another world-wide conflagration might force nation-states into giving up SOME of their sovereignty in order to avoid global catastrophe …?

            • Gezza

               /  December 18, 2017

              Forgive my temerity but I think you need to look in the mirror a bit more often when it comes to “instant debunking”.

              Two world wide conflagrations only persuaded the Brits & the Europeans to give up some of their sovereignty.

              And their people are all having a major rethink about whether that was wise – given that they obviously have major differences on all sorts of important issues – with different languages and national cultures, and a growing resentment people and bureaucrats of other nationalities and cultures invading their space & demanding that they adapt their ways and values to accept theirs.

              If there’s another world-wide conflagration it will probably be a clash of cultures, in which nations take sides, based on their shared cultures, as it usually is. One side will end up more or less victorious. Followed by a world-wide attempt to get everyone to get along together better, as always happens.

              Until there’s a worldwide switch to a universal culture (try blending just 3 religions in Israel or Saudi Arabia) you’re pissing into the wind. We’re a long way off from that.

              In NZ we’re doing pretty well, and there’s always room for improvement and change of direction via our MMP electoral system. It ain’t perfect, but it sure ain’t the pile of misery you seem to experience it as because it doesn’t work the way you want it to. It’s not the US, or Saudi Arabia, or Russia, or North Korea. We can change things with what we have when they get too out of balance, as we have done during our shared history, and as we will again.

              I used to be a pessimist but now I’m an optimist. Optimists achieve more.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 18, 2017

              Last sentence is very true, G. It is probably the secret of successful religions too. When we debunk religious dogma we shouldn’t throw that baby out with the bathwater.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 18, 2017

              To paraphrase Krishnamurti, “There is nothing healthy in being optimistic about a profoundly sick world staying profoundly sick” …

              He’s exaggerating for effect, I grant you, like me. We don’t want to kill the host body to heal the illness, but there’s still a lot in his little ditty …

              There were days when people were ever so optimistic about National Socialism in Germany …

              Even with MMP, I believe our system of so-called ‘democracy’ is actually designed to be anti-evolutionary.

              I’m F#*KING OPTIMISTIC about the future possibilities of human governance though …

            • Gezza

               /  December 18, 2017

              Well if you’re fucking optimistic about the future possibilities human governance you’ll get a lot fucking further with it if you don’t fucking attack everyone & everything with sarcasm, imo.

            • Gezza

               /  December 18, 2017

              On the issue of the possibilities of human governance, you still have to deal with the fact that people are different at both the individual and the group level – their cultures are different, &their wants are different, their abilities are different, their beliefs are different, & their values are different and while some of these overlap, that’s a reality that is the reason we are a long, long way from making a massive shift into some idealised form of governance that will work for everyone.

              If people want to change things at some point they have to stop just publishing books or articles or theories on the internet and persuade enough other people they can make it work to have them want to change for something else that works better. Ranting won’t do it.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 18, 2017

              And if you have any interest in it – which I’m perfectly happy to accept you don’t – you might do better than to instantly defend the status-quo, as in “Nation states won’t disappear.” Even just for the sake of having a spontaneous*, open-minded discussion …

              You might also avoid condescending, ill-informed lecturing, regardless of how short, as in “Nation states are made by people sharing a common language and/or a common identity, history & purpose.”

              How well does that describe Aotearoa New Zealand Gezza? The bicultural, multi-ethnic ‘nation’ you so vehemently defended against Alan earlier today …?

              *Spontaneity is defined (by Moreno) as “a new response to an old situation or an adequate response to a new situation” …

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 18, 2017

              ” … they have to stop just publishing books or articles or theories on the internet and …”

              This must explain the absence of any influence on human affairs due to books, articles or theories …?

              “Ranting won’t do it” …. Oh FFS! (Dies of exasperation) … That is one hell of a way to finish a rant!

            • Gezza

               /  December 18, 2017

              I’m not defending the status quo, I’m telling you what history shows. I’m interested in history. I read history. I look at how the world & nations and countries evolved into what we see now. I’m old enuf to have lived through quite a lot of history. There have been many changes. But most of them, looked at through the lens of thousands of years of history show that nothing has essentially changed in all that time except that in some nations people have acquired systems of governance in which they are able to change governments that do not suit the majority of them any more, and the freedom to criticise them.

              Spontaneity is defined as far more than what Moreno has limited it to.

              Lecturing is more your style than mine. I don’t try to pretend I’m a philosopher or an intellectual. just say what I think as briefly and concisely as possible. If you don’t like it, I know to expect a lecture, heavily dosed with sarcasm.

              How well does that describe Aotearoa New Zealand Gezza? The bicultural, multi-ethnic ‘nation’ you so vehemently defended against Alan earlier today …?

              Pretty well. The common language is English. I’d like to see more of us speaking and understanding Maori too though. I still see hope for Maori and Pakeha of goodwill and aroha to cohabitate and continuted korero is essential to that process. We have made progress toward reacquiring and achieving and appreciating what is good about each others’ cultures & we have a shared affinity for this land.

              I will always speak against those who try to poison the relationship envisaged in the Treaty which we are still trying to rebuild & which I believe future generations will be better at.

            • Gezza

               /  December 18, 2017

              “Ranting won’t do it” …. Oh FFS! (Dies of exasperation) … That is one hell of a way to finish a rant!

              rant
              verb
              1. speak or shout at length in an angry, impassioned way.
              “she was still ranting on about the unfairness of it all”
              synonyms: hold forth, go on and on, deliver a tirade, rant and rave, fulminate, sound off, spout, pontificate, trumpet, bluster, declaim; shout, yell, roar, bellow; informalmouth off; rarevociferate
              “she was still ranting on about the unfairness of it all”

              noun
              1. a spell of ranting; a tirade.
              “his rants against organized religion”
              synonyms: tirade, harangue, diatribe, broadside, verbal onslaught; rarephilippic
              “he went into a rant about the people who were annoying him”

            • Gezza

               /  December 18, 2017

              I don’t believe I do those things Parti.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 19, 2017

              I don’t believe I do the things you accuse me of Gezza … mostly …

              I acknowledge I get oppositional at times. I exaggerate for effect and I challenge orthodoxy. I am, after all, PartisanZ …

              But I’m active on other forums which make this one look like its basic unwritten rule is “close down any meaty conversation within the first or second replies”. If a conversation must run to three replies, default to ad hom or divert.

              The pervasive ‘shutting down’ negativity is palpable IMHO.

              You’ve just lectured me to convince me you don’t lecture me.

            • Gezza

               /  December 19, 2017

              It’s not a lecture. It’s a reply to a question you posed. I can’t help it if you see anyone disagreeing with you as attacking you personally. If you weren’t quite so keen on attacking others yourself you’d probably find it easier to see that. My comments change character once I’ve given you a dose of your own medicine.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 19, 2017

              Yes and I must learn to take my medicine dispensed by my intellectual superiors like a man …

              Thank you, oh thank you, for putting me in my place.

            • Gezza

               /  December 19, 2017

              Parti I’m not anyone’s intellectual superior & I don’t claim to be.

              There are a few people here who I consider to be intellectually smarter than me but I don’t consider that gives them or their opinions any superiority over mine or yours. It’s just their opinion. I either agree, disagree, don’t care, or might have an alternative view I feel like putting forth.

              I just find your overindulgence in sarcasm irritating. So I occasionally give you some back. To see if it helps you understand how unpleasant it is?

              You can justify being continually sarcastic to yourself by giving it alternative labels if you like but it always looks to me like just an angry attack response intended to hurt someone you think has put you down or whose alternative conservative viewpoint you think deserves a dise of abuse.

              You might think of yourself as a pacifist but in this environment it’s how you fight dirty with words instead of your fists.

              You are as entitled to your views as I am to mine & everybody else is to theirs, but if you want to complain that others here try to shut you down, imo, you habitually attack people with sarcasm & misrepresentation to try & shut them down, so don’t come the wounded saint.

              Your last sentence is just childish.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  December 18, 2017

      Cultural globalisation is very far from complete. The EU has demonstrated that economic globalisation cannot be achieved without political globalisation. I don’t give the analysis much credence accordingly.

  6. Kitty Catkin

     /  December 18, 2017

    A friend who used to be involved with a foodbank had some unedifying stories when we were talking about the charities who refuse tinned tomatoes because they are too hard to cook….one time the foodbank ran out, and the volunteers made up boxes from their own pantries. One woman was heard shouting & swearing at the woman who took her box of food in-she wanted meat and was furious because there wasn’t any. My friend bluntly told the recipient that (a) the foodbank workers had provided the groceries themselves and (b) if she didn’t smoke and drink she could buy meat for herself.

    I can’t see how anyone can not know what to do with tinned tomatoes. I have them all the time and I am hardly a gourmet chef.

    • PartisanZ

       /  December 18, 2017

      Them’s real classy communication skills you’re describin’ thair Miss Kitty …

      Heck, I wanna get me a food parcel like that there one … what comes complete with not one but two onslaughts a’ righteous indignation!

      Land’sakes, if’n I was already strung-out an’ maybe protein de-prived enough for my fuse to be that short – shoutin’ and a’swearing at charitable workerin’ folks – well, a double dose o’ guilt’d be just what the doctor ordered!

      Holy smoke n’ mirrors, I even get to feel guilty about me A-ddictions what I genuinely feel I ain’t got no control over …

      Where is this place!? I gotta get me some’a this for Christmas!

      • PartisanZ

         /  December 18, 2017

        Aktchilly you know, what I’d really like to do is start one of them food banks m’self, down by Sam Drucker’s general store – which is also the drug-store, town hall, savin’s and loan bank, library and newspaper printin’ office, as well as the railway terminus for the ‘Cannonball Express’ – so’s I could spend me days abusin’ them homeless people who’re startin’ to hang around down there …

        • PartisanZ

           /  December 18, 2017

          Hells Bells Miss Kitty, the most amazin’ thought just struck me like that forked lightnin’ what hit Mr Haney’s truck a couple’a years ago!

          I reckon if I got meself a food bank and become a charity case, I could get the government or some big business tycoon or some mix of the two to pay me to abuse all the poor people who came along for their free food parcels!

          Holy Nell, I couldn’ think of a better job … could you?

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  December 19, 2017

            Foodbank volunteering is not a job and the abuse was done by the recipient, not the volunteers who had given their own groceries, I must say that that I find the cod hillbilly-speak rather tiresome.It has been going on for too long and has ceased to be amusing-if it ever was. It completely undermines any points that you want to make.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  December 18, 2017

        I hope that if someone had emptied their own pantry for me that I would refrain from swearing at and abusing them because they hadn’t brought me the exact things that I wanted ! Especially if I was sitting there smoking and having a drink while they stooged around giving away food that they had bought themselves-they had emptied their pantries of food and they would then have to replace it. This woman knew this and still expected them to act as a free supermarket. I am surprised that she didn’t demand that they take a grocery list and return with the items on it.

        It’s a foodbank, not a supermarket, and if someone isn’t happy with what it provides, they should damned well buy the food themselves.

        Smokers who use foodbanks and spend their grocery money on cigarettes have a damned cheek anyway. Whinging and abusing the givers about what they are given is even more of a cheek.

        • PartisanZ

           /  December 18, 2017

          Oh I know Miss Kitty … I know exactly how you feel … Oh do tell yes …

          These lower classes have SUCH bad manners … and especially when we’re only trying to assist them … get them through another week of their miserable lives …

          Nothing wrong with us offering some suggestions by way of helping them help themselves as well … in the brief time it takes to …. *serve* them … so to speak …

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  December 18, 2017

            How do you feel about ambulance drivers being assaulted by people they are trying to help, PZ?

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 18, 2017

              Rather a Conspiratoorial thing to say Alan …

              … insulted and assaulted are two very different things …

            • Gezza

               /  December 18, 2017

              It’s a problem down here from time to time. They’re assaulted after they’re insulted.

            • Gezza

               /  December 18, 2017

              When I was in the Emergency Department in Welly Hospital a couple of years ago someone was brought in from a car accident. They died in the Emergency Department and the doctors were abused at the top of their companions’ lungs. They had to call security and the police to calm these arseholes down.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 18, 2017

              But are they? Just different manifestations or degrees of the same attitude I would have thought. And abusing or insulting your health workers (nurses cop similar attacks) is repugnant to most of us. Why should foodbank volunteers be abused or insulted either?

              Obviously most people helped do not act that way or the helping services would run out of staff and volunteers.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 18, 2017

              I did not say food-bank volunteers SHOULD be insulted Alan.

              Like emergency services personnel and medical professionals, who are often dealing with people in extreme physical and/or emotional states, the situation of food-bank personnel warrants them receiving some conflict resolution training, including a certain clinical or neutral ‘tolerance’ … if it isn’t innate in them …

              The very last thing they are there to do is judge other people’s attitudes and behaviour.

              The likes of acute and chronic pain and emotional pain, depression and *demoralisation* can make some people quite obnoxious. For example, it seems to be acceptable for some women when they’re in labour …?

              Many if not most volunteers are more integrated, honorable and committed persons, and less one-dimensional, than to be put off by a few verbal insults Alan …

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 18, 2017

              Maybe, PZ. I had a friend who delivered Meals on Wheels voluntarily and was taken aback to find he was delivering to ladies younger than himself who were engaged in a regular bridge party.

              My personal rule is not to work for arseholes. Should we expect others to do so? A few instances can be coped with but regular abuse is intolerable..

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 18, 2017

              Well, I can tell you one emergency service it is not “maybe” in Alan.

              “Regular abuse is intolerable” and yet society expects people to voluntarily become professional police officers, and demands there be ever more of them.

              And we go on and on and on and on NOT applying our considerable intelligence to the question: Why is there so much regular abuse? Why are these people being arseholes?

            • patupaiarehe

               /  December 18, 2017

              If I was ever so desperate & unfortunate enough, to have to ask for helf from a Foodbank, I’d attempt to draw as little attention to myself as possible.

            • Gezza

               /  December 18, 2017

              Why?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 18, 2017

              Good question there, PZ. Let’s ignore the financial inducement to take on the job. Why should we tolerate regular abuse? Why should we fund the abusers and those who produce more of them? What workable alternatives are there?

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 19, 2017

              This could go on all night, which I ain’t got, but ask anyone who has worked as a waitperson and they’ll tell you the biggest arseholes are the European (Pakeha) fat-cats …

              So I didn’t mean the same “these people” as you did. I meant – Why, generally, is there so much arseholeness? The recipient and the giver in Miss Kitty’s Food-Bank example both got to be arseholes, eh?

              The workable alternatives mostly lie, IMHO, in society voluntarily ‘flattening’ the hierarchical pyramid of inequality so that – for everyone’s well-being – there is no-one poor enough to need a food-bank.

              “We all do better when we all do better” …

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 19, 2017

              And ignoring the financial inducement to take the job …

              Therein lies a substantial and almost certainly a primary key to this puzzle … the financial inducement …

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  December 19, 2017

            I doubt the police you referenced found the European fat cats a regular source of abuse. I’m also a bit curious as to why only European fat cats are singled out? Not Maori, Chinese, Indian, …?? Was Kitty’s giver an arsehole or did she just put the situation in proper context? How do you flatten inequality given addiction, illiteracy and innumeracy, mental illness, criminality, childhood abuse and deprivation … ?

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 19, 2017

              You always get yourself into a position of asking questions Alan, never one of providing possible or even tentative answers.

              This way, IMHO, people you call ‘Looney Lefties’ get to try to fix up society’s ills while you Righties stand back, criticize and feel affronted by the ‘cost’ of it, citing “other peoples money” when you really mean your own.

              Well, speaking universally, your money was once someone else’s.

              I’m at least prepared to speculate –

              A) We investigate the causes of “addiction, illiteracy and innumeracy, mental illness, criminality, childhood abuse and deprivation”, and determine whether ‘manufactured’ inequality is one of them and perhaps a principal one?

              B) As a member of a society where “we all do better when we all do better”, we pay the cost of remedying the ills if we are able to and, of course, within reason (given that each case is an individual person).

              We ‘manufacture’ an education system, or a branch of our education system, that works for the students who remain illiterate and innumerate in our current system … We resource mental health services … provide people with decent livelihoods if the alternative is them becoming criminals … etc

              There’s a ‘cost’ either way … the less & non-financial cost just doesn’t get measured very much …

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 19, 2017

              This Government is about to throw all available money into “reducing child poverty” and presumably therefore inequality. So we will see if “more of the same” works. My guess is that it will not. That is why I ask the question.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 19, 2017

              Do you really believe I am advocating “more of the same” …?

              You think I’m a Labour stalwart or something? The reduction in inequality from our new government’s interventions is likely to be minuscule, but perhaps measurable in some way … probably using the same purely financial criteria as National or anyone else would use?

              However, if National’s much vaunted ‘social investment’ approach is so much better, how come National consistently delayed implementing it?

              Neither of these is really addressing the systemic causes of gross inequality or obscene iniquity. I say gross because yes, I believe some inequality will result naturally from basic freedoms. A decent society will temper those freedoms with responsibility and circumvent natural inequality becoming gross, obscene iniquity …

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  December 19, 2017

              The giver is from a working class background herself and her family knew hardship when she was a child. Had they not had a vegetable garden, it would have been even worse.

              I can’t see how PZ can think that giving own’s own groceries to someone else and then having to replace them makes that person an arsehole. This woman’s only income is her super. She doesn’t have a car. Virtually all foodbank users have them.

              She was naturally annoyed at her colleague being sworn at and abused because the foodbank gift wasn’t to the recipient’s liking, but refrained from sinking to that level herself. She was unable to resist saying that if the recipient didn’t smoke and drink, she could buy her own groceries. The taker was acting as if it was her right to have exactly what she wanted and that they were stupid for not knowing this.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  December 19, 2017

              I think that people who have been in accidents are likely to be in shock and have an adrenalin rush., Gezza, so there’s a bit more of an excuse. Shock makes people act irrationally.

              I know that when Hospice rang to say that my husband had died , my first reaction was to deny it-I didn’t abuse them, of course, but I did keep saying no-no-no- it couldn’t be true and so on.

              Even the friendliest pet will snap irrationally when it’s hurt, and people are doing the equivalent, I suppose.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  December 19, 2017

              @PZ, I have no idea what you are advocating which is why I asked the question. I still don’t know the answer or who you support politically. I just observed that this Government is about to take as large a step as it can manage in the direction of “more of the same”.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 19, 2017

              Notwithstanding the intrusion of Gareth Morgan’s personality, what you exhibit Alan is one of the main issues which I believe held back TOP during the election … People such as yourself appear simply unable to conceive of the possibility that someone else can be non-aligned politically, and even more alien, not support an established Party.

              “Not Left, Not Right, but What Works”

              I can offer very little support to any of it. What Labour are doing is “more of the same” dressed in Red, labelled Left, not what works.

              National would have been more of the same in Blue … tinged with Yellow …

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  December 19, 2017

            Why do you assume that the person was lower class ? At no time was her class mentioned, either to or by me.

            • PartisanZ

               /  December 19, 2017

              Exaggeration for effect Miss Kitty …

              “I think that people who have been in accidents are likely to be in shock and have an adrenalin rush., Gezza, so there’s a bit more of an excuse. Shock makes people act irrationally.”

              My whole point Miss Kitty. I think that people who have been in accidents, suffered physical &/or sexual abuse, psychological and spiritual trauma, and are probably substance addicts as a result, are likely to be in shock, PTSD, sudden rage, dis-inhibition and a host of others, so there’s a bit more of an excuse. These things can make people act irrationally.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  December 20, 2017

              This woman wasn’t doing that, from the sound of it, she was just bloody rude and ‘entitled’. Some people are like that by nature.