Open Forum – Wednesday

13 February 2019

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, or you think may interest others.. 

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. If they pass muster they will be released as soon as possible (it can sometimes take hours).

Next Post

101 Comments

  1. Corky

     /  February 13, 2019

    Trouble for our mates across the ditch.

    https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/world/382323/australia-government-in-historic-vote-loss-over-sick-refugees

    Interesting to note an Aussie correspondent told Mikey governments are meant to protect the borders and stop the wrong people coming in.

    I hear you, cobber. Unfortunately it seems your country is slowly losing it’s battle against liberal forces.

    We have already lost that battle over here.

    • Joe Bloggs

       /  February 13, 2019

      Damn those pesky liberals with their humanitarian attitudes… caring about other people and social justice. 😜

    • lurcher1948

       /  February 13, 2019

      Hope to see a muslim wearing a headscarf today, i will say welcome to NZ

      • Corky

         /  February 13, 2019

        Great living in a democracy, eh, Lurchy? I hope the irony isn’t lost on you.

        I think the graffiti in this clip telling Whitey to stay away is a little on the nose. What do you think, my man?

        • Corky

           /  February 13, 2019

          ”NO WHITES ALLOWED.'[‘

          Ross Kemp used the same body armour he required in Syria when visiting this area.

          This in modern day Britanstan.

          • phantom snowflake

             /  February 13, 2019

            You may find this idea surprising; but perhaps you would have more credibility if you didn’t continually link to foaming-at-the-mouth far-right nutbar conspiracist ‘fake media’!
            So far this week:
            – “One America News Network” (above)
            – Breitbart
            – Whaleoil

            • Corky

               /  February 13, 2019

              I’m not interested in credibility. I’m interested in facts. I had this problem with Kitty yesterday. I see she’s still at it, even when I’ve proved her wrong.

              But fair enough. I’m always interested in anything that’s incorrect. And it’s true everyone has an agenda.

              ”Foaming-at-the-mouth far-right nutbar conspiracist ‘fake media’!”

              What in the above clip do you find untrue.

              1- The Iman suggesting to shop owners alcohol not be sold?

              2- The racist graffiti?

              Try to do better than this!!!!

              Kitty:

              ”Ross Kemp did a series (I think it was a series) about the armed police and went out with them, which may be why he wore body armour, if he did.

              For most crime, Birmingham is below average.”

              More half truths mixed with confusion.

              🙄🙄✔

              Talk about ”fake.”

              https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/showbiz-tv/ross-kemp-says-nbirmingham-14420263ew-

            • phantom snowflake

               /  February 13, 2019

              I’m interested in facts.” HAAAAHAAHAAA Corky, you’re toooo much! I’m doing a fullblown Griff-style ROFLMFAO over here! *snort*

            • Corky

               /  February 13, 2019

              You can do whatever you like.

              I’m still waiting for a reply

              ”HAAAAHAAHAAA Corky”

              I’m sorry, dude. That’s no answer. Why don’t you just say: ‘I have no answer..’ now that’s funny. 😎👌

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  February 13, 2019

            More nonsense. The story is from One America/n News, a privately owned, very rightwing ‘news’ station.Their statistics are not backed up, and Trump made an idiot of himself by quoting some untrue ones.

            Ross Kemp did a series (I think it was a series) about the armed police and went out with them, which may be why he wore body armour, if he did.

            For most crime, Birmingham is below average.

            The population there is not growing at the rate described in this biassed ‘news’ story.

            I doubt if Birmingham was ever the paradise that they make it sound; they must have banked on Americans not knowing anything about it.

            We don’t know who wrote the tag; ever heard of an agent provocateur ?

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  February 13, 2019

              The immigrants will have their work cut out to outnumber the English; they are much smaller % than this video implies.!

            • Corky

               /  February 13, 2019

              Yeah, sure! You obviously haven’t looked at the clip.

              What does the clip imply re Muslim population in Britain and Birmingham. ?

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  February 13, 2019

              I did waste some time looking at the clip, and it gives the impression that they will soon outnumber everyone else; nonsense that plays on the neurotics and bigots’ paranoia.

              The source of the clip is unreliable, to say the least.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  February 13, 2019

              The Ross Kemp show was about gangs and drugs; the names of the gang members were ones like Anslow, Osbourne and Smith. There was one Muslim one.

              He was wearing body armour because he was with armed police. Wakey, wakey, these police were after drug-dealing gangs who are heavily armed themselves. They don’t go in wearing shorts and t-shirts.

              But why do I bother ? If someone’s incapable of seeing reason, trying to make them see it is waste of time.

            • Corky

               /  February 13, 2019

              Now the story changes.. the source of the clip is unreliable..to say the least. 😃

              You may be right. They were paid actors? Those Mossie terrorists didn’t come from Birmingham? And Ross Kemp- a programme I doubt you would ever watch- wasn’t in Birmingham in part to document terrorism… by Red September 😂

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  February 15, 2019

              Who claimed that they were actors ?

              Ross Kemp had nothing to do with this clip. You are going off at tangents and setting up straw men as an attempt to prove your nonsense.

              One American news is a commercal, extreme right organisation. It is not considered to be a reliable source; anyone can call themselves ‘News’. It doesn’t mean that what they say is real news.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  February 15, 2019

              Have you been to Birmingham ? I have. It wasn’t the idyllic place that the clip implied that it was.

              You are, of course, a liar. But don’t tell lies and try to make it seem that that someone else is telling them. You have admitted elsewhere to a failing memory, but not everyone has this problem, and as the proof is there, trying to put words in someone’s mouth is rather silly.

            • Corky

               /  February 13, 2019

              “But why do I bother?”

              Truly a great question to ask yourself.

              You must have some type of death wish. Why don’t you ignore me, like I do with most of your other stuff which I consider boring inane fluff?

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  February 15, 2019

              You don’t ignore it; you react with personal abuse and sneers.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  February 15, 2019

              Personal abuse again because you can’t think of anything better ?

              Be careful. little man.

  2. Blazer

     /  February 13, 2019

    yes the rights battle against inequality,empathy and humanity…waxes and…wanes.

  3. PartisanZ

     /  February 13, 2019

    Had the misfortune to watch Garner for a while this morning … There was an item about the ANZ Bank in which somebody, probably the CEO, trotted out the old maxim –

    “Markets hate uncertainty”

    If you’re a hard-core ‘free market’ capitalist … have a think about those 3 words?

    It’s such a stupid thing to say … and an even stupider thing to believe …

    What else is a ‘free market’ except uncertainty?

    Anarcho Capitalism is precisely Absolute Uncertainty …

    Even if you mean, “Markets hate uncertainty about regulation” its pretty stupid, because where is there a market without regulation?

    Can anyone translate “Markets hate uncertainty” into something REAL and MEANINGFUL for me?

    • Corky

       /  February 13, 2019

      Talking of markets.. I see business is ready to leave our shores because of wage increases.

      ”What else is a ‘free market’ except uncertainty?”

      Correct. But please segregate phoney crony capitalists from the real thing.

      ”Can anyone translate “Markets hate uncertainty” into something REAL and MEANINGFUL for me?”

      Markets accept -unfortunately- that some regulation is a given. What they don’t want is a government that’s vague about their policy direction, or a government that springs policy surprises on them at a moments notice.

      Business only works if a chain of unbroken links stay together. Once one link is taken out, the whole chain is compromised.

      Talking of vagueness ..roll the dice on a CGT. See what I mean, Parrti?

      • PartisanZ

         /  February 13, 2019

        So ‘markets’ want to have their cake and eat it too?

      • Blazer

         /  February 13, 2019

        is that why Cadbury closed down the Dunedin plant?
        ‘Business only works if a chain of unbroken links stay together. Once one link is taken out, the whole chain is compromised.’

        I thought the focus was just …profit.

        • Corky

           /  February 13, 2019

          Obviously the business is the mother link. Of course the focus of business is on profit. Unlike your lackeys in power, businesses can’t rob people at the point of a gun…and get away with it.

          Geez ..Kitty..I’m talking metaphorically.

      • Blazer

         /  February 13, 2019

        ‘. I see business is ready to leave our shores because of wage increases.’…name them…usual b/s.

        • Corky

           /  February 13, 2019

          Minimum wage increases..could cost small firms up to $80,000 per year

    • Blazer

       /  February 13, 2019

      anz-‘“Markets hate uncertainty” -why do we have floating exchange/mortgage rates then?🤦‍♂️

      • Corky

         /  February 13, 2019

        Maybe to give customers choice? They are after all selling a product.

        • Blazer

           /  February 13, 2019

          tell it to the banker then.
          Floating xchange rate=uncertainty.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  February 13, 2019

            No. Floating rate = rational valuations = minimal risk

            Fixed rate = political control = irrational valuations = big risks

            • Blazer

               /  February 13, 2019

              tying yourself in knots there Al…floating rate=uncertainty….period…you would think a banker would understand this…because his vocation is based on….rates!

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  February 13, 2019

              A banker would understand it but you obviously won’t.

            • PartisanZ

               /  February 13, 2019

              The stock market is imbued with uncertainty, surely?

              It’s effectively a kind of Big Business TAB …

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  February 13, 2019

              Any commercial venture is imbued with uncertainty and risk. The stock markets are a mechanism for sharing the risk and the rewards. Business is the art of managing risk and opportunity.

            • Gezza

               /  February 13, 2019

              The stock markets & finance markets these days are basically just gambling dens writ large.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  February 13, 2019

              No. There are risk elements as in all businesses together with rewards for good work.

            • PartisanZ

               /  February 13, 2019

              So we’ve come around to proving the massive BullShit of “Markets hate uncertainty” … It’s a scam …

              Thanks for participating folks.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  February 13, 2019

              It’s a fact, not a scam. Uncertainty costs money. God, the financial ignorance of the average NZer and voter is horrific. No wonder they elect the politicians they do.

            • Gezza

               /  February 13, 2019

              No. There are risk elements as in all businesses together with rewards for good work.
              There are too many professional gamblers making an absolute fortune playing with other people’s money in the markets.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  February 14, 2019

              @G, evidence and criteria?

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  February 13, 2019

      Elementary my dear Watson.
      Uncertainty = risk = cost

    • Gezza

       /  February 14, 2019

      Storm in a teacup. Badly worded letter. They’re not intending to deport this child. If you’re not NZ citizens and you’re only here on temporary visas your child has the citizenship of your country, not ours. If that wasn’t the case we’d soon be back to the bad old days of people arguing they should be allowed to stay because they had a kid here and the kid’s a citizen so surely that means they have to be allowed to stay even if they don’t qualify otherwise.

  4. David

     /  February 13, 2019

    Just in case the liberal fact checkers have overlooked this, Senator Kamala Harris and presidential hopeful on a breakfast show admitted to smoking pot and inhaling, so far so cool, and she did it in college and chilled out to Snoop and Tupac, also cool. Turns out Harris graduated in 1986 and Snoop and Tupac,s first released albums in 1991 and 1993 by which time Harris was an assistant DA so either she is a liar or she was breaking the law at the time she was a prosecutor.

    • Griff.

       /  February 13, 2019

      Oh dear .
      Someone smoked some weed .
      Have another drink bud ….hic.

      Decriminalization
      Moscone Act (1975)

      Decriminalization of cannabis – which treats possession of small amounts as a civil (rather than a criminal) offense – was established in July 1975 when the state legislature passed Senate Bill 95, the Moscone Act.[9][16][17][18] SB 95 made possession of one ounce (28.5 grams) of marijuana a misdemeanor punishable by a $100 fine,[19] with higher punishments for amounts greater than one ounce, for possession on school grounds, or for cultivation.[20]

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_in_California
      Not even a crime at the time……

      • David

         /  February 13, 2019

        So still an offence then. Perhaps you should cut back.

  5. David

     /  February 13, 2019

    What has happened to the Green New Deal from the Democrats released with much fanfare by AOC and friends and the support of the media ? Well the explainer has been quietly hidden after it seemed to outlaw petrol cars, air travel and fossil fuels while banning nuclear energy. Also quietly disappeared was the basic income for everyone including folk who dont want to work.
    Pelosi and Trump had the same opinion of it, a piece of absolute incoherent garbage put together by someone who was a bar maid 15 minutes ago.

    • High Flying Duck

       /  February 13, 2019

      “The problem with the Green New Deal

      A deeply unserious proposal to tackle climate change

      GOOD POLICY should seem more convincing as it becomes more detailed. The Green New Deal championed by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the newly minted Democratic superstar in Congress, has the opposite effect. For months the plan existed as little more than a slogan and a catch-all for progressive hopes and dreams. It would not just be a bracing proposal to confront climate change by reducing carbon-dioxide emissions to zero within ten years. It would also provide universal health care, a universal basic income, insulation from globalisation for workers, a jobs guarantee and other assorted goodies.

      Critics of the proposal were derided by Ms Ocasio-Cortez’s millions of admirers and Twitter followers as anti-environmental and, possibly worse, anti-progressive. The counter-revolutionaries were told to wait for the details. On February 6th those details arrived in blueprint form, as a House resolution. It is a document with monumental ambitions and minimal detail. The most prominent Democratic contenders for their party’s presidential nomination—including Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren—had all signed on even before the skeletal sketch was issued. They may come to regret it.

      Unless governments can come up with policies to slow global warming, climate change will make life extremely unpleasant for mankind. To prevent a 1.5°C increase temperature relative to pre-industrial times, greenhouse-gas emissions would probably need to be halved by 2030 and brought to zero by 2050. There are sensible policies that America has not yet enacted that would bend its current trajectory on carbon emissions: a carbon tax, subsidies for nuclear-power generation, an increase in research funding for carbon-capture and carbon-storage, to name a few.

      Yet the Green New Deal leapfrogs these ideas, which its creators deem too piddling and also too market-based to meet the proposal’s second objective: eliminating the excesses of late capitalism. At times the seemingly futuristic proposal sounds a bit Jeffersonian. The authors support “low-tech” carbon capture and storage for example—ie, planting trees—rather than developing more efficient technology. Pollution from agriculture would be eliminated by supporting family farming. Never mind that planting enough trees to make a dent in atmospheric carbon would require reforesting all 50 states, or that family farms are more resource-intensive than industrial operations.

      Substituting high-carbon energy sources like coal for cleaner ones like natural gas, nuclear and bioenergy would do a great deal to push America towards decarbonisation. But insisting on decarbonisation within a decade—with renewable capacity still limited—would push up electricity costs rapidly. What would be the cumulative effects of mandatory, wholesale decarbonisation of the power-generation sector within ten years? Or of the mandated retrofitting of every single building in the country? Of the requirement for electric-only vehicles, and the removal of every single dirty internal combustion engine? Would it really provide “millions of good, high-wage jobs” and “provide unprecedented levels of prosperity and economic security” for the impoverished—as the resolution promises—or simply make them poorer?

      In a single sub-paragraph, the American people are promised “high-quality health care; affordable, safe and adequate housing; economic security; and clean water, clean air, healthy and affordable food, and access to nature.” There is no further elaboration. Along with the previous guarantee of “a job with a family-sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and retirement security,” this vision of American society is beautifully utopian. It quite literally promises the world. Yet each component of this paradise would require massive upheavals. Voters deserve a bit more explanation on how to get from here to there.

      Such objections are thought unsportsmanlike by the proposal’s backers. The Green New Deal has people excited in ways think-tank white papers on cap-and-trade schemes never did. Boosters argue that it moves the “Overton window” of political dialogue: towards taking serious action on climate change. The little details, like how to pay for universal health care and a federal jobs guarantee can be dealt with later. Perhaps the Green New Deal will galvanise the youth vote, or help elect environmentally minded Democrats. Perhaps it is good politics to yoke environmentalism to other economic policies that could be popular.

      Yet it seems rather more likely that the politics of the Green New Deal will backfire for Democrats. Republican strategists have stymied progress on climate change by caricaturing Democratic ideas as pie-in-the-sky efforts that would result in massive tax increases. Their parody now seems reality. The next Democratic nominee may well be someone who has endorsed the idea of the Green New Deal.

      There is little wonder that Nancy Pelosi, who cares about climate change but also retains shrewd political instincts, has been so public in her doubting of the proposal. “The ‘green dream’ or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is but they’re for it, right?” she told Politico. The bold plan could make the party unelectable in conservative-leaning states, ensuring that Republicans retain control over one chamber of Congress or even the White House and then stymie all climate legislation—whether sensible or not—for years to come.

      There is a way to resuscitate the Green New Deal, and to harness the energy behind it. Its vagueness could be a virtue. Ms Ocasio-Cortez could retain the enthusiasm while rewriting the underlying policy so that it addresses a single issue—climate change. She and fellow progressives could make their enthusiastic pitches for universal health care, affordable housing, and boosting unions separately. Until then, the Green New Deal is unlikely to do anything to slow climate change. It may even get in the way of that goal.”

      http://discovery.economist.com/features/the-problem-with-the-green-new-deal?kw=all&csid=socialtpr&ref=features&qq=ok12

      • Griff.

         /  February 13, 2019

        You do know thats a load of dribble ?
        for instance

        The little details, like how to pay for universal health care

        The USA spends 17% of its GDP on its health care system .
        The rest of the west spends about 9% of their smaller GDP on their single payer socialist systems.
        Before you claim the USA has better health care.
        Guess who lives longer ?
        Still right wing who needs facts when you can cut and paste bullshite right wing think tank sourced opinions?

        FWIW
        I did check
        No by line on the bullshite I will bet it comes from some right wing talking point mill like CATO.

        It even pushes such dead ends as Nuclear power , carbon capture and storage
        rofl
        Really…..shows how stupid and badly informed they think you are .

        • High Flying Duck

           /  February 13, 2019

          Take it up with the Economist, who are generally progressive wannabies and should be all for this.
          The Green Deal is hopelessly economically illiterate (as is AOC) and this article isn’t the only one to point out that it is a hot air fest full of worthy goals and no plan to implement – it is drivel:

          https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/2/11/18220163/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-green-new-deal-faq-tucker-carlson

          https://www.aei.org/publication/the-fatal-flaw-of-the-green-new-deal-is-that-it-doesnt-take-climate-change-seriously/

          https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/01/15/the-trouble-with-the-green-new-deal-223977

          “Many observers believe that the programme is high on ambition but is not a practical plan to tackle climate change.

          “I’m afraid I just cannot see how we could possibly go to zero carbon in the 10-year timeframe,” said former US energy secretary Ernest Moniz speaking to NPR.

          “It’s just impractical. And if we start putting out impractical targets, we may lose a lot of key constituencies who we need to bring along to have a real low-carbon solution on the most rapid timeframe that we can achieve.”

          As well as problems on the practicality of the plan, there are political issues as well.

          While the project has support from the more left-leaning Democrats in the House and Senate, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi appeared less than enthusiastic initially.

          “It will be one of several or maybe many suggestions that we receive,” she said. “The green dream, or whatever they call it, nobody knows what it is, but they’re for it, right?”

          https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-47198581

          https://www.forbes.com/sites/rhockett/2019/01/16/the-green-new-deal-how-we-will-pay-for-it-isnt-a-thing-and-inflation-isnt-either/#33f112544d7f

        • David

           /  February 13, 2019

          The reason why Americans have lower life expectancy is due now to the opiod crisis, thank you Obama who didnt care because it happened in flyover country, and because they like to shoot one another again thanks Democrats because 96% of it happens in their districts to black and hispanics by black and hispanic folk…but Trump says hurty things on twitter.

          • Griff.

             /  February 13, 2019

            The USA has always had a lower life expectancy.
            If you dont have the money you cannot get good treatment so you die.
            The opioid crisis has only made a dent over the last couple of years.
            As to the rest.
            The only pain is hurt ribs laughing at the stupidity of trumpnuckles and the dribble Trump posts on twitter.
            You really are the ultimate gullible low info suckers being scammed by a snake oil salesman from way back.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  February 13, 2019

              If you’re a fan of AOC’s economic acumen despite the innumerable times she has been shown to be completely inept at anything fiscal, then I’m not surprised you spend a lot of time on the floor manically chuckling to yourself – you’re just her target demographic.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  February 13, 2019

              You will note that the critics of the Green deal are not anti its aims in any way – in fact most are 100% in favour of the goals. It is the fantasy land implementation they struggle with.

            • High Flying Duck

               /  February 13, 2019

            • Griff.

               /  February 13, 2019

              The green new deal is a inspirational goal signalling A clear direction to go in. Much of the socialist lean is already accepted policy in this country by all our political party’s .
              I might not agree with all the details such as pushing unions to strongly.

              Its a hell of a lot better that the USA right wing conspiracy gibbering its not happening bring back coal nonsense.

              As I have said many times .
              If the right dont engage with climate change the only way forward is the left.

              Dont like it start talking sense and come up with right wing solutions rather than posting denial bullshite from crank sources and gibbering nonsense like a bunch of fuckin loons .

            • Griff.

               /  February 13, 2019

              By the way duck
              A long time ago I discovered I was an economic illiterate.
              So I did a 101 economics paper just so I do have an idea .

          • Duker

             /  February 13, 2019

            Economics 101 is for illiterates, likely the same course 25 years ago would be laughed at now, same with what ever mumbo jumbo you were taught…although to be honest a lot of science too is like that

            • Griff.

               /  February 13, 2019

              Oh do fuck off.
              I did it about fifteenth years ago. Work wanted me to do some waste of time basic windows course so Instead I had them pay my fees to do both 101 computing and 101 economics part time..
              Basic Economics theory doesn’t change that much in that short a period of time.

              And son
              Hard sciences at anything up to 3rd year bsc level is pretty much the same for decades. They have not yet re wrtten the general theory of relativity 1916 or re jigged the periodic table since 1943. Some of the electives change a little with technology advances but the basics has been laid down for generations.

              In short you have no fuckin idea about what you are talking about.

            • Pink David

               /  February 13, 2019

              “re jigged the periodic table since 1943”

              errr….wasn’t it rejigged in 2016? 4 new elements were added.

            • Griff.

               /  February 13, 2019

              This dates from the Mendeleev’s theory of the periodic table in 1867 one of the new elements recently added 118 is proposed even then .

              When they say added what they mean is they have actually confirmed they can exist rather than only hypothetically.
              We are still waiting for 120.
              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbinilium

              Using Mendeleev’s nomenclature for unnamed and undiscovered elements, unbinilium should be known as eka-radium. Using the 1979 IUPAC recommendations, the element should be temporarily called unbinilium (symbol Ubn) until it is discovered, the discovery is confirmed, and a permanent name chosen.[39] Although unbinilium is widely used in the chemical community on all levels, from chemistry classrooms to advanced textbooks, scientists who work theoretically or experimentally on superheavy elements typically call it “element 120”, with the symbol E120, (120) or 120.[1]

  6. High Flying Duck

     /  February 13, 2019

    • Griff.

       /  February 13, 2019

      Oh dear
      yip duck
      Record warm and record drought has nothing to with fires
      At all ever.
      Meantime back on planet earth referencing actual scientists.
      https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mismanagement-isn-t-blame-california-wildfires-scientists-say-bucking-trump-n935426

      But scientists and fire officials say that climate change — and the dried out trees and shrubs produced by a changing environment — are the real culprits.

      Asked about Trump’s claim on Monday, one of the fire officials in charge of battling Southern California’s Woosely Fire, Los Angeles County Fire Chief Daryl Osby, said he found it “unsatisfactory.”

      “We’re in extreme climate change right now,” Obsy said. “We’re doing all that we can to prevent incidents and mitigate incidents and save lives.”

      University of Utah fire scientist Philip Dennison said that researchers know that mismanagement isn’t to blame because some of the same areas now burning were charred in 2005 and 2008.

      They aren’t “fuel-choked closed-canopy forests,” Dennison said.

      In those earlier fires, Paradise was threatened but escaped major damage, he said. In the current blazes, the town was virtually destroyed.

      The other major fire, in Southern California, burned through shrub land, not forest, Dennison said.

      “It’s not about forest management,” he said. “These aren’t forests.”

      The dean of the University of Michigan’s environmental school, Jonathan Overpeck, said Western fires are getting bigger and more severe. He said it “is much less due to bad management and is instead the result of our baking of our forests, woodlands and grasslands with ever-worsening climate change.”

      Wildfires have become more devastating because of the extreme weather swings from global warming, fire scientists said. The average number of U.S. acres burned by wildfires has doubled over the level from 30 years ago.

      Well I never! actual qualified wild fire experts disagree with what some gibbering nutbar at brietbart and a random mining geologists says.
      Even more evidence how easily mislead the gullible righties are on here .

      • David

         /  February 13, 2019

        California doesnt manage its forests properly and the outgoing Governor finally made the changes as he was leaving. California has always been hot and dry its nothing new and it is the only state that has these regular catastrophic fires, its piss poor management like pretty much everything in California.

        “And the bills signed by Gov. Brown after the end of the 2018 legislative session in September represent a stark break from past fire management practice.

        SB 1260, passed on the last day of session on August 31, makes three key policy changes: It makes it easier for California and private parties to conduct prescribed and controlled burns, it largely removes air quality impediments to preventive burns; and, it addresses the issue of environmental quality concerns and lawsuits slowing or stopping needed burns.

        The other bill, SB 901, also passed on the last day of session, appropriates $190 million a year to “improve forest health and fire prevention” and use prescribed burns to reduce the fuel load.

        Had these policy reforms been in place for the past 20 years, along with parallel federal policies, there is no doubt California would have prevented recent years’ steep loss of life and destruction of property.”

      • Duker

         /  February 13, 2019

        Weather isn’t climate..surely you know the definition of climate…which says that the California climate makes one of the highest fire prone areas in the world.

        • Griff.

           /  February 13, 2019

          Let’s start with the data for acres burned by wildfire in California

          The presence of a trend is clear. And, clearly it’s not linear.

          But we do know temperature and rainfall (we’ll use the May-Oct averages) should influence wildfire area, from basic physics: hotter and dryer means more flammable. They certainly are correlated to wildfire area, just from a plot of each year’s average temperature (May-Oct) against its total rainfall (May-Oct), with circles showing the area burned:

          Let’s try something crazy. Let’s model the logarithm of wildfire area using time (to represent a general trend) and temperature and rainfall. That will really test the influence of temperature and rainfall, because to have a significant impact they’ll have to do more than just follow the common trend. This model fits considerably better than the others, with the lowest AIC (Akaike Information Criterion) and lowest BIC (Bayesian Information Criterion) by far, and here it is:

  7. Corky

     /  February 13, 2019

    I wonder what the government will do with our Polytechnics?

    My guess, being socialists, things may go back to central control?

    • Corky

       /  February 13, 2019

      Notch in your belt, Corky. Although you’d have to be a fool not to have guessed this.

      • Kitty Catkin

         /  February 13, 2019

        ‘Self praise is no recommendation.’

        • Corky

           /  February 13, 2019

          It was a parody for you.. enjoy.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  February 13, 2019

            I doubt that. You are so embroiled in conceit that you almost certainly meant it.

            • Corky

               /  February 13, 2019

              Conceit ?

              That from one who condescendingly lists her education credentials at the drop of a hat. Who tells us many times over of her worldly travels.

              If I’m conceited, I’m definitely not in your league.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  February 15, 2019

              I list thosr things when you attempt to put me down; I don’t do it gratuitously. You often abuse me for being totally ignorant; I am not. I am not conceited about these things; people I know take it for granted that one goes to university and travels to different countries.

              Your boasting is mostly hot air and nonsense.

              If you sneer at people who know more and have done more than you, you must expect to be corrected. And I do. You called me totally ignorant because I haven’t made a cloudbuster (I have better things to do with my time) and are frequently abusive.

              You are the most conceited person I have come across recently, and it’s based upon nothing.

              C

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  February 15, 2019

              You see it as condescending; I see it as an obvious reply to being told that I need to be better educated or am totally ignorant and all the other untrue insults that you write. What do you expect ?

    • Duker

       /  February 13, 2019

      Central control? Last year was a $100 mill bailout…maybe the same again this year.
      As the taxpayers are paying both funding for students , funds for polytechs and bailouts don’t you think the Piper should call the tune. As the places are rife with corruption and mismanagement…the Hamilton one was just the most recent example

  8. High Flying Duck

     /  February 13, 2019

    Proof the moon landings never happened – your eyes will be opened!

    • Corky

       /  February 13, 2019

      This dude is on to something, High Flyer. I always said that Vam Diesel belt is a weak point for proving man went to the moon.

      • Gezza

         /  February 13, 2019

        😳
        That’s the Vin Diesel Belts, Corks.

        Certainly the best collection of arguments I’ve seen yet to prove that man obviously couldn’t have really landed on the moon. 😀

      • Blazer

         /  February 13, 2019

        the moon is made of blue cheese Corky..don’t tell anyone.

  9. PartisanZ

     /  February 13, 2019

    The REAL news of today –

    ‘Polytechnic mega-merger will take over apprentices and industry trainees’ – Heraldo

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12203337

    “A new national body will take over all of New Zealand’s 110,000 polytechnic students and 140,000 apprentices and industry trainees in a massive shakeup proposed today … The proposed NZ Institute of Skills and Technology will take over programme design and administration for all campuses of what are now 16 separate polytechnics.”

    Aside from general rationality – which has clearly been missing since the 1990s for some reason – [could it have been absorption of the neoliberal unemployed into ‘higher education’?] – and the obvious benefits to numerous industries – perhaps especially construction – I wonder if this move anticipates a drop in overseas student numbers … part of deteriorating relations with China … along with fewer overseas immigrants … ???

    Confuscious say, “Kill many birds with one stone”

    • Blazer

       /  February 13, 2019

      Confucious say ‘Kill many birds with one stone”..u sure!

      flock ..off.

      • PartisanZ

         /  February 13, 2019

        We already flocked off … We trying to flock back on again!

      • Patu

         /  February 13, 2019

        Confucious say “Man who walk thru’ airport turnstile sideways is going to Bangkok” 😉

  10. PartisanZ

     /  February 13, 2019

    ‘Northland man, 95, attacked by dog again after beloved pet was killed’ – Stuff

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/northland/110556831/northland-man-95-attacked-by-dogs-again-after-beloved-dog-was-killed

    Honestly, where’s some officially sanctioned Dirty Harry character when you really need him?

    Like a policeman maybe …?

    “Make my day pooch!” ………………. BANG!!!!

    • Corky

       /  February 13, 2019

      Something we can agree on, Parti. Violence isn’t all bad..especially if the bad guys are on the receiving end.