Hard News: Conversation Starters
401 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 17 Newer→ Last
-
Rather than changing the law, use the provisions and use them hard. Revoke liquor licences permanently on a second offence. Suspend for a week on a first offence. Levy maximum fines on everyone who's found breaching the law.
Fewer laws, more strictly enforced. It has a bit going for it.
-
Rather than changing the law, use the provisions and use them hard.
They are using the law rather better than before. I seem to recollect an acquaintance making laminated ID cards for an enterprise that featured a date of birth. IDing is clearly more vigorous, and to a better standard of ID than before the law change. Anyone remember the old paper driver's licence?
-
It''s not quite the same thing as an economy that makes things and sustains billions of people.
I think a case can be made that climate change is a direct result of capitalism. Capitalism is beleaguered by short-term, narrow thinking that results in some very bad outcomes.
I agree with Chomsky's comments that large corporations are "unaccountable private tyrannies" that are "pathological" in their behaviour.
When considering what to do about the injustices that are direct result of capitalist activities, it can be pretty tempting to simply ban capitalism outright and implement whatever scheme you want. Revolutions are expensive and certainly not worth the risk, IMO. Evolution is a better approach.
The problem with capitalism is not that it doesn't work, it's just that the parameters in which it operates enable it to engage in some negative practices without direct accountability. Capitalism values activity using our currency i.e. money. It is perhaps the best mechanism we have for doing this. The problem is that money is not a measure of all things, and anything that does not fit is not counted. There is no automatic feedback loop for the negative consequences of capital activity. Sure, you can have regulations etc, but it is often the case that lobbying is seen as more cost-effective than compliance.
The solution is to change the parameters in such a way that they are part of the system of capitalism, and not simply removable add-ons.
My proposal would be to extend our currency system to have three currencies instead of one. There would be three measures of value in any transaction; Capital value (i.e. money as we now know it), Social value and Environmental value aka blue, red and green $$.
Leave the market to setting blue$, as it is now. We would need different mechanisms for setting red$ and green$ values (and I would be inclined to initially disqualify non-natural entities from assisting to set the values). Exchange between the currencies would be illegal and it is assumed that a black market would therefore kept small enough to be manageable.
There is considerable scope for tailoring values to specific local considerations.
This system would mean that every single economic transaction would incorporate social and environmental considerations. Moreover, innovation would find ways to minimise theses costs, which means, in effect, the market would seek positive outcomes for all capital, social and/or environmental activities.
The downside is that this system requires some pretty significant IT infrastructure to make it seamless integrate across the entire economy, but I do not expect this to be by any means prohibitive.
This approach is less Smash-The-State anarchism, more a Tame-The-State anarchism.
Also, you could still be very wealthy in this system, but you won't be able to do it by wrecking stuff.
-
They are using the law rather better than before.
It's in the nature of the news media that we're always treating the present as a crisis.
I recall leaving through back issues of Playdate , New Zealand's first pop magazine in the 1960s, and seeing ads touting the potency of gutrot like Gimlet and Screwdriver -- which basically there to get young people really pissed.
And back then, of course, everyone drove drunk and the road toll was crazy.
-
Exchange between the currencies would be illegal and it is assumed that a black market would therefore kept small enough to be manageable.
I think that would guarantee the emergence of a black market, but it's an intriguing idea -- sort of carbon credits writ large.
-
I think that would guarantee the emergence of a black market
Yes, I think it's unavoidable. But it should prevent routine undermining of the intentions of the system by entities that have lots of cash.
A bit like when developers pay a small fine for wrecking something valuable (e.g. an old tree or a protected building), but stand to make killing in the process. That kind of trade-off would largely disappear.
-
And I'd rather have the Gypsy Tearooms in Grey Lynn than some vile place run by a licensing trust.
And I'd rather have the licensing trusts who plow the profits back into local organizations such as Plunket, soccer clubs and Surf rescue or free home first aid kits for local residents than some vile multinational corp that promptly sucks the money out of the country.
-
I seem to recollect an acquaintance making laminated ID cards for an enterprise that featured a date of birth. IDing is clearly more vigorous, and to a better standard of ID than before the law change. Anyone remember the old paper driver's licence?
The presence of photo drivers' licences made the law change a lot easier to enforce. Once it was established that the only acceptable forms of ID must be Gazetted, and must carry a photo, rather than allowing anything that purported to carry the DoB of the holder, it became completely indefensible for establishments to accept low-grade fake ID. They couldn't claim that "I thought it was OK", because they had been told precisely what was allowable.
Personally I think the accepted forms are a little bit restrictive, and that firearms licences (no, I don't have one) should also be allowed. But I understand the logic behind having a very small number of permitted types of ID, agree with it in general. -
And I'd rather have the licensing trusts who plow the profits back into local organizations such as Plunket, soccer clubs and Surf rescue or free home first aid kits for local residents than some vile multinational corp that promptly sucks the money out of the country.
Even if most of their profits come from pokies?
-
A bit like when developers pay a small fine for wrecking something valuable (e.g. an old tree or a protected building), but stand to make killing in the process. That kind of trade-off would largely disappear.
That's the Judiciary's fault, as much as anything. The law allows for very creative solutions that totally destroy the potential profit from such actions. Witness the developer (whose name I forget) who cut down protected pohutukawa on a site he wanted to subdivide in Royal Oak, even after being explicitly told that they were protected. The judge sentenced him to some moderate fine (I think it was in the vicinity of $20k, which was certainly far less than the upside potential of being able to subdivide the site), and also ordered him to plant and maintain to maturity replacement pohutukawa. So not only did he not get to sub the property, he also had to make good on his destructive actions. Yes the original trees were gone, but they were being replaced in a way that completely subverted the intent behind their destruction. We need more judicial behaviour in that vein, because if it became commonplace for developers to get absolutely nowhere with destructive behaviour they'd probably eventually get the message. Or they'd lobby for a law change, and hopefully the public outrage in the submissions on such a change would dissuade any government stupid enough to contemplate such a thing.
-
The downside is that this system requires some pretty significant IT infrastructure to make it seamless integrate across the entire economy, but I do not expect this to be by any means prohibitive.
You mean like replacing/re-writing/upgrading every single computer system in the country that deals with any sort of monetary transaction ?
That shouldn't cost much should it ?
-
ordered him to plant and maintain to maturity replacement pohutukawa
On the same site, that is. So he couldn't subdivide because the trees had to be planted in such a way that the site had to be kept intact.
-
Even if most of their profits come from pokies?
Well since you wish to bring a cute wee strawman out of his hidey hole........
I'd wager there are less pokies ins the Waitakere licensing area than there are in central Ak or in non trust areas like south Auckland. -
Well since you wish to bring a cute wee strawman out of his hidey hole.
Profits from pokies are also 'plowed back' into the community in non-trust areas. Licensing Trusts, like Gaming Trusts, are required to do this by law. It's not altruistic.
But back on topic. I grew up in a trust area in the South Island, and as far as I can tell, Trusts are core purveyors of the stupid drinking ethic that is the problem. Their bread and butter is big barn style drinking, reminiscent of the 6 o'clock swill, or the bar that Jake the Muss frequents in Warriors. And trusts typically prevent restaurants and cafes having licences, the kinds of places you'd expect to see a better drinking culture.
-
And how would this anarchist state (if that is not an oxymoron) get started?
Mikaere has suggested how, and it fits precisely with centruy-old ideas of anarchism developing within the shell of capitalism, as a consequence of exasperation, the weight of injustice, or a global crisis. At the moment it's hard to see it coming from Western societies - we're all too busy programming our iPods. But you never know, and there are plenty of other societies, some of them rather populous.
I agree with Chomsky's comments that large corporations are "unaccountable private tyrannies" that are "pathological" in their behaviour.
And he's a self-avowed anarcho-syndacalist, isn't he?
But weren't we going to smash the state anyway?
Did you learn everything you know about anarchism from a chocolate-wrapper? If you give me your address I'll send you some, er, pamphlets. In all seriousness.
Just possibly not nearly as well. Would the personal computer you're using be anywhere near as good if its technologies had not been forged in the contest of a market? Would we have even known that people wanted computers for their personal selves?
It just may be that what the world needs is social justice and fewer wars and a functioning climate ahead of Windows 7 and the latest Leopard OS. Just a thought. But even so, there are plenty of views of anarchism that are compatible with the aggressive pursuit of technological progress. Communications technologies in particular.
Don't the anarchists then have to form some sort of authority to stop authorities forming?
Presumably, or some mechanism of defence of the status quo - but it's hard to imagine a society that evolves into anarchism, and therefore the conditions in which such struggles might take place. In the real existing world, however, anarchists haven't all been pacifists of course. Many came from afar and died to defend Spain from fascism, for instance. And I'm no anarchist myself, but the closest thing I have to a personal hero is Gaetano Bresci, the killer of king Umberto I, and he was. Not all shirking violets, in other words.
-
How's capitalism working for a lot of people? Until such time as it starts catering for everyone, I shall remain grateful that there are people who advance alternative philosophies.
Couple of points: firstly one of capitalism's great strength is it isn't a philosophy, or at least it didn't start as one.
It just evolved out of people buying, selling, and trading with each other. Inother words, it evolved out of people just doing stuff naturally.
It wasn't dreamed up by, for example, some social misfit sitting in the British Museum Library. Having evolved, was retrospectively defined.
Which is one of its weaknesses - it tends to be defined by its enemies.
Isn't it ironic how pro-capitalists never mention that the people in abject poverty that their beloved system creates (or tolerates) are ultimately looked after by people - including plenty of religious organisations - who are themselves anti-capitalists?
non rather than anti-capitalist, I think. And they do mention such groups. Start with - I think - Burke's 'little platoons' of social groups of the kind you mention. Also look at more latter day work by communutarian writers such as David Selbourne. Fukuyama has had arather a lot to say about this as well.
-
That's the Judiciary's fault, as much as anything.
I agree that the judiciary need to take a stronger line one this kind of behaviour. IIRC, some guy went to jail for a few months in 2007 for repeatedly destroying native bush in the Waitekeres, but that's quite uncommon.
In my proposed system, if such a developer would be charged in social and/or environmental $ for the infringement. Since they wouldn't be able to simply convert blue$ to green or red, they wouldn't be able to count on using the capital appreciation flowing from the vandalism to pay for an fines. They would need to earn that red/green money on the sale of the development, which basically puts one of the prices up and makes the deal more expensive.
You mean like replacing/re-writing/upgrading every single computer system in the country that deals with any sort of monetary transaction ?
That shouldn't cost much should it ?
I've been writing banking software since '98, and IMO it's not that big a deal. Sure, it's non trivial and probably expensive to implement, but you wouldn't need any technological breakthroughs, just a lot of coding. In effect, we would have three times as many bank accounts, and inter-system protocols would need to support three values rather than one transaction value.
Given how much effort went in to Y2K, I think it's a doable proposition.
Also, this would be a great opportunity for some government-sponsored FOSS projects that could provide tools to assist businesses to track and calculate the triple currency values.
-
Couple of points: firstly one of capitalism's great strength is it isn't a philosophy, or at least it didn't start as one.
Neither did collectivism. And besides, capitalism is so a philosophy these days. We'd better hope that the twenty years are going to be more Jopseph Stiglitz than Milton Friedman, wouldn't you say?
And they domention such groups. Start with - I think - Burke's 'little platoons' of social groups of the kind you mention. Also look at more latter day work by communutarian writers such as David Selbourne. Fukuyama has had arather a lot to say about this as well.
You're just ruining my lumping now. Umph.
-
And besides, capitalism is so a philosophy these days.
Well, it has become one, or at least an attempt at one
I think that's been a massive wrong turn, but that's a whole thesis away...
-
It wasn't dreamed up by, for example, some social misfit sitting in the British Museum Library.
It could just as validly be argued that the 19th C. robber barons over which Marx became so exercised were social misfits. Takes one to know one.
-
I work part-time in a wine shop and have done so for the last four years. My observations;
1 - I do think it's a question of culture. The oft-vaunted French model where everyone is a model of sensible drinking is just that - a model - given the high drink driving rate that they have, and probably, just like Kiwi teenagers, Parisian and Bordeaux teenagers do get together and get riotously drunk. That's what teenagers do.
However, in tasting/drinking French and Italian wines, I've observed that they tend to be dryer than NZ wines. This puzzled me until I watched Jamie Oliver's cooking program a few years back where he did a road trip through Italy. Noticed how at every meal there was wine? And notice that wine wasn't drunk on it's own - i.e. where-ever there was wine there was food.
I realised that the French and Italian's build their wine to go with food, and have been doing so for centuries. I think there is much to be said for creating a culture where alcohol is served with food, and I mean *with* food, rather than food being a kind of adjunct to the wine. Our wines here are generally quaffing wines - to be drunk perfectly well on their own.
I believe that our culture has to change, that we have to see wine and beer as part of an experience - good food *and* good wine/beer. This will take time.
And let's not forget, we model our behaviour from our elders. If we were serious about the young getting trollyed, then we, as adults need to modify our behaviour so that we model different kinds of behaviour patterns around alcohol.
2 - I have observed that the young, until about 25, have undeveloped taste buds. They can't discriminate clearly between different kinds of tastes, or the dimensions, or quality of them. Which is why they prefer sweet alcohol RTDs - one dimensional taste sensations. Wine/beer (the crafted sort) is perceived as too sour.
A good way to 'educate' taste buds is for the parents/guardians to consistently taste wine/beer alongside youngsters, and discuss what they are tasting. Which is what the French and Italians do with their children.
Talking about taste sensations will mean that youngsters will be paying more attention to what they are drinking/eating, and hence I suspect less likely to get blind drunk when they start experimenting with alcohol outside of parental control.
3 - I work in an upmarket wine shop. I have observed that the publicly visible problems (drunk teenagers, violence) stemming from alcohol abuse tend to be associated with alcohol outlets that are simply selling alcohol to make a profit, i.e. low market outlets. It's not the size of the outlet that is a problem, it's the ethos of the outlet.
(Wealthy customers simply go home and beat their partners behind the high fences and walls in Remuera/Khandallah/Fendalton etc. Not public at all)
4 - Alcohol is profitable. Which is why one sees so many outlets around the place. However, in our neo-conservative times, and in the time when the Liquor Licensing Act was enacted, profit is king, and the state cannot meddle in the making of profit.
Which is why enforcement currently is a joke. Outlets breaking the law are usually closed for a day or two, and normally outside of peak trading periods. Who is the Licensing Authority to deny someone's livelihood?
Unless we change the message that with profit comes responsibility towards society, then enforcement of the rules will be light.
Tougher rules will mean grappling with issues such as what to do with innocent employees of outlets that are closed (put them on the dole?), and how to prevent an operator from simply setting up another company and opening up again?
Alcohol is a complex subject (and substance! all that taste and smell from some grapes and yeast?!!) - but the answers are I believe cultural.
-
Back to Gaza (and thanks for making a thread for it so we don't interrupt the holiday/travel stories):
I/S, thanks for the link. Great summary.
Gary Kamiya has a thoughtful piece about the US's special treatment of Israel.
Because Israel came into existence in the shadow of the Holocaust, and because it was immediately attacked by Arab states bent on destroying it, it has become an eternal victim in America's eyes.
The historical truths of Israel's creation, above all the fact of Palestinian dispossession, simply cannot compete with the tragic, beautiful myth of an embattled people, the survivors of one of the worst genocides in human history, returning to live in their historic homeland.
-
Call in an airstrike. Seems only fair.
-
Call in an airstrike. Seems only fair
I feel I should not have LOL'd at that.
-
I would also like to point out that I once chanced upon myself being described as an "extreme Marxist" in the forums of Trade Me. Awesome.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.