Posts by Sacha
-
Home Affairs Commitee meeting is streaming now (defaults to Windows Media Player - or can choose Silverlight instead, you lucky critters).
-
Hard News: The scandal that keeps on giving, in reply to Danyl Mclauchlan,
antagonise several groups of very powerful, ruthless people
That's a stressful thing to do.
-
Up Front: How About Now?, in reply to Idiot Savant,
the median age of marriage at divorce is 13.7 years
Interesting. Any figures on how that has changed over the last few decades?
-
Up Front: How About Now?, in reply to Emma Hart,
basic safety
Haven't been following closely, but perhaps you could point me to an explanation about this angle.
-
Hard News: The scandal that keeps on giving, in reply to Paul Williams,
in Australia, other than George Darroch
We've repatriated him.
Just you now.. -
OnPoint: Easy as 1, 2, 22.8 billion, in reply to DexterX,
Economic management with a lack of a focus on growth is the problem
Or a lack of focus on value. Including the sustainability of returns on investment (in more than just an economic sense too).
-
OnPoint: Easy as 1, 2, 22.8 billion, in reply to Andre,
the currently retiring generation voted
They still do. And too many of the rest of us don't. But it oversimplifies to take a generational snapshot as the basis of diagnosis. We all need to be part of what comes next.
-
Up Front: How About Now?, in reply to Russell Brown,
you get an iPad in the end
Sooner rather than later, if you go to a decile 9 school in Orewa.
-
Up Front: P.A. Story, in reply to Emma Hart,
Pink shirt, you say.
(and where's that attachment function gone again?)
-
OnPoint: Easy as 1, 2, 22.8 billion, in reply to BenWilson,
The theory is quite old, but the laws around contracts are older, and it's always been considered foolish to base them on decency and trust alone. An ironclad document, and a court before which disputes can be settled are basic ideas in good contracting. That's why I don't like the term used, because there's no way our relationship with the state is written down in an ironclad way, at least not on the side involving the state's obligations to us.
I believe the term *social* contract was used to differentiate it from the more literal, mechanistic interpretation you mention - not because it was identical. Though I believe there are still presumptions of good faith in both cases.