Posts by Bart Janssen
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
And this is why polls should be banned.
They are increasingly wrong, both inaccurate, that is they fail to predict the actual result, and imprecise, that is they are so variable that anyone with any statistical experience dismisses them as nonsense.
But they influence voters. So something utterly wrong changes people's votes and that should be banned.
-
Speaker: Low-quality language on immigration, in reply to william blake,
substantively about overseas ownership
Yeah but there were much better ways of demonstrating that the money had to be from overseas investors than using last names of registered buyers. It was stupid.
More importantly it allowed the government to ignore the actual problem of ridiculous levels of foreign investment in the residential market. That suited the government because their constituents and donors were the ones profiting from that investment at the expense of those unable to buy a first home.
In general we need overseas investment because we lack a large internal pool of money to invest in large ventures (kiwisaver is solving some of that). But very few countries allow overseas investment in residential property and that certainly is of very little benefit to NZ.
For Labour to utterly drop the ball on addressing that issue was an awful screw up. That they alienated a chunk of the community compounded that screw up. It left Labour unable to address either excessive immigration rates or the housing market and demonstrated an alarming level of incompetence.
-
Speaker: Low-quality language on immigration, in reply to Moz,
first accept immigrants we desperately need (the "really really skilled immigrant" category)
My issue with this is the reason we need them is because we've failed to educate residents to fill those roles. Sure in an emergency get them as immigrants but surely you'd be trying to fix the system that failed to train enough in the first place.
Ironically one reason we are seeing these issues in the health system is the sharp rise in population due to immigration.
To be honest I'd be happiest with your list in reverse order :) but that's probably just me.
-
I thought this was the really interesting quote
The politicians all agreed immigration was crucial to a thriving Aotearoa.
I'd happily triple our refugee quota (or more) because it's the humane thing to do.
But why is immigration "crucial"? Yes we need some immigration, if for no other reason than to balance emigration. But the idea that it's a good way to create some kind of utopia or improve our economy, that I just don't understand. How about we try and improve the society we have instead of using immigrants to provide some kind of panacea (and yeah I know our GDP increases lately have derived almost entirely from immigration).
If you view immigration as an economic tool (like all good neo-libs do) then you ultimately end up making value judgements on the quality of the people you let immigrate. Play with the words all you like that path is inherently inhumane.
I'd be far more comfortable using immigration as a tool to increase diversity than as a tool to increase NZ's wealth. How about a quota system that demanded a certain percentage from every part of the globe?
-
Worth remembering also that we are all different genetically. Almost every person on the planet will respond differently to these compounds. From differences in the actual receptor being targeted to differences in the way the liver will detoxify the compounds.
In most cases the differences will be slight and academic but it's also possible that some folks will react very differently to exactly the same compound and dose.
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to ,
Am I wrong ?
You're neither entirely wrong nor entirely right. Which is true of almost everyone expressing opinions.
However, the question for me is "Is what we are focusing on going to improve the well-being of New Zealanders?"
What has made me angry and upset is that rather than addressing the issues Metiria raised, and policies that might improve things, the response has largely been one of attacking the person. Exacerbating that anger has been the overt and covert sexism and racism in the way Ms Turei has been examined.
That behaviour is to be expected in the social media (sadly) but for the MSM to behave that way is really disappointing.
And then when she resigns, for the media to proclaim "it wasn't our fault, what did she expect if she bends over of course we'll kick her and stomp on her once she's down" is disgusting. Some people need to check their humanity.
But yeah, she isn't poor now and she was trying to get votes as well. But that doesn't make what happened since right or good or something for which New Zealanders can be proud.
-
It would be nice if one of the media that went after Metiria so enthusiastically had an extended investigative journalism series about how our welfare system is failing the very poor and how the hostile approach of WINZ is doing more harm than good.
You know - for the public good.
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to simon g,
Audrey Young's throwaway line in the Herald says it all, really:
One of my colleagues spent several hours buried in the National Library this week trying to track down her flatmates from that time.
While all this was happening, the Panama Papers fallout continued, reported by a few (Matt Nippert), ignored by most. TLDR: Key was wrong, his critics were right, and many millions of dollars were at stake. Sir John could not be reached for comment (because nobody bothered).
Which is my problem with this as well.
Our media, including John Campbell and Checkpoint (of whom I expected better), spent a huge effort going after Metiria and framing her "crime" even to the extent of condemning her for not becoming a drug dealer.
Yet we have a PM who has demonstrated he is completely comfortable with ripping off the taxpayer if it can be squeezed past a lawyer and happy to have the taxpayer continue the salary of an MP who recorded private conversations (possibly between aforesaid PM and a staff member).
Where are the nightly updates on that investigation? How many checkpoint journalists are digging through Mr Barclay's life history, or heaven forfend, Mr English's tax records?
Our media need to have a long hard look at themselves and ask themselves just how balanced are they? And are they really serving the best interests of the public with where they have placed their effort?
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to izogi,
but maybe that's just me as someone who really would like the discussion to be about poverty
Nope me too.
And as an aside can people stop saying The Green stole Labour constituency by talking about poverty - because up until then Little had been largely silent. Essentially The Greens picked up a ball that Labour was trying very hard to ignore.
Even now where is Labour's strong policy on social welfare, what exactly is Labour going to specifically do to lift up those who are really struggling. Sure we've heard about housing, which is part of it, and tax fairness, and general stuff that will indirectly help. But frankly right now I want to see some of my tax spent directly and specifically helping the very very poor and the only party willing to suggest that is The Greens.
So hardly cannibalising anything even if Mr Hickey thinks it's a cool headline.
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to Paul Campbell,
Metiria is shining the public spotlight on this ugly corner of our society
The problem as always is a lazy, under-resourced, inexperienced media.
It was always much easier to chase after the "Meteria story" than to dive into the morass of our welfare system and drag the problems into the light.
Even now places that promised better journalism (The Newsroom) are far happier talking about the politicians and politics than actually looking hard at the issues Ms Turei raised and the policies that created them.
You can proclaim all you like that "it was always going to be about her" but that is just accepting the Garners and Gowers as normal and right.