Posts by bmk
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: #NetHui: it's all about you, in reply to Sacha,
Yes I understand that. Was just making (I guess kind of randomly - not even sure how it was meant to tie in with what was being discussed) the observation that a lot of people who need to show how wealthy they are often aren't at all.
-
The funny thing is how (in my experience) people with lots of money and expensive lifestyles have told me about how the two are different sets of people. A lot of people with loads of money live relatively normal lives, living in a fairly average house and having a nice car but nothing extravagant. Whereas the people living in mansions with expensive cars seldom had that high a net worth as they had massively high debt.
When I thought about this it made sense in that the people who lived averagely while earning a lot would accumulate wealth. While people who live an expensive lifestyle would probably spend it as fast as they earn it.
As people the first group are far more pleasant than the second group. I have nothing against people who have a lot of money. But people who want everyone to know that they have more money than you aren't as easy to like.
-
Legal Beagle: Referendum Fact Check #2:…, in reply to BenWilson,
To me its good that people for whom animal rights is their key issue can have a say and legislate against cruelty. Their not prohibiting the religion just saying they can't practise the cruel parts of it in this country.
People complain about small single-issue parties. But to the people who vote for them those single-issues must mean a great deal (or else they would vote for a party with more policies) and this way they can use their vote to influence this issue.
And if what the small parties want is to extreme then the two major parties could always go into coalition. One would hope that if National and Labour had to choose between going into coalition with each other or forming a govt. with a fundamentalist christian party or white supremacy party they would choose to go into coaliton with each other. People say they would never do this as this would mean the death of one of the parties but I just can't buy this. People would still see them as separate parties and I know in Germany this grand coalition has happened without either party being wiped out afterward.
In many ways if say National and Labour were to go into coalition together you would have the most representative government with most people having supported one of the two parties. Also you think this would make less drastic swings in policy between left and right from government to government.
-
Hard News: #NetHui: it's all about you, in reply to Bart Janssen,
They once tried to block Trademe here but apparently the CEO was trying to sell his boat and that quickly got changed.
That is one of this things that is so funny it just has to be true. The stories I could tell about the different set of rules that apply to the top hierarchy in my company - but I better not as I can't see how to properly anonymise it and don't want to risk my job.
-
I am probably fortunate in that I work in an open-plan office with no fixed computer of my own. So I can’t really read PAS at work. I am glad of this as otherwise I fear my productivity would suffer.
But I can see how it would help other people relax and recollect their thoughts. Also can understand what was said about knowing people who would benefit from benefit from reading it.
Out of curiosity does anyone work in a place where PAS is blocked? My workplace has a very liberal policy and doesn’t appear to block anything even though Facebook and Trade Me are the most visited sites neither of which there are legitimate, work place related reasons to visit. I like this policy though – I think workplaces should let employees view pretty much anything they want. If employees abuse this then punish the employee themself rather than all employees as a whole. I can see however how some places (such as schools) couldn’t do this and would have to create a restrictive policy.
-
Hard News: #NetHui: it's all about you, in reply to Russell Brown,
PA had a higher proportion of people who read the site at work (35.48%) than any other Scoop site
You never feel guilty about the cost to the country's production you cause?:)
-
Is my memory serving me right in that she also raised the issue of deadly dihydrogen monoxide in the house?
-
Muse: That Book, The Ban That Isn't,…, in reply to Islander,
Thanks for the information. I had never known about that - that is a really good scheme that if it were done throughout the world would mean no new books would ever disappear.
-
Muse: That Book, The Ban That Isn't,…, in reply to Islander,
bmk: the national library __does__have-
Every book ever published? Or every NZ book ever published? I remember reading how every year so many books disappear never to be seen again but maybe that doesn't happen any more - would be nice to think so. I like the idea of there being a repository of every book.
-
Muse: That Book, The Ban That Isn't,…, in reply to HORansome,
Indeed, I think there's a good argument to say some library should buy it (because libraries are repositories).
Exactly. I remember being surprised when browsing my local library's history section to find several David Irving books there. But then I thought a library should stock books like that which won't be sold in regular book stores.
I mean the ideal library would have a copy of every book ever printed including the distasteful ones.