You couldn't have picked nicer weather for Waitangi Day. Wellington was wall-to-wall sun and hot as hell. I spent the day at Porirua's Festival of the Elements with an NZ Flag stall. A more multi-culural Waitangi Day, you are unlikely to see. Saw some excellent performances and heard some music from around the world. Greek dances, Korean ceremonials, Polynesian dancing, Patea Maori Club and Gary McCormick as MC. A truly Kiwi celebration.
We managed to sign over 500 people up on the petition. There were the usual "not interested" comments, but that's no biggie. Only one incident spooked me.
Early on, I had signed a couple of women up for the petition. About ten minutes later, she reappeared insisting on taking her name off the petition.
A big Maori fella wearing an Enough is Enough T-shirt turns up. He wants the Flag of the United Tribes as the national flag. "Right, sign up then," I replied. "It's already the national flag," he says. "No, it's not. But I'd have no problem if it was chosen as the national flag by Kiwis in a referendum. Sign here..."
"I'm not signing your paper. The (Flag of the United Tribes) is the national flag." His presumed wife viciously crossed out her signature and her daughter's. "You keep your papers to yourself," he warned.
Destiny and Free Will are mutually incompatible.
Sunday, February 06, 2005
Saturday, February 05, 2005
The Real and Complete goNZo Reasons for supporting the flag change debate
Adam Hunt at Public Address has made an excellent and reasonable comment on the Change the Flag campaign, which I hope to answer with equal skill. Why do I spend hours on the streets of Wellington, asking people to sign a non-binding referendum in record time in unpredictable weather, dodgy public space restrictions, and occasionally hostile responses?
Well, if truth be told, I'm mentally ill. It takes a certain madness to face insurmountable odds. Edmund Hillary should be locked up. You are absolutely right; there's no material gain by changing the cloth. This is something that can't be bought or sold. Sorry.
There are many noble causes to support in order to alleviate suffering. Wars, pollution, and poverty are nothing new and will exist for the foreseeable future. We're already on our Forth World War ( the Cold War was the Third one). Humans have been in shitting in their nests since the discovery of fire (patent not pending). Someone, somewhere is always starving. While we are striving to fix these woes, this is something that is achievable. If we want to.
Why on earth would anyone want to change the NZ flag? Well, let's look at it:
The top quarter is a Union Jack, or the Royal Union. This is comprised of the St George Cross of England
the Scottish flag
and Ireland's St. Patrick's Cross
Significant parts of Ireland are no longer held as British territory. Scotland has recently formed its own parliament. Even the English rugby teams wear St. George's Cross.
The Royal Union set on a blue background was the flag flown by the British colonial fleet, the stars differing on the colony. Fifteen stars for Cook Islands, six stars for Oz and four for us. At one time we were going to be a dependency of New South Wales and it made sense to have a similar, if inferior, flag to Australia's. Did you know the stars on our flag are different sizes? Did you care?
The New Zealand colonial ensign was used at sea and slowly adapted to land dwellings for lack of other identification. In 1902, when New Zealand was a dominion of the British Empire, it was officially adopted as the national flag. Hastily thrown together by British seamen in 1865, our current flag is a symbol of inertia.
This is not the first time an effort has been made to overcome this inertia. After WWII, the British Empire was in smoking ruins and England was getting out of the colonial business. When the Empire fell in 1950, New Zealanders were questioning the design of our flag. In the 1970s, renowned artist Friedensreich Hundertwasser (Kawa Kawa toilets) gifted the koru flag to New Zealand as a stimulus for this debate. Ask an old Kiwi and they'll tell you.
Flags are important at all sorts of times and not neccessarily at times of crises. Yes, the peaceful swastika was hijacked by some hateful ideas. Does that make it inherently evil, or was it something to do with the humans who let it happen at the time? There is a simple way to avoid the fervent nationalistic zeal that can bring symbols into disrepute. Just don't do it. Seeing as our combined miltary forces couldn't hold back a surprise attack by our nearest neighbours, the penguins in Antarctica, there is little for us to fear our flag becoming a symbol of global conquest.
Flags can be tribal things, but they also denote context and identity. More Kiwi backpackers put a silver fern or, well... a kiwi on their backpack to identify their starting point. The NZ flag? No way. There are some places in the world where mistaken identity can be fatal. Hey, we didn't vote for Bob Howard.
An old friend of mine likes taking a barge down some French river every year. Naturally, they fly the NZ flag to identify their vessel. "Fucking Brits!" yell the locals. "Fucking Kiwis!" she yells back. Immediately the locals lighten up. "Sorry about the bombs!"
Boating is a damned good reason not to have the silver fern on a black background as our national flag. On the waters, you wouldn't see it at in full moon, let alone a dark and stormy night. That's why pirates had black and white flags.
I bloody hate the NZ Flag logo. It has the sterility and moral backbone of a Nike swoosh. Nice if you're trying to sell a brand, but I agree with Adam Hunt. Kiwis can't be branded. While the silver fern is good for sports teams, and looks flash next to an adidas logo, it's not so good, for example, for our military. It is mistaken for a white feather (coward symbol) by some people. Maybe these people need to be properly educated. It's their fault. We can educate them over the gunfire.
Just as well, then, that this logo thing is merely a reference point for the debate, not some definitive choice.
Instead of just bitching about other symbols, I considered a question. If I didn't relate to the existing flag or the logo substitute on offer, what did I think would be better? So I put this together, based on the hills, the white cloud and insurmountable blue. The hills are in the wind. Hat tip Hundertwasser.
But hey, that's just my opinion. Jeffy James has got a nice one. So has Nick Wood of Rosehill College, Auckland. More designs are popping up the whole time. There are about four million Kiwis here and more abroad. Do you think between all of us, we could find something better, something that more accurately represents who we are?
Flags are dynamic things, as the evolution of the Royal Union flag shows. Hell, even the Yanks have changed their flag on numerous occasions, even if it is to add a star or 37. Before fellow Commonwealth member Canada changed its flag in 1965, 6000 design submissions were received. It is a good example of how common sense and general knowledge can help us come to the best possible answer. I hope all Kiwis take their opinions and stick 'em on paper and send them in for a go. One of us has the perfect flag, and it will be interesting to find out what it looks like.
Canada was "almost unique" in changing the flag without significant constitutional upheaval, although my late English teacher Mr Guerin would have berated me for poor word usage. If New Zealand has to wait for a revolution or civil war before looking at changing a national symbol, we'll be waiting another 150 years or more. If some people think referenda are expensive, it's certainly cheaper than civil unrest! The flag debate is not about republicanism, although there are some supporters of flag change who are republicans. When New Zealand considers this subject later on, we'll have enough to discuss among us without having to ponder a new flag too.
Machiavelli once said that one change leads the way for others. If this NZ Flag referendum is successful in motivating our representatives to actually do something, it will set a precedent for all future referenda. The NZ Flag referendum has learnt from previous attempts. The question is concise and unambiguous, as opposed to the Norm Withers petition. It is not a direct attack on our representatives' jobs, unlike Margaret Robertson's one. As far as partisan political topics go, this is pretty neutral ground. So what is the big tricky question we want the permission of our government to ask in this year's election?
"Should the design of the New Zealand flag be changed?"
If not us, then who? If not now, then when?
Well, if truth be told, I'm mentally ill. It takes a certain madness to face insurmountable odds. Edmund Hillary should be locked up. You are absolutely right; there's no material gain by changing the cloth. This is something that can't be bought or sold. Sorry.
There are many noble causes to support in order to alleviate suffering. Wars, pollution, and poverty are nothing new and will exist for the foreseeable future. We're already on our Forth World War ( the Cold War was the Third one). Humans have been in shitting in their nests since the discovery of fire (patent not pending). Someone, somewhere is always starving. While we are striving to fix these woes, this is something that is achievable. If we want to.
Why on earth would anyone want to change the NZ flag? Well, let's look at it:
The top quarter is a Union Jack, or the Royal Union. This is comprised of the St George Cross of England
the Scottish flag
and Ireland's St. Patrick's Cross
Significant parts of Ireland are no longer held as British territory. Scotland has recently formed its own parliament. Even the English rugby teams wear St. George's Cross.
The Royal Union set on a blue background was the flag flown by the British colonial fleet, the stars differing on the colony. Fifteen stars for Cook Islands, six stars for Oz and four for us. At one time we were going to be a dependency of New South Wales and it made sense to have a similar, if inferior, flag to Australia's. Did you know the stars on our flag are different sizes? Did you care?
The New Zealand colonial ensign was used at sea and slowly adapted to land dwellings for lack of other identification. In 1902, when New Zealand was a dominion of the British Empire, it was officially adopted as the national flag. Hastily thrown together by British seamen in 1865, our current flag is a symbol of inertia.
This is not the first time an effort has been made to overcome this inertia. After WWII, the British Empire was in smoking ruins and England was getting out of the colonial business. When the Empire fell in 1950, New Zealanders were questioning the design of our flag. In the 1970s, renowned artist Friedensreich Hundertwasser (Kawa Kawa toilets) gifted the koru flag to New Zealand as a stimulus for this debate. Ask an old Kiwi and they'll tell you.
Flags are important at all sorts of times and not neccessarily at times of crises. Yes, the peaceful swastika was hijacked by some hateful ideas. Does that make it inherently evil, or was it something to do with the humans who let it happen at the time? There is a simple way to avoid the fervent nationalistic zeal that can bring symbols into disrepute. Just don't do it. Seeing as our combined miltary forces couldn't hold back a surprise attack by our nearest neighbours, the penguins in Antarctica, there is little for us to fear our flag becoming a symbol of global conquest.
Flags can be tribal things, but they also denote context and identity. More Kiwi backpackers put a silver fern or, well... a kiwi on their backpack to identify their starting point. The NZ flag? No way. There are some places in the world where mistaken identity can be fatal. Hey, we didn't vote for Bob Howard.
An old friend of mine likes taking a barge down some French river every year. Naturally, they fly the NZ flag to identify their vessel. "Fucking Brits!" yell the locals. "Fucking Kiwis!" she yells back. Immediately the locals lighten up. "Sorry about the bombs!"
Boating is a damned good reason not to have the silver fern on a black background as our national flag. On the waters, you wouldn't see it at in full moon, let alone a dark and stormy night. That's why pirates had black and white flags.
I bloody hate the NZ Flag logo. It has the sterility and moral backbone of a Nike swoosh. Nice if you're trying to sell a brand, but I agree with Adam Hunt. Kiwis can't be branded. While the silver fern is good for sports teams, and looks flash next to an adidas logo, it's not so good, for example, for our military. It is mistaken for a white feather (coward symbol) by some people. Maybe these people need to be properly educated. It's their fault. We can educate them over the gunfire.
Just as well, then, that this logo thing is merely a reference point for the debate, not some definitive choice.
Instead of just bitching about other symbols, I considered a question. If I didn't relate to the existing flag or the logo substitute on offer, what did I think would be better? So I put this together, based on the hills, the white cloud and insurmountable blue. The hills are in the wind. Hat tip Hundertwasser.
But hey, that's just my opinion. Jeffy James has got a nice one. So has Nick Wood of Rosehill College, Auckland. More designs are popping up the whole time. There are about four million Kiwis here and more abroad. Do you think between all of us, we could find something better, something that more accurately represents who we are?
Flags are dynamic things, as the evolution of the Royal Union flag shows. Hell, even the Yanks have changed their flag on numerous occasions, even if it is to add a star or 37. Before fellow Commonwealth member Canada changed its flag in 1965, 6000 design submissions were received. It is a good example of how common sense and general knowledge can help us come to the best possible answer. I hope all Kiwis take their opinions and stick 'em on paper and send them in for a go. One of us has the perfect flag, and it will be interesting to find out what it looks like.
Canada was "almost unique" in changing the flag without significant constitutional upheaval, although my late English teacher Mr Guerin would have berated me for poor word usage. If New Zealand has to wait for a revolution or civil war before looking at changing a national symbol, we'll be waiting another 150 years or more. If some people think referenda are expensive, it's certainly cheaper than civil unrest! The flag debate is not about republicanism, although there are some supporters of flag change who are republicans. When New Zealand considers this subject later on, we'll have enough to discuss among us without having to ponder a new flag too.
Machiavelli once said that one change leads the way for others. If this NZ Flag referendum is successful in motivating our representatives to actually do something, it will set a precedent for all future referenda. The NZ Flag referendum has learnt from previous attempts. The question is concise and unambiguous, as opposed to the Norm Withers petition. It is not a direct attack on our representatives' jobs, unlike Margaret Robertson's one. As far as partisan political topics go, this is pretty neutral ground. So what is the big tricky question we want the permission of our government to ask in this year's election?
"Should the design of the New Zealand flag be changed?"
If not us, then who? If not now, then when?
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
I wanna get trashed with Don Brash
Oh dear. Thirty weeks out from election day, and National still haven’t got their shit together. Nor, as Mark Sainsbury pointed out on TV One, have their strategists learned anything from last year.
Katherine Rich, if she has the tenacity to stick around for another term, has done herself a world of good. Sticking to your principles is a rare and treasured commodity in politics. She’ll go far.
Judith Collins, the one who wants John Banks’ parents’ profession brought back to life, is stepping up as Jenny Shipley II. Another patronising Mother of the Nation has all the appeal of imagining one’s parents having sex.
As far as Don Brash goes, he must be feeling a bit of a Homer Simpson right now. Which is a bit of a pity. If he listened more to his gut than his Goneril, he has the possibility of winning a minority government this year.
Although I have never been formally introduced to Don Brash, I have had the chance to view him first hand on a number of occasions. The TV public persona of Geoffrey Palmer nerdiness does no justice to conversational Brash. He is a pragmatist with wit, and he knows a bit about gambling from his days at the Reserve Bank.
The current path is the safe bet, trying to hedge those safe seats and pick up the Fear and Loathing vote from… somewhere. The Nats have never got on with the Maoris, with the exception of Rob Muldoon. They had nothing to lose and everything to gain with Orewa I – A New Hope. Brash has disenfranchised a significant chunk of that support with Orewa II – A Nightmare on Elm Grove.
Bashing DPB Mums is not the best way to win brownie points. Not only does it piss off the solo Mums, but will annoy more Soccer Mums in net scheme of things. Kicking the only chick off the front bench is saying to our egalitarian households, “Although women make up half the population, we can’t find a single smart one to sit with the boys.” Half the population is a big minority vote to isolate.
To win an electorate, you aim at the incumbent’s record not the punters. Governments are voted out, not in. Attack the policies and outcomes.
For instance, between 2000 and 2003 the total number of women and children recorded by Women’s Refuge has increased by almost 50 percent. This is stuff Labour is supposed to be good at, and they are not. The social policy meant to paper over society’s cracks are failing. Katherine Rich would support that attack in a way Judith Collins won’t.
Unless Don Brash sets a mouse trap, he will sow the seeds of his undoing. Murray McCully must be replaced as strategist if Brash is to avoid a Rich, “Hungry”& Power-led post-election coup (“Hungry” = Gerry Brownlee). This would mean yet another bloodletting and frankly the Nats have a shallow talent pool for yet another leader.
Simon Power still has a bit to learn about falling off his bike before he gets pole position. Katherine Rich needs a couple more lessons too. Hungry is best suited to being a bouncer, not the DJ. The rest of the front bench are past their peak and yesterday’s men (Bill English), or Baby MPs such as John Key.
Thursday, January 27, 2005
Off the waiting list
Well, it's been 18 months since I first applied, but I finally had two hearing aids fitted by the public health system. I can hear!! It's the first time in my life that I can listen like a relatively normal person. First impression; the world's a fucking noisy place, but I love it.
I had one aid in the spectacularly deaf left (fact, not pun) ear for a few years, but that broke when I was destitute and picking bananas in Oz after Sept 11 killed the tourist trade in Queensland. Since then, I have missed women chatting me up the most. "WHAT WAS THAT?" doesn't get you laid, no matter how many times you say it.
I had one aid in the spectacularly deaf left (fact, not pun) ear for a few years, but that broke when I was destitute and picking bananas in Oz after Sept 11 killed the tourist trade in Queensland. Since then, I have missed women chatting me up the most. "WHAT WAS THAT?" doesn't get you laid, no matter how many times you say it.
Monday, January 24, 2005
Jeux sans frontières
Next time you're playing Halo 2 or Counterstrike and someone tells you off for wasting time, just tell them you're training for war. In an excellent example of turning plowshares into swords, a military arms company has converted a remote bomb defuser into a remote control killbot.
SWORDS, short for Special Weapons Operations Reconnaisance Detection Systems, are 3-foot high and light enough to be carried into combat by a soldier. They can climb stairs and be armed with a grenade launcher, anti-tank launcher, 12-gauge shotgun or many other useful plug and play gizmos.
"Operators work the robot using a 30-pound control unit which has two joysticks, a handful of buttons and a video screen. ...That may eventually be replaced by a "Gameboy" type of controller hooked up to virtual reality goggles."
They are off to help bring freedom and democracy to Iraq (hat tip NZPundit).
Thursday, January 20, 2005
The state we're in
Rodney Hide launched his first State of the Nation speech as leader of Act up in Orkland today. I missed the News at 6 coverage, so I'll have to wait for the late news to tell me what to think. Meantime, I checked out the script.
Nice start linking the tsunami with Labour's lack of The Vision Thing as drifting. Ominous sense that we are in a prelude/eye/aftermath of a disaster. The Wellington earthquakes earlier in the week seems to underline that there's a crisis somewhere, waiting to happen. Rodney as a prophet of loss.
A good go at the youthful entrepreneur (geek) vote. Much flattery, with references to "bright", "keen" and "confident." This is an untapped well for most political parties, which Rodney has shown savvy to exploit. Like him or hate him, he was the first and remains the most respected MP blogger. Makes Don Brash look C++.
Changes up a gear appealing to the self-employed. Another clean move. Labour gets its support from unions and public servants, not the thunderstruck builders, plumbers and so forth. With building construction in Orkland the way it is, there's bound to be more self-employed and SMEs to please with compliance culling.
Labour's Working for Families gig looks like it will need to fend itself off from the Closing the Gaps' fate. Some artfully written (no, I don't know who wrote them. If I'm being sychophantic, I'll make the Hannibal Noise) parliamentary questions earlier in the term yielded some stark realities which have Election Issue written all over them. For example:
"A family with one income earning around $50,000 will keep just 11 cents of every extra dollar they earn. The Government takes 89 cents, 33 cents tax, 30 cents loss of family support, 25 cents loss of accommodation supplement, and 1.2% ACC levies."
The implicit point is that Labour favours both parents (or whatevers) working and raising a family instead of one breadwinner supporting a whole-parent family upbringing, be they Tom, Dick, Dyke, or Harry. No, not Harry... Thankfully there's television, Playstation 2, and X Box to babysit and supervise while both parents juggle debt. Or maybe they're all on drugs.
Reminding the uninitiated of his party president position in Act's genesis, Rodney reaffirmed the party's commitment to the Personal Responsibility, Individual Freedom (PRIF) thing. Probably aimed at keeping the party backbone from going Nats-wards. Don't be spooked by a change in leader. Same aim, different angle.
In a remarkable show of optimism and determination, Rodney managed to turn the poll slump and leadership primary split into positive experiences. Painting Act as the persistent battler, he pointed out his commonality credibility; his Dad, the truckie.
The Association of Consumers and Taxpayers, aka the Liberal Party is now, also, the Workers' Party. What a thought.
Moving along quickly, Rodney then lists The Big Six Points.
Nice start linking the tsunami with Labour's lack of The Vision Thing as drifting. Ominous sense that we are in a prelude/eye/aftermath of a disaster. The Wellington earthquakes earlier in the week seems to underline that there's a crisis somewhere, waiting to happen. Rodney as a prophet of loss.
A good go at the youthful entrepreneur (geek) vote. Much flattery, with references to "bright", "keen" and "confident." This is an untapped well for most political parties, which Rodney has shown savvy to exploit. Like him or hate him, he was the first and remains the most respected MP blogger. Makes Don Brash look C++.
Changes up a gear appealing to the self-employed. Another clean move. Labour gets its support from unions and public servants, not the thunderstruck builders, plumbers and so forth. With building construction in Orkland the way it is, there's bound to be more self-employed and SMEs to please with compliance culling.
Labour's Working for Families gig looks like it will need to fend itself off from the Closing the Gaps' fate. Some artfully written (no, I don't know who wrote them. If I'm being sychophantic, I'll make the Hannibal Noise) parliamentary questions earlier in the term yielded some stark realities which have Election Issue written all over them. For example:
"A family with one income earning around $50,000 will keep just 11 cents of every extra dollar they earn. The Government takes 89 cents, 33 cents tax, 30 cents loss of family support, 25 cents loss of accommodation supplement, and 1.2% ACC levies."
The implicit point is that Labour favours both parents (or whatevers) working and raising a family instead of one breadwinner supporting a whole-parent family upbringing, be they Tom, Dick, Dyke, or Harry. No, not Harry... Thankfully there's television, Playstation 2, and X Box to babysit and supervise while both parents juggle debt. Or maybe they're all on drugs.
Reminding the uninitiated of his party president position in Act's genesis, Rodney reaffirmed the party's commitment to the Personal Responsibility, Individual Freedom (PRIF) thing. Probably aimed at keeping the party backbone from going Nats-wards. Don't be spooked by a change in leader. Same aim, different angle.
In a remarkable show of optimism and determination, Rodney managed to turn the poll slump and leadership primary split into positive experiences. Painting Act as the persistent battler, he pointed out his commonality credibility; his Dad, the truckie.
The Association of Consumers and Taxpayers, aka the Liberal Party is now, also, the Workers' Party. What a thought.
Moving along quickly, Rodney then lists The Big Six Points.
- The safest country in the world. The Get Tough on Crime platform is well-worn and, judging from United Future's opening salvo, looking at turning into a farce. Goff is already building prisons like Labour built state houses in the '50s. The Sentencing Act has incurred longer sentences for Evil People. If accused of soft-cock policy on criminals, Labour can fight from a well-defended position. No mention made on catching white collar criminals, just the thugs and bullies. How to get the courts to process the existing backlog and presumed extra workload is also left unsaid.
- The Claytons payrise. Rodney wants the government to give that staggering surplus back to workers. For a $40K job, that's $35 extra a week or equivalent to around a 2 percent payrise. Could have been dovetailed into Stuff's report of Scots-like stinginess on pay rises.
- Quango hunt. A Regulatory Responsibility Act mooted. Sounds like a companion piece to the Fiscal Responsibility Act. Nice touch, do-able and one concrete way to nail down unbridled power.
- Colour-blind government. Sounds like someone should be rummaging through the Human Rights legislation, looking for a another way to skin this kitty.
- Immigration. It's all good, of course. Best leave this chestnut to Winston. He wears it so well.
- The kitchen sink. Rodney presents the work done by the Act team. Heather Roy has been doing a good job chipping away with question time. Her press statements are read with alarm and concern, as opposed to Judith Collins' hysterics on teenage abortions. Nothing new in the Education sector. Somewhat mitigated by Deborah Coddington's recent acquisition of the portfolio since the Donna Awatere Huata fireworks. Muriel Newman's War on Welfare is mentioned. Nothing new. OECD quoted NZ as 'low middle income' next to Greece, Israel and Cyprus. Would have been more incisive if juxtaposed with NZ second 'longest hours at work' behind Japan.
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
Fundamentalist school board loses court battle
You may remember an episode of Penn & Teller's Bullshit featuring a God Squad in Atlanta called the Cobb County School Board. They put stickers in the front of Biology textbooks in school saying Evolution is a theory, not a fact. A few days' ago, they were ordered by a judge to remove the stickers and never hand them out again in any form.
Just goes to show how useful judges can be be, no matter what the president thinks.
Just goes to show how useful judges can be be, no matter what the president thinks.
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
Monday, January 17, 2005
Better dying through MDMA
The Food and Drug Administration in the US has approved a Harvard study looking into the palliative effects of MDMA on terminal cancer patients. Research is continuing on Ecstacy treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder as well. Check the MDMA Research site for more details.
Researchers are hoping to expand their research into other areas of beneficial psychotropic uses. Studies into psychedelic drugs have only happened since 2002. Up til then, they haven't been permitted for study since the 1970s.
About bloody time.
Researchers are hoping to expand their research into other areas of beneficial psychotropic uses. Studies into psychedelic drugs have only happened since 2002. Up til then, they haven't been permitted for study since the 1970s.
About bloody time.
Sunday, January 16, 2005
Fine with light breezes and occasional ice blocks
For the first time in human history, scientists have successfully landed a probe on an alien moon. Armed with a mass spectrometer, three cameras and a few other dangly bits, the Huygens probe sent back data that will keep the curious and speculative busy for hours. The first full colour picture can be seen here.
According to New Scientist, the Cassini-Huygens probe cost $A3.27 billion. That's about half New Zealand's budget surplus for this year. Given the choice, would you buy one election or two space probes?
NB. I Might be Wrong
TVNZ reckons Cassini-Huygens at $US 3.2 billion. You can buy one NZ election or only one space probe.
According to New Scientist, the Cassini-Huygens probe cost $A3.27 billion. That's about half New Zealand's budget surplus for this year. Given the choice, would you buy one election or two space probes?
NB. I Might be Wrong
TVNZ reckons Cassini-Huygens at $US 3.2 billion. You can buy one NZ election or only one space probe.
Bloody foreigners
DPF has commented on a call for foreigners to not be allowed on our roads. I was originally intending to post the stuff below as a comment on his blog. But then it grew into a rangent (a rant on a tangent) and thought it more appropriately stuck in my blog:
I'm surprised they weren't asking to ban Germans (Who won the bloody war anyway?!). Then Italians. Everyone knows Italians are crazy drivers. Maybe it should just be foreigners who travel on the wrong side of the road in their countries, like those awful Americans.
Mr Hutson should vote Greens. They want to remove all drivers from the roads and replace them with cyclists.
I favour a change to a tax on momentum. Due to differing Mess Potentials and the past experience of the clown steering each of them, a free market system would quickly apportion fiscal bills where they are due. For instance, tuktuks and scooters would be a fraction to keep on the roads compared with SUVs and other tanks.
Before you say, "Hey, we've already got that! It's called insurance," consider this; you are a lot more aware of your surroundings on a scooter than a tank. Whose insurance premiums and registration costs are higher?
I'm surprised they weren't asking to ban Germans (Who won the bloody war anyway?!). Then Italians. Everyone knows Italians are crazy drivers. Maybe it should just be foreigners who travel on the wrong side of the road in their countries, like those awful Americans.
Mr Hutson should vote Greens. They want to remove all drivers from the roads and replace them with cyclists.
I favour a change to a tax on momentum. Due to differing Mess Potentials and the past experience of the clown steering each of them, a free market system would quickly apportion fiscal bills where they are due. For instance, tuktuks and scooters would be a fraction to keep on the roads compared with SUVs and other tanks.
Before you say, "Hey, we've already got that! It's called insurance," consider this; you are a lot more aware of your surroundings on a scooter than a tank. Whose insurance premiums and registration costs are higher?
Saturday, January 15, 2005
One brave Borat
Boraq Sagdiyev from Kazakhstan (aka Sacha Baron Cohen aka Ali G) went above and beyond the call of satirical duty at a US rodeo recently. In a demonstration of support for America's war in Iraq, Borat said, "I hope you kill every man, woman and child in Iraq, down to the lizards...and may George W Bush drink the blood of every man, woman and child in Iraq."
After a bad-english version of the Star-Spangled Banner, complete with a final stanza of "your home in the grave," Borat and his film crew were rushed out of the area after the crowd turned nasty.
After a bad-english version of the Star-Spangled Banner, complete with a final stanza of "your home in the grave," Borat and his film crew were rushed out of the area after the crowd turned nasty.
Friday, January 14, 2005
Speaking of war...
I would strongly recommend The Fog of War as essential viewing. 82 year-old Robert Strange McNamara, former Secretary of Defense under Kennedy and Johnson, lists lessons learned. As relevant today as ever.
Fifteen lines of chaos
Ed Felton of Princeton University has developed the world's shortest P2P program. The 15 lines of Python code were devised to prove a point. Regulation will not work. Like the War on Drugs and the War on Terror, the War on Internet Freedom is another War Without End.
Thursday, January 13, 2005
Coca-cola; the new tobacco?
There has been a call from developing countries to boycott Coca-Cola. Mohammed Mesbahi writes on why Western consumers should too.
Do a Google on Fanta and Nazi, this is what you find. Hell, check Wikipedia for that matter.
Do a Google on Fanta and Nazi, this is what you find. Hell, check Wikipedia for that matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)