NZ Green Party
More Circular Uncertainty from National

Following the circular uncertainty created by John Key and his National government regarding the Emissions Trading Scheme, we now have another round of circular uncertainty, this time created by officialdom, no doubt because there is no clear leadership from the top.

To start with, we have the utterly confused and ambiguous signals to business regarding the status of the ETS, as highlighted in Jeanette’s post here the other day. What is clear is that John Key has either no comprehension whatsoever about how the ETS works, or he has such a dastardly plan up his sleeve that he dare not say anything lest he let the cat out of the bag. I opt for the former. Like the hillariously incompetent Keystone Cops, we have Key, Brownlee, Dunne and Hide all saying different things about the current and future status of the ETS.

No good deed goes unpunished, so now we have the Electricity Commission saying that they are not likely to approve Transpower’s NAaN grid upgrade, because of the uncertainty surrounding Genesis’ Rodney Power Station. The  Rodney District Council deffered their final decision on the Rodney Station last week, pending the uncertainty surrounding the Electricity Commission’s decision on the NAaN upgrade!

The only thing certain in all this is that there is no certainty for business. Not for the Energy Sector, the Agriculture Sector nor the Forestry Sector. Now parliament has risen until February, and boards across the country are left wondering just what they got for their first 100 days of a National led government. In short – they are worse off and worse informed than they were before the election.

Kick starting infrastructure investment?

Yeah Right!

Aspirational for New Zealand?

Yeah Right!

Balancing environmental protection with economic opportunity?

Yeah Right!

In that last case we have ended up with less of both. I thought that National was the party of business interests?

82 thoughts on “More Circular Uncertainty from National

  1. Make up your mind.

    You were complaining that National were going too fast, now you’re complaining that haven’t done everything yet.

    You guys had nine years, and you came up with….what, exactly?
    A smacking bill that didn’t solve any problem, yet annoyed a lot of people who weren’t the problem, and an EFA, the less said about the better.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  2. BlueBaby – do you have a list of trite, purile ‘whining points’ taped to your screen, that you leer at, drooling with skittish anticipation before tapping one out on your damp keyboard and send it off to Frog’s blog – all the while sniggering to yourself in a self-congratulatory way and thinking how well you are doing, spoiling all that lefty fun with your bilious piffle?

    Just curious :-)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  3. But if it circular you know where it is going. The initial start point. Otherwise it wouldn’t be circular. It would be a line.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  4. “Rodney District Council deffered (sic) their final decision on the Rodney Station last week, pending the uncertainty surrounding the Electricity Commission’s decision on the NAaN upgrade!”

    Hmmm – am I missing something here? I couldn’t see anything in the linked news article about Rodney District Council deferring their decision pending Electricity Commission decision?

    And the Electricity Commision linked news item is no big deal – they say the transmission upgrade isn’t needed for many years yet and will only take a few years to complete, so they’ve plenty of time. Wouldn’t that be regarded as a fairly sensible decision given the time span involved ?

    So exactly what is the problem here, and can someone please enlighten this confused person why the National Government is somehow seen as being at fault here? I’m either missing something or this whole item is a complete and utter nothing.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  5. Skeptic

    It’s like this. The tens of thousands of things that went wrong in the last seven years, but which haven’t been seen until now, are going to be blamed on the new government because that’s what politics is all about. Just as the tens of thousands of of things that went right in the 1999-2001 period were claimed as achievements by the last government, even though they were put in place by their predecessors.

    In the same way as circles are being criticised in this post, we have to accept that there are circles/cycles in politics. At the start of the cycle, the National Party is elected to government and has to spend years sorting out the mess that has resulted from socialism being in power. The next part of the cycle involves National putting in place strategies that deliver long term benefits in terms of the country’s overall standards and quality of life. In the third part of the cycle, the voters decide it is time to take the bribes being offered to them for voting the socialists in again. The final part of the cycle involves socialist governments claiming kudos for all the value flowing into the economy and spending the ‘profits’ on not very much at all.

    AT the end of the cycle. the socialists are voted out of government again, and the whole country is dismayed to find that the country is spent-up, borrowed up and needing to suffer an extended bout of fiscal hardship to get back to having a balanced budget. And so the next cycle starts!

    IN simple terms, and to paraphrase an ex minister of spending into penury . . . . . you won, we lost, thank god, NOW get on with fixing stuff so we can spend again!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  6. Your a dreamer strings ………………… its usually the natianals who leave the mess for other more responsible people to clean up …………… and they’ve been doing it for years.

    For instance the labor party of the 1970′s introduced a pension scheme that workers contributed into ……………… it would have been worth untold billions now and would have made providing for the baby boomers in their retirement easier for the country ……………. the Nats in their typical irresponsible fashion appealed to greed and scrapped it.

    …………….. and it should be remembered that when the Lange labor govt took office we were in the position ( thanks to the nats ) of DEFAULTING on repayments of overseas loans.

    The nats are the ones who always ride into power by bribery and appealing to racisim and greed.

    They are divisive to the country and always leave it in worse condition than when they come into power.

    Their last effort at governing was such a circus that when they were booted out by the voters they spent longer in opposition than any Natianal govt before them.

    I fully expect to see the usual divisive damage done by this lot of nats.

    ……….. it’s time a the new younger generation of voters get to see what they are really like ………….

    one term govt .

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  7. daddy, Oh!

    so explain to me this fantastic position we are in today, with 10 years of deficits being pointed out in the PREFU – i.e. before the election. Then have a look at all the crap that has floated to the surface since the election.

    For instance – ACC. The inclusion of ‘stress’ and other ailments under the classification of “accident’ for purposes of ACC compensation, as well as a myriad of other non-accidental complaints, has resulted in costs going through the roof, with NO PROVISION by the Labour-led, Green-backed Government of revenue to off-set those increases. The philosophy was (and yes, I heard it from a Minister’s mouth,) that the existing levies were enough to pay for the new stuff too! That’s a bit like saying that you can shift from one bottle of beer a week to a six-pack without your spending increasing. A nice socialist dream, but nothing like the real world!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  8. Fairly typical of the Greens and Labours “budgeting” strategies. When asked before the election how they are going to pay for their policy, posters here shrugged and say it’s up to the major party. One assumes they’ll use magic money.

    I guess that explains Labours non-budgeted insulation “promise”….

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  9. >>and it should be remembered that when the Lange labor govt took office we were in the position (

    I supported that Labour government. You appear to be backing Roger Douglas, then?

    The last National government left Cullen a near golden set of books. Labour have handed back ten years of deficits, a useless Fail Rail, and unsustainable government spending, a la Muldoon.

    Gee, thanks.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  10. I support daddyO (as a fellow wrinkly!)

    I have watched Governments come and go since the 1940′s (and I grew up in a politically very aware family which included/s two economists.)

    I remember when Labour took the reins from a multi-term National Government and AotearoaNZ was “within one week of very serious defaulting on loans … ”

    As important as we Kiwis may feel we are, the recent global economic shock has NOT been caused by the outgoing NZ Labour Government!

    Michael Cullen has done an excellent job and will be long remembered for that by “those in the know”… including our historians.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  11. >>“within one week of very serious defaulting on loans … ”

    So, you agreed with Roger Douglas?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  12. >>Michael Cullen has done an excellent job and will be long remembered for that by “those in the know”

    It’s partisan stuff. People remember Douglas how they want to remember him. The left paint him as a monster, whilst the right paint him as a hero.

    That’s how history “remembers” anything. It’s written by the victors.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  13. Icebaby,

    No I did NOT agree with Roger Douglas. As a Labour MP he used the situation to follow his (new found?) ideology (… and in the process was very bad for the health of my then elderly father, who had heart failure at that time!)

    However, all that is part of the political history that helped in the final break up of our “two Party” thinking

    … and, as a Values supporter, now a member of the Green Party, which is the recognised “Third Party” in Aotearoa/NZ I must acknowledge that Roger DID play his part!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  14. Icebaby,

    “That’s how history “remembers” anything. It’s written by the victors.”

    That is why we have (need?) academics to sort out the reasons for the various rememberances in light of the thinking of the times.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  15. Eredwyn
    re “the recent global economic shock has NOT been caused by the outgoing NZ Labour Government!” You should realise that the impact of the global recessionhas not yet reached New Zealand. We are coming to the hight of the major impact of one recession, the one caused by Cullen’s rediculous approach to fiscal responsibility, and round about February will start to feel the additional impact of the recession caused by the global financial meltdown.
    That’s right! Two recessions with different causes and impacts.

    I hope you don’t have any money invested in retirement savings of any kind, it is about to vanish – just ask people in the USA who are trying to live on the income from their savings – at a 0.25% interest rate they need TWO MILLION in savings to have the National Average Income before tax available to them to fund their senior years! A situation caused by the socialist governments of the UK and Europe supplemented by the Social Capitalism Government of The United States.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  16. PS
    re “the Green Party, which is the recognised “Third Party” in Aotearoa/NZ”

    Recognised by whom? As I see it, the Greens are a party that, since dropping out of the Alliance, has managed to be walked all over by successive Labour governments and has no real influence on anything.

    The Green Party did not win one electorate seat in the ’08 election. If there were to be a third party it would be the Maori Party who won 5 electorates. Face it – there are many young people who like the green ‘idea’, but as they mature they realise that the Green Party here in New Zealand (there is no such country as Aotearoa/NZ,) is left of Stalin in a Left-Right continuum and don’t want them barging around their electorate trying to change things.

    Electorates are the faith of the people, party votes are the refuge of the ‘can’t win a seat’ sad people (like Michael Cullen!)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  17. It’s a numbers game Dave. You can screw up your eyes as much as you like but it’s there in front of you – 3rd biggest support base, Greens. We are supported by a significant number of New Zealanders. Parties like Act, on the other hand, have support that is almost insignificant amongst the voting population. UnitedFuture … don’t make me laugh! Still, as you are aware, they managed to install themselves into the NActional government – lucky, lucky New Zealand!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  18. >>they managed to install themselves

    It’s called MMP, brought to us by Rod Donald. Do you want to take your ball back now?

    >>3rd biggest support base

    Not by electorate seats. Not by combination of electorate seats and party vote percentage. Only by party vote percentage.

    And no power whatsover.

    New Zealands most irrelevant party, slightly ahead of Winston First.
    And that Labour protest percentage you got will see you back around 5% next time round.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  19. quibble, quibble Blue Baby. naturally I don’t resent Actiods and UnitedFuturites their place in a government. I back ‘Rod Donald’s MMP’ 100%.
    ‘Not by electorate seats’ … you’re going all squinty-eyed on us Blue!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  20. You were complaining that National were going too fast, now you’re complaining that haven’t done everything yet.

    Certainty does not require that they do everything as fast as possible, otherwise all democratic governments would be plagued with uncertainty. It requires that they’re clear about their intentions in advance.

    The only things this government has been clear about is that it doesn’t understand what it’s doing.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  21. # IceBaby Says:
    December 22nd, 2008 at 2:23 pm

    Kinda like saying the first runners up in WW2…..”

    You mean Germany and Japan? The “winners” being the USSR, USA and Britian? Funny, that…

    As for “Electorates are the faith of the people, party votes are the refuge of the ‘can’t win a seat’ sad people” – where do you get that from Dave S? On what rational basis can you say that? 157 613 people “had faith” and voted Green, do you want to discard their votes and deny their voices, as has been done to the 95,356 NZF voters? Note that the Greens and NZF each had more votes than the Maori Party (55,980), ACT (85,496) or United Future (20,497), yet you are saying that because these parties have won electorates they represent the “will of the people”, but the parties with more votes do not? Are you implying that only an electorate based system represents the voters? Should we go back to the FPP system according to you?

    I doubt you are serious, I think you are simply trolling.

    As for BluePeter/Ice Baby’s speculation about 5% and the next election – it is just that – speculation. At this stage nobody can predict the next elections outcome at all. Statements such as these say more about the person making them than about an event that will only occur in three years’ time.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  22. >>You mean Germany and Japan?

    No.

    >>speculation about 5% and the next election – it is just that – speculation.

    Yes, you best inform everybody that I don’t know future events before they happen. Some people might well have been under the impression I indeed have that super power.

    But I’m betting around less than 5% as the “We hate Winston” Labourites return to the fold, and the AGW scare runs out of puff.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  23. Blue Baby – it’s this statement,
    ‘and the AGW scare runs out of puff’
    that assures me that your bet will be off by a country mile :-) and probably gives others cause to smile paternalistically at your gullibility.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  24. >>to smile paternalistically at your gullibility.

    I’ve picked future events better than anyone here from the left, including your percentage of the election vote, so they can “smile paternalisticly” all they want. I don’t rate them.

    Here’s what will happen:

    - the new scare story is the economy
    - people fear for their jobs
    - the immediate will take precedence over the future
    - “saving the earth” will be mostly about alternative energy generation projects
    - once people see the energy generation projects happening, they’ll feel they have done their bit
    - the next 3-5 years will be about pragmatism, not idealism
    - the AGW message will become part of the furniture
    - once that happens, I wouldn’t like to be a party that has green in my name….

    Your turn.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  25. Happening already….

    “Most news reports neglected to mention a major challenge to scientific claims in the UN’s (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) document at the core of conference policy discussions. The U.S. Senate Minority Report presents dissenting statements by 650 prominent international scientists, including current and former members of the IPCC. Further, the number of dissenters has increased from 400 just one year ago when the report was first released.”

    “For example, the UN claimed 2,500 scientists supported its key claim that human-generated greenhouse gases are the primary cause of global warming. But those 2,500 weren’t asked to support it–they were only asked to review it. Only 62 completed the review, and 55 had serious concerns, leaving a total of seven to support the science that is the basis of the IPCC climate-change policy.

    This, in part, is why many scientists are now speaking out.

    A 2008 survey of 51,000 Canadian scientists revealed 68 per cent disagreed with the claim that global warming science is settled. And 31,000 American scientists have signed the Global Warming Petition Project that urges the U. S. government to reject the Kyoto treaty and any similar proposals, saying there is “no convincing scientific evidence” of a “catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere.””

    ronically, our only hope for an appropriate response may be the downward spiralling economy. Surveys consistently show Canadians’ altruistic support for climate-change initiatives drops as our cost grows. As we enter a recession, the last thing Canadians will want is for government to toss tax dollars into an unproven climate change money pit.

    If scientific trends and scientists are increasingly contradicting what environmental interest groups have been telling us about climate change, it’s quite reasonable to expect any consensus on what we should do could be very different three years from now. It would be a shame to take steps now that will later be considered a foolish waste of time and money.”

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  26. Icebaby says: Here’s what will happen: etc…..

    These prognostications will be great to keep for future reference: We will either get a good laugh from them or a ‘gnashing of teeth’ :)

    Like, they are either going be right and lend weight to the misanthropist’s charge of Man’s superficiality or just SO wrong!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  27. Bookmark it.

    I’m waiting to hear the greenies predictions for the next 3-5 years. But I suspect they lack the courage of their convictions…..

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  28. PS: Green energy is the next bubble. Mucho money to be made in the next three to five years. It depends on Obama, and the oil price….

    Watch for it…..

    Just my opinion of course. Your mileage may vary.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  29. Of predictions, BlueBaby, you said recently,
    “Beware of certainty when talking about the future. Admit that you don’t know jack. It is the honest position”

    Now I see you blithley predictiing willy nilly. Curious to compare your two platforms – which to believe, which to believe ???

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  30. Dave S

    Oh dear! Assuming that we Greens haven’t “realised” this or that , and telling us what we “should” (or shouldn’t) do is seldom an effective way to get one’s points of view across!

    (However, having just said that, if you, in return, are willing to read some “CONSTRUCTIVE criticism” about how you come across on this forum, please feel free to read the following!)

    1. Take the time to check, and then use, a person’s correct name:
    I consistently use the name “eredwen” (all lower case). The name was carefully chosen and has become a part of who I am. Calling me Eredwyn indicates a of lack of respect (and thus I am less likely to take your opinion seriously).

    2. Don’t “personalize” a debate:
    eg : “You should realise” that the impact of the global recession has not yet reached New Zealand.”

    By starting that sentence with “The impact …” the argument becomes “emotionally neutral” and thus is likely to be effective with more readers.
    (I am assuming that communicating with others is one of the reasons you are here?)

    3. Separate facts from opinion, and make that separation clear:

    eg: “We are coming to the hight of the major impact of one recession, the one caused by Cullen’s rediculous approach to fiscal responsibility, and round about February will start to feel the additional impact of the recession caused by the global financial meltdown.”

    If you divide that into three:

    “We are coming to the height of the major impact of one recession.”

    “I believe that one was caused by Cullen’s approach to fiscal responsibility, which I regard as ridiculous.”

    “Round about February will start to feel the additional impact of the recession caused by the global financial meltdown.”

    ………………………………………………..
    Reading your post again:
    In conclusion:

    As an “oldie”, I’m already retired. I live on NatSuper (plus a similar amount from Government Super that I paid into during my oft interrupted teaching career.)
    My brother and family are long time Americans. As a recently retired academic he seems to have organised appropriately adequate financial security…

    Somehow as times change people and their societies adapt.
    Our parents were of the “Depression Generation”.
    Recently I find myself reverting to their frugal ways!
    ………………………………………..
    In response to your criticisms

    Now you say: re “the Green Party, which is the recognised “Third Party” in Aotearoa/NZ” … “The Green Party did not win one electorate seat in the ‘08 election.” …

    I reply: The Green Party campaigned on the slogan “Party Vote Green”
    We asked voters NOT to vote for the Green Candidates.
    (We did have a candidate in every electorate for “visibility”, and as a central figure to spread that “PARTY VOTE GREEN” message.)

    The Green Party now has nine(9) Green List MP’s and the Maori Party has five(5) Electorate MPs. Thus, in numbers of MPs, the Greens are the recognised “THIRD largest party in Parliament”.

    Finally, I’m not sure where you are living … but Aotearoa New Zealand has three recognized Official Languages: Maori, English and International Sign … and two official names: Aotearoa and New Zealand.
    (In internationally recognised convention the indigenous language takes precedence (ie it comes first). Out of politeness I include the easily recognised “NZ” with the indigenous “Aotearoa”. Personally, however, I wonder why we retain a name given by a Dutch sea captain who happened to “discover” an already long-inhabited land (its location already well known to the Polynesians.)

    I sometimes reflect on the obvious question: Who will “discover”and rename these Islands, that we call “ours”, next? (and under what circumstances?)

    Cheers!

    eredwen of Aotearoa NZ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  31. >>Now I see you blithley predictiing willy nilly. Curious to compare your two platforms – which to believe, which to believe ???

    I do not know jack.

    I’m making an educated guess.

    As are you.

    So,. what’s your best guess?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  32. >>But Aotearoa New Zealand has three recognized Official Languages

    Two.

    Maori and sign.

    And pick one or the other. Aotearoa New Zealand just sounds like you’re trying too hard to make a political point.

    It has no grace.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  33. C’mon….

    You’ve bookmarked this thread for future reference. As have I.

    Yet let it be remembered that NOT ONE greenie has yet had the strength of their convictions to tell us how the future will go.

    How strange for a philosophy that deals with the future….

    Cowards…

    Scared of being wrong?

    (again)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  34. BTW:

    Strange. Who is standing up for the underdog against big business wrecking the NZ landscape?

    tinyurl.com/79cz3f

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  35. eredwen

    “In internationally recognised convention the indigenous language takes precedence”

    By whom?,

    We live in NZ eredwen, the aotearoa rubbish is so unnecessary.

    I do notice it creeping in though, for some time certain people in our media have insisted on talking about a mountain I have never heard of, apparently it is called aoraki or something like that.
    Imagine my surprise when I found out they were talking about Mt Cook!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  36. big – you’d never heard of Aoraki? Come down into Nga Tahu country and say that and see how many admiring looks you get! Dolt!
    Blue Baby – my prediction: You will continue to duck, weave and insult your hosts for as long as it continues to amuse them! Your predictions, by your own words:
    ““Beware of certainty when talking about the future. Admit that you don’t know jack. It is the honest position”
    must be dishonest, or at least a waste of pixels. So Blue – the future for you? Inconsequential is my guess. I’ll be watching the developments for the pinus radiata industry with interest though :-)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  37. big – try, if you will, to imagine the surprise experienced by Maori when colonialists started talking about Aoraki, calling it “Mount Cook”!
    Any idea of the translation of “Ao raki” big? It carries significantly more punch than Mount Cook.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  38. Let it be noted that Greenfly failed.

    You were so certain about the future up until now, Greenfly.

    Why bail now?

    Greens are all about telling us how the future WILL be, and demanding we ACT NOW on their Predictions.

    Don’t you get it yet?

    You just lost.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  39. Just struggling with this little gem, Blue ““Beware of certainty when talking about the future. Admit that you don’t know jack. It is the honest position”
    I read it somewhere …and I’m an honest bloke :-)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  40. IceBaby

    Could you LINK to your claim that only 7 scientists actually supported the IPCC report or would you be ashamed of the source of the nonsense?

    I see you’re still hawking that phlegm about the petition signed by 31000 people of no particular qualifications. I am really weary of seeing this bnllsh!t paraded about as though it was meaningful. In the USA or Canada you could collect 50000 signatures to petition for Britney Spears to be the chief science advisor. With equal relevance to reality.

    “I’ve picked future events better than anyone here from the left”

    Bnllsh!t.. or don’t you count me as coming from the left?

    - “saving the earth” will be mostly about alternative energy generation projects

    This is true. It always WAS true… it isn’t a change. What makes you think it is?

    - once people see the energy generation projects happening, they’ll feel they have done their bit

    problem:

    What makes you think that these will actually happen? I’ve watched this mob inaction and I mean the pun. Doing something is beyond either of the major parties. National has proven only that it is good at undoing and Labour has proven that it is quite talented at NOT doing. National will preside over the building of new gas/oil powered generation… which will be totally useless within 2 decades.

    As for Green Power as the next bubble… it doesn’t quite work that way. The problem is that energy and money are not as unrelated as other commodities. The more energy we command the better off we are. That’s true no matter how much energy we actually have so it will not “bubble” the same way that property or dot.com did. I give you partial credit. There will be excessive speculation, but there will be actual value produced.

    our only hope for an appropriate response may be the downward spiralling economy.

    As I said over 2 years ago (and as many as 5 years ago). Before most people realized there would BE a downward spiral.

    As for AGW becoming “part of the furniture” I don’t think I quite understand what you are saying. Does this mean that it will be ignored or that it will be taken on board by the major parties. You are unclear to me and it may be local idiom. Clarify please.

    CO2 has continued to rise in spite of the recession. My hope is that there is a lag from the economic news to the CO2 levels, and that we will in fact see reductions in the next 12 months. The problem is that we’ve already seen bubbling methane out of the permafrost in the arctic, and we’re going from the solar minimum to the next solar max. In 5-8 years we may well see more records broken no matter what we do. We’ve already done too much damage.

    I do not think there will be much of a lull in awareness of AGW. There may be a brief period of lessened emphasis because we’ve let bankers and businessmen run and ruin the world economy to their benefit.

    Giving them more power to do so (pragmatism) is not likely to happen however. The mood in the USA is rather more conducive to greater tendencies towards socialism and social justice. There have been calls for public beheadings of those deemed responsible. Madoff is merely a poster boy for the ponzi pr!cks (banking community).

    Idealism vs Pragmatism? I don’t think so. I doubt we’ll see much action on that axis at all. I do think that the Green party here needs to do something about its excesses of idealism, but that depends on the members of the Green party, not on your prognostications.

    As for percentages at the next election, that depends too much on the actions of all the parties over the next 3 years, the economics of the planet and the next round of science relating to the climate.

    Here’s your “no evidence of increasing temperature”…

    http://climateprogress.org/2008/12/16/sorry-deniers-hadley-center-and-wmo-say-2000s-are-easily-the-hottest-decade-in-recorded-history/

    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  41. IceBaby

    Greenfly got you. First you say “Be honest and say you don’t know Jack” and in a post not more than 2 days later you are claiming to be more accurate and providing more predictions than Nostradamus. Yet “you don’t know Jack”
    is the honest position. Which makes you… less than honest? by your own words.

    I don’t think you do badly at prediction… but your attitude sncks swamp water and makes gas. Nor is there much honesty in your diatribes.

    I’ve never claimed to know what I don’t know… but I have never claimed ignorance as a virtue. Moreover, this predicting the future business is what makes human civilization work. At the engineering level we predict forces and work required to do things and it is exacting. As scientists we predict all manner of things with varying degrees of assurance depending on the available evidence. There is a fair body of evidence available about AGW . None contradicts it. Economists predict things as well… and it is clearly fortunate that we do not use their methods to build bridges. Mises and his followers predicted this of course… but the mainstream economists and in particular the monetarists, blew it big time. Then there are the religious folk, who predict things based on “the good book” which may be a Bible or a Koran or a Torah or…

    My point is that ALL of this is about predictions and whose predictions you believe and why…. because predicting and preparing for the correct future is what determines our odd of survival. We do it pretty good. It is why we have such a complex model of the world built into our heads.

    So saying we should not predict “be honest and say you don’t know jack” is a repudiation of human nature, and you proved that you can’t stand by that repudiation yourself within 2 days of making it. I suggest you back up and reconsider your attitude.

    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  42. Greenfly

    “big – you’d never heard of Aoraki? Come down into Nga Tahu country and say that and see how many admiring looks you get! Dolt!”

    Wow, you mean there might be violence?…who woud have thought that.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  43. “Any idea of the translation of “Ao raki” big? It carries significantly more punch than Mount Cook.”

    So calling something “big” has more punch does it?, given that is the best name they could come up with I would have thought they would be deliriously happy to call it by its proper name (Mt Cook)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  44. BB

    Aoraki appears to mean “Cloud Piercer” but its relationship to the story

    http://christchurchcitylibraries.com/HeManawa/LegendAoraki.asp

    …seems minimal. Why would the eldest brother be named “cloud piercer”?

    There is a bit of circular logic here… not defensible, but I suspect that calling you “big” rather than BB or “big bro” wasn’t all that defensible either

    I give brickbats to both sides for mutual incomprehension and incomprehensibility.

    I suggest that everyone take a short nap and come back when their neural patterns have returned to normal.

    :-)

    Not one of the better exchanges on the blog…..

    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  45. True, big bro, the word ‘big’ is a bit of a joke, being generally used where someone wants to inflate their ego, reputation or sense of importance due to some lacking or other :-)
    btw – Aoraki doesn’t mean ‘big’, big.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  46. Apologies to you bjchip. I posted before reading your comment. I shouldn’t diminish ‘big bro’ to ‘big’?
    I’ll take my brickbat though.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  47. greenfly

    As I said, I do not know the future. Nobody does. That is my point. We’re ALL making educated guesses.

    But some people are so convinced that *their* scenario is the one truth, they label everyone who disagrees with them denialists.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  48. Bj

    >>Greenfly got you. First you say “Be honest and say you don’t know Jack” and in a post not more than 2 days later you are claiming to be more accurate and providing more predictions than Nostradamus. Yet “you don’t know Jack”
    is the honest position. Which makes you… less than honest? by your own words.

    No, you and Greenfly are missing the point.

    In this thread, I’ve said I do not know the future. I’m making an educated guess and putting forward a possible scenario. As are the Greens (AGW leading to catastrophe unless we reduce c02 emissions by year X).

    But that’s all they are. Educated guesses. We know very little about the future, especially when it comes to complex systems

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  49. >>Then just stop doing that, Blue, and the problem will dissapear

    Doing what?

    BTW: I assume that by saying this….

    “that assures me that your bet will be off by a country mile :-) and probably gives others cause to smile paternalistically at your gullibility.”

    …you predict the opposite of what I did?

    What do you predict for the next 3-5 years? Different from my predictions? Do you agree with them?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  50. BJ

    Source:

    canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=46999d7c-4078-4fe4-a0e0-3df0eaac0f4f

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  51. BJ

    This is true. It always WAS true… it isn’t a change. What makes you think it is?

    It will mostly be about technology. It won’t be about switching to public transport, organic farming, socia*ism, or becoming “green”. It will be the US version of Green, which differs markedly from the NZ version, which has a lot more red in it, and is frequently anti technology.

    Doing something is beyond either of the major parties. National has proven only that it is good at undoing and Labour has proven that it is quite talented at NOT doing.

    Oh, NZ won’t do much at all. They’ll talk big and stall, because they know we don’t make a difference, neither can we afford to do much for the next ten years. I’m talking mostly about the US.

    I give you partial credit. There will be excessive speculation, but there will be actual value produced.

    Where did I say no value will be produced? The tech bubble produced a lot of value. A bubble isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It’s good for us gamblers, too ;)

    As for AGW becoming “part of the furniture” I don’t think I quite understand what you are saying.

    Like the hole in the ozone layer became part of the furniture. People will feel they’re addressing the problem with the energy projects. It won’t be a unique point of difference. It won’t be a political platform. For example, capitalism is part of the furniture.

    The next few years will be about pragmatism and the “now”.

    It depends how deep the crisis goes, but as I’ve said many times in the past – the idealistic green message relies on a booming economy, because it’s a penance message. It’s driven by guilt. People indulge in those messages when they’re well fed, but not when they’re hungry.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  52. BTW:

    tinyurl.com/79cz3f

    Now, one of the reasons given by the Greens why a recent hydro project shouldn’t go ahead was that it damaged the rugged, natural beauty of the river.

    Yet the Greens are quiet on the Mahinerangi Windfarm. The objection from locals is that the windfarm spoils the rugged natural beauty of the land.

    The Green charter says: “For the implementation of ecological wisdom and social responsibility, decisions will be made directly at the
    appropriate level by those affected.”

    Well, “those affected” are objecting.

    The “appropriate level” could be debatable (i.e. national interest) but it renders this principle meaningless. If you can use it to object to certain hydro projects, then surely others can use it to object to wind projects?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  53. “IceBaby Says:
    December 22nd, 2008 at 4:47 pm

    Here’s what will happen:

    1- the new scare story is the economy
    2 – people fear for their jobs
    3 – the immediate will take precedence over the future
    4 – “saving the earth” will be mostly about alternative energy generation projects
    5 – once people see the energy generation projects happening, they’ll feel they have done their bit
    6 – the next 3-5 years will be about pragmatism, not idealism
    7- the AGW message will become part of the furniture
    8 – once that happens, I wouldn’t like to be a party that has green in my name….”

    Icebaby,
    On the basis that you propose (that is that these are just guesses and that obviously we do not know the future) I guess the following (taking your points in order):
    (1) Pessimistically I have to agree with the first 3 of your points. However, in the “background” AGW will continue with substantially less minimisation/avoidance by humans. The recent backdown by developed world leaders at Poznan seems to support the “immediate before the future” scenario.
    (2) On your point 4 and 5 I have to go with BJChip. I however have to concede that whatever little progress is made on green energy technology will probably be latched onto by AGW deniers/sceptics as being “enough”.
    (3) Your point 6 is a bit confusing for me. Based on what I perceive your approach to be I assume you are saying that dealing with the economic crises is “pragmatism” and dealing with AGW is “idealism”? I fundamentally disagree that this analysis is correct and I would rather say that AGW is the biggest threat we face and the economic crises is but part of the cycle of human activity in general. Having said that I think (on your presumed analysis) that you may be right that the present economic crises will unfortunately take precedence over concerns about AGW.
    (4) Your point 7: I assume you mean that the AGW message will lose it’s impact on the broader public? Possibly, but it does not make a difference to the AGW happening.
    (5) In response to your point 8: We (the Greens) will still be here because our prinicples are relevant to the issues of the day, whatever they may be.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  54. >>Your point 6 is a bit confusing for me.

    Fair point.

    In this context, I mean that people will tend to make pragmatic choices based on their immediate needs. For example, people will “vote” for jobs and cheap food, as opposed to paying a premium for greater, holistic concerns (i.e. the environment).

    >>AGW message will lose it’s impact on the broader public?

    Yes. It will be pushed to the back. I think we’ve passed the peak on “AGW-as-defining-issue”. That is not to say the actual problem – as perceived by the Greens, I’m still on the fence about it myself – isn’t there.

    >>the Greens) will still be here

    Possibly, but I think the general public see the Greens and the AGW message being inextricably interlinked. When that concern gets pushed to the back burner, so to will the Green Party. The core base won’t change, but it remains to be seen if the base is above 5%.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  55. Icebaby,
    You said:
    “Possibly, but I think the general public see the Greens and the AGW message being inextricably interlinked. When that concern gets pushed to the back burner, so to will the Green Party. The core base won’t change, but it remains to be seen if the base is above 5%.”

    This is an interesting statement.
    I agree there is a core of us that vote Green, I “believe” it to be 5% or slightly above and it increases when the issues of the day can successfully be linked to Green policy – this depends on the campaign strategy, which is why I find myself in the camp that pushes for a stronger environmental focus by the party.

    As to the link between the Greens and AGW, yes the link is inextricable because we have aligned ourselves with the issue on purpose. It is however not the only environmental issue that the Greens are linked to and I think other issues will also be coming to the fore e.g water quality and dirty energy that will find resonance amongst potential Green voters as the AGW message becomes stale. (I know I am repeating this but I don’t want to create the impression that I think the AGW message is not correct – I think it is the real issue).

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  56. hee hee..i got nex weeks lotto numbers here – any takers amongst you fake wizards? It is money after all – hey Frog – i found their Xmas round-up; have a read – dam funny stuff.
    Is Santa a right wingnut in Drag? Could be, the way he elbows his way to the front alla time – very unpc…hey Mt Cook! I tried but she hit me with th ladle – oh dear Merry Whatever…

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  57. ‘Twas the night before Christmas and Santa’s a wreck…
    How to live in a world that’s politically correct?
    His workers no longer would answer to “Elves”.
    “Vertically Challenged” they were calling themselves.
    And labour conditions at the North Pole
    were alleged by the union to stifle the soul.

    Four reindeer had vanished, without much propriety,
    Released to the wilds by the Humane Society.
    And equal employment had made it quite clear
    That Santa had better not use just reindeer.
    So Dancer and Donner, Comet and Cupid
    Were replaced with 4 pigs, and you know that looked stupid!

    The runners had been removed from his sleigh;
    The ruts were termed dangerous by the E.P.A.
    And people had started to call for the cops
    When they heard sled noises on their rooftops.
    Second-hand smoke from his pipe had his workers quite frightened.
    His fur trimmed red suit was called “Unenlightened.”

    And to show you the strangeness of life’s ebbs and flows,
    Rudolf was suing over unauthorised use of his nose
    And had gone on Homes, in front of the nation,
    Demanding millions in over-due compensation.
    So, half of the reindeer were gone; and his wife,
    Who suddenly said she’d enough of this life,

    Joined a self-help group, packed, and left in a whiz,
    Demanding from now on her title was Ms.
    And as for the gifts, why, he’d never had a notion
    That making a choice could cause so much commotion.
    Nothing of leather, nothing of fur,
    Which meant nothing for him. And nothing for her.

    Nothing that might be construed to pollute.
    Nothing to aim, Nothing to shoot.
    Nothing that clacked, or made lots of noise.
    Nothing for just girls, or for just boys.
    Nothing that claimed to be gender specific.
    Nothing that’s warlike or non-pacifistic.

    No candy or sweets…they were bad for the tooth.
    Nothing that seemed to embellish a truth.
    And fairy tales, while not quite forbidden,
    Were like Ken and Barbie, better off hidden.
    For they raised the hackles of those psychological
    Who claimed the only good gift was one ecological.

    No baseball, no football…someone could get hurt;
    Besides, playing sports exposed kids to dirt.
    Dolls were said to be sexist, and should be passe;
    And WII would rot your entire brain away.
    So Santa just stood there, dishevelled, perplexed;
    He just could not figure out what to do next.

    He tried to be merry, tried to be gay,
    (But you’ve got to be careful with that word today).
    His sack was quite empty, limp to the ground;
    Nothing acceptable was to be found.
    Something special was needed, a gift that he might
    Give to all without angering the green, left or right.

    A gift that would satisfy, with no indecision,
    Each group of people, every religion;
    Every ethnicity, every hue,
    Everyone, everywhere…even you.
    So here is that gift, it’s price beyond worth…
    May you and your loved ones, enjoy life on Earth.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  58. IceBaby

    I’ve done plenty of predictions here, and my track record is far better than I like it to be (I am a pessimist and it would be far better for everyone for me to be wrong more often).

    The difference between my educated guess and someone else’s ? Mostly in the education I guess. Consider the WAY we make those guesses about the future. It isn’t just computed. We use them but we primates have been making guesses about the future ever since the grass on the plains moved when there wasn’t any wind.

    We have a model of the world built into each and every functional human brain. The more accurate the model the better our likelihood of survival, the more detailed the model the harder it is to use, or use quickly. It is a curious optimization problem. The point is that we all do predictions. You call it educated guesswork and that’s true enough as well. The problem we have with you is that YOU assert that your educated guess is as valid as the IPCC, and a sufficient basis to risk the future of all of human civilization.

    However, your model is informed too much by economics and not enough by thermodynamics.

    Risk management isn’t as serious because anything more than 15 years from happening isn’t serious to any economic model that relies on unlimited growth as a basis for estimating, and most appear to suffer this problem.

    All that is as it is, and I may be wrong about some parts of it. I am usually not inclined to put any line in the sand and say that X will be or Y will not. (When I have done so my errors can be counted on the fingers of one foot). I do try to couch my criticisms of other’s models in something like civility rather than derision. Some people respond to this and we gain mutual benefit from the exchanges….

    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  59. >>s that YOU assert that your educated guess is as valid as the IPCC, and a sufficient basis to risk the future of all of human civilization.

    Nonsense. It’s *more* valid than the IPCC! ;)

    But only if I’m right and they’re wrong….

    >>I do try to couch my criticisms of other’s models in something like civility

    I don’t tell you how to speak.

    Personally, I find the twee politically-correct mode of conversation used by many Greens – not you – annoying, but each to their own.

    I prefer to be direct, and I like putting a stick in the hive. I think it’s more fun when people’s passions come to the surface.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  60. Johan

    the issues of the day can successfully be linked to Green policy

    Having Green in the name is both a plus and a minus. When environmental issues are at the forefront of people’s minds, it’s a great brand. But when they aren’t, it’s a major negative. “Finance Company” used to be favorable term when the going was good….

    Now, I know “being Green” doesn’t just mean “the environment” as far as the faithful are concerned. But I’d wager everyone else isn’t making that distinction….

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  61. Icebaby,
    I take your point about the perception that Green is perceived as being solely linked to the environment etc. and I think it may be true for the general public.

    However, the Green Party is part of the wider family of Green Parties internationally, who in general terms subscribe to the same principles and as such builds up a “brand” similar to the “brands” of Labour/Labor parties internationally, or National parties internationally. While a person can not automatically make assumptions about policy detail based on the party name only, parties under these banners can generally be placed in similar positions on the Left/Right spectrum in relation to each other. My point is that while the Green in the party name may have certain limitations it has the benefit of a “brand”name as well, as you point out. If the Green Party is wrongly perceived by the public as being concerned only by environmental issues (and not by other issues of the day), the “brand” must not be abandoned but rather the perception changed while sticking to the four party principles. Eventually the “brand” will become established as a recognizable and available option for voters for all the issues of the day.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  62. Fair points.

    I think the problem will be in showing the true colours. I doubt the party would survive it, because whilst Green is currently fashionable, but R@d is not. Will R@d be fashionable just as green becomes unfashionable? It seems unlikely, especially in this centerist world.

    I think a centre party with a green tinge could survive , but a far left one won’t. It’s about as likely as a far right party surviving in NZ. ACT are only holding on by a seat, and I think their days are numbered, too.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  63. ……………. As the enviroment degrades ‘green’ issues will become paramount ……………….. and it has nothing to do with whats fashionable.

    ………… those who complain about PC are usualy a bit ‘socialy retarded’ and hanker for the old days when we had blunt direct language ……………. for instance ” poof’s, fags, whores, niggers, kites, wogs, wops, chinks, lefties ” etc etc etc, everyone knew what you meant but those bloody PC wowsers have spoiled all that ………..

    ……. aside from cannabis users and other “druggies” we cant discriminate against minoritys as we did in the old days.

    The countrys going down the drain ……………..

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  64. >>and it has nothing to do with whats fashionable.

    Yes, it does. The hippies tuned in and dropped out in the 60′s and 70′s. These trends come and go.

    >>those who complain about PC are usualy a bit ’socialy retarded’

    PC can be a tool for good (inclusive), and a tool for evil. It becomes evil when it is used to shut people up. It’s the passive aggressive option, often used by cowards.

    >>discriminate against minoritys

    I am one, mate.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  65. oh and reading earlier responses to my post about the natianals being the ones who are irresponsible.

    …………….. I’ll take my information from economists and other experts that Labor ( or cullen ) were pretty responsible apart from the election bribes bidding war that the Nats took full part in as well.

    In fact the last labor govt spent proportionaly less than the nats before them ……………

    The books were shit when the natianals last left power and thats not counting or including the usual damaging stuff the nats do to our society with their ‘divide and rule’ style ……………….

    ………. they really are trash

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  66. Nope – Lots of high performing people have a place on the autistic spectrum. Doesn’t mean much at all if you ask me. A little Asperger’s syndrome can take you places in the high-tech world. ; -)

    respectfully
    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  67. Fitted kitchens, Bj,
    Well technically yes as a measure of social retardation comparative to the rest of the populas is the main diagnostic criteria for any autistic spectrum disorder :P .
    That said, to call an individual with aspergers autistic is alittle incorrect also, while it is an autistic spectrum disorder because of commonalities in symptoms and heredity; an individual with aspergers, such as myself, will generally only be mildly socially impaired and will often have average or higher IQ than the general populas and as such can normally account for such social ‘retardation’ with some effort. Alot of the greatist minds were with aspergers, infact asperger used to refer to children with aspergers as something along the lines of ‘little scientists’.
    Those with autism on the other hand have a stronger social impairment and have delayed cognitive development which results in mental impairment/retardation, infact in all but high-functioning autism where the iq can be about 75 to 100 (if i remmeber correctly) the other autistic diagnosies also present with mental retardation.
    I wouldint view aspergers as a disorder so much as a gift; as bj says it can get you places in academia and applied science. If i didint fit the diagnosis so strongly in my youth then i would probally be just another silly irrational religious/moralistic nutter like many on this forum. :P

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  68. sapient – those ‘silly irrational religious/moralistic nutters” that infest this forum can be identified as ‘other than you’ by what mechanism? :-)
    In my various workplaces, I have had a good deal to do with Aspergers and autistic people.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  69. Greenfly,
    :P , by the normal mechanisims i employ of course; What is it that they want to accheive and how do their means work for or against accheiving said goal, thus how rational/irrational are their means.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  70. Yes, Sapient, I should have guessed! Clever, logical and extremely literal – gifted of course, but having difficulty with things like empathy, intuition, metaphor, seeing things from different perspectives…

    I have a daughter (and also a niece) with Asperger’s syndrome who is all of the above, but has yet to find her niche, sadly.

    If, like her, you are not recognised for your gifts, and many AS people are not, then you need us silly irrational soft-hearted, ‘normals’ to care about you and make it less easy for others to exploit, ridicule or hurt you.

    Sometimes it isn’t about achieving goals but about survival with some kind of dignity.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  71. Yeah – each to his /her own to the best of their ability, and sometime disability – we all go forward together – the saving grace being not all are at their worst on the same day.
    There is a lot of talk about what is unique to Humans on this site.
    For me – it is our unlimited ability to care for each other.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>