Open Mike 25/08/25

Written By: notices and features - Date published: - 53 comments
Categories: open mike


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

53 comments on “Open Mike 25/08/25”

Comment numbers have changed to permanent references. Older quoted numbers may no longer identify the same comment.

  2. 2

    Double-Blind Trials Are a Sign of Respect – by Chad Orzel

    of course the traditional practices of pre-industrial society can offer useful hints to modern science. That’s because they’re based on exactly the same thing.

    ou look at the world around you, and observe some phenomenon or collection of phenomena that you want to explain or exploit. You think about how that happens and make a model of why it works the way it does. You test the model by making further observations and conducting experiments. Then you tell other people the results of your tests, so they can benefit from what you’ve learned. This is an iterative process— once you’ve gone through it, you have some new information about the world that can help refine your model and extend it to other phenomena, and telling others about it lets them share in the benefits.

    There are no "alternative ways of knowing"!

    "Indigenous knowledge" where it is valid, was arrived at by the same, "Look (Observe) Think(Hypothesis) Test(Experiment) and tell (inform others) as the system we call science.

    Polynesion Navigators managed to find tiny Pacific Islands repeatedly because, whatever it is called, they applied look, think,test, tell. Just as modern scientists do. Of course witch Doctors, bullshit artists and charlatins abounded in every society, just as we have now. Unfortunately for our society they don't get "lost at sea"!

    Untested "reckons" unsupported by repeatable evidence, are simply opinions, that have no validity. Wherever they originate!

    1. 2.1

      Yeah, that's not surprising. Indigenous cultures have an interest in their own material subsistence, so their observations of natural phenomena are going to become very perceptive over time. Trial and error based on what they had observed in the past would almost certainly have been a way to advance their understanding. Nowadays, this is exactly how urban people learn to garden – over years we develop useful generalisations based on patterns of observable things. There is also the internet which can help – but this is no more than your neighbour or kin group in another village telling you what they've noticed – albeit on a bigger scale. (Though the bigger scale is also more likely to lead you astray with nonsense.)

      Acknowledging this obvious fact doesn't mean accepting the causes that indigenous cultures might assign to phenomena that they have accurately observed – such as gods, supernatural beings, or the spirits of ancestors. Unfortunately, the western chauvinists or outright racists who sneer at the idea of 'indigenous knowledge' seem incapable of making this simple distinction. It is spectacularly stupid of them – like sneering at Aristotle for not understanding Newtonian physics.

      1. 2.1.1

        Good observations.

        The other influence that colours science/indigenous knowledge is the impact of commerce.

        When findings from tests are overlooked or downplayed because 'profits' or first to market.

    2. 2.2

      One question to ask about indigenous knowledge is which parts of it have been disproven, and should not be used. Plenty of Western knowledge has been disproved, even something as simple as the density of liquid fluorine, which was underestimated for decades. So just saying some part of indigenous knowledge is wrong doesn't mean it's all irrelevant or useless. But if you can't think of anything that's wrong, or are offended at the question, then that's a much bigger problem.

    1. 3.1

      If the training is little different to that of the past, what are they saying?

      The past….there has been, and IMO, still is, a worrying systemic, bullying,dysfunctional culture in NZ's Police from top..down.

      Which has in fact, often been called out, and reported, by the decent, moral and law abiding members of NZ's Police force…and I greatly respect them for that.

      However, I link this….I followed what had happened to Louise Nicholas, and the absolutely corrupt slime bags responsible and the cover ups….bordering on move along,nothing to see here, by those who we should be able to implicitly trust.

      There are many more cases over the time..and are not included in the link (how many links/pages would be needed?)

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_Zealand_Police_controversies

      NZ Police…a work in progress? I sincerely hope toward a better way…

        1. 3.1.1.1

          If you like? IMO surely one as part of the other ? As I said previously : Top..down. As always Leadership leads. For better or worse…

          1. 3.1.1.1.1

            The interface is after they graduate. There is on the job training at that point

            Our police are sort of notorious for the short period of training at their college.

  4. 4

    I posted this on yesty OM before today's was up.

    It should come as no surprise that once this was enshrined in law then the restrictions would be loosened.

    This from the crowd that 'saved' the budget by denying thousands an opportunity to acquire pay equity.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/570934/act-mp-seeks-support-for-bill-changing-end-of-life-choice-act

    The list of Ministry recommendations is concerning considering the dire state of health particularly staffing and senior staff.

    Contrast what is proposed by the money over life party with this tragic story of under funding.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2019001311/mum-battles-red-tape-to-get-help-for-child-with-ocd

    1. 5.1

      If Luxon wanted lower interest rates, he could assist the Reserve Bank to achieve lower rates by taking money out of the economy – via taxing the well-to-do.

      2. 5.1.2

        Instead of using tax and mortgage rates we should be using kiwisaver to take money out of the system, the higher the income the higher the %.

        Kiwisaver needs to be mandatory

        1. 5.1.2.1

          Kiwisaver needs to be mandatory

          Hell no. And especially not when the country is doing it so hard.

          Further, we would need to lift incomes to enable the poor to afford it.

          Additionally, the country currently needs that funding to improve our ailing heath system and lagging infrastructure.

          1. 5.1.2.1.1

            It could be related to an income earned threshold, so those who cannot afford it are not impacted.

            That said, some others can but choose non KiwiSaver savings approach.

        2. 5.1.2.2

          If only you were leaking the lefts new policy.

          At the moment, when times are good, they raise interest rates and the banks take more of your earnings. When times are bad youre in your own.

          Using kiwisaver to stop the market from overheating and then giving it back to you if you hit dire circumstances makes a lot of sense.

          Seems some respondents can't see it though.

          1. 5.1.2.2.1

            Makes far more sense using a targeted tax approach (rather than a blunt tool) that would keep more of the funding here opposed to going to the big 4 banks which are some of the country's largest Kiwisaver operators

        3. 5.1.2.3

          Kiwisaver needs to be mandatory

          I tend to agree. Kiwisaver is better than nothing, but the NZ / Aussie 'super gap' is alas too wide to close – that ship has sailed, along with a lot of young Kiwi talent.

          How ‘super’ is paid

          New Zealand – KiwiSaver
          Contributions made by you: KiwiSaver (3 – 10%) is voluntary.

          Australia – Superannuation
          Employer contributions: Superannuation (12%) is compulsory.
          Contributions made by you: These are called voluntary contributions.

          https://www.firstsuper.com.au/kiwisaver-vs-superannuation/

          1. 5.1.2.3.1

            that ship has sailed, along with a lot of young Kiwi talent.

            The best time to plant tree was 20 years ago the 2nd best is now , , kitchy but true

      3. 5.1.3

        Nicola Willis can take full control over monetary policy off the RBNZ for the next full six months at her discretion. After that it only requires to pass a parliamentary vote to continue on.

        She could also just tell the governor to directly lower interest rates directly as a goal in her next instruction letter (this letter usually asks the RBNZ to complete an impossible task, to keep inflation in the 2-3% band using monetary policy alone).

        1. 5.1.3.1

          Why, using monetary policy alone?

          Bollard complained about that and suggested a mortgage surcharge instead.

          This was because raising the OCR raises the dollar – harming the exporter.

          Since then there has been

          1. a required deposit (20% for first home buyers and a higher rate for investors)

          and then

          2.income to loan criteria

          A rushed lower OCR is seen as benefiting the homeowners and landlords who vote NACT.

          Stimulation by government is more likely to help all or those who need it most.

          Which is why the noise from Luxon, to mimic Trump populism in service to the haves, rather than the have nots.

          1. 5.1.3.1.1

            What I am pointing out is just how independent the RBNZ is. If Luxon actually wants this RBNZ policy he would make it happen, if he wants an institution to blame for a mess of the economy his government has made, he lectures the RBNZ on their policy choices (which Willis asked them to implement).

              1. 5.1.3.1.1.1.1

                The government only holds one visible line on most issues due to traditional cabinet rules, so I don't know how anybody would know this supposed difference in position exists. The RBNZ acknowledges that housing market results are kind of beyond their capacity so I don't expect they can get house prices rising again, this outcome may well even be beyond the government's ability to alter.

                1. 5.1.3.1.1.1.1.1

                  The government only holds one visible line on most issues due to traditional cabinet rules, so I don't know how anybody would know this supposed difference in position exists.

                  The journalist did it, by quoting Bishop and Luxon.

                  The RBNZ does seem to be aware of a link between its OCR settings and house prices

                  The Reserve Bank's admitting to being surprised that house prices haven't been increasing as they expected, while also saying that only about half of the impact of the interest rate cuts made since last year has so far been transmitted through into the economy.

                  Of course other factors such as the numbers migrating to Oz and the government designed downward pressure on incomes is having an impact.

                  https://www.interest.co.nz/economy/134818/reserve-bank-admits-surprise-house-prices-have-not-been-increasing-points-out-only

                  1. 5.1.3.1.1.1.1.1.1

                    Yeah, yeah.

                    That whole last few quoted paragraphs reads like someone (a reserve bank economist) trying very hard to convince themselves they are able to direct the economy while not being able to observe any change in economic direction.

    2. 5.2

      Exactly, the performance of the economy is tangential to RBNZ's mandate – as long banks don't collapse, and inflation stays within the 1-3% band, RBNZ is achieving their goal. Given CPI/inflation is over 2% and the long run aim is 2%, RBNZ still have work to do to reduce CPI, which suggests slow, measured reductions, not larger reductions.

  6. 6

    This government has sucked enough $$ out of the economy already, and precisely in order to bring inflation down.

    Blaming the RB is true but only partial.

    The crushing ideology of targeting government spending at only 25% of the economy has had the same effect as Ruth Richardson did nearly three decades ago.

    Between the Reserve Bank and this government we now have sustained stagflation.

    1. 6.1

      https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/360797892/fiscal-responsibility-doesnt-mean-what-nicola-willis-thinks-it-means?cx_testId=10&cx_testVariant=cx_1&cx_artPos=3&utm_source=the_post_stuff_home&utm_medium=referral#cxrecs_s

      "Addressing New Zealand’s real economic decline requires more public spending, not less. True fiscal responsibility means ensuring government can deliver the public services that underpin a thriving society. It means recognising that prosperity depends on skilled workers, infrastructure, innovation, social cohesion and climate resilience – areas where public investment makes transformative differences."

      Makes sense to me.

    2. 6.2

      "government has sucked enough $$ out of the economy already," are you sure of this? the Willis spending is currently MORE than what Robertson's projected spending was for this period.

      1. 6.2.1

        Willis set the lowest new state spending in a fiscal year for a decade. Right in the face of a big economic contraction and a looming trade shock in the form of a global tariff war.

        Budget 2025 – Budget at a Glance

        Most government departments received no extra funding – all costs including inflation, wage increases, depreciation, regulatory change impacts etc all had to just be absorbed. Health was the main exception but even the capital programme for that was just eviscerated.

    1. 7.1

      There is no part of this economy that can cope with massive extra costs in the form of tax increases. Not housing, not households, not business.

      1. 7.1.1

        You telling me people like Fonterra's chief executive (earing around 6 million dollars annually) can't cope with a tax increase? Yeah, nah.

        1. 7.1.2.1

          We don't have enough billionaires, nor millionaires, nor even double-incomes over $200k.

          and we have far too many in low pay or no pay.

      3. 7.1.3

        Ad, those who have doubled their wealth during this are not paying enough. If they were operating in Australia the top tax is 45%

              1. 7.1.3.1.2.1.1

                The amount of tax claimable offsets for even your basic PAYE earner is INSANE in Australia.

                for example, I can make pre-tax “sacrifices” to my Australian Super account, reducing my PAYE rate, and only pay 15% tax on the gains made in my super account. It’s a no brainer.

                I work from home 2-3 days a week (and often on a Sunday). I can claim .78c for every hour worked from home – usually takes off $1500 from the tax bill.

                I buy office equipment (pens, keyboard, mouse) to replace old gear that I use solely for WFH? Deductible.

                I buy specific work related uniform/safety clothing? Deductible.

                I buy an espresso display screen to travel with for work? Deductible.

                Union fees? Deductible.

                Annual professional body registration fees? Deductible.

                It’s not hard to recover close to $5000 as a tax refund most years.

  8. 8

    Ordinary people's welfare does not count with this lot. Just a vote next year, thanks. Their sole purpose is to facilitate the selloff -Big oil, Ag, Tech, It's the latest incarnation of colonialism don't you know. Well, Maori have seen it all before.

    Unfortunately the failing infrastructure and public services, along with the end of the housing ponzi, along with big mills closing, power prices up, incomes stagnating, people are starting to notice. We are fucked.

Comments are closed.