Did you see the one about . . .

July 4, 2010

New Zealand and Uruguay as sporting equivalents – Pablo at Kiwipolitico compares one small country where sport and agriculture are important with another.

Don’t admit them to hospital then – Macdoctor on the smoking ban for prisoners.

Star the second – In A Strange Land has a star chart to help her stay dry for July.

What makes us happy? Rivetting Kate Taylor on what really matters.

Sparks in the universe – Stellar Cafe on the bright ideas that get away from you.

What determines productivity? – Anti-Dismal on attemts toa nswer the big question.

Biology isn’t destiny but it affects your saving throws – Offsetting Behaviour on nature vs nurutre.

Trio – Quote Unquote on tree planting and muttering and purring.

Mines railways or jobs – Liberty Scott on unintended consequences.

Happy Birthday to us – Gooner at No Minister on the blog’s third birthday.

TraeMe hints – Oswald Bastable knows something but he’s not telling much.

Farewell to the Independent – Liberation bids the paper goodbye with a parody of Chirs Trotter’s writing.

Apropos of which is The Independent 1992 – 2010 at Bowalley Road. He also discusses the redefinition of protest in Russel’s tussle.


Camembert and brie are healthy

April 27, 2010

It’s official – camembert and brie and healthy.

So are lamb racks and oysters.

So is canned and dried fruit – even if it has more sugar and preservative than vitamins.

So is pizza and full cream, high sugar yoghurt but, alas, not low fat ice cream.

So are Cactus Kate’s favourite dishes at Euro.

Gooner at No Minsiter thinks McDonalds’ burgers are and Whaleoil reckons most food at KFC is too.

The Maori Party’s Goods and Services Tax (Exemption of Healthy Foods Bill says so:

• Fruit and vegetables (including fresh, frozen, canned and dried):
• Breads and cereals (including all bread, grains, rice and pasta):
• Milk and milk products (including cheese, yoghurt and plain milk, but excluding ice cream, cream products, condensed and flavoured milk):
• Lean meat, poultry, seafood, eggs, nuts, seeds and legumes

The Visible Hand in Economics asks several good questions about the research behind the desire for exempetions.

I reckon it just proves that while good tax is an oxymoron, simple taxes are better.


Did you see the one about . . .

September 23, 2009

Friday motivation: Life = Risk  at Motella.

The Year 2050 at No Minister where Gooner says it’s time to cut to the core.

The daffy ambition of turning gold to blue – Alf Grumble digs up some facts on bulb breeding.

That was my suggestion! – Kiwiblog looks at negotiations on the 3 strikes policy.

Sensible shoes a safety issue – the Hand Mirror discusses heels high & low.

More court secrecy – Stephen Franks isn’t impressed by name suppression.

Wowser Alert! Destroy all those cute photos of the kids!!!! – Opinionated Mummy calls for common sense.

Get your free immigration advice here!! – Monkey with Typewriter wasn’t impressed with the service.


Word of the day

September 2, 2009

Propagrandstanding – explained by Gooner at No Minister.


Against the Act but not for smacking

June 25, 2009

It’s a tried and true debating strategy to take your opponents’ arguments to ludicrous extremes which enables you to depict them as extremists.

That’s why people who don’t want any change in the law around child discipline label anyone who does as pro-smacking.

However, it is possible to be against the Act without being in favour of smacking.

I don’t think smacking is a good thing to do but nor do I think parents who administer a light smack should be criminalised for doing so.

And what’s a light smack?  Borrowing from Chester Borrows and the amendment he attempted to introduce to the Act,  it would be one from which any pain is transitory and trifling, which doesn’t use a weapon or tool and isn’t inflicted by any means that is cruel, degrading or terrifying.

That would be a lot better than the old Section 59 and its replacement which still allows smacking providing its for prevention rather than correction.

Gooner points out at No Minister confusingly this means:

At the end of the day a smack for correction is prohibited but a smack for prevention is permitted. If a child constantly plays up then that child can be smacked under subsection (c) as long as parents tell the child “that is to prevent you behaving like that again“, rather than “that is to correct you for behaving like that“.

How silly is that? The Act which aimed to outlaw smacking still permits it yet those who want to change it are criticised for being pro-smacking.

The proponents of the Act got it wrong.

It’s bad law which permits smacking, providing its for the approved reason.

It should be changed to protect children, to protect families and to stop wasting police time.

There are more than enough crimes of violence, the effects of which aren’t transitory or trifling, which need their attention.


Running out of the blue

March 14, 2009

Hundreds of runners, walkers, mountain bikers and their supporters are converging on Wanaka today for the Motutapu Icebreaker.

It’s an off-road marathon or 50 kilomtere mountain bike ride through stunning scenery.

Among this year’s entrants will be Cardrona farmer Anne Scurr who is doing the run to celebrate her sons’ recovery from depression and to raise funds for the Mental Health Foundation .

You can make a donation here.

For another story on running for a cause, Gooner’s post at No Minsiter on the Taupo Iron Man run is inspirational.


%d bloggers like this: