The top 16 has been decided and England are in the box seat for a straight run to the final. By coming second in their group, they now face much lesser opponents now that Germany has been eliminated. Had Germany topped their pool I am sure England would have fought tooth and nail to win their final group match against Belgium as they'd likely be facing Germany in the quarter-finals had they lost.
Belgium are now faced with the likely prospect of Brazil in the quarter-finals, which is what England would have come across had they won their group.
England then, must beat Colombia round of sixteen; then beat either Sweden or Switzerland (easily achievable), then they'll come up against one of Spain, Russia, Croatia and Denmark. All of these teams have looked unconvincing. So it's down to England against Brazil in the final, Or England against Uruguay. Whoever it is, being on the other side of the draw looks far more formidable.
It looks like England have their thinking caps on.
June 29, 2018
June 27, 2018
The Big Lie About Reycling
The big lie is you're helping save the planet by recycling plastics. Am I committing heresy in saying it? Probably.
Here's the thing; recycling certain metals makes sense. They're expensive and come in limited quantities when mined. An example is gold, silver, lead and copper. Steel, the list goes on and on. But plastic, that's problematic as oil is available in vast quantities despite what the naysayers claim and when produced manufacturers do so in large production runs, using economies of scale.
Now consider the consumer, that's you and me. We go into a store and buy a drink stored in a plastic bottle. Does it make sense to then separate that plastic, transport it, sort it, process it into another plastic whatever? Clearly it does not as the amount of hydrocarbons displaced in 'saving' that precious bottle is greater than what went into making the bottle in the first place.
The only sensible thing you can do is ensure that that plastic bottle takes a short and safe trip to a landfill. Maybe, possibly an incinerator. But it makes absolutely no sense to recycle the thing.
And the really big lie is the one told to you time and again. That lie is when choosing to recycle you're saving the planet, protecting cute seals or some such, sustainable this, eco that. How about this as a sales pitch; are you prepared to take a 20% pay cut to save the planet? Oh and with no certainty that taking a pay cut will actually work, but it will make you feel like you're doing something. Have I won you over? No? Well that's what the consumer is being asked to do as that recycling 'industry' is building cost into every part of their saving everything.
Recycling sometimes makes sense. Mostly though, it's a sales pitch hoodwinking you, the put-upon consumer, into paying more and receiving less. What is the answer? Engineer alternatives that's what. Find other ways to do things. Don't take junk and think you can make something out of it.
Here's the thing; recycling certain metals makes sense. They're expensive and come in limited quantities when mined. An example is gold, silver, lead and copper. Steel, the list goes on and on. But plastic, that's problematic as oil is available in vast quantities despite what the naysayers claim and when produced manufacturers do so in large production runs, using economies of scale.
Now consider the consumer, that's you and me. We go into a store and buy a drink stored in a plastic bottle. Does it make sense to then separate that plastic, transport it, sort it, process it into another plastic whatever? Clearly it does not as the amount of hydrocarbons displaced in 'saving' that precious bottle is greater than what went into making the bottle in the first place.
The only sensible thing you can do is ensure that that plastic bottle takes a short and safe trip to a landfill. Maybe, possibly an incinerator. But it makes absolutely no sense to recycle the thing.
And the really big lie is the one told to you time and again. That lie is when choosing to recycle you're saving the planet, protecting cute seals or some such, sustainable this, eco that. How about this as a sales pitch; are you prepared to take a 20% pay cut to save the planet? Oh and with no certainty that taking a pay cut will actually work, but it will make you feel like you're doing something. Have I won you over? No? Well that's what the consumer is being asked to do as that recycling 'industry' is building cost into every part of their saving everything.
Recycling sometimes makes sense. Mostly though, it's a sales pitch hoodwinking you, the put-upon consumer, into paying more and receiving less. What is the answer? Engineer alternatives that's what. Find other ways to do things. Don't take junk and think you can make something out of it.
June 23, 2018
Lockwood Smith on Brexit
Lockwood Smith is a former Speaker of the NZ House of Representatives and High Commissioner to the UK, here making comment on Brexit. He explains precisely why Brexit is good for the UK.
June 22, 2018
Making East Cape Monaco
This is to provide an illustration of what I was talking about with my post, proposing that East Cape New Zealand be established as a principality like Monaco.
Study the picture below...
I've drawn a line roughly 20 kilometres long from just south of Tikitiki across to East Cape. This is a territory much larger than Monaco which is only approx. 2 square kilometres. Instead of looking at this area as deprived, create it as a haven for the rich; zero personal taxation for those from outside New Zealand and Australia but resident within East Cape for a minimum amount of time. Companies with no local business pay no income tax at all.
This principality would be in charge of its own government but not be able to have its own armed forces or foreign policy. What do you think?
Study the picture below...
 |
| East Cape New Zealand as Monaco |
I've drawn a line roughly 20 kilometres long from just south of Tikitiki across to East Cape. This is a territory much larger than Monaco which is only approx. 2 square kilometres. Instead of looking at this area as deprived, create it as a haven for the rich; zero personal taxation for those from outside New Zealand and Australia but resident within East Cape for a minimum amount of time. Companies with no local business pay no income tax at all.
This principality would be in charge of its own government but not be able to have its own armed forces or foreign policy. What do you think?
June 19, 2018
England at FIFA World Cup 2018
England beat Tunisia in their opening match of the FIFA World Cup. The victory came in spite of the refereeing which could at best be described as deplorable. Despite all the technology, the beautiful game is still blighted by the scourge of the referees.
June 17, 2018
International Rugby Union
The modern rules are ruining the game of Rugby Union. I've just watched the France vs New Zealand test in Wellington. It was a contest up to the point where the referee ruined the game by sending off Benjamin Fall of France. People pay to see a contest not this nonsense. The players are grown men who know they're in a game where collisions occur. Fall was not acting maliciously. They need to sort this out as referees, or more precisely the modern rules are ruining the spectacle.
June 16, 2018
Christchurch
What the hell is going on with Christchurch, New Zealand? They've now come up with the idea to drop something resembling a dead fish in the middle of Cathedral Square.
https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/q/b/j/f/5/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1qbihe.png/1528872088633.jpg
Are these people on planet earth? Why does the council keep getting re-elected?
https://resources.stuff.co.nz/content/dam/images/1/q/b/j/f/5/image.related.StuffLandscapeSixteenByNine.620x349.1qbihe.png/1528872088633.jpg
Are these people on planet earth? Why does the council keep getting re-elected?
June 13, 2018
Tony Abbott on Brexit
Former Australian Prime Minister, Tony Abbott has waded into the Brexit debate with an opinion piece in the UK's Sun newspaper.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6505379/brexit-wonderful-moment-for-britain-tony-abbott/
I notice he mentions the UK could join NAFTA. They could, and they could also join the TPP in the Pacific. Little known is that the UK owns part of the Pacific about the size of France. It is located around Pitcairn.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6505379/brexit-wonderful-moment-for-britain-tony-abbott/
I notice he mentions the UK could join NAFTA. They could, and they could also join the TPP in the Pacific. Little known is that the UK owns part of the Pacific about the size of France. It is located around Pitcairn.
June 12, 2018
New Zealand Political Landscape
Right now in NZ the two major parties, Labour and National, are pretty much locked in head-on battle. The landscape (for want of a better word) has returned to that which existed before the introduction of MMP (Mixed Member Proportional) in 1996.
In the early days of MMP smaller parties did have a much larger say. Examples are ACT (Association of Consumers and Taxpayers) and the Alliance (a left wing assemblage of New Labour, Mana Motuhake, Greens, Social Credit etc). Now there is no Alliance, and just the one ACT member of parliament.
Only two smaller parties figure these days; NZ First and Greens. Both hover around the 5% threshold. National are left stranded as they only have ACT as a natural fit.
Here's the deal, future governments in the very near future will be elected due to the strength of those smaller parties. It will be essential to have all their votes count. If the smaller parties currently in parliament fall below the 5% threshold their votes may be wasted. Seeing as all votes count once an electorate seat is won by that party, the sensible solution is to make deals, offering up winnable or safe seats to those potential partners. It means losing one or two electorates for the larger party but they have a chance of forming a government.
Think of it like this; if Labour are on 41% at the next election and their current coalition partners are on 4.5% each and they have no electorate seats, then the votes for those smaller partners don't count. But if Labour do deals, they can ensure all 9% that could be wasted fully counts, they get to 50% and form a government.
Consider the alternatives for either major party. If Labour do not play the game smart, they stand to watch National form a government with less than 50% of the vote if National end up the largest party. That's because all parliamentary seats must be allocated and are distributed amongst parties reaching the threshold. For its part National has to adjust and find a natural fit. One approach they could take given its much larger membership base, is start other brands, or possibly reverse takeover smaller parties.
How does this work? Well political parties must be democratic. The BlueGreens group within National could all join the Greens and take them over. Alternatively farmer groups within National could take over NZ First. National could do this quite easily if they had the will to do it. Whether they are organised or not however is another question. My thinking is the Greens would be easier to takeover.
We are in for some interesting manoeuvring.
In the early days of MMP smaller parties did have a much larger say. Examples are ACT (Association of Consumers and Taxpayers) and the Alliance (a left wing assemblage of New Labour, Mana Motuhake, Greens, Social Credit etc). Now there is no Alliance, and just the one ACT member of parliament.
Only two smaller parties figure these days; NZ First and Greens. Both hover around the 5% threshold. National are left stranded as they only have ACT as a natural fit.
Here's the deal, future governments in the very near future will be elected due to the strength of those smaller parties. It will be essential to have all their votes count. If the smaller parties currently in parliament fall below the 5% threshold their votes may be wasted. Seeing as all votes count once an electorate seat is won by that party, the sensible solution is to make deals, offering up winnable or safe seats to those potential partners. It means losing one or two electorates for the larger party but they have a chance of forming a government.
Think of it like this; if Labour are on 41% at the next election and their current coalition partners are on 4.5% each and they have no electorate seats, then the votes for those smaller partners don't count. But if Labour do deals, they can ensure all 9% that could be wasted fully counts, they get to 50% and form a government.
Consider the alternatives for either major party. If Labour do not play the game smart, they stand to watch National form a government with less than 50% of the vote if National end up the largest party. That's because all parliamentary seats must be allocated and are distributed amongst parties reaching the threshold. For its part National has to adjust and find a natural fit. One approach they could take given its much larger membership base, is start other brands, or possibly reverse takeover smaller parties.
How does this work? Well political parties must be democratic. The BlueGreens group within National could all join the Greens and take them over. Alternatively farmer groups within National could take over NZ First. National could do this quite easily if they had the will to do it. Whether they are organised or not however is another question. My thinking is the Greens would be easier to takeover.
We are in for some interesting manoeuvring.
June 08, 2018
President Trump and Tariffs
Oh no, President Trump has upset everyone with his tariffs on steel and aluminium. However if you step back for a minute, it is easy to see that the US has been taken advantage of. The countries that are now the focus of Trump's attention, very quickly skew the playing field when it suits them. All the US is doing is evening things up. Those countries affected are crying crocodile tears in other words.
June 01, 2018
Willie Jackson on the AM Show
Good on you Willie Jackson for saying what needed to be said. Turns out you see, National do hate poor people. Readers may remember me asking this very question of then NZ Prime Minister Simon "Bill" English. Well here it is folks, National were throwing people out of perfectly liveable homes. It's disgusting to think but apparently true.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/05/national-had-no-idea-meth-guidelines-were-wrong-judith-collins.html
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2018/05/national-had-no-idea-meth-guidelines-were-wrong-judith-collins.html
Mr Jackson said Ms Collins was feigning ignorance "to cover for [Ms Bennett] who was fronting and demonising poor people".
"Bennett should be on her knees grovelling to this nation for what she did to our community, what she did to poor people... This is one of the worst things that a Government has ever done."