It is worth remembering that NZ politics work a fair bit differently from US politics. not least is the party system. the party decides what way it's going, and then everyone in that party ends up voting that way/giving speeches to that effect, whatever their actual beliefs. while this is better than it used to be (a layered system of majority votes used to mean that it took (a specific) ten people or less to agree to get a law passed. MMP was introduced in part to put and end to this) it still means that it doesn't even require the invidual to be that clueless to get this sort of result.
the bigger the party, the more MPs are in there off the list. that means if they go against the party line they get the boot and get replaced by the next persons on the list. the rest are in for specific electorates, so can't be just kicked out of parliament, but if they 'cross the floor' (that is, vote against the party) odds are very good that they will NOT get the resources they need to run for the next election, or will be running as an independant against another party member (which Usually, though not always, results in a loss).
the exception to the above is when the party specifically states that something is to be a concence(sp) vote. this is usually done only for bills that would change the way elections work, start wars, etc. but is also used when a private members bill (proposed by an individual, not a party) comes up on an issue that is hot enough that voting either way has good odds of blowing up in the party's face and/or they have not made an opinion of it a part of their platform. alternatively if a coalition partner proposes soemthing that presents a similar situation. this is rare though.
the flip side to all this is that, generally speaking, most people aren't as obsessive about aligning with one party or another as seems to be the case in the USA. it helps that you don't have to go all the way over to the other side of the spectrum on any given issue to change who's running things, of course. (yay for multi-party unicarmel parliaments in constitutional monarchies, i guess. though i always wonder a bit about NZ's 'constitution'. it seems rather... flexable and disorganised, from my understanding of the situation, which is admitedly limited.)
alas, sadly, no. most of them are middle age or older white guys who spend too much time sitting around most of the time. (there are a reasonable selection of people who are not at least one of these, but young-ish + female + fit looking is a rather rare combination, no matter what ethnicity you're talking about...)
pretty sure we all would.
well, at least, i did until i stopped and thought about it and realised it was probably both depressing and stupid. now i don't.
quite possibly, given that the point in a handle (as they used to be called) is to connect your posts/articles/whatever with one annother as being by the same person, while obscuring who that person actually is in the real world, and thus length and conveniance is a fairly irrelivant factor.
they try the same stunt here (in New Zealand) on a surprisingly regular basis. actually, with our MMP system, the only wasted vote is when you vote for an elecotrate MP AND for their party when one or the other doesn't actually best represent you. except for excluding the other candidates doing so is redundant due to the overlaping systems. which doesn't stop the parties constantly pushing you to do so anyway and the majors trying to use media spin to convince you that voting for anyone who's not them is wasted. (never mind that we're not even supposed to HAVE a 'government' and 'opposition'. it was, at least origionaly, set up that the people who Actually Got Elected were, in their entirity, the government, and the unelected govenor picked their cabinete from that pool. the 'opposition' was, depending on how you looked at it, either the people who failed to get elected or those individuals who disagreed with you on the issue at hand, nothing more. of course the moment you introduce party politics that all goes out the window.)
true for goods in limited supply. this is the whole finite vs infinite goods thing coming back and shooting holes in your argument again though. provided someone, ANYONE, is putting even one instance of a distinct infinite good into circulation, for any reason (and when it comes to software, the standard reason would probably be 'the previously available good did not do what i needed at the time'), the simple fact that it is an Infinite good means that as many people as want may take it, and the supply will not deplete. the rate of increase may reduce, but that's it.
finite goods such as food, minierals, and so on are, of course, a different story, because they are a zero sum game.
fun fact: wealth is not an inherantly zero sum game either. (unless you count only the currency units its measured in, and even that's guaranteed only if the currency in question is on an actual meaningful standard.)
depends on the distortion, but subsidising agricultural production seems to be destructive by definition. subsidising Setup is one thing. production? not so much. (that said, there's (probably) a difference between subsidies to encourage production and subsidies to keep the prices down. i believe it has to do with how they are regulated and at what point in the chain they're placed. the latter is (potentually) useful. the former is not.)
and if your local producers and manufacturers cannot compete with imports, the correct responce would be to add tariffs to the imports, not subsidies to the production... also: only to a point. past a point the entire exercise must be deemed impractical and at that point it's better to let the local entity fail, have it's role in the production chain replaced by imports, and it's resources reapplied to something more benificial. (that said, ideally this would be simply a case of making adjustments to what, exactly, is being produced, rather than having entire industries colapse outright.)
a classic case of 'the right amount of the right thing in the right place is good for you. wrong quantities in the wrong place are bad'
there's a few things your body Needs for digesting food and such that, if they get into other parts of your system, can be quite dangerous. i'm guessing this is one of them.
i also seem to remember there being several different varieties of E.coli? but i may be thinking of something else.
On the post: New Zealand Politican Tweets How She's Violating Copyright Law Night Before Supporting Three Strikes Copyright Law
the bigger the party, the more MPs are in there off the list. that means if they go against the party line they get the boot and get replaced by the next persons on the list. the rest are in for specific electorates, so can't be just kicked out of parliament, but if they 'cross the floor' (that is, vote against the party) odds are very good that they will NOT get the resources they need to run for the next election, or will be running as an independant against another party member (which Usually, though not always, results in a loss).
the exception to the above is when the party specifically states that something is to be a concence(sp) vote. this is usually done only for bills that would change the way elections work, start wars, etc. but is also used when a private members bill (proposed by an individual, not a party) comes up on an issue that is hot enough that voting either way has good odds of blowing up in the party's face and/or they have not made an opinion of it a part of their platform. alternatively if a coalition partner proposes soemthing that presents a similar situation. this is rare though.
the flip side to all this is that, generally speaking, most people aren't as obsessive about aligning with one party or another as seems to be the case in the USA. it helps that you don't have to go all the way over to the other side of the spectrum on any given issue to change who's running things, of course. (yay for multi-party unicarmel parliaments in constitutional monarchies, i guess. though i always wonder a bit about NZ's 'constitution'. it seems rather... flexable and disorganised, from my understanding of the situation, which is admitedly limited.)
On the post: New Zealand Politican Tweets How She's Violating Copyright Law Night Before Supporting Three Strikes Copyright Law
Re: I have a question...
On the post: New Zealand Uses Earthquake As An Excuse To Sneak 3 Strikes Law Through
Re: Re: It wasn't attached to other legislation.
well, at least, i did until i stopped and thought about it and realised it was probably both depressing and stupid. now i don't.
On the post: Even Mainstream Reporters Now Mocking US Bogus 'Transparency' On Human Rights Issues Concerning Bradley Manning
Re:
On the post: Is It Time To Form A 'Rogue' Party Instead Of A 'Pirate' Party?
Re: Re:
can we be the first, run the second, and date the third? :P
On the post: ICE Redefines Detainment For Wikileaks Helper: You're Not Being Detained, You Just Can't Leave
Re: Re: Other DHS helpful redefinitions
On the post: Sony Settles PS3 Jailbreaking Lawsuit Against Geohot
Re: Geohot
On the post: 14,000 'Unsaved' Votes Suddenly 'Found' In Wisconsin?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Forget secret votes
On the post: 14,000 'Unsaved' Votes Suddenly 'Found' In Wisconsin?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
funny though :D
On the post: Instant Messenger Conversation Modifies Contract; Signed With 'Awesome'
Re:
On the post: The Cognitive Science Explanation For Why Copyright Doesn't Make Much Sense
Re: Re: Re: Re:
finite goods such as food, minierals, and so on are, of course, a different story, because they are a zero sum game.
fun fact: wealth is not an inherantly zero sum game either. (unless you count only the currency units its measured in, and even that's guaranteed only if the currency in question is on an actual meaningful standard.)
On the post: Why Hasn't The Report Debunking Entire US Foreign IP Policy Received The Attention It Deserves?
Re:
On the post: Monsanto Sued By Organic Farmers Who Don't Want To Be Accused Of Patent Infringement
Re: Re: I'm an actual farmer.
and if your local producers and manufacturers cannot compete with imports, the correct responce would be to add tariffs to the imports, not subsidies to the production... also: only to a point. past a point the entire exercise must be deemed impractical and at that point it's better to let the local entity fail, have it's role in the production chain replaced by imports, and it's resources reapplied to something more benificial. (that said, ideally this would be simply a case of making adjustments to what, exactly, is being produced, rather than having entire industries colapse outright.)
On the post: Monsanto Sued By Organic Farmers Who Don't Want To Be Accused Of Patent Infringement
Re: Re: Re: Ah, Monsanto.
there's a few things your body Needs for digesting food and such that, if they get into other parts of your system, can be quite dangerous. i'm guessing this is one of them.
i also seem to remember there being several different varieties of E.coli? but i may be thinking of something else.
On the post: Monsanto Sued By Organic Farmers Who Don't Want To Be Accused Of Patent Infringement
Re: Re: Stupid? Really
On the post: Monsanto Sued By Organic Farmers Who Don't Want To Be Accused Of Patent Infringement
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Monsanto Sued By Organic Farmers Who Don't Want To Be Accused Of Patent Infringement
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Sue Monsanto
On the post: Monsanto Sued By Organic Farmers Who Don't Want To Be Accused Of Patent Infringement
Re: Re: Re:
...also: terminator crops. because growing your own seed stock is forbidden.
On the post: Monsanto Sued By Organic Farmers Who Don't Want To Be Accused Of Patent Infringement
Re: Re: Re: Re:
things like this go a long way towards explaining it.
On the post: Amazon Launches Digital Music Locker, Even As Legality Is Still In Question
Re: Re:
Next >>