Tuesday, May 30, 2006

It's like a cochlea, only smaller!

A friend of mine asked me to make up an advertising pamplet for a little invention he was working on (an inner-ear monitor for musicians). I found this picture, and the caption just popped into my head! - I couldn't stop laughing all day. My friend didn't catch on at first, and it was not until he made his presentation, and everybody started laughing that the penny dropped. The promotion was however a great success. And yes, he is still a friend!

Hairdressers, Teachers, The Free Market and Government Interference

A few years ago I read a wicked story in the Free Radical magazine entitled Jimmy and the Lemonade Factory - it was about a young boy who wanted to earn himself a bit of pocket money, so he started making lemonade and selling it at the front gate, but got busted by the council for not having a permit, and not having a certificate for preparing food, and planning permission for his stall etc - It was a really great piece of work - I will dig it up and post it here sometime (with credits to the author of course!) ANYWAY, I liked it so much I thought I would have a go at writing one of my own, My effort was actually inspired by government run school teachers going on strike for more wages.

David and André were hairdressing graduates, who on completing their training started work at two separate salons.

David started work for a salon who paid all their stylists the same wage across the board.
André started work for a salon who paid their stylists a basic wage, but with incentives for how many clients they styled in a day, and how many of them made repeat bookings.

David started work only knowing 5 basic styles, but the clients that came to this salon had simple tastes. He cut 5 or maybe 8 clients hair in a day - the less the better as far as he was concerned - he didnt get paid any more for working harder or being able to provide more styles, and he certainly didn’t get any more for chit chatting with the clients - he just did his job, and got them out of there - the quicker the better.

André also started out with the 5 basic styles, but the clients at his salon were more demanding. Nobody wanted the basic old haircut anymore and he struggled to build up a client base, but by attending refresher courses and getting up to date with the latest trends, and fashions, he soon learnt a whole new range of modern styles and techniques, so that no matter who came to the salon, he could do just the right style for them. André was polite and chatted to his clients like they were old friends, offering them refreshments and his specialty - a refreshing scented facial wipe to make them feel relaxed and comfortable, all the while building a rapore and a reputation as a competent and caring professional.

André became so popular with his clients that he couldn't keep up. His boss put his wages and his chargeout rate up to try and ease the load, and put some of the clients off, but when you offer a top service, people are prepared to pay for something they want. Business was so brisk the salon had to employ more staff. However, not just any staff would do as their client base was used to such a high standard of service and expertise that they had to undertake a comprehensive interview system to ensure they employed only the best applicants.

This eased the situation for a short period, but eventually made things worse, as the new stylists were so good at their job, the salons reputation boomed - people were coming from miles around for the best haircuts available in the city.

Meanwhile, David seemed to be getting fewer and fewer clients! The salon was suffering financially - they couldnt afford to buy the latest gels and shampoos or razors etc so had to make do with cheaper, inferior products. This only made matters worse. What were they doing wrong?

Then one day, the hairdressers union demanded all hairdressers get a payrise, regardless of experience or workload. The salon couldn’t absorb this wage increase due to the downturn in business. The hairdressers in the salon were told to go on strike. “It was only fair” they said that they get a payrise - They weren’t doing anything different - they were still cutting hair! It wasn’t their fault business was slow. But things were so bad that the business just couldn’t recover from these demands and was forced into bankruptcy

But help was at hand. Because they employed so many staff, the government gave them a subsidy to keep them going. Now with the backing of government they could really compete in the market, so off they went again. The first thing they did was to slash their prices to attract some of their competitions clientele, because with this big sum of money now behind them, they could afford to run at a loss. Business boomed as it was bound to - after all, few could resist a haircut for $5 that was worth $15 on the normal market. The salon that André worked at was now in trouble - they had to lay off some of the staff they took on when things were booming. In fact they had to lay off some of their other staff also. Last to come, first to go, and André had to be laid off. He was devastated. he had worked so hard to be the best that he could - to strive and achieve excellence, yet this was how he was rewarded. Meanwhile the salon he used to work for was forced to lower its prices to almost cost, yet still they were unable to compete with the other salon in town who was operating at below cost, propped up by a big subsidy.

Down to a skeleton staff, they were barely able to keep the doors open. In the pursuit to compete, they found they had to delete some of their non-essential services like refreshments for the clients, and the ever popular warm scented facial wipes that were so relaxing and comforting.

Even with these stripped down services they were unable to compete, yet it was a well known fact they still had the best hairdressers in town. How had things got so bad?
Finally, unable to actually make a profit and make a living, the salon had to close down, leaving only one salon in town, who just happened to employ, poor staff, offering second rate haircuts, bad service and guess what! - at whatever price they chose to charge - after all - there was no competition anymore.

Monday, May 29, 2006

How the truth Hurts

It appears PC has got himself in a spot of bother in his colourful description of Slingshots Annette Presley.

It is a sad state of affairs in this country when you are threatened and bullied for writing the truth, yet can say things like "unbundling Telecoms Loop" and get away scott free. Of course anybody with half a braincell knows that "unbundling Telecoms Loop" is just another way of saying "Stealing Telecoms Property."
SO perhaps it is just the way he has said it!
Could it be Ms Presley just isn't a fan of plain English!

instead of Calling Annette Presley a "thieving Bitch" he could say she is the "illegitimate offspring of a female dog"
I don't know - maybe it's just the TRUTH she doesn't like!

If you don't like being called a thieving bitch (or bastard), then simply do not steal - or call for other people to steal on your behalf - things that belong to others.
People who steal things are commonly called thieves
A male would be a thieving bastard
A Female a thieving bitch
If you lay down with DOGS
It stands to reason that you will get up with FLEAS
or perhaps in the words of Bob Marley
"Who the cap fits, Let them wear it!"

Saturday, May 27, 2006

Why do we trust sports people, and not politicians

Why we do NOT trust politicians and bureacrats
Main stream party Politicians and local bureaucrats have no principles upon which they base their decisions and policy making. This is the reason why they cannot be trusted.
The decisions and policies they make are EMOTIVE based upon their own feelings, likes, dislikes etc.
Because everybody has their own view on a subject, and their own approval or disapproval, these decisions swing wildly one way or another.
You may find you agree with a certain politician on one matter, and then disagree on another - this is because there is NO solid, immoveable, consistent, unchangeable base or philosophy upon which they have come to their decision.

Why we DO trust sports people
Sports people in general are not directly responsible for stealing your money (except those who are calling for more FUNDING from the government).
They are not making promises about what they intend to do with the stolen money, or who they intend to redistribute it to.
They are not telling you that what they are doing is for YOUR own good.
They do not make promises that they reneg on down the track .
They do not generally promise to do one thing, and then do something else
They do not steal your property, and insist that they have a right to it.
Athletes do not Unbundle you, or TAX you

This is the sole reason why the Libertarian philosophy of “the non initiation of force” principle works so well.

For example:
I do not demand the government bans Boxing, or smoking, or prostitution or drugs just because I do not like them because I will be stopping other people from doing with their life and their body something they chose - because I will be forcing my will upon them.
In return I ask that others do not demand the government ban Boxing or smoking or prostitution or drugs, which would be stopping ME from doing things with MY life and body things that I chose!
You should have the RIGHT to do with your life, body and private property ANYTHING you chose providing you do not initiate force, or fraud upon others, and providing you pose no threat to THEIR life and property!

You do not use force, or ask other people (governments or councils) to use force on your behalf to get what you want, and in return ask the same respect from others

Here is a bit of an explanation of the Non-initiation of force principle - it is a bit heavy-going, but stick with it, and try and understand what it says.:

The precondition of a civilised society is the barring of physical force from social relationships – thus establishing the principle that if men wish to deal with one another, they may do so only by means of reason: by discussion, persuasion and voluntary, uncoerced agreement. – Ayn Rand.

Force is never justified when initiated against others, but only when used to in retaliation against its initiators, i.e. in self-defence.

To rule out force used in self-defence -- or to ignore the distinction between the initiation of force and force used in retaliation by labelling both as ‘violence’ -- does not remove aggression, it rewards it.
‘Non-violence’ invites agression, it does not disarm those who choose to ignore your ‘peaceful protest.’

The non-initiation of force principle does not just mean Physical force, but also threats and fraud – intimidating or deceiving someone into a course of action to which he would not otherwise have consented.

The essence of the evil of force is that it is the negation of a person’s mind and the choices otherwise freely made, effected by an attack or the threat of attack on a person’s body and/or property. It is an assault on his distinctively human attributes, his very essence as a human being. It is only by such direct physical coercion that man’s rights may be violated, by compelling him by force to act against his own judgement.

People generally have no difficulty identifying and condemning individuals who coerce other individuals, but they are conditioned to accept and applaud coercive behaviour by governments.

Thursday, May 25, 2006

Rational or Irrational

As far as I am concerned, all these people that climb mountains just for the fun of it are all bloody crazy people, but so long as they do not expect me to go with them OR help pay for their medical bills when their bits and pieces start to drop off, then what they do is their own business.
HOWEVER there has been some debate concerning Mark Ingliss, and his "lack of humanity" or to put it another way "selfishness" in not attempting to save the life of the British idiot he encountered three quarters of the way up Mt Everest.

My comment therefore is not on what he did or did not do, but on selfishness itself.
If Mark Ingliss - a double amputee, had attempted to save this man who was near-dead anyway, it is without question that BOTH of them would have died in the process - a pointless exercise.

Had one of Mark Ingliss's Sherpas attempted to save him, he would have depleted the Inglis party, therefore putting the lives of the entire party at risk, as it is these sherpas that carry all of lifes necessities on these trips, and due to the extremities of the conditions the role of every person in such an expedition is crucial to its success.

NOW, the thing that is most sacred to an individual - man's "thing of highest value" is his life, because without that he has nothing - he's dead!

Upon discovering the (ill equipped, poorly prepared) British climer, Mark Inglis would have had to make a decision.

If I attempt to get this guy back to safety (I will probably have to carry him because he's in such a bad way) I will probably die in the attempt!


If I die in the attempt, then he too will surely die because he needs my assistance!
SO, we BOTH die! - What is the point in THAT?

The people that attempt these crazy things are all self-centred individuals, making an informed decision to risk THEIR life in their relentless pursuit of (whatever)

In doing so, these people have CHOSEN to step OUTSIDE the boundaries of humanity, and have agreed to an un-writen pact.

I am of the belief that they know what they are doing, they are WELL AWARE of the risk and dangers of such an expedition, and that when the going gets tough it is every man for himself.

In leaving the British climber to die on Mt Everest, Mark Ingliss made a RATIONAL decision - to pursue his own interests and continue to the top of Everest, because to deny his own self-interest (to die in the attempt of saving the life of another) would be completely IRRATIONAL.

This is how the dictionary defines the word Rational:
* Having or exercising the ability to reason.
* Of sound mind; sane.
* Consistent with or based on reason; logical: rational behavior.
Definition: realistic; of sound mind
Antonyms: illogical, irrational, ridiculous, unrealistic, unreasonable, unsound

As inhumane as this may sound to some, I believe mark Ingle made the correct decision up there on the mountain, and has every right to the title "hero."

Inspiration is where you find it

There are some truly inspirational people out there involved in all kinds of activities and acts of achievement, but one of the people who has and and continues to inspire me, can be found here.
He has physically never laid a hand on me (and for that I/we are both truly thankful), yet he frequently metaphorically grabs me by the shoulders and gives me a good slap around the ears in the attempt of urging my poor sluggish braincells into colliding with each other and achieving the purpose they were created for - THINKING!
I urge anybody who can be bothered reading my simplistic scratching here to immediately go to this blog here. I could cut and paste all day the inspirational and thought-challenging articles that are posted here, but apart from just making me look intelligent it wouldn't achieve a lot. For example his articles on basic things like RECYCLING, or MOTHER THERESA, or UNSUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT or BEER. Admitedly, these are not all penned by HIMSELF, but if you are in the business of expanding your mind - forget the drugs (well, for a short while at least!) and read (and more importantly try to comprehend) what you will read there.
Now, this is not to say that EVERYTHING he has to say is worth reading - he does have a tendency to waffle on about mindless crap like Aussie Rules on the occasion, but apart from that it's all good.
Personally I have always harboured a love and fascination for architecture - I dont really know why, but maybe it is just an appreciation of good design, style and achievement. The author of this site is an architect, and so therefore frequently features what I have found to be fascinating and interesting articles on some great feats of architecture, and has brought to my attention stuff I probably would never have got to see.
There are frequently articles on MUSIC - another thing dear to my heart. Mostly old-school stuff - early british punk to Lou Reed, through to classic New Zealand Rock, and also much talk of the classical masters, of which I do my best to ignore, but must admit find myself enjoying more and more as the years catch up with me!
Above all else there is objectivism, intellectual and political commentary, property rights and philosophy.
This site focuses on truth, facts, reality, reason and rationality, and holds no space for mysticism, religion or any other forms of nonsense.
I do not wish this to sound like I am pissing in anybody's pocket here. It is more like a thank you for giving my head a good shake, and waking my braincells from their slumber! or perhaps like telling a friend about a good bottle of wine you have found.

One of my favourite quotes goes something like this:
Those who DO NOT read, are no better off than those who CAN'T read!
SO, do yourself a favour and set those braincells on a collision course with each other - read NotPC NOW

Thanks PC - Long may your Blog Reach!

Tuesday, May 23, 2006

Futuro - House of the future

As I have mentioned before, I am a big fan and collector - ok, ok, I am obsessed, with things from the 1950's - 1970's.

I have a collection of furniture, transistor radios, Flip-clock radio alarm clocks, eight-track players, record players, televisions, hand-held computer games, toys, bar and cocktail stuff, cigarette lighters, boxes, makers, pipes etc - you name it, and I probably have more than one of them!

Amongst my collection I have some pretty bizzare stuff which I may start posting here as a bit of a diversion from the politics and stuff that challenges my sanity on a daily basis.

Anyway, several months ago now, an aquaintance of mine (Brian, who owns the very excellent Weekend Sun Newspaper in Tauranga) who must have been aware of my fascination - ok OBSESSION with this kind of stuff asked me if I had a flying saucer!
This really scared me, because I know some people think I'm crazy, but to be placed in the category of UFO spotters, conspiracy theorists and time travellers kind of took me back a bit. Still, I digress! The flying saucer he was talking about was the one pictured above. a fibreglass HOUSE, made in the 1970's called a FUTURO. Brian informed me that he had seen one parked on the side of the road in a town called Thames. I was so excited at this news that I booked the next day off work, and drove off to Thames, which is approximately 100kms from where I live. I drove around a few times, but couldn't find the thing, (you can understand my hesitancy in asking for directions to the "flying saucer!") Anyway, after a while I finally spotted it on a piece of waste ground by the railway lines. Using my finely honed detective skills (I asked a bloke across the road, who was watching me closely) I tracked down a man who used to own it many years ago - in fact, he was one of the original franchise owners in New Zealand. Futuro's were originally made in Christchurch by Orbital Homes Ltd, under licence to a man called Noel Cumming, who is now no longer! The man I was speaking to actually owned this very Futuro, but he sold it, or to be more accurate, traded it to a man by the name of Mike Peti for a Holden Stationwagon! As well as the Futuro house, he also gave Mike the MOULDS for casting or making the fibreglass sections of the Futuro. Mike Peti on-sold the Futuro to an infamous character known as Mike Zero! Mike was, I believe, the owner of a very cool shop in Auckland called Hunters and Collectors, that bought and sold anything that was old, or cool or unusual and interesting, from leopardskin Dr Martin boots and brothel creepers (crepe soled rockabilly shoes) to dope pipes, leather jackets, old microphones etc etc. Rumour has it that Mike obtained a fierce appetite for ingesting illicit substances, and lost everything he had - including the Futuro. The present owner of the Futuro lives in Auckland. One day when I have accumulated some spare cash I shall give him a phonecall - I have a landing site all prepared. As you can see in the pics above, she is obviously in no fit state to fly any more, but check out the link here, to see what she could look like with a little (a lot) of care and attention.

Friday, May 19, 2006

Tauranga Council Department of Pimps and Hookers

There is a case in court at the moment, where a Hamilton escort agency is fighting a council bylaw restraining them from operating from their house in a suburban neighbourhood. Here is a presentation I made to the Tauranga District Council in defence of Private Property rights in general and can be applied to ANY situation not just that of prostitution.
My presentation is aimed at changing the minds of councillors that are able to think for themselves and come to a rational conclusion taking into consideration the points I have to make. It would be safe to say that there is not 1 person in this room that has actually witnessed a prostitute servicing a client UNLESS of course they did so of their own free will and CHOSE to? Why is that? Because the nature of this business relies on discretion - on the part of the WORKER AND the CLIENT! So WHY are some of you opposed to prostitution? - It is not as if you are offended by the things you see! If that WAS the case, then there are already rules and laws in place to prosecute people for commiting lewd or obscene acts in public view, as some recent prosecutions have proven. Likewise There are already bylaws regarding signage in residential areas. I believe dictating the maximum size sign a prostitute can have council will be inadvertantly setting the MINIMUM size – resulting in exactly the opposite effect to that which they wish to achieve. Many people find the views and practices of religious groups offensive or the clients of criminal defence lawyers – does the council propose a designated area for these people also? No, The people opposed to this bill are people who do not like the IDEA of prostitution. They use their IMAGINATION about what is going on behind the closed doors of somebody elses private property, and they dont LIKE what they see, so they wish to PREVENT them from doing it by installing more and more legislation - for WHAT! - a smutty thought in their OWN MIND! The problem is in THEIR MIND – not in their SIGHT, making it a MORAL issue, not a physical one. To make a bylaw based upon what is in somebodys MIND makes the council into THOUGHT POLICE, and this is ABSURD. Prostitutes dont really do anything different to what many do in the privacy of their own homes - except they do it for CASH as opposed to maybe LOVE, or - hold on a minute! what does the council rulebook say about “legitimate reasons to have sex!” Council have already recognised the possibility of actually CREATING a RED LIGHT DISTRICT with their legislation by saying that “registered” prostitutes may not have premises withing a certain distance of each other - oh yea like THAT is going to work! What about UNREGISTERED workers. What about a MASSAGE parlour or any other BOGUS job description? Prostitution has been completely ILLEGAL for who knows How many years - did it stop them from BLATANTLY advertising and carrying out their business in complete disregard to the law - NO! so what MIRACLE is going to happen because the council make a few new bylaws! Something else that puzzles me is that on the outskirts of the councils designated prostitute friendly area, it will be permitted to sell your body for sex at say number 15, but not nextdoor at number 17. In regards to the proposed FEE for registering or Licensing a brothel. By demanding a Licence fee, council are accepting MONEY for allowing prostitutes to accept money for SEXUAL FAVOURS. A person or organisation that holds this position is commonly know as a PIMP, which I believe to be a more immoral profession than the one some of you propose to regulate. – How Ironic I do not believe it is the councils job to dictate what consenting adults may or may not do in the privacy of their own home, and to those who DO I say MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS I propose the council should do NOTHING other than enforce laws that are already in effect

Thursday, May 18, 2006

Moochers, Looters and Thieves

If I saw an armed robber walking up your driveway with a shotgun the least I could do - the most moral action I could take would be to come and warn you of the intent of the approaching looter!

I would be hailed as a hero. Helen Clark would come and shake my hand (on second thoughts perhaps I'd let them rob you!) and I would get my name on the front page of all the newspapers.

Why then all the fuss about who leaked the news of the approaching robbers to Telecom? Whoever it was took the right and moral action and deserves a medal, and to have his/her hand shaken vigorously, when instead he has been branded as a thief and the perpetrator of a most terrible crime!

Of course it wasn’t one of the Labour Party - there isn't one of them that knows the meaning of the words property rights - each and every one a moocher and a looter!

Clark is worried about tarnishing her Governments reputation overseas, with having a snitch in the ranks - meanwhile her government has just committed one of the most disgusting crimes I can think of - state sanctioned robbery of a privately owned company.

Do not be taken in by the government’s smokescreen – trying to take the heat off what they have done by trying to find a scapegoat.

Look to the perpetrators of the “real” crime!

What is worse however, is that not ONCE have I heard the media looking at it from this perspective!

Here is Helen Clark sounding all outraged and appalled that some dispicable person let the cat out of the bag, yet SHE and her merry bunch of THIEVES are the ones stealing the private property.

Nanny state sure has done a great job at its state brainwashing centres (schools if you must) because not ONE radio or newspaper reporter has used the brain they were born with to actually THINK for themselves, and report the story from this perspective.

Mindless sheeple the lot of them - they need their tails docked and their crotches crotched because NOT ONE OF THEM has the BALLS to tell the story like it is

I am disgusted.

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Tobacco, Chocolate, and armed Robbery

I have writen numerous articles relating to the increasing frequency of armed robberies of Dairies and service stations for cigarettes and tobacco, when these robberies would stop overnight if the government were to remove their huge taxes from the products. As I say in the following two letters, in their efforts to save smokers from doing themselves damage, they are putting the lives of totally innocent people at an even greater risk.

The posting of these two articles was spurred by yet another armed robbery - that of the Shell papamoa service station on may 4th where armed robbers made off with a small amount of cash, and cigarettes and tobacco.

If the government were to put an equal amount of tax on CHOCOLATE, (and believe me, that's not too far away what with talk of a FAT tax!) the robbers would be filling up their swag bags (not to mention school bags and mobility scooters!) with Crunchie and Mars Bars as well!

Dairies and service stations are frequently targeted by armed robbers for cigarettes!
Why? Because they are expensive!
Why? Because the government in its effort to protect us from ourselves makes them!
If it's the governments job to protect its citizens, then why do they insist on putting every innocent dairy and service station workers lifes at risk by such mindless legislation? Governments have tried to stop people from drinking alcohol! Look where that got them! Did they learn “anything” from this exercise? Obviously not!
They’ve spent $quillions on the war on drugs - has that worked? No! Will it ever work? No! Will they spend $quillions more? Probably! Will the result be any different? N0!
People will drink, smoke and take drugs if they want to, regardless of what nanny says!
All the state does with its broken-record legislation is create crime, create criminals from otherwise law-abiding citizens who wish to do with their bodies what they wish, create victims of innocent people, and hand a money-making monopoly to gangsters. Meanwhile those who "should" be accountable for their actions ie the drug-taking, smoking, drinkers get their fix one way or another - legally or illegally. I say put the old bag in jail – she is the instigator of these crimes against the innocent people of this country!

Another Armed Holdup
One of the most important roles of an elected government is to protect
its citizens from harm, yet once again innocent members of the public
have been brutalised in direct relation to regulations imposed by
them! A tobacconist in Hastings was severely beaten with a hammer in
the most recent attack by thugs wishing to appropriate cigarettes due
to the fact that their price is exhorbitantly taxed by the mindless
ones in order to protect people from harming themselves. How does
"that" work?
Honest harworking New Zealanders bludgeoned within inches of their
life, because the state wish to stop other people doing something to
their own body that "they" disapprove!
I wish to have nothing to do with these bureaucrats who have such a
disregard for the safety and property rights of the people they are
employed to protect! - Shame on them!

What planet are they from?

Somebody wrote to the paper saying "I wonder what Planet Mr Clark and
Mr Watkins are from - So I have tried to explain it for him (seeing as he obviously doesnt have a mind to think for himself)
Mr Watkins and I are both from a civilised planet that abhors the use of force, and threats, and where people get things done on the basis of mutual consent. Where people trade their goods and services for what they are worth, at their own price and on their own terms.
The planet
encourages achievement and excellence, where parents are able to chose the education they desire for their children rather than be forced to pay for and learn what the government wants them to learn (and then charge them again!)` Where shopkeepers can open their shops when "they" want without the risk of becoming a criminal if they open on the wrong days! Where you can do anything you like on your own private property as long as you pose no threat or danger to others. Where roads are smooth because their owners wish to encourage people to use "them" rather than an alternative route, and the water is clean and pure because nobody wants to purchase dirty water, so the dirty water sellers go out of business. Where the hospital waiting lists are reduced by better service and more operations as opposed to making it harder to get on the waiting list. Where crime is at a minimum because police pursue crimes with victims as opposed to crimes against ourselves and revenue collection.
Watkins and I are here on an observation mission, and let me tell you, things are quite different here thats for sure!
We noticed that in Russia several years ago the government was the sole provider of
bread, telephones and cars, and nobody had any of them! It took seven years on a waiting list to get a car, and when it arrived it was a Lada!
We won't be leaving here, or going anywhere in the foreseeable future either as there is
a 3 year waiting list to fix my dodgy knee (but its OK - Mr Watkins can have his/her sex change operation right away!) and the resource consent fees to erect a shade cloth over our Futuro tele-transportation device (see pic above) viewing platform are so expensive we just cant afford them, and we must do that or else OSH will get in on the act and we'll never get away! In the meantime, perhaps B Stevenson could try to understanding freedom of association rather than bagging those who endeavour to offer alternatives to force and threats and encourage people to think for themselves and free their mind from the brain-numbing clutches of the state.

Monday, May 15, 2006

The English Language

I am all for the correct pronunciation of Maori words, and the effort is made by many to do so - not only by television and radio broadcasters, but also by many educators!
As I understand it, there are certain letters in the English alphabet that are not used in the Maori language, and that is fine!
What I would like to know, is who is safeguarding the English language, and its correct pronounciation and useage?
Pronounce a Maori word incorrectly and expect to be informed of its correct pronounciation in double-quick time! Those of you with school-age children at home will have no doubt been reprimanded on occasion.
Well, this is my observation. It appears to be part of the overall dumbing-down of the population by the PC state brainwashing centres to also remove certain letters from the English language?
I write this after spending too much time lately listening to radio and TV broadcasters (who used to have certain language quality criteria, although not any more it would seem!)
What I would like to know is in the English language, where has the letter "T" gone?

You see, I don't live in Rodorua anymore, and I certainly don't have a compuder, otherwise I would write a ledder to the newspaper! If I had nineynine dollars nineynine I could get a subscription to the Bay of Pleny times, or perhaps some budder to put on my toast, but alas, no! It appears English has become another foreign language option at school?

Friday, May 12, 2006

The TRUTH about Money

How true is this!

If only they would teach stuff like THIS at school!

This, writen by economist Milton Freidman

The four ways money is spent:

When you spend your money on yourself, you're keen to get the thing you want most at the best price. Think middle-aged men haggling with a Porsche dealer.

When you spend your money on other people, you still want a bargain but you're less interested in pleasing the recipients of your spending. That's why children get underwear at Christmas.

When you spend other people's money on yourself, you get what you want but price concerns go out the window. O'Rourke points to second wives, riding around with the middle-aged men in the Porsches, who shop at Neiman Marcus (think girl heaven) as this type of spender.

When you spend other people's money on other people you don't give a damn.
That would be government.

So don't blame politicians for your tax bills. If you want lower taxes, you need to wean yourselves off government services and the belief that the answer to every problem is that the government ought to "do something". It's not just a case of governments doing more with less. It's about governments doing less with less.
When that realisation dawns, you may discover that most things the government can do, you can do better and a whole lot cheaper.
You can read more like this here.

Thursday, May 11, 2006

Who says you shouldn't throw bottles!

In their spare time, two of my sons have taken up "throwing bottles!" In fact, they have become so good at it, that they have even turned it into a career!
One of them held in high regard to the effect that he has even been sent to Venice and Monaco to throw them!
All I can say is thank god they were brought up in New Zealand as opposed to lets say Northern Ireland, as the content of the bottles would have been significantly different (ie petrol instead of alcohol).
My boys Jason (25) and Adam (20) are both FLAIR BARTENDERS! - Yes, I know it's almost a foreign language. Let me explain!. They make cocktails in between juggling bottles full of alcoholic spirits, limes, lemons, and every kind of garnish you can think of, not to mention firebreathing and other incredible and entertaining acts of stupidity! All joking aside, I must say it's great to watch and a very skillful art requiring hours of practice (the juggling mostly - not the drinking!) and a vivid imagination, coming up with new ways to serve and present their liquid inventions. At competitions, this may involve a theme, and music to coreograph your juggling and cocktail pouring to. It is also important to get the crowd or audience on your side, so tricks and stunts to wind them up and get a reaction are all beneficial to your cause. The prizes up for grabs are also pretty good, often including trips to exotic locations to make, pour (and drink) cocktails! What a terrible way to have to earn a living eh! Neither of these guys can sing like their dear-old dad, but they sure are the "rock-stars" of the cocktail business! And to think all "I" used to get for throwing bottles was arrested!

State propaganda machine vomits out another one

I should really be writing my own commentary, but I couldn't let this one pass without sharing it with my readers.

This from the person I believe to be the only expert worth paying any atention to regarding anything to do with "welfare:" - Lindsay Mitchell.

David Benson-Pope is congratulating his government over the lowest unemployment seen since the mid-eighties. There are now 44,549 on the dole compared to 42,405 in 1986.

If he wants to make comparisons here's a few more.

1986 - 62,570
2006 - 103,362 +65 percent

Invalid benefit
1986 - 21,993
2006 - 74,401 +238 percent

Sickness benefit
1986 - 9,517
2006 - 46,072 +384 percent

Thanks for that Lindsay.
You didn't give us THESE figures DID YOU Mr Pope?

These figures really are enough to make anyone SICK

This man is so full of shite even his eyes are BROWN!

Monday, May 08, 2006

NZ Music Month

Please support New Zealand Music Month
If for no other reason than to help support one of the very few New Zealand bands/musicians that refuses to take handouts from the state, and gladly state they are "Proudly NOT" sponsored by NaZis On Air!
Yes folks, I am talking about
The Fabulous, Most Groovy BRILLEAUX -
maximum R&B - an original band from Tauranga, playing its own brand of moderrn, rhythm and Blues based original material. The latest of which even features a guest appearance by a certain Mr Lindsay Perigo, on a track entitled "Beat the Bastards Back"
Brilleaux have 3 albums to their credit, with a 4th one in the process. Not to be outdone by certain OTHER blogs in town, I would like to add my own twist to
NZ's 10 most OVER-rated bands/songs, and PCs FAVOURITE TOP TEN,
by adding my own favourite LOCAL Selection

Songs of Love and Not: Kokomo
Kokomo have about 7 albums (at last count), amongst which Songs of Love and Not is my favourite, although Kokomo Agogo - their new live album is right up there. These guys get better and better with every album, They sure set the bar pretty high when it comes to releasing quality albums.
Kokomo play acoustic kiwi blues and beyond

The Wicked Piano Pumpin Pickett:
I have known and loved Pickets music since I first saw him play live many years ago now. Ritchie plays the meanest honk-tonk piano I have ever heard, and his songwriting blows me away (favourites are Chameleon, and 3am hamilton Sunday Morning), and every track on "All Strung Out in a Bunch" (apart from ONE which suffers due to Pickets poor choice of a harmonica-player - but that is another story) is a masterpiece, This album is a world-class piece of work in my opinion, and has never gained the recognition it deserves.

All Strung Out In A Bunch: Ritchie Pickett

The End of the Beginning: Hard To Handle

Jon Michaelz: Some Songs
Jon - former vocalist with legendary Tauranga/Auckland band Hard to Handle, released his first solo album of acoustic-based balads and cruisey stuff - and I really like it - in fact I prefer Jon doing this than fronting his band - and that was awesome. This album has been in my CD stacker permanently since I first got it. Jon and I have jammed together on many occasions, in the past, and hopefully many times to come.

Sunday, May 07, 2006

NaZis on Air, Principles, Neil Finn, and the funding of crap

I often find myself jumping to the defence of people or things I do not personally like or agree with, but this is what happens when you make a principled argument.

Everything I write is based upon my bottom line - my principles. My principles are very simple. The non initiation of force. Simply put, I do not believe that people have the right to use force of any description upon others to get what they want! I do not believe they have the right to ask other people (ie government, councils, hitmen, etc) to use force for or on their behalf. The use of force is wrong and immoral. By basing every argument upon these principles, I am able to come to clear and consistent decisions, that are unswayed an unaffected by my own personal view of the subject. In fact I believe that the lack of such principles is the reason why politicians in general are regarded with such abhorence. On one topic they think one thing, and you agree with them, and on another subject they think completely the opposite - they are inconsistent. You may agree with them on one topic, and not the next. Their decisions and policies are just based upon their own "feelings, or view" on any given subject. For example:

One politician may give funding to Opera music, but not Pop music, another politician the opposite - decisions based upon their own "taste, or view on the argument!" My first thought would be "where is the money coming from! Who is creating, or earning the money to be given to these artists?"
If it is taken by force (ie tax) from the taxpayer, then I say NOBODY has the right to this money, other than the people it was stolen from. It is their money, let THEM decide who they give it to.

Now on to the main reason for this post.
I am a musician. I record and perform my own original music. I do it because I enjoy it, and it earns me money to pay for recording and publicity and to pay for my instruments (not to mention the sex and the drugs!) :-)
My band has 3 albums for sale, and a fourth one underway, all self-funded. People come to our shows, like what they hear, and purchase the cd's. I simply cannot understand why the taxpayers are forced to shell out huge sums of money to anybody that thinks they should be entitled to some of it to record music, when they can quite easilly - with a little hard work and practice (it's called paying your dues in the music business!) pay for it themselves. NaZis on Air hand out $5000 for a band to make a video, and $5000 to record ONE SONG. Hell, we recorded an entire album at a studio we were more than happy with for HALF that price, so somebody somewhere is getting ripped off. Another perfect example of how stolen money has NO VALUE.

Neil Finn is in the headlines lately disagreeing with the government bailing out Kiwi FM - a radio station that is playing 100% NZ music that is not paying its way, and I agree with him. The moochers and the looters (mostly musicians) are up in arms that Neil is against them getting handouts just because they think they deserve to. It's like Neil is selling out just because he is famous now and doesn't need a handout. I say How many handouts did Split Enz, or crowded house, or Hello Sailor, or Citizen Band, or Dragon, or The Dudes etc etc get to get where they (or their talented members) are today! NONE! - they get there through:
1. Being GOOD/Talented.
2. Hard Work.
3. Paying their dues (see No.2)
Receiving the large sums of un-earned cash is the only way CRAP bands/musicians can compete with GOOD ones. eg
If you are CRAP, and nobody likes you, only small numbers will go to your gigs. You probably wont get much work, therefore you wont be able to afford to record or make a video. If you are GOOD, people will pay to come to see you, purchase CD's, enabling you to record, advertise, hire a manager, negotiate a recording contract etc etc.
HOWEVER, with NaZis on Air, even if you are CRAP, you can get a large sum of money just by filling in an application form, enabling you to record and make a video without actually being deserving of it. This in turn makes it even MORE difficult for the bands and musicians who are good and DO deserve it because NaZis on air go round to all the Radio Stations and record companies promoting only the people they have spent the money on! (including the crap ones)
What happens to most of these artificially elevated crap bands once the booster of government money is taken away? They go crashing back down to REALITY, because the fact of the matter is "You can't POLISH a TURD!"

I say get the government out of music - give the taxpayers back their money so they can afford to buy cd's, and go to gigs, and patronise the bands, music and musicians of their choice, completely free of compulsion.

The taxpayers will be happy as they wont be being robbed.
The musicians will be happy because people will have more money to spend on gigs and cds etc
The moochers and Looters wont be squabbling over who gets the stolen loot (there won't be any) - they will have to pay their OWN way
Unfortunately the politicians and busybodies will be unhappy because THEY will be out of a job, and will be forced to find MEANINGFUL employment!

I saw Neil Finn on TV last night, and the reason he is NOT happy that the government are bailing out Kiwi FM is because he wants the frequency for one of HIS projects - youth radio or something. Apparently he has been campaigning for years to get a frequency from the government, and so far had no luck. For the Government to prop up Kiwi FM means he will have to wait even longer for a frequency. (He's a musician - I might have known he wouldn't have a principled argument!)

Friday, May 05, 2006

Bundle stolen from Telecom

I cannot believe some of the crap I am hearing at the moment! The shock Horror that the Telecom details were leaked by somebody in the government. Who could do such a terrible thing as to warn Telecom that the government was about to steal their private property, and make it available to their competitors to use, all in the name of having a "level playing field!"
Answer this! What is worse - That somebody leaked that the government were about to commit a dreadful attrocity concerning the rights and property of its citizens, or that Telecom have had their private property stolen?

This is how PC put it:
"Someone senior in the Government, a politician or an official, set out on a path of economic and political sabotage," Mr English told reporters. What an abject moron. This seeker of the irrelevant, this parliamentary apostle of wetness, suggests somehow that the whistle-blower did something immoral.

They didn't. What was 'sabotage' was Cunliffe's announcement -- what is immoral is the nationalisation. What was neither of the above was the advance warning of theft which the leak represents.

Whoever the whistle-blower was, whoever divulged Cabinet's plan to nationalise Telecom's network, did exactly the right thing. What the whistle-blower did was warn a victim of burglary what he overheard the burglars planning to do to them. It was a moral act.

Some "radio live" talk show host was horrified about the image our government would get with having somebody leak important information like this! - I say STUFF that - What sort of message does it give to the rest of the world that the New Zealand Government can stoop to an all time low and SEIZE - STEAL the private property of a privately owned company - an act so dispicable it is most commonly attributed to Nazi and communist dictatorships!

People are saying to me at the moment "Why are you sticking up for those bastards? (Telecom) Dont you want faster internet? Well, of course I do, but look at it this way! If you went in to the bank with a gun, and held them up, and stole their money just so you could purchase an expensive present for me, doesnt mean I would agree with what you had done. It just means that you have stolen somebody elses property, and passed the stolen goods on to me. I would rather NOT have that present at all

Please make no mistake about what the government have done! They haven't "unbundled" anything, they have STOLEN it.

Thursday, May 04, 2006

$8.3 Million dollar thrill

Ex Tauranga City Coucillor Joye Adams (I think thats who she is) wrote to the BOP Times congratulating the council on their $8.3 million dollar makeover of a part of the downtown city area that comprises a paved area for children that shoots jets of water up in the air at random intervals from random places, which is all very well and good, but is it truly a necessary expenditure when it could have been achieved by other means less TAXING (if you know what I mean!)

If all it takes is a quick squirt of water up the inside leg of some

people to justify the obscene $8.3 million of stolen booty spent on the
downtown makeover then I suggest all those that agree go outside and
stand on the garden hose and get their moneys worth.
It would save the ratepayers quite a bundle! Service groups and
community spirit (the old-fashioned style that didn't require the use
of force and compulsion) used to get together to provide these kind of
facilities free of charge, but now the council has hijacked the
concept, funded by the extortion of the ratepayers, cost is of no
consequence, as stolen money has no value. Bullying, threats and force
have taken centre stage over community spirit, pride, innovation and
co-operation. Quite a shame really, but the majority are obviously
happy with that option or they wouldn't keep voting for more of it
every time the council elections come around. Just remember - a council
big enough to give you everything you want, is also big enough to take
everything you have!

Legalised THEFT a heinous crime is committed

This is the plague effecting the people of this country - the plague of wanting - nay, expecting - demanding as a right, something for nothing. We demand a share of the private property of other people as a right! We do not care how we get it, or who steals it from the rightful owners, we just WANT it! We have been taught by successive governments that we are entitled to these things - in fact they are the perpetrators of these acts of theft. They steal the earnings of the working population, and redistribute it as they see fit! They steal it from working people, and give it to people who DON’T work. They give it to people to breed! They give it to people to make music, and NOW the most heinous of all, they steal the private property of one company, and give it to its competitors to use so that they can compete. They call this making a “level playing field.”

To soften the publics perception of this dastardly act, they have called it UNBUNDLING


This is government DOUBLESPEAK - Call it what it is - LEGALISED THEFT!

Peter Cresswell said:
What UNBUNDLING really means is nationalising Telecom’s telephone lines because other telecommunications companies can’t be arsed building their own, and the RMA makes it all but impossible to do so if the will was there in any case

As Rodney Hide said today following Cunliffe’s announcement of Telecom’s ‘unbundling’:
This decision is not about allowing competition, it’s about government forcing a private company to open their network to competitors. Labour has absolutely no respect for private property rights (neither does National, and ACT are also a bit suspect on the meaning of the words too - Tomahawk Kid). Instead of creating an alternative network, a group of companies have pressured Ministers to let them leech off Telecom’s lines... This sends a chilling message to any company wishing to invest in infrastructure - Government will regulate and control you, unless you do what politicians say.

The nationalisation of Telecom’s lines has been long-signalled, and will no doubt be widely celebrated by all those who want to get their hands on something that isn’t theirs, and don’t care about the power they give government by granting their support. All government wants is cheerleaders for its meddling. All the cheearleaders want is their own chance at someone else wealth. The moochers and the looters need each other to survive. ‘The goverment that robs Peter to pay Paul will always get the enthusiastic support of Paul’ is a truism that is too frequently forgotten; it is entirely appropriate to invoke it here this evening.

UNBUNDLING - which isn’t a word anyway has been made up by the spin doctors to SOFTEN the real word which is THEFT

Now the Govt have got into the SWING of things WHOS COMPANY WILL BE NEXT?

Better watch out - don’t become too efficient - don’t let the public rely too much on your innovation or your quality service or YOUR BUSINESS could be next!

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

Nationalise McDonalds

What with all the talk of banning Happy Meals, and nationalising Telecom and Vodaphone, all I can say is thank heavens nanny hasn't nationalised McDonalds yet! -

Can you imagine the queues at the counter?
The chips would be cold, the buns would be stale, - don't dare ask for extra sauce!

There would be no up-size, no fizz or sweet desserts, and the chocolate flake would be replaced by a carrot stick or something (there is an obesity epidemic you know!)

To reduce the queue you would have to show a "need" greater than that of the next person, or prove that you are on a benefit of some description before you qualify to place your order, much like applying for a job at jobfinders (Jobfinders won't offer anybody any of the jobs they have on their list unless the person has first signed up on a benefit - true story!)

Under the treaty of Waitangi, native people of American descent would be entitled to free happy meals (providing they havent yet banned them) and cheaper burgers because the company used to be owned by Americans! Some would get a bigger big mac than others due to the level of need shown!

Those on a higher income bracket would have to pay more for their burgers so as to make it fair to those who don't earn as much.

The green party would also want to get in on the act, and demand recyclable hemp cups for the icecream sundae, and demand we cut back on the colourful placemats replacing them with brown, recycled, unbleached newsprint so as to save the rainforest in indonesia!

Monday, May 01, 2006


Peter Neilsen!! - AAAAARRRRGGGHHHHH - I might have known it was one of the mindless ones cohorts to come up with a mindnumbingly crap idea like this!

Peter Neilsen wants the government to pay the first $3000 to anybody wishing to purchase a "Hybrid" car. How about they just don't steal that $3000 dollars from us in the first place - then we wouldn't NEED a bloody subsidy

These guys (Jim Anderton especially) trot out the same old tired B_shit time after time! What ever happened to Kiwi ingenuity to find a solution to a problem? (I have a few things to say about THAT, but I'll leave it for another day!) What ever happened to "thinking outside the SQUARE?" - To be innovative or even creative? An IMPOSSIBILITY for sure! Mr Anderton IS the epitome of square - he is the line that DEFINES the outside edges of the square - no wonder he can't think outside of it! No doubt the idea of purchasing a hybrid (battery/petrol) car has crossed many peoples minds of late, but pursued the thought no further as they couldn't afford one even if they wanted to. How about this for an idea! Instead of the government taxing us all to the eyeballs, how about they didn't steal that money from them in the first place! Then, they wouldn't NEED a "government subsidy" - In fact, by cutting out the middleman (govt), who obviously skims off a percentage to keep himself in a job - they would have even more cash to go towards the purchase! Hell, we could even apply the same principal to the health and education sectors! But lets not go THERE right now - this is about CARS right! or is it THEFT! (or should I say TAX) - no, wait a minute, its about COMPULSION - you know - FORCE! It was actually about FREEDOM OF CHOICE,! About being able to spend your OWN money on things YOU wish, and about being allowed to live your life without being accosted by dumb and dummer every time they get a brainwave. Please Mr Neilsen - get a real job - get a hobby or something for god sake, but spare us from more of this kind of drivel.

Apparently there was a radio poll that said 7 out of 10 people thought this was a good idea! MMmmmm - Reminds me of a cartoon I saw once:

Imagine if you will a bunch of people (of less than average intelligence) standing in a CIRCLE - each holding in their RIGHT hand a plate with a piece of cake on it.
On the word "go" they each reach across and steal the piece of cake from the person on their LEFT!
This little game can keep people of this ilk amused for AGES, as they all think they are getting something for NOTHING, yet are OBLIVIOUS to the fact that they are being ROBBED at the same time.

Get naked at Mark Pecks Place

Mark Peck, director of Smokefree Coalition is a very dangerous man! ! Why? Because he does not understand the meaning of two very simple words! Property Rights! If he does understand them, and instead choses to ignore the meaning and trample over the rights of property owners, then he is even "more" dangerous. You see, before he is able to ban smoking in a pub, first there must be a "pub." The owner of the pub "should" be entitled to make the rules of his establishment, be it dress code, age of patrons to be served, drinks to be available, closing time, and whether he choses to allow smoking or not. there is no compulsion for people to to patronise his establishment, or even work there, but mark Peck disregards this right, and wishes to dictate to property owners what they may and may not do. It is very simple really, yet he choses to ignore this very basic concept.

To make himself out to be the good guy in all this, Mark Peck claims to be the protector of the health and lives of the public, therefore justifying his demand for government to force peaceful private businessmen to operate their business on Peck's terms, of course any such laws are backed by the threat of punishment, including fines, closure of the business, and or imprisonment.

Wow, what a great rights-advocating liberty lover Herr Peck is eh?

Seeing as he is so happy to dictate what people may or may not do on their private property then I suggest property owners seek to pass a law regarding rules on "his private property!"

I know, lets pass a law saying that everybody that goes to his house should be forced to remove all their clothes! If they do not comply "he" should be taken to court and fined. Mr Peck! - you give meaning to the term "interfering busybody!" Mind your own business, and let others mind theirs!

More Spineless Busyboddies

C. Preston wrote to the BOP Times saying "where is society;s backbone. It is about time society stood up and said no more working weekends or public holidays" (and a lot more dribble besides!) Howard Baker had previously written concerning the rights of business owners to operate their business over the easter period.

Where is society’s backbone” says C. Preston! It is in the likes of Howard Baker who stands up for his right to operate "his" business when he see fit, without interference from the un-productive. C. Preston speaks as a "collective," (the mob) as if they have the right to run roughshod over the rights of the individual. How can we hope to stop bullying in schools with bullies like C. Preston on the loose? It is thanks to busybodies like this that government is free to impose invasive taxes and mindless legislation that force entire families to work twice as long as necessary just to pay their tax bill, and because local councils insist upon forcing Museums, art galleries and aquatic centres upon us, and because government insist we continue to support unsustainable pyramid schemes like superannuation and ACC, not to mention all the other sub-standard services such as under-achieving health and education systems most are forced to work twice as much as we would prefer. It is none of anybody’s business how or when an individual chooses to run his business. If you do not like the hours offered either negotiate, or apply for a job whose hours suit. Mind your "own" business, and let others mind theirs!

Sheeple in the Sand Dunes!

What would happen to the sand-dunes if there wasn't a group of dedicated people who see the necessity of the dunes, and spend their lives maintaining them? They would be trampled into the ground and washed out to sea! Surely everybody appreciates the seashore, and values the sand-dunes! Why would that happen? Because people take them for granted — they’ve always been there, so are quite happy to use them, all the while eroding them, until eventually there would be none left! Then you could be sure they would miss them, but by then it would be too late - they would be gone.
I apply this same philosophy to individual freedom and freedom of speech. There are many out there who are happy to have them and all the benefits they bring, yet spend their time trying to discredit and destroy them. People like Green MP Sue Kedgley calling for the ban of "happy meals" (although whether she actually did or not is now in dispute!) However with Miz Kedgleys track record, if it wasn't happy meals it would just as likely be something else! Not to mention the flocks of sheeple every day mindlessly bleating for the government to ban "this" and "ban that."
There are however a dedicated few who spend their lives in its defence —watching as the mindless sheeple vote away their rights and responsibilities at every opportunity, calling for more government interference in their lives. Each new law and rule ie regulations banning smoking on private property, prohibiting smacking, compulsory taxes and filling in censeless forms incrementally erode the most sacred things in the universe—the freedom and rights of the individual. Hear the sheeple squeal when they finally discover they have none left!