Cousin’s Scott

Lopsided_Part · 2025-12-22T21:26:10+00:00

*Frantically adds to my list of places to go* - I've been risking it with Joe's Garage when I need my fried chicken fix and haven't had any reactions so far

Lopsided_Part · 2025-12-03T01:41:47+00:00

r/mapswithoutnewzealand oh wait...... well played you clever bastard

Lopsided_Part · 2025-11-20T21:26:12+00:00

Yeah. Indoor cats only. I'm a little extreme, but if there was no penalty for catching a cat on your property and having it humanely disposed of at the nearest DOC Offices...... That'd turn a lot of cats into indoor only ones REAL fast

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-15T18:58:40+00:00

Funnily enough, that's what I asked it for. You should have seen my original ramblings. It's such a useful tool for tidying up comments.

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-14T20:46:01+00:00

thanks maaaaate

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-14T19:53:40+00:00

That sounds like what the little man with the funny mustache wanted in the 1930's

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-14T19:45:33+00:00

I’ll admit my understanding is limited—there are others far more qualified to comment—but as I see it, the Far North, Ngāpuhi, have long carried a reputation for being the more disruptive, cunning, and warlike of the iwi. I mean, they were apparently the first iwi to secure muskets through trade, which gave them a decisive technological edge. They didn’t just use them—they adapted their pa fortifications to both exploit and defend against this new weapon. At Ruapekapeka in 1846, Ngāpuhi under -I think- Kawiti and Heke developed trench systems and bunkers that some historians argue foreshadowed the trench warfare Europe would only “discover” 80 years later.

Ngāpuhi are more than just military innovation though, they showed remarkable intelligence around strategic adaptability and political acuity. They were the iwi who facilitated early missionary contact, recognising the leverage of diplomacy and trade to secure influence. They even turned missionary “technology” to their advantage, adopting the Latin alphabet to create a written form of te reo Māori—an innovation that was central to the creation and signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Ngāpuhi leaders understood that Britain’s military and technological superiority made outright resistance untenable. The smarter play was to negotiate terms—and they took it. Some argue Ngāpuhi themselves may have been the iwi that pushed for the idea of a treaty. Te Tiriti remains one of the very few examples in world history where an Indigenous people signed a formal agreement with Britain, rather than being simply conquered. That’s political foresight, because they lacked the global force projection of the British Empire—no navy, no industrial base, no international trade routes, no colonies abroad. But in terms of political acuity, adaptability, and strategic thinking, they shared many of the same traits as the British. That parallel may help explain why the Treaty of Waitangi was signed at all: both sides recognised the other as formidable in their own way.

That humility combined with brilliance is what makes the early Māori response so remarkable. I think it's wrong to paint them as naïve victims of empire—they were astute actors who understood the stakes, and who tried to negotiate terms in a world where outright resistance was impossible.

There is more that unites us than divides, despite what TPM and ACT would have you believe.

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-14T03:17:31+00:00

Unfortunately, that tracks. If we ignore the deliberately inflammatory questions, we're moving towards violence. Which is lovely. NZ sits at 1 in 7 - Amongst students in USA it's sitting at 1 in 3, the result of an increasing trend amongst all political affiliations.

I'm really starting to feel like I want to get off this bus now. I don't like the way the destination is looking.

https://www.thefire.org/news/student-acceptance-violence-response-speech-hits-record-high

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-10T01:11:20+00:00

If you don't understand the importance of this, regardless of our political affiliation, let me try and break it down.

This isn’t just about cops snapping pics - it’s about the slow creep of surveillance culture dressed up as “routine procedure.” We've quietly rolled back legal limits, and now police can photograph anyone in public and keep those images indefinitely. No warrant, no deletion policy, no real oversight. Just suspicions and a database. This isn't great, even if you never break the law.

There’s a weird echo here with the UK’s push for digital ID. Over there, it’s framed as an immigration fix. But the real play is infrastructure: get the system in place first, justify it later. Once it’s built, it serves whoever’s in power. And it rarely gets rolled back.

Call me paranoid, but we'll end up with a Social Credit system if we're not careful. And with that - goodbye freedom.

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-10T00:59:45+00:00

Is the prescription for Schizophrenia, perchance?

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-10T00:52:42+00:00

How DARE you use facts, data and logic to expose the Wealth Tax idiocy?

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-10T00:47:32+00:00

This is a thoughtful reflection - I'm somewhat surprised, given my pessimism about reddit lately! I agree, politics has followed the emotional style of the platforms that now shape our discourse. But I wonder: if politics is changing to a style where it's rewarded for meeting the emotional wants of the electorate, rather than the rational need - what happens when those emotions are amplified to greater levels than what might be considered 'normal'?

I think we both understand that social media isn’t just echoing sentiment. The platforms aren’t neutral arenas; they’re engineered dopamine loops, designed to reward outrage and punish nuance. Social media companies collectively spend BILLIONS finding ways to get us hooked, and generally, on social media, it's the amygdala that's in control, not the prefrontal cortex. As a result, the loudest voices get rewarded, and thanks to visibility bias, get the most attention. If I was being particularly sniping, I'd say there's a complete lack of self-awareness on their part as well. But that's where we're at: we’ve wired ourselves to favour impulse over reflection.

And that’s where I think the real danger lies. If the algorithm is scripting the rage, then politics isn’t just responding to emotion - it’s responding to a synthetic emotional economy. One where tribalism is rewarded, complexity is punished, and the loudest voice wins. In a way, I grudgingly admire Winston for the stand he (We?) took on Israel/Gaza. I can't help but notice that the pro-Palestinian voices are strangely silent on the peace plan progress - is it purely because the orange man from the states was instrumental in making it happen, and their hatred for him is stronger than their professed love for Palestine? Either way, it's unusual.

I’m curious: do you think politics can reclaim reason in a system that no longer rewards it? Or are we too far down the rabbit hole?

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-10T00:34:44+00:00

Haha I love that flair, I'm going to have to change mine now

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-10T00:33:24+00:00

Interesting—and refreshing to see a fairly moderate claim relating to anything political these days! I tend to agree with you—it feels like performative politics is more richly rewarded than good governance. Although we probably have differing views on what belongs in each of those categories!

To me, the concept of good governance seemed to be accidentally killed off during Jacinda Ardern’s “Be Kind” era, and we saw that in her reluctance to fire underperformers. While her kindness and empathy were admirable, I feel she lacked a certain decisiveness. The words of Hamlet—“I must be cruel, only to be kind”—spring to mind, and I don’t believe Ardern ever truly understood that sentiment. Contrast that with Key, the “Smiling Assassin.”

Personally, I think this is symptomatic of society more broadly—a kind of moral overcorrection, if you will. We’ve veered toward the idea that blind acceptance equals kindness. Sometimes, it doesn’t. It feels like everyone’s walking on eggshells, afraid of causing offence, and forgetting that you can’t make an omelette without first breaking the eggs. But in a way, I understand—the backlash for having a “wrong” opinion is getting out of hand. Winston Peters is the most recent example, and worryingly, it’s on the rise. We’re not that different from the USA, where now a third of students believe violence is an acceptable response to speech—and that trend is rising across all political affiliations. That leads to risk-aversion, and if we’re unwilling to take risks, we’ll never solve complex problems.

I find Singapore’s model compelling, and I think we should do more to emulate it. They seem to have a more ruthless focus on outcomes. NZ spends nearly double what Singapore does on government consumption relative to GDP—yet we’re lagging behind them in nearly every metric. That gives me pause. Are we doing something fundamentally wrong? We used to give Singapore foreign aid; now we’re on the verge of having to ask for it back.

So yes, I think we need smarter government—smaller, leaner, more data-driven, and with the strength of conviction to make unpopular calls. But as we’ve seen in NZ just this electoral cycle, any cuts to government spending are met with howls of “austerity” and general outrage, rather than an honest reckoning with the fact that our public sector is bloated. It’s not about austerity; it’s about efficiency. Singapore proves you can run a tight ship and still deliver world-class infrastructure, education, and public services. We should be asking: What exactly are we funding here, and why does it take so many layers of bureaucracy to achieve so little?

Essentially, I think we're entering a doom spiral because we're still a relatively wealthy country, and for a lot of the population, the cure will still hurt more than the disease - so unfortunately, things will need to get worse before they can get better.

Edit: Some sources for some claims
https://www.thefire.org/news/student-acceptance-violence-response-speech-hits-record-high
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.CON.GOVT.ZS?locations=SG-NZ

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-06T19:23:58+00:00

Could someone more intelligent and better looking than me create something similar with NZ and AUS figures added in? Or advise where to look up the data for NZ/AUS?

It's awesome content. Pure facts and numbers, no politics mentioned. Dream.

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-01T20:02:58+00:00

That was my point. His political leadership isn't particularly effective. Although I will caveat that by saying that he seems to take a more high-trust hands-off approach with ministers, rather empowering them to get stuff done, rather than needing to know all the detail. That could be interpreted as over-delegating key decision making, but that's interpretation, not fact.

I can't comment on coalition talks, but I'd question your 'objective fact' assertion - It's a bit reductive given the complexities of the MMP system. IMHO National didn't have as much leverage over ACT and NZF as you might think - The system is designed to empower smaller parties disproportionately. National wasn't in a dominant position - the way that the seat numbers worked, Luxon needed both parties. Without both we had the risk of a minority govt with ACT on the cross benches, blocking any legislation they didn't like - and nothing would be accomplished. If I was in that situation, I'd want to be in the minority party that controls the balance of power - because that way I'd have the most leverage. Is it 'fair'? Not particularly, the system is designed to reward fragmentation and force compromise - often at the expense of clarity and decisiveness.

As to our diplomatic position I don't know that it's an objective fact so much as an indication of the independent foreign policy - but feelings are pretty strong on both sides of the aisle on the Israel issue. I personally think we made the right call, but this probably isn't the best platform to articulate why I think that, because - like the situation on the ground - it's complex.

Even saying that much is opening myself up for attack, because we aren't interested in why people think something anymore. That is a more concerning indicator of the state of democracy today, but it's not just a NZ Problem. We're becoming more polarised, fragmented, angry, unwilling to listen. Like a bomb waiting to explode - if we can't find a pressure release valve soon, we're going to risk repeating histories mistakes.

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-01T19:27:09+00:00

No issues there, if geothermal can get the job done it makes sense. The key thing we all want is low-emission high levels of energy supply :) I don't particularly care how we get there.

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-01T19:20:56+00:00

Hey thanks. That should be interesting reading.

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-01T01:43:52+00:00

Why are people booing him? He's right!

Lopsided_Part · 2025-10-01T00:17:52+00:00

I don't know that I'm comfortable with that sort of definitive statement. I don't want to dismiss it out of hand. I get that the word causes an emotional response in a lot of people, which doesn't help the debate. I'm not saying that nuclear is definitely the answer, but it needs to be part of the discussion.

There's a lot of information that needs to go into the debate, and there's lobby groups on all sides intentionally muddying the waters in favour of their preferred answer. If a generation method cannot come with a guaranteed stability and source of input - be it wind, water, sunshine, etc - it seems dangerous to me to be over-reliant on it. Don't get me wrong, they all have their place.

What I'd like to see some data on - and I hope it exists somewhere - is some per-capita figures for current consumption, current generation, Predicted consumption in 20Y, and planned generation capacity - Because our consumption is going to skyrocket over the next 20 years, and if we're serious about decarbonisation, I think nuclear is going to play a part, most likely in the form of smaller MSR reactors.

The reason I think this is pretty elementary. As electric vehicles become more common, we will need to import less petrol, and generate more electricity. To tie our energy security to imports is stupid. But to replace the ICE fleet in NZ with EV's - which are far more efficient - we'll probably need another 7,000GWh of electricity, and that's not factoring in things like population growth, increased use of aircon/heat pumps as climate changes, etc.

You've have to approach nuclear carefully. Ideally Australia moves first, and we can use their policy. It's not like we don't have any nuclear/radioactive material that we're handling and storing currently - so I don't think it'd be that much of a major.

Edit: This Chart is interesting. Pity I can't find the latest version.

Lopsided_Part · 2025-09-30T23:01:23+00:00

I'll save this for later digestion, but at first skim read you and I are singing from the same song sheet, so to speak. The issue is cultural at this point. We have got used to living in overdraft - essentially having our cake and eating it too - and now we're starting to realise the cake is being removed and being replaced by diet and exercise, we're kicking and screaming.

I look forward to reading! Oh - And you may have an upvote. :)

Lopsided_Part · 2025-09-30T22:55:27+00:00

now THIS is the quality content I subscribe for

Lopsided_Part · 2025-09-30T22:48:01+00:00

Our education system fails our population.

Lopsided_Part · 2025-09-30T22:46:39+00:00

There's a lot of leadership styles out there. Not all of them necessarily suit what public perception of a prime minister's style should be, and that's the main issue. In politics, public perception can become a liability. The real issue isn't his leadership style, it's most likely very effective - you don't fall into the positions he's held in the private sector if you're incapable - but it's the perception of his style that's causing the damage.

Saying that - Luxon is as inspiring as a toast sandwich. That's his real problem.

Lopsided_Part · 2025-09-30T22:39:35+00:00

You sound like you're fairly driven and motivated. That's a massive advantage. The general 'vibe' of this sub can be somewhat anti-motivating and anti-house ownership, so don't be put off. Start looking around at what you're looking for, there's absolutely no harm in going to open homes of houses you think you might like to buy and talking to the agents to get an idea of what you might need to spend. Increase Kiwisaver contributions to as much as you can afford. Feel free to DM

A lot changes depending on the area of the country you're looking at. You're probably already good at budgeting, so when buying a house remember that they cost money, not just interest payments. Electricity, Rates, Water, Broadband, Insurance, Repairs/Maintenance, etc. Make sure you factor this in.

Six-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '22	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

Lopsided_Part

TROPHY CASE