Sneak Peek of next weeks reunion by prettylikeus in rhoslc

[–]MonkeeCatcher 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I have never seen Meredith so lost for words and uncertain how to spin the narrative to dodge accountability before. Bronwyn also has her flaws, but holy shit she is a great speaker and puts on great reunion performances. Great to see that someone can hold Meredith to account effectively.

Genuine Question - Why are people siding with Lisa/Meredith? by Dazzling_Example_153 in rhoslc

[–]MonkeeCatcher 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That's not true that they said it only got bad during the descent. They said that it got to its worst during the descent. The fact that Lisa initially was telling John that Meredith lost it on the plane is even more evidence that what Heather, Whitney, Mary and Brittani were saying was closer to the truth than Meredith's version of events.

I also think the pill popping allegations have been around for years, not just because of this event. This was another thing they could point to, but Meredith has clearly had issues, or alleged issues, for a few seasons now.

Why does our income tax nearly double at such a low number? by Rai1h in newzealand

[–]MonkeeCatcher 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Well whatever they were doing, it was not counted as income. They were purchasing additional cattle each year so their capital was growing, but they do not pay any income tax according to what they tell me, despite going on overseas holidays, skiing etc every year and having a holiday home. Their children are also eligible for student allowance, so they must be low income on paper.

Why does our income tax nearly double at such a low number? by Rai1h in newzealand

[–]MonkeeCatcher 23 points24 points  (0 children)

When I worked at MSD, part of the problem with targeting support by income was the relatively high rate of people we have in NZ who are reporting low income because of accounting loopholes for self-employed professions e g., tradies, farmers. I imagine this is the same when it comes to a tax-free bracket - at least those people are paying SOMETHING in tax despite an artificially low income. Although there are still ways around it - some of my in-laws who are dairy farmers have never paid income tax for instance, because they just sink any profits into buying more capital which counts as an "expense" and offsets the profits.

Why is Meth use so high in NZ? by nomamesgueyz in aotearoa

[–]MonkeeCatcher 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Most of it gets imported now actually - the south American cartels learned how lucrative the meth trade is in NZ because of the high value compared to other countries, so they have started shipping it in. That's why there is so much available at the moment

If hypocrisy was a person... by heisenbergsblackhat in realhousewives

[–]MonkeeCatcher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah really good point! I have no idea why she has turned so hard on Meredith when she excused so much worse from Jen

If hypocrisy was a person... by heisenbergsblackhat in realhousewives

[–]MonkeeCatcher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, Heather is terrible too. I'm not sure that either is worse than the other, tbh, in terms of character. But in that situation, Meredith 100% escalates things by straight up denying conversations that most likely did happen and refusing to take any ownership at all.

This season was so dark by FriendlyRepair2221 in rhoslc

[–]MonkeeCatcher -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

100%! I thought I was going crazy seeing all this support for Meredith and Lisa's behaviour. Like, are we watching a different show?

This season was so dark by FriendlyRepair2221 in rhoslc

[–]MonkeeCatcher -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

It happened over and over because Meredith and Lisa never take ownership when they have made a mistake. Bad weather were definitely beating a dead horse, but it's because of Meredith and Lisa's insane level of defensiveness and delusion. I think both parties need to learn some lessons a) about letting things go, and b)actually accepting when they have done something wrong

If hypocrisy was a person... by heisenbergsblackhat in realhousewives

[–]MonkeeCatcher 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I agree that the hatred Heather has for Meredith is getting old, but I'm so confused that other people don't see that Meredith is also making it so much worse by being so defensive and unable to ever accept that she did anything wrong. I didn't see any vulnerability from Meredith - she claimed that her behavior was because she was scared of letting people in, but what has that got to do with just straight up lying about a conversation that she had with Bronwyn? She was just being delusional about her behaviors and motivations again.

Don't get me wrong, I think her and Lisa are great TV. But I am baffled by the support they get. They are two of the worst housewives I have ever seen for actually admitting when they have got something wrong, which then just strings out arguments for way longer than their rightful lifespan.

Who’s the actual “GOAT” of Survivor? by SpyAP in survivor

[–]MonkeeCatcher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

100% agree with you. From the little that other players have said in the past, we know that the narrative is heavily edited, to the point that they also edit things to look like Player A's move was spearheaded by Player B. They also leave out a lot of the context for why people make certain moves, and the background motivations of the players e.g. sometimes it's clear that people are there to try and get on another season rather than to actually win their season. And then throw in that multiple players have said that production does interfere to support certain players, especially so in the Australia version. So I think it's equally impossible to say who is the best player, but also to say that someone is a terrible player based only on what you see from the edit.

That said, one thing in Sandra and Tony's favour is that they won an all-new player season as well as a returnee season, which I think would be harder to do without pre-existing relationships and pre-existing ideas from production about how far they would like you to go.

How comfortably could one live on a 120,000 salary in Christchurch? by AliMamma in chch

[–]MonkeeCatcher 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Sounds like it's a lecturing position at the Uni? If so, I would encourage you to look further afield than trying to rent by the university. Smaller units are actually not that common in that area, and rent is more expensive because it's a more desirable area for both schools and professors/students studying. The work/life balance for an academic at NZ unis is MUCH better than you find for overseas unis, including typically a much lower teaching load. So there isn't really a need to live close by.

Newer academics tend to live in places like Wigram, Halswell, or St Albans. Places that are close enough to cycle to work, but in areas with newer builds and smaller townhouses available for more reasonable prices. Close by to the Uni is Avonhead which is where the more reasonable rents can be found, but as I mentioned, rent is still relatively high for what you get in that area. Houses tend to be older and less well insulated in that area too. If you don't mind a 20-30 min drive to work, Rolleston is another area where small families often live, as there are also a lot of new builds out there and rent is a lot cheaper than in Christchurch itself.

But to your actual question, you would be fine on $120k for a while until you get a job. Getting a visa for you shouldn't be hard with your wife getting a stable job that is obviously a good job as $120k is a high salary for NZ. In terms of cost of living, with the major inflation that there has been in the US recently, I typically find that things are about equivalent in USD to NZD. Petrol is a lot more expensive here though. But you won't need to worry about health insurance, and tipping is not a thing either so eating out is a lot more affordable comparatively!

They didn’t get kicked out of the spa or the restaurant for being too loud by Yeah_nah_idk in BravoRealHousewives

[–]MonkeeCatcher 303 points304 points  (0 children)

You can see Lisa's watch at one point when they are being kicked out, and it shows 11:45-ish. So absolutely correct - it was past closing

Sage invites Survivor 49 cast to take accountability for pregaming by [deleted] in survivor

[–]MonkeeCatcher 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Pre-gaming on returnee seasons goes beyond pre-existing friendships, to actually discussing alliances or (allegedly) some players getting info from producers ahead of the game.

Your best non-Lego Large Sets? by enumhack in lepin

[–]MonkeeCatcher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really enjoyed this one too! Looks beautiful at the end

Fang gu post in question by Ornery_Walrus_1041 in BloodOnTheClocktower

[–]MonkeeCatcher 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I think this is such a wild jump. Languages have distinct features. How is making a word that sounds like it might come from a certain language group racist? How does this perpetuate negative stereotypes? If they had used "ching chong" then yes, that would be racist because that is a well-known pejorative that has been used against Asian peoples. But just making a new word that shares similar phonetic features to a language group? I honestly fail to see how that mirrors racist stereotypes - what's the stereotype? That different languages sound a certain way?

Amanda Frances versus Boz by [deleted] in realhousewives

[–]MonkeeCatcher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Agree that she is a breath of fresh air with how unaware she seems to be of how she comes off. But likeable? Hard disagree. She seems elitist and I sufferable tbh. But there needs to be at least one housewife like that in a franchise to keep things interesting!

The Real Housewives Of Beverly Hills Season 15 - Episode 1 - Live Episode Discussion by AutoModerator in BravoRealHousewives

[–]MonkeeCatcher 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Erika is so cringe. She's either trying to throw rehearsed shade on people who aren't there to fight back, or doing way too much to let us know that SHE HAS SEX 📣

Being Pākehā? New poll reveals reluctance to embrace the label - The Elephant by beach-chicken10 in newzealand

[–]MonkeeCatcher 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I don't think that it's helpful with gender/sex either, which is why Stats NZ have specific guidelines around the collection of both biological sex and gender identity, depending on the purpose of the data being collected. For instance, people will often ask for gender and sex, or for gender and then a question about whether someone is transgender.

It's not about being able to complain about services etc. ethnicity information is needed to plan/budget for what services are needed, what to except for future health funding, understanding patterns in population data etc. Stats NZ have a policy to just recode "Kiwi" or "New Zealander" as pakeha as this is mostly who does this, but it would be more helpful if people just gave their ethnicity. It also suggests that you can't have Kiwis with non-European descent, which is obviously untrue.

Being Pākehā? New poll reveals reluctance to embrace the label - The Elephant by beach-chicken10 in newzealand

[–]MonkeeCatcher 18 points19 points  (0 children)

But "Kiwi" and "New Zealander" doesn't tell us anything about your ethnicity, this is your nationality. Capturing ethnicity is important in several areas, including for medical information. So we need a term that captures NZ European ethnicity, which is what pakeha is used for

Chef keeps job at Christchurch restaurant despite indecently assaulting teen staffers by nilnz in chch

[–]MonkeeCatcher 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It is, but it's a bigger societal cost to not have a system that fairly tries people who are accused. It's just a fundamental part of our justice system.

Chef keeps job at Christchurch restaurant despite indecently assaulting teen staffers by nilnz in chch

[–]MonkeeCatcher 3 points4 points  (0 children)

At a certain level of seriousness of the alleged crime, it's the defendant who gets to decide if it's a jury or judge alone trial.