The Dim-Post

March 5, 2012

Joining very very large dots

Filed under: Politics — danylmc @ 10:38 am

Key refutes claim that his government’s stand on the Crafer farm deal is costing his government support. Meanwhile, National’s support is down. Meanwhile, completely coincidentally, National to crack down on migrants! DPFs awesomely subtle take on this: Does Labour want poor unskilled immigrants who go on welfare?

40 Comments »

  1. The NZ Herald’s latest poll – check out the neutral phrasing:

    Should richer migrants to NZ be favoured over those with less money who speak little or no English?
    – Yes
    – No

    Comment by Jordan — March 5, 2012 @ 10:45 am

  2. Or you could read the story, and note the changes were decided in May 2011.

    Comment by dpf — March 5, 2012 @ 11:33 am

  3. You can’t maintain a welfare system if you overburden it. New Zealand in 1972 had 26 working people for every beneficiary. Today that ratio is down to 7 to 1 (in fact 3 to 1, if you include superannuitants).

    Comment by Mike Pearlstein — March 5, 2012 @ 11:45 am

  4. “Or you could read the story, and note the changes were decided in May 2011.”

    It’s not so much about when the decision was made as when the dog-whistling takes place, david. it’s really more about trying to spin up the redneck support to combat the flagging polls than anything to do with the substance of the policy, as you probably know given your role.

    Comment by nommopilot — March 5, 2012 @ 11:50 am

  5. Should richer migrants to NZ be favoured over those with less money who speak little or no English?

    The Herald is merely recognising that only impecunious foreigners speak little or no English. Rich foreigners are naturally able to speak fluent English by virtue of the same Galt-like will and ambition and that enabled them to become rich.

    Comment by Psycho Milt — March 5, 2012 @ 11:57 am

  6. I strongly feel that New Zealand should take a step back for two years and not have many more migrants, rich or poor, coming into New Zealand. If we decreased the amount of people coming to live here by 10% per annum, and restructured our immigration policies so that nearly all these people were english-speaking refugees, that would be bloody good for our country.

    Comment by Daniel Lang — March 5, 2012 @ 12:03 pm

  7. “Rich foreigners are naturally able to speak fluent English”

    To be fair, those that are lucky enough to be born into rich families are commonly educated at expensive private schools and universities which place a great emphasis on learning the language of money aka. English.

    Whereas those born into poor households and receiving little to know education tend to learn only what they hear spoken around them. This is an important mechanism for keeping poor foreigners where they belong: in the ghettos and factories.

    Comment by nommopilot — March 5, 2012 @ 12:06 pm

  8. Or you could read the story, and note the changes were decided in May 2011.

    Yet leaked a few days ago.

    Makes you wonder, doesn’t it? Do Labour have some kind of undetectable loyal mole with ready access to Cabinet documents, who is so good that Cabinet has never caught, on but still somehow only manages to send information through ten months late? Very tardy mole. Surely would have been more useful to have these at the time.

    Or, perhaps, might it be more likely that someone with access to Cabinet documents has decided (or been told) now would be a good time to “leak” the changes to Labour, safe in the knowledge that they would kick up an immediate stink about it, which will be easily deflected by the government’s own comms machine (which I am not suggesting for a moment you are part of), and also handily attract media attention from other events?

    Fun to speculate. Although I would submit that if anyone in Labour thinks this mole is their best friend they probably need to take a closer look at things.

    Comment by Smiley — March 5, 2012 @ 12:12 pm

  9. Was this some sort of sanity test for your loyal readers, Danyl? National plummets an astonishing 1.5% since the beginning of the year and a catastrophic 2.2% since the election and the Government and its supporters drop a massive .5% in the last month while the left redistributes 1% among its own ranks and picks up an astonishing game changing net gain of .5% from either ACT or Others. Two hypotheses occur – you are auditioning for a job as a political commentator for the SST (with side specialties in interpretation of Horizon polls and headline writing) or recent posts are part of a trend that will shortly culminate in acute interest in the economic theories of Major Douglas.

    Comment by Tinakori — March 5, 2012 @ 12:25 pm

  10. From the look of dpf’s comments in his own comments thread over at the sewer, Danyl’s (metaphorical) parliamentary swipe card is about to be rescinded.

    Comment by Sanctuary — March 5, 2012 @ 12:55 pm

  11. Dpf says that you have “become quite nasty in the last year”. Which is ridiculous, because as far as I can tell you have always been quite nasty. Keep up the good work!

    Comment by pete — March 5, 2012 @ 1:44 pm

  12. ***Whereas those born into poor households and receiving little to know education tend to learn only what they hear spoken around them. This is an important mechanism for keeping poor foreigners where they belong***

    Not true. If you look at poor Chinese migrants to the UK (qualify for free school meals) or to the US, you will see that they academically outperform most other groups. You need to look at culture and human biodiversity.

    Comment by Mike Pearlstein — March 5, 2012 @ 2:01 pm

  13. Shades of John Key and John Banks lamenting the “nastiness” of their political enemies, as they sat around joking about how the supporters of those enemies are dying off, and shortly before bringing charges against a reporter and having a radio station searched by police. But at least they weren’t nasty to their faces!

    Comment by Ben Wilson — March 5, 2012 @ 2:02 pm

  14. By human biodiversity I’m referring particularly to performance on psychometric measures. These suggest that East Asians invariably will tend to do well academically.

    http://evoandproud.blogspot.co.nz/2011/02/east-asian-intelligence.html

    Comment by Mike Pearlstein — March 5, 2012 @ 2:04 pm

  15. Didn’t Key claim that National’s support amongst Maori was up right after a poll said that they wouldn’t piss on him if he was on fire?

    Comment by Vagabundo — March 5, 2012 @ 2:12 pm

  16. Now there’s a poll I’m sure we’d all like to see…

    Comment by Psycho Milt — March 5, 2012 @ 2:17 pm

  17. “…and shortly before bringing charges against a reporter and having a radio station searched by police.”

    In fairness to John Banks, it was only Key who laid the complaint. And in fairness to Key, it was the police who independently decided his complaint had enough merit to warrant an investigation (complete with search warrants provided by a court) into it. The PM can’t go around telling the police “go look into this crime … or else!”

    Right. I was fair. Now, as a good liberal, I feel smugly satisfied.

    Comment by Andrew Geddis — March 5, 2012 @ 2:31 pm

  18. Last time I looked there were about 60 polymorphisms related to variation in intelligence. Do these track with phenotypes like skin color? I really doubt it. Ethnic gene variation tends to be based on nutrition and disease, which can have huge selective pressure – not low pressure traits like intelligence. Claiming that results of IQ tests are genetic is a bit like saying, ‘eating with chopsticks is genetic.’

    Comment by danylmc — March 5, 2012 @ 2:32 pm

  19. Last time I looked there were about 60 polymorphisms related to variation in intelligence. Do these track with phenotypes like skin color? I really doubt it.

    There was some interesting research a while back that showed that a lot of colour phenotypes had been selected against in the US population and had become silent (so to speak).

    Comment by George D — March 5, 2012 @ 2:45 pm

  20. >Last time I looked there were about 60 polymorphisms…

    Wait a sec, lemme go get my popcorn.

    Comment by pete — March 5, 2012 @ 2:51 pm

  21. @ Jordan #1: ‘Honorary whites‘ policy, much?

    Comment by DeepRed — March 5, 2012 @ 3:00 pm

  22. Not true. If you look at poor Chinese migrants to the UK (qualify for free school meals) or to the US, you will see that they academically outperform most other groups. You need to look at culture and human biodiversity.

    Nonsensical remarks about race and intelligence aside, the argument wasn’t “rich Chinese people are better at learning to speak other languages (i.e. English) than poor Chinese people” (which your comment doesn’t address anyway, because you don’t compare poor Chinese immigrants to wealthy Chinese immigrants, only to “other groups”), the argument was “wealthy people in developing countries (i.e. countries from which refugees might come to New Zealand) are more likely to have access to English-language education, and so English competency migration standards will select for wealthy people regardless of their actual abilities to learn it when they get to English-speaking countries”. With an implied “which is a bit of a loss to NZ unless all you care about is the actual cash coming in”, hello Mr. Dotcom. Wealth and its correlation with English-speaking ability is not necessarily a good proxy for intelligence or skill.

    Comment by Tui Head — March 5, 2012 @ 3:10 pm

  23. @#13 “Not true. If you look at poor Chinese migrants to the UK (qualify for free school meals) or to the US, you will see that they academically outperform most other groups. You need to look at culture and human biodiversity.”

    I didn’t say the poor were not academically capable of learning English, they just largely do not get the opportunity. Chinese migrants to the UK are probably immediately better off than those who don’t have the opportunity to attend school at all or not one that has english as an option.

    The point is that the rich have better access to education and therefore a better chance to learn good English (better than my transposition of no/know, at least🙂 ).

    Comment by nommopilot — March 5, 2012 @ 3:45 pm

  24. oops, what #22 said. thanks tui (refresh -fail)

    Comment by nommopilot — March 5, 2012 @ 3:46 pm

  25. You really do seem to be the only leftish blogger capable of not just getting a rise out of Mr Farrar, but of getting him on the defensive…kudos to you

    Comment by David C — March 5, 2012 @ 4:29 pm

  26. #23: in fact, most of the poor Asians tend to remain in Asia, courtesy of immigration points systems.

    Comment by DeepRed — March 5, 2012 @ 4:31 pm

  27. Damnit Danyl, I told you to be careful with DPF…

    You might just have killed the goose that laid the golden eggs.

    Comment by Hugh — March 5, 2012 @ 5:45 pm

  28. I was actually thinking about this the other day when I was looking at a) the average age of the Tongan population in NZ (very young, like most migrant groups) and b) how much of our welfare spend goes on the pension.

    It occurred to me that possibly the ethnic group which receives the most benefit from the state on a per capita basis could well be NZ-Europeans. Simply because such a high proportion of our population is over 65 compared to other ethnic groups.

    I’m not going to waste hours working it out but i think it is entirely possible – or, if not true now that unemployment has risen it could have been true in the mid 200s when employment was high.

    Comment by Amy — March 5, 2012 @ 5:49 pm

  29. Anyone registered to comment at Kiwiblog and interested in formenting some shit over dpf’s proud anti-Racist record; might want to have a wee google about Brash’s immigration stance and what Winston Peters had to say about it. (Hint, he claimed Brash was stealing his policy). Bonus points for mentioning which leader of the opposition DPF was working with at the time.

    Comment by Pascal's bookie — March 5, 2012 @ 7:27 pm

  30. Farrar’s Curia newsletter tells me that the TV3 Reid poll showed a sharp drop in National support (3%). The weighted average of the three Feb polls (2 x Roy Morgan, and TV3) shows the Nats down 1%, Labour up 3% and the Greens up 1.5%. Seems like an emerging trend to me.

    Comment by Stephen Judd — March 5, 2012 @ 8:18 pm

  31. DPF has always been uncomfortable with migrants.

    “I have real concerns for future immigration which may contain Islamist Muslims ” http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2006/10/islam_in_nz.html

    Comment by Oh Busby — March 5, 2012 @ 9:08 pm

  32. Does it remind us of John Howard’s Crosby/Textorite remark during the Tampa controversy, “We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come.”

    Comment by DeepRed — March 5, 2012 @ 10:07 pm

  33. Nice dog whistle DM. Got the pack yapping.

    Comment by stephen — March 6, 2012 @ 4:06 am

  34. 33.Nice dog whistle DM. Got the pack yapping.

    And it wouldn’t quite be complete without an incontinent little mongrel like you to follow along.

    Comment by Smiley — March 6, 2012 @ 7:36 am

  35. Wow!

    “…He once defamed me so badly (suggesting I operate Curia in total breach of all professional ethics and the Privacy Act) that I was almost moved to consider defamation…”

    But presumably only if DPF’s lawyers, Bendini, Lambert & Locke can’t arrange a diving “accident” first.

    Comment by Sanctuary — March 6, 2012 @ 8:04 am

  36. Immigrant bashing is a safe thing to do when you’re caught wrong-footed on stuff that really matters.

    Comment by Steve (@nza1) — March 6, 2012 @ 12:29 pm

  37. Amy, you’re right there. The fact of the matter is that there’s only a few years before Government-funded superannuation costs us three to four times more than other social welfare expenditure. This is why Labour wants to raise the age of superannuation to 67 years. Personally I feel that that would conjure up another huge set of social and economic problems (such as an increase of elderly beneficiaries) so I believe in lowering the age of superannuation to 62 years and introducing Estate Taxation to help pay for it.

    Comment by Daniel Lang — March 6, 2012 @ 12:37 pm

  38. And I thought DPF was of immigrant origins.

    Comment by moko-lover — March 6, 2012 @ 3:02 pm

  39. “33.Nice dog whistle DM. Got the pack yapping.

    And it wouldn’t quite be complete without an incontinent little mongrel like you to follow along.

    Comment by Smiley — March 6, 2012 @ 7:36 am”

    You got banned for reason Guy, foremost for being a nasty little toe rag.

    Comment by stephen — March 6, 2012 @ 6:59 pm

  40. By all means keep guessing if you like.

    Comment by Smiley — March 6, 2012 @ 9:19 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: