'Cause I gotta have faith

The New Zealand government is borrowing $250 million per week to cope with the ongoing effects of the economic recession. As expected with the announcement of such a scary figure, fingers are being pointed, stress levels are rising and questions are being asked. One such question is being raised by Your Views. Do you have faith in the Government's handling of the economy? Well, do you?

Victor (Auckland)
No not at all. National Government is as bad as Labour Government. They are only there to look after their interest and of their friends and buisness colleagues.To cut down the governemt expenditure I urge Government to take the bold steps immediately:

1- Introduce death penalty for cold bloded murderers - saving cost on prison expenses and lesson to every one that if you take any one's life be prepared to lose your life.
2- Cut down on Immigrants and refugees coming to NZ
3- Impose family planning like India & China - maximum of 2 child per family. No extra benefits to be given if the mum ( solo) or parents they decide to have more then 2 children.
4- Change laws now that no former MP can claim for free travel benefits if they are no longer in Governement.
5- Change the term of the Government to 4 or 5 years to save millions in election costs & scrap MMP.
6-Cut the slaries of all Govt executives, Cabinets Ministers & MP's by 10% across the board.
7-Restrict overseas trips by MP and Government officials
8- Cut down the benefits to people who are able to work but are damn too lazy to work
9- Introduce tougher laws for manufactures & distributors of P- Life sentence.

Victor details his list of remedies for the country's woes, urging the current government to take heed of his suggestions. Victor doesn't have faith in the government's ability to handle the recession, but he does seem to have faith in using Your Views as a direct link to John Key. This reminds me of what Matt Southall, creator of spEak You're bRanes, said in a piece for the Guardian about users of the BBC's Have Your Say forum:

Who do they think they're talking to? The Queen? Terry Wogan? Father Christmas? I can tell you, actually. They all think they're addressing Gordon Brown. This is about as sophisticated as their politics gets. The BBC = the state = Gordon Brown. Having their tragic witterings "published" on the BBC's site (THE BBC!!! THE ACTUAL BBC!!!!!) is, for them, a validation of their moronic opinion and as good as speaking directly to the prime minister. 

Although I like to think I have a little more faith (the word of the day, really) in the users of Your Views, Southall no doubt points to the imagined communicatory connection between the State and features like Have Your Say and Your Views. Victor - perhaps write a letter to Mr Key with your thoughts? Such brilliant suggestions really need to reach the PM asap.

Laurence (United Kingdom)

Key needs to take his head out of his ass and stop buggering around with Maori types and other crank groups and immediately start with plans on improving productivity, closing the wage gap with Australia, paying off our huge overseas debt and developing other industries away from our dependance on agriculture. Key and National need to refocus their priorities and really think about what we voted them in for ie:creating jobs and improving living standards.

Laurence's prescription for a better New Zealand isn't as detailed as Victor's, however, he does outline John Key's first tasks: "tak[ing] his head out of his ass" and to "stop buggering around with Maori types and other crank groups". Using this kind of language is sure to discredit his response in the eyes of some other users, but more vulgar is Laurence's assertion that Maori are "types" who belong to a "crank" group. I wonder if we'd also find Laurence commenting in the Your Views thread on the Maori Television bid for the Rugby World Cup coverage rights, declaring that it's a pain in the ass for Key to be buggering around with Maori Television. "Refocus your priorities John, no more buggering around and get that head out of your ass!"

Margot Campbell (Napier)
They're doing around a gazillion times better through a recession than what Micheal and Helen did through the boom years. However, 1 gazillion is not good enough. JK is still a bit PC left wing. It might be time for Rodney to run the show to cut out the nonsense.

I have a fantastic yet terrifying mental image of Rodney Hide decked out in a yellow lycra bodysuit with a giant anti-PC sign on the front, cape blowing in the wind.

Lampie (Glen Eden)
No, next stupid question.

I love it. Lampie not only suggests that this question is stupid, but highlights the expectation that the next question will be stupid also. And yet Lampie still answers these stupid questions! Why do people continue to use Your Views if they dislike the service it is offering? I think that question deserves an entire post to itself. Stay tuned! 

Let's settle this over a beer

Assisted by figures from Statistics New Zealand, the Herald asserts that kiwi expats are returning home. The housing market looks set to prosper as expats flock home in droves to buy houses and sit down with a glass of L&P and some Marmite on Vogel's.

Your Views asked: As an expat, what are your thoughts on returning home? When you consider this question in light of others posed by Your Views, it's actually rather good. It defines a target audience within the group of Your Views users and contains an open question. Let's see how the users respond...

2 Shaxs (United States of America)
Reasons to Return -
1: Clean, Green
2: Lack of populace ( 4 mill.c'mon, thats nothing )
3: Surf, Beaches - no pollution.
4: No pollution ( read 3 )
5: No Genetically Modified Crapola in Food.
6: Mum,Daughter.( Normal - I miss family stuff )
7: Uncrowded Surf.

Reasons to say the hell away -
1: Lazy Maoris who want to steal your stuff. Don't call me racist as I am a Maori, but growing up there, I have seen Maoris who think the Dole and the DPB are a birth right, and what is yours is theirs ( after they break a window to get to it )
2: Bemoaning Politicians such as Peter Sharples who think Maor's should have everything handed to them because of injustices.
3: Pakehas who fall under the same heading as 2.
4: Pathetic, trivial sentences for criminals.
Wake up NZ. Rapes should be 25+. Mandatory. Assaults with weapons = Attempted Murder. Murder ( no brainer here ) = LIFE / NO Chance of parole. Thefts,If you didn't learn after the 3rd conviction, 10yrs no parole. Drunk Driving - easy too. 1st - lose car. Gone. Nada.$5000 fine. 2nd - 5yrs Prison.

In Shaxs' view, New Zealand is not just "clean" and "green" but has "no pollution". Does he work for the Tourism Board? No wait, he can't because he highlights his fear of the amount of crime in New Zealand and describes all Maori as lazy, dole-bludging thieves. Guess what Shaxs? That's a racist stereotype, so yes, I'm deeming your comment racist. 

Now for an interesting interaction between a "kiwi" and an expat:

Jeepers (Auckland)
What amazes me is that these people take off overseas to make their money but when times get tough they come running home! Do we really need these people back who can't show determination and stickability in hard times.

Monkeyboy (United Kingdom)
I have to laugh at comments by people like Jeepers who go on the attack to people who have moved overseas. I earn five times what I could in NZ so it makes sense to earn overseas and save to come back home. Unfortunately in NZ opportunities are scarce, wages are low, taxes are high, and can someone please tell me why interest rates are so high for mortgages in NZ, almost double the UK rates. Kiwis pay almost 10% of their property mortgage value in interest each year, that is scandalous and the Australian owned banks are laughing all the way to the.
NZ is and will always be my home, it doesn't make me a traitor to my country because I am making the most of opportunities that will allow me contribute to the NZ economy by returning with hard earned overseas cash (like John Key did).
Jeepers I will be returning home in a couple of years, not because times are tough but because I will have enough money to buy a house freehold and semi retire (all before 40). I will be more than happy to buy you a beer, if you can get the time off work.

Jeepers (Auckland)
Monkeyboy (UK), would love a beer and yes I have the time because I am retired and yes I'm only 45. And I did it here in NZ by hard work and seeing the need for a product that no one else did.

I would love to be a fly on the wall in the pub where Jeepers and Monkeyboy sit down for a bevvie!

What's in a name?

The Geographic Board has ruled in favour of putting the "h" back in W(h)anganui. Michael Laws isn't happy - surprise, surprise. Laws stated that the changing of the name was "more than just about the letter h" and described the Geographic Board as an "uncaring and unthinking organisation which is attempting in one foul swoop to expunge Wanganui's history, heritage, mana and culture."

With every new development in the W(h)anganui saga, the Your Views topic Should it be 'Wanganui' or 'Whanganui'?, which was created back in May, has been reinvigorated with interest. The thread of comments features energetic debate, with polarised discussion amongst both fans of the "h" and the anti-"h" brigade (the members of which probably also belong to the anti-PC brigade).

Dan (Wellington City)
If it's a spelling mistake why not correct it? Or is this one of those things that is supposed to be "racially charged" or an example of "political correctness gone mad"?

Dan gets the prestige of having the first post on the ever-growing thread of responses and manages to be both critical and pithy in this comment. Many representatives of the "h"-team posting on the thread seem to employ the correct spelling argument, which no doubt motivated the Geographic Board in their decision to rule in favour of the name change.

Of course anything Michael Laws-related mobilises the ML defence force:

Carpe Diem (Half Moon Bay)
Leave it alone! Tell all the PC boot lickers to to take a hike! Good on you Michael.

But what is most interesting about this thread are the debates surrounding the representation of New Zealand and Maori history. The perpetuation of misinformation is rife, with users pertaining to speak as expert historians in order to reinforce their opinion.

Geebs (Queensland)
It is time NZers took a stand and dealt with real issues. Maori have no rights as they are not indigenous, never were and never will be. It is time for people to realise that Maori are conning everyone and the parliamentarians are allowing for this to occur. Historical facts show the Maori ate the first people and don't forget it. Stop them eating into your rights now.

Misinformed viewpoints are quite concerning. But what is more concerning is when the spread of misinformation is applauded and therefore reinforced by other users:

Maureen (Queensland)
Good on ya geebs of Queensland. Anyway aren't the Maori originally from Taiwan?

But then, like a knight in shining armour, Jay from Swanson arises with a challenge to these assumptions surrounding the interpretation of NZ and Maori history:

Jay (Swanson)
I see we have experts on the Maori and te Reo Maori from Queensland, Canada, you name it. Maureen of Queensland, if by opining that Maori are "not indigenous" to NZ you mean that they were not the first people here, you must have found out something that no-one else has. If you go and check the current research you will find that there is no evidence which even suggests that there were others here before eastern Polynesians. If by saying that Maori were not indigenous you mean that they did not occur naturally here then we have to say that no-one on the planet is indigenous to anywhere except perhaps Ethiopians whose antecedents (and yours) it is thought spontaneously emerged there.

Although Jay doesn't mention any specific writing on the subject, he manages to question the circulation of assumed (and yet false) facts in the debate. Discussion forums are widely perceived as spaces in which people are able to reaffirm and reinforce their beliefs amongst like-minded peers, deterring those holding differing opinions. The interaction of responses between these users shows that this isn't always necessarily the case, and that folks will speak up if they see assumptions and misinformation being circulated without question.