So as an update, Hexbear have defederated us after a brief chat I had with an admin. They updated their instance on it here:
Removed lemmy.nz from our allow-list due to irreconcilable political differences between the instances. As well as them committing to permanently blocking hexbear.net
That’s not quite how I remember the conversation going, in fact I feel like I said it wasn’t permanent (or at least that’s what I was trying to imply):
Thanks for reaching out. I do intend to monitor the situation, in particular when more granular tools are available. But for the moment I think we will just watch from the side lines.
It’s a reasonable discussion, but in practical terms I don’t know if it’s worth differentiating between cats trespassing on property and cats being allowed out at all. It’s completely impossible for a cat owner to control where their cat roams if they are allowed outside at all. Maybe we need to think about whether cats should be allowed out, but it seems like that’s how the debate should be framed, not like this.
Also, even if all owners kept their cats inside, there is still a massive feral population. Getting that under control will take a lot of time and money.
I’m in the keep cats indoors camp. Cats live longer, healthier, happier lives if they’re kept indoors. We expect other animals to be kept confined to their owner’s property (dogs, cows, sheep, lizards, birds, etc) so I don’t see why that expectation should not extend to cats.
Given the enormous damage they do to our native ecosystem I think it makes sense. Feral cats are a pest and currently eradication efforts are hampered because we have to take measures we aren’t indiscriminately killing pet cats along with the feral ones. If all pet cats could be expected to remain under owner’s control, then the options for eradicating the pests go up a lot.
First step though is to require cats to be micro-chipped and registered, just like dogs are.
First step though is to require cats to be micro-chipped and registered, just like dogs are.
Definitely agree with that, there’s no reason every pet cat shouldn’t be mircochipped (and most desexed).
I agree the research definitely says cats are better off indoors overall, especially if they also have a catio. I’m not sure whether older cats can easily be transitioned to indoor life. Our cat has a curfew which she adapted to quite easily, but I think if we made her 100% indoors, she would not do well. A catio might help, but wouldn’t be the most practical at our place and would be expensive to build.
Our cat was born in a barn and is definitely an outdoor cat. We kept her in as a kitten when we first got her and she definitely went a bit stir crazy. I think it would be cruel to keep her indoors all the time.
Before we had a cat certainly the neighbourhood cats could be annoying but we befriended a few. Humans certainly have a huge sense of entitlement when it comes to ownship of the world and I think it is starting to bite us in the ass.
It’s completely impossible for a cat owner to control where their cat roams if they are allowed outside at all.
I dunno, a house on my street has some inward sloping wires along the top of their fences. It looks inexpensive and seems to do the job of letting the cat roam their backyard.
I don’t really know where I stand, but if dog owners have to have a fence capable of keeping their dog in, I don’t see this as being impossible for cat owners - it just needs to be a cat fence.
Trespass is quite an emotive term and not really appropriate for animals. While they are territorial they have no understanding of human property boundaries.
Well, cats are individuals in the same way birds, or squirrels are individuals.
Now, I live in Canada, and this discussion doesn’t exist so I don’t know the problems people have been having to constitute a discussion like this, but personally I think if you don’t want cats in your yard, you can put a fence up. Like you do with raccoons, or bears.
In the NZ context it’s a wider part of the pest control discussion. NZ never had native land mammals (except a species of bat) until fewer than 1000 years ago, and everything’s changed radically since colonisation from Europe began around 200+ years ago. We have lots of native flora and fauna that’s in a downward spiral, being eaten or hunted or starved towards extinction. There’s never been stability during that period, especially due to particular introduced species (rats, possums, mustelids) that destroy them.
Cats are also a big part of that dynamic, particularly feral, but it’s a complicated discussion because so many people have grown up and still have them as pets. At the same time as there are efforts to reintroduce native flora and fauna to populated areas, the presence of cats is a contradiction, particularly when the law allows them to roam in ways that sometimes result in them being many kms from home.
The “I don’t want cats on my property” line is often an extension of the belief that cat owners simply shouldn’t be allowed to let them leave their own property in the first place. That isn’t unprecedented, even near here. Across the Tasman in Australia there are lots of local jurisdictions which require cat owners to keep cats indoors or in proper enclosures. There are counter arguments, though, along the lines of “I keep my cat indoors at night” and “my cat never hunts any of that stuff”.
They officially represent British interests in their information, which is to be expected, as they act as a UK equivalent to Voice of America, RT, NHK, CCTV or any other international state broadcaster you can think of. Truth is not only subjective but constantly up for grabs. These old school but still massive (as far as reach) often opposing state broadcasters are somehow quaint in todays landscape.
No, they represent English interests, the bias against the other home-nations especially Scotland is incredible even from BBC Scotland itself, it’s quite subtle to an outsider but to someone who lives here, the BBC is not the impartial broadcaster that it’s meant to be anymore.
I live in the far north and they’d be better off increasing the heavy rail capacity to get all the fucking logging trucks off the road. Will fix some of the pothole problems too - they created that mess by increasing the weight limits on large vehicles under the last National government, now they get to winge about Labour not fixing it. Standard right wing strategy.
Doesn’t Japan have a working culture that glorifies long working hours and dedication to work, leaving little to no time for socialising and relationships? or has that changed in the last few years?
I think my info might be outdated, it seems like they’ve been working on changing it. According to Wikipedia their average annual working hours is less then us.
I have friends in Japan. The value given does not accurately reflect actual hours worked. There is a culture of long unpaid overtime hours, after hours social gatherings and more. They are not the worst, and they are trying to improve it, but it is still pretty bad.
Read the article I posted. There are significant challenges beginning and more expected in several countries, Japan, Korea, and more, due to a rapidly aging population.
But if you wish to be contrarian and insist everything will be fine, whatever. I don’t really care.
Well we need to prevent an aging population right? There are only two ways to do that. Either we start killing old people or we forcefully impregnate women and pop out babies faster than the death and emigration rate.
An aging population is a huge problem right? We can’t let it happen right? Look at the disaster that’s happening in Japan right now right? They are having a huge problem with an aging population right?
Is an aging population a major problem or not? If so should we do something about it or not?
You raised the alarm and in fact said we are going to suffer the same fate that has befallen Japan if we don’t do something. Presumably Japan is suffering due to an aging population right?
Yes, it is a fact that it is already causing problems, and likely will become major. Read the article.
You raised the alarm and in fact said we are going to suffer the same fate that has befallen Japan if we don’t do something. Presumably Japan is suffering due to an aging population right?
You added “if we don’t do something”. I just said what is happening in Japan is a worry. Never said we would be like that, never said there is anything to be done about it.
Yes, it is a fact that it is already causing problems, and likely will become major. Read the article.
Ok great.
Now obviously we can’t just let a major problem go unaddressed right? We have to do something about it right? We can’t let our country turn into Japan right?
That’s a lie. You made a judgment that said that an aging population is a massive problem and that it’s hurting Japan and you used as an example of how much it’s going to hurt us if we allow our population to age.
So clearly you think this is some dire and severe problem because you raised the alarm about it.
So now you want to say we should do nothing in the face of this massive problem? What’s wrong with you?
Look dipshit, you can say whatever the hell you want but it won’t change the fact that you are arguing against shit you made up.
Does a rapidly ageing population cause changes and problems? Yes, objectively. Does that mean we should force women to become pregnant to stop it? No, what’s wrong with you?
Does a rapidly ageing population cause changes and problems? Yes, objectively. Does that mean we should force women to become pregnant to stop it? No, what’s wrong with you?
How else will you solve this urgent and important problem?
If they can’t even form an opinion on a solution and if the problem only has one or two solutions then yes that person is incapable of recognising the problem.
Bollocks, you sound just like ilovethebomb. One is able to recognize a problem without knowing a solution for the problem. To say otherwise is disingenuous at best.
Kill older people or at least urge them to kill themselves to solve this crisis that’s going to destroy their country.
Then again I completely and utterly reject your insane alarmism over this issue. I don’t think this is some massive problem that’s going to destroy the country or GASP!!! make us like Japan. Imagine New Zealand being like Japan. Can anybody imagine something so horrible!!!
Implant babies in women. Allow more immigrants. Kill older people or at least urge them to kill themselves to solve this crisis that’s going to destroy their country.
Or encourage families to have kids through incentives? Or increase wages and lower the cost of child care so couples can afford it now? Or combat social norms that women are supposed to stay at home? There are lots of ideas that aren’t “force women to have babies” and “kill all old people”. I can only assume you are being intentionally obtuse, because I can’t imagine you are so stupid to think that these are the only options.
Then again I completely and utterly reject your insane alarmism over this issue. I don’t think this is some massive problem that’s going to destroy the country or GASP!!! make us like Japan. Imagine New Zealand being like Japan. Can anybody imagine something so horrible!!!
You do realize it’s not just me, but lots of countries and scientists around the world pointing to the problems that can arise from a rapidly aging population, right? Take Korea, for example. They have the worlds lowest birth rate, and this year it dropped even lower to 0.78 children per woman. By 2067, it is predicted that 46% of the population will be over 65. Can you really not grasp how this will have huge ramifications for a society? When the working population is drastically lower than it is now? How will this affect the economy? Who will look after all the retired people when they need care? And so on and so on. It’s not a hard concept, despite you doing your damnedest to channel a moron.
Honestly your alarmism is unhinged.
What alarmism? I simply pointed out it will be a problem if it continues. I didn’t shout “WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT NOW!” or anything, did I? I pointed out it is already starting to be a problem in other countries, which is true, and you started going on about forcing pregnancies and other stupid shit.
By the way, most countries where the birth rate is significantly below replacement level have started trying to combat this, usually with financial incentives for having children. Some, such as Korea, have spent billions on this. If it isn’t a problem, why waste all that money?
Or encourage families to have kids through incentives?
Wait. I thought you said you were not capable of coming up with solutions.
You do realize it’s not just me, but lots of countries and scientists around the world pointing to the problems that can arise from a rapidly aging population, right?
Yea lots of scientists around the world are also claiming the covid vaccine is harmful.
hey have the worlds lowest birth rate, and this year it dropped even lower to 0.78 children per woman. By 2067, it is predicted that 46% of the population will be over 65. Can you really not grasp how this will have huge ramifications for a society?
Yea it will not have any major ramifications.
When the working population is drastically lower than it is now? How will this affect the economy?
With increased automation and AI it will not effect the economy at all. If anything it will help because we are going to need less people to do the same work anyway.
If it isn’t a problem, why waste all that money?
Religion mostly. Also cultural norms to a lesser extent.
8,000 more smoking deaths, 13,000 more children in poverty, massive cuts to public services looming.
Remember this, every terrible thing this government is doing is all to smash and grab enormous amounts of public money, that could be spent on services for everyone, and give it to landlords.
Nothing but sheer economic vandalism and greed from this government.
I love this for some reason. Maybe it’s having to deal with sovereign citizens in the past. I always just wanted to say “you never agreed to be part of our society so you don’t want to follow our rules - OK but why are you here? Why do you use our roads, buy things in our shops, use our cell phone towers? No one will make you pay tax if you go into the bush and live self sufficiently on your own, if you stay away from the society that you don’t want to be a part of then no one will force anything on you, they won’t even know you’re there!”
I particularly liked the sovereign citizens protesting outside the DIA. “We don’t recognize your right to issue birth certificates, but for some reason it’s also really important to us that you don’t let people change their sex on their birth certificate. Also please issue me a birth certificate so I can go to other organisations and prove the document means nothing or something like that”.
Becasue they want all the benefits and convenance of living in a modern society while also accepting none of the responsibilities that arise from living in a modern society.
Dive on roads? Of course, that is our natural right!
Pay taxes to upkeep the road network? Nah, I never agreed to that...
They are adults that are pissed that their childhood notions of being an adult (being able to do what they want, when they want and no one can tell them no) is not reality.
Is it actually possible to go live in the bush self sufficiently without a shitload of startup money? Would you require licenses for hunting and fishing? Would you be allowed to build yourself a shelter on land you don’t own? Start cook fires? I really don’t think so. What if you have children? Pretty sure society won’t allow you to raise them in a cave.
Sovcits are hilarious but don’t pretend we can all just opt out of society if we want to.
I just feel like saying it. I may not have thought it through!
But the assumption is that you pick somewhere remote that you won’t be noticed. NZ has a lot of land and not a lot of people so I have no doubt it’s doable. There’s that guy down Christchurch way living in a cave, and he’s not even trying to avoid society.
I also like to imagine all the sovcits don’t have kids, because it’s less funny if they have kids, for many reasons.
This is what our generation does. It is what it is, we just got to get up and deal while hopefully making it easier for the next one… or at least one less fire for them to put out.
Editor’s note: We’re increasingly concerned by the misinformation and bad behaviour happening over on X (Twitter). So we’ve left that cesspit to focus on stories and connections that make things better for Kiwis
I recently drove SH6 over the Whangamoas. Most areas that were once 100 are now 80 or lower (except the closest part near Blenheim). I was towing a trailer, and it did not add any appreciable time to the trip, but made the whole drive much less stressful. No more Utes up my arse because how dare I not do the full 100 on the windy as fuck road. So from my personal experience I like the change.
It also helps that 80 is right around the most fuel efficient speed, which is nice now that petrol is $3+
If it were fit for purpose each location they changed it, that would be great. But I’ve yet to meet anyone who (for example) thinks changing the road from Featherston to Masterton to 80kph is fit for purpose. Especially the Featherston-Greytown section which is probably the straightest and best maintained piece of road in the Wairarapa.
The only thing it’s done is force more traffic onto side roads which are still 100.
Also, well I appreciate the frustration of having others up your arse (ha) there could also be something to be said for pulling over if/when you are in a slower vehicle (e.g. towing a trailer) - not saying that you don’t pull over, but the amount of people that don’t, even with slow vehicle bays (or worse speeding up at passing lanes) makes the whole thing more dangerous.
I’d have thought the speed limit between Featherston-Greytown is more due to the volume of traffic on a relatively narrow road, due to how not undulating or curvacious it was. Particularly as there’s been a decent number of collisions due to people turning on from the side roads etc.
Not sure I’d describe it as narrow, certainly not compared to other Wairarapa roads, or Wellington roads either for that matter. It’s got a wide median on both sides the entire way. If I could figure out how to post a picture form the mobile client I use, I’d add a picture to demonstrate. I do understand what you mean about the side roads though.
In the Carterton to Masterton stretch they’ve now put roundabouts in 3 different locations and a wire divider down separating the two sides - although I know some locals are unhappy as there is now a lack of turnaround areas - which presumably is to deal with the side road issue, but still the limit is (theoretically when complete) also 80 even with upgrades, again pushing more traffic down side roads.
I meant more in comparison to a proper double carriage-way or whatever, but ive not driven it for a long time and it sounds like the Carterton to Masterton stuff is way new from my last trip. I assume that area is still 100km/h with those extra protections in place?
Nope, they’ve lowered it to 80, and we’ve been told that they weren’t going to increase it. The council said that Waka Kotahi was looking to lower all rural roads to 60 which would be pretty slow in such a big area in the Wairarapa. Hence I’m keen for a policy change to return roads that are designed for it back up to 100.
I can’t speak for Wairarpa so I leave that to you.
I always pull over. I have a wife and kids who all get car sick, so I take it pretty easy generally. But my point wasn’t about me having people behind me doing 80 in a 100 zone - that would be understandable. My point was, previously large stretches of the road were uncomfortable at the posted limit, but even doing the limit angry locals would ride your arse only to Hoon past on a blind corner and speed off. My anecdotal evidence is the reduced limit has cooled people’s driving temperament noticably. I even got two toots for pulling over, and a couple of hazard light flashes - something that hadn’t happened in a long time before the limit reduction.
My partner actually purchased a little thumbs up light with a button we can hit when driving to thank the folks that do pull over.
I’m sure this whole situation depends on the particular road in question. On the remutakas the only people I’ve ever seen passing on blind corners are motorbikes which is incredibly stupid and suicidal. But there is a big speed differential between people who know the road and people who don’t - understandably so - but plenty of inconsiderate drivers (both slow and fast too). Generally trucks are the best at pulling over
Hello. It’s the only walking and cycling route through a densly populated(by rural NZ standards) area. It’s also a very busy road that can be a pain to turn on and off. I’d rather they built a shared path, improved the busy intersections as they are doing, and left it at 100. But in the absense of that, this is an improvement.
Considering how windy that road is I really don’t get why the locals went so feral about it being lowered. Even the straighter bits of roads have enough of an up-and-down that you can’t see oncoming traffic so you can’t overtake slower vehicles.
Exactly. Plus there are plenty of passing bays. I pulled over regularly to let people pass, no one had to wait very long behind me. I even got 2 toots!
Ditto the Napier-Taupo. There’s a section on the Western side that’s 80 well after it needs to, and ditto at the bottom of the Esk Valley - but all of the rest of it just isn’t a 100km/h road, despite what the munters in their Hilux’s think.
I drove that road just before the new limits came in, my impression was the sections that needed to be 80 already were, and a competent driver could easily travel at 100 on the rest.
It’s also worth noting the road was in appalling condition, with a number of spots of flushing, as well as a ridiculous amount of potholes. I managed to wheelspin going up a hill at 80 kmh, the traction was that bad.
What really stands out with these incidents is that all the handwringing against the protests themselves and how they should be ‘doing it the right way’ is total bullshit.
Turns out direct action (up to and including violence) is justified… If you’re delayed getting somewhere in your car by 15 mins. However, nonviolent direct action about our own government dithering on the biggest crisis humanity has ever faced is too much.
Wouldn’t it be nice if fines were based on the past/present/potential revenue (not profit) from the location where the offending took place?
Dig a trench on an archaeological site without permissin? Pay the full amount your business case said you might ever receive from the work you were making the trench for.
Drink drive? Instantly lose the vehicle you were driving.
Knowingly breaking the law should have extra penalties, I.e. corporate death penalties should be commonplace for those who knowingly break the law.
“congratulations, as the director of the company responsible you are now on the hook for the ongoing restoration and maintenance for the next 20 years”
Exactly! If it’s not already, breaking the law should be an examption to the whole concept of a limited-liability company - so you can’t just shut down the company and move on to another.
newzealand
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.