Thursday, July 27, 2017
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
Intimacy - film review by Tao Wells
I wrote the film off sixteen years ago. I just re-watched it. Back then I'll say that my values were more hardcore, I was front line punk social activist antagonizer, by simply having survived the neo liberal war still working in the camps that were once my halls of proud accomplishment. I had studies film theory, and genre's with Peter Falkenberg , the creator and director of The permanently radical Free Theater in CHCH, and this big beautiful American guy I can't remember NZ. In 1997 I submitted a thesis for genre study in film that was rejected for it was said The genre i wanted to study, technically did not exist yet, I was still too early, pre wave. That somewhere it had been decided that this was policy. And as radical as that film studies department was, being also the German dept, and theater department and I think somehow aligned with American studies, which was beautifully anti-capitalist. Most of these departments are gone now, with a shift of the sand from a rotten hand. Ah we were having fun. I learned Akido and how to defend myself against three attackers simultaneously with out even getting out of my bar stool.
It was and still is one of the most stunning moments in my life, where education, theory and practice paid off, really became real and helped me. After seven years of battling art school I was ready for something real. The genre I was into was gay cinema. Am I gay, who knows? I can tell you right now that I remember enjoying the excitement of their boldness, their license to shock and entice, the visual world of something so 'repulsive' right there in your face. I wanted to know could I look at it, could I see it, this that I found revolting. Could I still see the beauty and therefore grow learn and listen inside this culture. I was looking for support. My own culture was thin on the ground. An American immigrant to two American cultural exile parents, ex-peace core during Vietnam, these guys brought down the major in the town i was born in, and the millionaire who was pimping him. I saw something going right in queer cinema that was working. They laid out a followable narrative that was simultaneously accept me on my own terms and let me conform to your norm. It was an S&M tautology that I would later recognize, feel empowered by and love in author film maker critic, Chris Kraus' work. I wonder if queer culture is much of a force these days, well i have heard of the LGBT or something movement so I guess a shift in label is pretty significant, in it's inclusive formalness. That shit must be good for the young, I remember the day Universities outlawed Mankind, for gender specificity. That really was a revolution that we didn't know would happen but was certainly in the air. Something, someone, must have give.
The film stars my hero and someone I keep wanting to call Keri Hulme, but it's Kerry Fox, such a great name for a starlet. Kerry of course blew me and the rest of the country I wanted to call home, away with her performance as profoundly depressed and insightful writer Janet Frame. In the autobiographical film of the book with the same name, An Asian At My Table (thank you Raybon Kan, you are my hero). Angel, well it was a much more christian back drop of a country then, I mean you probably could be locked up for speaking directly to god, and me being a god, shit. ( You are a god, we are all gods, like the Greeks had it, only literally, we are little shits, and use our powers poorly). Kerry's career was I thought killed by this film. It had her sucking dick in it which was way radical for mainstream media and film, let alone avant-garde gay cinema. The fact that it was ugly sex, dirty, grimy and poor, made it unacceptable. Beyond any 'artistic' merit. I mean this grime stuck. The poverty, watching it now is so intense, like an Ethiopian hunger child in a walk up flat next door It is watching it again, of course a brilliant film. As accurate now as then. Contemporary. A kind of blindnes we seem to appear willing to demonstrate the will in having. How is this trick begun. Who's sending the signal?
But back then I only saw 'attempt at', it fitted in with English 'realism' socialist cinema, so the working class aesthetic was already a river running against me watching it. But this too the film anticipates boldly, writing it into the plot, Kerry is not only a thrill seeking cock sucker she was an actor who had flashes of brilliance she had nothing to show for, that no one would do anything with, except stand and stare. She stood for all NZ art and culture that wasn't capitalist suck up shit. All art that wasn't capitalist propaganda, but social, care for each other live and die art. It was like as if, Marx came down from heaven, and in a moment you awoke from a sudden darkness to be revealed that you now sit in the seat of power and Marx is handing you the keys to dismantle capitalism and the ghost of communism begins to take shape in front of you and for a second you think you see Stalin and panic, but really you know this is a trick and you reach out into the darkness only to notice your desire melt with your will. The power of such keys being too great for any one person, the power corrupting absolutely. Without fail or fault. Clean corruption, smooth transitions, those willing to do the job.
Kerry fox had such great titties, there was this scene from My Angel, where she briefly escapes the cold wet rock of NZ and is in some kind of southern euro holiday, splashing water in the sun, telling every one that she was a writer and that being interesting to everyone around her, she suddenly being important noticed and not ignored. Her large point breasts had that tautness you see in nervous starlets carrying just a little weight to get the giggles in a way that electrifies the flesh with a nerve jolting stun that never fails. Well it didn't and doesn't on me. The liberty of those boobs stirred me, not to mention make clear the contrast of how my own tits are treated in this country, cold damp wet miserable rock. God damn it there is sun here! I'll shake my tits yet.
What went totally over my head, was the great gulf of time that I couldn't recognize, at late twenties, of the thirties. That time when the glow falls off and the habits of youth become a cage, and even the escape routes become cages, these floppy open doors. The post marriage, post kid holocaust landscape of burning bodies and no language left to exercise a right or two of passion, no rites of passion, just grinding screw jamming tighter and tighter against the side of your head, till where you beg for the rat to chew your face off, enter your skull through your eye and take out the brain doing this to himself now.
Of course the upside is good, again invisible cause it's never depicted with out material wealth, and as we all know; material possession, own you! It's like showing a prison camp and saying see there's a beach, that painting on the wall, get out your here. Paid for in advance. This movie shows the folly that is the position from which one falls up, falls no where, that there never was a judge a council of experts raining down on you approval or disappointment, that it was just you making it up in your little head, And of course this is going to hurt but nothing you can't survive or maybe thrive if allowed if given encouragement. Ah encouragement, see how far a little goes, Socialist Arts OF NZ since the end of world war 1. Encouraging people to encourage themselves to give a little criticism of the system that depends on criticism to run. Democratic Socialism. The opposite of Hitlers and more.
This Film and Kerry are single handedly holding up our bargain end of the deal as cultural ambassadors for global Socialism (of which this experiment in emo liberalism has been fun, entertaining but ultimately swept to the dust bin of banal social histories. Compared to the kind of encouragement socialism gives you, capitalism is fading like a hungry ghost right before me. Ah will you go I wonder.
It was and still is one of the most stunning moments in my life, where education, theory and practice paid off, really became real and helped me. After seven years of battling art school I was ready for something real. The genre I was into was gay cinema. Am I gay, who knows? I can tell you right now that I remember enjoying the excitement of their boldness, their license to shock and entice, the visual world of something so 'repulsive' right there in your face. I wanted to know could I look at it, could I see it, this that I found revolting. Could I still see the beauty and therefore grow learn and listen inside this culture. I was looking for support. My own culture was thin on the ground. An American immigrant to two American cultural exile parents, ex-peace core during Vietnam, these guys brought down the major in the town i was born in, and the millionaire who was pimping him. I saw something going right in queer cinema that was working. They laid out a followable narrative that was simultaneously accept me on my own terms and let me conform to your norm. It was an S&M tautology that I would later recognize, feel empowered by and love in author film maker critic, Chris Kraus' work. I wonder if queer culture is much of a force these days, well i have heard of the LGBT or something movement so I guess a shift in label is pretty significant, in it's inclusive formalness. That shit must be good for the young, I remember the day Universities outlawed Mankind, for gender specificity. That really was a revolution that we didn't know would happen but was certainly in the air. Something, someone, must have give.
The film stars my hero and someone I keep wanting to call Keri Hulme, but it's Kerry Fox, such a great name for a starlet. Kerry of course blew me and the rest of the country I wanted to call home, away with her performance as profoundly depressed and insightful writer Janet Frame. In the autobiographical film of the book with the same name, An Asian At My Table (thank you Raybon Kan, you are my hero). Angel, well it was a much more christian back drop of a country then, I mean you probably could be locked up for speaking directly to god, and me being a god, shit. ( You are a god, we are all gods, like the Greeks had it, only literally, we are little shits, and use our powers poorly). Kerry's career was I thought killed by this film. It had her sucking dick in it which was way radical for mainstream media and film, let alone avant-garde gay cinema. The fact that it was ugly sex, dirty, grimy and poor, made it unacceptable. Beyond any 'artistic' merit. I mean this grime stuck. The poverty, watching it now is so intense, like an Ethiopian hunger child in a walk up flat next door It is watching it again, of course a brilliant film. As accurate now as then. Contemporary. A kind of blindnes we seem to appear willing to demonstrate the will in having. How is this trick begun. Who's sending the signal?
But back then I only saw 'attempt at', it fitted in with English 'realism' socialist cinema, so the working class aesthetic was already a river running against me watching it. But this too the film anticipates boldly, writing it into the plot, Kerry is not only a thrill seeking cock sucker she was an actor who had flashes of brilliance she had nothing to show for, that no one would do anything with, except stand and stare. She stood for all NZ art and culture that wasn't capitalist suck up shit. All art that wasn't capitalist propaganda, but social, care for each other live and die art. It was like as if, Marx came down from heaven, and in a moment you awoke from a sudden darkness to be revealed that you now sit in the seat of power and Marx is handing you the keys to dismantle capitalism and the ghost of communism begins to take shape in front of you and for a second you think you see Stalin and panic, but really you know this is a trick and you reach out into the darkness only to notice your desire melt with your will. The power of such keys being too great for any one person, the power corrupting absolutely. Without fail or fault. Clean corruption, smooth transitions, those willing to do the job.
Kerry fox had such great titties, there was this scene from My Angel, where she briefly escapes the cold wet rock of NZ and is in some kind of southern euro holiday, splashing water in the sun, telling every one that she was a writer and that being interesting to everyone around her, she suddenly being important noticed and not ignored. Her large point breasts had that tautness you see in nervous starlets carrying just a little weight to get the giggles in a way that electrifies the flesh with a nerve jolting stun that never fails. Well it didn't and doesn't on me. The liberty of those boobs stirred me, not to mention make clear the contrast of how my own tits are treated in this country, cold damp wet miserable rock. God damn it there is sun here! I'll shake my tits yet.
What went totally over my head, was the great gulf of time that I couldn't recognize, at late twenties, of the thirties. That time when the glow falls off and the habits of youth become a cage, and even the escape routes become cages, these floppy open doors. The post marriage, post kid holocaust landscape of burning bodies and no language left to exercise a right or two of passion, no rites of passion, just grinding screw jamming tighter and tighter against the side of your head, till where you beg for the rat to chew your face off, enter your skull through your eye and take out the brain doing this to himself now.
Of course the upside is good, again invisible cause it's never depicted with out material wealth, and as we all know; material possession, own you! It's like showing a prison camp and saying see there's a beach, that painting on the wall, get out your here. Paid for in advance. This movie shows the folly that is the position from which one falls up, falls no where, that there never was a judge a council of experts raining down on you approval or disappointment, that it was just you making it up in your little head, And of course this is going to hurt but nothing you can't survive or maybe thrive if allowed if given encouragement. Ah encouragement, see how far a little goes, Socialist Arts OF NZ since the end of world war 1. Encouraging people to encourage themselves to give a little criticism of the system that depends on criticism to run. Democratic Socialism. The opposite of Hitlers and more.
This Film and Kerry are single handedly holding up our bargain end of the deal as cultural ambassadors for global Socialism (of which this experiment in emo liberalism has been fun, entertaining but ultimately swept to the dust bin of banal social histories. Compared to the kind of encouragement socialism gives you, capitalism is fading like a hungry ghost right before me. Ah will you go I wonder.
" At one point I thought that if what we did together was all that you wanted it was because you knew more than me. I thought you had found something. I thought you were ahead of me, and that you would tell me what you knew. That was the really great thing, that some point in the future, you would tell me what you knew. But of course you just keep your gob shut"
- Delivered "Jay" played by actor Mark Ryance, now widely regarded as the greatest stage actor of his generation. Written by Hanif Kureishi, Anne-Louise Trividic and Patrice Chéreau
Patrice Chéreau I didn't recognize then as the director of a film that like it or not had deeply impressed me, Queen Margot. Violence taken to it's absurdity, where it is true and with this lens he tells a period drama of historical significance. With the actor,
Isabelle Adjani, as Margot, just glowing in every scene. A true specter haunting europe. He must have been at the time of making Intiamcy, too cool for School, which might explain it's radical dialogue passing the producers. What was radical about it, the lyrics weren't selling a dream, they were awake.
Intimacy is a radical feminist film, Kerry Fox is a radical female leader, a role model, certainly for my kids. The writers must be thanked, to switch the roles of the jealous woman to the man, to give her the cuckold, makes a change, but to send in her kid, friend of her lover but doens't know that her mothers a fucker in the middle of an argument where she doesn't know what she wants or should want, and he's just angry that he doesn't either, even though his equipment keeps going off like on a meter. Cause they'r ol grown up now and the fairy tales and lies that they tried out to keep a beat to dies out. And what's left is something way bigger, more important but takes a courage they have not used their lives up till then preparing for, so they fall short. It's here where the state could lend a hand, let us all stop work when we felt the need to, not participate laying bricks for a prison, but feel the real free breeze of an institution that is a practice of freedom from need, that supplies a basic list of wants so that we can all get on with living in the detail we are in. And stop, weed out the parasites that need to be challenged in broad daylight, in darkest holes.
Stay in a relationship that is sick for the child care, you can't afford to leave. What's that like men? You build the world to your rules, what's a women suppose to trade, no longer a mans world.
"( man speaking) You'll never be an actress!"
"You don't even know who I am, You don't even know how to hurt me, if you knew me a little, you'd know that what you call my lack of talent, sure it makes me suffer but it won't kill me"
- Claire played by Kerry Fox.
Shit I 've just realised that it is a remake of Last Tango in Paris. Only this time, they are both middle aged. It's a middle age crisis film, with out the youth as an escape route. The death of the myth of free sex, Men the hardest are the softest. Where he is more physically attractive than her, her realness blows him out into the water. He drifts, she delivers and leaves. Then the sound track to David Lynch's Lost Highways comes on, David Bowie's master piece Outsider "There is no hell, there is no shame, there is no hell like an old hell, there is no hell".
Tuesday, July 25, 2017
Wednesday, July 19, 2017
Hobbit cost taxpayers $191m. " It’s unfair that I have to work 60 hour weeks to fund your fucking life style, you bludging wanker. "
The latest statements for Warner Bros Entertainment's New Zealand subsidiary, 3 Foot 7, show the firm received a large budget screen production grant of $38.3 million in the 12 months to March 31 this year.
That adds to the $54.6 million it received in the 2014 year, $31.3 million in 2013, $46.9 million in 2012 and $20.2 million in 2011.
Across the five years, production costs amounted to around $1.1 billion, meaning the Warner Bros unit has claimed about 17 per cent of total costs under the grant.
The first two movies generated box office takings of about US$1.92 billion, according to IMDb website, and the third installment in the trilogy, 'The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Armies', was released in December.
Government sweeteners have been a contentious issue with New Zealand pressured to improve the lure of shooting big budget blockbusters locally.
In 2013, Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce and Arts, Culture and Heritage Minister Chris Finlayson sweetened the pot, lifting the incentive to 20 per cent of production costs, with an additional 5 per cent in the offing for meeting certain criteria designed to put the local industry on a stronger footing.
That deal helped lock in 20th Century Fox to greenlight James Cameron's three Avatar movies to be produced in New Zealand.
Warner Bros' 3 Foot 7 reported a profit of $229,000 in the latest financial year, down from $33.7 million a year earlier.
Read more:
• Hobbit tax break tops $150 million
• Hobbit jobs row buried four years on
The way the production is financed means filming costs are covered by interest free loans from New Line Cinema. 3 Foot 7 can then satisfy that debt, plus take a margin, by charging production service fees once filming is completed.
Its production service fee fell to $89.4 million in the year to March from $237.8 million in 2014.
The movie trilogy, originally planned as two films, suffered several delays, including funding woes from MGM, first-choice director Guillermo del Toro quitting and producer Peter Jackson taking over, a threatened actors' boycott, and surgery for Jackson.
The film became a political football in 2010, and saw Prime Minister John Key step in to broker a deal with Warner Bros executives amid fears the production could be shipped somewhere cheaper as local actors and technicians sought to standardise and improve their working conditions.
That saw the government give the studios an extra subsidy of up to US$7.5 million per movie for spending more than $200 million, expanding what spending qualifies for the rebate under the existing rules, and changing employment law to classify all film workers as contractors by default.
It would also stump up US$10 million to market local tourism as part of The Hobbit's release.
Staff reporter/BusinessDesk
Paid to promote virtues of unemployment
October 16th, 2010 at 1:19 pm by David Farrar
Keeping Stock alerted me to this story in the Dom Post:
He refuses to work, but is happy to apply for grants so he can preach about why people should bludge like him. WINZ should refuse to put him back on any benefit unless he can demonstrate sustained activity seeking employment.
This just makes my blood boil. We’re borrowing $240 million a week and this is what Creative NZ thinks is a priority. Why don’t the staff responsible at Creative NZ follow the advice of Mr Wells and quit their jobs to escape the slavery of work.
Tags: bludgers, Creative NZ, Stephen Wainwright, Tao Wells, welfare
An out-of-work artist is setting up a taxpayer-funded “beneficiaries’ office” in downtown Wellington to promote the virtues of being unemployed.Yes – taxpayer funded.
He is part of a $53,000 performance art installation series paid for by Creative New Zealand and Wellington City Council.Well why the fuck not? Someone should get sacked for this. Or at a minimum Chris Finlayson should take $40,000 out of their budget for next year. Art is one thing – but promoting the virtues of bludging should not qualify.
Creative NZ is defending its decision to provide a $40,000 grant but said last night it was unaware of the installation’s “precise content” when the grant was signed off.
Tao Wells, 37, advocates the opportunities and benefits of unemployment and says it is unfair that long-term beneficiaries are labelled bludgers for exploiting the welfare system.It’s unfair that I have to work 60 hour weeks to fund your fucking life style, you bludging wanker.
Wells’ installation, The Beneficiary’s Office, urges people to abandon jobs they don’t like rather than suffering eight hours of “slavery”.I await the Green Party insisting that this pilot be introduced nationwide – that everyone gives up their jobs to reduce carbon emissions.
“We need to work less, so we consume less. The average carbon footprint of the unemployed person is about half of that of those earning over $100,000.”
Backed by five “staff”, Wells plans to promote his unemployment philosophy publicly and debate it with politicians and the gainfully employed.Remember, we are paying for this.
He described himself as an unemployed artist with a masters degree who had been “off and on” the unemployment benefit since 1997. Wells said he was receiving welfare and admitted his benefit was at risk by him speaking out.Not just a greedy selfish bludger, but a stupid one also.
Late yesterday afternoon his benefit was cut off after Work and Income learned of the project.
He refuses to work, but is happy to apply for grants so he can preach about why people should bludge like him. WINZ should refuse to put him back on any benefit unless he can demonstrate sustained activity seeking employment.
Wells denied his pro-unemployment stance was hypocritical when he was being paid $2000 for the project. “We should never be forced to take a job. If you’re forced to take a job it’s a punishment. If a job’s a punishment then society must be a prison.”Listen Mr Fuckwit, you are not forced to take a job. So long as you don’t want those of us who do work to pay you a benefit, you do not need to ever work again.
Creative NZ boss Stephen Wainwright said the agency’s role was to encourage, promote and support the arts. Innovative new work, such as the Letting Space series, could act as a powerful form of social commentary and encourage debate.Oh for fuck’s sake. They seriously have too much money. Having a layabout wanker who is illegally claiming the dole, promote dole bludging as a lifestyle choice is not innovative. Would Creative NZ give money for a tax felon to set up an office and advise people not to pay their taxes?
This just makes my blood boil. We’re borrowing $240 million a week and this is what Creative NZ thinks is a priority. Why don’t the staff responsible at Creative NZ follow the advice of Mr Wells and quit their jobs to escape the slavery of work.
Tags: bludgers, Creative NZ, Stephen Wainwright, Tao Wells, welfare
199 Responses to “Paid to promote virtues of unemployment”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
October 16th, 2010 at 1:22 pm you are being too PC on how you feel about what he is doing David, get more animated
October 16th, 2010 at 1:25 pm Once he returns home from the Labour Party Conference, after his keynote speech, he should be meet by the Serious Fraud Office and arrested
October 16th, 2010 at 1:27 pm The more I think about this bludger, the angrier I get. Christopher Finlayson needs to urgently rattle some cages at Creative New Zealand. If the staff who approved this outrage without a proper sign-off believe that this is a reasonable use of taxpayer funds, they should be looking for new jobs by morning tea time on Monday.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:30 pm Bloody Jim Anderton hasn’t even resigned yet and this guy is jumping in to take over his job… impatient lefties.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:30 pm Yeah he’s obviously a tool of epic proportions but suck it up guys, there are thousands of things more important to the country than this and you’re just giving him more oxygen.
And don’t tell me it’s about the grant, it’s not, that money would have gone to some other equally unproductive cause. It just is what it is, get over it and find something worth worrying about.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:33 pm brings a new meaning to the word creative that’s for sure .. in a funny way, as he has picked up $40k, he has now got a job so isn’t in a position to discuss his promotion of being unemployed
October 16th, 2010 at 1:36 pm Wow, all I can say is unbelievable. And Act’s popularity is down.. I can see the migration across the tasman getting larger in numbers.. This is just the flake on top of the tip of the iceberg. Chris Finlayson isn’t only fucking up the beaches, he’s incredibly inept all together.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:38 pm jaba is right. The guy is a living mockery of himself. Hey look at me – I needed to be paid to do the job of telling you why you don’t need a job.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:39 pm DPF,
We spotted his early and had a crack in GD. The guy’s a complete clown.
WINZ acted quickly, which is good to see. Given that they were already alerted and had taken action priorto the article does raise whether that was part of his publicity too.
Agree that Chris Findlayson needs to act. The grant needs to be cancelled and any monies remaining, recovered immediately.
Surely a deliberate act of non-compliance is an offence that can have some real punitive punishment applied? Perhaps Creative NZ could be taken to task for complicity
October 16th, 2010 at 1:39 pm “And don’t tell me it’s about the grant, it’s not, that money would have gone to some other equally unproductive cause.”
You’re right it’s not about the grant, it’s about how indicative his attitude is with respect to the rest of the unemployed. I would hope actually that those thousands of unemployed people who don’t share his same sense of entitlement are prepared to take the bus in on Monday through Friday to debate with him and his five “colleagues” in an effort to learn them.
I doubt they’ll pick it up but if I was unemployed that’s what I would be doing.
Another thought is that the whole event could be greatly improved were Creative NZ to send the decision-maker along Monday through Friday as well, in order that s/he might debate with us, the public, on whether or not it was a good idea to spend the money on this.
That would be really good.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:41 pm Low wage workers should be protesting vigorously about this. His grant is more than a years salary for a low income worker simply to mock them for being wage slaves.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:41 pm DPF
It is fucking GREAT to see such passion from you….bloody well done!
October 16th, 2010 at 1:44 pm If you really are that worried about a few ten’s of thousands of tax payer dollars going to this dude then you should be 10,000 times more outraged at the government ineptitude that bought us to this waste of hundreds of millions of tax payer dollars:
Treasury knew early about SCF’s doom
October 16th, 2010 at 1:46 pm “Listen Mr Fuckwit,”
[30 demerits for “fuckwit”- Redbaiter]
October 16th, 2010 at 1:46 pm He is not an artist. He is an advocate for arsing about who has seriously under-estimated the ire his actions would provoke.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:47 pm m@tt any wastage is bad wastage – you can’t argue that this wastage is not a prob simply cause wastage also occurs in other areas as well. That’s about as nuts as Wells’ main premise.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:50 pm M@tt…this shit IS worth worrying about…if we don’t jump on the small stuff when it emerges we end up with real,$240 million a week problems to deal with.If this shit had been nipped in the bud early (indeed it should never been allowed to happen let alone the taking of tax moneys to do it in the first place) this country would be a far wealthier and better place to live for honest,productive people. Instead its a scumbags paradise.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:53 pm So is this $40K counted as part of the Labour party election campaign?
October 16th, 2010 at 1:53 pm This guy is obviously not attractive to females and has no children to support.
He has no pride in himself and needs to take lesons from the Chch wizard who is just as educated yet has never curried the wrath of the NZ public in all his years of public life. That man is a true role model.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:58 pm At least the unions won’t defend this idiot.
Why? Well, if people opt out of work like he has, there will be fewer people paying union fees, and less money for drones like Matt Jones from the Unite union to be paid to organise ridiculous publicity stunts. There could be an upside to this; an unintended consequence
PS – does Tao Wells remind anyone of that creepy geezer on the tv adverts about intersections?
October 16th, 2010 at 1:58 pm This illustrates why the whole bureaucratic mess that constitutes ‘Creative NZ’ should be dispensed with. Aspiring artists of any note should be able to succeed through private sponsorships or on their merits.
October 16th, 2010 at 1:59 pm This “artist” is supposedly capable of generating original ideas, right? So why the hell does he look like a mix of Van Gough and Lenin – two people actually achieved something (regardless of merit) through actual work? How can this guy call himself some sort of left-wing artist and not be ashamed of himself? In all fairness, I can think of one thing I’d be happy to see him cut off though…
October 16th, 2010 at 2:02 pm Hey wow wait up a moment!
DPF your obviously fired up over this
# big bruv (7,045) Says:
October 16th, 2010 at 1:41 pm
DPF
It is fucking GREAT to see such passion from you….bloody well done!
and rightly so so we can expect you to tell Findlayson to get his act together.
See, -even the locals can tell, but no amount of wine excuses the hypocrisy you have just inflicted on Redbaiter. Now I know he fires people up but check this.
Listen Mr Fuckwit, ( said by whom) Listen Mr Fuckwit, you are not forced to take a job. So long as you don’t want those of us who do work to pay you a benefit, you do not need to ever work again. DPF
and
“Listen Mr Fuckwit,”
[30 demerits for “fuckwit”- Redbaiter]..
# Redbaiter (12,135) Says:
October 16th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
Oh dear you will have him accusing you of being another progressive if you don’t watch out.
Your blog of course. But tut tut.
October 16th, 2010 at 2:03 pm “He has no pride in himself…”
IMO wiki, this guy has inordinate pride in himself. I think he probably sees himself as fiendishly clever, for coming up with a hitherto unknown way to game the system and give him what he’s entitled to while at the same time helping others by explaining his idea to them in order they free themselves from the bonds of serfdom. He probably thinks he deserves a medal.
The fact is of course his argument is entirely vapid and this has clearly escaped his attention. I’m rather looking forward to the media reports of the lively debates that are sure to ensue Monday through Friday, this coming week.
October 16th, 2010 at 2:03 pm I don’t want to state the obvious, but there are over a million of these people in NZ sucking on us every day. Sounds like M@tt is one of them.
October 16th, 2010 at 2:06 pm As Debra Hill-Cone said today.
It’s not really freedom if you can only say things which are respectful and don’t offend.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/social-issues/news/article.cfm?c_id=87&objectid=10680477
October 16th, 2010 at 2:08 pm Jimbob – the bludgers who live next door to where I board in Upper Hutt when I am in town for work just ripped all the copper spouting and downpipes off their state house and sold it for scrap. I rang HNZ and they promised they would ‘send them a letter’ and scheduled an inspection in mid Nov. There is so much of this going on it would make your blood boil.
October 16th, 2010 at 2:08 pm I just assumed he was being ironic, and he was just making an outrageous statement to garner publicity. This worked quite well.
He is fucking ugly though.
October 16th, 2010 at 2:08 pm Jimbob. You could not be further form the truth in my case and do you really think one million people are systematically ripping off the New Zealand tax payer through benefit abuse? If so I suggest you have some issues with reality perception, let alone basic maths.
For the record, I think this guy is a tool, as I said above, I just think there are far more ways that New Zealand is going down the toilet that can actually be addressed easier, and with greater effect, than wasting breath on this idiot.
So what makes my blood boil is that so many people find it easy to get their blood boiling at this inconsequential, easy target, stuff when there is far greater abuse going on in other areas.
October 16th, 2010 at 2:11 pm “It’s unfair that I have to work 60 hour weeks to fund your fucking life style, you bludging wanker.”
One of your best lines ever.
October 16th, 2010 at 2:11 pm Why is there any public funding of the arts? Seriously, why? This applies equally to organisations like the RNZ Ballet as well as to individual “artists” like this tool. Stop taxing me to pay for this frippery!
October 16th, 2010 at 2:11 pm Art is supposed to push boundaries and clearly this work has done that. As working 60 hours a week DPF that is your choice, you cannot hold this artist responsible for that.
October 16th, 2010 at 2:16 pm Some here are missing the point. This is a priority. But the priority isn’t to cancel this one instance of Creative NZ’s funding. This is a pointer to us that the entire Creative NZ is a waste of time. This will be the tip of the iceberg. Just shut them down, and return the money to the taxpayer. Anything happening in the arts that has merit will be able to find funding from sponsorship or artists choosing to work for free. Forcing people to actually get sponsorship will remind them that their “work” only gets done when someone with money wants it – they exist based on patronage. Without patronage, no money. All the great art was done that way, almost all govt funded art sucks.
Shut down Creative NZ. And then start making a list of other wasteful govt agencies to shut down.
October 16th, 2010 at 2:18 pm John – DPF can’t hold the artist responsible for him working 60 hours a week. He can hold him responsible for the fact that DPF is over taxed, meaning he has to work 60 hours a week so as to have a good lifestyle. If he was taxed less, he could earn the same in 40 hours a week. This guys wastage is contributing to DPF’s level of taxation.
October 16th, 2010 at 2:19 pm “the bludgers who live next door to where I board in Upper Hutt when I am in town for work just ripped all the copper spouting and downpipes off their state house and sold it for scrap”
You have to be fucking joking. Seriously? What do we do with people like this? What can we do when they probably have kids who would suffer if we made them pay it back. What can we do.
October 16th, 2010 at 2:20 pm Could this bludger be a younger version of the odious Whoar? Related to him by chance?
“We need to work less, so we consume less. The average carbon footprint of the unemployed person is about half of that of those earning over $100,000.”
Why stop there? Why not choose to die?
October 16th, 2010 at 2:32 pm “Why not choose to die?”
I imagine that very point will be made repeatedly at the Manners Mall event Manolo.
I wonder how long it will take before he and his “colleagues” begin to realise that perhaps it wasn’t such a fiendishly clever idea, after all?
October 16th, 2010 at 2:33 pm It really isn’t a good look to be criticising the gent for his looks, but then he has shown himself to be such a complete tool that he deserves whatever he gets.
The look in the photo is cultivated.
If you look closely at the photo you can make out that he shaves the front of this natural hairline for the “Art Garfunkel” look
October 16th, 2010 at 2:36 pm Why is Art only supposed to push social boundaries? Why can’t it also be for developing one’s craft to produce pieces of great beauty, cultural significance or artisanship, instead of just visual aids for post-modern finger-wagging or statements of such ripping good irony as a bag of puke on a deck chair?
October 16th, 2010 at 2:42 pm “The look in the photo is cultivated.”
No kidding. Someone should probably tell him that real workers don’t wear handkerchiefs that stick out of their pocket, at work and not too many of them wear tartan ties either.
I wonder what his parents said when he told them he’d won the grant. “Oh how wonderful son, we’re very proud of you?”
“Why is Art only supposed to push social boundaries? Why can’t it also be for developing one’s craft to produce pieces of great beauty, cultural significance or artisanship, instead of just visual aids for post-modern finger-wagging or statements of such ripping good irony as a bag of puke on a deck chair?”
Because that is too worthwhile adze and runs the risk of actually achieving something of value. Far far better to do what he’s doing, and for us to pay for it, don’t you think?
October 16th, 2010 at 2:53 pm This muppet eloqently sums up the philosophy of dole-bludgers quite well: “- what I’m critiquing is the idea of work”. The only thing that makes me angrier at the moment is that Paul Henry isn’t on-screen to lay into this miserable waste of particles. I guess I’ll just have to make do with Paul’s immortal words – “Die you c**t”.
October 16th, 2010 at 3:10 pm M@tt this guy is talking about people who do not like working, so should be on the dole and not in slavery. There is your million odd slackers that watch the clock, take long smoko breaks etc. You should spend a couple of days in the public service or local Government to see what these people call work. From memory they refer to it as “cushy”. There are actually not many people keeping this country afloat.
October 16th, 2010 at 3:16 pm $53,000 sound’s like a lot for an office that is to remain open about two weeks. It sounds like creative New Zealand haven’t got a clue what he is upto. Who’s job is it to check that this all above board financially or have we just spent $53,000 funding his and his won’t work mates life style. A small point but one worth thinking about his failure to work and pay tax effects the ability of our government to support overseas aid projects I wonder how many children have died because of him and his ilk. The extra million dollars we as a nation couldn’t afford to give because he was nobily avoiding work and the double wammy being supported by us. That is worse than stealing candy from a baby it is stealing rice from a dying child.
October 16th, 2010 at 3:17 pm The art scene in NZ and world wide has been hi-jacked by a so-called artistic elite who ” decide” what is fashionable at any given time.
It wasn’t long ago here that some “artist” won a prize of $100,000 for exhibiting a crate of empty beer bottles as a peice of art , when in fact it was a crate of empty beer bottles.
Artists if they are any good will attract patronage, even if it is Jenny Gibbs, there is no way the Government should be putting money into this crap. Creative NZ wil come out with this assinine statement like that of John Gibson above, about pushing boundaries and attempt to make us all seem like cultural peasants but a piece of shit by a piece of shit is still a peice of shit.
And John Gibson 2.11 you are presuming two things 1) That is is a peice of art 2) This dork is an artist.
MInd you , with the new Wellington Mayor he’s likely to be assigned the newly created post of Artist Laureate
October 16th, 2010 at 3:22 pm “when in fact it was a crate of empty beer bottles”
I’ve got lots of art like that lying around my place. It’s worth $100k apiece you say? I see….
October 16th, 2010 at 3:25 pm “There are actually not many people keeping this country afloat.”
Quite true. Be lucky if it was half a million. Except its not completely true.
The country isn’t afloat. It sinking rapidly. Bill English and John Key continue to borrow madly to keep government workers employed, gambling that the debt will be paid back by future generations in more prosperous times. A big gamble and one I really do not think English and Key have any real right to take.
The right option was to fire government workers en masse.
Have a look at this chart. Its from the US but our spending is similar enough for the purposes of the comparison. It charts government spending per person from 1792 to 2010. That is where all of our problems lie. Government spending should never have been permitted to accelerate as the chart demonstrates.
October 16th, 2010 at 3:29 pm Reid Apologies it was 10,000 he won not 100,000, you might have to empty a few more to make the hunndy
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=2350947
Diana Wichtel: Are these beer crates art? I think so
Share Email
Print
Nothing like a work of art to divide public opinion. Especially when the piece in question is nothing like a work of art.
Auckland solo dad and former plasterer David Stewart wins the $10,000 Trust Waikato Contemporary Art award with a controversial installation of five beer crates full of home brew.
Really, you couldn’t have made it up.
October 16th, 2010 at 3:30 pm reid, more like $4.50 or $1.70 for just the crate.
October 16th, 2010 at 3:53 pm If this guy thinks unemployment is so good then maybe someone should help him achieve his goals.
October 16th, 2010 at 3:57 pm I’m disappointed in the rapid write-down of my previously valuable assets and wondering whether approaching Creative NZ with a beer-crate display idea might not be a better option.
October 16th, 2010 at 3:59 pm DPF: are you advocating CNZ checking the political views of artists/art works before making grants?
October 16th, 2010 at 4:01 pm You’re just rubes for not understanding modern art! Didn’t you know: that modern art was invented by our self-appointed betters to provide themselves with a mechanism for proving they’re superior to us? It *has* to be ugly, or baffling, or just plain daft to the average person in order for you to be “in” by appreciating it! Timeless qualities such as beauty and finely-honed, well-executed technique are shunned *because* they have mass appeal. Freakin rubes……
DOWN
October 16th, 2010 at 4:03 pm He still costs us far less than all those mediocre athletes at the Delhi Games. Just what did each medal cost us? And is that good value for the taxpayer dollar?
SPARC is a jolly old pile of pork too.
October 16th, 2010 at 4:05 pm I’m not going to comment on the work itself, or whether or not it was a worthy funding recipient, because I haven’t seen it.
October 16th, 2010 at 4:12 pm John Gibson
@ 2.11
Thankyou John, for explaining to me what, ” art is supposed to do.”
i needed that.
Society needs intellectuals such as you to point these truths out to the masses.
i can’t decide which is the biggest joke,
your description of this tosser as, “this artist.”
your description of what he is doing as, “this WORK.”
or just you.
October 16th, 2010 at 4:14 pm “He still costs us far less than all those mediocre athletes at the Delhi Games.”
But why should anyone who isn’t disabled cost us anything at all? If they’re disabled, physically and/or mentally, fine. Help them.
If they aren’t, why should we pay them if they won’t pay us? Isn’t that how it works? You want something, you give something back. What’s this guy giving us, in return for us supporting him? Advice that’s useful, or complete bollocks and not just factually wrong it’s morally wrong as well. And he thinks we should be happy to pay him to spout this perspective?
I don’t give a fuck if he wants to stand in Manners Mall and say what he likes, if he does it on his own dime. I do give a fuck when he does it on my dime. Fuck him. I’m actually going to go along there one lunchtime this week and give him my perspective.
From the look of him in his expression and dress in the photo and in his words in the article, he’s quite up himself though, which normally means a somewhat fragile ego is hiding somewhere so I’ll take it easy on the guy, but boy, what a wrong-headed 37-year-old man. He can’t even claim youthful naivity. Either he doesn’t believe it and its to promote this very debate we’re having in which case good or he does believe it in which case, fuck him.
October 16th, 2010 at 4:30 pm So simple – he’s a failed artist. Living off benefits (although I expect those to be cut soon, and Creative NZ to also have their budget cut soon).
October 16th, 2010 at 4:41 pm Paula Bennetts mob acted quickly to deal with the bloke. Now I hope Chris Finlayson’s mob are as quick on the uptake or cut-off as it were.
October 16th, 2010 at 4:54 pm Part of the trouble is that beneficiary activists in various countries have conned the UN into adopting all sorts of bullshit conventions on beneficiaries’ rights, something which Robert Mugabe etc embrace with open arms (the only beneficiaries there would be his inner clique). This sort of requires sufficient welfare so that beneficiaries can take a full part in society.
I cannot help thinking that if Labour was still in power and WINZ cut off his dole, Heather Simpson would be screaming down the blower at WINZ and they would promptly restore the dole.
October 16th, 2010 at 5:01 pm Can I suggest that anybody who lives in Wellington takes the time to visit this “office” and give this parasite a piece of your mind.
The Beneficiary’s Office is on at 50 Manners St, level 3, from Monday.
October 16th, 2010 at 5:06 pm “…beneficiary activists in various countries…”
How come there are beneficiary activists in various countries but I haven’t ever heard of any get-a-job-you-loser type activist organisations.
Maybe we should start one up.
October 16th, 2010 at 5:12 pm I notice that Toad and the rest of the Greens have avoided this thread for some reason.
October 16th, 2010 at 5:28 pm I think Wells should be congratulated, I don’t know how he could have done a better job of highlighting how ridiculous art funding seems to have become. Arts should be encouraged, but overfunding controlled by a snobby elite is the worst way to do it.
And there’s a win-win with this, Wells has also highlighted how bad benefit abuse as a choice has become, rather than gratefully used as a backstop
October 16th, 2010 at 5:30 pm “And is that good value for the taxpayer dollar?”
Funding SPARC is far better for the nation than funding dole Bludgers and DPB slappers.
October 16th, 2010 at 5:31 pm Pete
Let me fix that for you…
“Arts should be encouraged, but public funding for the arts should stop immediately, if they (the artists) cannot make it in the real world then tough luck”
October 16th, 2010 at 5:32 pm Sigh. And, in addition to the nuttiness David points out, we have the standard stupid carbon footprint argument.
To anyone who seriously thinks that is a worthy objective in life I say: kill yourself. Now. That is by far the fastest and most effective way to achieve that objective.
Except, of course, your objective isn’t to cut carbon. Its just that you need an excuse to raise taxes and regulation, and bring absolutely everything into the domain of social democracy. So add that to the reasons, Mr Unemployment, why you’re a fucktard.
October 16th, 2010 at 5:32 pm At least sports people learn about long term hard work and striving for success.
October 16th, 2010 at 5:35 pm As someone pointed out above, I really have to ask is Creative NZ discharging their obligations lawfully if $40,000 can be handed out without knowing what the money is going to? If not I’d like to see the responsible people prosecuted. I would be surprised if such little oversight of grants was designed into law.
October 16th, 2010 at 5:39 pm C’mon john gibson
You appear to be a lone voice, albeit, a very superior one, supporting this tosser.
Explain again to the plebs what they have not understood.
i’ll point out again the joke you are, describing a bludger who is suggesting not working
as a WORK of art.
October 16th, 2010 at 5:41 pm There is no case for public funding of arts. Arts should be supplied in exact proportion to the willingness of people to pay for it, whether that be a buyer, or the artist themselves for their own enjoyment. No more, and certainly no less. The additional art you get from adding subsidy is not the high quality stuff – that’s what gets made regardless – its all the shite produced by people who aren’t good enough to stand on their own two feet. Europe has warehouses of shite art that nobody wants or ever
sees, the product of subsidies that take creative people’s talents and divert their activities into production that nobody wants. The result: society is deprived of all the valuable production they would have made, and instead we get acres of crap. For what?
October 16th, 2010 at 5:49 pm It’s unfair that I have to work 60 hour weeks to fund your fucking life style, you bludging wanker.
Well, I only work 40 hours a week (slack, I know) and I’d guess that I pay less income tax than you, but I’ll tell you what – I’m happy for my hard-earned taxpayer dollars to go towards funding Mr Wells’ art project.
Back in 2003 I was on the dole and doing the PACE “artist’s dole” programme. As part of that, I did a year-long course for people on PACE who are artfully inclined but unemployed. It was incredibly helpful and the kick in the pants I needed. As a result, I’ve been gainfully employed since then.
I’m quite happy for people like Tao Wells to be on the dole – people who use the time they have to do unpaid work and create art. Better than the cliche of the dole bludger sitting around eating cold pizza and watching Oprah, yeah?
We might not agree with Mr Wells’ provocative art project – but what is and isn’t art is a separate argument.
As I said before, I’m happy for my tax dollars to fund art projects like this. They make the world a better place.
October 16th, 2010 at 5:50 pm “There is no case for public funding of arts.”
Nah I disagree ben. Given all the other things we fund, why not also fund something like art.
Art isn’t a commercial product driven by market forces. By definition.
Yes it has a market value but ask any artist and they’ll all tell you they don’t do it for the money. Of course that changes when one or two of them get recognised and then they do start doing it for the money, but no artist that I have known decided to become an artist because they liked the money, they became an artist because they felt called to it. Lots of “successful” artists are also heavily overrated by the market which pays ridiculous money for what, to me, absolute crap. Those are the artists who do it for the money, but they didn’t start off like that, at least in my experience.
Therefore if we want to have it in our societies, some other forces need to come into play. Otherwise most artists would merely become worker drones in Sector 7-G.
October 16th, 2010 at 5:58 pm I’m glad you’re happy Robyn. However I’d suggest that you and John Gibson are a party of two. Y’see, Wells is not creating art; he’s trying to make a socio-political statement, and he’s using my taxes to do it.
Tao Wells is in all likelihood perfectly capable of working. What pisses me off is that he and his ilk CHOOSE not to work. Wells’ excuse is that work is “slavery”.
If Tao Wells doesn’t want to work, that’s fine; let him survive by whatever means he can. But he should not be allowed to CHOOSE not to work whilst holding out his hand to receive assistance from those who DO work, and who DO pay taxes.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:03 pm Reid
Art isn’t a commercial product driven by market forces. By definition.
It most certainly is subject to market forces. What definition of art are you operating with? You are effectively saying subsidies create no new art – which is their express goal!
Actually most art is a normal economic good like most others. It is a private good – both rival and exclusive. Public art is different – if city councils feel the need to commission art of public spaces good luck to them.
Yes it has a market value but ask any artist and they’ll all tell you they don’t do it for the money.
Yep, which is precisely why I said… “or the artist themselves for their own enjoyment”. I have zero objection whatsoever to the concept of art as a source of satisfaction and enjoyment and happiness.
Like billiards. Or hang gliding. Or blogging. Or knitting. Or cartoon drawing. Or bridge.
Anyway reid, there’s not much in your response that justifies government intervention. In fact there is nothing. You happen to not like what the mainstream demands. Fair enough, and I agree. You acknowledge many artists do it for something other than the money. We agree on that too. It follows, does it not, that non-mainstream, non-commercial art will still be produced without any subsidy at all. So what is the problem a subsidy is supposed to be fixing? [the answer, of course, is the incumbent government’s re-election, but that is beside the point]
Given all the other things we fund, why not also fund something like art.
Is this really your response? Government pays for all kinds of nonsense, so how about this too? How about funding my bridge habit?
October 16th, 2010 at 6:07 pm Robyn,
back in 2003 when you were doing the artists dole programme, in your mind, what category
of artist were you ?
Which branch of the arts were you in ?
We need more New Zealanders like you, and your mate Wells. Not.
Even john gibson appears to have been a productive member of society before retiring.
Who is employing you now you are working ?
Would it be a government department by any chance ?
October 16th, 2010 at 6:11 pm ..pfftt..welcome to fucked up New Zealand….absolute bullshit of the highest order…promoting the virtues of being unemployed…and WE are paying for it…fuck I cant wait to get out of this shithole.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:11 pm I am just so happy to have something to be angry about!
October 16th, 2010 at 6:13 pm Dumbfuck comment of the century, even for you matt.
Welfare dependency and parasitic lifestyles ARE THE SINGLE BIGGEST PROBLEM NZ has at the moment.
Apart from looking like he is from the Adams family, Wells completely shits on all working families who are struggling through the recession.
Just today I have been pighunting with a shepherd on a Northland sheep station which is massive. He works 12 hour days up there for a relatively modest salary, and I got a taste of his lifestyle today. I have to say that it makes me sick contrasting one guy who can opt out of the system, do a fucking worthless masters (similar to a certain KB poster) and sponge off us for his useless art projects. Then there are guys like the one I have met today (and many of the rest of us) who pay for these fucker’s lifestyles.
What a sack of shit. I would certainly tell this guy what I thought of him face to face.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:14 pm ..and sack all those cunts at creative NZ for pissing my money up against the wall…( demerits welcomed )
October 16th, 2010 at 6:21 pm My thoughts exactly ben! Heads should roll over this at CNZ. Will any action really be taken? Snort…
How charitable of you. The rest of us think he is a low-life parasite, but be free to give him some of your own cash at Manners Mall.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:21 pm Also Robyn,
Can’t you understand that when you say Wells is doing “unpaid WORK”
He has been paid by the taxpayer, thats me babe. And i’m not happy
i’ve been paying for this bludger. And you to sit on your arse for a year.
Also, how long do you calculate that you will need to work in order for your taxes
to equal what we paid you while you were on the dole ?
Let alone all the benefits of our society you availed yourself of during that time.
Do you have a concience ?
Are your parents proud of you ?
Did either of them work ?
October 16th, 2010 at 6:23 pm This makes me think if the truckloads of public funds that get pissed up against the wall by our universities every year in the form of masters/PHD scholarships.
I remember the case a few years back where that guy from WAikato got about 30K for a study on the lifestyles of bogans. It was titled “boganology” or something similar. This is only one of hundreds and thousands of such scholarships which must be likewise blown on worthless shit each year.
I wonder if this is what Helen Clark was meaning when she spoke of a “knowledge economy”
October 16th, 2010 at 6:25 pm Exactly
October 16th, 2010 at 6:31 pm “As I said before, I’m happy for my tax dollars to fund art projects like this. They make the world a better place.”
Really? Without sarcasm, please explain why and how Mr. Wells parasitic activities are beneficial to New Zealand and the world.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:34 pm I don’t believe the majority of receipients of benefits are bludgers who don’t want to work.
I do believe that beneficiaries need some sort of independent advocate to ensure they’re not treated unfairly by “Paula’s lot” (and indeed they are Paula’s lot, sharing her visceral contempt for the people they’re supposed to be helping).
Which is why I despise this parasite as much as anybody above.
$53,000 would pay for a competent advocate for a year. They could work out of an existing social services or church welfare organisation. And they could do some real good, helping people receive their proper entitlement and assist them in finding work.
Yet this clown takes that money and makes a mockery of it, giving people (including many of those above) the perfect opportunity to run the “all beneficiaries are like him” line.
I hope he’s left to live on his “artistic talent” rather than receiving another cent of money that could be spent on those who deserve, and appreciate, the help they’re given.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:35 pm This is a story that pushes the “angry button” on right wing readers and a few lefties too: which is the point of the art work. It has been designed to generate controversy and there attention for the author. You have all been suckered by the artist.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:35 pm Tao Well’s Masters degree doesn’t appear to have been in logic. He says:
Wow, let me try that:
We should never be forced to pay taxes. If you’re forced to pay taxes it’s theft. If taxes are theft then the government must be a criminal.
Hey, this is easier than I thought:
We should never be forced to pay unemployed artists the unemployment benefit. If you’re forced to pay them a benefit then it’s an unfair transfer of wealth. If benefits are an unfair transfer of wealth then unemployed artists must be ungrateful sponges and complete tools.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:38 pm You right wingers are so funny – I can’t actually believe you’re real. You sound like caricatures from some NBR comic strip. I think maybe I’m a bit happier than y’all too, which makes me laugh even more. I used to work with Tao, BTW, and he works pretty darn hard. We were often still at work around midnight. And no, it wasn’t for a government department. Oh, and he has a hot girlfriend.
Oh, and PS – Loved the results of the local body elections in Wellington and Auckland. Roll on 2011 for a change back to the left. X
October 16th, 2010 at 6:43 pm I do believe that beneficiaries need some sort of independent advocate to ensure they’re not treated unfairly by “Paula’s lot” (and indeed they are Paula’s lot, sharing her visceral contempt for the people they’re supposed to be helping
fuck off they do Rex…they are damned lucky to even get a cent of my hard earned tax dollar…its not a right to obtain a benefit… its a fucking privilege.. which is constantly abused by bludging lazy fucks.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:45 pm “This is a story that pushes the “angry button” on right wing readers and a few lefties too: which is the point of the art work. It has been designed to generate controversy and there attention for the author. You have all been suckered by the artist.”
John could you give me your money please. It’s just I’m not interested in earning it myself and you have some, so I want it.
Don’t expect me to be grateful for it either, since it’s my right as a person, to take it.
What’s your address so I can come round and pick it up. Alternatively, just email me your bank account and password and that’ll save me the journey.
I’m not fucking kidding either. I’m entitled to it, it’s my right, and you’re a wanker if you don’t give it to me.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:46 pm Also Robyn
Just for your information, i like many of your countrymen get sick to their guts every time
i pay another A.C.C. demand and know its going towards people like you and your mate Wells.
to get free accident insurance.
O K Robyn . Defend your position.
Why should i pay for you to sit on your arse for a year ?
Why sould i pay for this tosser Wells ?
do you think that money just comes from the government ?
Were your parents happy to tell their friends, ” Oh yeah, our daughter is on the dole, but hey’
she deserves it, she’s hoping to be an ARTIST ”
Cant you see how pathetic you are.
Looking forward to your comments.
i wont hold my breath.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:58 pm Were he advocating living on savings for a time, he might have a point. We could all use a break sometimes.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:00 pm My word that was $3k well spent. A priceless display from all the regulars – you have been punked you imbeciles.
and strangely uncharacteristic from you DPF. I thought we’d told you about drinking and blogging before?
October 16th, 2010 at 7:01 pm bereal, I admire you asking the questions, but long ago noticed the futility. There is no answer to those questions in justice or reason. There is no principle which can defend such arbitrary confiscation from the productive to be gifted to the unproductive. The answer is: because that’s what the median voter in this country expects the taxpayer to cover. That is the full and entire story. There is no justification beyond that needed, I’m afraid. It simply is. And any New Zealand government, blue or red, that gives any indication of touching that privilege for the increasingly many at the expense of the increasingly few will find themselves voted out. Only another public funding crisis can save New Zealand.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:06 pm Mr Wells’ Facebook page. He is a fan of:
Oh, look, another nutcase like Nick Wilson. What is it with these public sector leeches?
October 16th, 2010 at 7:08 pm Just what I was thinking today ben!
It is amazing observing the ignorance of the average voter. You can ask someone “why should my tax dollars pay for your healthcare”? and you will get a blank stare and a “it is easier if we all just chip in” or something similar.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:11 pm Tao Wells is a fan of the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand?
Well I’ll be buggered; I NEVER saw that coming!!!
October 16th, 2010 at 7:12 pm Good spotting hurf.
Check out the first page of his blog. The video at the bottom of the page sums him up nicely.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:12 pm May I take this opportunity to thank DPF for not running the photograph with this story.
Another blog (mentioned above) did and it quite ruined my breakfast.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:14 pm Sorry about that MT
October 16th, 2010 at 7:16 pm Robyn,
I have no problem with you supporting Wells. Good on you for your opinion. I hope it is honestly held though because I have the proposal to test it…
We taxpayers that do not agree with Wells will stop funding his non-work. (Actually our friends at WINZ have already commenced action to take care of this for us.)
You (and any other supporters you can find – good luck) can donate a portion of your salary to support him in his campaign (that means you have to fund his living expense too.)
So if you have any integrity you can get your wallet out and start donating to Wells, because we are not prepared to.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:19 pm Hurf Durf,
Thanks for that list. I take special note of:
“He is a fan of:
Petition International Criminal Court to Investigate Israeli War Crimes in Gaza
ARREST THE POPE (official)”
No doubt Luc Hansen will be along this evening to show his support for this leader in our community.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:21 pm “You have all been suckered by the artist.”
So Art = trolling?
Maybe for his next “instalment” he can question Anand Satyanand’s citizenship… I’m sure there’ll be even more bites.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:28 pm @john gibson
I just went outside and set a couple of tires on fire. Pollution gets people talking about the environment.
Then I crashed my car into some pedestrians and drove off. Violence gets people talking about crime.
Then I ran over a cat. Feline deaths get people talking about animal cruelty.
The ends justify the means, I’m an artist.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:38 pm labrator – fair enough. You should put together a proposal and apply for Creative NZ funding.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:42 pm john gibson
” You have all been suckered in by the artist.”
Thanks for pointing this out to all the less intellectualy endowed.
Bye the way,
Check your grammar mate, it’s not up your genius standard.
We’re all suckers except for you ?
When you describe this tosspot as an artist you demean all genuine artists
and reveal plenty about yourself.
This tosser Wells, Robyn, and yourself have got it, and we are all idiots.
Is Robyn your daughter mate.
You are both as pathetic as each other.
Thanks for explaining ,” the point of the artwork ” to us.
Where would we be without you to put us right?
Ben, i take your point but even though you are correct i gotta keep trying.
What happened to Robyn ?
J gibson will keep offering the superior/ gay side of the argument, however pathetic.
I don’t expect to hear any thing more from Robyns high horse on this matter.
But i could be wrong.
Gotta go now G’nite all.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:43 pm IV2; I had thought to suggest that he was probably a no.1 fan of the new green Mayoress in Wgtn.
Wgtn seems to have this problem and a major collection of these types.
Rex Widerstrom (3,518) Says:
October 16th, 2010 at 6:34 pm
I don’t believe the majority of recipients of benefits are bludgers who don’t want to work.
I think you may well be right Rex but the system allows many to be that way, its easy and so humans being what they are take advantage of the market signals. And thats what they are. Signaling, that if you can be bothered, then there is an easy life out there if you work the system. Plenty who collect the easy money and top up doing cash jobs of all sorts. Go to any market, look at those that collect seafood for sale under the table, mow lawns for cash etc etc.
Rex;
I do believe that beneficiaries need some sort of independent advocate to ensure they’re not treated unfairly by “Paula’s lot” (and indeed they are Paula’s lot, sharing her visceral contempt for the people they’re supposed to be helping).
Which is why I despise this parasite as much as anybody above.
$53,000 would pay for a competent advocate for a year. They could work out of an existing social services or church welfare organisation. And they could do some real good, helping people receive their proper entitlement and assist them in finding work.
Here you fall into the classic trap which is also a subject posted omn GB.
Paaula’s menb are going to monitor all the yopung ones leaving school to get them working. Apart from not succeeding this is just another waste of money. The way to get people working is to allow the jobs to grow and allow those that create meaningful jobs. i.e. private enterprise to make meaningful employment decisions. I.e. allow employers to employ young people at rates of pay that are viable for the employer and the young person. $520 per week for a 16 year old trainee is not viable. Hence no jobs.
Further all that money the Govt. spends on your behalf to provide solutions that are uneconomic add to the current govt. expenditure and borrowing. That is now 13 billion for this year.
Govt. needs to get the fuck out of peoples lives and let us do what we need to.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:43 pm I do not understand people like this, and I have come across a few in my life, and they baffle me.
You can only exist on the dole (if you are honest),so what benefits and opportunities could it ever create except narrow mindedness and intellectual myopia with a unhealthy dose of poverty?
October 16th, 2010 at 7:44 pm reid – there are lots of things I resent paying taxes for. Anything with “Treaty of Waitangi” in its title for a start. I have no issue with CreativeNZ. Art is important to our culture and identity, we don’t have the wealthy patrons that exist in other countries.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:49 pm i would suggest that 95% of people on the dole, for more than a couple of months either cant be bothered to work or are not bothered to apply themselves for their employer…. no wait, there just isnt any jobs.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:58 pm one off, 6 month emergency unemployment benefit.
2 year dpb, first child only.
work and income to place every sickness beneficiary in paid work.
no wff.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:07 pm Some truths to the debate.
NZ is currently enjoying some of its best ever selling conditions, high prices for products abound. The Govt. is running a 13 billion dollar deficit and despite all that stimulus NZ has a standstill growth rate.
Control does not foster nor create anything. Borowing on that scale causes the profit from our sales to be cleaned out.
What will the Govt have to do next?
Print money is all that is left.
Oh but wait. We could provide incentives. Lots of little no cost incentives. People act to make gains and avoid losses.
You know you are in trouble when the most cheerful thing the Finance Minister can think of to say about the economy is that people are no longer drawing down equity in their houses to spend up large.
Bill English highlighted the multi-billion-dollar turnaround from net equity withdrawal during the housing boom back to the more normal net equity injection, when briefing journalists on the release of the Government’s accounts for the 2009/10 financial year.
The change represents about a 10 per cent reduction in households’ spending power, at a time when incomes are flatlining.
It helps explain why figures out yesterday continue to show retail spending and the housing market are going sideways.
It represents a new realism on the part of households, English says, and a step towards “rebalancing” the economy towards less borrowing and more saving, less consumption and more investment in productive assets, less importing and more exporting.
But there is no joy in it for businesses or for their employees.
We won’t know for sure until December, but there is a decent chance the economy did not grow at all over the past six months.
It is troubling if that is the best we can do at a time when the stimulus from the Government is at its peak, interest rates are as low as they are going to go, and export prices close to all-time highs.
We are a quarter of the way into a financial year in which the Government expects to run a cash deficit of $13 billion (up from $9 billion last year).
Likewise the average mortgage rate people are paying is as low as it is expected to go in this cycle.
And world prices for a basket of New Zealand export commodities are just 1 per cent off their all-time high last May, boosting farm incomes. The net effect is a joyless, jobless phase of the recovery, where progress is measured by the fact that we have gone from being up to our nostrils in debt to merely up to our necks.
By Brian Fallow | Email Brian
October 16th, 2010 at 8:17 pm @ Viking2 – where do your words end and Brian Fallow’s words begin?
October 16th, 2010 at 8:28 pm Sorry IV2; Didn’t have a chance to fix that.
Fallow from here.
You know you are in trouble when the most cheerful thing the Finance Minister can think of to say about the economy is that people are
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/economy/news/article.cfm?c_id=34&objectid=10680671
Here is some more thoughts that rightly point out the Labour can smell blood.
The Treasury has had to keep revising downwards its economic growth forecasts and – worryingly for the Government – its tax revenue projections. English warned this week that running large Budget deficits to support New Zealanders through the “adjustment process” could not go on forever. To get back into surplus, the Government would have to tighten its spending. Falling tax revenue will force spending to be tightened even further. Before you can say John Maynard Keynes, the economy is on a downwards spiral.
However, such has been the focus on the ructions within Act, the handling of Paul Henry’s faux pas and Carter’s kamikaze raids on his old party that the sluggish state of the economy has been forced to take a back seat.
But not for much longer. Labour sees the debate over economic management starting to shift in its favour. While the international economy remains in flux, the time when National could also lay blame for the domestic economic downturn at Labour’s door is fast receding.
John Key’s prediction that the recovery would be “reasonably aggressive” has backfired. National is starting to look like it does not have the answers. English’s talk of “rebalancing” may be sound economic theory. But the average punter has little interest in that. English is consequently sounding out of touch. National is starting to look very vulnerable.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz-government/news/article.cfm?c_id=144&objectid=10680890
October 16th, 2010 at 8:36 pm Aldous Huxley once lamented: ”The failure of man to not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.”
And never was history, financial history particularly, more important.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/parity-starts-to-pale-as-dark-clouds-gather-and-bigger-battles-loom-20101015-16njx.html
October 16th, 2010 at 8:46 pm My last comment is still awaiting moderation… maybe you considered it offensive? I didn’t realise I was crossing the line.
Hmmm. Just thinking about it, if anyone could think of any successful contemporary New Zealand film-makers/actors/artists/musicians who have never been on the dole, could they please list them? I personally don’t know of any.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:04 pm Since I’ve never met an invitation I didn’t like (Hat tip to Sean Plunket) I feel compelled to reply to bhudson
Naturally, I would support an application to the ICC to have Israel indicted for war crimes. Israel is a rogue state that has a contemptuous attitude to international law. But indicting the Pope just seems a waste of energy, unless it led to a dismantling of the Vatican statelet. Now that would be a worthwhile project!
And guys, we really should learn to value diversity, including those who do not wish to work in our system. There is nothing omnipotent about the capitalist system and one never knows what a creative can come up with. People do get too bound up in day to day living and miss the big picture, like, for example, the fact that one day capitalism will be as much a relic of history as, say, fuedalism.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:06 pm “And guys, we really should learn to value diversity, including those who do not wish to work in our system. ”
Sure, but do not fucking well expect me to pay for this piece of shit.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:08 pm Luc,
And don’t forget socialism while you’re at it (USSR and it’s eastern bloc friends were socialists on their glorious path to communism – only they found the road was a dead end)
October 16th, 2010 at 9:13 pm Agreed Big Bruv; Tao Wells is welcome to opt out of the conventional life, and live off his wits. But when people the likes of Wells, Phillip Ure etc choose to opt out AND expect their lifestyle to be funded by MY taxes, I bristle. A civilsed society has an obligation to lokk after its vulnerable, i.e. those who CANNOT look after themselves. Wells, Ure and many like them are perfectly capable of working, but they have made a conscious decision not to.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:20 pm They don’t mind sucking from the teat of our system though, do they? Your attitude reminds me of the the official in this story here. Classic Cloward-Piven.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:24 pm No, no, big bruv, that’s part of our responsibility, to pay for it.
It’s just the right thing to do!
bhudson, when I say one day, I mean it in the same sense as how long ago fuedalism ended. To think there won’t one day be a completely new economic model is just silly. But we won’t be around to see it, don’t you worry.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:27 pm Luc
Now I know you are trolling, even you do not believe that we should fund parasites.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:34 pm Cloward-Piven
Hurf, how do you find out such things? I had never heard of Cloward-Piven. Gareth Morgan supports this idea.
But it’s a bit like this thought I had last night, when I heard that the Pentagon has ordered a halt to enforcing DADT (until the appeal is heard?).
My though was all gays and friends of gays in the military should come out in this period of hiatus, it should be in the tens of thousands, at a minimum, and challenge the Pentagon to dismiss them all.
That would be one army emasculated for a while!
October 16th, 2010 at 9:41 pm big bruv, I have always believed that we should support those who don’t want to work in the conventional sense to stay out of our way, and not to burgle us, not to assault us, and work out their own way of finding fulfillment.
It’s not necessarily at our expense. It could be to our benefit. When Einstein did the maths for his Theory of Relativity, he was unemployed, dependent on his wife and supporters.
They are not parasites. I am not trolling. But I may have my tongue in my cheek at times…
October 16th, 2010 at 9:44 pm Sup Puke.
I dunno how you managed to square that particular circle, though I like how you’ve managed to put yourself in a position whereby you support the Republican Party over the Obama Administration. Now that’s what I call Twilight Zone!
Again, here comes the anti-Western Puke Hansen who’d rather have our strategic rivals run rampant coming out of the gutter. Unlike Obama, you never fail to deliver.
October 16th, 2010 at 10:14 pm Luc,
Paying people not to hurt you or not to rob you is called taxation – gangs do it.
I don’t disagree we will have a different economic system some hundreds of years in the future. I was just making sure you weren’t going to try to push socialism as that option.
The reactions to Wells show you are in a minority when it comes to thinking we should embrace those who don’t want to work. I’d suggest he’d find few friends amongst the workers in the pubs of Porirua, Papatoetoe and Patea at he moment. It’s not only the middle class that would be disgusted by his attitude. As you are well aware Luc, lower income workers pay tax too. And they don’t like the idea of someone taking the piss out of them by sponging off the money that was theirs and which they could have made good use of
October 16th, 2010 at 10:23 pm When people say this, they’re usually thinking of renaissance masters being funded by the Doge of Venice or whoever to paint chapel ceilings… but up until very recent times a sovereign or feudal lord was the embodiment of the state. When a duke collected rents and tributes and spent some of it on art, who’s to say if he was acting as a private patron or state funding?
October 16th, 2010 at 10:27 pm John Gibson said
Jenny Gibbs? Julian Robertson? I rest my case!
October 16th, 2010 at 11:01 pm James, the difference is, a feudal lord wasn’t thinking, ‘I want to expand the realm of art, based on social objectives, which are determined by my ideological beliefs’. The closest thing a feudal lord would have is the desire to awe his subjects, in the case of grand art projects, and that requires an actual like on the part of people (for otherwise they’d hardly be in awe). Alternatively, he might be enjoying himself. In either case, twoddle about ‘expanding the realm of art’ was hardly on his mind, in either case. Nor was encouraging people to do less work. This is just a load of rubbish that I’m being forced to pay for and that is iniquitous.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:16 pm The fucker should be flogged and sent to the workhouse- as should anyone who supports or makes excuses for him!
October 16th, 2010 at 11:30 pm Actually, redqueen, speaking strictly as an art historian, “expand(ing) the realm of art, based on social objectives, determined by… ideological beliefs” describes the behavior of some feudal patrons perfectly. And, of course, it describes much, if not most, of the patronage during the Renaissance, (including the famous Medici family.) Unless patronage came from the church, of course – Caravaggio and Bernini both clocked in for them. Though the line between Working for the Church and Working for the State was pretty damn fine in those days. As it was in Ancient Greece, or Ancient Rome. In fact, much of what we study as “great sculpture” from some other time is little more than well executed advertising (really, Caesar Augustus, how many busts of your head do you REALLY need?) The point is, there is always a social goal to the funding of art. Some nobler than others.
Though I’m sure you weren’t really intending to suggest that feudal fiefdoms were preferable to Creative New Zealand…
October 16th, 2010 at 11:34 pm I’ve a brother in london and another in Dubai.
I’m moving to Singapore next month.
I love hunting and fishing etc in nz but shit like this just doesn’t make it worth it.
If you’re under 40 and earning under 150k in nz then you are a failure.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:04 am Luc Hansen
unless it led to a dismantling of the Vatican statelet. Now that would be a worthwhile project!
Hear hear!
And guys, we really should learn to value diversity, including those who do not wish to work in our system.
Hey I’m all for diversity when those choosing to be diverse, bless them, pay their own bills like the rest of us. Nobody has the right to complain about somebody choosing to be 6 kinds of useless PROVIDED that person doesn’t take advantage of the rest of us in doing so. Precisely because that’s what’s happening here, and precisely because the government a) is aiding and abetting b) is openly approving and c) throws those of us with productive jobs in prison when we don’t hold up our end of the bargain and pay our taxes, then we get a bit hacked off seeing such an easy ride being bought with our money. It’s not nice, actually Luc.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:09 am Luc Hansen
No, no, big bruv, that’s part of our responsibility, to pay for it.
It’s just the right thing to do!
Er, why? Culture has existed far longer than subsidies. Culture doesn’t need subsidy. The additional diversity subsidies buys is necessarily the diversity nobody was willing to pay for out of their own pocket i.e. value destroying. The cost is to reallocate resources out of productive uses (from things people were willing to pay to use) to things that costs more than it produces in value in the eyes of purchasers. New Zealand is made poorer for this.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:19 am Are we still really borrowing $240 million a week? Does anyone else think this is irresponsible?
October 17th, 2010 at 8:45 am When Einstein did the maths for his Theory of Relativity, he was unemployed, dependent on his wife and supporters.
A shining example of the right way to do it. He convinced others to privately support him, he didn’t get a taxpayer handout.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:16 am Hubbers, yes. For a country of only 4.2 million, it isn’t too hard to monitor creeps like Wells and, there are computers that are suppose to make administration more accurate and easier. He’s a burden on society and to create the Benefits of unemployment isn’t creating anything. It’s not art which if he profoundly believes so, then he isn’t an artist only masquerading as one for the benefit to sleep in. He should be thrown in jail for fraud and live off the taxpayer’s dollar all he wants, just don’t bend over.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:16 am I’m not sure that this is the type of debate that either Wells or Creative NZ had intended to encourage…but the project is richly ironic and, if that is what the “artist” intended, he deserves every penny.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:21 am Friend of mine in Ireland of all places just sent me this link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAOIl5GGaOk&feature=related
Hope I haven’t ruined anyones morning.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:34 am hubbers said “Are we still really borrowing $240 million a week? Does anyone else think this is irresponsible?”
No we aren’t, only David and Bill English still pretend this is the case. And yes, it IS irresponsible of them.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:46 am IHStewart this one probably better hints at a way to begin to understand what is happening in this work. I know most of the commenters here will never get it (or never admit that they get it) but plenty of readers might. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X8Q0ykLbxE
October 17th, 2010 at 9:50 am How bout we all put 20 bucks into a fund and pay some unemployed guy to walk into this dudes office and beat the absolute fuck out of him.
Call it performance art, give it a catchy name.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:57 am DPF: “It’s unfair that I have to work 60 hour weeks to fund your fucking life style, you bludging wanker.”
You’re usually quite good with numbers and analysis, what happened in this case? Clearly your 60 hours worth of income does not all go to funding this one guy. Maybe a second of it, if even that. (Not defending the guy, just saying this type of overly emotional response to these bludgers doesn’t help rational debate.)
October 17th, 2010 at 10:04 am Well, when a long term unemployed person turns around and says “I’m not being hypocritical, but I think y’all should pay me to tell everyone to go on the dole if they don’t like their jobs”, then rational debate has long since left the building.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:40 am @black paul I think most of the commenters fully understand what is happening here be they right centre or left, this guy has been looked after all his life by the state and his attitude towards us as the link you provide is clearly ” get fucked “. The Dominion Post said in the article he has a master’s degree. When I was a student I worked in a food distribution warehouse the guys I worked with put me through university and they did the same for this clown. His thanks for that is to say get fucked I am not getting a job not paying taxes I am going to continue to live of your efforts. I sure as hell don’t get your comment. If I have misunderstood you I apologise in advance.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:38 pm I am amazed at the lack of reason on this blog. There is a lot of emotion, not much actual thought or insight.
Tao Wells is offering you an opportunity to reflect. Yet much of these comments are bland reflections.
If one researches who funded the original massive modernisation of the USA it was business. It was not the poor. Did the poor bludge off the rich here? No it was the rich that used this modernisatiion to get richer.
All a poor person needs is shelter and food. Once this would have come via self sufficiency. We now live in a system that is based around monetary acquisition. Our entire paradigm is based on money. It defines our lives in every respect. We have no choice about this. Such a system is slavery plain and simple. The legal system is nothing more than a bully.
Now lets look at handouts. What happens when you are a Corporation and you have a financial crisis? Thats right, you get bailed out.
So its OK to be a badly managed business and get tax payers to bail you out???? Like Air New Zealand???
Who caused the entire world to fall to its knees? Was it the dole bludgers?
YOU POSTERS REALLY NEED TO WAKE UP TO THE REAL SCAM.
You put your faith and emotional support to a system that is corrupt to the core. In fact you go research who you are really working for. NOT NEW ZEALAND I can assure you. We are all stock to the world bankers. We all have a worth and a stock number. And our worth is traded. Look into who invented our monetary system. Research the Rothchids for a start. We are all being used like cattle. Are you ready he cold hard facts?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F4IGwuKdUQ
You can play the game like a perfect tax payer all your life, and one day they could take it all from you.
Looks whats happening in the US, people are loosing their homes all over.
We all deserve to be Free Men/Women on the land under the eyes of God not some artificial God Economy.
We have now been indoctrinated into a corporate economic model. What a bunch of suckers, trying to defend a corrupt system of slavery!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQzrfJbbj_o
WHAT IS THE PRICE FOR THOSE OBSESSED WITH “BIGGER AND BETTER”? A toxic environment. Polluted water and air.
Considering that New Zealand is to a large part kept functioning by a work force of volunteers getting no pay for their work, we must admit that payed employment is not the answer to a functioning nation.
To suggest that we have a right not to work and question why we do work is good.
Think beyond yourself.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:05 pm I like what bees do. If the drones are no longer needed, they sting them and throw them out of the nest. With humans, the drones
are guarded and they copulate and spawn more drones. We’re suppose to be intelligent?
October 17th, 2010 at 1:05 pm HYPOCRISY FROM OUR BLOG HOST???
DPF said:
And yet when Redbaiter simply quotes you back in his 1:46 pm comment yesterday:
You give him demerits. How does that work?!
So it’s alright for you to call someone a “fuckwit”, but if someone else does you issue demerits – and worse yet, you give someone demerits for simply quoting you back to yourself. What utter hypocrisy, DPF!
I think you need to sort your act out.
I believe you need to give an apology to Redbaiter, remove any demerits you have given him for any use of expletives which you yourself are guilty of, and MOST CERTAINLY remove demerits for simply quoting you back to yourself.
Perhaps if you don’t want any of the commenters here to accuse individuals of being a “fuckwit” (your words), then you need to set an example and clean your own language up.
I expect MUCH better from you, David.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:21 pm Not only should this clown have his dole cut off which I beleive happened on Friday. MSD should seek repayment of past payments to him. In addition the idiots responsible for giving a $40k grant and not checking what it was being used for should be fired and repayment of that Grant Should also be sought.
It is dickheads like this that mean those who have genuine hardship and need the dole while they find another job will be vilified as bludgers.
October 17th, 2010 at 2:09 pm If he wants to promote the benefits of bludging through art then fine – but not at taxpayer expense. Let him support himself. Looking forward to budget cuts at creative nz and the city council trimming arts funding. Talk about sending the wrong signals!
October 17th, 2010 at 2:31 pm And now we have the huge intellect of one, ‘Jad’ mincing onto the stage.
He has cornered the market on thought and insight, in his own mind.
He is doing mankind the favour of explaining where we are all going wrong.
Our legal system is a bully.
Our entire paradigm is slavery.
The system is corrupt.
We are all really all working for the Rothcids
Jad alerts us all to the,” real scam.”
We must admit that payed employment is not the answer.
We are all a bunch of suckers, trying to defend a corrupt system of slavery.
Jad, what is the answer to all these problems ?
You have, in your treatise, alerted us all to these great truths but you forgot to give us the answers.
Maybe i could suggest a couple for you.
Grow up.
Get a job.
Stop bludging of your fellow man.
Fuck off.
October 17th, 2010 at 2:34 pm Kris K, That was Redbaited making a wee joke. Yes it does happen.
IHStewart, the only point I was drawing attention to in that video was that everyone here is focused on this one guy and what he’s costing us (couple of cents a week each if that) rather than examining in any depth the work itself. In some cases I think there are commenters here who genuinely don’t go any further than thinking “bludger, give me back my two cents”. In other cases though I think some commenters here are quite aware of the points the artist is raising but are very uncomfortable with confronting them head on and find it easier to pretend there is nothing in it beyond the personal, the bludging, the individual example. DPF probably falls into this category.
October 17th, 2010 at 2:42 pm “we must admit that payed (sic) employment is not the answer to a functioning nation.”
Outstanding! Are you advocating we go the way of Somalia or Sudan?
October 17th, 2010 at 3:09 pm Manolo
Couldn’t get the edit to work.
i wanted to add to both Rothchids and payed.
I wonder where this genius Jad picked up his great insights, his high skool teecher
or maybe some lecturer at Waikato if he is old enough to have been there yet.
Lets hope he can give us a few more laughs soon. But i doubt it, i suspect he fired his big
guns and that was all he had. Poor mite.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:11 pm black paul 2:34 pm,
I stand corrected – I thought it was DPF addressing Red, “[30 demerits for “fuckwit”- Redbaiter]”, as opposed to Red having a dig at DPF for his use of ‘that’ word as a descriptor of someone.
But I stand by the fact that DPF dishes out demerits for commenters calling, say, a politician a “fuckwit”, but then he himself calls Tao Wells a “fuckwit”. It’s still a hypocritical stance IMHO.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:16 pm Second thoughts, Jad is probably a lecturer at Waikato himself.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:17 pm You might as well get used to being on the dole, unemployment just keeps going up up up!
October 17th, 2010 at 3:27 pm Jad(1) Says:
October 17th, 2010 at 12:38 pm
“To suggest that we have a right not to work and question why we do work is good.”
You can suggest all you like
What we do not do, is steal money from the taxpayers to fund that choice, then steal more money to sit on our arses being a pair of arty-farty ponces creating an even poncier “art installation” sneering down our noses at the poor deluded fools we just stole from.
This twat has the people of New Zealand working their butts off to fund his sitting around being a smug wanker. How is he not indulging in his own world of slavery where he is the slave owner and we are his slaves? And you think this is OK becuase there are evil corporations who also stole from the taxpayer?
I’m pretty damn sure I’m NOT the deluded one here. You should have learned at a relatively young age that two wrongs don’t make a right.
October 17th, 2010 at 4:11 pm Jad – your entire posted comment was copied and pasted from an activist brochure. Why don’t you try to add some depth to the superficial (and supercilious) claims you make.
You could start with the claim that the poor were able to feed & shelter themselves because they were self-sufficient but are now beholden to the man’s cash. The poor have never been self-sufficient. Even when they farmed and grew food and built there own shacks, they did so on the man’s land as fuedal vassals. Land is capital, cash is capital. They relied upon the man’s capital (=cash)
You can then move on from there to actually try and justify the rest of your twaddle.
Jad IS Zhumao
October 17th, 2010 at 4:24 pm Since my previous two comments were held up in moderation for a day… I’m interested in commenters views on these things :
1) Why do so many of you have such strong opinions on work most have you have never seen? Do you have that much faith in Dominion Post journalists?
2) For those of you who do believe in some public funding of the arts (including NZSO and NZonAir) – do you think funding should be based on whether or not you agree with artist’s political views? If so, who should do the deciding?
3) Organising vigilante attacks on recipients you don’t approve of – do you do the same for TV programs and music videos you don’t like who receive NZ-on-Air funding? Or is just people who can’t afford security guards?
4) It’s all very well to be high and mighty about not being a “bludger”, but how many of you could actually live on the unemployment benefit for any considerable period of time? Would you still do the jobs you are doing now if you were only paid the rate of the dole?
5) Is “working hard” always a good thing? Even if your job contributes nothing to society? What about if your work is detrimental to society?
October 17th, 2010 at 4:32 pm Kris K, I agree.
October 17th, 2010 at 4:48 pm h n,
In turn:
1. We don’t trust the Dompost journos’ intelligence but we do trust the paper to record and report quotes. There were enough quotes from Wells to tell the story.
2. Funding should be based on govt policy (as per cnz’s webste). Govt policy is that people on the dole should be seeking work. Govt policy on funding should be consistent with govt policy on the topic at hand. (if the artist wants to convey a contradictory message they are free to do so with thee own money.)
3. Don’t sook – grow up. The comments were people registering displeasure. If you really think they meant it, you need some different drugs or (preferably) better education
4. The jobs that many of us do now pay more than the dole because they provide value to the employer. Introductory economics would tell you that if the employer didn’t pay the labour would go elsewhere where their skills and value would be rewarded. (you will find a book in the public library – free too). This strawman is as ridiculous as “would more people seek to g on the dole if it paid 10X the average wage?”
5. i) yes, ii) according to who – all jobs contribute else no one would be using the product or service, iii) (again, according to who?) by the answer is get another job
Your comment were fatuous to put it nicely. Responded (partly) in kind
October 17th, 2010 at 4:59 pm And now ladies and gentlemen another huge intellect,’ h n’ takes the stage.
@4.24
He is interested in ‘commenters views’
the problem he has is that the statements he makes are such absolute confused tripe
and garbage they deserve only derision.
The tosser, Tao Wells has called in his two flatmates, Jad and h n for support.
Kindred spirits
Robyn @5.49 or John gibson @ 2.11 may oblige with comments.
Note that all these tossers have the same solution to their perceived ills of the world,
stop working.
Now there is a very convienient solution for useless bludgers.
isnt it wonderfull to sit on your arse your whole life and work on how you can
justify your indolence, and abuse wealth producers who are stupid enough to accomodate you.
Jeez, i hope these tossers are not capable of breeding.
Imagine having Tao Wells as your father.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:33 pm > 1. We don’t trust the Dompost journos’ intelligence but we do trust the paper to record and report quotes. There were enough quotes from Wells to tell the story.
Most of his quotes were outlining his political views. There was very little describing the artwork.
> 2. Funding should be based on govt policy (as per cnz’s webste). Govt policy is that people on the dole should be seeking work. Govt policy on funding should be consistent with govt policy on the topic at hand. (if the artist wants to convey a contradictory message they are free to do so with thee own money.)
I’m not sure which part of the website you’re referring to here. I’m pretty sure CNZ has never run a soviet-style arts funding programme. You could probably count the number of CNZ recipients who have been “consistent with govt policy” on one hand.
I suspect your problem is you consider Tao to be advocating illegal activity. But we’ve always funded theatre and TV programmes where fictional characters have done this. Perhaps Tao Wells is a fictional character. Have you never seen Borat?
>3. Don’t sook – grow up. The comments were people registering displeasure. If you really think they meant it, you need some different drugs or (preferably) better education
I’m not part of the artwork so no need to sook. I’ll wait to the end of the exhibition to see if they were serious. Yes I am a victim of all three stages of NZ’s state education system. What drugs to do you reccommend?
>4. The jobs that many of us do now pay more than the dole because they provide value to the employer. Introductory economics would tell you that if the employer didn’t pay the labour would go elsewhere where their skills and value would be rewarded. (you will find a book in the public library – free too). This strawman is as ridiculous as “would more people seek to g on the dole if it paid 10X the average wage?”
My point was that most people in paid employment are doing so for reasons other than not being a “bludger”.
I’ve read a number of interesting economics books from the public library. It’s wonderful to live in a society where the state funds ideas that are inconsistent with government policy.
> 5. i) yes, ii) according to who – all jobs contribute else no one would be using the product or service, iii) (again, according to who?) by the answer is get another job
So P dealers and hitmen are better for society than beneficeries?
October 17th, 2010 at 5:36 pm Hi bereal! I think you have me confused with someone else. I’ve never met Tao Wells and am in fulltime employment. I’ll keep you posted on my reproductive status.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:58 pm 4) It’s all very well to be high and mighty about not being a “bludger”, but how many of you could actually live on the unemployment benefit for any considerable period of time? Would you still do the jobs you are doing now if you were only paid the rate of the dole?
Well first answer is. who in their right mind wants to? Always money to be made if you get up and look for it.
Second is; some of it yes, because its what my passion is about. Many many people have hobbies that are driven by their passion. One could say they do that for less the the unemployment benefit. Without passion for your work, work is dull. Go find something you like.
5) Is “working hard” always a good thing? Even if your job contributes nothing to society? What about if your work is detrimental to society?
first answer; yes it is. Its good for the body and soul. whether it satisfies your needs or someone else’s is a different question.
second answer; define how you would define detrimental. Its like beauty, its in the eye of the beholder. So I can consider someones work detrimental to society but you might not. Until you can give a clear judgment on that which all agree upon, then we don’t know the answer.
October 17th, 2010 at 6:17 pm “Yes I am a victim of all three stages of NZ’s state education system. What drugs to do you reccommend (sic)?”
Little lead ones, administered intravenously by way of .22 rifle
October 17th, 2010 at 6:44 pm Excuse my “sooking,” big bruv, but can we please be a little more cautious with the death threats? I really do think that if we’re going to take a general position that Wells’ work is capable of being an actual offense by virtue of his saying something offensive, then we might consider comments like that in the same breath.
Incidentally, I can think of one possible definition of “detrimental” – that the production of the work causes physical harm, in its being made. Off the top of my head, that would include everything made by:
Nike
Bendon
Coca Cola
Bill Blass
Calvin Klein
Converse
Dillard’s Saks
Hasbro
Kenneth Cole Vans
and, Kohl’s
Arguably, any work done for any of these companies contributes directly to acts of physical harm upon other humans.
October 17th, 2010 at 7:05 pm Are you big blouse, oh twisted one, promoting shooting people in cold blood. What kind of criminal creeps you got on this blog Farrar?
October 17th, 2010 at 7:10 pm h n,
> 1. … “Most of his quotes were outlining his political views. There was very little describing the artwork.”
His political views and artwork (shouldn’t that be artnotwork?) are intertwined in this instance at least. In any case, people were responding to his views (which, as you agree, he had publicly expressed.)
> 2. … “I’m not sure which part of the website you’re referring to here. I’m pretty sure CNZ has never run a soviet-style arts funding programme. You could probably count the number of CNZ recipients who have been “consistent with govt policy” on one hand.
I suspect your problem is you consider Tao to be advocating illegal activity. But we’ve always funded theatre and TV programmes where fictional characters have done this. Perhaps Tao Wells is a fictional character. Have you never seen Borat?”
If you actually look at the website you will find it – information about CNZ. (Good thing they don’t run a soviet system – while it might be more to yours & Wells’ political leanings, they didn’t take too kindly to people not participating.)
I have no “problem” – CNZ does. CNZ is reponsible for delivering services in line with govt policy (their statement, not exact words.) In this instance they have funded something that is contra to govt policy. I’m sure they will have a “please explain” to deal with tomorrow.
Fictional – I’m sure Tao Wells is beginning to wish he was.
To my knowledge Borat has sponged no money from NZ taxpayers. I have seen him – didn’t think he was that funny, but it was mildly diverting. At least he was working though.
>3. .. “I’m not part of the artwork so no need to sook. I’ll wait to the end of the exhibition to see if they were serious. Yes I am a victim of all three stages of NZ’s state education system. What drugs to do you reccommend?”
The ones you are on seem to be having some effect. Perhaps you could find some that might open your mind and allow clarity of thought (basically the opposite of whatever you are taking at the moment.)
It is good to know you participated in all three stages of the state education system. You would seem to be a living example of why National Standards are needed so desperately. It is a shame they were not in place when you were. (The same could probably said for National Service too.)
>4. … “My point was that most people in paid employment are doing so for reasons other than not being a “bludger”.
I’ve read a number of interesting economics books from the public library. It’s wonderful to live in a society where the state funds ideas that are inconsistent with government policy.”
I’m glad you are still putting that taxpayer funded state education to good use. Possibly you could broaden your book selection a little. The ones without pictures generally offer a greater depth of information.
The state funds a broad range of material so that we can sort the wheat from the chaff.
> 5. … So P dealers and hitmen are better for society than beneficeries?
As I noted above fatuous questions. So I should have expected such as your response.
You questions were about what one should accept. My response was that if you were in a job that is detrimental to society, you should get out of it. The point before that was a question as to who determines what is beneficial/detrimental. The P example is self-evident (unless you are a fan of culling the population through illegal drugs h n)
Using your fatuous example, you shouldn’t get into it in the first place! It isn’t exactly something you just stumble into is it? “OMG, I’m selling sherbert – its actually P. LOL”
Twat.
October 17th, 2010 at 8:06 pm “What kind of criminal creeps you got on this blog Farrar?”
Good question D4J…..BTW, how is your battle going with the justice system?, still have those criminal convictions against your name do you?
October 17th, 2010 at 8:08 pm You are gutless anal pus big blouse.
October 17th, 2010 at 8:36 pm Iventory2 – “Jenny Gibbs? Julian Robertson? I rest my case!” – yes,yes but even their ability to fund institutions and artists is trivial in comparison to wealthy in countries like the U.S. We will always need public funding of the arts.
October 17th, 2010 at 8:47 pm ” We will always need public funding of the arts.”
Why?
Anything “arty” that needs public funding is obviously rubbish, I fail to see why I should fund snobbery and out and out wankery for the “elite”.
October 17th, 2010 at 8:54 pm The reason why ? big bruv is simple.
John Gibson thinks he is an artist.
its as elementary and as self serving as that.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:00 pm Of course, Helen Clark kept in good with the artists to ensure that she would always have a good supply of paintings to sign and pass off as her own work
October 17th, 2010 at 11:22 pm I know a guy with a stellar intellect who very sincerely believed that he should be paid by the state to stay home and write a book.
And so he went on the dole and wrote the book.
And when he finished the book, his next attempt to secure state funding was to try to get elected as a member of Parliament.
For Labour, of course.
(He lost.)
October 18th, 2010 at 12:01 am Very entertaining to see all the rednecks getting hot under the collar. Clearly the Fred Dagg adage still rings true for your average NZ rednecker – “Ya don’t know how lucky you are.”
You believe that the disease symptom is something to be “cured”?
You have been lied to and now you try to defend the lie?
One suggested I get a job and “fuck off”. Fascinating.
When prejudice leads we are guaranteed of uninformed comment.
The unanimity of bias passes for objectivity.
You think by working an “honest job” you are doing your “fair share”?
You think people are getting a “free ride” getting a benefit?
How much of your tax dollars do you see? What percentage directly benefits you?
Are you concerned about this too?
Some work 60 hour weeks some work 20 hour weeks. Both can sustain a living, but one is paying more tax. So the one working less is what? Bludging off the other?
How long does one need to work before they may be entitled to a benefit? Their whole life?
What is the difference if one receive a benefit before or after they work in a “steady job”.
Someone works their whole life and dies before they get a pension. Surely their son or daughter would have every right to claim that pension for a time, are they a bludger? Or claiming an inheritance in fact.
Who owns your money? You?
The suggest one has the right NOT TO WORK is just that. It is not necessarily suggesting that one would NEVER WORK.
If every one has the opportunity NOT TO WORK, then such is fare. Whats more it is a God send. Surely anyone can see that.
Surely we would all be better off if we chose to work because it enriched our lives as much as payed for it.
Our paradigm is so limited by our addiction to money.
So Tao Wells is (was) on the benefit, in a year or two he might be earning more money and paying more tax than all of you.
If it takes him a meager unemployment benefit to devise a plan to amass a fortune, surely a meager benefit is a small price to pay.
NZ benefits from having the Unemployment benefit.
Someone asked me what the answer to the corruption of the financial markets is, Its very simple.
Stop buying products which are short lived or loved and not essential.
Start growing your own food and taking true responsibility for your life.
Install solar power and get off the grid.
Irrelevant corporations will go bankrupt and pollution will lessen.
BEWARE
When prejudice leads the blind follow.
The unanimity of bias that passes for objectivity is the issue here…
October 18th, 2010 at 2:27 am Jad:
Are you friends with another nutcase, Jastowns, who used to pollute Kiwiblog threads?
The words “was” and “might” are probably not well-chosen when it comes to Tao Wells.
Now, Jad, here is a simple question I’d like you to comment on.
You say it’s a meagre benefit (note the correct spelling) and a small price to pay. So – here’s the question – why don’t you dip into your own pockets and donate to what you see as a worthy cause? Why should other taxpayers (through Creative NZ) be forced to fund such a waste of space?
And as for your small-price-to-pay argument, let me introduce you to another undeserving case:
That comment was made on 29 July 2009. Here we are 16 months later, and still no sign of the promised relief for New Zealand taxpayers. Guess that
copy-and-pastewaste-of-space service didn’t amount to much then. Or would you still argue it’s a small price to pay, Jad?October 18th, 2010 at 7:48 am Jad,
You are prejudiced against business. And you also expect the blind to follow you (I can tell that from reading the nonsense above.)
You also failed to add any depth of reasoning or logic to your claims (as you were challenged to do earlier.)
Of course people have a right not to work. No one has denied that. But if they exercise that right, we have an equal right not to fund them. Translated for your benefit – If you choose not to work, you can sustain yourself. No dole. Should be right up your alley, given your desire to the return to the utopia of self-sufficiency (which was still sponging land off the man,)
Hypocrite.
October 18th, 2010 at 9:30 am not sure yall ‘get it’ [via not seeing tao’s levels]. yall sound like humour-less bullies
October 18th, 2010 at 10:24 am I hope that all of you go visit this bludger and let him know (nicely) what sort of scumbag he is.
October 18th, 2010 at 11:24 am >To my knowledge Borat has sponged no money from NZ taxpayers. I have seen him – didn’t think he was that funny, but it was mildly diverting. At least he was working though.
No we have the British taxpayer to thank for this one, despite it not being British government policy to throw Jews down wells. You worked out he was a fictional character interacting with real people didn’t you?
>> 5. … So P dealers and hitmen are better for society than beneficeries?
>As I noted above fatuous questions. So I should have expected such as your response.
>You questions were about what one should accept. My response was that if you were in a job that is detrimental to society, you should get out of it. The point before that was a question as to who determines what is beneficial/detrimental. The P example is self-evident (unless you are a fan of culling the population through illegal drugs h n)
>Using your fatuous example, you shouldn’t get into it in the first place! It isn’t exactly something you just stumble into is it? “OMG, I’m selling sherbert – its actually P. LOL”
I’m obviously not talking about myself here – I’m happily employed. However a lot of people in our society are in the position of having few sellable skills, and becoming a P entrepreneur is one of the few available methods to escape the poverty trap.
To use a less extreme example, I know of many people in this time of recession who have only been able to get telemarketing jobs in their first few months of unemployment. Society would be better off if they stayed unemployed. Maybe you are more charitable than me but when my game of mahjong is interrupted by people attempting to sell me crap I don’t think “gee what a lovely hard-working person. I’m glad they came to work today instead of volunteering at their local recycling centre or making some mind-blowing art”.
People on the dole who refuse to sell P or become telemarketers exhibit a kind of quiet heroism. Society currently condemns these people as bludgers but hopefully Tao’s PR company will change this perception.
October 18th, 2010 at 11:38 am “You worked out he was a fictional character interacting with real people didn’t you?”
No, I thought he was head of the Beneficiaries Office on an overseas assignment. You mean he was some real noddy taking the piss out of people???… Oh, so I was right then.
“Maybe you are more charitable than me but when my game of mahjong is interrupted by people attempting to sell me crap I don’t think “gee what a lovely hard-working person. I’m glad they came to work today instead of volunteering at their local recycling centre or making some mind-blowing art”.”
I am no more charitable than you in this particular instance, but (unfortunately for our peace and quiet) telemarketing works. And for as long as it works businesses will employ people to do it. Those that undertake the work get rewarded for it. While I can’t and won’t comment on employment conditions offshore, NZ telemarketers are able to earn incentives through their work – They are rewarded further through adding additional value to the employer.
People on the dole (or in work for that matter) do not have to sell P. They do not exhibit heroism. What they exhibit is lawful behaviour (in that instance.) That is a fundamental expectation of society, not something that is to be celebrated with gold star achievers award
October 18th, 2010 at 12:29 pm God you’re an idiot, Farrar. Are you proud that your readers are promoting serious violence in response to something they don’t like the look of? You’re as bad as that gormless fool Kyle Chapman.
October 18th, 2010 at 12:50 pm feel sad that the Farrar hasnt got round to ‘moderating’ my comment.
October 18th, 2010 at 5:17 pm He actually picked up around $2000 for the performance, the $53,000 figure is the amount allocated for a whole year of projects from different artists.
Whatever the case I like this work, it’s pointed and funny. It does astonish me that so many people are up in arms about it, he obviously hit upon some ancestoral protestant vein.
October 19th, 2010 at 12:26 am There are many things in this world that make me angry.
Ignorance, hunger, war. disease and want stand high on my list.
Pity some you (Farrar included) haven’t the vision to get angry about something that really matters.
October 19th, 2010 at 9:02 am “There are many things in this world that make me angry. Ignorance…”
Maggie, after having read a number of your comments on this site I can only deduce that you are, therefore, extremely angry at yourself.
October 19th, 2010 at 11:46 am Nomestradamus
Funding for the arts is minuscule. Tao Wells is highlighting how ridiculous our society is.
He is doing you a favor and you dont want to support it. That’s your choice. But why get down on him.
I am not on a benefit. I pay tax and I am glad some of it is going to this artist. I fully support his work.
You are suggesting that I do not have a right to support him with my tax dollars, because you dont want to support him?
Gladly we have state funding still in NZ. It means not everything is compromised by corporate sponsorship.
I do not eat poison. But my tax dollars are being wasted saving peoples lives and treating people who have spent their lives eating poison and watching television. The supermarkets are I would say stocked with around 80% poison. I dont know why any one would buy this poison and then voluntarily eat it. That is something worth complaining about. Not an art project. (well I do know why, its marketing and brainwashing, it is not our tax dollars that should pay for cocacola’s (etc) mess.)
One is minuscule, the other is costing NZ billions of dollars.
I am not “anti business” Corporations are not “businesses” they are corporations. THE CORE PURPOSE OF A CORPORATION IS GREED. That is its function. Corporations farm their work out to the third world. A good business would support local industry and people. It would build community not destroy it. It would not poison the land for profit etc.
Watch the following to learn how the US Government tried to stop the corporations, but lost.
Learn how we got manipulated and used….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dA89CBBOC0
I do not need to be turned into a “happiness machine” so corporations can poison me and call it food.
How much are we spending to have the SAS in Afghanistan?
Really, you guys are all hypocrites. Red necks? True Blue Kiwi Blokes?
Why is child abuse so out of control in NZ? One of the worst countries in the world for it?
IS THAT WHAT WE ARE WORKING FORE? IT MUST BE BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT DOESN’T CARE. THE CORPORATIONS DON’T CARE.
WHAT ARE YOU WORKING FOR?
TO POLLUTE THE OCEANS? THE AIR? THE LAND?
WHAT ARE YOU WORKING FOR? TO PAY TAX TO PATCH UP VICTIMS OF CORPORATE GREED, AS THEY STUFF THEMSELVES FULL OF FEEL GOOD POISON?
To get angry about Tao Wells and his art project is pathetic.
It is so classic.
What it does do is highlight the pure hypocrisy of a culture that is obsessed with “me me me”… “why should he get a free ride?”.
There is no free ride friends. For anyone. This is our lives.
The truth is something borne of love.
Our culture is enriched and informed by art. yet that which is not understood is destroyed.
If the mirror that is held up to you highlights imperfection, what can you learn?
October 19th, 2010 at 7:42 pm I know the world is imperfect, Jad, but to say Wells’s art will enrich and inform our culture shows how out of touch you really are. Perhaps you should take a sedative made by one of those corporations you were talking about.
October 19th, 2010 at 8:23 pm It Tao’s art does not enrich, them what are all these comments about?
Oh right…. how bland people can be.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:10 pm Thank you, bhudson. You belong the group, a large one here, that are unable to provide a sensible, intelligent or rational response. So you indulge in personal attacks instead. Bit like John Key at Question Time.
October 20th, 2010 at 9:00 pm Maggie,
Thank you for a personal observation on me based on a single comment (which I believe you wholeheartedly deserve. I have actually read most of your comments. I’ll wager you can’t say the same of mine and yet you clearly feel you are in a fine position to pass judgement.)
Key pointing out the failings of Labour in the House is part of the job. Unfortunately your lot make it an easy job.
November 10th, 2011 at 12:05 pm for you darling: http://vimeo.com/31767875