My Photo
Mobilise this Blog





New Zealand Conservative


AmCam News Tips

  • Have you got mobile camera pix of breaking news, or a first-hand account you've written?
    email Investigate now on publicity [at] and we'll get you online
Blog powered by Typepad

« TV3 identifies suspect in medal theft | Main | This Irish turkey is going to sing in Belgrade »



I suspect as a Society, in the west at least, we are in our "forty years in the desert" Andrei after straying too far from the model offered by Judaism as modified by Christianity.
It can surely be only downhill to some sort of corrective now, hopefully not involving the shedding of blood.

I don't vote at all because I won't support any political party that allows abortion/bloody murder to continue. What might get me to turn out however, is a new box on voting slips that says: "non of the above" which NZ's in-bred political elite will have to be forced to accept and do something about. In what other peaceful way can sufficient numbers express their dissatisfaction at the line-up of the usual suspects including party hacks and appointees, ambitious political science graduates, feminists and homosexuals we are usually presented with.

Back to Whistlin' Dixie on this warm Sunday afternoon!

Psycho Milt

Tougher emission standards on imported cars just raises the price of all used cars, helps keep older cars on the road and the prices they command higher - obvious stuff really. who does this effect the most do you suppose?

Those damned socialists! The next thing you know we'll be a third world commie country like, er, California. The other thing these leftie bastards did was bring in warrants of fitness, which just made cars harder to own for poor people. Keeping cars roadworthy is an expensive business, so it should be our free, individual choice whether we bother to do it or not - shouldn't it?

John Tertullian

I suspect that all utopian schemes end up grinding down the faces of the more vulnerable and justify it as part of the price to be paid for the "great idea", however that might be conceived.
The wealthy are always better off because they have the benefits afforded to them by capital: they can buy protection in a thousand different ways, most of them perfectly lawful and moral. If they are so inclined they can also use their capital for less savoury modes of defence such as bribery and buying favours.
But those living from hand-to-mouth have no such protections, and the socialists consequently afflict them more harshly and severely than others. They end up bearing the real price.
The most liberating and helpful act that could be done for these more vulnerable members of the community is to remove the burdens that arise from the "utopia d'jour"--whether it be "making the world safe for democracy" or "saving the planet from greenhouse gases" or the pursuit of the rainbow myth of egalitarianism, or any other such pretentious, arrogant idolatry.
May the Lord free us eventually from all those who seek to bring their version of heaven on earth by means of legislation, rules, regulations, bans, taxes, and every other kind of wretched compulsion--all justified by the "great idea."
May God protect us from all utopians and the destruction they have wreaked upon humanity.


er PM don't you recognize that the new emission standards on used imports will increase the number of substandard vehicles on the road. By raising the price of used imports and limiting what may be imported the existing fleet on our roads today will have to last longer. And cars that should be junked will be kept going because the alternative for their owners is to have no car.

Or perhaps you think poor people shouldn't have cars only ordinary people such as University lecturers who have got themselves elected to Parliament should be allowed own them.

Psycho Milt

PM don't you recognize that the new emission standards on used imports will increase the number of substandard vehicles on the road.

I vaguely recall (was very young at the time) that the same arguments were made about requiring cars to have seat belts. And yet oddly enough, the only result was that cars became safer. The poor continued to drive cars and no university qualification or seat in Parliament was required to own one.


The problem with any overarching economic policy, whether it be left or right, is that it can never take into account the needs of the individual and thus some will always get hurt.

This is the power of groups organized around the meeting of socials needs in the thick of it on the ground, groups that engage the real lives of real people rather than simply theorizing from an ivory tower and from the tower, implementing Utopian ideals. Any government worth its salt would do all it could to empower community organizations that work with the poor, disempowered and broken.


... because it's those organizations that truly care for they have organized themselves specifically for the purpose of meeting the needs of those who need help. They are often full of volunteers who cherish the opportunity to serve and care and they often do it with little/no reward. Most organizations such as this will always be better than the state and meeting the needs of the poor.


I couldn't agree more Servant.

In fact involving youth in such initiatives could well have a beneficial side effect of helping then develop empathy and compassion.


Great point, Andrei.


Cars running catalytic converters may produce less nasty gases but they also use more fuel, which always seemed to me to be a rather odd way to save the planet. This also costs the peasants (sorry peasant) more to run the things.

Later oils are thinner for greater MPG as they have less resistance to flow but of course lower film strength under harsh, high wear conditions. Post SH oils (we're up to SM now I think) also have lower & lower levels of additives like phosphorous - which is an extreme wear additive - only because Cats don't like phosphorous, not because it makes the oil better.

BTW if you are among the few who use the "Moly-slip" additive you'd better stop it. Molybdenum disulphide breaks down under heat to form acid around the hotter parts of the engine, like exhaust valve guides and you probably don't really want that. Newer oils use molybdenum (not in the form of Molybdenum disulphide) to increase its sliperriness but this is only a substitute for the better original additive discontinued for Cats.

Oils haven't really improved much since the days of SG or SH, the only changes have been driven (oh pun!) by environmental considerations such as the increasing use of catalytic converters, and, as I said, thinner oils give more MPG which is very important in a big market like California which sets MPG rates for new cars which they must meet.

IMHO, if at all possible remove your catalytic converter (it is still legal to do so at the moment) for better MPG and power and change your oil back to a SH full synthetic of reasonable viscosity (like 20/50 or 10/50) for better engine protection. Full synthetics can be run for 10 thousand K's rather than the 5 mineral oils generally need changing at, at which time you should also swap out your oil filter. Therefore the higher initial outlay is pretty well offset when viewing a 10 thousand K oil & filter change cycle. Do not use an additive of any kind, some of them are junk and all of them upset the makeup of the oil which the manufacturers have invested millions in developing. Invest in a good synthetic like Mobil 1, Redline or one of the Ester based synthetics (read the labels).

If you are a cheapskate and insist on using those ghastly mineral oils you should know that your average multi viscosity mineral oil top rate (the "50" in the 20/50) breaks down 20-25% within the first 6-900 miles. So, after 800 miles your 20/50 is now a 20/40. This breakdown continues until - if left too long - you are running a straight 20 weight. Change your oil more often cheapskate :)

Semi-synthetics vary greatly in quality and some are by no means synthetic - but you can't tell which from the labels or the brand. Stick to full-syn.

Oh and don't buy *mineral* oil that claims to have a viscosity spread of over 35, i.e. greater than say 15/50 (full synthetics are not bound by this rule). I have seen a 25/70 mineral oil advertised which (despite the manufacturers claims) will break down to a 25/50 before you got down to the corner dairy.

For more info, a brief overview written by my good pal Gerry Bristow ex Duckhams & BP guy, sadly now departed this world:~

Its been a while since I researched this but you have the gist of it. Hope it helps.


Vote Libertarianz!

John Boy

Politics is all about control and dependency. They need us but we certainly don't need them. Left may be worse than right but they all suck.

Thanks usabikes for cat info. Lots don't get hot enough in use to even work as designed.

Sam Finnemore

Came to this kind of late. I don't think there's any more truth behind the right-wing assertion that the left are secretly plotting to keep the poor poor and thus in their thrall, than by the parallel left-wing assertion that the right are secretly plotting to do the exact same thing. It's a shame, since in general I agree that neither side has The Answers to the human condition.

To bastardise a classic quote, capitalism is the worst system of economics except for all the others which have been tried from time to time.

The comments to this entry are closed.