Because GTA6 is coming out.

Labour has quietly signed the death sentence of the compulsory monopoly that uniform shops have on school clothes, and the upcharge attached logo’d (though not patterned) items.

I’m now 31 but I‘m still nursing a grudge against my highschool for openly banning branded reusable shopping bags from places like Supre due to receiving kickbacks from Postie Plus. No exaggerating, Peggy Burrows and her deputies at Rangiora High School (she is now principle of Haeata college) used to hold “uniform assemblies” at Rangiora High where we would be told at length that ONLY postie plus shopping bags were allowed because Postie Plus provided kickbacks to the school. Also banned were black puffer jackets (the school sold an $80 logo’d windbreaker and god-knows-how-much optional blazer), and the policy that year 13s could wear mufti was abolished just before I reached that in favour of instituting a second brand new uniform for year 12s and 13s. Instead of getting to our “optional year” and getting to not wear the most uncomfortable clothing I’ve ever been forced into, we had to shell out literally hundreds of dollars for new skirts, shirts, etc because the school now required parents to buy TWO seperate uniforms. Now that’s a money making scheme if ever I saw one.

Never mind the determination schools and parents have to crush any demonstration of individuality children might try to cultivate via their appearance, which I think is bad for our youth in a totally different way to placing unnecessary financial pressure on parents and giving kids yet another reason to not show back up for year 12 and 13, when many kids already don’t have to or want to be there. Which is especially effective if your parents are poor.

Why is it the death knell? Because ACT are also promising the same thing. Which means that IF both parties stick to their promises and National doesn’t go hard in negotiations on its “Parents making their own parenting decisions is bad” stance, regardless of the flavour of government that follows this election, requiring branded items at huge costs to parents will be banned.

Side note: this is why you should join your school board, and think about the parents who don’t have the same means to send their kids to school that you do when making decisions on that board. School boards are grossly middle class and also lack student representation of any sort (which especially at highschool should be the case — these kids are 16, 17, 18 even, and schools supply leadership opportunities and create entire leadership teams without actually giving kids the opportunity to meaningfully interact with the policy being made that primarily affects them). The rollout of compulsory uniforms in order to better fundraise for the school via muftidays and retailer kickbacks is hugely hostile to the sorts of parents who usually don’t sit on school boards. And of course, they are longstanding school community members and not parents who’ve needed to move around a lot (and therefore shell out for more uniforms).

I wont pretend I don’t ideologically hate uniforms on principle and in my ideal version of New Zealand they’d be banned fullstop, but it is with absolute glee that I read Labour’s promise to make uniforms equitable and accessible for all families. The comment about families getting through a costly Christmas just to be hit with back to school expenses including potentially thousands of dollars worth of branded uniform items (if you have enough children, especially at the secondary level where uniform item prices reach ridiculous heights) felt especially in-touch. I wouldn’t expect Luxon or any of his well-salaried MPs can possibly understand how much of a stretch that is for normal families.

For the first couple of years of my primary, uniforms were optional. Over the course of thirteen years of schooling, I watched uniforms go from entirely a parental preference to one secondary school requiring the purchase of two seperate uniforms across just five years of schooling.

RIP the uniform monopoly, you won’t be missed. Get fucked.

Beef bones were $8/kg a month ago. They take hours to cook then you have to pick the beef off the bones so it's not exactly convenient. But I could put enough meat into a stew or a soup for a meal and the kids could get some iron that's not plant based for a change. Meat shouldn't be a luxury. Offcuts shouldn't cost $11/kg when most of it are bones.

I heard an Aussie pronouncing the word "nougat" as "NOO-gah" but my wife, my sister-in-law, many of our friends, and I (all kiwis from both rural and urban backgrounds) pronounce it as some variation as "NOO-git." Apparently the Aussie way is the way Brits pronounce it, whereas the way we pronounce it is American.

My wife did some research on Papers Past and found a reference which showed that Kiwis pronounced it the Aussie/British way back in 1938.

There seems to be some granularity in pronunciation and I'm curious to know in the comments: fellow kiwis, how do you pronounce this word?

And I don’t mean which party or person are you ticking at the ballot. I mean who are you voting on behalf of? Which the group of people who is front of your mind when you consider our current situation and select the politicians who might improve it?

Maybe you have disabled friends or family and you’re thinking about them as you assess your options. Perhaps you’re considering the pensioners, or overworked nurses, or kids and teens who can’t vote for themselves.

Obviously we all vote with some degree of self-interest but I’d like to think even the most inconsiderate of us contemplate the effects of their choices on others and have people or groups in mind who they believe will be helped by their party.

Personally I am thinking a lot of the homeless. I’d be lying if I said I couldn’t see a trajectory where that could become me some day, but for now at least I have a lot of buffers between me and that unfortunate situation. But in a society that has plentiful accomodation for all when we actually try to house everyone, it seems unconscionable that anyone should be allowed to suffer like the unhoused and housing-insecure do.

Who do you keep in mind when casting your vote?

Apologies if this has been raised on the sub before, but why is Stuff giving a platform to Chris Penk (a sitting MP) to publish what amounts to political campaigning drivel under the guise of an opinion piece? I read his story on Nicky Hager's book, and the opening line is literally "I haven't read the book." How can you credibly publish a critique of a book when the author openly admits he hasn't even bloody read it? There's a difference between publishing political commentary and giving actual politicians a platform to push a narrative without engaging with the material they're commenting on. Stuff should hold its contributors to higher standards.

And to be clear, my issue isn't with Penk himself. A few of his stories are reasonable and relatively insightful, but his pieces on the Greens, TOP and Nicky Hager barely go beyond National Party talking points.

I don't know who needs to hear this but meeting with gang leaders and posing for photographs during an election campaign is not a gang outreach program.

It is a political act, and one that requires serious scrutiny.

If a politician gladhands with someone selling meth to kids, murdering people on the street, trafficking woman and 3D printing guns that deserves criticism.

It's not racist to call the politicians who did this out.

Instead of doubling down and pretending they're fighting racism, admit the error, apologize and move on.

Why is this so hard?

My flat is managed by a property manager (Ray White) and they do flat inspections every 3 months, which is fine. My previous property manager was pretty chill and accommodating when I asked if he could come on a different day (I would prefer to be out of the house so would ask him to come on a day when I’d be in the office and not working from home).

My new property manager won’t accommodate this request and has informed me she’s coming on one of my work from home days. And the worst part is she won’t even tell me what time she will be there, not even a general timeframe (morning or afternoon).

I have bad anxiety, so I know I’ll spend all day a ball of anxiety waiting for her to come over. Terrified she’ll arrive when I’m in the middle of a meeting. Feel as though I can’t pop out to run an errand or go for a walk in case she shows up then.

It’s so inconsiderate to expect someone to wait around all day. Surely tenants should have some say in this? Has anyone experienced this?

I've read some of what happened about the case and I'm surprised there have been no protests against the victimisation of Ms. Z or the rampant police corruption involved. Why is that? Is it classic Kiwi apathy or our idolisation of NZ police as perfect little angels?

So I now understand why it was on special, but the budget brand was all out. Don't do it!

So what can I do with 8 bars of horrible smelling soap?

In the 3 day period where the body is in the house, are dogs allowed in the same room? Can a dog be allowed on marae grounds? Or even at the tangi itself?

How do I go about this?

Funny they put in a $25 fee if you dispute the charges.

Excess is now $3,600 and can only be lowered to $1,800, not $0, for $45/day or $6.5/h. Almost half of a Swift's daily rate.

Free km is now only 50km.

Free 5 minutes is good, although not sure if anyone has used it.

For Petrol cars, they require a min 30% fuel upon return. For EV, 70% min charge, or plugged in. Otherwise, you can pay $65 (for EV) to ignore this. All else, a $90 fee will apply.