I raved on about this 2 months ago, and again a month ago, because I thought it's such a serious topic.
Their reaction and handling of it is horrifying. I hate to say it but they genuinely do not care about Kiwis - something I realised very quickly in their handling of 3 Waters.
She's not ashamed though - these types just don't know shame if they tripped over it. Regrettably.
She comes across as though she is regurgitating lines and vibes without really believing in it. Like she is vaguely aware that what she is saying is morally wrong, but she’s too far down the rabbit hole to find a way out. She’s so incompetent as a minister.
She's been with Seymour since she was 21 years old or so and he's tutored and mentored her closely and guided her "meteoric rise" in the party so....it kind of makes sense from that perspective. I did write a post after seeing her on that Q&A asking who trains them to ... ah...spin things like that.
Yep makes sense - she has an air of being trapped in a cult. Blink twice for help, Brooke. Also she has obviously been media trained. I have no idea who ACT uses but there is no shortage of PR people charging through the nose for it. I like how Jack Tame bats away the media trainers’ cliches.
Exactly. The post I referred to above was about how her media training is very evident in this interview - and the above is only a small portion of the entire one.
Someone responded to my post with:
"She's had training from Janet Wilson, the ex-journo who is one of the top media trainers in the country. I know this because I saw BVV and Seymour leaving her house a few years back."
And
"ACT have their own internal candidate school (pretty sure this is standard across all the parties). But also I think she probably has a bit of' the 'tism like David. So she more than likely emulates much of the talking points and ideas from David which is why it sounds rehearsed and not like you're talking to an actual human."
Oh jeez, Bill Ralston’s partner. Well, it’s evident Brooke has had an experienced trainer but even the best trainer wouldn’t be able to do anything about the glazed look on her face - that would require Brooke to escape from Seymour. In my fantasy parallel universe she does - she goes travelling and relives her 20s a free woman.
Fundamentally this is a story about worker health, and illness caused by bad manufacturing. Its not an economic story. Except if you believe the health and wellbeing of your workforce is inconsequential.
So:
Brooke: "We need them to be safe"
Jack: "We need them to be alive"
But the best bit was ... the logic flow from Brooke which was stellar in terms of how she frames her thinking. It went like this:
Brooke:
"I don't want to be a reactionary politician. Where any red flag, any signal means we stop the economy. I don't think thats good for people. I don't think its good for businesses. And I don't think its good for workers as well. We need people to be able to turn up for work. We need them to be healthy. We need them to be safe"
Wow. So lets break that down.
That logic flow is this:
People's perception of me as a politician>Is dependent on me not sending signals that stops the economy>If I send signals like that it slows the economy>A slow economy is not good for "people" [which means capital growth btw]>And that is not good for businesses>Who rely on workers>We need them to turn up>They need to be healthy to work>And safe to keep working"
Thats pretty transparent: we need people to provide labour. If there is a possibility that their work will kill them, then we won't act to protect them. Unlike Australia just did.
She should be ashamed of herself.
van Velden: 'We need people to be able to turn up to work, we need workers to be safe'.
Tame: 'We need them to be alive don't we?'
I raved on about this 2 months ago, and again a month ago, because I thought it's such a serious topic.
Their reaction and handling of it is horrifying. I hate to say it but they genuinely do not care about Kiwis - something I realised very quickly in their handling of 3 Waters.
She's not ashamed though - these types just don't know shame if they tripped over it. Regrettably.
She comes across as though she is regurgitating lines and vibes without really believing in it. Like she is vaguely aware that what she is saying is morally wrong, but she’s too far down the rabbit hole to find a way out. She’s so incompetent as a minister.
She's been with Seymour since she was 21 years old or so and he's tutored and mentored her closely and guided her "meteoric rise" in the party so....it kind of makes sense from that perspective. I did write a post after seeing her on that Q&A asking who trains them to ... ah...spin things like that.
Yep makes sense - she has an air of being trapped in a cult. Blink twice for help, Brooke. Also she has obviously been media trained. I have no idea who ACT uses but there is no shortage of PR people charging through the nose for it. I like how Jack Tame bats away the media trainers’ cliches.
Exactly. The post I referred to above was about how her media training is very evident in this interview - and the above is only a small portion of the entire one.
Someone responded to my post with:
"She's had training from Janet Wilson, the ex-journo who is one of the top media trainers in the country. I know this because I saw BVV and Seymour leaving her house a few years back."
And
"ACT have their own internal candidate school (pretty sure this is standard across all the parties). But also I think she probably has a bit of' the 'tism like David. So she more than likely emulates much of the talking points and ideas from David which is why it sounds rehearsed and not like you're talking to an actual human."
Oh jeez, Bill Ralston’s partner. Well, it’s evident Brooke has had an experienced trainer but even the best trainer wouldn’t be able to do anything about the glazed look on her face - that would require Brooke to escape from Seymour. In my fantasy parallel universe she does - she goes travelling and relives her 20s a free woman.
You remind me of someone I like on Reddit. Thanks for the smile. I'm sure there's a parallel universe out there somewhere.
I like Jack.
Fundamentally this is a story about worker health, and illness caused by bad manufacturing. Its not an economic story. Except if you believe the health and wellbeing of your workforce is inconsequential.
So:
Brooke: "We need them to be safe"
Jack: "We need them to be alive"
But the best bit was ... the logic flow from Brooke which was stellar in terms of how she frames her thinking. It went like this:
Brooke:
"I don't want to be a reactionary politician. Where any red flag, any signal means we stop the economy. I don't think thats good for people. I don't think its good for businesses. And I don't think its good for workers as well. We need people to be able to turn up for work. We need them to be healthy. We need them to be safe"
Wow. So lets break that down.
That logic flow is this:
People's perception of me as a politician>Is dependent on me not sending signals that stops the economy>If I send signals like that it slows the economy>A slow economy is not good for "people" [which means capital growth btw]>And that is not good for businesses>Who rely on workers>We need them to turn up>They need to be healthy to work>And safe to keep working"
Thats pretty transparent: we need people to provide labour. If there is a possibility that their work will kill them, then we won't act to protect them. Unlike Australia just did.