Posts by dc_red
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Or do our new leaders think our economy consists of farms, banks and construction projects?
Yes, and real estate agents.
Everyone else is a non-frontline bureaucrat who produces no wealth.
-
I always likened it to crickets (the full-on night-time chorus).
-
At 175 cm I'd have to weigh just over 100 kg to be a BMI of 35. I'm pretty sure I could in fact sit in a single plane seat without inconveniencing anyone else.
The dig about Rush being obese was indeed at sly reference to the news article about the woman refused immigration visa yesterday. Given the problems of using BMI as a measure for individuals (rather than populations) I wish they could use other health measures that tell you more about a particular person. BMI was never intended to be a health measure for one person.
You'd have to be 108kg - which would make you very stocky, but probably not so large as to spill over onto a second (or third) airplane seat.
In sports where bulk counts for a lot (rugby, league) quite a few of the (not-exceptionally-tall) players have BMIs in the high 20s to low 30s. The NRL's monstrous Fuifui Moimoi has a BMI of 32 for example.
It's perhaps worth noting the American refused permanent residency had a BMI of 50. Given that her weight was given as 135kg, that means she's around 164 cm tall.
A simple BMI cut off of 35 suits the NZIS well enough, as it is a crude 'measure' of health that may preclude more serious analysis of individual health status.
Although the more pertinent fact in the 135kg American case may be that she has Type II diabetes. If memory serves, that's grounds for more-or-less automatic denial of permanent residency in New Zealand.
Too bad for the 1.6 million Americans diagnosed with diabetes each year, I guess.
-
Would Rush Limbaugh qualify for immigration? He is an obese drug addict after all.
Indeed. Just a couple of days ago a 135kg American was denied permanent residency due to obesity.
The story suggests the NZIS cut off is a BMI of 35.
-
Well they got these riots because they were soft on crime and cared more for the criminals than the victims
Soft on crime committed by white cops against black victims, you mean?
the number of European children killed by adults is significantly greater than those by polynesian.
If that's not a case for restricting Swiss immigration to New Zealand I can't think of one!
-
There was no underfloor heating in the "large raupo hut" I'll wager. Although why should I use my meagre post-tax income on shelter when criminals are given a raupo hut for free? On prime waterfront land, no less! Come to think of it, the hut was probably a C19th Club Med - I bet they committed crimes just to enjoy its many luxuries!
"many lives were lost which could not be traced to the Maoris."
He is a cow cocky.
Fortunately, cow cockys are salt of the earth types. Any lives lost which cannot be traced to "the Maoris" are certainly not the fault of cow cockys. Diseased and despondent white urban youth, perhaps? Oh, and Asian gangs.
-
Sounds like a Garth McVicar cure for violent crime; catapault the guilty into the sea with a giant slingshot. That'll teach 'em.
Typical leftie - soft on crime. Catapaultin's too good for them.
They should be forced to walk out into the cold, unforgiving ocean using their own energy. Whatever energy they might have from the single bowl of half-cooked oats they're allotted each day, that is.
-
sworn Police officers, and the less goon-ish behaviour from that quarter the better.
Well, for our Waitangi day, we watched Goodbye Pork Pie (28 years to the day since its release), in which both traffic and 'regular' cops display an amusing array of behaviours, both goonish and inept.
This was accompanied by a fine array of kiwi foods (burgers with beetroot, asparagus rolls, stirling colby, pavlova), washed down with whatever kiwi wine could be found in these parts (sauvignon blanc only I'm afraid).
-
Oh, FFS... seriously, what the hell were they supposed to do? Have Key behind a wall of black suits, as he's hustled from locked down photo op to a venue where you only get within a mile of the great man if you've lined up for three hours to get through a security barrier?
And various other comments from Craig about the DPS.
I see it differently. They are a bunch of well-paid, well-dressed, high-tech goons who follow the PM everywhere with essentially only one purpose ... to stop him being assaulted.
History suggests that Waitangi is the place where such an assault is most likely to occur.
Key is barely out of his car when the DPS allow not one, but two, morons to assault him (the second one getting a good throttle going for a few seconds there).
Thus, the DPS failed in their duty (which, to answer Craig's question, is to do whatever is required under the circumstances to stop morons shoving and throttling the PM).
-
Well said, RB - the ongoing desire among conservatives to make other people mouth prayers they don't believe in is a curious, yet enduring, trait.
As for the Official Waitangi - an ongoing disgrace.
The ineptitude of Key's DPS minders in protecting him against assault in precisely the time and place where such an assault is most likely is also pretty crap.
When asked whether his security let him down, Key said something 'diplomatic' along the lines of "that's for them to discuss". I think a better answer would have been "Yes, and it's not f8cking good enough."