Posts by Rich of Observationz
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Is it because schools will start "adjusting" their data so they can improve their position in the tables ?
They will engage in all manner of abuses and rorts to the detriment of children.
- Selecting kids for middle-classness. (In the UK, this involved in one school interviewing kids to see if their home had a burglar alarm).
- Excluding any child at the slightest hint of trouble.
- Admitting additional middle-class kids through zone fiddles.etc, etc..
-
Maybe this doesn't apply to all churches, but in a lot of cases the church is part of the problem for Pacific Islanders here and in the islands. Making already-poor people fork out large chunks of their income to keep pastors in luxury isn't my idea of something our government should be supporting.
-
wasn't Project Aqua going to be a dam on the Lower Waitaki not anywhere near the Cook Strait cable......
The Inter-island HVDC link of which the Cook Strait cable is part runs from Benmore Dam to Haywards in the Hutt Valley. It transmits power at higher efficiency than conventional AC cables, especially on the underwater bit.
My point is that losses from medium distance (<1000km) power transmission are not significant, so the argument that only resources close to large power consumers should be exploited isn't valid. (On energy grounds that is. There is obviously a cost to building transmission lines, but basically it's too late for us to scrimp on the work we need to do to get to 100% renewable energy).
-
Project Aqua was the wrong plan and in the wrong place. More power production should be established closer to end-users.
Ok, where's your evidence for that statement?
The proposed Aqua system was going to be close to the existing HVDC link across the Cook Strait to the Hutt Valley. HVDC links lose 3% per 1000km, so losses over the 610km transmission distance would be about 2%.
Which means that 520MW of generation on the Waitaki would be equivalent to 510MW in the Hutt. Negligible, really.
We *can* get to 100% renewables and on to replace transport and static uses of fossil fuel. It's a matter of political will - we need to progress all viable renewable generation projects.
Sure, we'll lose landscape value. The alternative is submerged cities, crop failure and species extinction. Not to mention running out of fossil fuels anyway. You choose.
-
I'll believe nuclear power is a good idea when nuclear plants:
- carry insurance for the full risk of their operations (most countries with nuclear power exempt them from this requirement)
- make full provision for lifetime waste disposal costs
- make full provision for decommissioningIf you do that, they suddenly become uneconomic. Not to mention that nuclear power is inherently uneconomic in NZ, for the technical reasons above.
-
Angus: it's really simple. The police decide whether the case merits prosecution, then the court decides whether the case is proven and, if so, what a suitable punishment is.
How can the court possibly make any decisions unless the case is brought before it, which implies a decision must be made to do so?
(Maybe we should have an independent crown prosecutor, as in many overseas jurisdictions, but that's a different matter)
-
Slept with this guy.
Were the "bats tattooed on his neck" baseball, or cricket?
-
Some cases deserve prosecution more than others.
Family First slated the police in support of a man with an extensive history of domestic violence and an armed robbery conviction. In pursuing that support, they minimised and flat-out lied about the facts of the case.
Must be prosecuted. Obvious really.
It was.
Angus said:
no longer do we have an independent judiciary deciding what is "reasonable" punishment of a child. Now a government department decides what punishment of a child appears "inconsequential".
Assuming that means you don't agree with this state of affairs, then that would require *every* case, not just the one you cited, to go to trial so the judiciary can decide on the facts. That would seem somewhat impractical.
-
All kinds of gangs, not just Polynesian ones, have used Nazi symbols because they communicate being anti-social.
Still wierd, given that Hitler considered everyone not North European to be an untermensch, with a bit of a free pass for allies, like Franco and Mussolini. Oh, and himself.
I only raise this coz at the weekend I saw a swastika tag in a central North Island town, assumed it had been put there by skinheads and speculated on how long they survived.
-
Angus: are you suggesting that every single complaint on any offence must end up in front of a court?