Posts by JonathanM
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Deborah: My reading of the policy (thanks for the link) is that any risk is labelled "potential" while the benefits are labelled as a given. I do agree that any risks currently recognised are tiny. Too tiny to bother mentioning?
The focus seems to not be anti-science, rather focused on the argument of public benefit versus ones right to opt-out where feasible.
Their comments on fluoridated water being used to mix baby formula seem science based as well: http://www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/safety/infant_formula.htm
There's a current study being undertaken looking at whether there's evidence for developmental issues associated with fluoride in NZ, so in the next year or so there should be some more evidence on NZ-specific issues or the absence thereof.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10895675
-
Cracker: Johnny Foreigner & the Auckland…, in reply to David Hood,
Interesting David - thanks for that. It kinda makes my point: If Labour had simply said "actually, we'd love to have accurate numbers, but the Nats shut down CHRANZ in 2011. What we do have is this survey here that suggests the number is around 5-7%. Professor X suggests that removing those people from the market would mean reduced prices of around 0-12%".
That's a policy announcement that I and many other NZers would support. Instead, we get a bunch of weak waffle.
-
My main problem with this policy is the apparent lack of analysis by Labour at least as to what the effect might be. That it took a 3rd party before any reasonable figures on the percentage of overseas owners was known speaks volumes. Regardless of whether it's good or not, if it's clear you've not actually investigated it properly, you don't get my support just for repeating an idea. This goes for any policy.
Regarding a CGT, why exempt the family home? That just creates unnecessary distortions. If you happen to be one of the "unlucky" that get hits by a large bill, then are you really unlucky? After all, you'd be thinking yourself pretty lucky if a CGT hadn't applied, and you had that extra cash in your backpocket.
To be effective you'd want it to be collected annually similar to rates - that way you start having an impact immediately. Any gains or losses over and above the annual rate would then be payable or credited at realisation.
-
To expand a little on Graeme's response:
With a mayoral STV, why are the lowliest second votes counted first? What if the top two candidates were very close, but the centre left had just edged out the centre right option, and the more extreme lefty was third and extreme righty was fourth. By taking fourth places' 2nd votes it could tip the second choice into the mayoralty despite the majority of voters choosing left wing politicians.
In that case, votes for the left are higher than votes for the right (1st > 2nd and 3rd > 4th, so 1st + 3rd > 2nd+4th) thus, even if all those that first-voted for the 4th candidate 2nd voted for the 2nd candidate, the total votes for the 2nd candidate would not increase to more than half the votes. Thus, the 2nd choice of voters that voted for the 3rd candidate would also be considered, meaning the 1st candidate in your scenario (center-left) would be elected.
-
Ah, 55 hours of travel hell only to find you've only just arrived in Hell (the town closest to Trondheim Airport.)
At least in this case Hell wasn't frozen over, it being summer and all.
(I was greatly disappointed to have to get a new passport and thus stop using the old one with the "Hell" stamp in it).
Thanks for the great read, and enjoy your time at NTNU.
-
This is fantastic. Oh to be in on one of those calls! Thanks for taking the time to write this David.
-
He may have shortcomings in the ethics department, but at least he has a great name...
-
Obama's already ahead in the popular vote, and it's only going to get bigger now, yes.
-
3000 songs, 2-300 seconds a song, 32KB/second is 20-30 GB, so a reasonable dent if you are unfortunate enough to have a low data cap. Fortunately low data caps seem to be slowly but surely becoming a thing of the past with snap, orcon etc. all offering much larger data packs now.
Disclaimer: Also a (happy) snap customer.
-
Keith is just way too polite :) Pity he didn't say: I'm sorry, but you guys just don't have the statistical skill to know what is appropriate to do with these data and how to do it. You're misleading the public by applying statistical techniques that are not valid to data that is not amenable to the comparisons you are trying to make.
With that said, I thought he did a great job of retaining his composure, given the body language from the other two (particularly Mr Milne).