The system works on trust. And with MMP, the effect of any transgressions is limited. (FPP magnifies fraud by allowing bogus votes in key electorates to transform a result).
I think that if CGT had been packaged with say a $10k personal allowance (which would equal about $50 a week for most taxpayers) as tax fairness issue between landlords and workers, then it would have had no problems. It's the concept that it's just an extra tax that people (ignorantly in most cases) balked at.
“I’d guarantee I earn four times your salary, and I voted Labour. National is for low paid idiots”
Awesome. Did you burn a fiver for good measure, like Chelsea supporters used to do?
There is a probability that an electorate that may be thought a "bellwether" has actually aligned that way from chance (more so with FPP electorates that always elect an MP from the winning party, I think).
It would be interesting to calculate this for Ōtaki and also to look at the time series.
So any NZers who've been away for over three years can fly in the day before (but not on the day), register and vote.
That proscribes the exit polling of advance voters, surely? Not voters voting *on* polling day.
I'd be interested in how they think they have (criminal) jurisdiction over an act outside NZ.
Given there is an efficient system for people who haven't registered to turn up and vote *before* polling day (and to vote anywhere), could this be extended to allow unregistered voters to vote on polling day (with some more technology to speed registering them, maybe).
And then possibly get rid of registering at all so people can just turn up and vote.
Can we drop the trailing 'T'?
It's only the government/education sector who use it. Everyone else calls it IT, or "tech".
*It's all information, whether it's travelling (being communicated) or at rest
See https://royalsociety.org/~/media/education/computing-in-schools/2012-01-12-computing-in-schools.pdf. That paper recommends losing the 'ICT' term from UK education because the subject had become (in the space of 20 years) perceived as 'boring' by most learners.
( A later report may or may not have recommended that 'History' be renamed 'Nazis and wars and other cool shit' )
nominate non-pharma-grade products that could be prescribed
Is it really acceptable for doctors to prescribe (e.g. advise someone to take a medicine on a basis of their authority and standing) something that hasn't been properly monitored for quality and efficacy?
Wouldn't it be much better just to legalise weed in some form (non-commercial sale, no advertising, whatever) and let doctors advise a patient of the possible risks and benefits of using it to help their condition, but not hand them official endorsement in the form of a script?