Jacinda Ardern sued over lockdown

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Jacinda Ardern sued over lockdown

1 | ... | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18

6418 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2481868 12-May-2020 12:58

No don’t give up.

Heres one. On Friday, when commenting on NZ’s unemployment rate (1000/Day added), Grant Robertson compared our unemployment rate to that of the USA. Ours 0.8% of population compared to 10% for the US. Why didn’t he use Australia’s rate instead?

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

SaltyNZ

6921 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#2481885 12-May-2020 13:20

I suppose he could have done. It's currently 5.2%.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2481908 12-May-2020 13:53

Dingbatt:

No don’t give up.

Heres one. On Friday, when commenting on NZ’s unemployment rate (1000/Day added), Grant Robertson compared our unemployment rate to that of the USA. Ours 0.8% of population compared to 10% for the US. Why didn’t he use Australia’s rate instead?

It's pointless doing cross-country comparisons when different short-term measures to try to protect jobs have been implemented - and it's very hard to make a comment about whether Robertson was cherry-picking data when I haven't heard what was said in context. Sure - as you present it - it could sound stupid - unless it was a comment about the effectiveness of different policies to protect jobs and business in the short term where NZ (and Aust) approach differs from the US approach. Long term - we'll find out later.

So what was he actually comparing - not comparing NZ to Aus (with broadly similar response to C-19) or NZ to US (dissimilar response to C-19) ?

MikeAqua

7616 posts

Uber Geek

#2482038 12-May-2020 15:51

Dingbatt:

No don’t give up.

It's OK, I've only given up on convincing Fred that something he read between the lines in a post of mine (in I which I was basically agreeing with him) is a product of his imagination.

Mike

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2482040 12-May-2020 16:02

MikeAqua:

Dingbatt:

No don’t give up.

It's OK, I've only given up on convincing Fred that something he read between the lines in a post of mine (in I which I was basically agreeing with him) is a product of his imagination.

Nice try.

Handle9

9640 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482059 12-May-2020 16:34

SaltyNZ:
Handle9: This is getting quite interesting. It appears that the epidemic response committee will issue summons for the production of legal advice about the legal basis of the powers exercised by the Government. It opens some very tricky constitutional doors and frankly quite disturbing possibilities. If the AG and Commisioner of Police were to ignore a summons from the house it puts their authority under significant pressure.

The government has chosen to waive privilege when it has suited them in the past.

https://publicaddress.net/legalbeagle/parliamentary-privilege-and-the-summonsing/
https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL2005/S00087/unlawful-lockdown-and-government-accountability.htm

It's interesting you think this is interesting, given that the ERC was setup and deliberately stacked with opposition members by the government and given an almost unlimited power of summons for precisely this reason.

I think you are missing the point I was trying to make.

Handle9

9640 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482064 12-May-2020 16:44

Fred99:
MikeAqua:

My claim was that all politicians (see bold above), tend to seek out and utilise statistics that support their position, regardless of accuracy. This was not a dig at the current govt, or a specific reference to any data currently available.

Rather, it was a comment on politicians generally and a conjecture that given choice of models, politicians will always chose the one that produce outcomes supporting their view/policy/position. I.e. using the lamp-post for support rather than illumination.

You didn't show an example of where the present government is "data-dredging" C-19 epidemic data to support their position. You used a generalisation about "politicians", then a fallacious argument that because politicians do it, then all data presented by politicians must be suspect, then projected to try to create a conspiracy theory that the government "must be" lying or covering up C-19 statistics.

That's crazy.

You have done exactly the same thing you are accusing Mike of. You are extrapolating a fairly reasonable statement (that politicians use data that supports their position) to accuse Mike saying that the government are making things up.

That's daft.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2482089 12-May-2020 17:25

Handle9:
You have done exactly the same thing you are accusing Mike of. You are extrapolating a fairly reasonable statement (that politicians use data that supports their position) to accuse Mike saying that the government are making things up.

That's daft.

Not when it was implied that the government / MoH is data-dredging C-19 data to support their position.

Handle9

9640 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482099 12-May-2020 17:48

Fred99:

Handle9:
You have done exactly the same thing you are accusing Mike of. You are extrapolating a fairly reasonable statement (that politicians use data that supports their position) to accuse Mike saying that the government are making things up.

That's daft.

Not when it was implied that the government / MoH is data-dredging C-19 data to support their position.

That's not what was said, that is your interpretation. I read it differently.

BarTender

3530 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482102 12-May-2020 17:55

Fred99:

Handle9:
You have done exactly the same thing you are accusing Mike of. You are extrapolating a fairly reasonable statement (that politicians use data that supports their position) to accuse Mike saying that the government are making things up.

That's daft.

Not when it was implied that the government / MoH is data-dredging C-19 data to support their position.

And I think the response from the PM and MoH says everything in the facial response.

And the exchange today.

https://youtu.be/ih2HiB248FQ?t=2876

If they the government and MOH are lying or being selective then they seem pretty bemused by the suggestion.

and

SaltyNZ

6921 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#2482106 12-May-2020 18:04

Handle9:

I think you are missing the point I was trying to make.

Possibly - try again? I don't want to be obtuse, I do want to have a genuine conversation.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Handle9

9640 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482207 12-May-2020 20:40

SaltyNZ:

Handle9:

I think you are missing the point I was trying to make.

Possibly - try again? I don't want to be obtuse, I do want to have a genuine conversation.

All good. The point I was (unsuccessfully) making was if the government and it's officials try and claim privilege without going to court and getting a stay that opens up a huge can of worms. We would have government officials failing to comply with an order of the house of representatives.

It hypothetical at the moment but could get serious very fast.

Also interestingly the COVID-19 Response (Further Management Measures) Legislation Bill is before the house to make the provisions of level 2 explicitly legal.

Theres still a way to go on this and I don't see nefarious intent. It's useful to have the opposition asking these questions.

Dingbatt

6418 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2482487 13-May-2020 08:37

SaltyNZ:

I suppose he could have done. It's currently 5.2%.

The stat you linked is a labour force one and to quote directly from it;

“The trend unemployment rate remained steady at 5.2 per cent in early March, from a revised February figure.” (Bolding added by me).

So you cherry picked a stat that is different from the original discussion, which was per capita (vs labour force) and then from a period prior to lockdown.

Lies, damn lies and statistics......

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

SaltyNZ

6921 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#2482537 13-May-2020 09:37

Dingbatt:

“The trend unemployment rate remained steady at 5.2 per cent in early March, from a revised February figure.”

Yes, indeed, it is likely to be higher than that now. However, I am not privy to any unreleased numbers and can only go on what they have released. You can Google it for yourself if you like.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

SaltyNZ

6921 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#2482560 13-May-2020 10:03

Handle9:

All good. The point I was (unsuccessfully) making was if the government and it's officials try and claim privilege without going to court and getting a stay that opens up a huge can of worms. We would have government officials failing to comply with an order of the house of representatives.

It hypothetical at the moment but could get serious very fast.

Also interestingly the COVID-19 Response (Further Management Measures) Legislation Bill is before the house to make the provisions of level 2 explicitly legal.

Theres still a way to go on this and I don't see nefarious intent. It's useful to have the opposition asking these questions.

Yes. I would be disappointed - and a little surprised - if they tried to hold back everything forever after going so far out of their way to be as up-front as possible. I don't currently see it likely to be going full Trump-administration. If that had been their intent they wasted a lot of effort on all the other trappings. That said, though, I am not really surprised that the PM wanted to hold ultimate authority to make public statements. It isn't that unusual - even in my job, I know a lot more about what's going on in the business than I can or will discuss on Geekzone. And I can imagine that she has enough trouble already keeping some of them in line *cough*Winston Peters*cough* that she wants to make it crystal clear.

It is good that questions are being asked. I think, though, that there are some people out there who aren't asking them in the right spirit. It's hard to imagine that our original interlocutors Nottingham and McKinney, for example, had only the public interest in mind when they sued. And senior National Party figures haven't impressed me with their even-handedness or determination to take the moral highground either.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

1 | ... | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18