Statistic of the Day

19 comments on “Statistic of the Day ”

• Comments are now closed

1. James 1

   15 August 2013 at 10:42 am

   If you have Sky or smoke – you have enough. So I think anyone with either of them should be automatically discounted from any stats.

   Amazing how many luxury’s like sky you see in lower socioeconomic areas.
   • DTH 1.1

     15 August 2013 at 10:59 am

     OK, maybe I missed something? Where in those stats does it say anything about Sky or smoking?
     • James 1.1.1

       15 August 2013 at 1:00 pm

       they are talking about people that do not have enough money to get by.

       I was arguing that “not enough money to make ends meet” – should not include people that choose to use money on luxuries.

       I have assumed that a lot of them are included in this as there is no definition of “unable to make ends meet” means.
   • Mary 1.2

     15 August 2013 at 11:54 am

     Do you believe beneficiaries who smoke deserve access to the government’s free tax-payer funded anti-smoking treatment programme?
     • James 1.2.1

       15 August 2013 at 1:01 pm

       I believe that everyone should. Stopping smoking is good for people health. Not to mention the $$$ they save at the end of the week for other things.
       • Mary 1.2.1.1

         15 August 2013 at 2:52 pm

         But according to you smoking is a choice so why should the tax payer foot the bill for beneficiaries whose sole source of income is a social welfare benefit?
   • framu 1.3

     15 August 2013 at 12:30 pm

     “Amazing how many luxury’s like sky you see in lower socioeconomic areas.”

     how do you know that james? I hope your not going by the number of dishes you see – you know, the ones sky leave installed whether the resident has a sky account or not

     Im amazed that people are still pulling that particular piece of bullshit out of their arses.
     • James 1.3.1

       15 August 2013 at 1:04 pm

       Its hard to qualify the exact number – and obv there will be cases as you mention. But you will also have to concede (without looking stupid) that there are a lot of people that still do have sky.

       So its not bullshit.
       • framu 1.3.1.1

         15 August 2013 at 1:10 pm

         no its bullshit because it proves nothing.

         the topic is stats isnt it? – so unprovable generalised anecdotal assumtpion doesnt cut it

         theres lots of people who have sky – yes of course there is – but you didnt actually make any such argument. Your argument is “well i see lots of sky dishes so therefore they just cant be that poor”
       • Macro 1.3.1.2

         15 August 2013 at 1:33 pm

         If I wanted to I could easily afford sky or freeview – but as it’s all crap I choose to have neither. I have recently purchased a house (unencumbered) with dishes and inputs for all manner of signals. As framu says – its a load of bullshit you spout…

         Furthermore its about time you got out and about, and actually started looking seriously into some of these issues regarding poverty that people go on about here – many of them are obviously speaking from direct knowledge of the subject. Having myself worked in support services for a number of years, I know that what these statistics say are the truth, and NO you don’t find sky in these homes, many don’t even have a home to go to! Garages and someones couch are about all they can aspire to.

         As for the accusation that they should give up smoking – well you are a pernicious little bugger aren’t you. Most are addicted from their parents before they can even talk.. You have heard of 2nd hand smoke haven’t you? So what chance do they have.. And its not always easy to deal with an addiction when you have other more basic needs to attend to, such as finding food and shelter.

         I don’t know how old you are, but it would seem that you live in a NZ of the past when the economic pie was distributed a lot more equitably than it is today. That world disappeared with the neoliberal ideology of Douglas and Richardson and equality in NZ has been steadily deteriorating ever since.
       • Murray Olsen 1.3.1.3

         15 August 2013 at 9:49 pm

         People called James with their heads stuck up their anal orifices should not be allowed to join adult discussions. It’s hard to quantify (note) the exact number, but obviously it’s too high. I do not have to concede anything to them, because to do so would be stupid.

         Hint: in a thread about statistics, actual researched numbers are good. Anecdotal prejudices are bad. Please go back to WhaleSpew. They’ll think you’re a hero and you might even win promotion to lance corporal in the Blubber army.
       • Molly 1.3.1.4

         16 August 2013 at 8:03 am

         ..you also make the arrogant assumption that everyone in the area you drive through (counting Sky dishes) is a beneficiary – and a smoker to boot.

         And don’t start talking about state housing, many currently well-off Kiwis running small limited companies were eligible for state housing and bought the same during their last National sell-off.
   • bad12 1.4

     15 August 2013 at 4:50 pm

     Aw how bout the one where you have seen lots of ‘them’ eating out at K-fried, face it you wad, you have never had anything to do with a beneficiary let alone lots of them to justify ‘knowing’ that lots of ‘them’ have Sky,

     Your pathetic little snivel doesn’t really deserve the dignity of any reply other than one that takes the piss out of you…
   • Mike S 1.5

     15 August 2013 at 5:54 pm

     So you go into lower socioeconomic areas and enter peoples houses to see if they’ve got sky do you? (Just because there’s a dish on the roof doesn’t mean they have sky). We have a dish on our roof but can’t afford (and don’t want) sky.

     No you don’t, you’re just making shit up based upon how you think things are rather than how they actually are.

     Further, you’re assuming that all these people you’ve seen with sky are part of the 15% mentioned in the article.

     at least have a think about things before posting such bollocks.
   • Bearded Git 1.6

     16 August 2013 at 10:15 am

     “Amazing how many luxury’s like sky you see in lower socioeconomic areas.”

     to go with their bread and water James? Or maybe bread is a little luxury?
2. Tiger Mountain 2

   15 August 2013 at 1:16 pm

   Some areas like the Far North have been down so long due to lack of regional development that locals barely notice recessions and hard times. Life is adjusted to subsistence levels, hunter gathering etc. Local transfer stations referred to as “Mitre 9”, people go to acquire stuff as much as drop off trash.

   The small percentage doing ok live in denial often on stolen land or profiting off it. Some posters here do not have clue number one about what life is like for people living on under $20,000 per year. And don’t start me on beneficiaries who ‘exist’ on way less.

   This country would descend into a Greece/Portugal/Zimbabwe nightmare very quickly if it were not for the Aussie soakhole and to some extent kiwi fortitude. Kids that don’t leave home, living in rellies garages, getting less hours than you really need at work, all these coping behaviours bury the real unemployment levels. Beggars are actually appearing on Auckland streets these days in increasing numbers and some of them are not homeless either. Face it–if you are a ShonKey voter, and tell me if I am wrong, but most Standard readers and commenters would vote, then you need to own this shit not blame the poor folks.
3. aerobubble 3

   15 August 2013 at 1:20 pm

   Stats do matter when spin is now so ubiquitous. Just wait until they are sniffing through the stream of information from five eyes…

   That we get a much more spun version is no surprised given how well rotated the politic scene is cleansed and controlled. Take Campbell Live, why did Campbell never press Key on the real issue why doesn’t he trust parliament to come up with a wide cross floor consensus especially when Key keeps drumming home how Clark did little different…

   …the politics is clear, Key needs to rush the legislation in, because he doesn’t want to stand next to Shearer at a press conference. And damn it if Key cares that its well written or not, or exposes NZ to even more ridicule when its legislator falls flat on its face yet again, Key will be retired in Hawaii.

   There are serious concerns to business from this legislation, that those up stream with full access will collate and aggravate the data to pick winners in the economy. Remember 9/11 where a fiscal derivative position was taken that would have seen a windfall flow had it been paid out, seemingly predicting the 9/11 attack. Its not just civil liberty that we should worry about, its the shear economic power it will give a few.

   It wasn’t always this way, MSM and the internet make it much easier to smear an issue out of any relevance, and find a PM whose ability to saying nothing is world beating. He even manage to congratulate ACC when commenting on their new blunder. What was a ACC employee doing with bank account details when the individuals themselves would not carry their own data around so recklessly.
4. Takere 4

   15 August 2013 at 4:21 pm

   It’s pretty clear …. with the number of big employers laying off staff recently, Rio Tinto(given a bailout of $334m) Solid energy ect ….. approximately 237 people lose their jobs every week since Jan 1st 2013. Keys finally achieved his objective of bringing the country to its knees and is readying the country for the ultimate quick fire sale! He and Joyce have continuously promised us that there’s new jobs created to replace the jobs lost however miners in southland can retrain to be teachers in the booming education sector in southland?? People in cities can move to rural area’s to work on farms, youth can become multi-skilled and have a number of casual jobs, highly trained/educated people can move to another country to have a career of their choice. All industries are dying a slow death and the impact of the global slowdown is having a major impact now that the Nat’s have run the country out of new trading partners and is in the process of isolating NZ Inc even more by not investing in manufacturing and the productive sector(s). With the Fonterra F#@k up, we’re dead in the water as the US have been eying up that Asian dairy market for sometime and now have an opportunity to jump in through the backdoor to China? The GDP figures don’t reflect the health of NZ Inc & Industry, it reflects the velocity of money, good or bad. The bump that everybody has been talking about that they said Key/Joyce/Blinglish were manufacturing, is here!! Hang on tight because its gunna be ugly! Pullah Benefit ugly …….
5. bad12 5

   15 August 2013 at 4:39 pm

   Yes your stats, 15% who are not coping financially and 33% who are but 1 disaster away from the edge shows the Slippery little shysters cynical tax switch for what it was,

   48% condemned to do the hard years while the upper 52% via a carefully planned cynical slicing and dicing of the income brackets via the tax switch do it in relative comfort,

   As an election tool you have to hand it to the Slippery little prick, it’s worked wonders…

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS