National Thus Far

[Ab]

Wussel's complaint, abridged: "John Key told the truth in order to improve nationals election chances!!!1"

[CCS]

"GIVE ME MY FLAG BACK! GIVE ME MY FLAG BACK!"

Yeah nah. Russel is a moron. I just can't take him seriously when he gets shrill.

[pxpx]

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Oh okay. So what you're saying is it's only really National that can pull that kind of thing? It makes sense I guess, it does take a kind of critical mass, some kind of position of authority to effectively make a mountain out of a molehill as National has been effective at, mountains some around here are so eager to climb up.

You are boring
I am not entertained

[Lightspeed]

NZ near bottom in global R&D spending: report

National: "Nah, bullshit, it's all good!"

The whole idea of a knowledge economy was bunk anyhow? Cows and tourism, that's the future, technology is just a fad, AMIRITE?

[pxpx]

Interdasting.

Originally Posted by Stats NZ

In 2012:

Total research and development (R&D) expenditure was $2.6 billion, up 10 percent from 2010.
Business R&D expenditure jumped by 23 percent, to reach $1.2 billion.
Nearly half of businesses expected to pay back their R&D investment within two years.
Government R&D expenditure dropped, but government funding of business R&D increased by over 70 percent.
The amount of R&D performed by the higher education sector remained steady.

http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_..._HOTP2012.aspx

I wonder how we've tracked in the last 2 years. I trust Stats NZ more than I do a private accounting firm with unknown motives.

[Lightspeed]

Plenty of reason not to trust Stats NZ. National dissolved any independence it had from government fairly early on. I recall (but sadly cannot find - I did link it a long time ago though) the outgoing head statistician talking about how the quality of statistics would be compromised without independence.

[spigalau]

http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_...cs-part-2.aspx

"Statistics New Zealand provides independent (and free) population estimates (and projections) for every local authority area of New Zealand"

[Lightspeed]

How is their independence maintained? Does the current government have any authority over Stats NZ or capacity to change its function?

Ooh, I forget, National are our benevolent saviours, their constant lapses prove that they are working hard for all NZers.

[^BITES^]

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

How is their independence maintained? Does the current government have any authority over Stats NZ or capacity to change its function?

Ooh, I forget, National are our benevolent saviours, their constant lapses prove that they are working hard for all NZers.

[Lightspeed]

Nope, I didn't vote National.

[pxpx]

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

How is their independence maintained? Does the current government have any authority over Stats NZ or capacity to change its function?

Ooh, I forget, National are our benevolent saviours, their constant lapses prove that they are working hard for all NZers.

The fuck does Gerry Brownlee walking through a security gate have to do with Statistics NZ being independent?

[Lightspeed]

Oh, that's just the latest of a stream of National MPs and cabinet members using or attempting to use their position of authority for purposes other than the purpose the authority was given.

There are more pertinent, but less recent instances. Such as was it Smith telling Fish & Game or whoever it was off, threatening their statutory status, for speaking out against government policy.

[pxpx]

Do you know what pertinent means?

[Lightspeed]

You don't see how a government minister threatening a statutory body's status relates to the independence of other statutory bodies' being in question? I guess some of those words are pretty big.

[Ab]

Yeah, the Civil Aviation Authority look pretty damn intimidated, fining Brownlee 2K and issuing written warnings to his staff. That OBVIOUSLY means Stats NZ can't be trusted.

[Lightspeed]

Yes, we know one organisation won't be cowed by National's behaviour so we can be assured this is true for all organisation.

[Ab]

But... you're saying that an allegation of attempted National interference with some other authority means that Stats NZ can't be trusted...?

[Lightspeed]

Not really, but nice worming around there. I'm saying the government and those reporting to the government can't be completely trusted and that there's plenty of evidence of untrustworthy behaviour by the government including but not limited to directly threatening some other authority. There's also what happened with the Problem Gambling Foundation.

[Ab]

Ok so when you said

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Plenty of reason not to trust Stats NZ.

What exactly are the plenty of reason?

[pxpx]

Taito Phillip Field is a criminal.

Using Lightspeed Logic, every member of Labour is a therefore a criminal. I can make this argument stronger by saying "there's plenty of evidence to prove it", and change the subject when someone asks me to provide evidence.

[pxpx]

Can we change Lightspeeds tag to "Because reasons"?

[pxpx]

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Plenty of reason not to trust Stats NZ. National dissolved any independence it had from government fairly early on. I recall (but sadly cannot find - I did link it a long time ago though) the outgoing head statistician talking about how the quality of statistics would be compromised without independence.

http://www.stats.govt.nz/tools_and_s...t-14feb14.aspx

Never have I ever seen a more comprehensive list of obvious National Party Shills!

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by Ab

What exactly are the plenty of reason?

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

I'm saying the government and those reporting to the government can't be completely trusted and that there's plenty of evidence of untrustworthy behaviour by the government including but not limited to directly threatening some other authority. There's also what happened with the Problem Gambling Foundation.

Using pxpx logic a discernible pattern is equatable to a single instance.

Gee, you'd think NZGames has some kind of right-wing bias going on, lolz.

[plaz0r]

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Gee, you'd think NZGames has some kind of right-wing bias going on, lolz.

Individuals express personal opinions on a discussion forum?

No wai!

[pxpx]

Originally Posted by plaz0r

Individuals express personal opinions on a discussion forum?

No wai!

Dont be fooled plaz, that outburst is really an attempt to turn the conversation away from him being completely unable to back himself up.

We all await the scandalous evidence that Stats NZ is a corrupt organisation fluffing the numbers to ensure a neo-liberal regime well into 2020s.

[Lightspeed]

At NZGames you either agree with the dominant view or you're wrong and crazy for having a different view.

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by pxpx

Dont be fooled plaz, that outburst is really an attempt to turn the conversation away from him being completely unable to back himself up.

We all await the scandalous evidence that Stats NZ is a corrupt organisation fluffing the numbers to ensure a neo-liberal regime well into 2020s.

It seems you don't know the difference between evidence and proof. Or you think that in the absence of proof any evidence must be completely disregarded and we must assume the best of our government and political institutions.

[CCS]

So... asinine wide ranging conspiracy theories aside... Dat R&D stuff is pretty good.

[Ab]

Lightspeed so far you've said that Stats NZ can't be trusted, because it reports to the government and those reporting to the government can't be trusted.


Do you not see how that's kinda... nutty?

[Lightspeed]

I think it's nutty that you trust the government. It doesn't matter who is in power, power acts for power. That National MPs have been caught time and again in overstepping their bounds suggests that National struggles to maintain discipline in this regard. So I'm especially untrustworthy of them and those whose authority is in someway dependant on the government.

Of course, this is very unpopular view here at the moment, given the passionate support for the right in this forum, so I can appreciate how it's hard not to get caught up with your mates with the whole "nah, nah man, you're wrong, you're crazy" business.

[Lightspeed]

At least arguing this stuff gets people posting.

[pxpx]

Can you trust Grant Thornton Ltd?

By their own admission they have a lot of clients in the venture capital space - they've lobbied on behalf of this client base before, can you assume that their report tells us the whole truth, unsullied by any ulterior motives? Maybe their clients stand to lose a funding source, and therefore their revenue stream is at risk?

reference:
http://whoslobbying.com/nz/grant_tho...evidence_given
http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/googl...grant+thornton

[Ab]

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

I think it's nutty that you trust the government.

I don't trust the government. But we're not talking about the government, we're talking about Stats NZ.

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by pxpx

Can you trust Grant Thornton Ltd?

Not completely, no. Everyone has an agenda and their own bias.

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by Ab

I don't trust the government. But we're not talking about the government, we're talking about Stats NZ.

You're convinced Stats NZ is immune to the political environment?

[Ab]

You claimed there are plenty of reason not to trust Stats NZ. What are they? Other than a general "because government". What are the things that Stats NZ has done to make you not trust it?

[Lightspeed]

Why does it have to be about anything Stats NZ has done? Is it because it would be impossible to demonstrate anything they've done given we don't have easy access to the inner workings of the organisation? I'm talking about the accessible political context Stats NZ operates in. Are you convinced that Stats NZ is immune to this context?

[blynk]

Originally Posted by spigalau

"Statistics New Zealand provides independent (and free) population estimates (and projections) for every local authority area of New Zealand"

Yes, they do provide independant and free population estimates.

This is not saying anything about the other data they provide, and where those R&D numbers come from. There are plenty of ways for this number to look better than it is.
Also, Comparing a 2012 vs 2010 doesn't give a full picture. Maybe 2008 was greater than 2012 is.
Maybe it was because of election year, and they that budgets get reported, or allocated.

I am not saying that stats is not trustworthy, but I am saying that it is easy for them to be supplied with "creative accountancy" numbers.

[pxpx]

I asked Stats NZ to comment:

Originally Posted by Statistics NZ

The Govt Statistician has statutory independence, as set out in the Stats Act 1975. See section 15:

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/p...vene_25_se&p=1

This gives the GS sole responsibility for deciding the "extent, form, and timing of publication" of official statistics.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Why does it have to be about anything Stats NZ has done? Is it because it would be impossible to demonstrate anything they've done given we don't have easy access to the inner workings of the organisation? I'm talking about the accessible political context Stats NZ operates in. Are you convinced that Stats NZ is immune to this context?

How is Grant Thornton Ltd immune in this context? How can you demonstrate that their information is any more or less valid than that provided by Stats NZ? Surely those companies benefiting from their services would be just as likely to attempt to influence the results of their reports as the Govt is to try to influence those provided by Stats NZ?