#NYTimes summary of Nordhaus on #climatechange @jamespeshaw @Oxfamnz @GreenpeaceUSA
02 Nov 2018 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, development economics, energy economics, environmental economics, global warming, politics - USA Tags: climate alarmism
1996 Welfare reforms were predicted to leave countless destitute children to freeze in the streets overnight @SenSanders
02 Nov 2018 Leave a comment
in politics - USA, poverty and inequality, welfare reform
Didn’t know of @ProfSteveKeen Rory Robertson bet! Bereft @NZTreasury doesn’t know who’s who in economics profession anymore!
01 Nov 2018 Leave a comment
in business cycles, economics of bureaucracy, global financial crisis (GFC), great recession, macroeconomics, monetary economics, politics - USA, Public Choice Tags: Post-Keynesian macroeconomics
The Time Rock & Roll Saved Free speech
31 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in economic history, law and economics, Music, politics - USA, Public Choice Tags: free speech
Scalia: How to appoint Supreme Court Judges (Nov. 27, 2012) | Charlie Rose
30 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in law and economics, politics - USA Tags: Antonin Scalia
Never under-rate the power of solution aversion in politics
30 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in environmental economics, global warming, politics - USA Tags: political psychology
How Jazz Musicians Smashed Racial Barriers
29 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in economic history, Music, politics - USA, Public Choice Tags: creative destruction, racial discrimination
@ProfSteveKeen Rory Robertson 40% Australian housing crash bet
29 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in macroeconomics, politics - New Zealand
Steve Keen lost a bet in 2010 with Rory Robertson about a 40% crash in Australian housing prices. The loser of the bet, which was Steve Keen, had to walk from Sydney to Mount Kosciusko, a mere 200 km, wearing the T-shirt as shown below saying “I was hopelessly wrong on home prices! Ask me how”.
Robert Murphy summarises Nordhaus on #globalwarming @jamespeshaw @Greenpeace @OxfamNZ
29 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, development economics, energy economics, environmental economics, global warming, politics - New Zealand, politics - USA Tags: climate alarmists
How Sears Used the Market to Undermine Racism
28 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in discrimination, economic history, entrepreneurship, industrial organisation, politics - USA, survivor principle Tags: creative destruction, racial discrimination
Why does @women_nz @JulieAnneGenter treat men’s occupational choices as superior? Women choose more interactive occupations because of their vastly superior reading and verbal skills
28 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in discrimination, economics of education, gender, human capital, labour economics, labour supply, occupational choice, politics - New Zealand Tags: gender wage gap
Note for @SenSanders
27 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in economic history, Marxist economics, politics - USA Tags: fall of communism, The Great Fact
Former CIA Chief Explains How Spies Use Disguises | WIRED
27 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in defence economics, economics of crime, law and economics, politics - USA
Rejoinder to @TVNZ reply to @BSA_NZ complaint
25 Oct 2018 Leave a comment
in politics - New Zealand, poverty and inequality
My rejoinder is TVNZ is so sloppy with the facts that it is spent most of its reply on the exemption in cases of where paternity is uncertain or disputed. That has nothing to do with my complaint about their failure to mention in their broadcast the exemption in the case of threats of violence.
To support their reply, TVNZ attached a rambling paper from Auckland action against poverty and a Herald op-ed about the need to have a lawyer’s letter. TVNZ misread the rambling Auckland action for poverty document with talks about needing a lawyer to get the exemption lifted. This is different to when first applying for the benefit. The New Zealand Herald op-ed is unclear about which exemption is under discussion: for threats of violence or for disputed paternity.
TVNZ interviewed the minister about the exemption but put none of the activist allegations to her according to the attached official information response of TVNZ. An opportunity lost for balance.
I put the allegation that a lawyer is required to apply for the exemption in case of threats of violence through official information requests to the Minister and her ministry. Both the Minister and the ministry said that was not so: a lawyer is not required to apply for the exemption. The Ministry also explained that benefit applicants are interviewed by the case manager and briefed on their options.
TVNZ included the link https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/map/income-support/core-policy/child-support/carer-unable-to-provide-written-proof-of-the-risk-of-violence.html
I clicked on the link Exempting section 70A reductions https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/map/income-support/core-policy/child-support/exempting-section-70a-reductions.html and then clicked on Risk of Violence link https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/map/income-support/core-policy/child-support/risk-of-violence-01.html and then clicked on Carer required to provide proof of risk of violence link https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/map/income-support/core-policy/child-support/carer-required-to-provide-proof-of-the-risk-of-violence.html
The above screenshot lists all the 3rd parties who are credible witnesses. TVNZ had to go through these links to find the link Carer unable to provide written proof of the risk of violence at https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/map/income-support/core-policy/child-support/carer-unable-to-provide-written-proof-of-the-risk-of-violence.html
Sole parent beneficiary applicants are not asked for a letter from a lawyer as claimed by TVNZ. The link supplied in the TVNZ reply says applicants are advised to speak to a family violence coordinator or a service centre manager at WINZ. TVNZ is convicted by the information it supplied to the BSA.
In summary, TVNZ never mentioned the exemption on air. When I complained, it relied on allegations from activists that were never put to the Minister or her ministry despite opportunities to do so in an interview with the Minister. In the reply to the complaint, TVNZ provided written proof to the BSA from WINZ that applicants are advised to speak a family violence coordinator or a WINZ service centre manager if they are having trouble documenting the threats or abuse. The link provided by TVNZ shows there is no requirement for a letter from a lawyer. The exemption was never mentioned on air nor its purported shortcomings. The claim that TVNZ did not need to mention the exemption because it was unworkable because of the need to hire a lawyer has no foundation in fact and was never put to the minister or WINZ for comment and balance.
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments