Hard News: Fact and fantasy
628 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 … 26 Newer→ Last
-
The editor-in-chief of the Herald, Tim Murphy, had a complaint about the original post:
I see on your blog you say the editorial ‘repeatedly accuses Joy of deliberately “exaggerating” and “overstating” problems with New Zealand’s contaminated waterways and declares that “such overstatement is the stuff of advertising, not academic observation.”
But the editorial said no such thing about contaminated waterways. Not once. Therefore not ’repeatedly.’ No, we commented on his broad brush ‘clean and green’ and ‘100% pure” commentaries. Not water. We noted tourists’ shock at seeing that rivers are unsafe for swimming. The editorial in general assessed his judgment on whether we have ‘pristine environments’ and on our ‘environmental record’. He wasn’t just talking water or waterways. Nor were we. And that’s the point. So we can’t, no matter how you pitch it, be criticised by you for dissing his water expertise or studies.
I’m happy to acknowledge this is true so far as it goes. The editorial refers to tourists finding rivers unsafe for swimming, and not “contaminated waterways” per se. I would also point out that a river is a waterway.
And yes, the editorial otherwise referred to Joy’s comments on New Zealand’s environmental performance in general, rather than on water specifically. I’m not sure this makes a great deal of difference, but I was not strictly correct in saying “waterways” and am happy to make the correction. I have annotated the original post thus.
Edit: I should also note, in case anyone's confused, that the comment Tim is referring to -- "We don't deserve 100 per cent Pure, we are nowhere near the best in the world, we are not even in the top half of countries in the world when it comes to clean and green." -- didn't appear in the NYT/IHT story. They were given to a Herald reporter who called Joy after that story appeared -- the editorial writer misread the Herald's own story and misattributed to them to the NYT/IHT original.
Also, on the basis of the PLoS study, what Joy said about New Zealand's general performance relative to other countries is true. As Mike noted above, it wouldn't be true of waterways alone.
-
Matthew Poole, in reply to
So my partner and I spun them a yarn that we were getting married in Europe, needed $50k to fund the event. “No problem” they siad and we got the cash.
Thank you.
Also, loans for IVF. What're the bank going to do? Repo the foetus? -
But the editorial still claims that Dr Joy's comments about the environment are inappropriate, suggesting either he is wrong (he isn’t) or he’s not qualified to talk about the environment in general (he is) or that we shouldn’t talk about that sort of thing because it might make us look bad (really?).
-
Just noticed that today's ODT editorial repeats the spin from the government's press release on pulling out of the Kyoto Protocol - that NZ will instead join the alternative Framework Convention on Climate Change because the KP only covers 15% of emissions so it's just symbolic, whereas all the big player are in the FCCC.
Thing is, we were already a party to the FCCC - it pre-dates the KP. The KP came about because the FCCC was totally symbolic - there were no binding commitments and as a result nobody did anything. The KP (for all its faults) was an attempt to change that.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Fund winners, don't pick them.
Hmmm...but they're already winners. They don't need funding. To fund the winners is to reduce the diversity of your industry, and ultimately to be picking the winners, without intending to, in a self-fulfilling prophecy. We've been doing this forever already, we have a political party that was dedicated to keeping farmers the top dogs in this town, and it's still the GOP.
What I think does work is for government to create the environment through sensible policy: so for instance a policy of moving electricity rapidly to 100%+ renewables would help, because when everyone else has rapidly rising fuel bills, we wouldn't.
It's like the last 30 years of NZ energy history never happened.
-
Stephen Judd, in reply to
Fund winners, don’t pick them.
Is that really what Sir Paul said? It's been a while since that presentation of his was doing the rounds, but my recollection is that he wanted funding for technical education, funding for research, and a general spending commitment to develop the kind of equal society that would make NZ "a place where talent wants to live." My impression of what he advocatedwas of generally encouraging the conditions where high tech winners would flourish, not giving more to those who already were winnign.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
but they’re already winners. They don’t need funding.
Often winners don't have funding nor can they get it. They win by dint of persistence and excellence in spite of lack of funding. You get more bang for your buck by funding those people who are excellent regardless of whther they fit your strategic goals.
That was Callaghan's point.
He also pointed out that throwing lots of money in the general direction of agricultural science just led to a lot of average to bad vaguely agricultural science being done while really top class engineering couldn't get funding.
-
Rich of Observationz, in reply to
Yeah, I think that's fairly well known. I've never used the same bank for business and personal, or even voluntarily told the personal bank anything about where my monthly checks come from.
But it remains that unsecured lending to business is risky (as South Canterbury's creditors, which I guess includes us all, have found). Holidays in the sun, less so. That's the stats - obviously individual points are outside this, but banking is like insurance, it works on the aggregate.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
They win by dint of persistence and excellence in spite of lack of funding.
What do they win?
-
Tim Murphy's editorial says:
"the Prime Minister made the very reasonable comment that compared with the rest of the world, New Zealand was 100 per cent Pure"
Isn't this like saying that grey is actually white compared to black? Sounds like Fox News science to me.
-
Sacha, in reply to
funding those people who are excellent
Identifying 'excellence' is the trick with that approach. Some industries like science have well-developed comparative mechanisms; others don't.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
Tim Murphy’s editorial says:
I'm not even sure it's Tim Murphy. It sounded far more like a certain long bow drawer who just happens to be on the Press Council.
Still, the wider issue is that greed and green are headed for a Tenerife runway greeting - no one wants to notice until things rage out of control.
-
Rich of Observationz, in reply to
Extra turns. Like in pinball, or space invaders.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Tim Murphy’s editorial says:
I’m not even sure it’s Tim Murphy. It sounded far more like a certain long bow drawer who just happens to be on the Press Council.
Tim says it's not Roughan (who, let's face it, was the raging favourite with the bookies) and Fran says it's not her. I don't think it's Tim.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
“the Prime Minister made the very reasonable comment that compared with the rest of the world, New Zealand was 100 per cent Pure”
Isn’t this like saying that grey is actually white compared to black? Sounds like Fox News science to me.
The original Key quote is even more mathematically impossible. He adds a "for the most part" qualifier at the beginning to match the one on the end.
-
There are farmers lowering stocking rates right now , and enjoying greater individual farm profitability from the reduced production.
Umm I wasnt talking about anyone’s profitability. We are not all about money.
Or hadn’t you noticed? Seems a farmer’s life is getting easier. Greater from less…my!So what is the populace prepared to forgo in response to the reduced national income?
Why dont we ask them? could be a long conversation
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
But the editorial still claims that Dr Joy’s comments about the environment are inappropriate, suggesting either he is wrong (he isn’t) or he’s not qualified to talk about the environment in general (he is) or that we shouldn’t talk about that sort of thing because it might make us look bad (really?).
I know. But it doesn’t hurt for me to address a criticism of my own work.
-
Euan Mason, in reply to
Graeme,
Recent legislation that weakened the emissions trading scheme makes it easier to pollute. We now have a Clayton's scheme, which is perhaps a other piece of "just marketing".
-
Sacha, in reply to
Tim says it's not Roughan
really? shrinking pool of suspects..
-
Farmer Green, in reply to
Well it’s a win all round then : lower stocking rate = reduced nutrient leaching + increased profitability+ better animal welfare. There may be other benefits as well.
It may not have occurred to you that the increased stocking rates were an attempt to achieve viability in the economic sense.
Reduced GNP could be avoided by adding more value to the reduced production which would result from lower stocking rates.
Why does it not happen?
-
Sacha, in reply to
For the same reason many of our businesses have just hired more bodies rather than investing in infrastructure or smartness - lack of confidence and a slanted playing field towards more of the same. The very opposite of the 'ambition' the current mob promised.
-
Farmer Green, in reply to
All true but it was the previous mob which legislated to override the Commerce Commission so that the anti-competitive Fonterra could be formed. You bet that there is a lack of confidence. The playing field was severely tilted by the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act which allowed Fonterra to obstruct the formation of new added -value dairy companies by rigging the value of raw milk.
So where do we go from here? -
Stewart, in reply to
True leadership and political will is needed today in central government to move in a more sustainable direction with respect to how the country uses and protects its precious coastal marine ecosystems. Dr. Michael V. McGinnis, PhD
In which case we're sunk! The glib, self-serving short-termist twats currently running the show resemble this description as much as I resemble delicate dew on a spider's web in an early morning.
-
andin, in reply to
Well it’s a win all round then : lower stocking rate = reduced nutrient leaching + increased profitability+ better animal welfare. There may be other benefits as well.
The native flora & fauna? seems to be missing from your equation.
Not that I’m picky, You've probably buried it in there somewhereIt may not have occurred to you that the increased stocking rates were an attempt to achieve viability in the economic sense.
Oh I had noticed.
-
Stewart, in reply to
For the same reason many of our businesses have just hired more bodies rather than investing in infrastructure or smartness - lack of confidence and a slanted playing field towards more of the same. The very opposite of the 'ambition' the current mob promised.
Oh, sorry - is 'the current mob' the euphemism we're using now?
Very much 'my bad'.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.