Posts by Steve Barnes
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
<quote>How can they be that expensive?/quote>Search me. It may have something to do with those people that do the costings for govt. departments.
Cost of container. $2,500
fitout (labour & materials) $3,500
Land cost $60,000
Use of desk $10,000
Use of Govt. pen $30,000
Staples $40,000
Paper $4,000
Resource Consent $30,000
consultation $200,000 -
The cost of building accommodation to the standard of the new Spring Hill prison in Meremere, south of Auckland, works out at about $643,000 per bed. Using shipping containers, the cost is an estimated $380,000 per bed.
See, I said they were expensive. It would be cheaper to build them three bedroom houses in Manurewa
-
Corrections and Clarifications.
It has been brought to our attention that we mistakenly referred to a Mr Crawford of Wellington as having an idea. This of course was incorrect.
We apologise unreservedly for any discomfort this may have caused.
Ed (Mr) -
Sir,
It has been suggested by a Mr Crawford of Wellington, that we could render these crims into fertiliser. I would like to say that this will not be a good idea, has he not considered runoff?
Prisoners running off is one of the biggest problems society faces today.
Yours,
Tumescent of Torbay. -
Dear sir.
I have never heard such utter rubbish, criminals in containers, pah!. Do these politicians not understand that we are in a recession? Containers are not cheap[ and we need them to import the goods we need to spend our way out of the economic downturn.
It would be far more cost effective to use old 45 gallon drums. You should be able to fit two prisoners in each drum, more if you mulch them first, then we could make them into a raft and float it on the harbour, party central.
Flatulently yours,
Fed up of Freemans Bay. -
Using generalisation to create categories for......
grrrr -
Using generalisation to create categorise for analysis in statistical models to predict trends leads to less than perfect results.
Geez, try saying that ten times while tapping your head and rubbing your belly.Surely with todays technology we don't need to use generalisations such as ethnicity. What defines you, in everyday sociological terms, are, rarely,the habits, beliefs or behaviour of your great grandparents and their ancestors. You may identify with these social mores, even to the point of being a member of a tribal grouping, but in terms of how the state plans for the future workings of society, they are of little use.
So. I propose that the information gathered by the state in a census could well do without questions of ethnicity and, instead, concentrate more on questions of a more individual nature.
-
Would crossing out "good parental" on the ballot paper and then voting yes, be regarded as a spoiled ballot?.
Omitting those words does not alter the meaning of the question, other than removing an obscure reference to children."Should a smack as part of correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?" Well, Yes.
It may be too late for the Govt. to change the question but its not too late for us.
-
I suspect the outcome of the referendum is moot because Govt. and opposition have already stated their position that the law will not change and, as well we all know, these referendums are non binding.
However, can we trust slippery John and his merry followers?.I still think a Yes vote is worthwhile, after all, the No voters we are talking about are the "Silent Majority" eh?.
-
re the 'furious sleep' reference. I am trying to track down a documentary of this name, about a mid-Wales farming community.
Wasn't that 'furious sheep'?