God, I really feel for them. That's all.
Friday, May 01, 2020
Wednesday, April 29, 2020
Don Brash: Have we been conned?
Have we been conned? (originally published in elocal April 2020)
Perhaps it is dangerous to write about such a fast-moving situation as the Covid-19 pandemic when what I write may not be published for 10 days or more, but at time of writing my strong impression is that the public believe that the Government has done a remarkably good job of suppressing, perhaps even eliminating, the spread of Covid-19 in New Zealand, and that they deserve warm applause.
I believe the public has been conned.
To begin with, in common with most of the countries in Europe and North America but quite unlike the countries of East Asia, the New Zealand Government was very slow to take the virus seriously. Despite the Ministry of Health issuing a statement in late January talking of the extremely serious threat posed by the disease, the Government did little or nothing to prepare for its arrival on our shores for more than a month.
By contrast, and perhaps because they had had experience of the SARS epidemic some years ago, countries like South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong swung swiftly into action with far-reaching testing and tracing. As a result, for example, Taiwan – geographically and economically much closer to the source of the virus in China than New Zealand – has vastly few total Covid- 19 cases than New Zealand has had. Indeed, on a per capita basis, New Zealand has had some 17 times as many cases as Taiwan has had.
As late as the middle of March, there had been no suggestion that the very large public ceremony to mark the anniversary of the Christchurch massacre would be cancelled, even though a crowded public event would have been the perfect way of spreading the virus.
On 17 March, the Minister of Finance announced what he called a “$12.1 billion support for New Zealanders and business”. Some of that was well targeted – including an extra $500 million for the health sector and a substantial wage subsidy to help businesses retain staff. Other parts were very poorly targeted, including a permanent increase in benefit levels and a change in the depreciation rules around commercial buildings. And the Government made it clear that they intended that a further increase in the minimum wage would still take place on 1 April, making it certain that whatever impact the virus had on employment would be made worse by a significant increase in the cost of employing people.
On 23 March, the Prime Minister announced that two days later the country was moving into an Alert Level 4 lockdown for four weeks. We had to do this, we were told, because otherwise “tens of thousands” of New Zealanders would die from the disease and our hospital system – especially the availability of ICU hospital beds – would be overwhelmed. Yes, there would an economic cost it was acknowledged, but faced with a choice between saving lives and worrying about dollars, the Prime Minister was clear that she placed a higher value on lives saved than on dollars.
Has it worked? Superficially yes. The number of new cases yesterday (I’m writing on 18 April) was just eight, only 14 people were in hospital, and only three were in ICU beds. Only 11 people have died from the virus. Perhaps we could even look forward to the day when New Zealand has no cases of Covid- 19, and we can all get back to work, though with our international borders permanently closed, or at least closed until an effective vaccine is discovered and deployed.
But very serious questions must be asked.
First, it is now clear that “tens of thousands of deaths” were never likely. Yes, some of the projections made by epidemiologists at Otago University suggested that deaths could rise to between 8,600 and 14,400 – not exactly “tens of thousands” but certainly a very large number – but those numbers assumed that the Ministry of Health would abandon its trace, test and isolate strategy. As Ian Harrison of Tailrisk Economics has noted, the same model “configured with effective tracing and isolation, and some other plausible assumptions, generated about 160 deaths” 1. And given that we have had 1,409 identified cases at this stage, and only 11 deaths as a result, it appears that the fatality rate is not much over 1% (I’m allowing for a few more deaths from those who, at time of writing, had contracted the disease but had not yet recovered).
Second, it also seems clear that Australia has had fewer cases of Covid-19 than New Zealand has had, on a per capita basis, despite having a much more relaxed attitude to “lock-down”.
Third, without exception all those who have died of Covid-19 in New Zealand are people who were over 70 (and most were over 80), all with one or more other serious “health issues”. While clearly overseas experience confirms that younger people can die of Covid-19, it appears that in other countries too those who have succumbed to the virus have overwhelmingly been over 70, and overwhelmingly people with other health issues. At no time has our hospital system even looked like being overwhelmed, and typically no more than three or four ICU beds have been occupied at one time – of the several hundred ICU beds which either are, or could quickly be, available.
More serious still is the fact that the Prime Minister seems to think that by locking the economy down tightly she is showing that she cares more about lives than about dollars. If she imagines for a single moment that locking the economy down tightly has no effect on lives lost she is even less well informed than I had imagined. We all know that four weeks of isolation in our respective bubbles has seen a marked spike in domestic violence. We can guess that seeing a business that one has spent years or decades building up destroyed in the course of a few weeks has led to an increase in suicide. And suddenly being unable to bring home a wage or salary will be having a similarly devastating effect on the mental health and lives of many tens of thousands of employees.
Professor John Gibson, one of New Zealand’s leading academic economists, has drawn attention to the fact that life expectancy is to some extent a function of real GDP per capita. He has noted in a recent paper that “if real per capita GDP in New Zealand falls by 10% due to the lockdown and other effects associated with Covid-19, life expectancy would be predicted to fall by 1.4 years” 2. Of course, not all the fall in real GDP per capita is a result of the lockdown: earnings from international tourism, and the education of foreign students, were going to fall precipitously, almost no matter how severe our cdomestic lockdown had been.
But there can be little doubt that severely locking down much of the economy will have cost a great many lives, and very probably many more than the lives clost to Covid-19 to date. As the Prime Minister must surely know, every time cthe Government decides to spend money on improving road safety, or cincreasing the Pharmac budget, or increasing the school lunch programme, they are implicitly (and often explicitly) calculating how many dollars they are willing to spend to save a life. I strongly suspect that in adopting perhaps the strictest lockdown regime in the world, the government has cost more lives than it has saved.
Don Brash
April 2020
Perhaps it is dangerous to write about such a fast-moving situation as the Covid-19 pandemic when what I write may not be published for 10 days or more, but at time of writing my strong impression is that the public believe that the Government has done a remarkably good job of suppressing, perhaps even eliminating, the spread of Covid-19 in New Zealand, and that they deserve warm applause.
I believe the public has been conned.
To begin with, in common with most of the countries in Europe and North America but quite unlike the countries of East Asia, the New Zealand Government was very slow to take the virus seriously. Despite the Ministry of Health issuing a statement in late January talking of the extremely serious threat posed by the disease, the Government did little or nothing to prepare for its arrival on our shores for more than a month.
By contrast, and perhaps because they had had experience of the SARS epidemic some years ago, countries like South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong swung swiftly into action with far-reaching testing and tracing. As a result, for example, Taiwan – geographically and economically much closer to the source of the virus in China than New Zealand – has vastly few total Covid- 19 cases than New Zealand has had. Indeed, on a per capita basis, New Zealand has had some 17 times as many cases as Taiwan has had.
As late as the middle of March, there had been no suggestion that the very large public ceremony to mark the anniversary of the Christchurch massacre would be cancelled, even though a crowded public event would have been the perfect way of spreading the virus.
On 17 March, the Minister of Finance announced what he called a “$12.1 billion support for New Zealanders and business”. Some of that was well targeted – including an extra $500 million for the health sector and a substantial wage subsidy to help businesses retain staff. Other parts were very poorly targeted, including a permanent increase in benefit levels and a change in the depreciation rules around commercial buildings. And the Government made it clear that they intended that a further increase in the minimum wage would still take place on 1 April, making it certain that whatever impact the virus had on employment would be made worse by a significant increase in the cost of employing people.
On 23 March, the Prime Minister announced that two days later the country was moving into an Alert Level 4 lockdown for four weeks. We had to do this, we were told, because otherwise “tens of thousands” of New Zealanders would die from the disease and our hospital system – especially the availability of ICU hospital beds – would be overwhelmed. Yes, there would an economic cost it was acknowledged, but faced with a choice between saving lives and worrying about dollars, the Prime Minister was clear that she placed a higher value on lives saved than on dollars.
Has it worked? Superficially yes. The number of new cases yesterday (I’m writing on 18 April) was just eight, only 14 people were in hospital, and only three were in ICU beds. Only 11 people have died from the virus. Perhaps we could even look forward to the day when New Zealand has no cases of Covid- 19, and we can all get back to work, though with our international borders permanently closed, or at least closed until an effective vaccine is discovered and deployed.
But very serious questions must be asked.
First, it is now clear that “tens of thousands of deaths” were never likely. Yes, some of the projections made by epidemiologists at Otago University suggested that deaths could rise to between 8,600 and 14,400 – not exactly “tens of thousands” but certainly a very large number – but those numbers assumed that the Ministry of Health would abandon its trace, test and isolate strategy. As Ian Harrison of Tailrisk Economics has noted, the same model “configured with effective tracing and isolation, and some other plausible assumptions, generated about 160 deaths” 1. And given that we have had 1,409 identified cases at this stage, and only 11 deaths as a result, it appears that the fatality rate is not much over 1% (I’m allowing for a few more deaths from those who, at time of writing, had contracted the disease but had not yet recovered).
Second, it also seems clear that Australia has had fewer cases of Covid-19 than New Zealand has had, on a per capita basis, despite having a much more relaxed attitude to “lock-down”.
Third, without exception all those who have died of Covid-19 in New Zealand are people who were over 70 (and most were over 80), all with one or more other serious “health issues”. While clearly overseas experience confirms that younger people can die of Covid-19, it appears that in other countries too those who have succumbed to the virus have overwhelmingly been over 70, and overwhelmingly people with other health issues. At no time has our hospital system even looked like being overwhelmed, and typically no more than three or four ICU beds have been occupied at one time – of the several hundred ICU beds which either are, or could quickly be, available.
More serious still is the fact that the Prime Minister seems to think that by locking the economy down tightly she is showing that she cares more about lives than about dollars. If she imagines for a single moment that locking the economy down tightly has no effect on lives lost she is even less well informed than I had imagined. We all know that four weeks of isolation in our respective bubbles has seen a marked spike in domestic violence. We can guess that seeing a business that one has spent years or decades building up destroyed in the course of a few weeks has led to an increase in suicide. And suddenly being unable to bring home a wage or salary will be having a similarly devastating effect on the mental health and lives of many tens of thousands of employees.
Professor John Gibson, one of New Zealand’s leading academic economists, has drawn attention to the fact that life expectancy is to some extent a function of real GDP per capita. He has noted in a recent paper that “if real per capita GDP in New Zealand falls by 10% due to the lockdown and other effects associated with Covid-19, life expectancy would be predicted to fall by 1.4 years” 2. Of course, not all the fall in real GDP per capita is a result of the lockdown: earnings from international tourism, and the education of foreign students, were going to fall precipitously, almost no matter how severe our cdomestic lockdown had been.
But there can be little doubt that severely locking down much of the economy will have cost a great many lives, and very probably many more than the lives clost to Covid-19 to date. As the Prime Minister must surely know, every time cthe Government decides to spend money on improving road safety, or cincreasing the Pharmac budget, or increasing the school lunch programme, they are implicitly (and often explicitly) calculating how many dollars they are willing to spend to save a life. I strongly suspect that in adopting perhaps the strictest lockdown regime in the world, the government has cost more lives than it has saved.
Don Brash
April 2020
[1]The
Ministry of Health’s modeling of the impact of the Coronavirus on New Zealand:
A look behind the headlines, April 2020, Ian Harrison.
[2]
Quoted in Croaking
Cassandra, a blog by former
Reserve Bank economist Michael Reddell, on 16 April 2020.
Dancing on the grave of Radio Sport
I recently wrote a piece about the forced feminization of society.
Here's another blow for the boys. The death of Radio Sport, much to the delight of someone called Zoe George who, if the internet links are up-to-date, is paid by the state via RNZ.
She must have listened in to Radio Sport's farewell episode on Monday furiously scrawling her complaints, counting how many times sportswomen women weren't mentioned, taking offence at the blokiness and a derogatory mention of Paris Hilton (who I am sure subscribes to the adage '... any publicity is good publicity'), fulminating whilst formulating "Why Radio Sport missed the mark."
"Only four female voices were heard among the sea of middle-aged men on Monday's show."
She quotes a female journalist who worked there briefly saying, "Radio Sport was never able to shake that macho appeal."
Well here's a thought. Perhaps it didn't want to.
Just where can men be men anymore?
A commercial enterprise, Radio Sport doubtless died from the lack of sport, sponsorship, advertising etc. under lock down conditions. More Covid collateral.
But no. Along comes this publicly-funded person to tell us all that it failed, "missed the mark" because it refused to submit to feminization.
In conclusion she crows,"By taking all these blokes off the airwaves, the percentage of female sports journalists is higher than ever before."
Says it all really doesn't it?
Here's another blow for the boys. The death of Radio Sport, much to the delight of someone called Zoe George who, if the internet links are up-to-date, is paid by the state via RNZ.
She must have listened in to Radio Sport's farewell episode on Monday furiously scrawling her complaints, counting how many times sportswomen women weren't mentioned, taking offence at the blokiness and a derogatory mention of Paris Hilton (who I am sure subscribes to the adage '... any publicity is good publicity'), fulminating whilst formulating "Why Radio Sport missed the mark."
"Only four female voices were heard among the sea of middle-aged men on Monday's show."
She quotes a female journalist who worked there briefly saying, "Radio Sport was never able to shake that macho appeal."
Well here's a thought. Perhaps it didn't want to.
Just where can men be men anymore?
A commercial enterprise, Radio Sport doubtless died from the lack of sport, sponsorship, advertising etc. under lock down conditions. More Covid collateral.
But no. Along comes this publicly-funded person to tell us all that it failed, "missed the mark" because it refused to submit to feminization.
In conclusion she crows,"By taking all these blokes off the airwaves, the percentage of female sports journalists is higher than ever before."
Says it all really doesn't it?
Tuesday, April 28, 2020
Monday, April 27, 2020
Saturday, April 25, 2020
Why did the world go ballistic over Covid 19?
I keep trying to figure out why the world went ballistic over Covid 19.
There's been a string of scary viruses but international panic didn't ensue. Deadly influenza circulates but international panic didn't ensue.
Yes, first world societies have become increasingly risk averse and legislated to reflect that. Health and safety is a suffocating, saturating blanket which employs thousands directly and indirectly. Its tentacles reach further and wider.
But I think there's more. The world has been primed with hysteria over the spectre of rising seas, the extinction of species, and searing temperatures that will become frankly non survivable. In the very near future no less. The masses appear to believe these predictions based mostly on modelling, some manipulated imagery and an acceptance that the science was settled and the scientists infallible. We are collectively cowering and unable to control our destiny.
Then, along comes a new and unknown threat. Covid 19.
The threat pretty quickly magnifies with modelling. We are conditioned to trust modelling because modelling gave us all the climate change predictions which are now part of our wall paper. Our articles of faith.
So a critical mass is already scared witless. The media provides evidence of that daily.
BUT at last a threat we can exercise some control over. We can don our masks and keep our distance. Make lifestyle changes with immediate individual consequences if not collective. Quickly we are aided and abetted by the authorities. Perhaps most importantly, validated.
Lock down, Stay home, Stay safe.
What relief.
Trouble is, one man's relief is another man's aggravation.
There's been a string of scary viruses but international panic didn't ensue. Deadly influenza circulates but international panic didn't ensue.
Yes, first world societies have become increasingly risk averse and legislated to reflect that. Health and safety is a suffocating, saturating blanket which employs thousands directly and indirectly. Its tentacles reach further and wider.
But I think there's more. The world has been primed with hysteria over the spectre of rising seas, the extinction of species, and searing temperatures that will become frankly non survivable. In the very near future no less. The masses appear to believe these predictions based mostly on modelling, some manipulated imagery and an acceptance that the science was settled and the scientists infallible. We are collectively cowering and unable to control our destiny.
Then, along comes a new and unknown threat. Covid 19.
The threat pretty quickly magnifies with modelling. We are conditioned to trust modelling because modelling gave us all the climate change predictions which are now part of our wall paper. Our articles of faith.
So a critical mass is already scared witless. The media provides evidence of that daily.
BUT at last a threat we can exercise some control over. We can don our masks and keep our distance. Make lifestyle changes with immediate individual consequences if not collective. Quickly we are aided and abetted by the authorities. Perhaps most importantly, validated.
Lock down, Stay home, Stay safe.
What relief.
Trouble is, one man's relief is another man's aggravation.
"Millions of cases; small amount of death"
I spent an hour watching this and found it rather compelling.
Two practicing doctors - specializing in immunology and microbiology - who are trying persuade the governor of California to end their lock down. This is the press conference they called on Wednesday last week.
Two practicing doctors - specializing in immunology and microbiology - who are trying persuade the governor of California to end their lock down. This is the press conference they called on Wednesday last week.
"Acclaim for the PM boosts Labour in the polls – but voters may not be so kind as the recession bites"
A cut and paste from Point of Order:
"...is it a winning narrative first to exaggerate the catastrophic number of deaths likely from the coronvirus, striking panic into the population, and then to claim “We saved you”?
That narrative will not resonate with small business owners whose dreams have been shattered by the way the government has operated in the Covid-19 lockdown. Already many are convinced the government’s lockdown rules have been far too stringent, an over-reaction to academic modelling that was wildly inaccurate.
They are asking why NZ didn’t follow Australia’s example in allowing small and medium businesses to continue operating .
Then there is the problem with the word “kindness”. It worked very well for the Prime Minister as she steered the country through the threatened crisis. But how will that go if unemployment reaches 10% or more of the workforce?
The danger for the PM and her ministers is that hundreds of thousands of voters may come to believe they were hoodwinked into being confined in their cells for the duration.
That belief, if mixed with socialist policy solutions for the blitz on the economy subsequent to the pandemic, could prove a fatal political cocktail. The record shows the Ardern coalition carries too much deadweight in Cabinet when it comes to framing and implementing policy.
Peter Dunne summed it up neatly:
“Critical to this whole process of crisis management is there being an actual crisis to manage. That has been clearly the case in places like the US, Britain, Italy and Spain, for example, as the numbers of cases and deaths have been spiralling out of control and the public reaction has been one of desperate panic.
“While the potential impact for NZ was just as serious, the perverse consequence of acting early to avert the extent of the crisis has been that the extremes seen overseas have been averted. But an inevitable consequence is that some now question whether there was ever a crisis here in the first place”
What won’t escape voters is that the billions of dollars being spent by the government as a result of its decision to fight the pandemic in the way it did will have to be repaid, not just by the current generation of taxpayers but by future generations — and the prosperity which New Zealanders were enjoying just a few months ago may not return any time soon.
So, as voters approach the ballot box to cast their votes, will phrases like “ Be kind” and “we are all in this together” still be ringing in their ears?"
Complete article here
Personally I don't think there are any 'buts' or 'maybes' about it. It is one of the few comforting thoughts I have currently. She's gone come September ...
"...is it a winning narrative first to exaggerate the catastrophic number of deaths likely from the coronvirus, striking panic into the population, and then to claim “We saved you”?
That narrative will not resonate with small business owners whose dreams have been shattered by the way the government has operated in the Covid-19 lockdown. Already many are convinced the government’s lockdown rules have been far too stringent, an over-reaction to academic modelling that was wildly inaccurate.
They are asking why NZ didn’t follow Australia’s example in allowing small and medium businesses to continue operating .
Then there is the problem with the word “kindness”. It worked very well for the Prime Minister as she steered the country through the threatened crisis. But how will that go if unemployment reaches 10% or more of the workforce?
The danger for the PM and her ministers is that hundreds of thousands of voters may come to believe they were hoodwinked into being confined in their cells for the duration.
That belief, if mixed with socialist policy solutions for the blitz on the economy subsequent to the pandemic, could prove a fatal political cocktail. The record shows the Ardern coalition carries too much deadweight in Cabinet when it comes to framing and implementing policy.
Peter Dunne summed it up neatly:
“Critical to this whole process of crisis management is there being an actual crisis to manage. That has been clearly the case in places like the US, Britain, Italy and Spain, for example, as the numbers of cases and deaths have been spiralling out of control and the public reaction has been one of desperate panic.
“While the potential impact for NZ was just as serious, the perverse consequence of acting early to avert the extent of the crisis has been that the extremes seen overseas have been averted. But an inevitable consequence is that some now question whether there was ever a crisis here in the first place”
What won’t escape voters is that the billions of dollars being spent by the government as a result of its decision to fight the pandemic in the way it did will have to be repaid, not just by the current generation of taxpayers but by future generations — and the prosperity which New Zealanders were enjoying just a few months ago may not return any time soon.
So, as voters approach the ballot box to cast their votes, will phrases like “ Be kind” and “we are all in this together” still be ringing in their ears?"
Complete article here
Personally I don't think there are any 'buts' or 'maybes' about it. It is one of the few comforting thoughts I have currently. She's gone come September ...
Thursday, April 23, 2020
NZ - The little engine that couldn't
NZ has always been 'the little engine that could.' It's endearing imagery but also powerfully symbolic.
But thanks to our leadership and their reckless decision-making now compounded by dogmatic digging-in, we are fast becoming the little engine that couldn't.
Today exactly what many have predicted has begun. Pharmac backtracks on a cancer drug that could have saved 1,400 lives a year because, "it can no longer afford to make the investment." In a headlong rush to save the lives of an unknown but over-stated quantity, the lives of a known number will be lost.
The economy, our very lifeblood, was all but switched off with no advice from people whose job it is to understand and appreciate its criticality. I still can't work out why. Maybe Grant Robertson thought that NZ was in a relatively strong position debt-wise and he could take risks, enormous risks with it. But I am dismayed and disgusted by how many people think it's a mere matter of switch off - switch on. Just like that. Hence their patronising chiding of the rest of us to 'just be patient. 'It's only a few more days in your bubble'. Or worse, their snitching to the authorities.
Hell's bells. Have these idiots (many deriving their security from Super or a public service salary) really thought any further than the end of their twitchy noses? They seem incapable of joining the dots beyond just A to B. Austerity will come as a rude and rough shock and they will deserve it.
Everyone of us is a domino to some degree.
Many have all ready fallen over. Tragically, today it was lung cancer patient's turn
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have."
But thanks to our leadership and their reckless decision-making now compounded by dogmatic digging-in, we are fast becoming the little engine that couldn't.
Today exactly what many have predicted has begun. Pharmac backtracks on a cancer drug that could have saved 1,400 lives a year because, "it can no longer afford to make the investment." In a headlong rush to save the lives of an unknown but over-stated quantity, the lives of a known number will be lost.
The economy, our very lifeblood, was all but switched off with no advice from people whose job it is to understand and appreciate its criticality. I still can't work out why. Maybe Grant Robertson thought that NZ was in a relatively strong position debt-wise and he could take risks, enormous risks with it. But I am dismayed and disgusted by how many people think it's a mere matter of switch off - switch on. Just like that. Hence their patronising chiding of the rest of us to 'just be patient. 'It's only a few more days in your bubble'. Or worse, their snitching to the authorities.
Hell's bells. Have these idiots (many deriving their security from Super or a public service salary) really thought any further than the end of their twitchy noses? They seem incapable of joining the dots beyond just A to B. Austerity will come as a rude and rough shock and they will deserve it.
Everyone of us is a domino to some degree.
Many have all ready fallen over. Tragically, today it was lung cancer patient's turn
"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have."
Monday, April 20, 2020
ANYONE FOR A PROTEST?
OK. People everywhere are banging away on their keyboards (especially on KiwiBlog) and that's fine. But all the angry frustrated commenting does is dissipate the anger and frustration.
The economy is dying in front of us.
The modelling that caused the move to level 4 has been subsequently discredited.
There is enough evidence now to convince that the cure IS worse than the disease.
Every day business cannot operate their prognosis worsens.
I would go and stand on the lawn at Parliament with a banner conveying any one of these messages (and there are more) but I'd be swiftly removed under the new laws the police have been given (though the sole climate change protester stayed there for weeks).
Three people made sense to me yesterday and none was the PM. Sir Ray Avery (we cannot eliminate Covid), Oliver Hartwich (the economy is getting sicker by the day - exponentially) and Ian Harrison (the modelling the govt relied on was flawed.)
We should be moving out of Level 4 right now and to 2 if not 1.
If you are in the Wellington area and feel like I do email me.
The economy is dying in front of us.
The modelling that caused the move to level 4 has been subsequently discredited.
There is enough evidence now to convince that the cure IS worse than the disease.
Every day business cannot operate their prognosis worsens.
I would go and stand on the lawn at Parliament with a banner conveying any one of these messages (and there are more) but I'd be swiftly removed under the new laws the police have been given (though the sole climate change protester stayed there for weeks).
Three people made sense to me yesterday and none was the PM. Sir Ray Avery (we cannot eliminate Covid), Oliver Hartwich (the economy is getting sicker by the day - exponentially) and Ian Harrison (the modelling the govt relied on was flawed.)
We should be moving out of Level 4 right now and to 2 if not 1.
If you are in the Wellington area and feel like I do email me.
"The Statisticians That Killed New Zealand"
A response to the Covid crisis strategy from Sir Ray Avery (if you haven't already seen it):
The most worrisome of words routinely used by Jacinda Adern, Ashley Bloomfield and Shaun Hendy is the rhetoric around New Zealand's mission to eradicate COVID-19 in New Zealand .
This has no scientific validity and if we continue on this course to get our infection rates down to zero then our country will become bankrupt for no good reason.
Over-Arderned
The Dominion Post features no less than five images of Jacinda Ardern this morning. On the front page, pages 7 and 8, and 13 and 14. Perhaps an editorial decision was taken to fill the void left by avoidable women's mags.
This led me to reflect yet again how visible previous leaders would have been in a similar crisis.
I cannot for instance imagine Helen Clark appearing daily to make housekeeping-type announcements.Neither can I envisage John Key being so heavily involved in the minutiae.
Not a big fan of the whole societal love of 'leadership' I do accept that at a certain level good leaders are vital.The best I have experienced are delegaters; people who nurture the abilities around them and who keep their powder dry for the really important stuff.
As someone who will never vote for Labour the PM's 'over-exposure' is my perception and my problem - not hers.
But will it remain that way? The cult of personality is very fickle. The biggest fans can become the greatest detractors. Quite quickly.
This led me to reflect yet again how visible previous leaders would have been in a similar crisis.
I cannot for instance imagine Helen Clark appearing daily to make housekeeping-type announcements.Neither can I envisage John Key being so heavily involved in the minutiae.
Not a big fan of the whole societal love of 'leadership' I do accept that at a certain level good leaders are vital.The best I have experienced are delegaters; people who nurture the abilities around them and who keep their powder dry for the really important stuff.
As someone who will never vote for Labour the PM's 'over-exposure' is my perception and my problem - not hers.
But will it remain that way? The cult of personality is very fickle. The biggest fans can become the greatest detractors. Quite quickly.
Sunday, April 19, 2020
Six in 10 of the 'employed' now on a wage subsidy
The most recent data for the employed was December 2019 when 2,648,000 people were working.
We now know that at April 10, a week ago, 1,236,875 people were being paid a wage subsidy.
47% of the country's workers are sitting idle.
Update: Treasury is providing different data saying "The number of Jobseeker Support beneficiaries has jumped sharply. Total wage subsidies payments reached $8.9 billion on 9 April, benefiting 1.4 million people." That would represent 53% of workers.
Update two: According to this source, 1.6 million at Friday April 17 - 60%
The article says, "By Friday afternoon, the government's wage subsidy was supporting 1.6 million workers - half the entire work force." I am using a different denominator - the closest approximation available of the number working before the crisis. The workforce includes people who were not.
The article also says, "Not every worker receiving the wage subsidy will lose their job - many are in construction, which is one of the areas tipped for boom times once the lockdown restrictions end."
Tipped by who? That's not what I am hearing firsthand.
We now know that at April 10, a week ago, 1,236,875 people were being paid a wage subsidy.
47% of the country's workers are sitting idle.
Update: Treasury is providing different data saying "The number of Jobseeker Support beneficiaries has jumped sharply. Total wage subsidies payments reached $8.9 billion on 9 April, benefiting 1.4 million people." That would represent 53% of workers.
Update two: According to this source, 1.6 million at Friday April 17 - 60%
The article says, "By Friday afternoon, the government's wage subsidy was supporting 1.6 million workers - half the entire work force." I am using a different denominator - the closest approximation available of the number working before the crisis. The workforce includes people who were not.
The article also says, "Not every worker receiving the wage subsidy will lose their job - many are in construction, which is one of the areas tipped for boom times once the lockdown restrictions end."
Tipped by who? That's not what I am hearing firsthand.
Saturday, April 18, 2020
What use is empathy?
Hat-tip Inquiring Mind.
But the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff isn’t empty. It is crammed full of casualties. Right now 1.4 million existing on wage subsidies wondering if or when they will work again. 30,000 more eking out an existence on a benefit wondering if or when they will work again.
Empathy is a rather useless trait because it merely requires you to 'walk a mile' in EVERYONE else's shoes. Leading exactly where?
The decisions required from a government should be utilitarian. Based on the greatest good for the greatest number. I see no evidence that they have been.
Friday, April 17, 2020
Jobseeker benefit numbers and wage subsidies at April 10, 2020
The cost of the wage subsidy is now twice that of the ANNUAL spend on working age benefits (see my previous post)
Thursday, April 16, 2020
The lie I really take issue with
This is the lie I really take issue with.
Verbatim from the Prime Minister at today's press conference:
Can anybody explain that to me?
We know that Covid 19 is relatively harmless to the working age, those who keep the economy afloat. Hospitals in crisis would be a dreadful but a contained catastrophe. As it stands nobody has been going there anyway.
Lives have a value. Pharmac calculates it somehow. Hospital administrators do it all the time when juggling waiting lists. New Zealand may have sustained much greater loss of life if it hadn't gone into lock down BUT the economy, notwithstanding the damage from external factors beyond our control, would not have ground to a halt.
It would have been hurting, undoubtedly, but the government, with an unholy rush of blood to the head committed the proverbial extremely unkind act of 'kicking a man when he's down.'
Verbatim from the Prime Minister at today's press conference:
"Three and a half weeks ago NZ was in a unique position. Unlike other countries we had enough lead-in before Covid 19 reached our shores. That meant we could make a choice.Why would the economy have ground to a halt?
We could allow a wave of devastation to hit us like it has in other countries or we could take decisive preemptive action by going hard and early into lock down to stop the spread of the disease in its tracks. We chose action and the indications at this stage are promising. We will never know what would have happened if we'd taken the first path but the projections were for thousands of deaths if the virus got away on us, many more sick and in hospital and the COUNTRY AND OUR ECONOMY GRINDING TO A HALT REGARDLESS."
Can anybody explain that to me?
We know that Covid 19 is relatively harmless to the working age, those who keep the economy afloat. Hospitals in crisis would be a dreadful but a contained catastrophe. As it stands nobody has been going there anyway.
Lives have a value. Pharmac calculates it somehow. Hospital administrators do it all the time when juggling waiting lists. New Zealand may have sustained much greater loss of life if it hadn't gone into lock down BUT the economy, notwithstanding the damage from external factors beyond our control, would not have ground to a halt.
It would have been hurting, undoubtedly, but the government, with an unholy rush of blood to the head committed the proverbial extremely unkind act of 'kicking a man when he's down.'
Wage subsidy cost already supersedes ANNUAL working-age welfare benefit bill
Wage subsidy data at April 3:
Just to give you an idea of how much $5.361 billion is, it equates to:
MORE than the ANNUAL combined Jobseeker, Supported Living Payment and Sole Parent Support cost of $4.525 billion
or
37 percent of the ANNUAL Super bill at $14.562 billion
Not that I begrudge the claimants. I save my bitter resentment for this reckless government.
Just to give you an idea of how much $5.361 billion is, it equates to:
MORE than the ANNUAL combined Jobseeker, Supported Living Payment and Sole Parent Support cost of $4.525 billion
or
37 percent of the ANNUAL Super bill at $14.562 billion
Not that I begrudge the claimants. I save my bitter resentment for this reckless government.
Wednesday, April 15, 2020
Bit of much-needed excitement
Amazing display by mother nature today. You can see the 3-4 metre wall of wave in Muritai Bay and in the foreground is sea where it has never been before. Not in the 25 years I have lived here.
A park bench and pontoon had both disappeared. A young man sped past on his motor scooter heading south with surfboard tucked under his arm. I smiled quietly wondering how the police launch was going to cope with that.
And while I enjoy a bracing bumpy flight into Wellington Airport (remember airports??) you can leave me out of ferry trips across heaving seas.
Monday, April 13, 2020
Good example of the confusion that abounds
The opinion of a Timaru lawyer, questioning the legality of the lockdown, a better communicator than dear leader:
This guy makes sense to me and yet when I click on the embedded link midway through the article I read this:
Alert level 4 - eliminate
And yesterday: "Almost two-thirds of New Zealanders are willing to have the current lockdown extended so Covid-19 can be eradicated, a new survey has found."
There is a distinct whiff of the Mad Hatters tea party about all of this. And it's getting stronger by the day.
Still we've had all manner of bureaucratic bullshit going on for a while in this country. Smokefree Aotearoa 2025, Predator Free 2050 and most recently Road to Zero - the elimination of all road deaths. We haven't even achieved that in the lockdown!
"In the meantime, if we comply with the rules, enforceable or not - because they are good law - then we will get to the end of the 4 weeks, flatten the curve, and carry on in restricted fashion with a health service able to cope with whatever comes its way, which is the point of all this. After all, the virus has cemented its place in our health environment and in the fashion of viruses, has secured its own survival by not killing everyone it meets." (My emphasis)
This guy makes sense to me and yet when I click on the embedded link midway through the article I read this:
Alert level 4 - eliminate
And yesterday: "Almost two-thirds of New Zealanders are willing to have the current lockdown extended so Covid-19 can be eradicated, a new survey has found."
There is a distinct whiff of the Mad Hatters tea party about all of this. And it's getting stronger by the day.
Still we've had all manner of bureaucratic bullshit going on for a while in this country. Smokefree Aotearoa 2025, Predator Free 2050 and most recently Road to Zero - the elimination of all road deaths. We haven't even achieved that in the lockdown!
Saturday, April 11, 2020
Australia versus NZ in Covid cases
Interesting graph from Michael Reddell's Croaking Cassandra another of the blogs I follow, just more spasmodically:
I'm away to take in the excellent Easter racing coming in from Royal Randwick in Sydney this afternoon featuring some of New Zealand's best horses and jockeys.
Nothing to watch in this country.
I'm away to take in the excellent Easter racing coming in from Royal Randwick in Sydney this afternoon featuring some of New Zealand's best horses and jockeys.
Nothing to watch in this country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
