John Gibson

John Gibson: Your blog on my Marsden Fund project

This is an unedited Right of Reply. ?I will also not comment. ?You may see that John has misconceptions about our commenters – which isn’t unusual. ?If you’re going to complain about it, then you’ll end up proving his point. ?I suggest you stick to the topic at hand and make me proud. ?Thanks.

Dear Cameron

You raised some questions today in your blog about my project which the Marsden Fund will support from 2015-17. Let me try to answer them. Please note that I am directly e-mailing you because I don’t comment on blogs. Some commentators on blogs seem impervious to evidence, so my commenting would probably be a waste of time. When I produce evidence that might be of interest to a blogger I do sometimes send it to them directly (e.g. on rising public sector wage premiums to David Farrar and on school zone effects to Eric Crampton) ?so I am not opposed to blogs per se but I do prefer to limit my engagement with them. Also note, that while I am an empirical economist and so will support conclusions based on what the evidence indicates, politically I would be broadly considered as right-of-center (not that this should be relevant) and am well aware of the limits to state action and the importance of individual responsibility.

a) what is already known in NZ and why is the study necessary?

A series of studies by Wellington School of Medicine researchers along with economists from Otago and NZIER used two types of data from Stats NZ: the Household Economic Survey (HES) and Food Price Index (FPI) data. They modeled the effect of prices on the shares of the household budget allocated to a number of food and beverage groups, with “energy drinks” as one group and “carbonated soft drinks” as another. Their model examined how households altered their budget shares for each item as prices changed. Based on their results, they concluded that “a 10% tax on carbonated soft drinks could lead to a 13% decrease in population purchases of these products”. The reduced purchases were assumed to all be in terms of quantities purchased, and this evidence, along with similar overseas studies has been influential with the NZMA etc in recommending a 20% tax on fizzy drinks as one way to combat rising obesity. ?? Read more »

More health troughers score big from the Marsden Fund

Another set of health troughers has been revealed to be attacking food and drink manufacturers and all funded by the Marsden Fund.

A “sin tax” on unhealthy items is often touted as a way to stop people having them so often, but it might drive them to cheaper brands.

A team led by a University of Waikato researcher has just received $800,000 to study the idea, focusing on sugary soft drinks and cigarettes.

And while the data they’ll analyse doesn’t come from New Zealand, the findings have implications for Kiwis.

Economics professor John Gibson is leading a team looking into whether a “sin tax” would bring down consumption of fizzy drink and cigarettes.

It was one of four Waikato-led projects to receive funding from the Marsden Fund, and reaped $805,000.

“There are New Zealand studies which say 20 per cent fizzy drink tax would save X number of lives and those are the studies we have some questions about,” Gibson said.

There was a loophole in data which focused on spend rather than quantity bought, he said.

“They might simply go from drinking expensive Coke to either cheaper Coke . . . or they might go from Coke down to Pams or Homebrand,” he said.

For instance, Countdown sells a 600ml bottle of Coca Cola for $3.99 whereas 1.25L of Homebrand Lemonade is just 97 cents.

“The existing studies assume the reduction in spending translates to a reduction in quantity,” Gibson said. ? Read more »

Labour's smutty dirt flinging

I don't fire warning shotsMinister questioned over Rankin appointmentThe Government was challenged in Parliament today to say whether it would remove Christine Rankin from the Families Commission if it turned out she had been lying about rumours swirling around her private life. [Stuff Politics]

Labour should be very, very careful in going down the path they are heading with Christine Rankin.

It is clear that they have decided that flinging poo is the way forward and dragging peoples bedroom behaviour into th parliament is a good look.

I would caution then against doing so because then they will be open season.

Annette King herself should be very careful given she herself is twice married and her husband could hardly be called the pinnacle of discretion. Likewise Trevor Mallard.

There are too many skeletons in too many closets for Labour to want those busted wide open. But then again they still think smear and innuendo would work at the election.


The Curious case of Rajen Prasad and Labour's hypocrisy

The media are now running Labour’s attack lines for them especially that Christine Rankin’s appointment was wantonly partisan and therefore a despicable act by a deeply corrupt government or something like that.

Clare Trevett is clearly not a student of history. If she was then she would have noted that  the first Families Commissioner was none other than Rajen Prasad. (She won’t be getting the top shelf stuff in teh blogmobile for sure.)

You know the same Rajen Prasad who is;

A career academic, Prasad was appointed by his mates in the Labour Party and proceeded to dump on the National Party from the position. Then he ditched his six figure salary for a high ranking on the Labour Party list and a seat in Parliament.

Now what is curious is that the media don’t or won’t look at these things and that Labour has all of a sudden a case of forgetfulness around their own political appointments.

National is busily appointing its own to prime positions

National is busily appointing its own to prime positionsChristine Rankin’s move to the Families Commission is the latest in an increasing number of appointments to Government posts of people with links to the National Party. Most so far are sufficiently well regarded or qualified for… [NZ Herald Politics]

And why wouldn’t they. At least the National and Act appointees may have some business accumen.

Labour willy nilly stacked boards and commission with political appointees, irrespective of their abilities.

Mike Williams is a case in point, and the silly bint from Hamilton who was appointed to the Food Standards Authority to name just two.

This qualifies as SPAM Journalism.


The Misogyny of the Left

Has anyone noticed that the left and I include the media are all outraged when anyone attacks the lefty woman. But then all po-faced when they all bay for the blood of a woman who doesn’t seem to fit the correct thinking ideology-wise.

I point this out because of the rank hypocrisy being shown in recent attacks on Judith Collins, Melissa Lee, Paula Bennett and Christine Rankin.

If we take Christine Rankin, there has been much made of her previous marriages but not one squeak about the rest of the Commission and their previous marriages. Not one squeak from Labour when they appointed them, not one squeak from Peter Dunne when the Commission was set up with divorcees on the Commission. The rank hypocrisy stinks.

What can it be then about Christine Rankin that so appalls the left? Is it because she is a supporter of National? Possibly. Is it because she is successful in all by her marriages? Possibly. Or is it because she cuts through the bullshit and doublespeak? Possibly. It is more likely to be a combination of all of those plus a healthy does of leftist misogyny. Just what exactly has she done to earn so much opprobrium from the left.

Some are starting to notice. Ali Ikram has a thoughful piece on the issue. Fairfacts Media at No Minister has what just may be his best post ever, noting the misgoyny of the left.

Likewise the attacks on Melissa Lee. What we are seeing here is constant attacks against successful, good looking women who aren’t in the mould of ugly by the leftwing. Their view of the world seems to want women to be in sack-cloth and ashes and to only think their way.

Meanwhile they continue the meme that the Auckland Supe City transitional authority will be filled with “Dead Old White men”. Well what is David Shearer if he isn’t grey, dead, and old and a man compared with young, vibrant, female Melissa Lee.

Leighton Smith on Melissa Lee and Christine Rankin

After TV3’s stitch-up of Melissa Lee it is clear that Duncan Garner and TV3 are running their own agenda with Mt Albert. (There won’t be a link, the prick never attributes stories so why should I)

However there are some in the media that are starting to see what is what. Listen to these two comments by Leighton Smith. The first was on monday morning and the second this morning.



Rankin's 'insensitive' marriage draws fury

Rankin’s ‘insensitive’ marriage draws furyNew Families Commissioner Christine Rankin is facing fresh criticism after revelations she married a Wellington man just months after his previous wife took her own life. Close friends and colleagues of Margo McAuley, 42, who died… [NZ Herald Politics]

I’ll tell you what draws fury, sactimonious newspaper editors on a political crusade dragging peoples personal lives into public appointments.

I do hope that Carolyne Meng-yee has a perfect and saint like life as does the editor of the Herald on Sunday. Because I tell you what, people like me tend to go biblical on hypocritical, finger-pointing busybodies. (If anyone does have some dirt on these two then let me know via the tipline)

Since we are talking about going biblical lets look at a couple of pertinent text that the MSM would do well to learn as they do a “Palin” in Christine Rankin and Melissa Lee.

John 8:7

Matthew 7:1


The slaughter continues, add another name to Sue Bradford's Wall of Shame

Instead of screeching like a banshee over the appointment of Christine Rankin to the Familight like to explain quite how this poor wee soul was protected by her s59 law. Perhaps at the same time she might like to apologise because quite clearly our kiddies are NOT safe now.

I note also that this is yet another victim of Silly First Name Syndrome.

One expert has called the killing of Duwayne Pailegutu by his stepfather, Johnny Pukerua Joachim, “systematic torture” comparable to that suffered by Rotorua toddler Nia Glassie.

For the seven days before Duwayne Pailegutu died, he was kept inside his mother and stepfather’s small flat in Nelson – so no one could see he had been beaten so badly he was paralysed, incontinent, and slowly suffocating on his own blood.

The left side of his body was disabled after repeated blows to the right side of his head which caused a stroke, and he struggled to eat or drink.

In addition to the haemorrhage, an autopsy found at least 10 deep bruises to his scalp – some of them inflicted by the shoes of his stepfather as the little boy cowered in the corner of his Fergusson St bedroom.

A further 75 bruises were found over the rest of his small body.

So while wankers like Bomber and Idiot like to wail about torture of terrorist combatants we have people here in New Zealand thinking it is acceptable to torture and maim children. Liberal wankers like them make me sick, it is their abandonment of standards that has caused this slaughter and their tolerance and excuse making for feeble-minded scum-bags that has destroyed our society.

A bullet is far, far too kind for Johnny Joachim. I think that he should be hanged, drawn and quartered in that the condemned prisoner would be:

  1. Dragged on a hurdle (a wooden frame) to the place of execution. This is one possible meaning of drawn. The more likely meaning of Drawn is the act of disembowelment.
  2. Hanged by the neck for a short time or until almost dead (hanged).
  3. Disembowelled and emasculated and the genitalia and entrails burned before the condemned’s eyes (this is another meaning of drawn—see the reference to the Oxford English Dictionary below).
  4. The body divided into four parts, then beheaded (quartered).

Some great one liners from John Armstrong

Rankin reference rebounds on Clark – 13 Mar 2008 – Politics: New Zealand Political News, Analysis and Comment including 2008 election coverage – NZ Herald

John Armstrong writes in the Herald this morning about Clark’s desperate and ultimately doomed attempt to drag 1999 into 2008 by trying to smear John Key with Christine Rankin. As Armstrong acknowledges younger voters don’t even know who Christine Rankin is. By the time of the election an 18 year old first voter only has the political memory of nine long years of Labour as the government. They were only nine years old when the Christine Rankin story was Labour’s bludgeon against National. Now onto John Armstrong’s one-liners.

The Prime Minister came to Parliament yesterday wanting to party like it was 1999. Unfortunately for her, it is 2008. She instead sounded like she was doing the Time Warp.

Yesterday’s attempted haymaker from Clark was so off target it risked knocking her out instead.

Yep, kncoked out is dead right.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,