Comments on: Pollsters give up and go to beach http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/ hopping along the corridors of power Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:35:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: phil u http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36833 phil u Mon, 28 Jan 2008 03:20:15 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36833 you need to be told things a few times..? phil(whoar.co.nz) you need to be told things a few times..?

phil(whoar.co.nz)

]]> By: phil u http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36831 phil u Mon, 28 Jan 2008 03:18:46 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36831 you seem a bit slow on the uptake..andrew.. phil(whoar.co.nz) you seem a bit slow on the uptake..andrew..

phil(whoar.co.nz)

]]> By: phil u http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36830 phil u Mon, 28 Jan 2008 03:17:31 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36830 your loss..andrew.. phil(whoar.co.nz) your loss..andrew..

phil(whoar.co.nz)

]]> By: andrew http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36825 andrew Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:40:50 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36825 phil wtf? you were in some other thread about the poll issue & complaining it hadn't been mentioned in this blog, now that it has, you are here talking about something else? (which has also been covered with a thread elsewhere) this isn't a news site ffs. you complain about "censorship" being practiced here, yet they tolerate you constantly plugging your own website which i for one will never visit for the same reason i avoid any other product which befouls my airspace or my space in general with irritating advertizing phil wtf?
you were in some other thread about the poll issue & complaining it hadn’t been mentioned in this blog, now that it has, you are here talking about something else? (which has also been covered with a thread elsewhere) this isn’t a news site ffs.
you complain about “censorship” being practiced here, yet they tolerate you constantly plugging your own website which i for one will never visit for the same reason i avoid any other product which befouls my airspace or my space in general with irritating advertizing

]]> By: Ari http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36807 Ari Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:31:04 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36807 Phil- why do you post about Russel in every thread that has to do with the Green Party's polling in any way? I can understand if it's important to you but Russel really isn't under discussion here. As for the Herald's view on Russel- good god, I think that article is worth a letter to the editor or two. Personally speaking, Russel's role in the party assures me that they are grappling with my biggest doubt about them- that they could lapse into xenophobia in some areas because of how independent they want New Zealand to be. It's great to see an Australian in the Green Party, and I wish we had more people who chose to be New Zealanders present, rather than just so many that were born New Zealanders. On the <i>actual</i> topic, I definitely agree with Frog that New Zealanders are edgy of giving any one party a majority under MMP, and rightly so. The system is not designed for outright majority government. I'm also glad so many people on this blog are cautious about survey and poll results. Good on you. Those are best used to get a picture of the trend of people's opinions, rather than as an actual indicator. Phil- why do you post about Russel in every thread that has to do with the Green Party’s polling in any way? I can understand if it’s important to you but Russel really isn’t under discussion here.

As for the Herald’s view on Russel- good god, I think that article is worth a letter to the editor or two. Personally speaking, Russel’s role in the party assures me that they are grappling with my biggest doubt about them- that they could lapse into xenophobia in some areas because of how independent they want New Zealand to be. It’s great to see an Australian in the Green Party, and I wish we had more people who chose to be New Zealanders present, rather than just so many that were born New Zealanders.

On the actual topic, I definitely agree with Frog that New Zealanders are edgy of giving any one party a majority under MMP, and rightly so. The system is not designed for outright majority government. I’m also glad so many people on this blog are cautious about survey and poll results. Good on you. Those are best used to get a picture of the trend of people’s opinions, rather than as an actual indicator.

]]> By: dbuckley http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36796 dbuckley Sun, 27 Jan 2008 21:40:38 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36796 I read that Demographia report in full last week. I hadn't expected it to be a political propaganda tool, perhaps I was just being naive. However, I felt the conclusion generally was erroneous, and the understanding of the NZ property market upon which the conclusion is (in part) based is just plain wrong. It fails in many ways, but I'll just pick a couple. There are a lot of folks in NZ who have invested in property but that have mortgage financing to acquire that property. So they are not actually investors <i>per se</i>, but something else. The mortgaged house is then rented out to pay the mortgage. For this system to continue to operate there has to be a continuous supply of renters. If renters had the option of buying a house affordably, many would, and thus the property investment wagon would come off the rails bigtime due to lack of renters. Where I am, there is no shortage of land to build on within the current building zone system; as I commute many KMs to work (this is in North Canterbury) I pass many KMs of fields that could all have housing along the road edge, within commutable distance of Christchurch. However the farmers that own said fields aren't willing to sell at todays high market rates, what would make anyone think they would sell them for less? I read that Demographia report in full last week. I hadn’t expected it to be a political propaganda tool, perhaps I was just being naive. However, I felt the conclusion generally was erroneous, and the understanding of the NZ property market upon which the conclusion is (in part) based is just plain wrong.

It fails in many ways, but I’ll just pick a couple.

There are a lot of folks in NZ who have invested in property but that have mortgage financing to acquire that property. So they are not actually investors per se, but something else. The mortgaged house is then rented out to pay the mortgage. For this system to continue to operate there has to be a continuous supply of renters. If renters had the option of buying a house affordably, many would, and thus the property investment wagon would come off the rails bigtime due to lack of renters.

Where I am, there is no shortage of land to build on within the current building zone system; as I commute many KMs to work (this is in North Canterbury) I pass many KMs of fields that could all have housing along the road edge, within commutable distance of Christchurch. However the farmers that own said fields aren’t willing to sell at todays high market rates, what would make anyone think they would sell them for less?

]]> By: jh http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36793 jh Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:45:33 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36793 Kevin, Thanks. There is an important issue here and that is influencing the voter (Spin). Most people can't digest a document like (size and statistics) that but the presentation and having an ex governor of the reserve bank introducing it is powerful. Also they say : "There is a general consensus among economists that the principal cause of the housing affordability loss has been prescriptive planning, the strategies of “urban consolidationâ€? or “smart growthâ€? that ration land and impose excessive fees on development." I would like to see it systematically dissected (<i> For Dummies</i>) ___________________________ A cynical view: "The encouragement of migration from overseas, in order to provide continuing work and business opportunity for businesses that would have otherwise languished. In a seemingly never ending cycle, shopping malls (with their mandatory acres of car parking remote from housing developments) were constructed, to provide new citizens with the opportunity to spend money they did not have, while houses were constructed to provide homes for new migrants in order to fill the shopping malls with patrons." http://globalpublicmedia.com/articles/345 Kevin, Thanks. There is an important issue here and that is influencing the voter (Spin). Most people can’t digest a document like (size and statistics) that but the presentation and having an ex governor of the reserve bank introducing it is powerful. Also they say :
“There is a general consensus among economists that the principal cause of the housing affordability loss has been prescriptive planning, the strategies of “urban consolidationâ€? or “smart growthâ€? that ration land and impose excessive fees on development.”

I would like to see it systematically dissected ( For Dummies)

___________________________
A cynical view:
“The encouragement of migration from overseas, in order to provide continuing work and business opportunity for businesses that would have otherwise languished. In a seemingly never ending cycle, shopping malls (with their mandatory acres of car parking remote from housing developments) were constructed, to provide new citizens with the opportunity to spend money they did not have, while houses were constructed to provide homes for new migrants in order to fill the shopping malls with patrons.”
http://globalpublicmedia.com/articles/345

]]> By: jh http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36792 jh Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:22:10 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36792 The Greens aren't getting far because (essentially) incumbents are pushing their world view on the populace. The Greens aren’t getting far because (essentially) incumbents are pushing their world view on the populace.

]]> By: Roman http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36791 Roman Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:15:43 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36791 BJ, Sub prime is affecting the Banks cost of funds. All our Fixed rate mortgages are securitized and sold off shore. As the cost of funds is going up, that is being passed onto the NZ and Australian consumer. Agree, our Banks have written a small % of sub prime. But the high cost of funds is affecting our ability to invest. Your average household is struggling to stay afloat and the matter is made worse by our high tax rates. NZers just dont earn enough. BJ, Sub prime is affecting the Banks cost of funds. All our Fixed rate mortgages are securitized and sold off shore. As the cost of funds is going up, that is being passed onto the NZ and Australian consumer.
Agree, our Banks have written a small % of sub prime. But the high cost of funds is affecting our ability to invest. Your average household is struggling to stay afloat and the matter is made worse by our high tax rates. NZers just dont earn enough.

]]> By: Simeon http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36790 Simeon Sun, 27 Jan 2008 19:21:31 +0000 http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/01/26/pollsters-give-up-and-go-to-beach/#comment-36790 How come you trust the NZ Herald poll more than Roy Morgan? The NZ Herald poll asked 750 people while Roy Morgan asked 1588 electors. It is obviously logical to trust the Roy Morgan Poll more. How come you trust the NZ Herald poll more than Roy Morgan?

The NZ Herald poll asked 750 people while Roy Morgan asked 1588 electors.

It is obviously logical to trust the Roy Morgan Poll more.

]]>