Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government
spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government
- that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely
that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government
spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government
- that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely
that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:people accommodated in motels (aren't we the lucky generous country!) is statistically
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government
spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government
- that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely
that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and this number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion of homeless
If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and his ilk can't get themselves elected.
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:57:52 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion of homeless
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government
spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government
- that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely
that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and this
How many motel rooms do $7.7 million per quarter ( say $30 million perNot that many. These people being accomodated tend to be the lowest of the low - they've been evicted from other properties and have criminal records, P issues and the like, so motel operators are rightfully charging a premium. Reports of up to $1743 for
annum) pay for, JohnO?
How big does it need to be to be statistically
insignificant in your eyes?
can't get themselves elected.If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and his ilk
Of theres plenty else in just the housing crisis JohnO, but then you
knew that - attack the messenger (who by the way wasn't the person
that identified this problem) is clearly easier for you than trying to
defend the indefensible.
On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:45:24 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:people accommodated in motels (aren't we the lucky generous country!) is statistically
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:57:52 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government
spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government
- that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely
that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and this number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion of homeless
- they've been evicted from other properties and have criminal records, P issues and the like, so motel operators are rightfully charging a premium. Reports of up to $1743Not that many. These people being accomodated tend to be the lowest of the low
How many motel rooms do $7.7 million per quarter ( say $30 million per
annum) pay for, JohnO?
But lets say half that $900/7 days, against $30 mill would then equate to around 5000 room nights. Vs 5 million room nights from the statistics.
5000 vs 5 million. 0.1%. Statistically insignficant.
Are you following, Dickbot, or do we need to get a school child to help you with the math?studied statistics either?
How big does it need to be to be statistically
insignificant in your eyes?
Oh I guess around 3-4% depending on poll size and variability. I see you never
can't get themselves elected.
If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and his ilk
Of theres plenty else in just the housing crisis JohnO, but then you
There is no "crisis".
knew that - attack the messenger (who by the way wasn't the person
that identified this problem) is clearly easier for you than trying to
defend the indefensible.
I never attacked the messenger, you irredeemably slow-witted little moron.
Now *that* is attacking the messenger. And fully justified too.
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:40:06 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>this number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion of homeless people accommodated in motels (aren't we the lucky generous country!) is statistically
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:45:24 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:57:52 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government >> >> spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government >> >> - that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely >> >> that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and
low - they've been evicted from other properties and have criminal records, P issues and the like, so motel operators are rightfully charging a premium. Reports of up to $1743Not that many. These people being accomodated tend to be the lowest of the
How many motel rooms do $7.7 million per quarter ( say $30 million per
annum) pay for, JohnO?
around 5000 room nights. Vs 5 million room nights from the statistics.http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/89584624/Premium-motel-rates-danger-money-for-emergency-housing-risk
But lets say half that $900/7 days, against $30 mill would then equate to
5000 vs 5 million. 0.1%. Statistically insignficant.
Its been reported that thee are 2600 families in motel accomodation.
Assuming a (possibly low) 3 people per family, and that the motels are
filled for say 300 days per year, that would be a lot bigger number
than 5000 - see if you can do the maths, JohnO!
with the math?Are you following, Dickbot, or do we need to get a school child to help you
never studied statistics either?How big does it need to be to be statistically
insignificant in your eyes?
Oh I guess around 3-4% depending on poll size and variability. I see you
ilk can't get themselves elected.
If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and his
Of theres plenty else in just the housing crisis JohnO, but then you
There is no "crisis".
knew that - attack the messenger (who by the way wasn't the person
that identified this problem) is clearly easier for you than trying to
defend the indefensible.
I never attacked the messenger, you irredeemably slow-witted little moron.
Now *that* is attacking the messenger. And fully justified too.
ofOn Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:40:06 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:45:24 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:57:52 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government >> >> >> spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government >> >> >> - that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely >> >> >> that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and
this number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion
PNot that many. These people being accomodated tend to be the lowest of the >> >low - they've been evicted from other properties and have criminal records,homeless people accommodated in motels (aren't we the lucky generous country!)
is statistically insignificant.
How many motel rooms do $7.7 million per quarter ( say $30 million per
annum) pay for, JohnO?
Sigh!issues and the like, so motel operators are rightfully charging a premium. >> >Reports of up to $1743 for a week in a 1 bedroom apartment.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/89584624/Premium-motel-rates-danger-money-for-emergency-housing-risk
But lets say half that $900/7 days, against $30 mill would then equate to >> >around 5000 room nights. Vs 5 million room nights from the statistics.
5000 vs 5 million. 0.1%. Statistically insignficant.
Its been reported that thee are 2600 families in motel accomodation.
Assuming a (possibly low) 3 people per family, and that the motels are
filled for say 300 days per year, that would be a lot bigger number
than 5000 - see if you can do the maths, JohnO!
A room night is a room night you fucking retard.
Are you following, Dickbot, or do we need to get a school child to help you >> >with the math?
How big does it need to be to be statistically
insignificant in your eyes?
Oh I guess around 3-4% depending on poll size and variability. I see you
never studied statistics either?
If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and his >> >> >ilk can't get themselves elected.
Of theres plenty else in just the housing crisis JohnO, but then you
There is no "crisis".
knew that - attack the messenger (who by the way wasn't the person
that identified this problem) is clearly easier for you than trying to
defend the indefensible.
I never attacked the messenger, you irredeemably slow-witted little moron. >> >
Now *that* is attacking the messenger. And fully justified too.
On Tuesday, 28 February 2017 08:53:21 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:insignificant.
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:40:06 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:45:24 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:57:52 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government >> >> >> spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government >> >> >> - that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely >> >> >> that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and this number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion of homeless people accommodated in motels (aren't we the lucky generous country!) is statistically
for a week in a 1 bedroom apartment.Not that many. These people being accomodated tend to be the lowest of the low - they've been evicted from other properties and have criminal records, P issues and the like, so motel operators are rightfully charging a premium. Reports of up to $1743
How many motel rooms do $7.7 million per quarter ( say $30 million per
annum) pay for, JohnO?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/89584624/Premium-motel-rates-danger-money-for-emergency-housing-risk
But lets say half that $900/7 days, against $30 mill would then equate to around 5000 room nights. Vs 5 million room nights from the statistics.
5000 vs 5 million. 0.1%. Statistically insignficant.
Its been reported that there are 2600 families in motel accomodation.
Assuming a (possibly low) 3 people per family, and that the motels are
filled for say 300 days per year, that would be a lot bigger number
than 5000 - see if you can do the maths, JohnO!
A room night is a room night you fucking retard.
with the math?
Are you following, Dickbot, or do we need to get a school child to help you
How big does it need to be to be statistically
insignificant in your eyes?
Oh I guess around 3-4% depending on poll size and variability. I see you never studied statistics either?
If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and his ilk can't get themselves elected.
Of theres plenty else in just the housing crisis JohnO, but then you
There is no "crisis".
knew that - attack the messenger (who by the way wasn't the person
that identified this problem) is clearly easier for you than trying to
defend the indefensible.
I never attacked the messenger, you irredeemably slow-witted little moron. >> >
Now *that* is attacking the messenger. And fully justified too.
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:40:06 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion of homeless
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:45:24 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:57:52 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government >>>>> spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government >>>>> - that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely >>>>> that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and this
for a week in a 1 bedroom apartment.Not that many. These people being accomodated tend to be the lowest of the low - they've been evicted from other properties and have criminal records, P issues and the like, so motel operators are rightfully charging a premium. Reports of up to $1743
How many motel rooms do $7.7 million per quarter ( say $30 million per
annum) pay for, JohnO?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/89584624/Premium-motel-rates-danger-money-for-emergency-housing-risk
But lets say half that $900/7 days, against $30 mill would then equate to around 5000 room nights. Vs 5 million room nights from the statistics.
5000 vs 5 million. 0.1%. Statistically insignficant.
Its been reported that thee are 2600 families in motel accomodation.
Assuming a (possibly low) 3 people per family, and that the motels are
filled for say 300 days per year, that would be a lot bigger number
than 5000 - see if you can do the maths, JohnO!
Are you following, Dickbot, or do we need to get a school child to help you with the math?
How big does it need to be to be statistically
insignificant in your eyes?
Oh I guess around 3-4% depending on poll size and variability. I see you never studied statistics either?
If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and his ilk can't get themselves elected.
Of theres plenty else in just the housing crisis JohnO, but then you
There is no "crisis".
knew that - attack the messenger (who by the way wasn't the person
that identified this problem) is clearly easier for you than trying to
defend the indefensible.
I never attacked the messenger, you irredeemably slow-witted little moron. >>
Now *that* is attacking the messenger. And fully justified too.
Anybody can make a mistake but most would shut up or accept they have made an error as soon as it is pointed out. Not Rich, he has to bend the story and post lies.On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:47:21 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Tuesday, 28 February 2017 08:53:21 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:40:06 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:45:24 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:57:52 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >> >> >> wrote:Not that many. These people being accomodated tend to be the lowest of >> >> >the low - they've been evicted from other properties and have criminal records,
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this
government
spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the
government
- that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More
likely
that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and >> >> >> >this number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion of
homeless people accommodated in motels (aren't we the lucky generous country!)
is statistically insignificant.
How many motel rooms do $7.7 million per quarter ( say $30 million per >> >> >> annum) pay for, JohnO?
P issues and the like, so motel operators are rightfully charging a premium.
Reports of up to $1743 for a week in a 1 bedroom apartment.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/89584624/Premium-motel-rates-danger-money-for-emergency-housing-risk
But lets say half that $900/7 days, against $30 mill would then equate >> >> >to around 5000 room nights. Vs 5 million room nights from the statistics.
5000 vs 5 million. 0.1%. Statistically insignficant.
Its been reported that there are 2600 families in motel accomodation.
Assuming a (possibly low) 3 people per family, and that the motels are
filled for say 300 days per year, that would be a lot bigger number
than 5000 - see if you can do the maths, JohnO!
A room night is a room night you fucking retard.
I thought you may have a prolem with the numbers. Yes of coure a room
Looks like your numeracy is as poor as your spelling, fool.
night is a room night - I have not said otherwise.
No, you showed you have no clue by muddling the number of occupants into a >discussion of room nights. The number of occupants is not relevant to room >nights nor the price of room nights.
The question is how
many room nights is the government purchasing?
Indeed, and occupants are irrelevant.
The 2600 families is the number now, but we know that it has been
increasing over the last quarter, and Bill English says that it will
continue to increase. Leaving it at that number, I have suggested an
average of 3 people per family.
Here we go again...
Then there is how long they stay - so
I reduced 365 days down to 300 to allow for turnover and the motels
having time between clients - again you have not argued with those
assumptions.
Because they are meaningless nonsense.
So the number of room nghts expected over the next year are then
ROTFLMAO!
something like :
2600 x 3 x 300 per year. or 2,340,000 or 2.34 million, which is
certainly above your level of 'statistical significance' of 3-4% of
total guest nights of 5 million
OMFG! According to Dickbot we're heading to a bill of around half a $billion >for emergency motel accommodation.
2600 room nights is 2600 room nights. End of story. You don't multiply them by >occupants nor by days occupied per year.
What a fucking idiot.
This is so amazing. According to Dickbot the entire NZ tourism sector will >have to be closed down as that's a majority of the available motel stock!
ROTFLMAO!
Now you may have legitimate argument about those assumptions, or you
Indeed I have. Your "math" is laughable. You are embarrassing yourself.
may really believe that National will achieve something to reduce the
need for such emergency accomodation, but as you so delicately put it,
even a fucking retards could tell that totally beyond you . . .
Are you following, Dickbot, or do we need to get a school child to help >> >> >you with the math?
How big does it need to be to be statistically
insignificant in your eyes?
Oh I guess around 3-4% depending on poll size and variability. I see you >> >> >never studied statistics either?
There is no "crisis".
If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and >> >> >> >his ilk can't get themselves elected.
Of theres plenty else in just the housing crisis JohnO, but then you >> >> >
knew that - attack the messenger (who by the way wasn't the person
that identified this problem) is clearly easier for you than trying to >> >> >> defend the indefensible.
I never attacked the messenger, you irredeemably slow-witted little
moron.
Now *that* is attacking the messenger. And fully justified too.
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:47:21 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>government
wrote:
On Tuesday, 28 February 2017 08:53:21 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:40:06 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:45:24 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:57:52 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this
governmentspends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the
likely- that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More
this number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion of homeless people accommodated in motels (aren't we the lucky generous country!) is statisticallythat the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and
the low - they've been evicted from other properties and have criminal records,Not that many. These people being accomodated tend to be the lowest of
How many motel rooms do $7.7 million per quarter ( say $30 million per >> >> annum) pay for, JohnO?
around 5000 room nights. Vs 5 million room nights from the statistics.http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/89584624/Premium-motel-rates-danger-money-for-emergency-housing-risk
But lets say half that $900/7 days, against $30 mill would then equate to
5000 vs 5 million. 0.1%. Statistically insignficant.
Its been reported that there are 2600 families in motel accomodation.
Assuming a (possibly low) 3 people per family, and that the motels are
filled for say 300 days per year, that would be a lot bigger number
than 5000 - see if you can do the maths, JohnO!
A room night is a room night you fucking retard.
I thought you may have a prolem with the numbers. Yes of coure a room
night is a room night - I have not said otherwise.
The question is how
many room nights is the government purchasing?
The 2600 families is the number now, but we know that it has been
increasing over the last quarter, and Bill English says that it will
continue to increase. Leaving it at that number, I have suggested an
average of 3 people per family.
Then there is how long they stay - so
I reduced 365 days down to 300 to allow for turnover and the motels
having time between clients - again you have not argued with those assumptions.
So the number of room nghts expected over the next year are then
something like :
2600 x 3 x 300 per year. or 2,340,000 or 2.34 million, which is
certainly above your level of 'statistical significance' of 3-4% of
total guest nights of 5 million
Now you may have legitimate argument about those assumptions, or you
may really believe that National will achieve something to reduce theyou with the math?
need for such emergency accomodation, but as you so delicately put it,
even a fucking retards could tell that totally beyond you . . .
Are you following, Dickbot, or do we need to get a school child to help
never studied statistics either?
How big does it need to be to be statistically
insignificant in your eyes?
Oh I guess around 3-4% depending on poll size and variability. I see you
his ilk can't get themselves elected.
If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and
moron.
Of theres plenty else in just the housing crisis JohnO, but then you
There is no "crisis".
knew that - attack the messenger (who by the way wasn't the person
that identified this problem) is clearly easier for you than trying to >> >> defend the indefensible.
I never attacked the messenger, you irredeemably slow-witted little
Now *that* is attacking the messenger. And fully justified too.
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:47:21 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>insignificant.
wrote:
On Tuesday, 28 February 2017 08:53:21 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:40:06 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:45:24 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:57:52 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government >>>>>>> spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government >>>>>>> - that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely >>>>>>> that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and this number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion of homeless people accommodated in motels (aren't we the lucky generous country!) is statistically
low - they've been evicted from other properties and have criminal records, P issues and the like, so motel operators are rightfully charging a premium. Reports of up to $Not that many. These people being accomodated tend to be the lowest of the
How many motel rooms do $7.7 million per quarter ( say $30 million per >>>>> annum) pay for, JohnO?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/89584624/Premium-motel-rates-danger-money-for-emergency-housing-risk
But lets say half that $900/7 days, against $30 mill would then equate to around 5000 room nights. Vs 5 million room nights from the statistics.
5000 vs 5 million. 0.1%. Statistically insignficant.
Its been reported that there are 2600 families in motel accomodation.
Assuming a (possibly low) 3 people per family, and that the motels are
filled for say 300 days per year, that would be a lot bigger number
than 5000 - see if you can do the maths, JohnO!
A room night is a room night you fucking retard.
I thought you may have a prolem with the numbers. Yes of coure a room
night is a room night - I have not said otherwise. The question is how
many room nights is the government purchasing?
The 2600 families is the number now, but we know that it has been
increasing over the last quarter, and Bill English says that it will
continue to increase. Leaving it at that number, I have suggested an
average of 3 people per family.
Are you following, Dickbot, or do we need to get a school child to help you with the math?
How big does it need to be to be statistically
insignificant in your eyes?
Oh I guess around 3-4% depending on poll size and variability. I see you never studied statistics either?
If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and his ilk can't get themselves elected.
Of theres plenty else in just the housing crisis JohnO, but then you
There is no "crisis".
knew that - attack the messenger (who by the way wasn't the person
that identified this problem) is clearly easier for you than trying to >>>>> defend the indefensible.
I never attacked the messenger, you irredeemably slow-witted little moron. >>>>
Now *that* is attacking the messenger. And fully justified too.
On Tuesday, 28 February 2017 19:13:08 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:this number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion of homeless people accommodated in motels (aren't we the lucky generous country!) is statistically
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:47:21 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Tuesday, 28 February 2017 08:53:21 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:40:06 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:45:24 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:57:52 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >> >> >> wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government
spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government
- that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely
that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and
P issues and the like, so motel operators are rightfully charging a premium. Reports of up to $Not that many. These people being accomodated tend to be the lowest of the low - they've been evicted from other properties and have criminal records,
How many motel rooms do $7.7 million per quarter ( say $30 million per >> >> >> annum) pay for, JohnO?
Sorry you were confused by a typo - you seem to be descending intohttp://www.stuff.co.nz/national/89584624/Premium-motel-rates-danger-money-for-emergency-housing-risk
But lets say half that $900/7 days, against $30 mill would then equate to around 5000 room nights. Vs 5 million room nights from the statistics.
5000 vs 5 million. 0.1%. Statistically insignficant.
Its been reported that there are 2600 families in motel accomodation.
Assuming a (possibly low) 3 people per family, and that the motels are
filled for say 300 days per year, that would be a lot bigger number
than 5000 - see if you can do the maths, JohnO!
A room night is a room night you fucking retard.
I thought you may have a prolem with the numbers. Yes of coure a room
Looks like your numeracy is as poor as your spelling, fool.
night is a room night - I have not said otherwise.
No, you showed you have no clue by muddling the number of occupants into a discussion of room nights. The number of occupants is not relevant to room nights nor the price of room nights.
but you have no justified alternative - your low guess remains justThe question is how
many room nights is the government purchasing?
Indeed, and occupants are irrelevant.
The 2600 families is the number now, but we know that it has been
increasing over the last quarter, and Bill English says that it will
continue to increase. Leaving it at that number, I have suggested an
average of 3 people per family.
Here we go again...
Then there is how long they stay - so
I reduced 365 days down to 300 to allow for turnover and the motels
having time between clients - again you have not argued with those
assumptions.
Because they are meaningless nonsense.
So the number of room nghts expected over the next year are then
ROTFLMAO!
something like :
2600 x 3 x 300 per year. or 2,340,000 or 2.34 million, which is
certainly above your level of 'statistical significance' of 3-4% of
total guest nights of 5 million
OMFG! According to Dickbot we're heading to a bill of around half a $billion for emergency motel accommodation.
2600 room nights is 2600 room nights. End of story. You don't multiply them byoccupants nor by days occupied per year.
What a fucking idiot.
This is so amazing. According to Dickbot the entire NZ tourism sector will have to be closed down as that's a majority of the available motel stock!
ROTFLMAO!
Indeed I have. Your "math" is laughable. You are embarrassing yourself.
Now you may have legitimate argument about those assumptions, or you
may really believe that National will achieve something to reduce the
need for such emergency accomodation, but as you so delicately put it,
even a fucking retards could tell that totally beyond you . . .
Are you following, Dickbot, or do we need to get a school child to help you with the math?
never studied statistics either?
How big does it need to be to be statistically
insignificant in your eyes?
Oh I guess around 3-4% depending on poll size and variability. I see you
There is no "crisis".
If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and his ilk can't get themselves elected.
Of theres plenty else in just the housing crisis JohnO, but then you >> >> >
knew that - attack the messenger (who by the way wasn't the person
that identified this problem) is clearly easier for you than trying to >> >> >> defend the indefensible.
I never attacked the messenger, you irredeemably slow-witted little moron.
Now *that* is attacking the messenger. And fully justified too.
On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:17:31 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>homeless people accommodated in motels (aren't we the lucky generous country!) is statistically
wrote:
On Tuesday, 28 February 2017 19:13:08 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 17:47:21 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Tuesday, 28 February 2017 08:53:21 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:40:06 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 15:45:24 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Feb 2017 14:57:52 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >>> >> >> wrote:
On Monday, 27 February 2017 08:45:02 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Spin, or incompetence? It could be either or both, but this government
spends a lot of time on making the best of poor numbers.
http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/02/government-counts-homeless-in-tourism-stats.html
So now the Statistics Deparment has nothing to do with the government
- that's called plausible deniability . . .
Perhaps the Minister of Tourism had his eye off the ball? More likely
that the Nats just can't connect things together . . .
There are currently nearly 5 million guest nights per annum in NZ and this number is growing at around 5%. The error involved in the inclusion of
P issues and the like, so motel operators are rightfully charging a premium. Reports of up to $Not that many. These people being accomodated tend to be the lowest of the low - they've been evicted from other properties and have criminal records,
How many motel rooms do $7.7 million per quarter ( say $30 million per
annum) pay for, JohnO?
Sorry you were confused by a typo - you seem to be descending intohttp://www.stuff.co.nz/national/89584624/Premium-motel-rates-danger-money-for-emergency-housing-risk
But lets say half that $900/7 days, against $30 mill would then equate to around 5000 room nights. Vs 5 million room nights from the statistics.
5000 vs 5 million. 0.1%. Statistically insignficant.
Its been reported that there are 2600 families in motel accomodation. >>> >> Assuming a (possibly low) 3 people per family, and that the motels are >>> >> filled for say 300 days per year, that would be a lot bigger number
than 5000 - see if you can do the maths, JohnO!
A room night is a room night you fucking retard.
I thought you may have a prolem with the numbers. Yes of coure a room
Looks like your numeracy is as poor as your spelling, fool.
pooh-land.
night is a room night - I have not said otherwise.
No, you showed you have no clue by muddling the number of occupants into a discussion of room nights. The number of occupants is not relevant to room nights nor the price of room nights.
2600 families is 2600 families - how many people in a family, JohnO? I >suggest it is higher than the typical the number of tourists in a
room. If each family is in one motel room, then 2600 families times
say 300 nights is 780,000 nights throughout New Zealand. Most tourism >statistics are in numbers of people - where did you get your number
from?
you with the math?but you have no justified alternative - your low guess remains just
The question is how
many room nights is the government purchasing?
Indeed, and occupants are irrelevant.
The 2600 families is the number now, but we know that it has been
increasing over the last quarter, and Bill English says that it will
continue to increase. Leaving it at that number, I have suggested an
average of 3 people per family.
Here we go again...
Then there is how long they stay - so
I reduced 365 days down to 300 to allow for turnover and the motels
having time between clients - again you have not argued with those
assumptions.
Because they are meaningless nonsense.
that - a personal guess.
So the number of room nghts expected over the next year are then
ROTFLMAO!
something like :
2600 x 3 x 300 per year. or 2,340,000 or 2.34 million, which is
certainly above your level of 'statistical significance' of 3-4% of
total guest nights of 5 million
OMFG! According to Dickbot we're heading to a bill of around half a $billion for emergency motel accommodation.
No, we are heading for around $8 million a quarter based on what
National are telling us - based on $7.7 in the last quarter of 2016,
and they believe that will increase. A reasonable estimate is
therefore say $30 to $35 million a year. All because National has run
out of ideas about how to get people out of having to live in cars . .
.
2600 room nights is 2600 room nights. End of story. You don't multiply them by occupants nor by days occupied per year.
What a fucking idiot.
This is so amazing. According to Dickbot the entire NZ tourism sector will have to be closed down as that's a majority of the available motel stock!
ROTFLMAO!
Now you may have legitimate argument about those assumptions, or you >>Indeed I have. Your "math" is laughable. You are embarrassing yourself.
Personal abuse is not reasoned argument, JOhnO - are you trying to
emulate Trump?
may really believe that National will achieve something to reduce the
need for such emergency accomodation, but as you so delicately put it,
even a fucking retards could tell that totally beyond you . . .
So what do you think NAtional wil do to reduce the cost, JohnO? Their
budget fororecasts have proved woefully inadequate - what will they
do?
Are you following, Dickbot, or do we need to get a school child to help
You have not provided any maths - try again.
How big does it need to be to be statistically
insignificant in your eyes?
Oh I guess around 3-4% depending on poll size and variability. I see you never studied statistics either?
There is no "crisis".
If this is the best Angry Andy can moan about it's no wonder he and his ilk can't get themselves elected.
Of theres plenty else in just the housing crisis JohnO, but then you >>> >> >
Tell that to those who have needed emergency housing:
"In July 2016, the Government's $354 million emergency housing grant
was launched - the first time permanent funding had been set aside -
and uptake was significant.
Between July and September 30, approximate figures supplied by the MSD
show 2140 clients around the country made 5450 applications. Cost for
the quarter was $4.3 million. In Waikato, 190 clients made 600
applications at a cost of $559,000.
Between October and December 2016, when the figures were entered into
the ministry's quarterly reports, 8860 applications were accepted -
851 in Waikato - at a national cost of $7.7m.
From $4.3 million one quarter to $7.7m the next - what will the Jan to
March quarter this year cost?
knew that - attack the messenger (who by the way wasn't the person >>> >> >> that identified this problem) is clearly easier for you than trying to
defend the indefensible.
I never attacked the messenger, you irredeemably slow-witted little moron.
Now *that* is attacking the messenger. And fully justified too.
It is of little interest where you spray your venom, JohnO - this is
usenet after all.
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 188:05:18 |
| Calls: | 2,081 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 11,137 |
| Messages: | 947,658 |