Category: General

Everything else

Dodgy Poll

· 1 Comment ·

Not all what to seems

 

[Please note I am not taking aim at Digi-Poll in any shape or form and I do respect their credibility as a polling company highly. I do however, take aim at the NZ Herald for their “reporting” and not laying out the fall statistical facts about the poll clearly in their article]

 

I did notice the Herald Digi-Poll out this morning citing a poll about Mayor Len Brown. You can read the article here: Thumbs down for Len Brown – poll

What the online piece did not show was the actual graphs which can be seen below from Twitter earlier today:

The Herald Digi-poll subsequently brought a stinging rebuke from Stats Chat which said:

Beyond the margin of error

Now, the Herald-Digipoll is supposed to be a real survey, with samples that are more or less representative after weighting. There isn’t a margin of error reported, but the standard maximum margin of error would be  a little over 6%.

There are two aspects of the data that make it not look representative. Thr first is that only 31.3%, or 37% of those claiming to have voted, said they voted for Len Brown last time. He got 47.8% of the vote. That discrepancy is a bit larger than you’d expect just from bad luck; it’s the sort of thing you’d expect to see about 1 or 2 times in 1000 by chance.

More impressively, 85% of respondents claimed to have voted. Only 36% of those eligible in Auckland actually voted.

,.,,,

So, how could the poll be so badly wrong? It’s unlikely to just be due to bad sampling — you could do better with a random poll of half a dozen people. There’s got to be a fairly significant contribution from people whose recall of the 2013 election is not entirely accurate, or to put it more bluntly, some of the respondents were telling porkies.  Unfortunately, that makes it hard to tell if results for any of the other questions bear even the slightest relationship to the truth.

——–

You can read the full Stats Chat piece here: http://www.statschat.org.nz/2014/03/20/beyond-the-margin-of-error/

 

The bits in bold is what gives suspicion the poll was slanted to produce a “story” that was not truly there. Then again check this:

Thumbs down for Len Brown – poll

By Bernard Orsman 5:30 AM Thursday Mar 20, 2014

The journalist running the story is not known to be “objective” from time to time and has been pulled up before for either slanting or giving a misrepresentation (that is his opinion rather than a claimed fact).

So I would be very careful in trotting out this poll which has misrepresentations and a bad case of slanting as proof of fact against the Mayor. Using such a poll in that method will not do your credibility any good – although two of the oppositional five Councillors had (although expected).

 

Back to City Building we go as there is nothing to see from that Orsman piece.

 

True Train Power

·

Union Pacific Shows How to Haul a Freighter

 

If you have been ever inclined to protest because a Kiwi Rail freighter held you up then spare a thought if you were waiting for these true freighters to clear a level crossing

 

Union Pacific SD70 (their main locomotives) hauling a long train through a work area (you can hear the maintainers talking to the driver)

And that was just one SD70

 

Now for some multiple SD70 hauled freight

Just don’t have the volume too high when the train blasts by

 

And for our serious train fans here is a selection of Union Pacific locomotives of different classes in LA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5N6UMn_kfCo

 

Some quick stats on the SD70 that Union Pacific uses:

SD70ACe

Kansas City Southern SD70ACe 4034 at Nichoals Yard in December 2009

The SD70ACes are similar to the SD70MAC; however, the model has been upgraded to meet Tier-2 EPA regulations. Production commenced in 2004.[1] SD70ACes are equipped with EMD’s 16-710G3C-T2 prime mover, rated at 4,300 horsepower (3,200 kW).[8] They are rated at 157,000 lbf (700 kN) continuous tractive effort (191,000 lbf (850 kN) starting). Braking effort is rated at 106,000 lbf (470 kN).[8]

Although mechanically similar to earlier SD70 units, the SD70ACe rides on a new underframe and uses mostly new sheetmetal above the frame. Electrical cables and air lines have been routed beneath the walkways on opposite sides, allowing for easy access by maintenance workers. The radiator on the locomotive is nearly as wide as the cab, the center hood section is a step down below the roofline, and the dynamic brakes have been moved to the rear of the hood; these changes are reminiscent of the SD80 and SD90 series. The SD70ACe uses the cab design of late-model SD90MAC units, which uses rectangular window glass and is externally different from the two cab variations used on earlier SD70M and SD70MAC units. In 2008, EMD standardized the isolated cab on subsequent SD70ACe’s after non-isolated cab units were restricted from leading on BNSF Railway due to excessive cab vibration. SD70ACe models are rated at 4,300 horsepower (3,200 kW). As of late, more than 1350 examples of this model locomotive have been produced. Purchasers include BNSF Railway, CSX, Ferromex, Kansas City Southern Railway, Montana RailLink, CVG Ferrominera Orinoco, Union Pacific,Quebec North Shore and Labrador Railway, BHP Billiton, Arkansas & Missouri Railway, and Norfolk Southern.

In January 2012, BNSF Railway announced the order of 10 SD70ACe-P4 locomotives. This engine would compete with GE’s popular ES44C4. These units will have a B1-1B wheel arrangement, unlike the ES44C4’s A1A wheel arrangement. They are set for 2013 delivery.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SD70

 

As a comparison a EMD SD70 has 4,300 horse power behind it while our DL’s have a horse power rating of 3,600.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_DL_class_locomotive

 

DL’s hauling freight

 

So next time you are stuck at a level crossing waiting for a freighter to pass by, remember you are not waiting for a long Union Pacific freighter to go through 😉

4,260 Submissions and Counting

·

Meanwhile there were only 1,947 Annual Plan Submissions

 

The numbers are rather telling with a bit of an imbalance with the two different submissions.

From Shape Auckland on the Unitary Plan

UNITARY PLAN SUBMISSIONS: 4,260 AND COUNTING

More than 4,260 submissions on the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan have now been registered, with many more to come. As expected, the majority of submissions came in on the last week of the five-month submission period: through the online form, by email, by post or through libraries and council service centres. The closing date was 5pm on Friday 28 February.

Given the statutory process of individually registering each one, and assessing for duplicates or additions to original submissions, the tally won’t be known until closer to the end of the month.

Once registered, Auckland Council staff will go through each submission to summarise what decisions are being asked for. This is an extensive process, but we are aiming to be able to publish the summary, along with a full, searchable set of the submissions, online by the end of May. This will then start the process of further submissions.

…

As for further submissions

Further submissions

The five-month submission period for the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan ended at 5pm on 28 February 2014. The council will publish all submissions online by the end of May, along with a summary report of the decisions requested in them. The submissions will be indexed and searchable by submission number, name, local board, and theme. The summary report will be publicly notified, marking the start of the further submissions period. During this period, people will be able to respond to the decisions requested by submitters, by stating either their support or opposition to particular points raised.

We will publish further details about this process closer to the time.

—ends–

 

Meanwhile with the Annual Plan (annual budget):

Source: Mark Thomas of Orakei Local Board

Over consulted again or bad timing having two submission periods together with Area Plan submissions to start soon as well…

 

More Taxes? No Thanks

·

Mayor Outlines Possible New Taxes

 

I saw this morning that the Mayor is effectively looking at a Poll Tax to either replace or supplement the current rating system (property tax) Council uses to raise revenue.

From Stuff:

Brown’s bold tax plan

Making all Aucklanders pay a council income tax may help elderly people in affluent areas who can’t afford their rates, mayor Len Brown says.

The current system is “inherently unfair” on people living on fixed incomes and paying high rates because of the value of their properties in areas like Devonport-Takapuna, Brown says.

Introducing an income-related tax for local council services that everyone pays is an option, he says.

Only property owners pay rates but the council is spending money on infrastructure and services for everyone, Brown says.

He believes the only way to mitigate the rates burden as property prices rise is to rethink how local government is funded.

Brown won’t express a view on what alternative might work saying he is “quite open minded”.

Options could include funding through income tax, GST, user pays charges, or bed taxes from hotel.

—-ends—-

 

Last time a poll tax got mentioned it cost Maggie Thatcher her Prime Ministership in 1990 to John Major. While we do need to think how Local Government is funded in New Zealand such as all GST collected from rates is given straight back to the Council rather than Central Government keeping it (Australia has a GST sharing arrangement between the Federal Government and the State Governments) I believe priority one is getting our expenses in line first.

Debt moving from 175% to 275% to me is unacceptable by all means. If we need to go that high then it seems it might be time to take the ruler and red pen over expenditure. I was given an alternative to how the budget should be set for Council by an elected representative once. The idea was quite intriguing in using a big massive white board at the back of the chamber where the Councillors meet (so where the food sits) with revenue down one side and expenditure (OPEX and CAPEX) down the other. Everyone can see it, everyone can comment on it, but the sole key requirement was you did the income first then the expenditure to match the income. Not the current method of do the expenditure first then find the income to cover it. With the board present it would serve as a constant reminder if you want something can the revenue cover it – if not what needs to “go” first. Pretty much this is what households and businesses do – or rather should do (our savings and debt is nothing to crow about)

 

So I am rather cool on the Mayor’s announcement on new funding mechanisms when our current budgets are disjointed as they are.

 

Just a quick note on another Orsman piece this morning I noticed he was going on about the City debt lifting by $74 million currently. A reminder that $60 million of that is the Colin Maiden Park purchase from the University of Auckland to ensure Auckland continues to have green space as it grows. So not as alarming as it was portrayed this morning as that $60m will continue to pay dividends for generations to come.