The Dim-Post

November 30, 2012

So this actually happened

Filed under: psuedopolitics — danylmc @ 6:50 am

Gerry Brownlee on inner city rail in Auckland. Skip forwards to 3:25.

About these ads

41 Comments »

  1. Who is the mole in his office? This is either genius level farcial contempt, or absolute stupidity.

    FM

    Comment by Fooman — November 30, 2012 @ 7:17 am

  2. I just don’t get why National hate the CRL so much.

    Comment by Sanctuary — November 30, 2012 @ 7:30 am

  3. Does he get paid for the plug?

    Comment by Fran — November 30, 2012 @ 7:49 am

  4. Just awesome.

    Comment by Ben — November 30, 2012 @ 8:18 am

  5. So this actually happened… and the opposition made no opposition to it happening.

    Comment by Sam — November 30, 2012 @ 8:47 am

  6. Monorail…. Monorail….monorail…

    Comment by max — November 30, 2012 @ 8:55 am

  7. @Sanctuary probably because it’s a $2,000,000,000,000 project that is likely to overrun by 100% at least that will allow the extra movement of around 6 to 8 trains per hour (supposedly 23000 to 46000 passengers per day). At an interest rate of 5% that’s $100M per year (without overruns), meaning a cost per extra enabled train of around $60000. If each train had 100 people on, that would be $60 per passenger. At that’s just the cost of the rail infrastructure and doesn’t include maintenance, trains, fuel etc.

    Comment by MarkS — November 30, 2012 @ 9:05 am

  8. The CRL is going to cost two trillion dollars?

    Comment by Sanctuary — November 30, 2012 @ 9:08 am

  9. So an inner city rail loop would cost two trillion dollars?? Alright Dr Evil

    Comment by max — November 30, 2012 @ 9:09 am

  10. That’s the Langley & Associates scheme

    Comment by Greg Dawson — November 30, 2012 @ 9:12 am

  11. Its a good burn, but the fact he says it compeltely straight faced and all the Nats don’t even show a smile, means that they don’t know what the hell it is all about. Which shows you why we need less baby boomers in parliament.

    Comment by max — November 30, 2012 @ 9:26 am

  12. I don’t get it either. Who or what are Lyall Langley and Associates ?

    Comment by Brent Jackson — November 30, 2012 @ 9:37 am

  13. The ring came off my pudding can!

    Comment by izogi — November 30, 2012 @ 9:46 am

  14. In “The Simpsons”, Lyle Langley sold a monorail to newly-flush Springfield and it was a bit of a pup. The episode was “Marge vs. The Monorail”.

    Comment by Hugo Drax — November 30, 2012 @ 9:56 am

  15. Oh – I see now. I’m among those (i.e. almost everyone), who thought it was a real company in Aussie or somewhere obscure like that. Facepalm.

    Almost makes me kinda want to respect the big Brownlee for it, only his comic delivery was a bit, well, missing. However, it is on the record (Hansard), in perpuity, which is a pretty cool thing for something so absurd…

    Comment by Sam — November 30, 2012 @ 10:17 am

  16. Trick for linking to a particular time in a youtube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSgTTQ_AAeU#t=203

    Comment by Matt — November 30, 2012 @ 10:20 am

  17. Comment by Sam — November 30, 2012 @ 10:22 am

  18. I don’t get it either. Who or what are Lyall Langley and Associates ?

    Oh – I see now. I’m among those (i.e. almost everyone), who thought it was a real company in Aussie or somewhere obscure like that. Facepalm.

    Almost makes me kinda want to respect the big Brownlee for it, only his comic delivery was a bit, well, missing. However, it is on the record (Hansard), in perpuity, which is a pretty cool thing for something so absurd…

    Yes I was also struggling to understand the reference. So much for my hipster post modern street cred… and yes credit to Brownlee.

    Next up Peter Dunne quotes Kent Brockman on Tax Avoision.

    Comment by TerryB — November 30, 2012 @ 10:25 am

  19. The Simpson are SO yesterday. I discovered this interesting fact when i made a cool hipster reference to my sixteen year old niece, who scornfully informed me no one thought the show was cool anymore. That kinda makes sense, because it hasn’t been that very funny for years.

    Comment by Sanctuary — November 30, 2012 @ 10:38 am

  20. Sorry – three too many zeros ($2B it should be, so $2,000,000,000). However, the rest of the calculations still look correct.

    Comment by MarkS — November 30, 2012 @ 11:25 am

  21. Next I want Hekia Parata to do the finger thing (which means the taxes): http://youtu.be/gollGYob57M

    Comment by max — November 30, 2012 @ 11:50 am

  22. Sorry, embedd fail, feel free to edit

    Comment by max — November 30, 2012 @ 11:51 am

  23. zip it sweetie was a bit more to the point

    have the Nats just done a crash course in popular culture

    Comment by NeilM — November 30, 2012 @ 12:01 pm

  24. Is there a chance the track could bend?

    Comment by Rich — November 30, 2012 @ 12:43 pm

  25. ” However, the rest of the calculations still look correct.”

    Maybe, but from what I can tell, your math is meaningless. Care to show your working and explain what you’re trying to show?

    What will it cost per passenger based on 30-50 years of use with a growing population? something significantly less ridiculous than your figures, I’d imagine.

    There are too many variables (population growth, oil prices, residential development, social behavioural change) to come up with an accurate figure for the lifetime of the project and I’m not going to waste time fudging it, but however correct your calculations, the assumptions you base them on are erroneous.

    Comment by nommopilot — November 30, 2012 @ 12:58 pm

  26. When I first read Danyl’s post this morning, I thought he was talking about Gerry Brownlee on inner-city rail in Auckland.

    Then I watched the clip, and found it was too good to be true. :(

    Comment by izogi — November 30, 2012 @ 1:02 pm

  27. “…that is likely to overrun by 100% at least…”

    Really? Why? The Newmarket viaduct was ahead of schedule and under budget; So was the Victoria Park tunnel. The idea that we can’t complete big projects on-budget and on-time and therefore we should just give up is another aspect of the cult of defeatism that seems to be a key intellectual building block of right wing thinking in this country.

    Comment by Sanctuary — November 30, 2012 @ 1:13 pm

  28. Also, the episode of the Simpsons Brownlee’s referencing screened in 1993.

    Soooo, he’s been waiting 20 years for the opportunity to drop that joke and when he does it’s so old and obscure that no one gets it…

    Comment by nommopilot — November 30, 2012 @ 1:20 pm

  29. I got it, but I also watched that show over and over religiously for the first few years. (I thought it lost something when all the maths-geek writers went to Futurama.) I figured he was just hoping someone from the opposition would take the bait thinking it was a real company, and then either waste a question or invite themselves for ridicule or both.

    Comment by izogi — November 30, 2012 @ 1:45 pm

  30. @19 Sanctuary “because [The Simpsons] hasn’t been that very funny for years.” Tongue in cheek?

    The show has certainly had it’s ups and downs; however we’ve found Season 23 to be a pleasing return to form.

    Also the show contains many jokes which would be well outside of a teenagers comprehension; hardly the target audience.

    Comment by Luke. — November 30, 2012 @ 3:38 pm

  31. @MarkS ” However, the rest of the calculations still look correct.”

    Perception is in the eye of the calculator:

    Pessimistically:
    100 million / 23000 passengers per day / 365 days = $12 per person…

    which’d fall if there were more passengers per day and/or the cost of the job was lower (or interest rates were lower).

    Comment by Nathaniel — November 30, 2012 @ 5:12 pm

  32. you won’t get 23000 passengers on the weekend, surely?

    Comment by Clunking Fist — November 30, 2012 @ 5:27 pm

  33. But you might get more on weekdays. And in a properly functioning network why wouldn’t you (Saturday nights etc…)?

    Comment by Nathaniel — November 30, 2012 @ 5:34 pm

  34. monorail, monorail, MONORAIL!!!…. mono… D’OH!!

    Comment by mutyala — November 30, 2012 @ 9:51 pm

  35. This would have been funny except for the fact that he’s already got Langley & Associates running the Chch rebuild.

    Comment by Teej — November 30, 2012 @ 10:00 pm

  36. It was funny that Mallard and Co had no idea what he was talking about.

    Comment by phil — November 30, 2012 @ 10:18 pm

  37. I call the big one bitey.

    Comment by Aztec — November 30, 2012 @ 11:53 pm

  38. No, you were right the first time MarkS, the CRL will cost $2,000,000,000,000.

    Because the only way it would get built is if the Greens get into government and they would only be able to pay for it through their money printing schemes. I say “built”, once international finance is cut off from New Zealand the only way the CRL is being “built” is by slave labour, sorry “Citizen Volunteer Committees”.

    Comment by OECD rank 22 kiwi — December 1, 2012 @ 9:05 am

  39. “This would have been funny except for the fact that he’s already got Langley & Associates running the Chch rebuild.”

    Lol anit that the truth in NZ the one party state.

    Comment by Simon — December 1, 2012 @ 10:51 am

  40. Does this mean we’re also getting that escalator to nowhere?

    Comment by garethw — December 1, 2012 @ 10:00 pm

  41. “…that is likely to overrun by 100% at least…”

    Really? Why?

    Here’s a paper which looks into this issue: Survival of the unfittest: why the worst infrastructure gets built—and what we can do about it

    The author looked at 258 projects in 20 nations and found that on average rail projects run over budget 44.7%, bridges and tunnels 33.8%, and roads 20.4%. Ridership in nine out of ten rail projects is overestimated with rail ridership falling short of predictions 51.4% on average.

    That means that rail projects usually attract half the expected traffic and run over budget by nearly half. The number of roads with overestimated and the number with underestimated traffic is about the same with half of road traffic forecasts being out ±20%.

    What this shows is that most infrastructure projects are built on overoptimistic predictions and that rail is especially prone to cost underestimation and ridership overestimation.

    The explanation the author offers for this is a public choice one where benefits are emphasized and costs and risks de-emphasized by those who stand to benefit, politicians, officials, developers, &c.

    Comment by Quoth the Raven — December 2, 2012 @ 6:25 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 413 other followers

%d bloggers like this: