Pest Eradication Economics Applied To Women
August 10, 2021
By NZB3
Palmerston North City Council has spent over $30,000 in just one go to stop women meeting for discussion. It’s a partially successful in attack on free speech because it did manage to reduce the attendance to just 20 people.
Speak Up For Women were suppressed because they were accused of being anti-trangender. Are they? Not important. The government judged that they were so turned the power of their legal machine toward shutting them down.
If we could estimate how many people would have come to the meeting in the Palmerston North central library without government interference we could determine the market value of suppressing women.
Let’s err on the side of a big number such as 100 more women who would have liked to attend but were put off by the government’s suppression efforts. The ratepayers spent $30,436 on lawyers in the failed High Court case so that’s $304.36 spent for every person deterred.
“New information released to Stuff reveals it cost the council $30,436 for the lawyers to defend its position at the hearing in June.”
“After the High Court ruled the council was wrong to stop the meeting, Let’s Talk about Sex Self-identification, it went ahead in front of about 20 people.” – City council spent $30,000 on unsuccessful bid to stop public meeting, Stuff (2021)
The average rates bill for a Palmerston North property is $2639 which we may divide by two by assuming a given house has at least 2 occupants contributing to the bills. So, $1319.50 is a high estimate of how much a given person pays in rates, meaning it takes 4.34 ratepayers to suppress one woman ($1319.5/$304.36.) That’s a low estimate because, probably, far fewer than 100 women were suppressed and, probably, a rates bill is shared between more than 2 people on average.
Political suppression expenses at these rates are totally unsustainable. Every council service put together needs to be less than 1:1 if the council is able to save or pay off debt or not go into more debt. Roading, propaganda, rubbish collection, elections, bread and circuses, bureaucratic salaries etc. all need to be charged per ratepayer at less than they pay in or the system will go bust!
The only way this top-heavy ratio for suppressing women makes sense is from a pest eradication point of view. If there are very few women to suppress then fewer ratepayers will be provided to meet the bill. It makes sense to over-spend on shooting goats or poisoning possums or suppressing free speech today if it eradicates larger outbreaks in the future.
This is surely what Palmerston North’s elected officers are doing. From their point of view, self-expressed woman are the political equivalent of feral goats. But, of course, they can’t admit that to the public at the same time as pretending to serve them because the game would be up.
—
Ref. “But for an average house on a section valued at $243,000, the rates bill would go up from $2639 to $2842.”- Rates level for PN, Stuff (2021)
Like Comment Share
