Monday, 16 June 2014

The Kouk DEMOLISHES Judith Sloan and Sinclair Davidson AGAIN

The Kouk demolishes Judith Sloan here. It shows Judith knows basic statistics as well as she knows budget papers.
Sloan has simply taken on Davidson's argument which we must assume also doesn't understand basic statistics.
It does help to understand an argument you are mounting although she was writing in the Australian where ignorance is strength!

One really does have to wonder how anyone can have a job that writes at Catallaxy!

update
 Here is Sinclair Davidson on more rubbish.
Just a few points

  • Increasing market share does not mean increasing overall sales. I am surprised that an academic does not understand such a basic point. Cheaper cigarettes could well be rising but overall cigarettes falling. thus we have to say either Davidson does not understand this basic point or he does and is simply lying!
  • Well yes every statistic is subject to revision. This is what occurs when you undertake sample surveys. This does not ,mean you ignore the evidence in front of you which is what Davidson wants to do. The evidence is opposite to what he likes so he wants to ignore it until we get the final revised statistics.
  • We know why and what occurred with computers and their prices but what evidence does he give that something similar is occurring with regard to tobacco i.e. prices falling substantially. err none
Unbelievable.
Postscript
A person has e-mailed me and suggested plain packaging would if anything mean less possibility for price rises and thus there should be less cheaper cigarettes with plain packaging than before it was introduced.
you could say this argument has gone up in smoke!
Further postscript
The KOUK blows Davidson out of the water. It isn't a fair fight as The Kouk is an economist.

M0nty has his say now.

Further postscript.

I notice commenter JC at Catallaxy is saying the demand curve has changed. Err no. Consumption has fallen.
The ABS clearly shows this and as the Kouk says the ABS takes into account substitution.
The demand function hasn't changed at all.
 Plain packaging may have made the demand curve less inelastic. This of course goes completely against Davidson's argument . As a great philosopher might say duh!

More evidence Davidson simply does not understand how the ABS works. how does this man have a job? And this shows he does nor understand simple demand curves!

Now Davdson is arguing black is white. Here is an article basically saying what I theorised would occur. So prices have gone down BUT we know from BAT Annual Report their volumes have fallen and the ABS says volumes have fallen.
Davidson is incapable of telling the truth! as THIS shows. Davidson has been paid for doping work at the IPA. It was finally drawn out of him at Harry Clarke's blog. He then tries to say the Kouk has been paid by big tobacco because they pay taxes. Yes he has got that bad!
More evidence. He doesn't resile from his erroneous position but will not say why. The reason? He cannot

Here is Harry Clarke

The KOUK HERE and HERE, and then hoists the OZ ans the IPA on their own petard,