So I crunched some numbers.

[zjet]

I,m the type of guy that you tell some thing and I have have to go off and bang my head against the wall to figer it out for myself. Its a pain the the rear but it has lead to many interesting things in my life. I don't "know" something until I "know" it for myself.

So Why the title zjet, Well I have a funny feeling we are being lead down the garden path abit here and more so for the fact that the stereo type "motorcycles are more dangerous" believe than facts. So off i went to look up some info and see what I could discover.

Dum dum daaa.
First I said to myself how am I going to measure this to gauge the facts.
My answer percentages, rather than actual numbers percentages can level a group for measurement. And from here to the info I go.

First stop
New Zealand
motor vehicle registration
statistics 2008

Why? I wanted to know what the percentages for cars V bikes was, heres what I found.

2788938 - Cars was 67% of the total resisted cars in NZ for 2008
130213 - Motorbikes was 3% (guess what) I included Mopeds in this figer (hey ACC did as well :P )

Great so now I know the percents I have start numbers.

Now we wana know what the crash's are....

On to
NATIONAL HEALTH STATISTICS FOR ROAD USERS

Now this was a pain in the ass as they really do a great job with this and it is broken down really well, so to pin point what they want if needed is my guess.

*some must knows before I continue *
In this report Motorcycles includes passengers in the stats. However cars don't. "That what I thought interesting huh" Don't worry I have added em back in so we get a fair picture.

Ok onto numbers I looked at the Injuries first heres what I found.
11901 - Accidents with a car involved making a total of 78% of all Injuries for 2008
1396 - Accidents with a Motorcycle involved coming to 9% (mopeds included)

Cars 11% difference from the registered total of cars
Bikes 6% difference from the registered total of bikes

at this point i,m scraching my head thinking hmmm ACC can't have gotten it this wrong they pay some one big money to look into these numbers and i,m a bum looking for work at the mo that dropped out of school at 16.

But wait zjet you only looked at Injuries... ok lets look now at deaths.

268 - Cars = 78% ... wait a min this is the same as Injuries, nope I double checked before you ask its right.

50 - Bikes = 13% ... AHHH theres what they are talking about,,, but hang on.

you see what I saw ???

Cars - 11% increase from the total percent cars.
Bikes - 10% increase from the total percent bikes.


So what can I deduce from this. Facts I can see are.

YES - You are more likely to die on a Motorcycle, however your still 1% more at risk being in a car.
If you live your less likely to have Injuries than being in a car by a wooping 5%
Based on 2008 stats.
---------------------
Using a percent negates the need for the numbers and allows us to measure this.
Like one of my friends said 3% of 100 and 3% of 10 is still 3%.



I guess my question now is Whos subsidising who ???





p/s if i,ve missed something let me know or you think i,ve made a boo let me know. If I have it wrong least we have some facts.

[MarkyMark]

It isn't really fair to look at it as 6% more injuries than the number of bikes, rather it means about 3 times as many injuries per bike as per car, and about four times as many deaths. All else being equal, this line of argument is rally ammunition *for* the levy increases, I'd let it die quietly.

[James Deuce]

It isn't really fair to look at it as 6% more injuries than the number of bikes, rather it means about 3 times as many injuries per bike as per car, and about four times as many deaths. All else being equal, this line of argument is rally ammunition *for* the levy increases, I'd let it die quietly.

Err, why? It refutes the Government argument for the increases, though it only counts cars. NZ's registered Vehicle Fleet is around 4.1 million btw.

[Conquiztador]

I,m the type of guy that you tell some thing and I have have to go off and bang my head against the wall to figer it out for myself. Its a pain the the rear but it has lead to many interesting things in my life. I don't "know" something until I "know" it for myself.

So Why the title zjet, Well I have a funny feeling we are being lead down the garden path abit here and more so for the fact that the stereo type "motorcycles are more dangerous" believe than facts. So off i went to look up some info and see what I could discover.

Dum dum daaa.
First I said to myself how am I going to measure this to gauge the facts.
My answer percentages, rather than actual numbers percentages can level a group for measurement. And from here to the info I go.

First stop
New Zealand
motor vehicle registration
statistics 2008

Why? I wanted to know what the percentages for cars V bikes was, heres what I found.

2788938 - Cars was 67% of the total resisted cars in NZ for 2008
130213 - Motorbikes was 3% (guess what) I included Mopeds in this figer (hey ACC did as well :P )

Great so now I know the percents I have start numbers.

Now we wana know what the crash's are....

On to
NATIONAL HEALTH STATISTICS FOR ROAD USERS

Now this was a pain in the ass as they really do a great job with this and it is broken down really well, so to pin point what they want if needed is my guess.

*some must knows before I continue *
In this report Motorcycles includes passengers in the stats. However cars don't. "That what I thought interesting huh" Don't worry I have added em back in so we get a fair picture.

Ok onto numbers I looked at the Injuries first heres what I found.
11901 - Accidents with a car involved making a total of 78% of all Injuries for 2008
1396 - Accidents with a Motorcycle involved coming to 9% (mopeds included)

Cars 11% difference from the registered total of cars
Bikes 6% difference from the registered total of bikes

at this point i,m scraching my head thinking hmmm ACC can't have gotten it this wrong they pay some one big money to look into these numbers and i,m a bum looking for work at the mo that dropped out of school at 16.

But wait zjet you only looked at Injuries... ok lets look now at deaths.

268 - Cars = 78% ... wait a min this is the same as Injuries, nope I double checked before you ask its right.

50 - Bikes = 13% ... AHHH theres what they are talking about,,, but hang on.

you see what I saw ???

Cars - 11% increase from the total percent cars.
Bikes - 10% increase from the total percent bikes.


So what can I deduce from this. Facts I can see are.

YES - You are more likely to die on a Motorcycle, however your still 1% more at risk being in a car.
If you live your less likely to have Injuries than being in a car by a wooping 5%
Based on 2008 stats.
---------------------
Using a percent negates the need for the numbers and allows us to measure this.
Like one of my friends said 3% of 100 and 3% of 10 is still 3%.



I guess my question now is Whos subsidising who ???





p/s if i,ve missed something let me know or you think i,ve made a boo let me know.

Based on your figures:

Cars registered: 2788938
Accidents: 11901 ( 0.43% of cars had accidents)
Deaths: 268 (2.25% of accidents resulted in death)
0.01% of registered cars killed a passenger/driver (yes, a stupid way of putting it I know, but could not come up with anything better at this hour)

Bikes registered: 130213
Accidents: 1396 (1.07% of bikes had accidents)
Deaths: 50 (3.58% of accidents resulted in death)
0.04% of registered bikes killed a rider/pillion.

Based on this: If you ride a bike instead of driving a car it is close to 2.5 times more likely that you have an accident, and in that accident you are 1.6 times more likely to be killed.

And if you decide to ride a bike instead of driving a car you are 4 times more likely to die in an accident.

So you se, it depends on how you use the figures.

[James Deuce]

Based on your figures:

Cars registered: 2788938
Accidents: 11901 ( 0.43% of cars had accidents)
Deaths: 268 (2.25% of accidents resulted in death)
0.01% of registered cars killed a passenger/driver (yes, a stupid way of putting it I know, but could not come up with anything better at this hour)

Bikes registered: 130213
Accidents: 1396 (1.07% of bikes had accidents)
Deaths: 50 (3.58% of accidents resulted in death)
0.04% of registered bikes killed a rider/pillion.

Based on this: If you ride a bike instead of driving a car it is close to 2.5 times more likely that you have an accident, and in that accident you are 1.6 times more likely to be killed.

And if you decide to ride a bike instead of driving a car you are 4 times more likely to die in an accident.

So you se, it depends on how you use the figures.

Which again is still vastly better than the figures the Government are trying to push as justification for the increase.

[kwaka_crasher]

Which again is still vastly better than the figures the Government are trying to push as justification for the increase.

If you're referring to the 18x more likely to be involved in an injury crash on a motorcycle than you are in a car, you must remember that was done on the basis of a survey of mileage. Of course, the ACC levy isn't charged on a mileage basis, which makes the comparison totally unfair.

[zjet]

Seems I may have been using the wrong way to mesure the numbers. I don't mind being wrong when smart people show me why.

I,m guessing they have gone $200 odd a year x 3 yep $700 odd will do.

I am keen to know where they got the 16 times more likely from tho ??
ah there we go.

[James Deuce]

If you're referring to the 18x more likely to be involved in an injury crash on a motorcycle than you are in a car, you must remember that was done on the basis of a survey of mileage. Of course, the ACC levy isn't charged on a mileage basis, which makes the comparison totally unfair.

A survey of mileage undertaken in 1999 on a very small sample of motorcycles also. Probably 2 hours of sportsbikes at the Summit of the Rimutakas.

[Pixie]

Conspiracy Theory time.

ACC minion: "Lets outrage the bikers with some patently false statistics.Then they will come up with some numbers closer to the mark showing an increase could be justified. Then we will say 'sorry our mistake' we will make the increase only $400"

Satan (ACC boss-penting fingers): "Eeexcellent"

[NighthawkNZ]

Then we will say 'sorry our mistake' we will make the increase only $400"

Satan (ACC boss-penting fingers): "Eeexcellent"

I reckon thats what sgoing to happen... but it does not need to rise at all and we should fight for that...

What I want to know going buy their numbers if the average claim for bikers is $19g per claim and for cars it is $24g per claim... the said for bikes the actual levy should $3770 per bike ... what is the actually levy per car then?

[Zuki lover]

It does need to rise - but it should be equal accross the board -and they should charge cyclists and quad riders and motorcross too - not sure how, but they need to be on their own statistics, not road vehicles.

[James Deuce]

Why does it need to rise when ACC are making money and no other group of NZers is singled out?

There is no financial logic behind the decisions, just easily manipulated public opinion and the desire to make each individual ACC "account" act as a Corporate profit centre on an Insurance Company model.

That is patently ridiculous for a Government compensation scheme that more than pays its way.

The levies don't need to rise at all, and we are actually making a point for all NZers, not just motorcyclists. ACC works, it makes money despite only spending 1 dollar in 8 on cases requiring compensation. Sounds like a scheme that benefits all NZers and provides some people with jobs to me, without a net loss to taxpayers.

We should be campaigning for the two guys managing the ACC's investment portfolio to take over all Government investment and the Reserve Bank.

[Bounce001]

I read somewhere over the weekend that ACC actually made a profit last year. Was this from less payouts or from investment returns?

I have also heard a rumour that one of ACC's investments is in a tobacco company. Does anyone know if this is true?

[Ixion]

A survey of mileage undertaken in 1999 on a very small sample of motorcycles also. Probably 2 hours of sportsbikes at the Summit of the Rimutakas.

44 hours a year, total average kilometres about 800 a year.

because they asked "List all motorvehicles in the household".

So people did. Including bikes that were not in use at all.(How many houses have a 'not in use' bike at the back of the shed).

Then counted those as zero kilometres.

[Pixie]

It does need to rise - but it should be equal accross the board -and they should charge cyclists and quad riders and motorcross too - not sure how, but they need to be on their own statistics, not road vehicles.

As in Bikes and cars pay the same rego.
I will stand for nothing less

[Laxi]

I have also heard a rumour that one of ACC's investments is in a tobacco company. Does anyone know if this is true?

i'd love it if it was, wouldn't be a bad time for ACC to get some (more) bad publicity!