Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

🤖 AI Summary

📝 Summary:

The thread centers on New Zealand's upcoming election, primarily debating the economic management and policy differences between the center-left Labour government and center-right National/ACT opposition. Key criticisms target Labour's fiscal stewardship, citing ballooning government expenditure #7#272, housing unaffordability, and unfulfilled promises like KiwiBuild and dental care expansion #16#12. A user #7 highlighted Labour's annual 9% spending growth versus 1.5% under previous governments, arguing this fueled inflation. National's tax-cut policy faced scrutiny over funding gaps and legality, with user #215 questioning Luxon's reliance on "trust me" assurances.
Leadership competence emerged as a critical theme, particularly in later posts. Luxon drew heavy criticism after a contentious interview where he struggled to defend policy details #194#199#211, while Willis faced backlash for her economic credentials. Hipkins garnered fleeting praise for articulation but was ultimately seen as representing poor governmental outcomes #45#119. A trusted user #308 presented expert economic analysis contradicting Treasury optimism. Infrastructure issues—like Wellington's water crisis and the dental school staffing shortage—were cited as examples of systemic mismanagement #235#12. Notable policy debates included road-user charges for EVs #220, immigration impacts on rents #299, and coalition scenarios involving NZ First #182#258. Early fringe discussions on candidates' rugby allegiances gave way to substantive policy critiques, culminating in grim Treasury forecasts discussed in posts #271#304#308. User #168 also revealed concerns about Labour rushing regulatory changes to entrench policies pre-election.

🏷️ Tags:

Economic Policies, Housing Crisis, Leadership Competence

📊 Data Source: Based on ALL posts in thread (total: 10000 posts) | ⏱️ Total Generation Time: 20s
You don't have permission to regenerate AI summary.

NZWarriors.com

Here's something totally out of left field to consider.... at the moment, landlords are able to claim back income related expenses (rates, repairs and maintenance, insurance [don't mention interest]) but they can't claim back capital expenses such as new heat pumps, additions or providing double glazing.

At the moment, repairs and maintenance to solar systems are income related expenses but providing a new solar system isn't. Not getting into discussions about whether or not solar systems lead to higher electrical prices for others, I'd like to see the government allow the provision of a new solar system to be counted as an income related expense to provide an incentive to landlords to install them... in just the same way they did with insulation. Cap what can be claimed back to a certain amount for say the occupancy of the dwelling. Allow for a certain amount of storage capacity for each unit again based on occupancy.... if the landlord goes over that, he can't claim the excess back of his tax.

That would then provide energy cost savings to the renters while also increasing some of the renewable resources to the country.
If economic stimulation is your goal I guess. Otherwise just making energy as cheap as possible and then give concessions.

Personally I would go with nuclear and provide free and subsidised energy to regular households, small business and domestic manufacturing and tech. The stimulus from freeing up those billions would be far greater.
 
If economic stimulation is your goal I guess. Otherwise just making energy as cheap as possible and then give concessions.

Personally I would go with nuclear and provide free and subsidised energy to regular households, small business and domestic manufacturing and tech. The stimulus from freeing up those billions would be far greater.
What's the cost of installing nuclear generation in a country our size?
 
Back
Top Bottom