Politics đŸ—łď¸ 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.
And here's the privatisation. No money for health, money for tobacco barons, roads to nowhere, tax cuts we can't afford, tax "relief" for the starving landlords and profits for luxon on properties sold untaxed.

And the irony is Labour had heaps of money for whatever they wanted.

Borrowed $100b and ramped up taxes on the wealthy (new 39% tax rate) and hammered the middle class (not indexing taxes).

Where’s all the hospitals, ferries and infrastructure so National didn’t have to sort it all out during the recession part of the economic cycle!

So much waste during the boom part of the cycle and there’s nothing to show for it. Waste that makes potential capital gains revenue look insignificant! The incompetence was mind blowing.

By the poor, for the poor, and made us all poor…
 

NZWarriors.com

And the irony is Labour had heaps of money for whatever they wanted.

Borrowed $100b and ramped up taxes on the wealthy (new 39% tax rate) and hammered the middle class (not indexing taxes).

Where’s all the hospitals, ferries and infrastructure so National didn’t have to sort it all out during the recession part of the economic cycle!

So much waste during the boom part of the cycle and there’s nothing to show for it. Waste that makes potential capital gains revenue look insignificant! The incompetence was mind blowing.

By the poor, for the poor, and made us all poor…
Its terrible mismanagement for decades. When you look at the raw numbers, # of hospitals, drs per capita, health spend per capita, NZ should be doing great. Same problem as ALL NZ infrastructure. Too few people spread across too large an area, wanting other people to pay for their services.

Just on Dunedin hospital, there is also..

Dunstan
Lakes District
Clutha First
Gore
Charlotte Jean Maternity
Wanaka
Ranfurly
East Otago
Omararu

And now absolute shock, Southland Hospital is actually too small after being upgraded only 20 years ago

 
Never going to happen, but NZ should invest and develop heavily in rotary wing air medical services. Make all the regionals satellites and move criticals via helicopter. Like they Flying Drs in Aus but on a small scale. You would get faster response times than ambulances. Plus global demand is huge if you developed manufacturing as well.

Develop paramedicine and incentivise the job uptake.
 
Never going to happen, but NZ should invest and develop heavily in rotary wing air medical services. Make all the regionals satellites and move criticals via helicopter. Like they Flying Drs in Aus but on a small scale. You would get faster response times than ambulances. Plus global demand is huge if you developed manufacturing as well.

Develop paramedicine and incentivise the job uptake.
The primary hospital would need to have the capacity to service all the satellite sites. Dunedin hosp does this already for specialist procedures in the wider Otago & Southland zone, and struggles for beds.

What did you mean about developing manufacturing for global demand?
 
That's what I thought he meant, you're dreaming Chopper!

How about picking up patients with drones and delivering them to hospital like pizzas.
An Uber ambulance service with choppers or drones?

Independent contractors taking call-outs based on price (supply/ demand)?

And they deliver pizzas in between!

I think we’re getting somewhere here.
 
Conflict of interest, corrupt, greedy, you name it. Of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.

View attachment 9752
Not the same Bernard Hickey who made almost the same amount of untaxed capital gain when selling property? Hypocrite!!!

 
Not building choppers but aero medical equipment. Massive business. S&R, remote location, mining, military. All heavily invested in air medicine.
You would probably be aware of and seen this.
Met an American plastic surgeon 20 or years ago who had settled here. He was wealthy, told me he made most of his money buying US military field hospitals and equipment after the various Gulf campaigns. State of the art stuff that they sold cheap rather than pack up and move. He sold to third world countries.
 
Which part of the statement about luxon is incorrect Mike?
1) Luxon didn't avoid paying tax on $460K as only one property would have been subject to the 'brightline".... he would never have had to pay tax on the Onehunga investment properties because of when Luxon brought them, were outside of the "brightline" test dates introduced by the Labour government.
2) The headline on Hickey's site yesterday and the article below it, talk about Luxon avoiding paying over $70K in capital gains tax if Luxon had sold the Wellington apartment in February... yet, less than two weeks earlier, Hickey was complaining that NZ doesn't have a CGT. Question... how can Hickey say Luxon avoided a tax he previously said NZ doesn't have?



While all the time enjoying the just less than $400K untaxed capital gain Hickey made.
 
1) Luxon didn't avoid paying tax on $460K as only one property would have been subject to the 'brightline".... he would never have had to pay tax on the Onehunga investment properties because of when Luxon brought them, were outside of the "brightline" test dates introduced by the Labour government.
2) The headline on Hickey's site yesterday and the article below it, talk about Luxon avoiding paying over $70K in capital gains tax if Luxon had sold the Wellington apartment in February... yet, less than two weeks earlier, Hickey was complaining that NZ doesn't have a CGT. Question... how can Hickey say Luxon avoided a tax he previously said NZ doesn't have?



While all the time enjoying the just less than $400K untaxed capital gain Hickey made.
There’s no conflict of interest reducing it back to 2 years when this was cleary an election item, campaigned on and voted in support by the public.

National had a clear mandate.

Just more negative left smear campaign. Public doesn’t like the negativity and hence Hipkins keeps going down in the polls. Show us your vision Labour instead of negativity…
 
1) Luxon didn't avoid paying tax on $460K as only one property would have been subject to the 'brightline".... he would never have had to pay tax on the Onehunga investment properties because of when Luxon brought them, were outside of the "brightline" test dates introduced by the Labour government.
2) The headline on Hickey's site yesterday and the article below it, talk about Luxon avoiding paying over $70K in capital gains tax if Luxon had sold the Wellington apartment in February... yet, less than two weeks earlier, Hickey was complaining that NZ doesn't have a CGT. Question... how can Hickey say Luxon avoided a tax he previously said NZ doesn't have?



While all the time enjoying the just less than $400K untaxed capital gain Hickey made.
Since Hickey doesn’t set the rules around a cgt, what did he need to do to gain the higher moral ground in your eyes? Donate it to charity?
 
Copied this article from the ARL thread.


The CEO is doing an exceptional job of sorting the ARL out. Look at this exceptional quote:

“Leadership is being prepared to make hard calls and she’s obviously prepared to make hard calls. If you want to be everyone’s friend, you give them icecreams - when you’re a leader, you’re not there to give icecreams away.”

Reminds me of Luxon making hard and not always popular calls vs Jacinda being kind and giving ice creams to everyone and anytime which got us in the current shit… just like the ARL was.
 
Since Hickey doesn’t set the rules around a cgt, what did he need to do to gain the higher moral ground in your eyes? Donate it to charity?
Isn’t the definition of hypocrite when you criticise someone for doing something you yourself did? ‘Judge not, lest ye be judged’

If he wanted the moral high ground he would have declared in the article he did the same thing so when he criticises, people can judge him as well.
 
Isn’t the definition of hypocrite when you criticise someone for doing something you yourself did? ‘Judge not, lest ye be judged’

If he wanted the moral high ground he would have declared in the article he did the same thing so when he criticises, people can judge him as well.
Comes across as a bit of a strawman argument when doesn’t set the rules but is critical of the person who has the power to effect the change and the gain he has acquired. There’s a substantial invested interest in most politicians regarding property. Luxon isn’t lost to hypocrisy either. His clean car subsidy and learning of Te Reo on the taxpayer, to then go and scrap both was pretty hypocritical
 
Back
Top Bottom