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

I just think the argument against colonisation is like an argument against say, the existence of a mosquito, or how the atomic bomb happened

It just is.

Yes, it could have been done better.

But at the same time, it couldn’t. Because that’s how it happened, for better or worse, for all of us to get to where we are now
 
māori were colonisers. They colonised the Moriori and some tribes colonised others at various times.
Bit of a can of worms with this one, bit of a myth though.

A few iwi went to the Chathams and killed off most of the Moriori, who some say were an off shoot of the first Māori to get to the mainland while others say the Moriori were on the Chathams prior.

By all accounts its a combination of both.
 
I just think the argument against colonisation is like an argument against say, the existence of a mosquito, or how the atomic bomb happened

It just is.

Yes, it could have been done better.

But at the same time, it couldn’t. Because that’s how it happened, for better or worse, for all of us to get to where we are now
Is the argument about colonisation?

or the treaty and subsequent long history of it being ignored & breached?
 
Bit of a can of worms with this one, bit of a myth though.

A few iwi went to the Chathams and killed off most of the Moriori, who some say were an off shoot of the first Māori to get to the mainland while others say the Moriori were on the Chathams prior.

By all accounts its a combination of both.
Yes, but one tribe imposing themselves on another is colonisation. There are probably very few people or races or ethnicities that have never been colonised. Most races have been colonised multiple times.
 
I'd say judging what you think people can choose to be or believe by the actions of long dead ancestors is a slippery slope.
Huh? Im not "going off" anything. A question was asked about co-governance and and answer was given that implied māori have some sort of innate guardianship knowledge. I merely pointed out that doesn't appear to be the case looking at the record.
 
What if they only ever traded. Wouldn't that also have been a net benefit to both?
This is an interesting point of view.

Would māori have developed without foreign capital investment and foreign economic and educational systems? We will never now but I would suggest NZ would be an isolated backwater like much of the pacific islands or Africa.

Would it have been better? All perspective but many islanders currently leave for ‘western’ countries. 170,000 māori have left for the bright lights of Australia which is a hugely significant 20% of the māori population. The take away for me is māori embrace western colonised society.
 
They cant cosplay as having a special relationship of conservation. Would you say thats fair?
Have always found this a little ironic and a bit if revisionist history. Fits much better into todays values but an afterthought in Hunter gatherer survival.
Haast Eagle extinct due to over hunting of Moa, Tuatara hunted to extinction on mainlands, numerous other species along with massive areas of forest burnt to clear for crops and hunting doesn’t paint a conservationist picture
 
Back
Top Bottom