Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

[wizard of Tauranga]

"Question (and you need to answer for once!) What is the alternative system and more importantly, how will it drive competition, innovation, productivity and improvement?" And I have answered more than once. Alternative to neoliberalism? Bog standard capitalism will do nicely thanks, even better if it's the keynesian variety. I haven't read Doughnut economics but I'm pretty sure that and many, many other books will have some great ideas too. See that's the thing, there's a misunderstanding and in some cases a wilful misinterpretation of what neoliberalism is in these pages, and by proxy, what I am for or against. I'm not against capitalism. I'm against the rapacious greed and destruction of democracy all around us while you lot shout "COMMIE!!! RED!!!! MARXIST!!! WHY SHOULD I <fill in selfish rant>!!!!! WHAT'S IN IT FOR ME!!!!!" that we are witnessing right now. That includes, especially fascism, authoritarianism and dictatorships.

"All stirring stuff but it’s sort of irrelevant if you can’t show another system with examples how it’s worked around the world." Are you serious? FFS Wiz, it's in NZ, Australia, The UK, USA, Argentina, Brazil, it's wreaked havoc in many South American countries, many African countries, it's in Hungary......it's embedded in the right and far right all around the world!!! FOR THE LAST 70 YEARS.

Once and for all - NEOLIBERALISM IS NOT CAPITALISM. It is a subset, and a particularly nasty, destructive one that serves to make the rich richer, and the rest of us fucked in as short a time as possible.

We (National and Labour) use Keynesian economics, all countries do, even the ones you complain about like the US:

From chat GPT:

Keynesian economics is a school of thought developed by British economist John Maynard Keynes, mainly from his 1936 book The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money.

At its core, Keynesian economics argues that:

• Free markets don’t always self-correct quickly, especially during recessions.
• Government intervention (through fiscal policy like spending and taxation, and sometimes monetary policy) is needed to stabilize the economy.
• In downturns, governments should spend more (even run deficits) to boost demand, while in booms they should save more or raise taxes to prevent overheating.

Key Features of Keynesian Economics​

• Emphasis on aggregate demand as the driver of economic output and employment.
• Support for countercyclical policies (government action opposite to the business cycle).
• Tolerance for government borrowing in recessions.
• Belief that unemployment can persist without government action.

---

Countries that Use Keynesian Economics​

Almost all modern economies use some form of Keynesian policies, especially in recessions, though rarely in a "pure" form (most combine with free-market/neoliberal approaches). Examples:

• United States:
  
  • The New Deal (1930s, Roosevelt) was heavily Keynesian.
  • Post-WWII economic management relied on Keynesian principles.
  • In 2008–09 (Global Financial Crisis) and 2020 (COVID-19), the U.S. used Keynesian stimulus—massive government spending and relief packages.
• United Kingdom:
  
  • Directly influenced by Keynes himself.
  • After WWII, Britain adopted Keynesian demand management policies until the 1970s.
  • Recent years (COVID-19 furlough scheme, stimulus spending) show Keynesian influence again.
• European Union:
  
  • Many EU states (Germany, France, Italy, Spain) used large fiscal stimulus in 2008 and 2020.
  • The European Central Bank combines this with monetary policy.
• Japan:
  
  • Has run repeated fiscal stimulus programs since the 1990s to fight stagnation (“Abenomics” included Keynesian-style government spending).
• Australia & New Zealand:
  
  • Used stimulus packages during the 2008 crisis and COVID-19.
  • Generally follow mixed economies with Keynesian interventions when needed.
• Developing economies (e.g., India, Brazil, South Africa):
  
  • Often use Keynesian tools (infrastructure spending, subsidies, public works) to boost employment and growth.

---

In short: Most modern economies are “neo-Keynesian” in practice, combining market mechanisms with government intervention when markets fail.

 

[MaybeTop8]

‘At its core, neoliberliasm emphasizes free markets, limited government intervention, and individual responsibility as the best way to organize society.’

Those are the attributes that have driven the competition that we have all benefitted from. Capitalism is stunted without it!

As I said, examples of other countries where different systems have worked

No, those are the attributes that drive profit, greed and power into the hands of the few already wealthy, and fuck the rest of us over.

Different systems to neoliberalism? And as I said, anywhere that bog standard equitable capitalism is applied with fairness in any society. Many european countries fulfil this criteria.

You're a neolib Wiz. It's your lifeblood. You worship "There is no alternative".

 

[MaybeTop8]

We (National and Labour) use Keynesian economics, all countries do, even the ones you complain about like the US:

From chat GPT:

Keynesian economics is a school of thought developed by British economist John Maynard Keynes, mainly from his 1936 book The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money.

At its core, Keynesian economics argues that:

• Free markets don’t always self-correct quickly, especially during recessions.
• Government intervention (through fiscal policy like spending and taxation, and sometimes monetary policy) is needed to stabilize the economy.
• In downturns, governments should spend more (even run deficits) to boost demand, while in booms they should save more or raise taxes to prevent overheating.

Key Features of Keynesian Economics​

• Emphasis on aggregate demand as the driver of economic output and employment.
• Support for countercyclical policies (government action opposite to the business cycle).
• Tolerance for government borrowing in recessions.
• Belief that unemployment can persist without government action.

---

Countries that Use Keynesian Economics​

Almost all modern economies use some form of Keynesian policies, especially in recessions, though rarely in a "pure" form (most combine with free-market/neoliberal approaches). Examples:

• United States:
  • The New Deal (1930s, Roosevelt) was heavily Keynesian.
  • Post-WWII economic management relied on Keynesian principles.
  • In 2008–09 (Global Financial Crisis) and 2020 (COVID-19), the U.S. used Keynesian stimulus—massive government spending and relief packages.
• United Kingdom:
  • Directly influenced by Keynes himself.
  • After WWII, Britain adopted Keynesian demand management policies until the 1970s.
  • Recent years (COVID-19 furlough scheme, stimulus spending) show Keynesian influence again.
• European Union:
  • Many EU states (Germany, France, Italy, Spain) used large fiscal stimulus in 2008 and 2020.
  • The European Central Bank combines this with monetary policy.
• Japan:
  • Has run repeated fiscal stimulus programs since the 1990s to fight stagnation (“Abenomics” included Keynesian-style government spending).
• Australia & New Zealand:
  • Used stimulus packages during the 2008 crisis and COVID-19.
  • Generally follow mixed economies with Keynesian interventions when needed.
• Developing economies(e.g., India, Brazil, South Africa):
  • Often use Keynesian tools (infrastructure spending, subsidies, public works) to boost employment and growth.

---

In short: Most modern economies are “neo-Keynesian” in practice, combining market mechanisms with government intervention when markets fail.

Chat gpt needs sources. The ai is notoriously unreliable and will tell you what you want to hear.

Most of that is complete bullshit.

Especially what you call keynesian. Absolute bollocks.

 

[MaybeTop8]

Do you believe responsible drinkers should be penalised for the few idiots?

Should all laws be set for the lowest common denominator?

Bollocks. The government is bought and sold by the tobacco and alcohol lobby, amongst others.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

No, those are the attributes that drive profit, greed and power into the hands of the few already wealthy, and fuck the rest of us over.

Different systems to neoliberalism? And as I said, anywhere that bog standard equitable capitalism is applied with fairness in any society. Many european countries fulfil this criteria.

You're a neolib Wiz. It's your lifeblood. You worship "There is no alternative".

Ok… chat gpt is wrong and you provide no alternative source… hmmmm.

You're a neolib Wiz. It's your lifeblood. You worship "There is no alternative".

I’m personally more liberal but aware many can’t do what I do. I believe in the welfare system and am pro public health and education. Like you, I frequently question aspects of society and if we can do better or different.

 

[MaybeTop8]

Ok… chat gpt is wrong and you provide no alternative source… hmmmm.

I’m personally more liberal but aware many can’t do what I do. I believe in the welfare system and am pro public health and education. Like you, I frequently question aspects of society and if we can do better or different.

Please don't try and rewrite history in your own attempted game of lame one upmanship.

UK: Thatcher - hard right. Major - hard right. Blair (same as Clinton, same as Ardern - neolib lite), David Cameron hard right, Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Rishi Sunak - all hard right, all neolibs
NZ: 1984 Labour government - Prebble, Douglas, Moore, Bassett - hard right. Ruth Richardson - hard right, Shipley - hard right, Bolger - right, Clark - Centre, but elements of the right in her government, Key - Right, with hard right elements, Luxon - a hard right sock puppet - all foundationally neolibs
USA: Reagan, Bush - hard right, Clinton neolib lite, Bush jr hard right, Obama neolib lite, Trump hard right, Biden neolib

If you can't work from a factual foundation, not interested.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

Please don't try and rewrite history in your own attempted game of lame one upmanship.

UK: Thatcher - hard right. Major - hard right. Blair (same as Clinton, same as Ardern - neolib lite), David Cameron hard right, Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Rishi Sunak - all hard right, all neolibs
NZ: 1984 Labour government - Prebble, Douglas, Moore, Bassett - hard right. Ruth Richardson - hard right, Shipley - hard right, Bolger - right, Clark - Centre, but elements of the right in her government, Key - Right, with hard right elements, Luxon - a hard right sock puppet - all foundationally neolibs
USA: Reagan, Bush - hard right, Clinton neolib lite, Bush jr hard right, Obama neolib lite, Trump hard right, Biden neolib

If you can't work from a factual foundation, not interested.

I don’t even know what your posting about now? We know you don’t like any mainstream politicians!

Post some of the alternative governments/ leaders of alternative countries that you want us to follow so we can see what you like!

 

[defensivebomb]

Except that the misery it causes sees incumbent governments thrown out usually, replaced by something similar, who get thrown out and the original mob come in to repeat the dose only this time even stronger.

Yeah ok I can see this

"Thinking there is some malevolent hand pulling the strings is just an easy out" - this seems more like your own viewpoint.

Neoliberalism is real, the dominance is driven as a tool by groups such as Atlas, Heritage, Mont Pelerin society, Project 2025, and in New Zealand, Act, The fucking taxpayers bullshit union, and most of National, the NZ Business Initiative etc for different local aims but ultimately to break down democracy, remove barriers to mass profit and effectively end any kind of equality or push for diversity around the world. The actual aims spoken behind closed doors I'm sure are much worse.

Highly ideological, utterly destructive. ACT are pushing these very things. Deregulation, privatisation, destruction of our environment, paid for by their donors, utterly corrupt. Wreaking havoc on the average New Zealander.

Act did get circa 10% of the vote. Yes, there were donations and influence. But PR and policy resulted in people turning up on election day to vote for them. Nobody held a gun (or a dollar) to their heads to vote for act. Therefore what you vote for is what you get

There may not be one cohesive conspiracy here, but it's all there, all out in the open, from Friedman, Hayek, Thatcher, Reagan, Prebble, Douglas to Key, Luxon, Seymour, Bolsonaro, Trump, the idiots in the last British government, the idiots in the last Aussie government, the Reserve Bank, probably the majority of senior economic civil servants around the world in Western societies.

Yes yes yes. But these people were voted in. As idiotic as Trump is, for example, he resonated with the electorate so what we are seeing now is, directionally,, the desire of voters

Even worse now are the billionaires that aren't even pretending. They seriously want to turn the earth into a fiefdom again.

It's been embedded for the last 50 years in New Zealand.

" If you don’t like neoliberalism, you actually don’t like the average man on the street, in today’s society. " Rubbish, sorry, that's your take mate.

Definitely my take. I don’t profess to be any sort of knowledgeable authority. Just trying to make sense of how economic theory ends up in policy. My *opinion* is that it *generally* ends up in policy via democracy. But it is more palatable to think it is an offshore organisation than it is to think it is your friendly neighbour

It's laughable that I see attempts at false equivalence - "But what about the left???" "OOOHHH those nasty marxists!!!" "But the left do it too!!!"

Don’t know if this is directed at me so I’ll just leave it there

I just think that most people, nowadays, are just trying to do the best they can with their 60-80 ish years on earth. When you are dead, you are dead, and you don’t get to enjoy the fruits of whatever economic theory you align with, for eternity. Most people are just trying to have the easiest life they can, and will vote in accordance with this. Self interest is the easiest concept to understand and with the requirement for both parents to work, people generally vote in a way that protects their own pocket. Is it a capitalist spiral? With scarcity of resources, the dismantling of royalty and distrust of authority, I think so

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

Bog standard capitalism will do nicely thanks, even better if it's the keynesian variety. I haven't read Doughnut economics but I'm pretty sure that and many, many other books will have some great ideas too.

This shows you understand there’s no real alternative that has challenged neoliberalism in real life, you just dislike our current system, and that’s fair enough.

Capitalism is brutal and destructive. Businesses and ideas that can’t compete are pushed aside, while the ones best suited thrive and grow. It’s harsh, especially for the people caught in the process. The collateral damage is real, even as stronger ideas and businesses improve and ultimately raise living standards. It’s survival of the fittest.

No one pretends it’s perfect. For example, I dislike globalism (a core feature of neoliberalism). I see a place for small tariffs (protectionism) if they support local producers against similar foreign products. I strongly support public health and education, because they can’t rely on market competition, they must serve everyone and are too important to gamble with. That said, I think private support can play a useful role alongside them.

In the end, I don’t think most people differ much in believing the grass looks greener elsewhere, or that there must be a better way — regardless of political alignment.

 

[MaybeTop8]

Yeah ok I can see this



Act did get circa 10% of the vote. Yes, there were donations and influence. But PR and policy resulted in people turning up on election day to vote for them. Nobody held a gun (or a dollar) to their heads to vote for act. Therefore what you vote for is what you get

Yes yes yes. But these people were voted in. As idiotic as Trump is, for example, he resonated with the electorate so what we are seeing now is, directionally,, the desire of voters

Definitely my take. I don’t profess to be any sort of knowledgeable authority. Just trying to make sense of how economic theory ends up in policy. My *opinion* is that it *generally* ends up in policy via democracy. But it is more palatable to think it is an offshore organisation than it is to think it is your friendly neighbour

Don’t know if this is directed at me so I’ll just leave it there

I just think that most people, nowadays, are just trying to do the best they can with their 60-80 ish years on earth. When you are dead, you are dead, and you don’t get to enjoy the fruits of whatever economic theory you align with, for eternity. Most people are just trying to have the easiest life they can, and will vote in accordance with this. Self interest is the easiest concept to understand and with the requirement for both parents to work, people generally vote in a way that protects their own pocket. Is it a capitalist spiral? With scarcity of resources, the dismantling of royalty and distrust of authority, I think so

Pinochet in chile wasn't voted in. Neoliberalism was forced on that country resulting in disaster for the majority population. I don’t have bruce jessons references to hand, but members of the national and Labour parties were on sponsored trips to the Chicago school of economics in the late 70s. These things don't happen in a vacuum