Politics šŸ—³ļø NZ Politics

šŸ¤– AI Summary

šŸ“ 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.

šŸ·ļø Tags:

Economic Policies, Housing Crisis, Leadership Competence

šŸ“Š Data Source: Based on ALL posts in thread (total: 10000 posts) | ā±ļø Total Generation Time: 20s
You don't have permission to regenerate AI summary.
Under your reckoning NZers voted for change (and I agree there was a bit of a swing) however the results of the poll strongly show NZers didn't vote for Seymour & Peters to be the govt.
National had to form an alliance with them to form a government (which is a symptom of mmp) but it once again indicates your blanket statement of New Zealanders voted for change isn't exactly as all-encompassing of voters as you try to make out.
You are grasping.
 

NZWarriors.com

The solution to inflation is slowing the economy and rising unemployment.

Of course Nationals changing back the reserve bank to how the rest of the world has it and getting rid of Labours employment conditions that have just made inflation worse for longer in NZ (supported by stats against other countries).

The economy was even forecast to have significantly worse unemployment above 5% this year by the reserve bank while Labour was still in government.

This just shows the media are economic illiterates.

 
"Hard left" what is that & who is hard left? Pseudo yankee thinking much?
There's been a lot of discussion on here how NZers are largely in the middle...more correct.
And stop trying to appease yourself with 'NZers voted for change' as if ALL NZers voted for change.
Yes the majority of New Zealander’s fall somewhere between centre right & centre left. However the majority of New Zelander’s also aren’t screaming conspiracy with every announcement from the new Government.
 
Yes the majority of New Zealander’s fall somewhere between centre right & centre left. However the majority of New Zelander’s also aren’t screaming conspiracy with every announcement from the new Government.
Outright disrespectful organising and backing protests a week after an election aimed at the new governments clearly foreshadowed policy.
 
The hard left majority contributing to this thread are a minority out there in the real world. Shouldn’t come as a surprise. New Zealanders voted for change and they are happy with what they see so far.
NZ voter knowledge in a nutshell. Thinking anyone here is remotely seriously left is the funniest thing ever.

You guys are all shades of the centre engaged in partisan politics.
 
The solution to inflation is slowing the economy and rising unemployment.

Of course Nationals changing back the reserve bank to how the rest of the world has it and getting rid of Labours employment conditions that have just made inflation worse for longer in NZ (supported by stats against other countries).

The economy was even forecast to have significantly worse unemployment above 5% this year by the reserve bank while Labour was still in government.

This just shows the media are economic illiterates.


Sort of makes this pledge from national as contradictory to endorse unemployment as a saviour towards inflation but say anyone who can work, should. We also see a 90 day trial in the workplace gone, fair pay agreement-gone. What’s to stop these people from falling to the bottom of the scrap heap with no support to get their way out? The only illiterates aren’t thinking of the big picture.
 
Yes the majority of New Zealander’s fall somewhere between centre right & centre left. However the majority of New Zelander’s also aren’t screaming conspiracy with every announcement from the new Government.
Have only mentioned one conspiracy in any of my posts (15 min cities) and that was tongue in cheek.
Have read quite a few on here tho, albeit mostly implied not outright wacko. Well, mostly not...
 
Have only mentioned one conspiracy in any of my posts (15 min cities) and that was tongue in cheek.
Have read quite a few on here tho, albeit mostly implied not outright wacko. Well, mostly not...
Yet the previous government brought the media off. Funny how some things are plausible in some people’s eyes but other things not based on political leanings.
 
Have only mentioned one conspiracy in any of my posts (15 min cities) and that was tongue in cheek.
Have read quite a few on here tho, albeit mostly implied not outright wacko. Well, mostly not...
Yeah look I shouldn’t have linked the words majority & hard left. Perhaps majority of posts and hard left is a bit more accurate šŸ˜‚
 
Under your reckoning NZers voted for change (and I agree there was a bit of a swing) however the results of the poll strongly show NZers didn't vote for Seymour & Peters to be the govt.
National had to form an alliance with them to form a government (which is a symptom of mmp) but it once again indicates your blanket statement of New Zealanders voted for change isn't exactly as all-encompassing of voters as you try to make out.
And again on the hard left rhetoric...if hard left is wanting your grandchildren to have as good a quality of education as the 'rich', opportunity to pursue their passions and live a prosperous fulfilling life (which isn't all about money), be safe in their neighburhoods, eat real food that isn't poisonous, live in a unique, unspoilt beautiful country where they can drink the water, swim in the rivers and at beaches, buy their own home (however humble) or at least be able to afford to rent one, be able to travel the country and the world if they choose, te mea, te mea.
Is that hard left?
I guess that's me then
It's only hard left if you expect somebody else to pay for it.
 

Sort of makes this pledge from national as contradictory to endorse unemployment as a saviour towards inflation but say anyone who can work, should. We also see a 90 day trial in the workplace gone, fair pay agreement-gone. What’s to stop these people from falling to the bottom of the scrap heap with no support to get their way out? The only illiterates aren’t thinking of the big picture.
How many collective bargaining agreements were actually set up under the fair pay agreement scheme? It was only a few, wasn't it?
 
Yet the previous government brought the media off. Funny how some things are plausible in some people’s eyes but other things not based on political leanings.
I’ve pushed that a bit. I don’t believe the media were bought off but because it ā€˜could have’ influenced media decisions it was stupid.

1 - The optics and perception were diabolical. Govt should steer well clear of conditional additional money to the media.
2 - Even if not directly influencing media it’s going to subconsciously favour the ā€˜team that has their back’
3 - To have your favoured policies as a condition of receiving the funding is wrong and disadvantaged other political parties, even if no conspiracy. Wrong!
4 - the reality is a bunch of extra journalist have jobs now because of Labour - optics and subconscious influence again.

The govt deserves any flack it got for being so stupid even if it was done with honest intentions. It needs the criticism to stop it happening again in future. I think they and the media got the message!
 
What were negatives with the scheme?
A business in Gore having to pay the same as a business in Auckland despite completely different market conditions.

Either the gore business pays over local market or Auckland pays under local market rates.

With teachers, where pay is nationalised, we have seen teachers flee Auckland because two areas aren’t equal
 
NZ voter knowledge in a nutshell. Thinking anyone here is remotely seriously left is the funniest thing ever.

You guys are all shades of the centre engaged in partisan politics.
Back in the early 80's I worked with a number of English trade unionists, guys in their 50's and 60's and sometimes older. They were hard left and hard working. They believed in the class struggle, it was the core of their political position. All employers were villains and management usually the same. It was treason to abandon the struggle.
It was not a position held by young people, it was doomed to die out and it largely has.
It has evolved into a centrist system we have now, some to the left, some to the right but basically everyone wanting the same thing but not agreeing entirely on how we get there.
Does the NZ Communist Party exist, or the SUP? If they do their meetings could be held in a two man tent. The SUP used to be very active in the trade union movement here.
 
I’ve pushed that a bit. I don’t believe the media were bought off but because it ā€˜could have’ influenced media decisions it was stupid.

1 - The optics and perception were diabolical. Govt should steer well clear of conditional additional money to the media.
2 - Even if not directly influencing media it’s going to subconsciously favour the ā€˜team that has their back’
3 - To have your favoured policies as a condition of receiving the funding is wrong and disadvantaged other political parties, even if no conspiracy. Wrong!
4 - the reality is a bunch of extra journalist have jobs now because of Labour - optics and subconscious influence again.

The govt deserves any flack it got for being so stupid even if it was done with honest intentions. It needs the criticism to stop it happening again in future. I think they and the media got the message!
But it was plain to see with the likes of q and an and the hui for example that there was no bias in the governments favour because of the money allocated? Is this belief based on a Jessica then tova order of questions asked? If so, that’s a long bow to draw. How would you like for media to get their funding? Donations?
 
Back
Top Bottom