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 mean she could sue for defamation couldn't she? Pretty slam dunk case.. if of course you haven't been fellating strange men in toilets
How do you know they were strange?

Dont know if she'd have a case, if our defamation laws are anything like the French courts you can say anything about anyone if you claim you believed it in good faith at the time.
 
How do you know they were strange?

Dont know if she'd have a case, it our defamation laws are anything like the French courts you can say anything about anyone if you claim you believed it in good faith at the time.
NZ pays out on defamation all the time. Chantelle Baker is literally going through one now. You can say anything you want in private verbal comms, outside that good luck

 
Also if the back drop is that guys room, police need to have a look at his hard drive.

1752200653211.webp
Looks like a nerd to me, what are you suggesting?
 
Apparently she wanted to learn saxophone but Clinton had some unique teaching methods

View attachment 13736
That bunt should be strung up too.

1742745496886602.webp

That infantilized middle aged men are over represented in the sexual offenders category and to a larger degree "Disney adults" (infantilized adults) are responsible for a huge subset of problems.
You think that guy is the problem when all of our institutions are corrupted with compromised rapists and paedos at the very top?
 
That infantilized middle aged men are over represented in the sexual offenders category and to a larger degree "Disney adults" (infantilized adults) are responsible for a huge subset of problems.
There was once upon a time that that was about the lowest you could accuse a male of without any evidence and in my view it still is. Think you really need to look at yourself if you’re leanings or persuasion in any political scene drives you spout such things. Ironic thing is you’ve done exactly what the guy says in trying to discredit by making allegations without evidence and you’ve done it with him, the Mayor of Wellington and over on the trump thread. Disappointing Frank
 
There was once upon a time that that was about the lowest you could accuse a male of without any evidence and in my view it still is. Think you really need to look at yourself if you’re leanings or persuasion in any political scene drives you spout such things. Ironic thing is you’ve done exactly what the guy says in trying to discredit by making allegations without evidence and you’ve done it with him, the Mayor of Wellington and over on the trump thread. Disappointing Frank
Make an off hand joke about a creepy weirdo with plushie toys in his room ≠ serious allegations of sexual offending. Unlike the mayors fellating 😂
 
Back
Top Bottom