Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

[John Nick]

As well as our dilapidated infrastructure and faltering education system and results.

Imo. No politician wants to spend money to improve our systems for another to take over.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

So what do you honestly think about these cuts to pay for a tax cut no one needs, that will cost many lives, misery and the country billions of dollars?

There’s a bit of hyperbole in my replies.

I personally don’t agree with dropping the smoking policy but in the sceme of a complete policy platform it’s irrelevant. There are positives and negatives from all parties and no one will like all policy.

I also don’t think the revenue is the reason. If I remember it was the dairy owners who were being smashed by crime and it was a policy in reaction to that. Reactive policies rarely work but the dairy workers were literally getting killed and threatened with being put out of business so if the legislation was well thought through in regards to the unintended consequences it would have probably not been an issue. But so many changes were rushed through on top of covid, a inflation crisis, health crisis, homelessness crisis, etc that people have been pushed to far and the changes need to pause so we can catch our breath and build some resilience again.

Overall I don’t smoke and don’t particularly care if people want to smoke and kill themselves - up to them… just like playing league or eating KFC, drinking alcohol, consuming sugar or having gay sex. Not the governments business.

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

Imo. No politician wants to spend money to improve our systems for another to take over.

Wow… bit doom and gloomy.

I know Labour has caused some deep scars but even Labour politician we’re trying to do right, they just didn’t know how!

I believe most people get into politics with good intentions, even if reality forces compromise. Many successful businessmen (Key, Luxon) don’t need the money or hassle. They actually want to do good or they wouldn’t be putting themselves through it.

 

[MaybeTop8]

There’s a bit of hyperbole in my replies.

I personally don’t agree with dropping the smoking policy but in the sceme of a complete policy platform it’s irrelevant. There are positives and negatives from all parties and no one will like all policy.

I also don’t think the revenue is the reason. If I remember it was the dairy owners who were being smashed by crime and it was a policy in reaction to that. Reactive policies rarely work but the dairy workers were literally getting killed and threatened with being put out of business so if the legislation was well thought through in regards to the unintended consequences it would have probably not been an issue. But so many changes were rushed through on top of covid, a inflation crisis, health crisis, homelessness crisis, etc that people have been pushed to far and the changes need to pause so we can catch our breath and build some resilience again.

Overall I don’t smoke and don’t particularly care if people want to smoke and kill themselves - up to them… just like playing league or eating KFC, drinking alcohol, consuming sugar or having gay sex. Not the governments business.

There’s a bit of hyperbole in my replies.

I personally don’t agree with dropping the smoking policy but in the sceme of a complete policy platform it’s irrelevant. There are positives and negatives from all parties and no one will like all policy.

I also don’t think the revenue is the reason. If I remember it was the dairy owners who were being smashed by crime and it was a policy in reaction to that. Reactive policies rarely work but the dairy’s were getting killed and threatened with being put out of business so if the legislation was well thought through in regards to the unintended consequences it would have probably not been an issue. But so many changes were rushed through on top of covid, a inflation crisis, health crisis, homelessness crisis, etc that people have been pushed to far and the changes need to pause so we can catch our breath and build some resilience again.

Overall I don’t smoke and don’t particularly care if people want to smoke and kill themselves - up to them… just like playing league or eating KFC, drinking alcohol, consuming sugar or having gay sex. Not the governments business

Unfortunately pushing through changes are exactly what this mob are doing, with great social consequence

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

Unfortunately pushing through changes are exactly what this mob are doing, with great social consequence

The smoking law hasn’t even come into effect yet and no other country in the world has the same law.

It’s pausing the changes proposed by Labour to how it’s always been but with a continued focus on reducing smoking through the ways that have worked to date by making it socially unacceptable and financially punitive.

 

[juju]

The smoking law hasn’t even come into effect yet and no other country in the world has the same law.

It’s pausing the changes proposed by Labour to how it’s always been but with a continued focus on reducing smoking through the ways that have worked to date by making it socially unacceptable and financially punitive.

Simply illogical thought pattern when you have a finance minister needing the tax revenue to fund tax cuts.

Wanking on about Unions & the left wing and not acknowledge the Tabacco Industry lobbying and the part this played in this decision is extremely hypocritical.

ALSO very wrong about other countries doing the same - UK, Mexico, Portugal are aiming for smoke free generations by 2040.
The UK government are going ahead with a policy based off the NZ framework

 

[MaybeTop8]

The smoking law hasn’t even come into effect yet and no other country in the world has the same law.

It’s pausing the changes proposed by Labour to how it’s always been but with a continued focus on reducing smoking through the ways that have worked to date by making it socially unacceptable and financially punitive.

Twist and turn all you want Wiz, it's paying for a tax cut and will cost lives and billions in health impact.

 

[MaybeTop8]

There’s a bit of hyperbole in my replies.

I personally don’t agree with dropping the smoking policy but in the sceme of a complete policy platform it’s irrelevant. There are positives and negatives from all parties and no one will like all policy.

I also don’t think the revenue is the reason. If I remember it was the dairy owners who were being smashed by crime and it was a policy in reaction to that. Reactive policies rarely work but the dairy workers were literally getting killed and threatened with being put out of business so if the legislation was well thought through in regards to the unintended consequences it would have probably not been an issue. But so many changes were rushed through on top of covid, a inflation crisis, health crisis, homelessness crisis, etc that people have been pushed to far and the changes need to pause so we can catch our breath and build some resilience again.

Overall I don’t smoke and don’t particularly care if people want to smoke and kill themselves - up to them… just like playing league or eating KFC, drinking alcohol, consuming sugar or having gay sex. Not the governments business.

Revenue is the only reason

 

[John Nick]

Wow… bit doom and gloomy.

I know Labour has caused some deep scars but even Labour politician we’re trying to do right, they just didn’t know how!

I believe most people get into politics with good intentions, even if reality forces compromise. Many successful businessmen (Key, Luxon) don’t need the money or hassle. They actually want to do good or they wouldn’t be putting themselves through it.

Your examples of Key and Luxon are prime examples of guys desperate to become PM. Nothing to do with improving the quality life for the people. Simple fact.

 

[regenerated borg]

Tax cuts ... couldn't even wait... what's that going to do? Apart from loading up the party donors pockets... Money don't trickle down, never has...
Wow... and change smoking ban policy to fund it probably tax tobbacco and vapes more as well (the money must flow up true meaning of bottom feeders).. may divide and poverty prosper..
Stay tuned.. Next week .. mass immigration..

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

I know some of you guys are still in the denial and anger stage of the grief cycle but the election was a while ago now.

Can we get this out of your system and move onto acceptance before Christmas?

I’m going to be critical of the govt too when they stuff up or don’t get results but they haven’t even met in parliament yet and it’s all policy that was democratically approved by the electorate.

 

[MaybeTop8]

I know some of you guys are still in the denial and anger stage of the grief cycle but the election was a while ago now.

Can we get this out of your system and move onto acceptance before Christmas?

I’m going to be critical of the govt too when they stuff up or don’t get results but they haven’t even met in parliament yet and it’s all policy that was democratically approved by the electorate.

They have stuffed up. Big time already.

 

[Bay39er]

….. and it’s all policy that was democratically approved by the electorate.

What a load of codswallop

 

[wizard of Tauranga]

Tax cuts ... couldn't even wait... what's that going to do? Apart from loading up the party donors pockets... Money don't trickle down, never has...
Wow... and change smoking ban policy to fund it probably tax tobbacco and vapes more as well (the money must flow up true meaning of bottom feeders).. may divide and poverty prosper..
Stay tuned.. Next week .. mass immigration..

Just to be clear when the Green wanted to tax the hard working subset to pay for tax cuts for the middle class and now National want to increase the tax to the smoking subset to pay for tax cuts, is there a difference?

The hard workers contribute to society and smokers have negative effects on society…

I’m trying to understand the logic? Do we want to stop smokers by legislation force but don’t want to stop them by financial force?

 

[regenerated borg]

Just to be clear when the Green wanted to tax the hard working subset to pay for tax cuts and now National want to increase the tax to the smoking subset to pay for tax cuts, is there a difference?

The hard workers contribute to society and smokers have negative effects on society…

I’m trying to understand the logic? Do we want to stop smokers by legislation force but don’t want to stop them by financial force?

The logic is why have tax cuts period... surely us and the rest of the world should of learnt by now... it just doesn't work... the private business sector never has or will solve any social problems ... a country is a society of people not a bunch of consumers...

 

[MaybeTop8]

The logic is why have tax cuts period... surely us and the rest of the world should of learnt by now... it just doesn't work... the private business sector never has or will solve any social problems ... a country is a society of people not a bunch of consumers...

Yep, there's 50 years + evidence right out there, and a large portion of us have been living it.

 

[MaybeTop8]

Just to be clear when the Green wanted to tax the hard working subset to pay for tax cuts for the middle class and now National want to increase the tax to the smoking subset to pay for tax cuts, is there a difference?

The hard workers contribute to society and smokers have negative effects on society…

I’m trying to understand the logic? Do we want to stop smokers by legislation force but don’t want to stop them by financial force?

Hard working subset? You mean the rich, with all those tax havens and free capital gains? Geez, you've got all the boomer's playbook going here haven't you Wiz?

 

[Noitall]

I’m trying to understand the logic? Do we want to stop smokers by legislation force but don’t want to stop them by financial force?

That’s not how addiction works. Will be handy for methamphetamine users when psuedoephedrine is back for all public consumption over the counter for all again too as Seymour wants.

 

[MaybeTop8]

That’s not how addiction works. Will be handy for methamphetamine users when psuedoephedrine is back for all public consumption over the counter for all again too as Seymour wants.

Actually I must admit the existing cold stuff doesn't work but yeah social cost 'n all

 

[juju]

Just to be clear when the Green wanted to tax the hard working subset to pay for tax cuts for the middle class and now National want to increase the tax to the smoking subset to pay for tax cuts, is there a difference?

The hard workers contribute to society and smokers have negative effects on society…

I’m trying to understand the logic? Do we want to stop smokers by legislation force but don’t want to stop them by financial force?

Who wants to educate this dullard on the concept of social investment?