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'd rather they spent a fraction of that money on new prisons.... and a lot more on programs to reduce reoffending rates. While I don't want to see the privisation of prisons, there are programs run in some South American prisons by Prison Fellowship which have reduced reoffending by over 60%. PROVIDED they aren't used to "evangelise" prisoners or in any way privatise the prisons, why don't we look at what they're doing and adopt what we can here?
Look to the Dutch, Norway and Sweden. Focus is on rehabilitation. They are actually reducing prison capacity or leasing it to other countries! Lol.
They also have massive public sectors and public sector budgets. Which most people on here think is the road to Sodom.
 
Look to the Dutch, Norway and Sweden. Focus is on rehabilitation. They are actually reducing prison capacity or leasing it to other countries! Lol.
They also have massive public sectors and public sector budgets. Which most people on here think is the road to Sodom.
I have absolutely no problem with an efficiently run public sector. Our problem is that we swing from pumping it up with huge amounts of money without being accountable to striping it back down with every change of government. Heaven forbid we should not just pump money into the public sector but also ensure the money is then used wisely.... as they also do in those three countries you mentioned. Unfortunately, our major parties want to appeal too much to the voting public (and the whims of the financial backers) than to actually do what's best for the country.
 
Look to the Dutch, Norway and Sweden. Focus is on rehabilitation. They are actually reducing prison capacity or leasing it to other countries! Lol.
They also have massive public sectors and public sector budgets. Which most people on here think is the road to Sodom.
100% Rizzah. And that describes an ideal for me too. Backlash coming shortly - just to bring it on quicker I'll say 6 words - bring in a capital gains tax
 
I have absolutely no problem with an efficiently run public sector. Our problem is that we swing from pumping it up with huge amounts of money without being accountable to striping it back down with every change of government. Heaven forbid we should not just pump money into the public sector but also ensure the money is then used wisely.... as they also do in those three countries you mentioned. Unfortunately, our major parties want to appeal too much to the voting public (and the whims of the financial backers) than to actually do what's best for the country.
Agree, the need for protection for large swathes of our core services and infrastructure from political interference of supply, funding and planning is imperative.

All of that is antithesis to the neoliberal creeps.
 
Agree, the need for protection for large swathes of our core services and infrastructure from political interference of supply, funding and planning is imperative.

All of that is antithesis to the neoliberal creeps.
I'm quite surprised that ACT has allowed the government to suggest that there be a consensus on large infrastructure projects between National and Labour. Seems to go against one of their core beliefs... private over public building of assets.
 
Look to the Dutch, Norway and Sweden. Focus is on rehabilitation. They are actually reducing prison capacity or leasing it to other countries! Lol.
They also have massive public sectors and public sector budgets. Which most people on here think is the road to Sodom.
That worked back when they had a high trust society and mono-ethnic cultures. All three of those places have massive crime problems.

 
I have absolutely no problem with an efficiently run public sector. Our problem is that we swing from pumping it up with huge amounts of money without being accountable to striping it back down with every change of government. Heaven forbid we should not just pump money into the public sector but also ensure the money is then used wisely.... as they also do in those three countries you mentioned. Unfortunately, our major parties want to appeal too much to the voting public (and the whims of the financial backers) than to actually do what's best for the country.
The efficiency argument is a massive beat up IMO. You don't cut funding to find efficiency, that fucks the whole thing up.
 
That worked back when they had a high trust society and mono-ethnic cultures. All three of those places have massive crime problems.

The principle still applies. A rehab focus is better for everyone.
 
Im not talking general crime here. Im talking almost exclusively violent crime. Are there longitudinal studies on the health of societies who rehabilitate violent criminals?
Do those countries rehab their most violent criminals? Always exceptions to the rule and some will require long term incarceration.
Remembering we have one of the highest incarceration rates in the OECD.
 
Back
Top Bottom