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.
As anyone in business knows, depreciation is recovered when you sell the asset for a profit, so it’s a zero sum game long term.

Boost in the short term, non issue in the long term.

A reporter without much idea, preaching to the uninformed šŸ¤·ā€ā™‚ļø
Again, not addressing the actual article content and the issues raised by the reporter.

Then slandering that reporter with no factual basis.
 

NZWarriors.com

Corruption, chaos and economic damage

Sorry what’s the problem with accelerated depreciation? It’s a tax benefit in year 1 that promotes investment at a time when our economy needs a kickstart and that tax benefit is eventually offset across the remaining life of the asset. What’s corrupt about that?
 
Sorry what’s the problem with accelerated depreciation? It’s a tax benefit in year 1 that promotes investment at a time when our economy needs a kickstart and that tax benefit is eventually offset across the remaining life of the asset. What’s corrupt about that?
Please read the article. Carefully, and absorb what the journalist, who has done great work, is reporting on.

Understand who is behind this and what the impacts are for all New Zealanders.
 
Okay, so you've been completely wrong in the presentation of this - any apology? After all, more than once you have accused me of being a conspiracy theorist and spreading disinformation. Without basis or proof either. Like I say, you do you, but at least try and be honest.
Who says I’m wrong? I’m saying if you are right Nationals even better!

In any case, either way, where’s the rich getting richer, neoliberalism, far right issues that started the whole thing? That’s the misinformation you haven’t disproved 🤣
 
Please read the article. Carefully, and absorb what the journalist, who has done great work, is reporting on.

Understand who is behind this and what the impacts are for all New Zealanders.
Labours finance minister approves of it. Most other countries do it.

You are the one hinting at big conspiracies šŸ˜‰
 
Please read the article. Carefully, and absorb what the journalist, who has done great work, is reporting on.

Understand who is behind this and what the impacts are for all New Zealanders.
I’ve read the article but I’m more interested in hearing from you - why do you think it is corrupt? You’re the one who has labelled it that way so explain to me your standpoint please.
 
Stop hiding behind other people’s work. You are the one who labelled it corrupt so please explain yourself.
And maybe you could apply the same scrutiny to your mate wiz, unless of course you have double standards, which I know you do.

I'm extending the definition of stupidity to continuing this as well as wiz.

Jaysis you lot eh
 
And maybe you could apply the same scrutiny to your mate wiz, unless of course you have double standards, which I know you do.

I'm extending the definition of stupidity to continuing this as well as wiz.

Jaysis you lot eh
You’re then one leading with the chin in this thread. Come on back up the big nasty words like CORRUPTION you throw out there all the time. Why is it corrupt… or does it just not sit perfectly with whatever ideology it is that you think you prescribe to?
 
I see you watching @miket12 .

Please change the subject… how did we end up going from needed a smoke alarm for safety to 100 of them in a house, all interlinked costing $1000 per house?

Make it make sense, Mike. Safety to the extreme! Next we will require sprinkler systems in domestic housing, when we rarely have house fires anymore.

14 people die in house fires every year on average. How many die from homelessness because they can’t afford a house anymore?
 
Last edited:
I see you watching @miket12 .

Please change the subject… how did we end up going from needed a smoke alarm for safety to 100 of them in a house, all interlinked costing $1000 per house?

Make it make sense, Mike. Safety to the extreme! Next we will require sprinkler systems in domestic housing, when we rarely have house fires anymore.

14 people die in house fires every year on average. How many die from homelessness because they can’t afford a house anymore?
If only you'd owned up to your rubbish before wiz we probably wouldn't be here.
 
If only you'd owned up to your rubbish before wiz we probably wouldn't be here.
Where? Having to install copious amounts of smoke alarms?

You made all the big heavy rubbish statements and haven’t backed them up…

Corruption? Nope.

Running things into the ground? Nope, even you can’t dispute there’s massive increases in funding!

Best govt ever - Despite the smoke alarms. We need to get Seymour the ā€˜regulation terminator’ onto them! 🤣
 
Sorry what’s the problem with accelerated depreciation? It’s a tax benefit in year 1 that promotes investment at a time when our economy needs a kickstart and that tax benefit is eventually offset across the remaining life of the asset. What’s corrupt about that?
Private business is corrupt Mr Brownstone, when will you learn. There is only the all knowing state, in charge of everything.
 
I see you watching @miket12 .

Please change the subject… how did we end up going from needed a smoke alarm for safety to 100 of them in a house, all interlinked costing $1000 per house?

Make it make sense, Mike. Safety to the extreme! Next we will require sprinkler systems in domestic housing, when we rarely have house fires anymore.

14 people die in house fires every year on average. How many die from homelessness because they can’t afford a house anymore?
Sorry, but unless you've building house with over 50 bedrooms, 30 living areas and 20 hallways, you wouldn't need 100 smoke alarms.

The cost difference between a battery only alarm to an interlinked alarm is around $20 per unit. Standard five bed house with three living areas (lounge/dining combined plus an upstairs landing and a media room) and two hallways would need 10 alarms under the latest BC requirements. Before, that could have had three/four alarms at a minimum (kitchen, hallways within 3m of bedrooms.

If this has pissed you off, you'd hate to know that there's a MBIE working group currently looking at a minimum solar system per new build dwelling for the next lot of changes being considered for H1 Energy efficiency of the acceptable solutions to the NZBC. Wait for incoming fire from @MrFrankWhite over that one.
 
Interesting that the very politicians getting upset at the scrapping of the SmokeFree legalisation are the same ones getting upset that some beneficiaries are going to be receiving bank cards which will restrict what items can be brought on them.... i.e. food and not for booze or smokes. Oh, the games politicians play.
 
Back
Top Bottom