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.
The unofficial committee is rounded out with former MPs Jackie Blue, Jo Hayes and Belinda Vernon from National, Nanaia Mahuta, Lianne Dalziel, Steve Chadwick and Lynne Pillay from Labour, Ria Bond from New Zealand First and Sue Bradford from the Greens. All are working on a 'pro bono' - unpaid - basis.


The jokes write themselves “wHY arE wE PAId LESs?”
I know I'm old and it takes time for things to filter through but am I wrong in assuming that there are men paid more than women doing the same thing? I though that was illegal in NZ?

So, if men and women doing the same thing are paid equally where is the issue?

Is it because the public service unions have figured out a way to grift more dosh by saying a primary teacher is at the same level as an airline pilot (both have responsibility for their passengers) and once entrenched there (and costing $12b a year) it can then be unionised into the private sector?

Methinks the proletariat are being misled. Don't hear anyone from the nurses for example wanting to be compared to a Thoracic surgeon. Go figure. Just another grift. As Mark Knopfler would say, Money for nothing and the votes are free.
 

NZWarriors.com

I know I'm old and it takes time for things to filter through but am I wrong in assuming that there are men paid more than women doing the same thing? I though that was illegal in NZ?

So, if men and women doing the same thing are paid equally where is the issue?

Is it because the public service unions have figured out a way to grift more dosh by saying a primary teacher is at the same level as an airline pilot (both have responsibility for their passengers) and once entrenched there (and costing $12b a year) it can then be unionised into the private sector?

Methinks the proletariat are being misled. Don't hear anyone from the nurses for example wanting to be compared to a Thoracic surgeon. Go figure. Just another grift. As Mark Knopfler would say, Money for nothing and the votes are free.
Same old grievances from the same old grievance peddlers.

The reason women earn less than men is perfectly encapsulated in the article. They do things like work for free and work less hours in general (as well as having babies). But this apparently is unfair, so the grievance peddlers want women's earnings to be equal to men, despite working less hours, ergo more pay for less work. Standard leftism
 
Same old grievances from the same old grievance peddlers.

The reason women earn less than men is perfectly encapsulated in the article. They do things like work for free and work less hours in general (as well as having babies). But this apparently is unfair, so the grievance peddlers want women's earnings to be equal to men, despite working less hours, ergo more pay for less work. Standard leftism
You have no idea like always. I'm sure Rick O’Shay would be interested in your dinner table too
 
I know I'm old and it takes time for things to filter through but am I wrong in assuming that there are men paid more than women doing the same thing? I though that was illegal in NZ?

So, if men and women doing the same thing are paid equally where is the issue?

Is it because the public service unions have figured out a way to grift more dosh by saying a primary teacher is at the same level as an airline pilot (both have responsibility for their passengers) and once entrenched there (and costing $12b a year) it can then be unionised into the private sector?

Methinks the proletariat are being misled. Don't hear anyone from the nurses for example wanting to be compared to a Thoracic surgeon. Go figure. Just another grift. As Mark Knopfler would say, Money for nothing and the votes are free.
Methinks you lot haven’t a clue from your position of privilege and ignorance.
 
If they're having babies to keep the species going presumably they'll take more leave over a career, but what's the correlation with that and equitable hourly pay rates?
I don’t understand the question. Women get on average 8.2% less than men. Women work 8.2 percentage points less than men.

The New Zealand equitable pay dispute, encompasses both wage gap, participation rate gap and Industry specific pay rates.

The reason a librarian is paid fuck all, is it was not meant to be a career. It’s meant to be a part time job for married women and grandmothers. Because it’s a job you can do 9 months pregnant, or post partum and as a frail 80 year old women.
 
I don’t understand the question. Women get on average 8.2% less than men. Women work 8.2 percentage points less than men.

The New Zealand equitable pay dispute, encompasses both wage gap, participation rate gap and Industry specific pay rates.

The reason a librarian is paid fuck all, is it was not meant to be a career. It’s meant to be a part time job for married women and grandmothers. Because it’s a job you can do 9 months pregnant, or post partum and as a frail 80 year old women.
When was it decided that's what a librarian job was meant to be, are we going back to the great library of Alexandria?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom