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

shes not going to be happy!
you could try and boil it down to neoliberalism.

it’s for the rich by the rich.
it’s who they are!
something like that anyway, apparently.

maybe add in atlas if you get stuck.
🤪
Damn right. She's a born Marxist and I say that to her face although she does like the odd bauble.
The bruises will heal eventually if I can get through ED in a couple of days. She reckons with her background and if we'd stuck with Te Aka Whai Ora, I would have been seen and processed before she gave me the slap.
 
Damn right. She's a born Marxist and I say that to her face although she does like the odd bauble.
The bruises will heal eventually if I can get through ED in a couple of days. She reckons with her background and if we'd stuck with Te Aka Whai Ora, I would have been seen and processed before she gave me the slap.
Richard Marx has a lot of fans after his biggest hit hazard
 
RNZ’s radio audience continues to decline sharply – where it was once the market leader, it now sits eighth behind Newstalk ZB and six music stations.

3280B4CC-C639-48D0-B0F7-FF9963605F1D.webp

You can clearly see people in 2021 switch away from the left RNZ to the right ZB foreshadowing the change in govt. the gap between left and right is growing indicating 3 more years for the coalition?
 
And, you're saying my wife is not an actual woman? Haven't shown her this yet. Bit afraid.
can you even say she is a woman? It is actually impossible to come to that conclusion:
  1. First she’d have to self-identify. But in order to do so, she’d need a definition to reference her identity against
  2. The modern definition of "a woman" is a person that self-identifies as a woman
  3. But that’s a circular definition. As a result, it is an impossibility for her identify as a woman, which means she is not a woman
  4. By process of elimination, if she can't be a woman, she can only be a man
And that, @Rick O’Shay, means your wife is actually your husband ;)

(not that there's anything wrong with that. It's actually quite a modern arrangement)
 
Moody’s has dropped the US’s credit rating for US federal Government debt from AAA to AA1. 11 countries retain their AAA status including Australia and New Zealand.

The interest payments on US federal debt in 2025 will absorb approaching US$1 in every US$5 of federal revenue. They exceed US defence spending.
(I'm replying to Wiz's post which was originally in the Donald Trump thread).

For those of you who think that the government should just tax more and borrow more (as per the Greens alternative budget), consider where NZ is placed on this chart from the IMF which doesn't look a borrowing as a percentage of GDP (as most who say the NZ government should just borrow more), but looks at where NZ is when the cost of borrowing is looked at in relation to government revenue.

1748469775231.webp

Sorry, but just borrowing more isn't the answer.... why? Because the interest payable on that borrowing is holding back growth, infrastructure, health, education, poverty outcomes, social services. Every dollar spent on interest is a dollar less that could be spent on these. Chlöe's answer.... tax more to pay for the interest on the additional borrowing.

 
(I'm replying to Wiz's post which was originally in the Donald Trump thread).

For those of you who think that the government should just tax more and borrow more (as per the Greens alternative budget), consider where NZ is placed on this chart from the IMF which doesn't look a borrowing as a percentage of GDP (as most who say the NZ government should just borrow more), but looks at where NZ is when the cost of borrowing is looked at in relation to government revenue.

View attachment 13188

Sorry, but just borrowing more isn't the answer.... why? Because the interest payable on that borrowing is holding back growth, infrastructure, health, education, poverty outcomes, social services. Every dollar spent on interest is a dollar less that could be spent on these. Chlöe's answer.... tax more to pay for the interest on the additional borrowing.

Hey, none of this in depth rational analysis. Be kind and try concentrating more on emotive stuff

Signed - Green voter
 
See there's more calls for compulsory testing for meth in rental properties.... but those wanting it don't think the landlords should put up the rent to cover it.

Really?

I wonder how many landlords produce/use meth in the rental properties. Sorry, but it's the renters who do because no landlord wants to go through the expense of decontaminating their rental properties.

It always amazes me that people don't think that costs incurred by landlords will eventually be recovered from the tenants by rental increases.... the increases might not be today, they might not be tomorrow but eventually, when the landlord thinks the tenants can afford it, the cost will be recovered through rental increases.
 
(I'm replying to Wiz's post which was originally in the Donald Trump thread).

For those of you who think that the government should just tax more and borrow more (as per the Greens alternative budget), consider where NZ is placed on this chart from the IMF which doesn't look a borrowing as a percentage of GDP (as most who say the NZ government should just borrow more), but looks at where NZ is when the cost of borrowing is looked at in relation to government revenue.

View attachment 13188

Sorry, but just borrowing more isn't the answer.... why? Because the interest payable on that borrowing is holding back growth, infrastructure, health, education, poverty outcomes, social services. Every dollar spent on interest is a dollar less that could be spent on these. Chlöe's answer.... tax more to pay for the interest on the additional borrowing.


For all the criticisms of the previous government not hitting targets they set out to, many aren’t being achieved by this one either and look like there’s no way they can in some areas like already saying there’s no possible way they will be recruiting 500 police as was said. It makes it look ridiculous the borrowing they did to pay out the meaningless for most tax cuts when they came into power and drove up that dept further
 
Really?

I wonder how many landlords produce/use meth in the rental properties. Sorry, but it's the renters who do because no landlord wants to go through the expense of decontaminating their rental properties.

It always amazes me that people don't think that costs incurred by landlords will eventually be recovered from the tenants by rental increases.... the increases might not be today, they might not be tomorrow but eventually, when the landlord thinks the tenants can afford it, the cost will be recovered through rental increases.
"P" testing was the biggest load of horseshit. Funnily enough, driven by the companies that stood to profit.
 
Back
Top Bottom