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.

NZWarriors.com

MOST people only take what they need when sick - eg teachers.

But some see it as an entitlement where you should take the max every year.
It’s crazy eh. There are some people that view their sick leave entitlement as annual leave

I work in the private sector, where your annual leave is your discretionary entitlement. And when you are sick, you take sick leave.

But some industries (eg nurses), it is basically accepted that sick leave is viewed as an entitlement to use at your discretion

Now, I get that nurses are underpaid, and deserve more. But the flip side is that they treat their 10 days of sick leave as annual leave
 
It is 10 weeks full pay if you work 1 day per week.

If you work 1 day per week, you work 52 weeks and days in a year. If you have 10 days off sick leave, you work 42 weeks/ days in a year.

That’s 10 weeks off fully paid at your 1 day per week.
Seriously? Jaysis I'd hate to see your maths qualifications.

If you're so unhappy why do you employ people? If you don't trust your employees and think the worst, why do you employ people?
 
Seriously? Jaysis I'd hate to see your maths qualifications.
I’m not wrong. I’ve employed and paid wages for over 20 years.

I’ve asked you continuously, how many weeks off can a person employed for 1 day per week have in a year for sick pay? Tell me the answer or accept they are entitled to 10 weeks off šŸ˜‰
 
I've replied continuously your math is shite
If you can’t understand someone working part time with the same 10 day entitlement gets a larger percentage of their time available as sick leave than someone working full time, then you shouldn’t be commenting on this debate.

It’s what it’s all about and why it’s fundamentally unfair on full time workers and disproportionately assists part time workers and severely affects consistency in workplaces.
 
Back
Top Bottom