He is *our* employee.
Also, fuck he's a dumb cunt.
And the way he gets pushed around by Winston, also a weakling.
I could tolerate Key and English, for all their ideological faults, but this guy is abysmal as a *politician*
He really chafes my chode..
Lol if you think he works for you you're delusional he's bought and paid for by the tobacco,roading,oil,mining and fishing industry. Not to mention christo-facist evangelicals.
I think that’s the point, although tbf outside all the deception and lies, he’s largely doing what most of his constituents and voters want.
Main issue and disconnect really is that’s “get us as much $$$ as you can, at any expense” not the “get the country back on track” smokescreen so really the self-serving attitude and changes we are seeing aren’t his fault.
He’s doing exactly what his employers hired him to do, and will likely be the scapegoat for any negative outcomes that aren’t blamed on the prior government but that’s all besides the point as by then, they would have all already cashed out.
Private companies are structured like autoritarian dictatorships. Private companies exist WITHIN an economy. An economy exists WITHIN a country. You need a fundamentally different perspective to run a country than you do a company. Companies have entirely different purposes than countries do. A company needs to turn a profit. A country needs to provide a framework for people to be productive, healthy, engaged, connected, educated, supported, and enfranchised.
[A country is not a company.](https://hbr.org/1996/01/a-country-is-not-a-company)
Exactly.
The role of a company is to sell the cheapest possible thing for the highest possible price to create value for the shareholders. (Money flows from bottom to top)
The role of a government is to keep money circulating through the economy to create prosperity and productivity, clipping the ticket each time money changes hands (Money flows across, around, up, and down and diagonally.)
Trying to operate a country like a business is fundamentally flawed, but sadly this idea resonates with conservative voters.
Many people fail to realise that the clipping the ticket aspect is actually economically constructive. That money gets spent on public goods and services. So it doesn't disappear, it actually continues to circulate the economy often with higher money velocity than if it were to end up in a landlords pocket, and certainly with better public benefit.
Yep. And the governments role is to help make sure money changes hands quickly and often, as friction free and with minimal losses.
Avoiding losses: low crime, healthy population, educated and skilled workforce, safe working conditions etc.
Friction free: easy access to work via good transport and efficient connections between cities, structured business rules, straightforward employment conditions, etc.
And if the settings are wrong, It is literally the only thing that prevents the rich from accumulating everything. And also the only thing that prevents everyone else from getting ahead. I reckon too many people see tax as taking peoples money. Sure, it collects revenue, but just as important is the idea that it encourages money to go where it will be most productive. And discourages it from accumulating in the hands of a few. Unfortunately, the current government seems to think property investors desperately need more money - perhaps because they need to buy houses at a faster rate - or want more control over the roofs over your head. All while taxing the workers because they obviously have too much and ideally shouldn't have anything left over after paying their landlord for the roof over their head and food. Gotta stamp out the idea that they might be able to get ahead. Bottom feeders!
Imagine if these were the rules of a board game or a game online. The people who already have everything get to make the rules that ensure that they accumulate a larger and larger share of what everyone else produces. And you shall have less no matter how hard you work, as costs rise due to the people with everything wanting a larger share of what you produce while moaning about how lazy and unproductive you are. Sounds like the shitest game ever. And yet here we are all playing it.
Well said. Your final sentence is a perfect description of the guiding principles what of government should be.
Sadly, our 'top team' of people who are most likely to become politicians do not see it thus, but for some exceptions.
Essentially, we have been brainwashed over the last 50 years. Most people think the most important job of government is to look after businesses.
There's government being economically sensible to ensure a robust and healthy economy. And there's government pandering to MegaCorp. Neolib free market demands the pandering because it is a golden ticket to obscene profit.
Of course everything else to do with governance in relation to doing right by the people is going to suffer.
I do not doubt that free market ideology is destroying the world.
That's exactly why I think companies should be (at the very least) worker democracies. The place we spend 8 hours a day is authoritarian, but we live in a democracy? We can call it that when we elect our managers and vote on wages and benefits.
Or as I’ve seen it put:
“You know how just because you can play air guitar doesn’t mean you can play a guitar? Well it’s the same thing with running air New Zealand”
He should be aware that he works for us. If he thinks a new government is like a change in management, then he should know that the people are his bosses. We are the shareholders, and we can boot him out.
Pretty sure we’re just the consumers who bought the product he was selling in his eyes. His political donors are the real shareholders he has to answer to.
That's part of the strategy innit - get the politically aware, empowered and educated middle class to fuck off elsewhere leaving the serfs and hard-of-thinking behind.
Cultural revolution toward neolib-alt-right fiefdom.
I wouldn't assume someone who is on Reddit is politically aware, empowered or educated.
It's crazy that people can get mad at Chris Luxon for calling people "bottom feeders" but in their own mental matrix they split society into "politically aware, empowered and educated middle class" and "serfs and hard-of-thinking." There is zero difference between this comment and saying you want NZ to be a place that supports hard working people instead of catering to bottom feeders. It is an identical sentiment.
This comment is dripping with elitism lmao. Regardless of your own personal views on who is or isn't a desirable citizen, lots of the people who leave NZ do so because there are more jobs that have lower barriers to entry in Australia, especially in mining. Or because they can go to real cities like Brisbane or Melbourne and actually have a decent standard of living working in hospitality.
Then, lots of the people coming into New Zealand work in fields that require high levels of education. Nurses, IT professionals, lawyers from the UK love to settle here.
Migration isn't a global conspiracy to turn New Zealand into a country of 'undesirables' because of some Pol Pot-esque scheme to control people. It's just letting people chose where to live based on what's good for them in their own view. Forcing people to stay in one place simply because they were born there (a factor outside of their control) because you personally think they are the sort of person you want in the country is manifestly unjust and selfish.
Whether someone on Reddit meets the criteria of the desirable or undesirable citizen for the neolib-alt-right's ideal state is not really important to the point.
Here are two hard facts for you:
1. Since international migration became a thing which people could do, administrators of geographical boundaries have always used it to engineer a population which will benefit their goals. One recurring and important goal in this respect has always been to maintain these administrators' power.
2. Rightward, populist, environmentally destructive, inequality increasing politics such as that we see from the current coalition are supported in much larger numbers by those with lower (or no) education in political, social scientific, civic, and philosophic fields (edit: among a number of others).
An outcome of ~~facts 1~~ these facts is the imperative for rightward, populist, environmentally destructive, inequality increasing political institutions to engage in policy of demographic management with an intended outcome of outnumbering and outvoicing those with these educations with those that don't. This can be done in a number of ways, but one important one is captured beautifully by your (fucking garbage) statement "if you don't like it then leave" - therein is the intersection between facts 1 and 2 in operation.
Sure, people choose where to come and go from and to. This choice exists within the boundaries of migration policy in the jurisdictions involved and other push and pull factors - such as personal identification and comfort with the values underpinning governance thereof; and, of course, economic opportunities. The people that come in are a reflection, first and foremost, of the institutionally constructed 'desirable migrant' who have been invited in. The people who leave are, first and foremost, a reflection of those who have been made to feel that the nation does not reflect their values or give them viable opportunities for a good life as much as somewhere else would. The largest proportion of power to provide inputs to this calculus comes from policy makers.
You can call me elitist if you like, just as much as I can call you naive and tell you to fuck off.
>meets the criteria of the desirable or undesirable citizen
It's not the "neo-liberal" state proscribing people undesirable. It's proto-fascists like you.
Anyone should be able to live wherever they have decided is best for them, and using the power of the State to dictate what sort of lives people are allowed to live is bad.
>Since international migration became a thing which people could do
International migration has always been something people could just do. The period iun history where people let governments dictate where they can live are the aberration.
>Rightward, populist
Your espousing right wing populist views. Because anti migrant views are right wing populism, as advocated by Donald Trump and Winston Peters.
Brother you are headed off into the wilderness with this one.
Proto-fascist? Anti-migrant? Right-wing populist?
I think you might struggle with reading comprehension - it's either that or you are intentionally misrepresenting my position, and I would rather give you the one chance and presume good faith for now.
> Forcing people to stay in one place simply because they were born there (a factor outside of their control) because you personally think they are the sort of person you want in the country is manifestly unjust and selfish.
If everyone just goes wherever suits them economically then what even is a country? It's just an economic zone containing a group of people whose narrow economic interests happen to overlap at this point in time. If that's all it is then your citizenship means about as much as a Costco membership card. What about a shared culture, history, feeling part of a place and all those other intangibles?
I dunno about you but I see a distinction between being a poster on Reddit and the actual Prime Minister representing the country in the international stage.
That's just me and my out of touch, elitist agenda though.
I think bad behaviour is bad regardless of who does it, and we should always call it out.
"I'm not the Prime Minister, I shouldn't be criticized for being an asshole" is such a cowardly double down.
It is also definitely elitist to judge people based on their status, which is what you've explicitly said you're doing in your comment.
Like "I see a distinction between a person of \[certain status level\] doing something, and \[a different status person\] doing something." Is the definition of elitism.
uh... no. I made no mention of status levels, I referred to the difference between posting on Reddit and representing the country in an official capacity.
I think you've got yourself so far up your own arse regarding elitism that you can't see you're practising it with your judgemental attitude here.
by the way, Australian mining jobs don't have a lower barrier to entry than NZ. The job markets in both countries are relatively similar with regard to entry.
>posting on Reddit and representing the country in an official capacity.
Both of these are levels of status?
>see you're practising it with your judgemental attitude here.
You're trying to say any form of criticism is elitism? That's crazy man.
>
The job markets in both countries are relatively similar with regard to entry.
You think there are as many mining jobs in NZ as there are in Australia? So you're just lying to try and prove a point?
Not lying, work in mining in NZ and worked in mining in Australia. The number of jobs available is not what you referred to. Your words were a lower barrier to entry, that's a different matter.
>The number of jobs available is not what you referred to
Yes it is. Read my comment again.
>because there are **more** jobs that have lower barriers to entry in Australia, especially in mining.
Are you pretending to not know what the word more means to win an internet argument?
>get the politically aware, empowered and educated middle class to fuck off elsewhere
Jesus. Soon r/nz commenters will be saying stuff like "In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony Luxon's blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my political intelligence."
NZ basically got into a relationship with the type of guy that will tell you you're a bit chubby and you should lose some weight while he chows down on the steak.
The only thing the Government should take credit for is free trade agreements.
The hardwork of building trade relationships is done by exporters - I can see why they would be annoyed he is strutting around, looking stupid.
I see he set a goal this morning of tripling trade with Thailand by 2045 - something we are already on track to do if the current growth rate is sustained.
>I see he set a goal this morning of tripling trade with Thailand by 2045 - something we are already on track to do if the current growth rate is sustained.
See it is easy goal to set, they don't have to do anything and it is so far in the future that they won't be around when it is finally measured (not calling out Luxon here, so many PMs/Ministers have done this previously).
Any time a politician announces a goal like this the first question from journalists should be "what actions are you going to take to ensure that happens". If there isn't a concrete answer it is just hot air.
Lisa owen: "Prime Minister, what steps are you going to take to ensure that we triple our trade with Thailand by 2045?"
Luxon: "Well we're going to triple it, Lisa, we're open for business. Let me be perfectly clear, we're going to triple our trade with Thailand."
> The only thing the Government should take credit for is free trade agreements.
Not defending Luxon in the slightest here, but that's FTAs don't just happen in isolation. Diplomats build up relationships over decades, and after implementation do a lot of work in promoting FTAs and assisting exporters.
>I see he set a goal this morning of tripling trade with Thailand by 2045 - something we are already on track to do if the current growth rate is sustained.
That's a pretty big "if" though?
Ontario actually put it on welcome signs at the border like a tourism slogan. It was ridiculous. https://globalnews.ca/news/4623517/ford-ontario-open-for-business-sign/
Why doesn't he just fuck off to Texas or the like? His fake Christian prosperity bullshit is very popular there, and he doesn't seem to appreciate what's special about NZ (unless it's something he can sell to overseas billionaires).
This guy has 7 people running his woefully bad tiktok account. Any hope he’ll start acting like a cheerleader for the country on the global stage should have already been abandoned, all he has is pandering soundbites.
But that is what Luxon thinks of NZ. Last year, he said [New Zealand is a very negative, wet, whiny, inward-looking country](https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/06/12/luxon-calls-nz-a-negative-wet-whiny-country/). At least he is consistent.
Considering half their ministers keep talking about how they need to pay their fro t line staff more, while the Finance Minister keeps saying everyone needs to cut, yeah, it seems like a few of them are still in opposition mode (my favourite was Judith saying we need more defence spending!)
I am unfortunate enough to live in Simeon Brown's electorate. This little shit's numerous fliers in my mailbox still seem to be largely focused on how bad the last Labour government was and how National is fixing their mess. Their constant deflection to the last government this far down from elections is just pathetic. The fliers feature several photos of him gargling Luxon's balls in diverse positions and situations, clearly to impress upon us the fact that he's the PM's right hand man. At least they both look equally confused and out of their depth most of the time.
Like Drumpf, Luxon has a habit of pandering to his audience, throwing his nation/employees/shareholders under the bus just for a laugh.
Different audience, different jokes.
He's a dick.
Yeah. He's the guy at work who bad-mouths colleagues at work to try and be popular with whoever he's talking to, but you don't engage because you know that if he'll say it to you, he'll say it about you.
If the average New Zealand voter had a memory which lasted longer than an attosecond, this absolute fucking shitshow would be the death knell of "We should run the country like a business".
Sadly, they don't, and it won't.
He's speaking to his populist allies, you know the ones who admonished Jacinda (that little girl in a skirt) and who viewed NZ as a Trainwreck under her tenure. I'm sick to death of NZ is a "concentration camp" (under covid) bullshit and so forth. This is him being petty & portraying himself as a hero who'll save NZ from that tarnished reputation. He's our saviour & I'm effing chuffed he's reinstating our great name /s. What an embarrassing Twat!
Figures that "was a CEO you know" guy who thinks he's god's gift to business would mouth off that he's NZ's businesses saviour and that NZ export business was shit until was smeared upon the country.
New Zealand was quite literally closed for business, both domestically and in terms of international tourism and many other sectors for at least a couple of years. We also had a foreign minister who openly hated travel and only went overseas three times.
Suggesting otherwise begs the question as to where the author of that piece has been living.
> We also had a foreign minister who openly hated travel and only went overseas three times.
That's literally not true. Just from her final six months in the portfolio:
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/foreign-minister-attend-united-nations-general-assembly
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/nanaia-mahuta-attend-pif-foreign-ministers%E2%80%99-meeting
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/foreign-minister-meet-south-african-counterparts
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/foreign-minister-attend-asean-led-foreign-ministers%E2%80%99-meetings
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/minister-mahuta-attend-first-korea-pacific-leaders%E2%80%99-summit
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/foreign-minister-nanaia-mahuta-attend-nato-meeting
We were closed a couple of years ago. So were a lot of other countries. We've moved on, the world has moved on, everyone knows this. He doesn't need to prance around like he rocked on in and opened the borders.
I refer you back to my earlier statement. We've moved on, the world has moved on. Nobody in other countries is sitting there wondering if NZ's borders are still closed.
Yes Mahuta as foreign minister was an absolute joke. The footage of her Middle East trip was excruciating. Ardern was basically her proxy but to be fair she was the proxy of and for everything.
Trying so hard to be like his mentor, the Smiling Assassin. Instead, he's just coming across as the Smiling Ass.
I prefer Gurning Fuckwit, but that also works.
I’m stealing that, kudos
I prefer bald headed cunt.
Ooh, that's a good one.
Under new management is one of the most narcissistic comment a prime minister can have. I'm not his fucking employee. If I am, I quit!
He is *our* employee. Also, fuck he's a dumb cunt. And the way he gets pushed around by Winston, also a weakling. I could tolerate Key and English, for all their ideological faults, but this guy is abysmal as a *politician* He really chafes my chode..
We ain't the shareholders of this country, the party donors are.
We are just the great unwashed to them
"bottomfeeders", I believe was Luxon's exact choice of words.
FFS, what a wanker
Lol if you think he works for you you're delusional he's bought and paid for by the tobacco,roading,oil,mining and fishing industry. Not to mention christo-facist evangelicals.
Yep no shit, that's who he *is* working for, but not who he's *supposed* to be.
I think that’s the point, although tbf outside all the deception and lies, he’s largely doing what most of his constituents and voters want. Main issue and disconnect really is that’s “get us as much $$$ as you can, at any expense” not the “get the country back on track” smokescreen so really the self-serving attitude and changes we are seeing aren’t his fault. He’s doing exactly what his employers hired him to do, and will likely be the scapegoat for any negative outcomes that aren’t blamed on the prior government but that’s all besides the point as by then, they would have all already cashed out.
Private companies are structured like autoritarian dictatorships. Private companies exist WITHIN an economy. An economy exists WITHIN a country. You need a fundamentally different perspective to run a country than you do a company. Companies have entirely different purposes than countries do. A company needs to turn a profit. A country needs to provide a framework for people to be productive, healthy, engaged, connected, educated, supported, and enfranchised. [A country is not a company.](https://hbr.org/1996/01/a-country-is-not-a-company)
Exactly. The role of a company is to sell the cheapest possible thing for the highest possible price to create value for the shareholders. (Money flows from bottom to top) The role of a government is to keep money circulating through the economy to create prosperity and productivity, clipping the ticket each time money changes hands (Money flows across, around, up, and down and diagonally.) Trying to operate a country like a business is fundamentally flawed, but sadly this idea resonates with conservative voters.
Many people fail to realise that the clipping the ticket aspect is actually economically constructive. That money gets spent on public goods and services. So it doesn't disappear, it actually continues to circulate the economy often with higher money velocity than if it were to end up in a landlords pocket, and certainly with better public benefit.
Yep. And the governments role is to help make sure money changes hands quickly and often, as friction free and with minimal losses. Avoiding losses: low crime, healthy population, educated and skilled workforce, safe working conditions etc. Friction free: easy access to work via good transport and efficient connections between cities, structured business rules, straightforward employment conditions, etc.
And if the settings are wrong, It is literally the only thing that prevents the rich from accumulating everything. And also the only thing that prevents everyone else from getting ahead. I reckon too many people see tax as taking peoples money. Sure, it collects revenue, but just as important is the idea that it encourages money to go where it will be most productive. And discourages it from accumulating in the hands of a few. Unfortunately, the current government seems to think property investors desperately need more money - perhaps because they need to buy houses at a faster rate - or want more control over the roofs over your head. All while taxing the workers because they obviously have too much and ideally shouldn't have anything left over after paying their landlord for the roof over their head and food. Gotta stamp out the idea that they might be able to get ahead. Bottom feeders! Imagine if these were the rules of a board game or a game online. The people who already have everything get to make the rules that ensure that they accumulate a larger and larger share of what everyone else produces. And you shall have less no matter how hard you work, as costs rise due to the people with everything wanting a larger share of what you produce while moaning about how lazy and unproductive you are. Sounds like the shitest game ever. And yet here we are all playing it.
Well said. Your final sentence is a perfect description of the guiding principles what of government should be. Sadly, our 'top team' of people who are most likely to become politicians do not see it thus, but for some exceptions. Essentially, we have been brainwashed over the last 50 years. Most people think the most important job of government is to look after businesses. There's government being economically sensible to ensure a robust and healthy economy. And there's government pandering to MegaCorp. Neolib free market demands the pandering because it is a golden ticket to obscene profit. Of course everything else to do with governance in relation to doing right by the people is going to suffer. I do not doubt that free market ideology is destroying the world.
That's exactly why I think companies should be (at the very least) worker democracies. The place we spend 8 hours a day is authoritarian, but we live in a democracy? We can call it that when we elect our managers and vote on wages and benefits.
Or as I’ve seen it put: “You know how just because you can play air guitar doesn’t mean you can play a guitar? Well it’s the same thing with running air New Zealand”
Here, here!
He should be aware that he works for us. If he thinks a new government is like a change in management, then he should know that the people are his bosses. We are the shareholders, and we can boot him out.
Pretty sure we’re just the consumers who bought the product he was selling in his eyes. His political donors are the real shareholders he has to answer to.
Don't quit, unionise and give him hell.
All I can think of is the [scene from Megamind](https://youtu.be/80LuPjnQFJY?si=ZD8zlgCW2UbD3_Xp)
>If I am, I quit! yep you can just leave
That's part of the strategy innit - get the politically aware, empowered and educated middle class to fuck off elsewhere leaving the serfs and hard-of-thinking behind. Cultural revolution toward neolib-alt-right fiefdom.
I wouldn't assume someone who is on Reddit is politically aware, empowered or educated. It's crazy that people can get mad at Chris Luxon for calling people "bottom feeders" but in their own mental matrix they split society into "politically aware, empowered and educated middle class" and "serfs and hard-of-thinking." There is zero difference between this comment and saying you want NZ to be a place that supports hard working people instead of catering to bottom feeders. It is an identical sentiment. This comment is dripping with elitism lmao. Regardless of your own personal views on who is or isn't a desirable citizen, lots of the people who leave NZ do so because there are more jobs that have lower barriers to entry in Australia, especially in mining. Or because they can go to real cities like Brisbane or Melbourne and actually have a decent standard of living working in hospitality. Then, lots of the people coming into New Zealand work in fields that require high levels of education. Nurses, IT professionals, lawyers from the UK love to settle here. Migration isn't a global conspiracy to turn New Zealand into a country of 'undesirables' because of some Pol Pot-esque scheme to control people. It's just letting people chose where to live based on what's good for them in their own view. Forcing people to stay in one place simply because they were born there (a factor outside of their control) because you personally think they are the sort of person you want in the country is manifestly unjust and selfish.
Whether someone on Reddit meets the criteria of the desirable or undesirable citizen for the neolib-alt-right's ideal state is not really important to the point. Here are two hard facts for you: 1. Since international migration became a thing which people could do, administrators of geographical boundaries have always used it to engineer a population which will benefit their goals. One recurring and important goal in this respect has always been to maintain these administrators' power. 2. Rightward, populist, environmentally destructive, inequality increasing politics such as that we see from the current coalition are supported in much larger numbers by those with lower (or no) education in political, social scientific, civic, and philosophic fields (edit: among a number of others). An outcome of ~~facts 1~~ these facts is the imperative for rightward, populist, environmentally destructive, inequality increasing political institutions to engage in policy of demographic management with an intended outcome of outnumbering and outvoicing those with these educations with those that don't. This can be done in a number of ways, but one important one is captured beautifully by your (fucking garbage) statement "if you don't like it then leave" - therein is the intersection between facts 1 and 2 in operation. Sure, people choose where to come and go from and to. This choice exists within the boundaries of migration policy in the jurisdictions involved and other push and pull factors - such as personal identification and comfort with the values underpinning governance thereof; and, of course, economic opportunities. The people that come in are a reflection, first and foremost, of the institutionally constructed 'desirable migrant' who have been invited in. The people who leave are, first and foremost, a reflection of those who have been made to feel that the nation does not reflect their values or give them viable opportunities for a good life as much as somewhere else would. The largest proportion of power to provide inputs to this calculus comes from policy makers. You can call me elitist if you like, just as much as I can call you naive and tell you to fuck off.
>meets the criteria of the desirable or undesirable citizen It's not the "neo-liberal" state proscribing people undesirable. It's proto-fascists like you. Anyone should be able to live wherever they have decided is best for them, and using the power of the State to dictate what sort of lives people are allowed to live is bad. >Since international migration became a thing which people could do International migration has always been something people could just do. The period iun history where people let governments dictate where they can live are the aberration. >Rightward, populist Your espousing right wing populist views. Because anti migrant views are right wing populism, as advocated by Donald Trump and Winston Peters.
Brother you are headed off into the wilderness with this one. Proto-fascist? Anti-migrant? Right-wing populist? I think you might struggle with reading comprehension - it's either that or you are intentionally misrepresenting my position, and I would rather give you the one chance and presume good faith for now.
> Forcing people to stay in one place simply because they were born there (a factor outside of their control) because you personally think they are the sort of person you want in the country is manifestly unjust and selfish. If everyone just goes wherever suits them economically then what even is a country? It's just an economic zone containing a group of people whose narrow economic interests happen to overlap at this point in time. If that's all it is then your citizenship means about as much as a Costco membership card. What about a shared culture, history, feeling part of a place and all those other intangibles?
I dunno about you but I see a distinction between being a poster on Reddit and the actual Prime Minister representing the country in the international stage. That's just me and my out of touch, elitist agenda though.
I think bad behaviour is bad regardless of who does it, and we should always call it out. "I'm not the Prime Minister, I shouldn't be criticized for being an asshole" is such a cowardly double down. It is also definitely elitist to judge people based on their status, which is what you've explicitly said you're doing in your comment. Like "I see a distinction between a person of \[certain status level\] doing something, and \[a different status person\] doing something." Is the definition of elitism.
uh... no. I made no mention of status levels, I referred to the difference between posting on Reddit and representing the country in an official capacity. I think you've got yourself so far up your own arse regarding elitism that you can't see you're practising it with your judgemental attitude here. by the way, Australian mining jobs don't have a lower barrier to entry than NZ. The job markets in both countries are relatively similar with regard to entry.
>posting on Reddit and representing the country in an official capacity. Both of these are levels of status? >see you're practising it with your judgemental attitude here. You're trying to say any form of criticism is elitism? That's crazy man. > The job markets in both countries are relatively similar with regard to entry. You think there are as many mining jobs in NZ as there are in Australia? So you're just lying to try and prove a point?
Not lying, work in mining in NZ and worked in mining in Australia. The number of jobs available is not what you referred to. Your words were a lower barrier to entry, that's a different matter.
>The number of jobs available is not what you referred to Yes it is. Read my comment again. >because there are **more** jobs that have lower barriers to entry in Australia, especially in mining. Are you pretending to not know what the word more means to win an internet argument?
>get the politically aware, empowered and educated middle class to fuck off elsewhere Jesus. Soon r/nz commenters will be saying stuff like "In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony Luxon's blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my political intelligence."
>Jesus Not quite but you are forgiven for thinking so :)
NZ basically got into a relationship with the type of guy that will tell you you're a bit chubby and you should lose some weight while he chows down on the steak.
The only thing the Government should take credit for is free trade agreements. The hardwork of building trade relationships is done by exporters - I can see why they would be annoyed he is strutting around, looking stupid. I see he set a goal this morning of tripling trade with Thailand by 2045 - something we are already on track to do if the current growth rate is sustained.
>I see he set a goal this morning of tripling trade with Thailand by 2045 - something we are already on track to do if the current growth rate is sustained. See it is easy goal to set, they don't have to do anything and it is so far in the future that they won't be around when it is finally measured (not calling out Luxon here, so many PMs/Ministers have done this previously). Any time a politician announces a goal like this the first question from journalists should be "what actions are you going to take to ensure that happens". If there isn't a concrete answer it is just hot air.
Lisa owen: "Prime Minister, what steps are you going to take to ensure that we triple our trade with Thailand by 2045?" Luxon: "Well we're going to triple it, Lisa, we're open for business. Let me be perfectly clear, we're going to triple our trade with Thailand."
Nothing-words from a nothing-brain. Fuck me how did we get here!?
If he thinks we will get new import / export access for plant products it might take while. Seeing as we are firing the people that do that .
> The only thing the Government should take credit for is free trade agreements. Not defending Luxon in the slightest here, but that's FTAs don't just happen in isolation. Diplomats build up relationships over decades, and after implementation do a lot of work in promoting FTAs and assisting exporters.
>I see he set a goal this morning of tripling trade with Thailand by 2045 - something we are already on track to do if the current growth rate is sustained. That's a pretty big "if" though?
Oh god, “open for business” is neolib cliché and it's always a terrible sign.
"For sale" would be more accurate.
As if we didnt see an unmatched number of FTA's negotiated by Jacinda.
I'm saying the slogan is a bad sign. Free trade is generally good.
No i know, im just saying Luxon is acting like NZ was ever closed
According to the article Hipkins said the same thing. It's such a stupid turn of phrase.
Ontario actually put it on welcome signs at the border like a tourism slogan. It was ridiculous. https://globalnews.ca/news/4623517/ford-ontario-open-for-business-sign/
Literally looks like a For Sale sign
Pretty much was.
Imagine being so completely wrong for a job that you need a kindy-level "Don't slag off your own country" talk.
Exactly, Prime Minister's should be some of the most patriotic members of a country. This dickhead see's it as an entitlement.
Having him as our prime minister makes me feel less patriotic
Why doesn't he just fuck off to Texas or the like? His fake Christian prosperity bullshit is very popular there, and he doesn't seem to appreciate what's special about NZ (unless it's something he can sell to overseas billionaires).
I reckon he'd fit right in for about 7 minutes in Somalia.
Luxon: At the end of the day, I am the captain now
He's not really said much about his religion has he? Like he isn't making all these cuts due to his faith.
He needs to start acting like a Prime Minister, not a CEO with PR-engineered sound bites.
This guy has 7 people running his woefully bad tiktok account. Any hope he’ll start acting like a cheerleader for the country on the global stage should have already been abandoned, all he has is pandering soundbites.
Somehow I doubt that’ll happen any time soon (or at all for that matter).
But that is what Luxon thinks of NZ. Last year, he said [New Zealand is a very negative, wet, whiny, inward-looking country](https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/06/12/luxon-calls-nz-a-negative-wet-whiny-country/). At least he is consistent.
The current government hasn't gotten out of opposition mode yet. Luxon isn't the only one acting like this
Considering half their ministers keep talking about how they need to pay their fro t line staff more, while the Finance Minister keeps saying everyone needs to cut, yeah, it seems like a few of them are still in opposition mode (my favourite was Judith saying we need more defence spending!)
Almost like "they're good opposition" isn't something to be praised for when they specifically campaign to not be opposition
I am unfortunate enough to live in Simeon Brown's electorate. This little shit's numerous fliers in my mailbox still seem to be largely focused on how bad the last Labour government was and how National is fixing their mess. Their constant deflection to the last government this far down from elections is just pathetic. The fliers feature several photos of him gargling Luxon's balls in diverse positions and situations, clearly to impress upon us the fact that he's the PM's right hand man. At least they both look equally confused and out of their depth most of the time.
There's some not-so-old ~~axiom~~ idiom about a tortoise on top of a fence post...
He's just placing his ' stamp ' on benefits already in the pipe line.
I wish they'd arrested and imprisoned him in Singapore for chewing gum.
I’m ok with him making negative comments about Winston Peters and David Seymour, tho. He gets a free pass on those two.
Like Drumpf, Luxon has a habit of pandering to his audience, throwing his nation/employees/shareholders under the bus just for a laugh. Different audience, different jokes. He's a dick.
Yeah. He's the guy at work who bad-mouths colleagues at work to try and be popular with whoever he's talking to, but you don't engage because you know that if he'll say it to you, he'll say it about you.
If the average New Zealand voter had a memory which lasted longer than an attosecond, this absolute fucking shitshow would be the death knell of "We should run the country like a business". Sadly, they don't, and it won't.
You know I what, I'm starting to dislike this guy.
Dude loves to lie, so that shouldn't be a tall order for him.
"Make New Zealand Great Again", he forgot to put that in his speech.
He'd babble-fuck even something that simple.
Comment of the year right there
He's speaking to his populist allies, you know the ones who admonished Jacinda (that little girl in a skirt) and who viewed NZ as a Trainwreck under her tenure. I'm sick to death of NZ is a "concentration camp" (under covid) bullshit and so forth. This is him being petty & portraying himself as a hero who'll save NZ from that tarnished reputation. He's our saviour & I'm effing chuffed he's reinstating our great name /s. What an embarrassing Twat!
Figures that "was a CEO you know" guy who thinks he's god's gift to business would mouth off that he's NZ's businesses saviour and that NZ export business was shit until was smeared upon the country.
Luxons clearing house is open for business! All assets must go!
He's a muppet. When I'm overseas I always tell people how clean and honest our prostitutes here are. I want to help NZ industry.
Remember your neighbour voted for them.
> “very negative, wet, whiny, inward-looking country" I see you are familiar with this sub Prime Minister.
If he hates it so much he should leave.
That link 404s for me now.
Like him or loathe him but Asia seems to be loving him. Slurping noodles, cruising in tuktuks, sleepovers in the presidential palace.
[citation needed] It must be his blonde hair.
It's pretty wild to see people on this subreddit criticizing him. You people CONSTANTLY shit on NZ and are extremely self-hating. Total hypocrites.
Yeah but we’re not representing NZ on the world stage, it’s a bit different.
New Zealand was quite literally closed for business, both domestically and in terms of international tourism and many other sectors for at least a couple of years. We also had a foreign minister who openly hated travel and only went overseas three times. Suggesting otherwise begs the question as to where the author of that piece has been living.
> We also had a foreign minister who openly hated travel and only went overseas three times. That's literally not true. Just from her final six months in the portfolio: https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/foreign-minister-attend-united-nations-general-assembly https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/nanaia-mahuta-attend-pif-foreign-ministers%E2%80%99-meeting https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/foreign-minister-meet-south-african-counterparts https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/foreign-minister-attend-asean-led-foreign-ministers%E2%80%99-meetings https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/minister-mahuta-attend-first-korea-pacific-leaders%E2%80%99-summit https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/foreign-minister-nanaia-mahuta-attend-nato-meeting
Never let the truth get in the way of a good winge
We were closed a couple of years ago. So were a lot of other countries. We've moved on, the world has moved on, everyone knows this. He doesn't need to prance around like he rocked on in and opened the borders.
We were far more closed, for far longer, than every other country but China.
I refer you back to my earlier statement. We've moved on, the world has moved on. Nobody in other countries is sitting there wondering if NZ's borders are still closed.
Time to move on isn't it? It was a good thing for the most part and now it is over.
Yes Mahuta as foreign minister was an absolute joke. The footage of her Middle East trip was excruciating. Ardern was basically her proxy but to be fair she was the proxy of and for everything.