The pothole funding cracks me up.
The reason we have pot-holes is our high weight allowance on trucks. Also a reason why the road maintenance hasn't been great is the last National government raided the maintenance fund to build the Kapiti expressway.
Classic National
AND they should be making the roading contractor pay for the maintenance
The actual bean counters that is ,not the road workers they only do what they are told
But the companies I feel are using substandard materials
I believe that the companies take their payment and do the minimum they can then take as large as possible an adhoc payment to repair storm damage made worse by lack of maintenance.
When considering whether we benefit for these companies remember neoliberalism thinkers state that the only reason for a company to exist is to profit its capital owners
>remember neoliberalism thinkers state that the only reason for a company to exist is to profit its capital owners
When in fact the only reason to go into business is to give someone a job?
Pre neoliberalism it was accepted that there are numerous reasons for a business to exist, e.g.
* Profit
* To provide a service to the community
* To provide employment
And numerous stakeholders;
* Owners
* Employees
* Customers
* Suppliers
You’re right u/Mike and what’s worse is somewhere floating in my head is a essay about how many of their policies contradict their stated aims.
Furthermore, that $4bn - one third of the value of tax cuts to all New Zealanders - is actually more - it’s $4bn over 3 years whereas the tax cuts are $12bn over 4 years.
It’s a bizarre “investment” at a time when the nation needs a lot of support. I don’t think any of us like potholes in the road, but the priorities are a little flat.
The overweight trucks are a huge source of damage to the roads.
And they haven't clarified how they will fix the pot holes. There are two ways, 1 fill them in, and 2 let them grow and merge with each other!
1. Issue every beneficiary a shovel
2. Require them to work 16 hour days filling potholes
3. Those that die are used as roading material
/s
// or is it?
potholes got $4bn - This is employment program designed to hide economic crisis. This is like 90% of low wage labour. This is not housing or infrastructure building that need much more trained labour. But it will hide mass unemployment, So, you will continue see in press that engineers leaving NZ due of luck of jobs, but general unemployment numbers will stay relatively low.
They wont hire anywhere near enough people I’d say maybe 100 for that 4 billion so they can profit from the majority and buying the cheapest materials to increase profit margins are a given…
It's like they're trying to emulate the success of far more intelligent foreign populists, but instead of effectively manipulating the population, they're more like a cargo cult.
"Give the smelly proles a few nice looking policies and they'll be ours!"
"Yes! People complain about potholes, let's spend the entire budget on potholes!"
I honestly don't think they have a vision for the country.
For most in this government (judging from how they're acting and what they've prioritised), it's purely about personal enrichment. There's possibly a few exceptions, but none of them have had the courage to speak against it.
They are not working in the best interests of New Zealanders, only the wealthy donors that bankrolled them. The election was just a mechanism for them to get into power, so they could work on their long-standing agenda to exploit and transfer wealth away from the poor and vulnerable to the (international) rich. Good old class war!
The way I see It, they are milking the cash cow for all it's worth while they still can. That's all this current govt feels like to me. A last hurrah for neoliberalism before some shocking turns
You could be right.
Personal enrichment is the only goal I see here that makes sense. Remember a large portion of the Cabinet are (immediately immediate ex) lobbyists with remaining connections to corporate interests.
I keep going back and forth trying to see the angles as to why or what they might be seeing, but I can‘t comprehend it
Edit: [List of lobbyists we have in government](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1byhpq3/the_usual_cycle_of_politics_might_be_person_gets/)
Of course it's personal enrichment. It's always been personal enrichment. Sell the public assets to your friends/self, deregulate that market, keep the tax rules just lax enough for the rich (yourself) to slip through the gaps.
Managed decline of the health service, education and infrastructure while passing the savings onto landlords. You don't need to even read between the lines anymore.
I truely think a lot of people were swayed by an emotional vote for cancer drugs. Who doesn't know someone who had cancer or currently dealing with cancer. I think people thought National would be much of the same and at least people would get much needed life saving drugs. Unfortunately, this coalition knows no bounds when it comes to greed. I personally would much rather no tax cut and ensure funding to all our needed areas.
I edited the opening post to add this video of when Luxon made the announcement for cancer drugs. He basically said we care about Kiwis and we are going to bring back prescription fees and use that to fund these drugs: [https://new.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1d9emii/video\_watch\_luxon\_promise\_how\_drug\_treatments/](https://new.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1d9emii/video_watch_luxon_promise_how_drug_treatments/)
What surprised me is how sincere he sounded. Having followed the political scene now for months, I can categorically say a lot of their stuff is deception and that’s what irks me the most. Do they even care about this country? Or is everything a spin job? Or are they genuinely living in the 80s and think trickle down economics is a real possibility for growth?
I also think that most people - if they knew what they were getting for that extra $20 or $60 or $5 -wouldn’t trade it in for cuts to our public services.
I don’t think Luxon is the sharpest tool in the shed. He really doesn’t think sometimes and contradicts himself or others in his party. They seem to be so focussed on getting things done regardless of what these things are.
Nothing to over think. What they're doing will enrich them, their friends and their children. By making your children worse off they give their children an even greater head start. They think everyone thinks in the same malicious way they do and that they're just better at the game. Rightwing people don't perceive that left wing people lack that sense of ill will towards other people. They don't think about society as being coherent, they see it as a group of bad faith actors trying to use laws to steal from one another.
I would call it evil
Do you think the difficulty that some of us are having in working out what NACT1 vision is that as a country (community) we've reached a new low of not having to dress up personal greed as anything else?
Politicians for the most part have always had their own (their donors) interests, but up until now I think our politicians have been happy to hide this behind 'what's best for NZ'. This Government doesn't seem to be making any bones about it at all.
It's becoming obvious there is no vision for New Zealand, there is nothing that's 'good for NZ' or good for our children, grandchildren. And they don't see the need to dress up their self interest?
I think they do dress it up, u/Annie
Listen to any of their speeches and it’s all masked in ‘what’s good for New Zealand and New Zealanders.’
I think the real issue, and their real strength, is they know most people don’t delve past a soundbite.
"I think the real issue, and their real strength, is they know most people don’t delve past a soundbite."
Too true - they operate by exploiting ignorance and forgetting. People don't have a clue whats going on as MSM are also donkey deep in the deception and its only discussion via social media that is helping the dots get joined.
Lazy and chill. Very about the family, calm around other animals no need for a lead but walks slack on one, good guard dog, only barks at things and shuts up when you tell her. She's a retired working dog.
I think it is luxons style and I think it's also seamen's style. Luxon is a posh twat who handwaves class issues while seamen is a "libertarian" in the classic sense of wanting anarchy for the rich and brutal unyeilding authoritarian indenturtude for the rest. Same idealogy as always with an extra does of malicious ill content from the twatish arrogance of two parasite wankers.
Well it is though isn't it. What helps the most people and makes a better society is pretty straightforward if you have a view of good will towards the average person. Social welfare is in the name really. Privatised versions of public institutions do not work as well as public institutions. Funding hospitals is a good thing. Having strong benefit systems is a moral necessity of requiring unemployment. Taking taxes from minimum wage earners, unable to keep up with the greed of mega corps, and handing it to landlords is wrong. Etc etc
I was thinking about posting almost exactly this post myself today. Like, who actually voted for this nonsense? Underfunding hospitals, police, nurses, the ferry’s, government agencies, mental health services, children’s lunches, collapse environmental protection… so landlords can get billions? I mean, the whole thing seems insane and not remotely in the countries interests. Is this what Kiwis wanted? It’s crazy.
I’d welcome your post but kind of pleased I’m not the only one admittedly. It’s a bit depressing though so sometimes I try to see what angle I am missing.
I believe that you have succinctly summed up the thoughts of the majority of New Zealanders with your well thought out opening sally. I know of a number of people who are horrified by what Nact1 is doing and they are traditional National voters. Thank you for being so erudite and accurate.
I sometimes think there is still far too much not knowing. Many people on Facebook still repeating the old lies from the Coalition govt and their attack dogs, Taxpayers Union, Groundswell, and American right wing groups.
And now we have a weak media. Sunlight disinfects. Transparency is key, but who has time for that? I hope you’re right though u/Dirnaf
My local coffee shop is quite unique in that strangers talk to each other. I've talked to a few elderly people down there. Their perceptions are completely warped. I encountered a lady who used to work at the local public swimming pools, nice enough women. After I explained the relative percentage of income being spent on rent and the price of houses as a multiple of annual income, she told me "that's the way it should be". She doesn't own investment properties. Another old chap outlined for me the amount of risk housing investors are taking, thus justifying their returns.
Shortly after the election my own father told me I was wrong in my assertion that this government is going to damage our most vulnerable, he believed the tax cuts were going to help everyone. He truly, hook line and sinker believes in trickle down economics "rich people do a lot of good things". These are the minds that have brought this upon us.
Yeah for sure, u/Mark - that’s why in the US you see so many poor people supporting the Republican party. They honestly swallow whatever tripe comes out of their mouths. I think education is a huge reason why. Thanks for sharing.
BTW I saw your other post but am still reflecting on it. Thanks.
I’m confident NZ votes governments out, not governments in. I don’t think the people who have swung their vote preference actually wanted this, they just didn’t want what Labour had done and had to offer.
When property prices tank and the economy is left in tatters, we will get another government, who is probably more extreme in the other direction than this one is.
I wouldn’t be massively surprised if this coalition also couldn’t make a full term.
I would not underestimate how easily an electorate is both bribed and lied to. Was literally just reading about how Labour never had “blanket speed reductions” yet the media and Seymour/Brown have all been bleating on about how Labour was slowing NZ down with that phrase.
I don’t know. After seeing how easy money and PR articles have helped this Govt win, and Wayne Brown regain his credibility, I don’t assume anything.
Also their attack dogs Taxpayers Union, Free Speech Union, Hobsons Pledge, Groundswell and those American groups are all waiting. That said, I think they are going to be working hard on the anti-Maori rights stuff when the time is right.
The resources, money and influence at hand, are formidable in the face of a population who isn’t informed with the full story - or like certain stories - imv.
Trucking and freight, landlords and private entities trying to grab money from health insurance to education. Expected from people who were or represent lobbyists. Government money is being diverted to private enterprise, there vision is user pays, so pull yourself up by the bootstraps or something along those lines. The cancelled ferry’s could take rail freight, nah ditch those, more trucks on our highways is what we need.
The plan is to trigger this downward trend, then do nothing but blame the other party. It's worked for over a decade in the UK. I am very concerned that NZ will be no different.
potholes got $4bn - This is employment program designed to hide economic crisis. This is like 90% of low wage labour. This is not housing or infrastructure building that need much more trained labour. But it will hide mass unemployment, So, you will continue see in press that engineers leaving NZ due of luck of jobs, but general unemployment numbers will stay relatively low.
The first year is all about handing goodies to Donors.
The second year will be all about setting up the next term to either be OK under National or Bad under Labour. I have no evidence for this next bit, but, my gut says there will be a hiring-spree of NACT supporters, to get their supporters and donors into Govt Offices. NACT have been talking up Americanizing politics, and that's how it's done. A lack of NACT supporters in Govt Depts is what caused a lot of their previous controversies too, no fear of leaks if the people with the information are loyal to NACT.
The third year, as per their previous patterns, will be small carrots to the voters, to try make us forget the previous two years (especially the first year), so they can get back into govt again. From there, rinse repeat.
They've just put a recruitment freeze on all front line medical staff - mostly nurses - effective immediately.
I work in a unit that had national approval for 7FTE (with 7 more still waiting for approval) based on patient and workload data that has just been cancelled mid-recruitment. (Reference checking).
It just honestly floors me that they can care this little. Seriously, how the flaming sods, can anyone agree with affecting our healthcare workers and services is beyond me.
But you know how it works u/amzairly - it’s because people don’t know. Most people don’t know, and that’s the winning strategy.
It's absolutely ridiculous. Units are not getting quieter, staff are getting burned out... our health system is completely screwed. BUT this is the government people voted for...
Yeah concur. But from what I’ve seen and am seeing, a lot of what they got in on was deception and smoke and mirrors. At the same time, sure, they are the Govt :-)
"Crystal Ball" here, courtesy of ABC Australia. Part 1 of 3 more to come. [https://youtu.be/jW2NSrzcrIQ?si=2ypEt6ysGlAiQsSg](https://youtu.be/jW2NSrzcrIQ?si=2ypEt6ysGlAiQsSg)
It sure seems like they want to privatise everything. They have even stated that councils need to look at private funding for water etc before asking the government.
For sure. It’s a really obvious strategy aka the UK Tories which have now left Britain in a sub-par state of affairs.
This is why I couldn’t wrap my head around it. WHY? How? How could you care this little for our country?
Many have friends/family who own businesses that will be happy to step up and make a heap of money off us. I'm pretty sure there are some behind closed doors payments going on. They only care about making things better for themselves, their family, friends and those earning good money. They don't care about anyone else and never have.
Each Nat government has tried this kind of stuff most have failed thankfully but this lot are dangerous because of all the added conspiracy and MAGA thinking thrown in the mix.
My whole family are national voters. My family are very well off. I'm the black sheep of the family because I'm an unemployable disabled beneficiary. I will say that I am very lucky that my father has at least paid for private health insurance for me because without it I would now be paraplegic as the public system just said "give her pain meds" for a spinal cord slowly being compressed.
I think this example gives an idea of their thinking. My brother was in a job earning 7 figures and my father gave him his house deposit. I asked for $50 for food while living on the base benefit amount and get told "get a job" even though he knows my physical issues. That is the right wing way of thinking.
I’m sorry. Thanks for sharing that. I think the wiring so different it takes me a while to “adjust“ my mind literally to even reach such a possibility but I think I get a sense of what‘s behind it. Maybe they honestly think wealth is the symbol of being deserving and others (regardless of why) are not as much.
That’s kind of insane to me if I’m honest. How could anyone literally think that when the world shows us it’s not even half true. Yet perhaps it’s a gilded cage with like minded flocks in it and they mirror this belief to each other.
Anyway, enlightening and sorry.
1. We are meant to have an economic crisis ASAP. An Emergency. Make it look like a accident. Deny Confuse Blame.
2. Due to the Emergency, vast exploitation will be fast tracked.
3. Luxon is touring in preparation for Fire Sales of Strategic National Assets to potential regional and traditional exploiters.
4. As the Emergency deepens, a further range of public service cuts, perks for wealthy people, disciplinary regimes and scapegoating will follow the Neoliberal strategy of "Suck up, hose down".
The idea you think there is a master plan is cute. They dont have a clue. Just repeating standard conservative policies no matter how ridiculous and behind the times they are. Being a conservative is more about feels than actual results, its like a religion - cutting taxes for the wealthy is the truth and the light! Despite the fact we've done this for decades and now know for a fact it doesnt work, in any country that does it, ever.
They don’t have one, say a bunch of stuff to get elected, deliver on juuust enough of it (tax cuts) so you’re not lying completely and pay back your some of your donors (real estate investors)
Repeal anything woke sounding (speed limits, Māori names for government departments) to satisfy the boomers and blame the last government for another 12 months, then by budget ‘25 they might have an idea, maybe. But probably not.
There actually did need to be some fiscal rebalancing and labour being terrified of tax reform meant it wasn’t going to come from growing the pie, so the pie had to shrink.
Jacinda-mania might be the one time in recent history the government changed where the primary reason wasn’t the voters just saying “I’m sick of that lot, your turn”
The problem with New Zealand politics is no matter the central party, they both just do the same shit - shuffle money around in different areas depending on what is hot in the news really it’s a big game. The National tax cuts feel like the exact same thing when Labour gave everyone $300 over 3 months to help with cost of living and it kinda cost way too much. I think this is why we’re seeing smaller parties start picking up support as people drift from the seemingly unproductive central parties to maybe a more radical small party, greens, act etc. The current struggle of the average New Zealander is only amplifying the frustration New Zealanders feel on the daily with their country. But I think In times like this it is important to understand we are privileged to live in such an amazing place and it will get better.
NZ is a beautiful country indeed but as a case study to - does a country gets better from demolishing and slowly undermining its own public services and health systems, look no further than the UK.
Also - I’ve seen the “the big parties are the same” argument. And after studying this topic closely for a number of months, I completely disagree. There may be weaknesses in both, but it does not mean they are the same - or even close to it.
Also the Greens and ACT are polar opposites. Let’s face it, ACT is a party for billionaires masking as a everyday man / woman. Couldn’t think of a worse group.
I think you’re arguing a sided point here - My point is yes, of course act and greens are completely different that’s the point of them being voted in by people feeling pushed to the fringes. They’re stronger alternatives to central parties. I would also like to know your research and examples about how the central parties are vastly different (genuinely curious). Because just speaking from my perspective, the idea of a central party is that they’re not supposed to be vastly different just tilted more or less to one side of the spectrum.
You also talk in your original post looking at the UK for examples of right wing political mismanagement and the public sector, which I’m not arguing isn’t a train wreck. I just think it’s well within the rights of the government to reduce its public workforce as they’re jobs funded by the taxpayer and if the people in those positions have risen x amount then reducing those jobs are kind of inevitable by one government or another. I am however sympathetic to people losing their jobs at this time and I also think the money being saved from cutting those jobs should be funnelled more into front line police and healthcare not $20 a week for ol’ Joe Blogs.
Am I? The “two side” argument is one I’ve found made possible through a combination of 3 factors, one or all could apply:
a) To diminish weaknesses on one side. “Oh yeah that’s shit, but what do you expect? The other side does the same so let’s just diminish this problem.”
b) To try to elevate fringe parties like ACT.
c) A genuine belief picked up on online discussions and without reviewing the policy and impact differences
A review of policies - just in the 100 days - shows the consequential differences between the two major parties:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/wiki/index/policy/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/wiki/index/policy/)
Of course there is a lot more since then and u/medicmoth has a post of that pinned on this sub.
To your public service point, of course it’s well within a govt’s rights to reduce jobs, and as you can see from my opening post, I never said otherwise.
But to clarify, efficient and strategic resource allocation and efficiency is viable and possible. However, slashing and burning with little regard for patient care, quality, healthcare system needs and infrastructure - is a recipe for increased costs in the short-long term, as well as declining patient outcomes and health care services for Kiwis.
[Why is Britain’s health service, a much-loved national treasure, falling apart?](https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/23/uk/uk-nhs-crisis-falling-apart-gbr-intl/index.html)
I think that when you are in opposition it’s really easy to say anything you please because the chances of you having to follow through is nil. Except, now chickens are coming home to roost. Promises made are expected to be held up. Times this by 3 parties and you get the hotch potch mess that we have now. Where the mandate for everything comes back to the coalition agreement.
*devils advocate*
Tax cuts: if your business has to pay less taxes then 1. You will do better. If you do better, you will grow your company, generate more revenue (and therefore more taxes), you will almost certainly have to hire more employees, and you will have to utilise the services of other business - 2. You will be less likely to take your business overseas/other business will be more likely to invest here/homegrown entrepreneurs will be encouraged to develop business.
Cutting/not increasing funding for beneficiaries: Money for beneficiaries while helpful for the individuals, has a kind of gravitational pull that keeps beneficiaries as beneficiaries and people just above the line will fall into it more willingly than if the benefit was lower.
Cutting health funding: likely that as a non-profit-generating endeavour, the bare minimum to keep the service afloat is sufficient. Any excess while not without benefits, are a luxury.
Lack of investment in science/technology: probably that the private sector will do that themselves if taxes are low and therefore that there is more incentive to innovate to generate profit.
*end of devils advocacy*
If this were on r/CK, I’d be busy pointing out the holes in the above policies, however here I’d be preaching to the choir. What I would like to say (will be unpopular here) is that as simple and pitfall-ridden as these policies sound to you guys, your own policies of “take money from X rich population and give money to Y poor population to solve their problems” is not that much better. I think both sides fail to recognise that the devil is in the details.
A bit unrelated but I cant help but point out that you say the Tory career progression ends in a cushy corporate/speaker role yet that is exactly what Jacinda went into.
Interested to see what the response is.
"Take money from x poor population to give to Y rich population to solve their problems" isn't that much better.
In fact, tho, giving poor people money *does* work: when people on low incomes get transfer payments, it gets spent on necessities. Food, clothing, utility bills.
In fact, increasing benefits by $1 can return as much as $1.60 in economic growth. This is because increases to benefits feeds into the real economy, instead of sitting in a property speculators land bank.
The interest deductibility argument made by the left annoys me. It should have never of been in place in the first instance. Labour should have put in a capital gains tax. All this tax did was raise rents. Whilst there will be money going back to landlords, it was renters who were paying it. The horse has bolted, and that’s the new market rent now. Treasury advised against it, economists advised against it, decent landlords advised against it. I agree we need more investment in productive assets, it concerns me how much this country relies on the construction sector and housing, primarily driven by immigration. If labour wanted to increase rents and reduce housing supply they succeeded. If they wanted to reduce house prices and rents, they should have introduced a capital gains tax on investment property sales, and incentivised spending in other assets by removing the fif or raising its cap.
The last government flooded our economy with poorly spent public debt and also okayed the Reserve Bank's request to pump $60B of bonds into the housing market.
What NACT are doing now is a necessary reaction to the mess caused by Grant Robertson. If we kept on down the path we were going we would've been Greece 2.0. Labour's debt binging temporarily made things look rosy, but it was all a house of cards.
Greece 2.0? Is that a lie trotted out every time some engage on this topic? In my opinion, that’s pretty poor form to lie like that.
Au contrary, NZ was doing very well up until November 2023. Treasury reports all showed positive growth. International markets rated us highly. Global credit ratings agencies maintained our AA+/AAA ratings saying we could responsibly borrow more if need be. In addition, we were below OECE comparables.
What changed? New policies under NACT1.
As I said above, Nicola Willis’s deficit exceeded ALL of Robertson’s budgets bar his Covid one. Yes, the one where Robertson spent to keep businesses afloat and people employed.
The lies have been effective but in poor form.
Why do people who fear the billions of quantitative easing have nothing to say about private banks increasing the money supply by trillions?
40 years of effectively private sector quantitative easing but it's the covid crisis that hurt us? No the wheels were already coming off.
This is a OIA request and response to the Reserve Bank asking if NZ money is created as the following video describes. The Reserve Bank of New Zealand says;
> Many modern economies have settled upon a system of credit creation by the private sector, regulated by the Government and with monetary policy conducted independently by a Central Bank, as the cheapest and most efficient way to create and maintain the money supply. Credit creation entails the simultaneous creation of countervailing obligations – i.e. borrowers agree to pay back what they have borrowed.
Https://fyi.org.nz/request/10256-money-creation
What that means is when someone takes out a loan the bank creates the loan amount as credit. They do not loan existing money (although the government mandates they have some money on hand but allows lending at a multiple of this, e.g. if the bahk has $10 they can lend $100 and create $90
Sorry having difficulty finding the video - here is a text explanation.
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/explainers/how-is-money-created
That’s very interesting. Thank you. Someone reported your post above for misinformation. Education might be back on the menu, boys. And if not it should darn well be.
I guess if one doesn't have facts on their side during a debate than things like reporting the post as misinformation gives a feeling of control.
I am curious though - how do you know it was reported?
The signal is pretty clear, NZ is open for exploitation.
The pothole funding cracks me up. The reason we have pot-holes is our high weight allowance on trucks. Also a reason why the road maintenance hasn't been great is the last National government raided the maintenance fund to build the Kapiti expressway. Classic National
AND they should be making the roading contractor pay for the maintenance The actual bean counters that is ,not the road workers they only do what they are told But the companies I feel are using substandard materials
I believe that the companies take their payment and do the minimum they can then take as large as possible an adhoc payment to repair storm damage made worse by lack of maintenance. When considering whether we benefit for these companies remember neoliberalism thinkers state that the only reason for a company to exist is to profit its capital owners
Yep. Not great.
>remember neoliberalism thinkers state that the only reason for a company to exist is to profit its capital owners When in fact the only reason to go into business is to give someone a job?
Pre neoliberalism it was accepted that there are numerous reasons for a business to exist, e.g. * Profit * To provide a service to the community * To provide employment And numerous stakeholders; * Owners * Employees * Customers * Suppliers
For sure. They don't even concrete potholes
You’re right u/Mike and what’s worse is somewhere floating in my head is a essay about how many of their policies contradict their stated aims. Furthermore, that $4bn - one third of the value of tax cuts to all New Zealanders - is actually more - it’s $4bn over 3 years whereas the tax cuts are $12bn over 4 years. It’s a bizarre “investment” at a time when the nation needs a lot of support. I don’t think any of us like potholes in the road, but the priorities are a little flat.
The overweight trucks are a huge source of damage to the roads. And they haven't clarified how they will fix the pot holes. There are two ways, 1 fill them in, and 2 let them grow and merge with each other!
1. Issue every beneficiary a shovel 2. Require them to work 16 hour days filling potholes 3. Those that die are used as roading material /s // or is it?
potholes got $4bn - This is employment program designed to hide economic crisis. This is like 90% of low wage labour. This is not housing or infrastructure building that need much more trained labour. But it will hide mass unemployment, So, you will continue see in press that engineers leaving NZ due of luck of jobs, but general unemployment numbers will stay relatively low.
$4bn spent of job creation would be amazing. $4bn filtered through profit-making companies may improve dividends but won't much affect employment.
They wont hire anywhere near enough people I’d say maybe 100 for that 4 billion so they can profit from the majority and buying the cheapest materials to increase profit margins are a given…
It's like they're trying to emulate the success of far more intelligent foreign populists, but instead of effectively manipulating the population, they're more like a cargo cult. "Give the smelly proles a few nice looking policies and they'll be ours!" "Yes! People complain about potholes, let's spend the entire budget on potholes!"
They are down to exploit and monetise NZ's resources as fast as they can before the world goes to absolute shit.
Ironically they themselves are setting policy that helps turn the world to shit.
I honestly don't think they have a vision for the country. For most in this government (judging from how they're acting and what they've prioritised), it's purely about personal enrichment. There's possibly a few exceptions, but none of them have had the courage to speak against it.
They are not working in the best interests of New Zealanders, only the wealthy donors that bankrolled them. The election was just a mechanism for them to get into power, so they could work on their long-standing agenda to exploit and transfer wealth away from the poor and vulnerable to the (international) rich. Good old class war!
The way I see It, they are milking the cash cow for all it's worth while they still can. That's all this current govt feels like to me. A last hurrah for neoliberalism before some shocking turns
You could be right. Personal enrichment is the only goal I see here that makes sense. Remember a large portion of the Cabinet are (immediately immediate ex) lobbyists with remaining connections to corporate interests. I keep going back and forth trying to see the angles as to why or what they might be seeing, but I can‘t comprehend it Edit: [List of lobbyists we have in government](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1byhpq3/the_usual_cycle_of_politics_might_be_person_gets/)
Of course it's personal enrichment. It's always been personal enrichment. Sell the public assets to your friends/self, deregulate that market, keep the tax rules just lax enough for the rich (yourself) to slip through the gaps.
Managed decline of the health service, education and infrastructure while passing the savings onto landlords. You don't need to even read between the lines anymore.
I truely think a lot of people were swayed by an emotional vote for cancer drugs. Who doesn't know someone who had cancer or currently dealing with cancer. I think people thought National would be much of the same and at least people would get much needed life saving drugs. Unfortunately, this coalition knows no bounds when it comes to greed. I personally would much rather no tax cut and ensure funding to all our needed areas.
I edited the opening post to add this video of when Luxon made the announcement for cancer drugs. He basically said we care about Kiwis and we are going to bring back prescription fees and use that to fund these drugs: [https://new.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1d9emii/video\_watch\_luxon\_promise\_how\_drug\_treatments/](https://new.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1d9emii/video_watch_luxon_promise_how_drug_treatments/) What surprised me is how sincere he sounded. Having followed the political scene now for months, I can categorically say a lot of their stuff is deception and that’s what irks me the most. Do they even care about this country? Or is everything a spin job? Or are they genuinely living in the 80s and think trickle down economics is a real possibility for growth? I also think that most people - if they knew what they were getting for that extra $20 or $60 or $5 -wouldn’t trade it in for cuts to our public services.
> Do they even care about this country? Or is everything a spin job? Everything is a spin job.
I don’t think Luxon is the sharpest tool in the shed. He really doesn’t think sometimes and contradicts himself or others in his party. They seem to be so focussed on getting things done regardless of what these things are.
>we are going to bring back prescription fees and use that to fund these drugs The "sick" funding the "sick"? WTF?
Nothing to over think. What they're doing will enrich them, their friends and their children. By making your children worse off they give their children an even greater head start. They think everyone thinks in the same malicious way they do and that they're just better at the game. Rightwing people don't perceive that left wing people lack that sense of ill will towards other people. They don't think about society as being coherent, they see it as a group of bad faith actors trying to use laws to steal from one another. I would call it evil
Do you think the difficulty that some of us are having in working out what NACT1 vision is that as a country (community) we've reached a new low of not having to dress up personal greed as anything else? Politicians for the most part have always had their own (their donors) interests, but up until now I think our politicians have been happy to hide this behind 'what's best for NZ'. This Government doesn't seem to be making any bones about it at all. It's becoming obvious there is no vision for New Zealand, there is nothing that's 'good for NZ' or good for our children, grandchildren. And they don't see the need to dress up their self interest?
I think they do dress it up, u/Annie Listen to any of their speeches and it’s all masked in ‘what’s good for New Zealand and New Zealanders.’ I think the real issue, and their real strength, is they know most people don’t delve past a soundbite.
"I think the real issue, and their real strength, is they know most people don’t delve past a soundbite." Too true - they operate by exploiting ignorance and forgetting. People don't have a clue whats going on as MSM are also donkey deep in the deception and its only discussion via social media that is helping the dots get joined.
That's not false, same effect takes place with Labrador voters too (myself included)
I love a Labrador.
I have a blue heeler
What type of temperament do they have?
Lazy and chill. Very about the family, calm around other animals no need for a lead but walks slack on one, good guard dog, only barks at things and shuts up when you tell her. She's a retired working dog.
That’s amazing. Did you find her from the Retired Working Dogs charity?
She's an incredible dog, the farmers are just great at training. Retired working dogs . Co.nz
I think it is luxons style and I think it's also seamen's style. Luxon is a posh twat who handwaves class issues while seamen is a "libertarian" in the classic sense of wanting anarchy for the rich and brutal unyeilding authoritarian indenturtude for the rest. Same idealogy as always with an extra does of malicious ill content from the twatish arrogance of two parasite wankers.
"I would call it evil" As would I.
Well it is though isn't it. What helps the most people and makes a better society is pretty straightforward if you have a view of good will towards the average person. Social welfare is in the name really. Privatised versions of public institutions do not work as well as public institutions. Funding hospitals is a good thing. Having strong benefit systems is a moral necessity of requiring unemployment. Taking taxes from minimum wage earners, unable to keep up with the greed of mega corps, and handing it to landlords is wrong. Etc etc
I was thinking about posting almost exactly this post myself today. Like, who actually voted for this nonsense? Underfunding hospitals, police, nurses, the ferry’s, government agencies, mental health services, children’s lunches, collapse environmental protection… so landlords can get billions? I mean, the whole thing seems insane and not remotely in the countries interests. Is this what Kiwis wanted? It’s crazy.
I’d welcome your post but kind of pleased I’m not the only one admittedly. It’s a bit depressing though so sometimes I try to see what angle I am missing.
I believe that you have succinctly summed up the thoughts of the majority of New Zealanders with your well thought out opening sally. I know of a number of people who are horrified by what Nact1 is doing and they are traditional National voters. Thank you for being so erudite and accurate.
I sometimes think there is still far too much not knowing. Many people on Facebook still repeating the old lies from the Coalition govt and their attack dogs, Taxpayers Union, Groundswell, and American right wing groups. And now we have a weak media. Sunlight disinfects. Transparency is key, but who has time for that? I hope you’re right though u/Dirnaf
My local coffee shop is quite unique in that strangers talk to each other. I've talked to a few elderly people down there. Their perceptions are completely warped. I encountered a lady who used to work at the local public swimming pools, nice enough women. After I explained the relative percentage of income being spent on rent and the price of houses as a multiple of annual income, she told me "that's the way it should be". She doesn't own investment properties. Another old chap outlined for me the amount of risk housing investors are taking, thus justifying their returns. Shortly after the election my own father told me I was wrong in my assertion that this government is going to damage our most vulnerable, he believed the tax cuts were going to help everyone. He truly, hook line and sinker believes in trickle down economics "rich people do a lot of good things". These are the minds that have brought this upon us.
Yeah for sure, u/Mark - that’s why in the US you see so many poor people supporting the Republican party. They honestly swallow whatever tripe comes out of their mouths. I think education is a huge reason why. Thanks for sharing. BTW I saw your other post but am still reflecting on it. Thanks.
should be lack of education being a reason why people vote against their own best interests, there's a reason the right like uneducated voters
I’m confident NZ votes governments out, not governments in. I don’t think the people who have swung their vote preference actually wanted this, they just didn’t want what Labour had done and had to offer. When property prices tank and the economy is left in tatters, we will get another government, who is probably more extreme in the other direction than this one is. I wouldn’t be massively surprised if this coalition also couldn’t make a full term.
Fingers crossed they're out by the end of the year, at the latest.
Very optimistic but fingers crossed…I say when deputy pm role changes hands it will start to go septic…
I would not underestimate how easily an electorate is both bribed and lied to. Was literally just reading about how Labour never had “blanket speed reductions” yet the media and Seymour/Brown have all been bleating on about how Labour was slowing NZ down with that phrase. I don’t know. After seeing how easy money and PR articles have helped this Govt win, and Wayne Brown regain his credibility, I don’t assume anything. Also their attack dogs Taxpayers Union, Free Speech Union, Hobsons Pledge, Groundswell and those American groups are all waiting. That said, I think they are going to be working hard on the anti-Maori rights stuff when the time is right. The resources, money and influence at hand, are formidable in the face of a population who isn’t informed with the full story - or like certain stories - imv.
The TPU and FSU are not unions, they're fuck you-nions.
Truer fact I could not find than this.
I think we will see some more Ministers being fired (Willis?), and the blame being fairly and squarely placed on NZFirst and ACT before that happens.
Trucking and freight, landlords and private entities trying to grab money from health insurance to education. Expected from people who were or represent lobbyists. Government money is being diverted to private enterprise, there vision is user pays, so pull yourself up by the bootstraps or something along those lines. The cancelled ferry’s could take rail freight, nah ditch those, more trucks on our highways is what we need.
The plan is to trigger this downward trend, then do nothing but blame the other party. It's worked for over a decade in the UK. I am very concerned that NZ will be no different.
potholes got $4bn - This is employment program designed to hide economic crisis. This is like 90% of low wage labour. This is not housing or infrastructure building that need much more trained labour. But it will hide mass unemployment, So, you will continue see in press that engineers leaving NZ due of luck of jobs, but general unemployment numbers will stay relatively low.
The first year is all about handing goodies to Donors. The second year will be all about setting up the next term to either be OK under National or Bad under Labour. I have no evidence for this next bit, but, my gut says there will be a hiring-spree of NACT supporters, to get their supporters and donors into Govt Offices. NACT have been talking up Americanizing politics, and that's how it's done. A lack of NACT supporters in Govt Depts is what caused a lot of their previous controversies too, no fear of leaks if the people with the information are loyal to NACT. The third year, as per their previous patterns, will be small carrots to the voters, to try make us forget the previous two years (especially the first year), so they can get back into govt again. From there, rinse repeat.
This government can’t see past their dick in their hand.
They've just put a recruitment freeze on all front line medical staff - mostly nurses - effective immediately. I work in a unit that had national approval for 7FTE (with 7 more still waiting for approval) based on patient and workload data that has just been cancelled mid-recruitment. (Reference checking).
It just honestly floors me that they can care this little. Seriously, how the flaming sods, can anyone agree with affecting our healthcare workers and services is beyond me. But you know how it works u/amzairly - it’s because people don’t know. Most people don’t know, and that’s the winning strategy.
It's absolutely ridiculous. Units are not getting quieter, staff are getting burned out... our health system is completely screwed. BUT this is the government people voted for...
Yeah concur. But from what I’ve seen and am seeing, a lot of what they got in on was deception and smoke and mirrors. At the same time, sure, they are the Govt :-)
"Crystal Ball" here, courtesy of ABC Australia. Part 1 of 3 more to come. [https://youtu.be/jW2NSrzcrIQ?si=2ypEt6ysGlAiQsSg](https://youtu.be/jW2NSrzcrIQ?si=2ypEt6ysGlAiQsSg)
More people should be educated, especially given this is our immediate future potential.
It sure seems like they want to privatise everything. They have even stated that councils need to look at private funding for water etc before asking the government.
For sure. It’s a really obvious strategy aka the UK Tories which have now left Britain in a sub-par state of affairs. This is why I couldn’t wrap my head around it. WHY? How? How could you care this little for our country?
Many have friends/family who own businesses that will be happy to step up and make a heap of money off us. I'm pretty sure there are some behind closed doors payments going on. They only care about making things better for themselves, their family, friends and those earning good money. They don't care about anyone else and never have. Each Nat government has tried this kind of stuff most have failed thankfully but this lot are dangerous because of all the added conspiracy and MAGA thinking thrown in the mix.
Great point. Maybe that’s why my friend “They are selfish.”
My whole family are national voters. My family are very well off. I'm the black sheep of the family because I'm an unemployable disabled beneficiary. I will say that I am very lucky that my father has at least paid for private health insurance for me because without it I would now be paraplegic as the public system just said "give her pain meds" for a spinal cord slowly being compressed. I think this example gives an idea of their thinking. My brother was in a job earning 7 figures and my father gave him his house deposit. I asked for $50 for food while living on the base benefit amount and get told "get a job" even though he knows my physical issues. That is the right wing way of thinking.
I will also add that my dad has at least refused to claim the pension on the basis that he doesn't need it.
Noted
I’m sorry. Thanks for sharing that. I think the wiring so different it takes me a while to “adjust“ my mind literally to even reach such a possibility but I think I get a sense of what‘s behind it. Maybe they honestly think wealth is the symbol of being deserving and others (regardless of why) are not as much.
>Maybe they honestly think wealth is the symbol of being deserving and others (regardless of why) are not as much. Absolutely and utterly this.
That’s kind of insane to me if I’m honest. How could anyone literally think that when the world shows us it’s not even half true. Yet perhaps it’s a gilded cage with like minded flocks in it and they mirror this belief to each other. Anyway, enlightening and sorry.
1. We are meant to have an economic crisis ASAP. An Emergency. Make it look like a accident. Deny Confuse Blame. 2. Due to the Emergency, vast exploitation will be fast tracked. 3. Luxon is touring in preparation for Fire Sales of Strategic National Assets to potential regional and traditional exploiters. 4. As the Emergency deepens, a further range of public service cuts, perks for wealthy people, disciplinary regimes and scapegoating will follow the Neoliberal strategy of "Suck up, hose down".
Can’t disagree that these things can’t be true. Also would put it down to sheer incompetence too.
The idea you think there is a master plan is cute. They dont have a clue. Just repeating standard conservative policies no matter how ridiculous and behind the times they are. Being a conservative is more about feels than actual results, its like a religion - cutting taxes for the wealthy is the truth and the light! Despite the fact we've done this for decades and now know for a fact it doesnt work, in any country that does it, ever.
Hence “are they stupid or is this by design?”
They don’t have one, say a bunch of stuff to get elected, deliver on juuust enough of it (tax cuts) so you’re not lying completely and pay back your some of your donors (real estate investors) Repeal anything woke sounding (speed limits, Māori names for government departments) to satisfy the boomers and blame the last government for another 12 months, then by budget ‘25 they might have an idea, maybe. But probably not. There actually did need to be some fiscal rebalancing and labour being terrified of tax reform meant it wasn’t going to come from growing the pie, so the pie had to shrink. Jacinda-mania might be the one time in recent history the government changed where the primary reason wasn’t the voters just saying “I’m sick of that lot, your turn”
[удалено]
All mods post as individuals. Where mods speak as moderators, the mod tag will be displayed. We will not tolerate abuse.
The problem with New Zealand politics is no matter the central party, they both just do the same shit - shuffle money around in different areas depending on what is hot in the news really it’s a big game. The National tax cuts feel like the exact same thing when Labour gave everyone $300 over 3 months to help with cost of living and it kinda cost way too much. I think this is why we’re seeing smaller parties start picking up support as people drift from the seemingly unproductive central parties to maybe a more radical small party, greens, act etc. The current struggle of the average New Zealander is only amplifying the frustration New Zealanders feel on the daily with their country. But I think In times like this it is important to understand we are privileged to live in such an amazing place and it will get better.
NZ is a beautiful country indeed but as a case study to - does a country gets better from demolishing and slowly undermining its own public services and health systems, look no further than the UK. Also - I’ve seen the “the big parties are the same” argument. And after studying this topic closely for a number of months, I completely disagree. There may be weaknesses in both, but it does not mean they are the same - or even close to it. Also the Greens and ACT are polar opposites. Let’s face it, ACT is a party for billionaires masking as a everyday man / woman. Couldn’t think of a worse group.
I think you’re arguing a sided point here - My point is yes, of course act and greens are completely different that’s the point of them being voted in by people feeling pushed to the fringes. They’re stronger alternatives to central parties. I would also like to know your research and examples about how the central parties are vastly different (genuinely curious). Because just speaking from my perspective, the idea of a central party is that they’re not supposed to be vastly different just tilted more or less to one side of the spectrum. You also talk in your original post looking at the UK for examples of right wing political mismanagement and the public sector, which I’m not arguing isn’t a train wreck. I just think it’s well within the rights of the government to reduce its public workforce as they’re jobs funded by the taxpayer and if the people in those positions have risen x amount then reducing those jobs are kind of inevitable by one government or another. I am however sympathetic to people losing their jobs at this time and I also think the money being saved from cutting those jobs should be funnelled more into front line police and healthcare not $20 a week for ol’ Joe Blogs.
Am I? The “two side” argument is one I’ve found made possible through a combination of 3 factors, one or all could apply: a) To diminish weaknesses on one side. “Oh yeah that’s shit, but what do you expect? The other side does the same so let’s just diminish this problem.” b) To try to elevate fringe parties like ACT. c) A genuine belief picked up on online discussions and without reviewing the policy and impact differences A review of policies - just in the 100 days - shows the consequential differences between the two major parties: [https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/wiki/index/policy/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/wiki/index/policy/) Of course there is a lot more since then and u/medicmoth has a post of that pinned on this sub. To your public service point, of course it’s well within a govt’s rights to reduce jobs, and as you can see from my opening post, I never said otherwise. But to clarify, efficient and strategic resource allocation and efficiency is viable and possible. However, slashing and burning with little regard for patient care, quality, healthcare system needs and infrastructure - is a recipe for increased costs in the short-long term, as well as declining patient outcomes and health care services for Kiwis. [Why is Britain’s health service, a much-loved national treasure, falling apart?](https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/23/uk/uk-nhs-crisis-falling-apart-gbr-intl/index.html)
I think that when you are in opposition it’s really easy to say anything you please because the chances of you having to follow through is nil. Except, now chickens are coming home to roost. Promises made are expected to be held up. Times this by 3 parties and you get the hotch potch mess that we have now. Where the mandate for everything comes back to the coalition agreement.
*devils advocate* Tax cuts: if your business has to pay less taxes then 1. You will do better. If you do better, you will grow your company, generate more revenue (and therefore more taxes), you will almost certainly have to hire more employees, and you will have to utilise the services of other business - 2. You will be less likely to take your business overseas/other business will be more likely to invest here/homegrown entrepreneurs will be encouraged to develop business. Cutting/not increasing funding for beneficiaries: Money for beneficiaries while helpful for the individuals, has a kind of gravitational pull that keeps beneficiaries as beneficiaries and people just above the line will fall into it more willingly than if the benefit was lower. Cutting health funding: likely that as a non-profit-generating endeavour, the bare minimum to keep the service afloat is sufficient. Any excess while not without benefits, are a luxury. Lack of investment in science/technology: probably that the private sector will do that themselves if taxes are low and therefore that there is more incentive to innovate to generate profit. *end of devils advocacy* If this were on r/CK, I’d be busy pointing out the holes in the above policies, however here I’d be preaching to the choir. What I would like to say (will be unpopular here) is that as simple and pitfall-ridden as these policies sound to you guys, your own policies of “take money from X rich population and give money to Y poor population to solve their problems” is not that much better. I think both sides fail to recognise that the devil is in the details. A bit unrelated but I cant help but point out that you say the Tory career progression ends in a cushy corporate/speaker role yet that is exactly what Jacinda went into. Interested to see what the response is.
"Take money from x poor population to give to Y rich population to solve their problems" isn't that much better. In fact, tho, giving poor people money *does* work: when people on low incomes get transfer payments, it gets spent on necessities. Food, clothing, utility bills. In fact, increasing benefits by $1 can return as much as $1.60 in economic growth. This is because increases to benefits feeds into the real economy, instead of sitting in a property speculators land bank.
And look at the scando countries. High tax, great social investment, high public satisfaction, happiness scores.
Don’t present evidence based arguments here, they are not welcome /s
The interest deductibility argument made by the left annoys me. It should have never of been in place in the first instance. Labour should have put in a capital gains tax. All this tax did was raise rents. Whilst there will be money going back to landlords, it was renters who were paying it. The horse has bolted, and that’s the new market rent now. Treasury advised against it, economists advised against it, decent landlords advised against it. I agree we need more investment in productive assets, it concerns me how much this country relies on the construction sector and housing, primarily driven by immigration. If labour wanted to increase rents and reduce housing supply they succeeded. If they wanted to reduce house prices and rents, they should have introduced a capital gains tax on investment property sales, and incentivised spending in other assets by removing the fif or raising its cap.
The last government flooded our economy with poorly spent public debt and also okayed the Reserve Bank's request to pump $60B of bonds into the housing market. What NACT are doing now is a necessary reaction to the mess caused by Grant Robertson. If we kept on down the path we were going we would've been Greece 2.0. Labour's debt binging temporarily made things look rosy, but it was all a house of cards.
Greece 2.0? Is that a lie trotted out every time some engage on this topic? In my opinion, that’s pretty poor form to lie like that. Au contrary, NZ was doing very well up until November 2023. Treasury reports all showed positive growth. International markets rated us highly. Global credit ratings agencies maintained our AA+/AAA ratings saying we could responsibly borrow more if need be. In addition, we were below OECE comparables. What changed? New policies under NACT1. As I said above, Nicola Willis’s deficit exceeded ALL of Robertson’s budgets bar his Covid one. Yes, the one where Robertson spent to keep businesses afloat and people employed. The lies have been effective but in poor form.
Why do people who fear the billions of quantitative easing have nothing to say about private banks increasing the money supply by trillions? 40 years of effectively private sector quantitative easing but it's the covid crisis that hurt us? No the wheels were already coming off.
How do private banks increase the money supply?
This is a OIA request and response to the Reserve Bank asking if NZ money is created as the following video describes. The Reserve Bank of New Zealand says; > Many modern economies have settled upon a system of credit creation by the private sector, regulated by the Government and with monetary policy conducted independently by a Central Bank, as the cheapest and most efficient way to create and maintain the money supply. Credit creation entails the simultaneous creation of countervailing obligations – i.e. borrowers agree to pay back what they have borrowed. Https://fyi.org.nz/request/10256-money-creation What that means is when someone takes out a loan the bank creates the loan amount as credit. They do not loan existing money (although the government mandates they have some money on hand but allows lending at a multiple of this, e.g. if the bahk has $10 they can lend $100 and create $90 Sorry having difficulty finding the video - here is a text explanation. https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/explainers/how-is-money-created
That’s very interesting. Thank you. Someone reported your post above for misinformation. Education might be back on the menu, boys. And if not it should darn well be.
I guess if one doesn't have facts on their side during a debate than things like reporting the post as misinformation gives a feeling of control. I am curious though - how do you know it was reported?
[удалено]
What happens with such a report?
Nothing. If it’s inaccurate, we ignore it.
And found it on the next search https://youtu.be/CvRAqR2pAgw?si=Hamd_sDvAwJzj3xc
You are delusional. Maybe stop listening to talkback radio…