NZ Election 2020

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › NZ Election 2020

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ... | 76

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2495666 31-May-2020 13:26

Obraik:

Unfortunately, I don't think the public would have supported that. It wasn't until cases actively started popping up in NZ that people started to understand what was at stake. If the government had proposed restrictions earlier while most of NZ saw the virus as an international issue and not a local issue it would not have been effective. People would have flouted the rules and kicked up a stink about how unnecessary it all was.

I'm not saying we should have gone into a full level 4 lockdown early.

We isolated the people brought back from Wuhan in a separate part of Auckland in early Feb but let people back across the border (even moved the deadline) without having to even quarantine at home all the way up to mid-March, when we knew there was community transmission in other parts of the world.

We were also prepared to hold mass-gatherings right up until the middle of March and only cancelled them at the 11th hour.

That doesn't really gel with 'going hard and early' but people kept saying and no one ever questioned it, and just repeated it until it became unquestionable fact.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16319

Lifetime subscriber

#2495669 31-May-2020 13:31

GV27:

That doesn't really gel with 'going hard and early' but people kept saying and no one ever questioned it, and just repeated it until it became unquestionable fact.

Look at where we are today. Especially compared to some other parts of the world. Either we were just incredibly lucky, or those responsible for the decisions knew what they were doing.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2495670 31-May-2020 13:45

GV27:

Obraik:

Unfortunately, I don't think the public would have supported that. It wasn't until cases actively started popping up in NZ that people started to understand what was at stake. If the government had proposed restrictions earlier while most of NZ saw the virus as an international issue and not a local issue it would not have been effective. People would have flouted the rules and kicked up a stink about how unnecessary it all was.

I'm not saying we should have gone into a full level 4 lockdown early.

We isolated the people brought back from Wuhan in a separate part of Auckland in early Feb but let people back across the border (even moved the deadline) without having to even quarantine at home all the way up to mid-March, when we knew there was community transmission in other parts of the world.

We were also prepared to hold mass-gatherings right up until the middle of March and only cancelled them at the 11th hour.

That doesn't really gel with 'going hard and early' but people kept saying and no one ever questioned it, and just repeated it until it became unquestionable fact.

Thats fair enough. As Obraik said, if we locked down earlier (I know thats not your point) it would have seemed super excessive. If we had been clear here, as we were, and quarantinung every incoming passenger (nowhere to put them anyway) or telling them to self isolate, way ahead of virus getting here, that is likely to have been seen as excessive. We have already seen how liberal many have been IN LOCKDOWN, let alone if everyone else was enjoying Kiwi life and we had thousands every day hemmed in at home, for supposedly a low risk or no risk (perceived at that time)

Im hopeful of a large review after this is done. Many of the criticisms are hindsight based. Our existing seperate DHB structure made many things difficult. A thorough review, knowing what we know now will be very useful for next time. Get a few things in place that weren't before, etc. But we got it right, 9th day of no cases today (longer as some recent cases were historical and added as we added them to WHO numbers). Yes, the incoming passengers were a big issue, unavoidable IMO, but even that, plus the testing starting low, contact tracing not existing to begin with, yet here we are. The overall plan exceeded expectations. Imagine if a few silly people didn't carelessly and inadvertently infect the rest homes, our numbers would have looked even better.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2495671 31-May-2020 13:50

Rikkitic:

GV27:

That doesn't really gel with 'going hard and early' but people kept saying and no one ever questioned it, and just repeated it until it became unquestionable fact.

Look at where we are today. Especially compared to some other parts of the world. Either we were just incredibly lucky, or those responsible for the decisions knew what they were doing.

Yep. I'd not say lucky though. I'd also say that we didn't know what we were doing, no-one did. But we took a conservative approach that stood on the virus before it could get established here. When it was sizeable, it remained manageable. Some politicians said it was excessive, too much. They were and are wrong. They are still saying that. Tasman Bubble yesterday, etc. Right now businesses are running, its been a great weekend for local tourism as I linked to earlier. More bad economic news will happen, but we are on the way up again for sure.

MikeAqua

8032 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3822

#2510439 23-Jun-2020 13:17

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300040526/taking-the-high-road-nationals-strategy-to-neutralise-jacinda-ardern

An interesting and well written opinion piece by Graham Adams on what he sees as a strategy to neutralise Ardern. Here is my favourite line (context is recent border quarantine blunders).

"Ardern’s unwillingness to accept responsibility for poor outcomes after revelling so obviously in the praise for the earlier good outcomes has made it clear that while success has many mothers, failure on her watch will always be an orphan"

As Nick Stone often says: "Fair One"

Mike

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2510510 23-Jun-2020 13:50

It's something I have been pondering on for a while, that I don't really think that Ardern believes in personal responsibility. To my mind "accidents happen, let's move on" is the explanation she applies to everything that goes on. The situation with the failure to test and the breaches are utterly unacceptable.

She talks a good game.

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2510532 23-Jun-2020 14:05

I agree fully. When I heard no witch hunt that made me cringe. Denial. Dont touch me

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2510552 23-Jun-2020 14:36

networkn:
It's something I have been pondering on for a while, that I don't really think that Ardern believes in personal responsibility. To my mind "accidents happen, let's move on" is the explanation she applies to everything that goes on. The situation with the failure to test and the breaches are utterly unacceptable.

She talks a good game.

It's basically straight out of the John Key playbook. "At the end of the day it's the chief executives responsibility not the minister's"

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2510556 23-Jun-2020 14:43

Assuming the border issue is what this is about, I would have pointed the finger at the group, so the public knows and can understand, rather than scratch heads and wonder why the secrecy. Names if needed can come later. Group can be Govt, MoH, or Police, thats another debate though

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2513904 28-Jun-2020 14:12

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300044157/green-partys-8b-plan-would-guarantee-income-of-325-a-week-and-pay-for-it-with-a-wealth-tax-on-millionaires

Love it. High migration from government policies along with huge consenting and supply issues forces up house prices in Auckland, and then you tax people for being 'rich'.

Meanwhile, someone who owns the same amount of land with the same-sized house on it in another part of the country, with lower living costs, doesn't get taxed at all.

gzt

18690 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7830

Lifetime subscriber

#2514011 28-Jun-2020 16:01

GV27: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300044157/green-partys-8b-plan-would-guarantee-income-of-325-a-week-and-pay-for-it-with-a-wealth-tax-on-millionaires

Love it. High migration from government policies along with huge consenting and supply issues forces up house prices in Auckland, and then you tax people for being 'rich'.

You are overreacting entirely. I'll assume you have not read the article rather than being deliberately misleading. There are many get outs to the policy..

"It would only apply to the worth of those assets over the threshold - so would only be one per cent of $100,000 if someone had net wealth of $1.1m"

Ie; $1000 in that particular case. Can be deferred if retirement, low income, etc.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2514017 28-Jun-2020 16:33

gzt:
You are overreacting entirely. I'll assume you have not read the article rather than being deliberately misleading. There are many get outs to the policy..

"It would only apply to the worth of those assets over the threshold - so would only be one per cent of $100,000 if someone had net wealth of $1.1m"

Ie; $1000 in that particular case. Can be deferred if retirement, low income, etc.

I had indeed read the article. I am not sure in which way I am being 'misleading'.

There is a huge agency issue with central government creating population pressure with things like migration settings and urban planning legislation, and then trying to clip the ticket when house prices and people's unrealised wealth rise with it.

If your tax sees 90 year old pensioners caught up in for the dastardly crime of owning their own home, then perhaps just admitting your tax is poorly targeted is the better option, rather than pretending a deferment is some sort of merciful act.

gzt

18690 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7830

Lifetime subscriber

#2514062 28-Jun-2020 16:57

The fact it is deferred means I'm entirely comfortable with that outcome.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2514071 28-Jun-2020 17:26

gzt: The fact it is deferred means I'm entirely comfortable with that outcome.

I think a wealth tax is a great idea - but there's always a fatal flaw.

The most wealthy always find loopholes to minimise wealth - so to generate revenue it becomes incredibly unfair on the "middle class", thus unpopular.

rugrat

3142 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 945

Lifetime subscriber

#2514076 28-Jun-2020 17:52

Under the Greens policy why would anyone work part time?

Earn under $325, get topped up to $325. Do no work, get topped up to $325. Or is there something I missed?

Then there's couples if one working not other, or both not working, or are two single people better off?

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ... | 76