Christopher Luxon, New Zealand Prime Minister 2023

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

Forums › Politics › Christopher Luxon, New Zealand Prime Minister 2023

1 | ... | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | ... | 186

533 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3227332 7-May-2024 15:11

sir1963:

Have you any evidence that the reduction in crime was the result of being tough on crime ?

There are a whole heap of socio-economic factors involved , For example a declining rate of poverty

https://www.statista.com/statistics/200463/us-poverty-rate-since-1990/

How has the rate of violence been impacted through the decriminalisation of marijuana ?

Has Unemployment changed ?

Education ?, access to welfare ?, aces to mental health care?

I totally get you. I'm in full agreement with everything you are saying. I'm only taking the devil's advocate because it seems challenging and I'm hoping to learn a thing or two.

Look, if you are in disagreement with the actions of a democratically elected govt bringing in policies that they campaigned on, onus is on you to provide those extensive evidence proving them wrong.
As stated earlier, I have no stake in either. Mere attempt at rationalising what it seems to be a hugely unpopular policies on GZ by current govt.

You said- USA tough on crime never worked: I provided downward trending graph that somehow shows whatever they are doing, is working.

You said- NZ issued travel warnings to USA: I responded with so does other model heavenly countries have travel warnings.

I’ve provided a basic response to your points about "tough on crime" USA vs "soft on crime" NZ.

At the very least, you can agree that with those stats provided that shows clear trending updwards/downwards, current govt is not randomly bringing these policies in.

Yes of course if it was up to me, I'd be asking to be kind to criminals so they can have a change of heart in their own time, provide them with everything they need in the meantime so they can transition from criminals -> non-criminals -> good citizens contributing positively to the society.
I'll allocate billions and trillions of dollars towards universal income for all kiwis, free food for anyone who 'needs' it, unlimited rehab for criminals, 60-80% tax rate for the wealthy etc.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3227334 7-May-2024 15:17

@thinkingtrex8848:

sir1963:

Have you any evidence that the reduction in crime was the result of being tough on crime ?

There are a whole heap of socio-economic factors involved , For example a declining rate of poverty

https://www.statista.com/statistics/200463/us-poverty-rate-since-1990/

How has the rate of violence been impacted through the decriminalisation of marijuana ?

Has Unemployment changed ?

Education ?, access to welfare ?, aces to mental health care?

I totally get you. I'm in full agreement with everything you are saying. I'm only taking the devil's advocate because it seems challenging and I'm hoping to learn a thing or two.

Look, if you are in disagreement with the actions of a democratically elected govt bringing in policies that they campaigned on, onus is on you to provide those extensive evidence proving them wrong.

As stated earlier, I have no stake in either. Mere attempt at rationalising what it seems to be a hugely unpopular policies on GZ by current govt.

You are clearly showing you have a stake in this discussion when you wrote:

"Was just confused with the stats that their "tough on crime" approach should have made things worse as claimed by current opposition but as you posted, the trend is going downwards and as you stated, went from "horrific" to less horrific/bad which means it is improving and positive change. Whereas, "soft on crime" approach of NZ has seen the same stats trending upwards."

Whereas is not the same as meanwhile. In the context you used it means "to the contrary" which basically to me says this sentence tries to demonstrate advances in one policy (US) and failings in another (NZ).

"I have not stake" is the wrong attitude. You either want crime reduction or not. In either case, it's an interest. Not having a stake means not bothering with either outcome.

"I have no stake" is in this context is similar to "I am just asking questions."

thinkingtrex8848:

You said- USA tough on crime never worked: I provided downward trending graph that somehow shows whatever they are doing, is working.

"Whatever they are doing" is not a good enough qualifier. As sir1963 mentioned before it could be attributed to a number of different actions. You seem to associate it with "tough on crime" but there are social factors and other government actions you are not considering.

thinkingtrex8848:

I’ve provided a basic response to your points about "tough on crime" USA vs "soft on crime" NZ.

At the very least, you can agree that with those stats provided that shows clear trending updwards/downwards, current govt is not randomly bringing these policies in.

Again, this government has provided no evidence that "tough on crime" would give different results than education, welfare and even, yes, strengthening of police and sentences used together or separately.

As it is, this government is pandering to the Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) crowd, providing no evidence to their claims that "tough on crime" will provide any different outcome. We are not an experiment. We need results.

thinkingtrex8848

533 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3227336 7-May-2024 15:28

freitasm:

Again, this government has provided no evidence that "tough on crime"

I'm just saying that for some or majority of kiwis who get swayed by click bait articles or punchline news and election claims, the above provided graphs show a decline in USA crime rate which I would assume should be going up due to their tough on crime approach but the opposite is happening.

This by itself might be enough for non GZ kiwis to think "oh maybe this govt is onto something".

Again, believe me, I seriously have no stake and happy to go whichever direction is supposed to be the correct direction.

Also, how do I 'multi quote' like you have done? I tried to do that and it keeps erroring on me

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3227337 7-May-2024 15:32

thinkingtrex8848:

freitasm:

Again, this government has provided no evidence that "tough on crime"

I'm just saying that for some or majority of kiwis who get swayed by click bait articles or punchline news and election claims, the above provided graphs show a decline in USA crime rate which I would assume should be going up due to their tough on crime approach but the opposite is happening.

I'm sorry, this makes no sense. Were you expecting the "tough on crime approach" to actually increase crime? Because that's what you just wrote.

thinkingtrex8848:

Also, how do I 'multi quote' like you have done? I tried to do that and it keeps erroring on me

You can only post up to two quotes per reply. Admin and mods don't have this limit.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3227386 7-May-2024 15:36

thinkingtrex8848:

This by itself might be enough for non GZ kiwis to think "oh maybe this govt is onto something".

Also, you are generalising by making a label and applying it to Geekzone users ("non GZ kiwis") as being different from other New Zealand citizens and residents. This despite you only seeing a small number of people posting here, out of 100,000.

thinkingtrex8848

533 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3227387 7-May-2024 15:37

freitasm:

thinkingtrex8848:

I'm just saying that for some or majority of kiwis who get swayed by click bait articles or punchline news and election claims, the above provided graphs show a decline in USA crime rate which I would assume should be going up due to their tough on crime approach but the opposite is happening.

I'm sorry, this makes no sense. Were you expecting the "tough on crime approach" to actually increase crime? Because that's what you just wrote. - I may have confused myself. I was saying that majority believes tough on crime is bad and it doesn't bring crime down but the graph says otherwise.

You can only post up to two quotes per reply. Admin and mods don't have this limit. - Oh yep, that make sense..

Replied above with underlines..

Also, just taking the less popular opinion to debate have mostly always made me learn more about the particular subject. Like everyone, I'd like to see a drop in crime rate and whatever the right thing to do, should be taken by the govt.

thinkingtrex8848

533 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3227389 7-May-2024 15:41

freitasm:

thinkingtrex8848:

This by itself might be enough for non GZ kiwis to think "oh maybe this govt is onto something".

Also, you are generalising by making a label and applying it to Geekzone users ("non GZ kiwis") as being different from other New Zealand citizens and residents. This despite you only seeing a small number of people posting here, out of 100,000.

Okay, I consider most GZ political forum posting members to be critical thinkers and able to weed through good/bad policies and politics -hence why generalising there against regular every day kiwis.

Open to a better way to word that if you can suggest. My grammar isn't the strongest..

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

ezbee

2405 posts

Uber Geek

#3227497 7-May-2024 20:08

For the NZ 2019 Homicide figures, remember what happened in Christchurch.

It then went back down to.
1 per 100K for 2020, and est 2021 of 1.1 per 100K
https://www.police.govt.nz/sites/default/files/publications/historic-new-zealand-murder-offences-1926-2021.pdf

Still disturbing that in 2018 12% of the number was under 5's

The dramatic USA reduction goes back to last millennium.
Technology from 1990's onward invariably impacted catching more otherwise repeat offenders who earlier hid over county and state lines, more easily etc. Forensics and all that stuff.
As French Bombers found NZ can be a bit of a village.
Overall the USA number is not great, and it would not be a good swap

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3228297 9-May-2024 12:22

Found this on LinkedIn.

I am now putting David Seymour as an extreme-right wing conservative. Politicising kid's food? Calling food "woke"?

What a drag (pun intended).

And here is a worthy comment from Mike Godwin, of Godwin's Law fame:

SaltyNZ

8218 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#3228298 9-May-2024 12:32

Wow, he sounds really angry. 'OK fine, you whinging idiots, I did what you asked for. Are you happy now?' sort of thing...

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

sir1963

3260 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#3228300 9-May-2024 12:33

freitasm:

Found this on LinkedIn.

I am now putting David Seymour as an extreme-right wing conservative. Politicising kid's food? Calling food "woke"?

"Woke" is an undefined word, it is a tigger word used to get the listener to "fill in the blank" with their worst interpretation.

They NEVER say why something is "woke", or what the meaning they are trying to convey is with "woke", because the ONLY intention is to trigger people.

Any politician (and others) who use the word "woke" are simply no longer worth listening to, and some such as Seymour never were.

thinkingtrex8848

533 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3228301 9-May-2024 12:40

freitasm:

Found this on LinkedIn.

I am now putting David Seymour as an extreme-right wing conservative. Politicising kid's food? Calling food "woke"?

What a drag (pun intended).

And here is a worthy comment from Mike Godwin, of Godwin's Law fame:

I'm going to take the devils (lot consider DS to be one lol) advocate here again.

@freitasm-

Can you prove or have inside information that he did not save 107million as he states?

Reality as he claims that Labour did not budget for school lunches past this year - is that incorrect?

He is saying he is able to keep funding the program - is that not correct?

@freitasm - If the above statements are true, I'd like to know the reason for fairly harsh words like "fukchead" etc regardless if DS is right/left/center and the term "woke" is not something he only uses.

He says he'll be feeding kids with fruit and sandwiches. I assume strange use of the word "woke" in this context, could be similar reason that was recently in the media urging kiwis to stop buying not-value-for-money "greenwashing" scam type of foods where it appears to be paying a premium for some benefit that doesn't exist or doesn't match the cost - https://campaigns.consumer.org.nz/greenwashing

thinkingtrex8848

533 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#3228304 9-May-2024 12:44

sir1963:

freitasm:

Found this on LinkedIn.

I am now putting David Seymour as an extreme-right wing conservative. Politicising kid's food? Calling food "woke"?

"Woke" is an undefined word, it is a tigger word used to get the listener to "fill in the blank" with their worst interpretation.

They NEVER say why something is "woke", or what the meaning they are trying to convey is with "woke", because the ONLY intention is to trigger people.

Any politician (and others) who use the word "woke" are simply no longer worth listening to, and some such as Seymour never were.

Sorry, what do you mean by that word is not defined? Here is not one, but three sources for "definitions"-

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/woke
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/woke
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/woke

sir1963

3260 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#3228306 9-May-2024 12:49

thinkingtrex8848:

Sorry, what do you mean by that word is not defined? Here is not one, but three sources for "definitions"-

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/woke
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/woke
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/woke

In the context and the intention of their usage, it is not defined. The ONLY thing they intend with "woke" is to trigger people and get them to supply the meaning, ie the worst opinion they can.
This is why when people get asked "what do you mean by woke" its basically "Its just woke".

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3228307 9-May-2024 12:50

thinkingtrex8848:

sir1963:

freitasm:

Found this on LinkedIn.

I am now putting David Seymour as an extreme-right wing conservative. Politicising kid's food? Calling food "woke"?

"Woke" is an undefined word, it is a tigger word used to get the listener to "fill in the blank" with their worst interpretation.

They NEVER say why something is "woke", or what the meaning they are trying to convey is with "woke", because the ONLY intention is to trigger people.

Any politician (and others) who use the word "woke" are simply no longer worth listening to, and some such as Seymour never were.

Sorry, what do you mean by that word is not defined? Here is not one, but three sources for "definitions"-

He meant that, yes the word has a definition but right-wing conservatives are using it as a "trigger word" - anything they don't like is "woke".

Ask any to define "woke" and they won't give any of the common dictionary definitions, if they can come up with something at all.

1 | ... | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | ... | 186