Our new coalition government.

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

Forums › Politics › Our new coalition government.

1 | ... | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | ... | 182

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2127122 15-Nov-2018 12:02

Bluntj:

You can agree to differ...

I agree that the teachers are now being greedy and spinning to the media about it NOT being about money...

As I said earlier that they did deserve a correction, but its now out of hand. Getting $12k each extra per annum is massive and should have been enough to avert strike action. If its not about money they could have taken less and put the rest into hiring teachers aids etc...or they could donate their holiday job money to a charity for childrens lunches/shoes.

I thought this government was going to be about helping the needy, not the greedy.

That point is where I give the Govt a tick. Its a Labour Govt, supposedly run by the unions. But, they gave a generous offer, increased it a little, and now stand their ground and say no more. Funds are not unlimited. That, and the policy of fiscal responsibility they have, and the strong meetings with the Business group they created shows they are quite centrist, inclusive, and not the ratbags that gave pre election lolly scrambles of yesteryear. Unions need to represent their members, not play power games. I hope we look at importing teachers, I'm unsure what they offered for extra numbers though, if any

linw

2849 posts

Uber Geek

#2127727 16-Nov-2018 08:44

Thanks, @6FIEND that video parody was superb!!

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#2127923 16-Nov-2018 13:40

#BrokenRecordWarning

The NZHerald reports on another case of our PM and her team allowing the press and NZ public to believe something that isn't quite what it seems.

For several days her (Ardern's) officials had been telling New Zealand media that she would be sitting next to Pence at his request.

She began answering questions about it in Cairns, on the way to Singapore for the East Asia Summit. It was considered a diplomatic coup to get several hours of quality time with such a prominent figure in the Trump Administration.

She continued to answer questions about it when she arrived, in terms of what issues she would expect to raise with him during the dinner.

At no point did she say she would be sitting near him, not next to him. But when it became clear someone had mucked up, and she was sitting with Mrs Pence, not Mr Pence, Ardern insisted that that had been the plan all along.

It meant treating the news media as though it had been at fault in misinterpreting the dinner invitation to sit next to Mr Pence as an invitation to sit next to Mr Pence.

Again, in isolation I would consider this to be a trivial matter. But there does appear to be an established and consistent pattern of behaviour here that directly contradicts pre-election promises of honesty, openness and transparency.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2127928 16-Nov-2018 13:45

I think anyone not disabused of the notion that Ms Adern doesn't understand the meaning of those words (transparency, honesty or openness) or has taken serious intentional license with their interpretation clearly hasn't been paying attention or is willfully ignoring overwhelming evidence.

I can't really recall many times I've felt they have been anything LIKE honest and transparent. In my view they are far worse than the prior Government in that regard.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2127938 16-Nov-2018 14:17

tdgeek:

You are very passionate. I like that a lot, and you know that. Your passion towards National is well over the top, you avoid what you choose to, thats defensive, and its not a discussion. DISCUSS with facts, or as is often the case for any of us, opinion, and backup your opinion. But if you choose to be so biased that it clouds your view as others here have stated (and Im not referring to the usual offenders) and be just plain defensive, its valueless, and its not a discussion. Calling me childish for offering my post is childish. But you often have an issue with being disagreed upon. I could quite easily use adjectives freely if someone disagreed with me. I am very reluctant to sink to that level. Thats a problem you have. I am sorry to have to say that. If someone disagrees with me, then A) I'm wrong, enlighten me, or B) you have a different option, tell me why your opinion is correct. Its simple, its a discussion.

No, unlike others here I don't bait a response. My statement was very clear. There is no housing crisis, there is no health crisis, there is no education crisis.

So, people want better pay and so on. Backing that up with 90% of Kiwis want better pay/conditions is pretty meek. If not weak, you are avoiding.

IMHO there is a housing crisis, if anyone objects say so and why

IMHO there is an education and healthcare crisis. You can backtrack by saying its a problem not a crisis. Again, weak. But explain why its JUST a problem and not a crisis. After all its just a discussion. I'm all ears.I have no issue being corrected or informed, but I also have no inherent bias to rark me up.

Yes, I very much agree with the last paragraph.

Back to the greedy comment. Its been made quite clear here by some, that there is no real issue with housing, health and education. As you offer, it's a problem, not a crisis. The continual newsfeeds might dispute that. But thats open to interpretation. If there is no crises, just problems, then those in the three sectors being greedy is a fair response. Its not ideal, but its not that bad (i.e. just a problem), so me saying they are greedy is quite fair, if it is just a problem, not a crisis.

Obviously I dont agree and I am making a point, but based on some comments its actually a very fair point.

I thought hard about not replying to this, because I honestly don't feel it will make any difference. You will hold your views regardless. However, since you refute the claims of the childish post, and make mention of MY style of communication, I feel it reasonable to point a couple of things out.

An non childish response to what I posted would have been :

"I am surprised you feel there is no Healthcare or Education Crisis", or "I disagree with your claim there is no education or healthcare crisis, here is the evidence to support the fact I feel there IS one".

Instead you wrote

"Today I learned there is no Healthcare or Education Crisis".

This is childish/saracastic/unneseccary, because you clearly DIDN'T learn anything of the sort, as you went on to disagree. You learned that some people in this discussion don't feel there is a crisis. You must have known framing your comments this way, would elicit a strong response, hence the baiting.

I am not backtracking anything. I do not believe there is anywhere near a general crisis on either two topics. I have family in both Healthcare and Education and have a fair bit to do with others who work in these fields. My wife for example, a Doctor for the last 15+ years disagrees there is a *crisis*. My sister, a teacher, also disagrees there is a *crisis*. There are SOME areas of healthcare/education which require urgent reform, like Mental Health. It's a horror show. I could elaborate in quite a lot of detail, but I do get to hear a fair bit as a result of my associations and what not, about where Doctors feel there are serious issues. My view, partially held because of my interactions with those medical field, is that it's not just about not enough money, but rather WHERE that money is put, used and spent. Some spending within healthcare is political. Sexy things like new surgical units in areas that don't really need them, get approved because they are high visibility, but things like Mengiacocal vaccines are only able to be afforded by those less likely to contract it, and the list could go on for pages. Should Health and Education workers get pay increases? Are they on the breadline? Nope.

I agree with @6fiend that crisis can cover a variety of scales, however, in the traditional view of crisis, no I don't feel there is anything near a true crisis. Patients are still being seen to a standard of care most people who have been treated overseas, would feel is of the highest standard.

Finally, I believe it's perfectly reasonable to say that pay increases for those striking doesn't indicate a crisis, but does still represent there is an issue, and that can also preclude those parties being neccessarily greedy. Having said that, I do feel the latest set of demands are over the top and don't reflect an understanding that after this, there are lots of others who will likely want pay increases too, and short of upping taxes, there isn't more money, just a reallocation of existing resources.

The press love to sensationalize things, and often work to an agenda of their own, depending on the bent of the reporter writing the article. CRISIS is a world that gets clicks.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2128124 16-Nov-2018 18:38

networkn:

I thought hard about not replying to this, because I honestly don't feel it will make any difference. You will hold your views regardless. However, since you refute the claims of the childish post, and make mention of MY style of communication, I feel it reasonable to point a couple of things out.

An non childish response to what I posted would have been :

"I am surprised you feel there is no Healthcare or Education Crisis", or "I disagree with your claim there is no education or healthcare crisis, here is the evidence to support the fact I feel there IS one".

Instead you wrote

"Today I learned there is no Healthcare or Education Crisis".

This is childish/saracastic/unneseccary, because you clearly DIDN'T learn anything of the sort, as you went on to disagree. You learned that some people in this discussion don't feel there is a crisis. You must have known framing your comments this way, would elicit a strong response, hence the baiting.

I am not backtracking anything. I do not believe there is anywhere near a general crisis on either two topics. I have family in both Healthcare and Education and have a fair bit to do with others who work in these fields. My wife for example, a Doctor for the last 15+ years disagrees there is a *crisis*. My sister, a teacher, also disagrees there is a *crisis*. There are SOME areas of healthcare/education which require urgent reform, like Mental Health. It's a horror show. I could elaborate in quite a lot of detail, but I do get to hear a fair bit as a result of my associations and what not, about where Doctors feel there are serious issues. My view, partially held because of my interactions with those medical field, is that it's not just about not enough money, but rather WHERE that money is put, used and spent. Some spending within healthcare is political. Sexy things like new surgical units in areas that don't really need them, get approved because they are high visibility, but things like Mengiacocal vaccines are only able to be afforded by those less likely to contract it, and the list could go on for pages. Should Health and Education workers get pay increases? Are they on the breadline? Nope.

I agree with @6fiend that crisis can cover a variety of scales, however, in the traditional view of crisis, no I don't feel there is anything near a true crisis. Patients are still being seen to a standard of care most people who have been treated overseas, would feel is of the highest standard.

Finally, I believe it's perfectly reasonable to say that pay increases for those striking doesn't indicate a crisis, but does still represent there is an issue, and that can also preclude those parties being neccessarily greedy. Having said that, I do feel the latest set of demands are over the top and don't reflect an understanding that after this, there are lots of others who will likely want pay increases too, and short of upping taxes, there isn't more money, just a reallocation of existing resources.

The press love to sensationalize things, and often work to an agenda of their own, depending on the bent of the reporter writing the article. CRISIS is a world that gets clicks.

1. There was no need to reply, but you have in a lengthy manner so I will respond as brief as I can

2."You will hold your views regardless. " You say this a lot. If anyone posts here with the express need to change others minds, thats unwise. Apple vs Android, Ford vs Holden, National vs Labour. It wont happen. Dont chase that, and dont get angry when it fails. Discuss, put a view forward and discuss, but dont use pseudo name calling to advance the integrity of the post. Pot calling the kettle black?

3. Your version of a non childish post is correct. My post was sarcastic, that is patently obvious. Off course I have not JUST learnt something that changes my opinion 180 degrees. Off course I did not base that just on comments here. It was clearly sarcastic based on the themes here. To the point where there was no need to add /S Sarcasm is valid, it gets a point across. If my post was not obviously sarcastic then others can chime in if they wish. If it was too subtle and could have been taken another way, say so

4. Crisis. That has been defined here. Your spin on a crisis is a world changing event, or in this case, a health, education or housing changing event. HUGE. That is not the definition of a crisis. The 1961 (I think) Cuba crisis that my Dad told me about and I learnt about later was a crisis. Nothing actually happened. It could have, but it didnt. Russia sent nuclear armed warships to Cuba to face off against the US. Nothing happened. It was a crisis where the next step was bad. It is not a sensationalist word, its defined. Your spin is that its HUGE, the correct meaning is that is an issue beyond just a problem. If I used your view of a crisis, I would agree, but your view of a "crisis" is incorrect.

5.Your anecdotal evidence of no crisis is worth something. Its good to know. I go by what I read and by what I google. Comments from all levels of the food chain seem to disagree. If you were a GP, or a nurse working for a GP, no issue. If you are at any level in a private hospital no issue. My annecdotal readings show that in public hospitals the doctors, specifically young are over worked, work stupid shifts, and the nurses forego breaks, work past their shifts as there is no one else. Thats what I see. Id like to see a work to rule instead of strikes. That will be the litmus test, enact that as a permanent standard not just as a strike type action. Then we will see if there is a crisis. When patients miss some of their daily cares as the nurse is elsewhere, where pre meds are not dispensed as the nurse has finished, rescheduled the op tomorrow, sorry, thats all booked out . That type of thing. If the health "issues" are "just" a problem, it wont make the news.

6. You describes 97 or 98% of people all want a day rise. That just marginalises the teachers and health people. There is a difference between I'm miffed I only got 1% than going on strike over pay, excessive work shifts etc. IMHO. Teachers they want more teachers. So they can get the job done and get training and so on.

7. Are they all greedy? If its just a problem, yes they all are as are the whingers about housing affordability. IMHO it goes deeper than that. We do agree that despite whatever the problem is, they cannot have it all now

8. "Finally, I believe it's perfectly reasonable to say that pay increases for those striking doesn't indicate a crisis" You didnt say that, you compared the strike action sectors to 97% of the rest of employees all want a pay increase, marginalising the issue.

9. I agree that NZ health care is excellent compared to overseas. NZ road traffic is excellent compared to Mumbai. Its not the same.If the public health sector worked to rule, to the minute, and it was all fine, I would then agree. But these employees dont run machines, they run people, they cant walk away and they dont. Now they have had enough.

10.The press do sensationalise things, no question on that. I give the media a grain of salt. I look who says what, and I see all levels saying they have big issues. But if you went to a GP or private hospital I doubt there are any issues, its the ones at the coalface dealing with the end users.

My last point is the political stance. If someone officially decreed there was a crisis, that puts the blame on the previous Govt, and IMHO, that is the trend here, to minimise that. Had the previous Govt been Labour Coalition, I imagine all hell would break loose here. My opinion, no more. And thats not a criticism of anyone, its the way people are.

In any case my brief reply was not brief. Its a pity that a one liner goes this far, that was my only issue. The other stuff is a good discussion. It not always about right and wrong, its about new views

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2128125 16-Nov-2018 18:39

Apologies @freitasm, for the long post including the long post. I felt that both were relevant.

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.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2134618 26-Nov-2018 15:57

Credit where credit is due. The government has announced a meningococcal disease vaccination program *this side of Christmas* for Northland, one of the highest areas of concern for this disease. It was something mentioned above by me. Good on them for hearing of the issue and making a step in the right direction with it.

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2134957 27-Nov-2018 01:21

MikeB4:
So the Government banned letting fees and they are being replaced by tenancy fees levied against the property owner which of course will be passed onto the tennant. I would have thought that this was obvious and the Government acted to curb this response. So the bottom line is no change in cost for the tennants. A swing and a miss on this one.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/108595008/tenancy-fees-for-landlords-replace-banned-letting-fees

I think that banning letting fees is an excellent law change. Top marks to Labour for doing so. Reason - a tenant can't change property managers while still renting or applying for the same property. While a landlord can easily change property managers. And it removes the problem of property managers getting new tenants in every year as a way of charging more letting fees. And forcing tenants to pay far more in moving expenses than what the letting fees cost.

And I say the above despite being anti most other things done or proposed by the current government. And never having paid, or needing to pay a letting fee.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2135162 27-Nov-2018 11:45

About time although it could be extended for all the Civil Service and NZ in general.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/108894914/extensive-review-into-bullying-and-harassment-at-parliament

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2135167 27-Nov-2018 11:52

Keeping it off Govt IT systems and destroying it afterwards is a good move. There is no point if any staffers feel there is a slight chance of being known. Hopefully it publicises a damning report and changes are made. All parties will be as bad as the other in all likelihood, but there also needs to be balance as it will be a small number of bad apples, not the whole crate that's at fault.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2135227 27-Nov-2018 13:14

tdgeek:

Keeping it off Govt IT systems and destroying it afterwards is a good move. There is no point if any staffers feel there is a slight chance of being known. Hopefully it publicises a damning report and changes are made. All parties will be as bad as the other in all likelihood, but there also needs to be balance as it will be a small number of bad apples, not the whole crate that's at fault.

Not just political parties, workplace bullying is spread across all employment groups in NZ and is something that needs to addressed.

vexxxboy

4243 posts

Uber Geek

#2135441 27-Nov-2018 18:43

Aredwood:
MikeB4:

So the Government banned letting fees and they are being replaced by tenancy fees levied against the property owner which of course will be passed onto the tennant. I would have thought that this was obvious and the Government acted to curb this response. So the bottom line is no change in cost for the tennants. A swing and a miss on this one.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/108595008/tenancy-fees-for-landlords-replace-banned-letting-fees

I think that banning letting fees is an excellent law change. Top marks to Labour for doing so. Reason - a tenant can't change property managers while still renting or applying for the same property. While a landlord can easily change property managers. And it removes the problem of property managers getting new tenants in every year as a way of charging more letting fees. And forcing tenants to pay far more in moving expenses than what the letting fees cost.

And I say the above despite being anti most other things done or proposed by the current government. And never having paid, or needing to pay a letting fee.

sorry but how can a tennant change property managers even if they wanted to. I thought the contract would be between the manager and the owner and there's not much the tennant can do even with a law change.

Common sense is not as common as you think.

Aredwood

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2135500 27-Nov-2018 21:15

vexxxboy:
Aredwood:I think that banning letting fees is an excellent law change. Top marks to Labour for doing so. Reason - a tenant can't change property managers while still renting or applying for the same property. While a landlord can easily change property managers. And it removes the problem of property managers getting new tenants in every year as a way of charging more letting fees. And forcing tenants to pay far more in moving expenses than what the letting fees cost.

And I say the above despite being anti most other things done or proposed by the current government. And never having paid, or needing to pay a letting fee.

sorry but how can a tennant change property managers even if they wanted to. I thought the contract would be between the manager and the owner and there's not much the tennant can do even with a law change.

That is exactly my point, tenants can't change property managers.

Which means that if a property manager is charging more money than is reasonable for their letting fees, a tenant can't do anything about it.

MikeAqua

7773 posts

Uber Geek

#2135747 28-Nov-2018 09:48

Aredwood:

I think that banning letting fees is an excellent law change. Top marks to Labour for doing so.

I don't know about other landlords, but I factored this into a substantial rent increase, assuming I would tenant the place every 6 months. I did this ASAP after labour was elected and had an agent rent the property ... while letting fees were still legal.

Made the property profitable and sold it to another landlord at price I'm very happy with.

Mike

1 | ... | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | ... | 182