Why I wont vote National

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

Forums › Politics › Why I wont vote National

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1870368 21-Sep-2017 16:15

jonathan18: Russell Brown’s latest post on Public Address highlights some of the areas of moral failure of National’s current reign ............

Its hard for me to take anything from Russell Browns mouth seriously. If I recall correctly he was a big supporter of Metiria Turei, went on defending her benefit fraud, and even confessed to benefit fraud himself.

Sorry, will scroll past that post.

allio

895 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 529

#1870383 21-Sep-2017 16:47

Wiggum:

jonathan18: Russell Brown’s latest post on Public Address highlights some of the areas of moral failure of National’s current reign ............

Its hard for me to take anything from Russell Browns mouth seriously. If I recall correctly he was a big supporter of Metiria Turei, went on defending her benefit fraud, and even confessed to benefit fraud himself.

Sorry, will scroll past that post.

Ignorance is bliss!

networkn

Networkn
32864 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15455

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1870409 21-Sep-2017 17:33

It's easy to make the world seem like it's ending presenting extreme edge cases like people who take sleeping pills to avoid getting hungry. Logically something seems off about reports like that. There is a LOT of help for people in NZ.

I do wonder what Russell Brown wants to *actually* do about hunger in NZ? He hasn't proposed a solution to consider, just wants to complain that the problem exists. We have enough complainers.

I also would like cited proof on the 30,000 kids who end up in hospital as a result of preventable housing-related illnesses.

It seems like a very slanted article. Not a lot of balance there.

For the record I am not stating there isn't an issue with some of these things, I do question however, the veracity of the size and types of claims being made around it.

Stats can be twisted to support any view.

Does Russell Brown believe that Labour can solve the problems mentioned, faster than eventually?

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1870449 21-Sep-2017 18:38

In what way is it the government's fault that NZ chose to build large garden sheds instead of houses for the preceding 100 years or so?

If they were to introduce the buildings and materials standards, building oversight standards, building trade standards and so on and so forth required to correct that (and the so-called 'leaky homes' debacle is proof that it is still a relatively current state of affairs) just how much would the houses that people already say that they cannot afford then cost?

The leaky homes thing, for instance, should have fallen 100% on councils, architects and central government for approving the materials they should not have approved, appointing poorly qualified staff to assess construction, drafting bad standards and so on and so forth. In most comparable nations, the surveyors or architects would be required to carry tens of millions in PI cover, as would the Councils etc etc - literally none of the costs should have fallen on the home owners, who merely paid to comply with regulations etc that later proved to be unsuitable for purpose.

There is a significant propensity to simply blame government for not somehow magically housing every single person in NZ - yet not even Labour really addresses the cost issues that would be involved in revamping the NZ building industry from the ground up, changing to modern, fast forms of construction, breaking monopolies and so on. It's far more complex than anyone seems to think it is - or at least as anyone seems to want Joe Public to think it is - and it won't do anyone any good to simply reduce the discussions to the simplest common denominator which is what happens in political point scoring debates on the subject.

It requires are much wider, systemic reboot to ensure what is being built is still useful in 50 years time etc etc.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1870455 21-Sep-2017 19:10

Geektastic:

In what way is it the government's fault that NZ chose to build large garden sheds instead of houses for the preceding 100 years or so?

If they were to introduce the buildings and materials standards, building oversight standards, building trade standards and so on and so forth required to correct that (and the so-called 'leaky homes' debacle is proof that it is still a relatively current state of affairs) just how much would the houses that people already say that they cannot afford then cost?

The leaky homes thing, for instance, should have fallen 100% on councils, architects and central government for approving the materials they should not have approved, appointing poorly qualified staff to assess construction, drafting bad standards and so on and so forth. In most comparable nations, the surveyors or architects would be required to carry tens of millions in PI cover, as would the Councils etc etc - literally none of the costs should have fallen on the home owners, who merely paid to comply with regulations etc that later proved to be unsuitable for purpose.

There is a significant propensity to simply blame government for not somehow magically housing every single person in NZ - yet not even Labour really addresses the cost issues that would be involved in revamping the NZ building industry from the ground up, changing to modern, fast forms of construction, breaking monopolies and so on. It's far more complex than anyone seems to think it is - or at least as anyone seems to want Joe Public to think it is - and it won't do anyone any good to simply reduce the discussions to the simplest common denominator which is what happens in political point scoring debates on the subject.

It requires are much wider, systemic reboot to ensure what is being built is still useful in 50 years time etc etc.

TLDR version - "it's complicated".

It's not any single past government's cause - hence it's disappointing that they choose to politicize it - trying to score points instead of fixing the issues.

bmt

574 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 227

#1870547 21-Sep-2017 22:45

lol sleeping pills on Friday to avoid eating in the weekend. That's called an anecdote and it's pretty ridiculous to imply it's happening on any sort of scale.

Re who gets first shot at forming a government, they were talking about this on ZB today. It's not a rule or law, just a convention. If Labour spoke to the Greens and NZ First on Saturday night and decided to form a government and went to the GG on Sunday morning at 9am, while National waited to call NZ First until 10am.. well, tough luck National.

As I understand it.

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1870582 22-Sep-2017 07:06

bmt:

lol sleeping pills on Friday to avoid eating in the weekend. That's called an anecdote and it's pretty ridiculous to imply it's happening on any sort of scale.

Re who gets first shot at forming a government, they were talking about this on ZB today. It's not a rule or law, just a convention. If Labour spoke to the Greens and NZ First on Saturday night and decided to form a government and went to the GG on Sunday morning at 9am, while National waited to call NZ First until 10am.. well, tough luck National.

As I understand it.

Convention or not they will follow that. I believe National gets first dibs as they will get a higher vote. If they cannot form a Govt, then Its Labours attempt. Probably irelevant as whoever partners with NZF will be over the line

gulfa

321 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 128
Inactive user

#1870626 22-Sep-2017 07:50

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/97075642/greed-not-taxes-will-ruin-this-country

When the privileged belittle those who are struggling and tell them to work harder, it shows how ignorant they are.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1870632 22-Sep-2017 08:01

gulfa:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/97075642/greed-not-taxes-will-ruin-this-country

When the privileged belittle those who are struggling and tell them to work harder, it shows how ignorant they are.

The tax attack has been poor. The tax cuts give everyone over 52k $20 a week. If you earn less than that you get less. So the low income get less support

Labours plan was to target the low income. Thats all there is to it. But the strategy from National, which might get them into power is very misleading. Like the $75 increase to bottles of wine, the $30 or whatever it was on cabbages, farmers going broke. very few farmers are affected by the water royalty. Fiscal hole that economists say is wrong, but Bill and Steven still hammer that.

Strategy is fine, its a free world, but misleading to create worry is below the belt IMHO. Maybe they could have targeted that their policies are better than Labours??

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 429
Inactive user

#1870704 22-Sep-2017 09:01

tdgeek:

gulfa:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/97075642/greed-not-taxes-will-ruin-this-country

When the privileged belittle those who are struggling and tell them to work harder, it shows how ignorant they are.

The tax attack has been poor. The tax cuts give everyone over 52k $20 a week. If you earn less than that you get less. So the low income get less support

Labours plan was to target the low income. Thats all there is to it. But the strategy from National, which might get them into power is very misleading. Like the $75 increase to bottles of wine, the $30 or whatever it was on cabbages, farmers going broke. very few farmers are affected by the water royalty. Fiscal hole that economists say is wrong, but Bill and Steven still hammer that.

Strategy is fine, its a free world, but misleading to create worry is below the belt IMHO. Maybe they could have targeted that their policies are better than Labours??

I think under Labour, debt levels will increase significantly, far more than under National, so borrowing heavily to finance election promises is not good for the country.

OK for tax, if I earn $52k a year, National's already legislated tax policy will reduce my tax by $1,000 a year. Therefore, if Labour cancel this legislation, it is certainly increasing the tax I have to pay by $1,000 per year. This is not a lie as Labour claims, it's a simple arithmetic fact that any 10 year old could understand!

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 429
Inactive user

#1870705 22-Sep-2017 09:01

tdgeek:

gulfa:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/97075642/greed-not-taxes-will-ruin-this-country

When the privileged belittle those who are struggling and tell them to work harder, it shows how ignorant they are.

The tax attack has been poor. The tax cuts give everyone over 52k $20 a week. If you earn less than that you get less. So the low income get less support

Labours plan was to target the low income. Thats all there is to it. But the strategy from National, which might get them into power is very misleading. Like the $75 increase to bottles of wine, the $30 or whatever it was on cabbages, farmers going broke. very few farmers are affected by the water royalty. Fiscal hole that economists say is wrong, but Bill and Steven still hammer that.

Strategy is fine, its a free world, but misleading to create worry is below the belt IMHO. Maybe they could have targeted that their policies are better than Labours??

I think under Labour, debt levels will increase significantly, far more than under National, so borrowing heavily to finance election promises is not good for the country.

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 429
Inactive user

#1870706 22-Sep-2017 09:01

tdgeek:

gulfa:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/97075642/greed-not-taxes-will-ruin-this-country

When the privileged belittle those who are struggling and tell them to work harder, it shows how ignorant they are.

The tax attack has been poor. The tax cuts give everyone over 52k $20 a week. If you earn less than that you get less. So the low income get less support

Labours plan was to target the low income. Thats all there is to it. But the strategy from National, which might get them into power is very misleading. Like the $75 increase to bottles of wine, the $30 or whatever it was on cabbages, farmers going broke. very few farmers are affected by the water royalty. Fiscal hole that economists say is wrong, but Bill and Steven still hammer that.

Strategy is fine, its a free world, but misleading to create worry is below the belt IMHO. Maybe they could have targeted that their policies are better than Labours??

I think under Labour, debt levels will increase significantly, far more than under National, so borrowing heavily to finance election promises is not good for the country.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1870716 22-Sep-2017 09:17

frednz:

tdgeek:

gulfa:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/97075642/greed-not-taxes-will-ruin-this-country

When the privileged belittle those who are struggling and tell them to work harder, it shows how ignorant they are.

The tax attack has been poor. The tax cuts give everyone over 52k $20 a week. If you earn less than that you get less. So the low income get less support

Labours plan was to target the low income. Thats all there is to it. But the strategy from National, which might get them into power is very misleading. Like the $75 increase to bottles of wine, the $30 or whatever it was on cabbages, farmers going broke. very few farmers are affected by the water royalty. Fiscal hole that economists say is wrong, but Bill and Steven still hammer that.

Strategy is fine, its a free world, but misleading to create worry is below the belt IMHO. Maybe they could have targeted that their policies are better than Labours??

I think under Labour, debt levels will increase significantly, far more than under National, so borrowing heavily to finance election promises is not good for the country.

OK for tax, if I earn $52k a year, National's already legislated tax policy will reduce my tax by $1,000 a year. Therefore, if Labour cancel this legislation, it is certainly increasing the tax I have to pay by $1,000 per year. This is not a lie as Labour claims, it's a simple arithmetic fact that any 10 year old could understand!

Everyone says its a lie, not just Labour. Id rather forego a bribe tax cut that I dont need, and align the "tax cut" to support low income earners, who under the tax cut will get the least per capita. The "tax cut" will happen if Labour gets in, but it wont be called a tax cut, but it will do the same thing, but for low earners only. When interest rates are low, salary increases are low, inflation is low, most of us can look after ourselves, which is supposed to be the mantra of a market based economy, so why do we still get a tax cut across the board? Just give it to those who need it

frednz

1467 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 429
Inactive user

#1870728 22-Sep-2017 09:33

tdgeek:

frednz:

tdgeek:

gulfa:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/97075642/greed-not-taxes-will-ruin-this-country

When the privileged belittle those who are struggling and tell them to work harder, it shows how ignorant they are.

The tax attack has been poor. The tax cuts give everyone over 52k $20 a week. If you earn less than that you get less. So the low income get less support

Labours plan was to target the low income. Thats all there is to it. But the strategy from National, which might get them into power is very misleading. Like the $75 increase to bottles of wine, the $30 or whatever it was on cabbages, farmers going broke. very few farmers are affected by the water royalty. Fiscal hole that economists say is wrong, but Bill and Steven still hammer that.

Strategy is fine, its a free world, but misleading to create worry is below the belt IMHO. Maybe they could have targeted that their policies are better than Labours??

I think under Labour, debt levels will increase significantly, far more than under National, so borrowing heavily to finance election promises is not good for the country.

OK for tax, if I earn $52k a year, National's already legislated tax policy will reduce my tax by $1,000 a year. Therefore, if Labour cancel this legislation, it is certainly increasing the tax I have to pay by $1,000 per year. This is not a lie as Labour claims, it's a simple arithmetic fact that any 10 year old could understand!

Everyone says its a lie, not just Labour. Id rather forego a bribe tax cut that I dont need, and align the "tax cut" to support low income earners, who under the tax cut will get the least per capita. The "tax cut" will happen if Labour gets in, but it wont be called a tax cut, but it will do the same thing, but for low earners only. When interest rates are low, salary increases are low, inflation is low, most of us can look after ourselves, which is supposed to be the mantra of a market based economy, so why do we still get a tax cut across the board? Just give it to those who need it

A tax cut across the board is fair, just as paying NZ Super to everyone is fair. Why shouldn't people who work around the clock to earn enough to support their families be rewarded so they can afford to buy electric cars that will help mitigate the effects of climate change? Why shouldn't doctors and dentists, for example, who give up huge chunks of their lives and huge chunks of money to get qualified, be rewarded with a tax cut.

The Robin Hood policies of Labour and the Greens are out of place in modern society.

It's not everyone who says National is telling lies about Labour's proposed tax increases, it's only those who don't understand simple maths.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1870735 22-Sep-2017 09:43

frednz:

A tax cut across the board is fair, just as paying NZ Super to everyone is fair. Why shouldn't people who work around the clock to earn enough to support their families be rewarded so they can afford to buy electric cars that will help mitigate the effects of climate change? Why shouldn't doctors and dentists, for example, who give up huge chunks of their lives and huge chunks of money to get qualified, be rewarded with a tax cut.

The Robin Hood policies of Labour and the Greens are out of place in modern society.

It's not everyone who says National is telling lies about Labour's proposed tax increases, it's only those who don't understand simple maths.

You have answered the query perfectly

There is no place for the have nots, pity if many of them cant get out of that, I guess that's tough bikkies....

Signed, another National voter, one who feels a helping hand is worth more than a reward for me to pay my Sky bill

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8