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 | ... | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | ... | 182

584 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 284

#2140679 6-Dec-2018 16:55

Mr Mallard was far more careful today in making sure the Government answered the questions that were asked. Its very clear to me as an occasional watcher of Question Time, the Speaker showed a lot of bias toward the Government in allowing them to not fully answer questions.

I believe that a previous speakers comments may well have assisted Mallard correct the situation. I wonder how long he will keep it up.

I understand that National has been making complaints to the Speakers Officer for some time and was getting no where.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16317

Lifetime subscriber

#2140690 6-Dec-2018 17:03

So what's the difference? Here are some of National's broken election pledges. Whether one is worse than the other depends entirely on your bias, of which you do have plenty.

Edit: Dammit, this keeps happening. This is a response to the previous post by networkn.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2140702 6-Dec-2018 17:31

I don't mind broken election promises by any government if the reason for breaking is changes in circumstances that make them no longer appropriate, E.G Natural disasters, GFCs etc.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15464

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2140760 6-Dec-2018 18:22

MikeB4:

I don't mind broken election promises by any government if the reason for breaking is changes in circumstances that make them no longer appropriate, E.G Natural disasters, GFCs etc.

Exactly. I think most people feel the same way. The only challenges this Government have faced so far, are the ones of their own making.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16317

Lifetime subscriber

#2140762 6-Dec-2018 18:35

And you insist you are not biased!

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2140798 6-Dec-2018 19:35

networkn:

Heh, no it's not as bad, at least not in my eyes. National didn't get elected by promising to deliver on huge policies like Kiwibuild etc and then not only fail to deliver, but so far so badly, it's embarassing. If Labour had campaigned on dozens of new houses each year for 10 years, how do you think they might have affected voters choices? If they had promised what they were actually going to deliver? National states there is no housing crisis, and Labour says there is one, but they have a big magic wand to fix it, and get elected, and a year in, what is the net effect to the housing crisis?

In my opinion it is as bad. Its very subjective, its not like on day 345 house rocketed up. National wants the market to manage the economy, houses included. Thats fine. When a point is reached that its out of control there should have been measures, but there weren't. That doesn't favour their demographic. That is also fine, each party has their own direction.

Kiwibuild embarrassing are you kidding??? :-), Yes it is. Two reasons why. 100,000 houses in 10 years could be done, but come on, thats a stupid target. If they oversaw the building industry, as in coordinating, it could be done. 2) The housing crisis is there, but the horse has bolted. Buyers have bought, its over. The crisis isnt over affordability rose, but increases are over. Thats what BE meant when avoiding that question. The direction should have been what else can we do to get people who are now locked out, into a home. I can think of a few innovative measures. But they struck to 100k houses. Did that buy votes? Not really, as there are many factors that swayed the election. Its one factor.Im not aware that Labour stated there is a housing crisis, the fact is, everyone else says that. By international ratios of salary to house price.

The net effect on the housing crisis is zero.Buyer have bought that why prices are high. The rest cannot afford. Kiwibuild can help those, but its a niche benefit. I dont believe that one policy turned the election, not by a long shot, its one factor of many

Todays house prices are here to stay, they wont drop. They will fluctuate depending on interest rates, and if there is a GFC that will affect them, but in general todays prices here are now the standard. Thats what needs to be dealt with.

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2140800 6-Dec-2018 19:40

networkn:

MikeB4:

I don't mind broken election promises by any government if the reason for breaking is changes in circumstances that make them no longer appropriate, E.G Natural disasters, GFCs etc.

Exactly. I think most people feel the same way. The only challenges this Government have faced so far, are the ones of their own making.

What about campaigning on no taxes, then increase GST a few months after? The election campaign factually stated that National increased 21 taxes. Thats not right.

The GFC/EQ's dont explain why any salary and wage earner will get a free $2000 p.a. as the election campaign bribe. Thats a Labour trick. Labour campaigned on not giving that. Yes, it went to the wire, and yes NZF stepped in, but bribes are bribes. Tell the people we can afford it, then reduce tax. Great. Tell people we MUST have more GST to move forward. Again, no.

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15464

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2140803 6-Dec-2018 19:47

Rikkitic:

And you insist you are not biased!

As I have said all along, if Labour were doing things that I felt benefited NZ in the long term, better than other parties, if their policies were soundly thought out and executed, and if I felt their ministers were largely capable and competent, then I'd vote Labour. It might surprise you to know, I wasn't always a National voter.

The reality is, it's been a long time since I felt Labour were best for NZ, and so far they have done little or nothing to disabuse me of my current beliefs this term. There were things I didn't like about Nationals policies and handling of situations.

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15464

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2140914 7-Dec-2018 09:01

Rikkitic:

So what's the difference? Here are some of National's broken election pledges. Whether one is worse than the other depends entirely on your bias, of which you do have plenty.

Edit: Dammit, this keeps happening. This is a response to the previous post by networkn.

Pot, Kettle, Black.

Honestly, learn a new tune already.

wsnz

654 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 204

#2140920 7-Dec-2018 09:36

tdgeek:

What about campaigning on no taxes, then increase GST a few months after? The election campaign factually stated that National increased 21 taxes. Thats not right.

The GFC/EQ's dont explain why any salary and wage earner will get a free $2000 p.a. as the election campaign bribe. Thats a Labour trick. Labour campaigned on not giving that. Yes, it went to the wire, and yes NZF stepped in, but bribes are bribes. Tell the people we can afford it, then reduce tax. Great. Tell people we MUST have more GST to move forward. Again, no.

Increasing GST and lowering income tax was neutral. That was well documented.

networkn

Networkn
32871 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15464

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2140921 7-Dec-2018 09:38

Also, if you want to talk about tax promises....Petrol Tax increases anyone?

Just because they used word trickery doesn't mean it wasn't dishonest.

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2140953 7-Dec-2018 09:48

networkn:
Also, if you want to talk about tax promises....Petrol Tax increases anyone?

Just because they used word trickery doesn't mean it wasn't dishonest.

Excise, Levy......tax, maybe JA believes it but not many other Kiwis do, I hope.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2140956 7-Dec-2018 09:55

wsnz:

tdgeek:

What about campaigning on no taxes, then increase GST a few months after? The election campaign factually stated that National increased 21 taxes. Thats not right.

The GFC/EQ's dont explain why any salary and wage earner will get a free $2000 p.a. as the election campaign bribe. Thats a Labour trick. Labour campaigned on not giving that. Yes, it went to the wire, and yes NZF stepped in, but bribes are bribes. Tell the people we can afford it, then reduce tax. Great. Tell people we MUST have more GST to move forward. Again, no.

Increasing GST and lowering income tax was neutral. That was well documented.

Incorrect. In the 2008 campaign, National offered large tax cuts. It did not propose increasing GST to pay for them. It did not include a GST increase as part of its campaign. GST increased in 2010.

In fact National offered hardly any policy, and no detail, it relied on the time for a change campaign. Much as the current Labour party did this past election, and has been criticised for that. Being new and fresh etc. Its policies and themes were remarkably similar to Labours.

An interesting read is here on the 2008 campaign https://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/2009/09/nationals-2008-election-campaign.html

As this article does not read well for National, it will be dissed, but its all open knowledge.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2140958 7-Dec-2018 09:59

Didn't they "promise" trees lots of them, new houses, no new taxes, being nice and a few I have forgotten.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2140960 7-Dec-2018 10:03

networkn:

Also, if you want to talk about tax promises....Petrol Tax increases anyone?

Just because they used word trickery doesn't mean it wasn't dishonest.

Its actaully an AKL target transport levy, but yes it IS a fuel tax. Why is it there? Since gaining power in 2017, what has Labour done to cause the longstanding congestion issues in AKL? Along with other sectors they are historical problems, caused during National's 9 year reign of surpluses by holding back investment. I am also sure the previous 9 year Labour Government was implicated as well in some or all of these issues.

Two options. AKL is happy with congestion and does not want any improvements. Or, AKL wants congestion issues caught up, but who will pay for it? Rightly or wrongly, AKL drivers are targeted, whether that's better than a national fuel levy, thats another story

But if Labour screwed up AKL congestion in the last 12 months and now a tax is levied to fix that, let me know

Best to look at the whole issue, not cherry pick. Same applies to health and education, they are not new issues

1 | ... | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | ... | 182