networkn: If National make up fairy tales and then can't or won't deliver we will hear about how it's ok because everyone stretches the truth it's expected, so as long as they are aspirational it's all good?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/300790463/ardern-hipkins-and-the-phrase-that-became-a-rod-for-the-prime-ministers-back

Some Climate Change work Chris Hipkins needs to push on with.  

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/simon-wilson-chippy-vs-the-donors-de-luxe/76LVB2BAA5HD5B5GREONLV7J2I/

Simon Wilson takes a look at Chris vs Chris.

tdgeek:

 

My personal opinion though is that the effect of the pandemic and war is largely ignored here. I recall "its all local inflation", walked back to mainly local inflation. Thats rubbish. Look everywhere else in the world, its a major factor. How we managed the pandemic financially is better than most, inflation is better than most, deaths per 1000 is better than the vast majority. How we bounced back is better than most.To me thats a fact not an option or dream. Is that defending the Realm? No, its just being realistic. All governments had little choice how to react. But NZ's performance was largely rubbish as expected apparently.

 

Well said.

I see so many comments that the country is struggling and it's all the government's fault; they totally ignore the external factors that the NZ government has no control over and that are affecting all other countries too. It's actually worse in many other countries, eg in the US egg prices have jumped 60% in the last year while back here we've seen shortages and price increases but nothing like that amount (in NZ eggs were 16% higher in November 2022 than in November 2021). People complain about our health system being overloaded while in the UK there are hundreds of avoidable deaths in the NHS every week due to shortages (the UK recorded 50,000 more excess deaths in 2022 than in 2019).

tdgeek:

 

The Key and Clarke days ignored investment in health, education and infrastructure, no matter who rules now, those issues are there. And thus, each budget the Government, whoever it is will be bagged for the issues we still have thats a fact of life here. Stuff wasnt attended to over time, it was left. Own a house that you ignore as it gradually falls apart? Same deal. One day you will be dealing with major issues, and its too expensive to fix it at once. Thats New Zealand in a nutshell.

 

Agreed. Many of the problems that we face today started decades ago and we very probably might not be having those problems now if the governments of those times had made the right investments in health, housing, education, law enforcement, etc.

quickymart:

 

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/simon-wilson-chippy-vs-the-donors-de-luxe/76LVB2BAA5HD5B5GREONLV7J2I/

 

Simon Wilson takes a look at Chris vs Chris.

 

Paywalled - what was the gist of it? Simon Wilson is very pro Labour/Green and quite open about it. I can take a guess.

johno1234:

 

Paywalled - what was the gist of it? Simon Wilson is very pro Labour/Green and quite open about it. I can take a guess.

 

Yes he is, but like most things I ignore that and look at any facts, as factual statements cannot be falsified. In his case, yes he is cherry picking

Is it allowed in GZ to copy/paste the odd snippet or is that copyrighted so cannot be done?

In short its about the massive donations National got from wealthy people/businesses and the bugger all Labour got. I've no issue with that at all

Then mentions tax, as if richer people may be worried (an Economic Analyst comment, not his) National debt, health expenditure, inflation, trade status, farm prices , all of which favour Labour. What he says is not incorrect, but he should not throw in half the story, it needs to be balanced. This article isn't, however, what he does say is correct

If its allowed, I'm happy to post snippets 

Small snippets, for context/comment. Never an entire article.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/simon-wilson-chippy-vs-the-donors-de-luxe/76LVB2BAA5HD5B5GREONLV7J2I/

Snippets

START OF

Economic analyst Max Rashbrooke has suggested they might be worried about “Labour’s plan to research how much tax the wealthy do or do not pay, the new top tax bracket [and] property investor taxes”.

Or is it the national debt? Even though, post the big Covid spending, New Zealand has a lower level of debt than all other democracies in the developed world. Per capita, Australia has about twice our level of debt; Singapore’s is six times as high. Finance Minister Robertson has been so cautious, debt is reducing ahead of schedule. On the right, though, there’s an obsession with debt. John Key and Bill English, in power 2008-2017, made eliminating it their number-one goal.

 In the five years to 2017, National budgeted a total of only $781 million for “health infrastructure”: mainly, the maintenance and replacement of hospitals. In both 2015 and 2016, the figure was zero. In Labour’s five years from 2018, they allocated $5.8 billion to addressing this. But to make good on the years of neglect, there is still much more to do.

What about other economic indicators? In addition to relatively low debt, New Zealand currently enjoys good terms of trade on the back of the best farm prices in a decade, low unemployment and lower inflation than most countries in the OECD. And pundits expect the recession, if it happens, to be short and shallow.

Another little history check. National responded erratically at every step of the unfolding pandemic in 2020, before working its way around to conceding the right steps were taken.

And while it’s obvious enough that Labour should have done better with the vaccine rollout and MIQ, is there anything in National’s record to suggest it would have done any better?

Perhaps all they’re really worried about is “incompetence”. After all, several Labour ministers have stumbled, there’s no denying it.

But is it incompetence those donors are upset about, or the opposite?

Maybe what really keeps them awake at night are fair pay agreements, rising minimum wages, inflation-indexed benefits, even slightly stronger trade unions. The things the Government has quite competently done to create a more equitable society and a higher-wage economy. Is that it?

END OF

Unbalanced for sure, biased for sure, but no different to anti left articles, you just need to filter the jabs from the facts, and be aware that negatives will be minimised/ignored, goes for all articles and for that matter, posts

tdgeek:

 

Unbalanced for sure, biased for sure, but no different to anti left articles, you just need to filter the jabs from the facts, and be aware that negatives will be minimised/ignored, goes for all articles and for that matter, posts

 

Pretty low-rent stuff from Wilson, which is actually a shame because his focus on Auckland issues is more badly needed than easily dismissed partisan reckons nine months out from an election, with neither main party having revealed a final line-up or most of their policy positions yet. 

gzt:

networkn: If National make up fairy tales and then can't or won't deliver we will hear about how it's ok because everyone stretches the truth it's expected, so as long as they are aspirational it's all good?

This seems to be a two way back and forth it's hard to make much sense of. I'd suggest using the other topic for the National Party.

It was in reference to 'tangible policy' commentary which was started here.

Was 100K houses and 1 Billion trees tangible? Labour clearly thought so. In reality they were fairy tales. People want policies that can be delivered. Why should they be given another chance? They should be held to account for presenting these policies as credible, defending them repeatedly and failing to deliver on them. 

In reality, they won't really ever be held to account for these failures.

You need to read back in the thread for context but they are relevant to this thread.

tdgeek:

 

The attacks have been daily here and not from the Centre-Left  Criticism is fine, but hasnt been that common, its basically attack mode. Clearly my perception differs. Yes, I have seen some harsh bite backs from  Labour people. But you seem to make out like its a solid adult discussion of criticism and that results in attacks. Not how I see it. At all. 

 

Yes your perception differs, though I wonder how by so much honestly:

Hell man, I'm even older than Biden. I barely have the energy to criticise you. Fortunately, you make an easy target.

Just one example on THIS page. I've been critisized for being 'biased' yet there are others here who are so so much further in the red bias wise, yet they never get criticized. 

 

I hope National doesn't make up fairy tales, as long as they give us tales to vote on. No ideology. Results based policies. 

 

You seemed happy enough for Labour to promise 100K houses, A billion trees etc etc, those were not results based policies. Why should National produce sensible achievable policies? (for the record no party should promise what it doesn't genuinely intend to achieve unforseen circumstances aside). If a publicly traded company promised 100K houses and delivered 1-2% of those (using a billion dollars of taxpayer money) , the CEO and most of the cxo suit would be facing charges and likely prison time. When the Government does it people shrug and say things like 'at least they are aspirational)

networkn:

 

You seemed happy enough for Labour to promise 100K houses, A billion trees etc etc, those were not results based policies. Why should National produce sensible achievable policies? (for the record no party should promise what it doesn't genuinely intend to achieve unforseen circumstances aside). If a publicly traded company promised 100K houses and delivered 1-2% of those (using a billion dollars of taxpayer money) , the CEO and most of the cxo suit would be facing charges and likely prison time. When the Government does it people shrug and say things like 'at least they are aspirational)

 

I don't recall saying I'm happy about those policies at all. IIRC I stated along the lines of whether they were genuine goals or just vote buying is debatable. Those policies were results based, they failed to achieve those results, pure and simple, and they are accountable as they cannot hide from that. They will pay for that in October

Aspirational, transformational. Clearly that didn't play out. While the soon to be ex PM was exceptional in crisis mode, she did not deliver as aspirational and transformational. 

Both parties should deliver tangible results based policies. What they feel they can deliver. It doesn't need a 100/100 pass mark. Labour made the same mistake Muldoon did with his failed Think Big policy. Labour didn't learn that big ticket items are a risk, they will ultimately pay for that in October. The fact they they have actually delivered a number of smaller ticket items over the years now becomes irrelevant.

In short National needs to put tangible policies on the table as well. Not ideology based policies such as we will grow NZ, increase production, increase incomes and so on. We want the policies that will achieve those results, or at least show steady progress towards them. If those results based policies showed positive trends, I would call that successful.  

It sounds like the CGT might be back on the cards. I hope they've learned their lesson and are planning on tweaking it substantially. The initial policy and later Working Group was a major missed opportunity, it would be a shame to get the same underwhelming and poorly thought-out policy dusted off again. 

networkn:

 

Yes your perception differs, though I wonder how by so much honestly:

 

Hell man, I'm even older than Biden. I barely have the energy to criticise you. Fortunately, you make an easy target.

 

Just one example on THIS page. I've been critisized for being 'biased' yet there are others here who are so so much further in the red bias wise, yet they never get criticized. 

 

I agree.

No one is being criticised as biased, that's the nature of these threads. These threads are not to persuade anyone, they are just discussions. Stretching the truth as you mentioned, yes everyone will do that, its normal. In my opinion, its not what is said its how it is said. One person here has the same beliefs as you, yet his commentary is very calm and to the point. Not saying you are not calm, and all your other posts in other topics are great. I know that. I've been here a while.  Here, you and others are very passionate, that's a good thing, but sometimes, in MY opinion, it gets too heated and too vocal occasionally. That's all. Nothing more.