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 | ... | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | ... | 182

2031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 545

#2228897 1-May-2019 18:13

tdgeek:

ockel:

Looks like the climate change legislation might be finally making progress.

Once again the question was: what does Winston want?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/112353042/methane-emissions-deal-kick-starts-climate-change-legislation

Its a coalition, end of story.

94% of voters did not vote for the way this country is being governed.

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228900 1-May-2019 18:22

networkn:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/112370005/ev-advocates-unimpressed-as-date-slips-for-cabinet-to-consider-new-incentives

"Gilbert said the apparent lack of progress from the Government was "disappointing when signals were that this was 'the year of delivery'".

Correct

"The former National government set a target in 2017 of increasing that to 64,000 by 2021, but Gilbert said that was dead in the water."

Also correct

Its a political hot potato, no one wants to own it as it will hurt them. Both parties have promised but it's silent. Kiwis hate taxes. The Fuel Tax is actually a levy, temporary, to assist AKL faster tracking its transport needs, I am in favour of that, but no one supports it, as its a tax. Taxes are evil.

Now, if we don't want the Fuel Tax to support AKL transport infrastructure (and lets face it, AKL is key for NZ), how will we do with a Fuel Tax that assists people who can already afford it, to buy a $60,000 new car, while the rest of the populous pay for it by a fuel tax??? The current word is $10k, and a feebate. Many cannot afford a new car, they pay for someone else's new EV, some have a use case that EV cannot provide, so they pay for someone elses new EV. If you can afford a 60k+ EV the 10k is not an incentive. It maybe for some who can stretch to 50k, but lets be realistic, its free money. And every ICE motorist pays for it, as they are poor, or are not poor but cannot afford it, or whose use case is not EV.

I'd like an EV, I can afford it, I will buy when its worthwhile financially. Its a bit like solar PV, yes it WILL save money, but it costs too much to save it.

I'd support a business subsidy. Not 10k, but a 100% depreciation on it. And tax free Gain on Sale IF the business replaced that EV with a new one. That also supports the growth of used EV's.

So, I get the sentiment, but both party's talked the talk, but cannot afford to go for it.

It would be nice if there was a solution that got more people into an EV, maybe scouring the globe for used ones. Are there ones in China (who lead EV)? Not sure. We need to be creative maybe look at a subsidy that hets paid back over time, saving petrol costs bit not making it a taxpayer ball and chain. Plus there is Hydro to be looked at. I can imagine if EV went through a spike of sales, lakes were low, power usage costs went up, blame EV's

Its a 10 year plan

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228904 1-May-2019 18:28

ockel:

tdgeek:

ockel:

Looks like the climate change legislation might be finally making progress.

Once again the question was: what does Winston want?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/112353042/methane-emissions-deal-kick-starts-climate-change-legislation

Its a coalition, end of story.

94% of voters did not vote for the way this country is being governed.

Numbers are awesome! NZF is not running the place, a coalition is. A coalition will stop radical plans. As the radical plan party needs support, so overall, it becomes a conservative Govt. As they all need to compromise. Do we want Labour to call every shot? or the Greens? or NZF? No. Its a compromise, non radical, a compromise.

Will NZF and its 7% of voters control our destiny? No. Nuff said.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228915 1-May-2019 19:13

networkn:

Right, because that seems tbe the excuse for everything.

No, because its a fact, it applies to every coalition, check the UK.

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228923 1-May-2019 19:14

tdgeek:

Will NZF and its 7% of voters control our destiny? No. Nuff said.

No, not Nuff said at all.

I believe that a LOT of people (The vast majority) , including me, believe the tail is wagging the dog. Greens have no say due to their weak approach to the negotiations (The Government could not have been formed without them too don't forget) but they quietly gave up their say so they could be in Government, so really, the only people with a say on the countries direction is Labour and NZF. NZF *are* calling the shots because whenever they don't agree, they can simply threaten to pull the pin on the Coalition and everything vanishes in a plume of smoke, including any chance of "progress" under Labour.

I am unsure what the deal with the CGT is. It was weak to just flush it like that. Some believe they never intended to introduce it and were just going through the motions so they could tick it off, which at best makes them dishonest. Alternatively, they allowed NZF to bully them out of "doing the right thing" which is weak.

In my view a reduced CGT was absolutely required and probably would have got through an election. Labour harped in opposition about it plenty.

Something was better than nothing, but Ardern isn't really that brave, she is just like every other politican, "brave" when nothing is at stake. They didn't even try. IF she was brave she would have proposed what she felt was the right thing to do and let voters decide come election time.

A significant sum of money was flushed down the toilet.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228926 1-May-2019 19:17

ockel:

tdgeek:

ockel:

Looks like the climate change legislation might be finally making progress.

Once again the question was: what does Winston want?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/112353042/methane-emissions-deal-kick-starts-climate-change-legislation

Its a coalition, end of story.

94% of voters did not vote for the way this country is being governed.

You know how a coalition works, but still you go on. Does Peters control EVERY issue? No.

Geekzone support

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

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228928 1-May-2019 19:24

networkn:

tdgeek:

Will NZF and its 7% of voters control our destiny? No. Nuff said.

No, not Nuff said at all.

I believe that a LOT of people (The vast majority) , including me, believe the tail is wagging the dog. Greens have no say due to their weak approach to the negotiations (The Government could not have been formed without them too don't forget) but they quietly gave up their say so they could be in Government, so really, the only people with a say on the countries direction is Labour and NZF. NZF *are* calling the shots because whenever they don't agree, they can simply threaten to pull the pin on the Coalition and everything vanishes in a plume of smoke, including any chance of "progress" under Labour.

I am unsure what the deal with the CGT is. It was weak to just flush it like that. Some believe they never intended to introduce it and were just going through the motions so they could tick it off, which at best makes them dishonest. Alternatively, they allowed NZF to bully them out of "doing the right thing" which is weak.

In my view a reduced CGT was absolutely required and probably would have got through an election. Labour harped in opposition about it plenty.

Something was better than nothing, but Ardern isn't really that brave, she is just like every other politican, "brave" when nothing is at stake. They didn't even try. IF she was brave she would have proposed what she felt was the right thing to do and let voters decide come election time.

A significant sum of money was flushed down the toilet.

As in any coalition, no one owns what they do. NZF is a king maker thats life. he has more sway than his 7% but if you want to labour on that as it was not your choice of Govt thats just an excuse. If Labour got on with full control the world is their oyster, then what? We live with one party sitting on their hands doing nothing, then another other with wild dreams.

CGT was a dead loss, we all know that. It was raised, for a change. No support. It it went through, the world will end, if it did not go through its more whining

Its better to discuss than whine.

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228940 1-May-2019 19:57

tdgeek:

You know how a coalition works, but still you go on. Does Peters control EVERY issue? No.

No he only controls every decision he cares about. Denial is not a river in Egypt.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228946 1-May-2019 20:09

networkn:

tdgeek:

You know how a coalition works, but still you go on. Does Peters control EVERY issue? No.

No he only controls every decision he cares about. Denial is not a river in Egypt.

LOL. If you can get past the anger of a non National government, you might see it more clearly. Read up on the pros and cons of a coalition.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16319

Lifetime subscriber

#2228947 1-May-2019 20:09

This sounds awfully familiar. If anyone has anything new to add, let me know.

The Greens have not done well at all, but it is (yet another) distortion to claim they have had no say in the direction of the government. Here is an excerpt from a generally critical Herald article: Of course, the Greens have had some big wins. Richard Harman pointed these out at the start of the year: "the end to irrigation funding; the ban on offshore oil exploration; the move away from funding motorways; funding for conservation measures and a more aggressive scrutiny of foreign land purchases". That is hardly having 'no say'.

The rest is just the usual broken record. If it is even a little bit true, the government will lose the next election, which is the only poll that matters. If it does not, I expect some massive apologies here followed, at last, by blessed silence.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228948 1-May-2019 20:11

tdgeek:

As in any coalition, no one owns what they do. NZF is a king maker thats life. he has more sway than his 7% but if you want to labour on that as it was not your choice of Govt thats just an excuse. If Labour got on with full control the world is their oyster, then what? We live with one party sitting on their hands doing nothing, then another other with wild dreams.

CGT was a dead loss, we all know that. It was raised, for a change. No support. It it went through, the world will end, if it did not go through its more whining

Its better to discuss than whine.

Greens could have been Kingmakers just as easily. The Government could not have been formed without them too.

The CGT didn't have no support. Take a look online, there were MANY in support of it. MANY. There would have been many more if it had been introduced more moderately (Smaller percentage taxes or affecting less types of things like excluding business etc).

They could have introduced it in stages or many other things to help people adjust, but they were too scared it would be the end of them, so instead of doing the right thing, they did the easy thing. Weak and self-serving. You can't keep everyone happy. For example, National knew that selling assets was going to be wildly unpopular, and it was, but they felt it was the right way forward, so they campaigned on it and had a mandate when they were elected. It's not a National vs Labour thing, it's an example recently in this country where the unpopular choice that was best for the long term was pitched and won.

Geekzone

Want to support Geekzone and browse the site without the ads? Subscribe to Geekzone now (monthly, annual and lifetime options).

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228951 1-May-2019 20:22

tdgeek:

networkn:

tdgeek:

You know how a coalition works, but still you go on. Does Peters control EVERY issue? No.

No he only controls every decision he cares about. Denial is not a river in Egypt.

LOL. If you can get past the anger of a non National government, you might see it more clearly. Read up on the pros and cons of a coalition.

You know, if you keep making personally directed inflammatory comments, keep expecting inflamed responses.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228952 1-May-2019 20:26

networkn:

tdgeek:

As in any coalition, no one owns what they do. NZF is a king maker thats life. he has more sway than his 7% but if you want to labour on that as it was not your choice of Govt thats just an excuse. If Labour got on with full control the world is their oyster, then what? We live with one party sitting on their hands doing nothing, then another other with wild dreams.

CGT was a dead loss, we all know that. It was raised, for a change. No support. It it went through, the world will end, if it did not go through its more whining

Its better to discuss than whine.

Greens could have been Kingmakers just as easily. The Government could not have been formed without them too.

The CGT didn't have no support. Take a look online, there were MANY in support of it. MANY. There would have been many more if it had been introduced more moderately (Smaller percentage taxes or affecting less types of things like excluding business etc).

They could have introduced it in stages or many other things to help people adjust, but they were too scared it would be the end of them, so instead of doing the right thing, they did the easy thing. Weak and self-serving. You can't keep everyone happy. For example, National knew that selling assets was going to be wildly unpopular, and it was, but they felt it was the right way forward, so they campaigned on it and had a mandate when they were elected. It's not a National vs Labour thing, it's an example recently in this country where the unpopular choice that was best for the long term was pitched and won.

Its definitely a National and Labour thing, read the thread.

Ok the CGT didnt have zero support, its obvious what I meant. Funny how some are anti CGT then part of it is ok. Its our bias, as ling as it doesnt affect me or in case it helps my anti Coalition debate.

Whats you take on EV? National has failed Labour will fail, its a political issue in that no one wants to go down with that ship. But guess there is the real answer?

Asset sales. mandate? They got elected so they have a mandate on everything they want to do. Thats making one scenario sound special when its the norm. They had a referendum and had to extend it due to poor response, although they already said they will go ahead as they have a mandate via the 2011 election. Get the facts right.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2228953 1-May-2019 20:28

networkn:

tdgeek:

networkn:

tdgeek:

You know how a coalition works, but still you go on. Does Peters control EVERY issue? No.

No he only controls every decision he cares about. Denial is not a river in Egypt.

LOL. If you can get past the anger of a non National government, you might see it more clearly. Read up on the pros and cons of a coalition.

You know, if you keep making personally directed inflammatory comments, keep expecting inflamed responses.

Same to you. I posted, you come up both a poor excuse of a reply Denial = De Nile

Your obsession with National is well known, but try and keep to topic. No matter what is said, you shave topic Pro National reply, so its a waste of ink. As has been stated tonight, is there anything new?? No

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#2228970 1-May-2019 21:04

networkn:

They could have introduced it in stages or many other things to help people adjust, but they were too scared it would be the end of them, so instead of doing the right thing, they did the easy thing. Weak and self-serving. You can't keep everyone happy. For example, National knew that selling assets was going to be wildly unpopular, and it was, but they felt it was the right way forward, so they campaigned on it and had a mandate when they were elected. It's not a National vs Labour thing, it's an example recently in this country where the unpopular choice that was best for the long term was pitched and won.

Oh spare anyone who can read. If they introduced a CGT, you would be here moaning and whining about how this is just a bunch who taxes everything etc.

1 | ... | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | ... | 182