NZ Election 2020

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

Forums › Politics › NZ Election 2020

1 | ... | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | ... | 76

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2493207 27-May-2020 22:13

Rikkitic:

As far as Covid 19 goes, a comparison between New Zealand and Britain adjusted for population suggests thousands of people here probably owe their lives to the government's actions in this regard. I don't have the actual figures at hand but everything I have seen indicates that we have got away with an unusually low infection and death rate unmatched anywhere else. Surely that suggests that the authorities have done something right?

You can whinge all you like about the things they got wrong. I for one am extremely grateful for the things they got right.

Some of your facts are plain wrong. Taiwan in terms of death rate and early control/handle on the disease has been significantly better than us. That's just one example that one can find without trying very hard.

"Flawless" has an established meaning. People need to decide whether they are going to just rant and rave and say whatever they want so long as it's favourable to their own side. If that's your style, go for gold. But you are no longer discussing anything meaningfully the moment you head down that path How can some of the things I cited be better? In respect of some of the issues I've identified, I don't think it's too much to ask for a government department to obey the law, especially over a matter as sensitive as someone wanting to spend his father's last days with him. The MoH should be raked over the coals for the Christiansen case and people sacked for it, yet the government did little. The OIA business? How about they just obey the law again? In terms of handling the lockdown breaches, look at Australia and their massive on-the-spot fines. We should have done the same thing.

These things aren't that hard to get right. OTOH, getting them wrong sure doesn't invalidate the other achievements by the government. But unless you are Homer Simpson or a political hack, simply ignoring them is reality denial.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18517 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2493252 28-May-2020 00:06

dejadeadnz:

These things aren't that hard to get right. OTOH, getting them wrong sure doesn't invalidate the other achievements by the government. But unless you are Homer Simpson or a political hack, simply ignoring them is reality denial.

Nothing you say changes my mind on anything. The government has done an outstanding job on Covid 19 and as a vulnerable person, I am grateful for it. If I lived in Taiwan, I would be equally grateful to that government, but I live here and I am damned glad I do.

I am not ignoring the mistakes. I just choose not to dwell on them. I'm sure you can do that for both of us. In the meantime, I remain a fan of both Homer Simpson and Jacinda Ardern.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Handle9

11107 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2493302 28-May-2020 06:16

dejadeadnz:
Rikkitic:

As far as Covid 19 goes, a comparison between New Zealand and Britain adjusted for population suggests thousands of people here probably owe their lives to the government's actions in this regard. I don't have the actual figures at hand but everything I have seen indicates that we have got away with an unusually low infection and death rate unmatched anywhere else. Surely that suggests that the authorities have done something right?

You can whinge all you like about the things they got wrong. I for one am extremely grateful for the things they got right.

Some of your facts are plain wrong. Taiwan in terms of death rate and early control/handle on the disease has been significantly better than us. That's just one example that one can find without trying very hard.

"Flawless" has an established meaning. People need to decide whether they are going to just rant and rave and say whatever they want so long as it's favourable to their own side. If that's your style, go for gold. But you are no longer discussing anything meaningfully the moment you head down that path How can some of the things I cited be better? In respect of some of the issues I've identified, I don't think it's too much to ask for a government department to obey the law, especially over a matter as sensitive as someone wanting to spend his father's last days with him. The MoH should be raked over the coals for the Christiansen case and people sacked for it, yet the government did little. The OIA business? How about they just obey the law again? In terms of handling the lockdown breaches, look at Australia and their massive on-the-spot fines. We should have done the same thing.

These things aren't that hard to get right. OTOH, getting them wrong sure doesn't invalidate the other achievements by the government. But unless you are Homer Simpson or a political hack, simply ignoring them is reality denial.

I wouldn't bother. The hacks on both sides have closed minds. There is no room for big thoughts, just the small and petty ones that reinforce their world view.

The Saint Jacinda supporters are just as bad as the ones running around accusing her of starting the COVID 19 epidemic (I'm looking at you David Prosser you lunatic).

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2493306 28-May-2020 07:15

I still remain unconvinced you can tie the 'huge public events' like Pasifika and March 15th memorial services still going ahead to the 11th hour, our lack of quarantine enforcement and the moving of the deadline to allow more people in without having to quarantine themselves with 'going early and going hard' but it seems to have been adopted almost unchallenged as the description for our response. This is more a failure on the media's part than anything else.

That said I will say the communication around cases and alert levels has been solid, less so on the way down than the way up, but credit where credit is due.

We are going to hear a lot more about the impact of the lockdown as time goes by so I will hold fire on this, however I do feel there has been a massive disconnect between Govt and the private sector in understanding the impact of cashflow just stopping entirely with three day's notice, for an undetermined period of time, while businesses continued to incur standing costs like rents, insurances and other outgoings. The remarks of certain Labour MPs at the response committee did nothing to increase confidence there either.

tdgeek

29537 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2493311 28-May-2020 07:41

GV27:

We are going to hear a lot more about the impact of the lockdown as time goes by so I will hold fire on this, however I do feel there has been a massive disconnect between Govt and the private sector in understanding the impact of cashflow just stopping entirely with three day's notice, for an undetermined period of time, while businesses continued to incur standing costs like rents, insurances and other outgoings. The remarks of certain Labour MPs at the response committee did nothing to increase confidence there either.

But where do we draw the line? There were 12 weeks of wage subsidy, and another 8 has been created, thats almost half a year of a cash grant, i.e. Govt pays the wages instead of the employer. Does the Govt need to pay all orther expenses as well? What about people whose hours have been cut, do we top up their Sky bill as well? I hear what you are saying, but everyone has borne the brunt of this crisis, some more than others. Paying 12 or 20 weeks wages is a big boost to cashflow and to expenses. Im not sure how many billion it would cost to pay the bills all business have. Isnt there a provision for bank loans at low interest to assist with cashflow? And delays to pay tax, no penalty etc?

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2493336 28-May-2020 08:38

tdgeek:

But where do we draw the line? There were 12 weeks of wage subsidy, and another 8 has been created, thats almost half a year of a cash grant, i.e. Govt pays the wages instead of the employer. Does the Govt need to pay all orther expenses as well? What about people whose hours have been cut, do we top up their Sky bill as well? I hear what you are saying, but everyone has borne the brunt of this crisis, some more than others. Paying 12 or 20 weeks wages is a big boost to cashflow and to expenses. Im not sure how many billion it would cost to pay the bills all business have. Isnt there a provision for bank loans at low interest to assist with cashflow? And delays to pay tax, no penalty etc?

Eh, the wage subsidy was a blessing and a curse in some ways. Yes, the money was there up front, but you're committing to paying it to your workers and committing to keeping those workers on for 12 weeks. So while it is a boost to 'cashflow' it is effectively ring-fenced.

The timing of the lockdown was right after the traditional creditor runs in March and wiped out month-end trading, immediately before 1st of month commercial rents - it's a pretty vulnerable time in the cashflow cycle.

There were various overtones during lockdown to commercial rent relief but all we got was a change to the eviction process timeline and a "Be kind" message from the PM.

Just as an aside, I took a big hit in income levels (back to pre-graduate levels for a while) so I'm aware of people what people have given up to keep a job. I'm also aware that some public servants have been WFH now and won't be back in offices until the end of the year, the whole time they're on 100% pay and accruing their usual five weeks of annual leave, regardless of hours worked or actual output (see Immigration NZ who basically sent everyone home on full pay with no work because they weren't able to WFH).

Contrast that with IRD and MSD who I imagine were pulling triple shifts to get through subsidies and tax arrangements, and MOH on top of that. My partner worked for an essential organisation and ended up working 60 hour weeks. People's experiences of lockdown were hugely varied, but it grates me to hear Winston Peters describing it as a 'four week holiday'.

tdgeek

29537 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2493344 28-May-2020 08:51

GV27:

Eh, the wage subsidy was a blessing and a curse in some ways. Yes, the money was there up front, but you're committing to paying it to your workers and committing to keeping those workers on for 12 weeks. So while it is a boost to 'cashflow' it is effectively ring-fenced.

The timing of the lockdown was right after the traditional creditor runs in March and wiped out month-end trading, immediately before 1st of month commercial rents - it's a pretty vulnerable time in the cashflow cycle.

There were various overtones during lockdown to commercial rent relief but all we got was a change to the eviction process timeline and a "Be kind" message from the PM.

Just as an aside, I took a big hit in income levels (back to pre-graduate levels for a while) so I'm aware of people what people have given up to keep a job. I'm also aware that some public servants have been WFH now and won't be back in offices until the end of the year, the whole time they're on 100% pay and accruing their usual five weeks of annual leave, regardless of hours worked or actual output (see Immigration NZ who basically sent everyone home on full pay with no work because they weren't able to WFH).

Contrast that with IRD and MSD who I imagine were pulling triple shifts to get through subsidies and tax arrangements, and MOH on top of that. My partner worked for an essential organisation and ended up working 60 hour weeks. People's experiences of lockdown were hugely varied, but it grates me to hear Winston Peters describing it as a 'four week holiday'.

IMO the wage subsidy was huge. They had to pay it to the employees??? Off course. The employer got the benefot of not needing to pay wages for 12 weeks, ad many I know just got the subsidy, no top up. I have no issue with that, employees take the hit as well, and reduced hours was common. I dont see how the cashflow form the wage subsidy is ring fenced, its a 100% cash grant, they pay their employees a Government cheque, not a company cheque

Yes there are businesses that did well, like supermarkets, Govt employees that were full paid, but overall many took a hit.

Like I said there are cheap loans to help with cashflow and other measures, Im not sure how far we can go with paying expenses as well.

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2493350 28-May-2020 09:04

tdgeek:

Like I said there are cheap loans to help with cashflow and other measures, Im not sure how far we can go with paying expenses as well.

The loans were incredibly hard to get. Some banks were demanding 100% security despite only bearing 20% of the risk. The actual amount lent out was pretty small in the end. Reconfiguring your securities over things like stock gets hard when no one can come and do things like trade finance audits or valuations.

Ultimately the IRD scheme was far more useful but it was much further down the track.

Again, the Government was the ones who shut the economy down. The attitude of 'maybe you should have put more money in, lmao!' from Russell etc was pretty repulsive.

tdgeek

29537 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2493355 28-May-2020 09:15

GV27:

Again, the Government was the ones who shut the economy down. The attitude of 'maybe you should have put more money in, lmao!' from Russell etc was pretty repulsive.

The virus shut the economy down. A lockdown was not a choice Thats why we have zero cases for over 2 weeks here,and why elsewhere such as even Australia are still having new cases. The plan was that the unavoidable economic shutdown happens once. Im thankful that the desire to end L4 after bugger all time suggested by some MP's, didnt happen, otherwise we will deal with multiple waves and never get into a position where all businesses can freely operate, which is not far off.

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2493407 28-May-2020 09:39

tdgeek:

The virus shut the economy down. A lockdown was not a choice Thats why we have zero cases for over 2 weeks here,and why elsewhere such as even Australia are still having new cases. The plan was that the unavoidable economic shutdown happens once. Im thankful that the desire to end L4 after bugger all time suggested by some MP's, didnt happen, otherwise we will deal with multiple waves and never get into a position where all businesses can freely operate, which is not far off.

The virus did not shut the economy down, the Government did.

The real Covid19 response question is "Was Level 4 needed if the Government actually went as hard and as early as they claimed?" I do not think the answer is as clear-cut as some would like it to be.

tdgeek

29537 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2493416 28-May-2020 09:49

GV27:

tdgeek:

The virus shut the economy down. A lockdown was not a choice Thats why we have zero cases for over 2 weeks here,and why elsewhere such as even Australia are still having new cases. The plan was that the unavoidable economic shutdown happens once. Im thankful that the desire to end L4 after bugger all time suggested by some MP's, didnt happen, otherwise we will deal with multiple waves and never get into a position where all businesses can freely operate, which is not far off.

The virus did not shut the economy down, the Government did.

The real Covid19 response question is "Was Level 4 needed if the Government actually went as hard and as early as they claimed?" I do not think the answer is as clear-cut as some would like it to be.

Level 4 was hard, thats why it worked, so you can do that once

You're saying there was a choice. National said they would have gone a week earlier, which is basically anything to be different. So unless a party other then National or Labour governed the lockdown was inevitable. Where are we now? In business. How is Sweden, thats the alternative, and others that locked down less everely are getting new waves, even South Korea as we see today. You can shock businesses once but to have to keep doing that over and over each time they dust themsleves off was a no go for NZ. We will never know what would have happened if we went casually. But the evidence is all around the globe

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2493431 28-May-2020 10:17

GV27:

The real Covid19 response question is "Was Level 4 needed if the Government actually went as hard and as early as they claimed?" I do not think the answer is as clear-cut as some would like it to be.

It's certainly far less contentious that you seem to think it is, when you operate using standard ethical decision making frameworks that recognise the irreversible nature of death and other rather obvious matters, as I partly showed here. The government has gotten plenty enough wrong during the lockdown but it's absolute madness to think we would have been better off going for some half-arsed "level 4" approach which wouldn't have alleviated a lot of the issues suffered by businesses whilst likely materially jeopardizing the health outcomes sought.

Money isn't everything.

MikeAqua

7767 posts

Uber Geek

#2494142 29-May-2020 09:51

Rikkitic:

As far as Covid 19 goes, a comparison between New Zealand and Britain adjusted for population suggests thousands of people here probably owe their lives to the government's actions in this regard. I don't have the actual figures at hand but everything I have seen indicates that we have got away with an unusually low infection and death rate unmatched anywhere else. Surely that suggests that the authorities have done something right?

I'm not sure it's valid simply to adjust for population density. You would also need to look at prevalence of vulnerable people in a community, population density. Movement of people in/out of a country, when COVID first infiltrated the country, transport arrangements, cultural factors (e.g. extended family cohabitation), the list goes on.

I do think the govt response has been effective. I also think they were assisted to a large extent by a bunch of factors not within their control. But whoever is in the hot seat gets the credit for things going well. They also are accountable for what don't go well, and that includes 21 deaths.

Mike

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2494202 29-May-2020 10:10

dejadeadnz:

It's certainly far less contentious that you seem to think it is, when you operate using standard ethical decision making frameworks that recognise the irreversible nature of death and other rather obvious matters, as I partly showed here. The government has gotten plenty enough wrong during the lockdown but it's absolute madness to think we would have been better off going for some half-arsed "level 4" approach which wouldn't have alleviated a lot of the issues suffered by businesses whilst likely materially jeopardizing the health outcomes sought.

You're missing my point: we keep saying we went 'hard and early' but we could have gone much earlier and much harder. At that point, would Level 4 have even been needed?

Of course, the situation we found ourselves in made Level 4 necessary, but did we have to end up there in the first place?

Obraik

2112 posts

Uber Geek

#2495089 30-May-2020 13:49

GV27:

You're missing my point: we keep saying we went 'hard and early' but we could have gone much earlier and much harder. At that point, would Level 4 have even been needed?

Of course, the situation we found ourselves in made Level 4 necessary, but did we have to end up there in the first place?

Unfortunately, I don't think the public would have supported that. It wasn't until cases actively started popping up in NZ that people started to understand what was at stake. If the government had proposed restrictions earlier while most of NZ saw the virus as an international issue and not a local issue it would not have been effective. People would have flouted the rules and kicked up a stink about how unnecessary it all was.

Looking to buy a Tesla? Use my referral link and we both get credits

1 | ... | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | ... | 76