-
@Godder said in NZ Politics:
@JC said in NZ Politics:
@Godder said in NZ Politics:
@Kirwan said in NZ Politics:
@Godder said in NZ Politics:
@JC as a Labour Party member, it's nowhere near the entire wish list.
I know this is probably a joke. But if this is representative of the attitude of Labour members the country is fucked.
JC posted a pretty somber take on the mismanagement going on and you joke about it not being the entire Wishlist?
It's a joke with a grain of truth - there are plenty of blogs and articles with the view that the budget hasn't done enough in various places, particularly the tax system, welfare and the environment. There are also articles along the whole continuum of how awful the budget is to how excellent it is, and all points in between, so it's not remotely a consensus of mismanagement.
I’m sure that if you look at articles in a fawning press you will indeed see lots of praise for the government. I’d be interested to see what they say but I will read it with the scepticism deserving of any plan that suggests a fifth of a trillion dollars of debt is a decent idea for a country of less than 5million people.
A point in some articles at least is that the government is constrained by uncertainty since it is still relatively early days, and we don't really know what the world economy will look like, so they can't really decide on or commit to major structural changes (and that's without consideration of getting a mandate at the upcoming election).
And you think uncertainty is a sound base from which to launch a potentially disastrous response?
The longer conversation will be whether to change the social contract and if so, what it will look like. For all the criticism of the Grant Robertson in here, he did a pile of work on the Future of Work while in opposition, so he's probably one of the most knowledgeable in NZ on the subject.
Grant Robertson has never had a first class mind. If he’s one of the most knowledgeable people on any subject we are probably in trouble. And I’ll counter your claim that he understands the future of work by stating there are many types of work and it’s not just wage and salary workers who do it. Robertson, and the government in general, appear to have no understanding, let alone empathy, with the self employed, business owners or those who run firms up and down the country. I guess if he is OK with the concept of everyone working for the state people like that serve no purpose anyway, so maybe it makes sense.
For local news and economic commentary, I mostly read RNZ, Stuff, Newsroom, NZ Herald, Newshub, Pundit, Interest.co.nz, and Croaking Cassandra. They vary in their fawning nature, from quite a bit, to not at all, but they all have in common that the NZ economy requires some form of rescue package, and that tourism and a lot of other jobs are gone and need to be replaced because having an extra 200,000 unemployed and doing nothing to help is not viewed as an option. They certainly differ in their views of what to spend money on, but almost nobody says they shouldn't spend anything or that a 50% debt to GDP ratio is a problem.
And I didn’t say they shouldn’t spend anything either. And that debt ratio is 64% (200b/310b) not 50%, not that details matter to people who like to spend other people’s money. The press over here is very much fawning, and I’m not surprised they don’t say that the debt to GDP ratio is a problem, because from what I’m seeing it’s hardly mentioned at all. But it is a problem because there are only a couple of ways of paying it back, and the most effective way is letting inflation reduce the value of the borrowings over time. That has of course worked out really well for Venezuela. And before anyone says that’s a ludicrous comparison, Venezuela’s problems started from a very well intentioned place too.
Edit: For the sake of precision, I should point out that the 64% debt to GDP ratio is based on current GDP, which is of course projected to fall significantly. Even the ridiculously low projection of a 4.6% contraction will push that ratio up to almost 70%.
-
@JC Govt debt will still be below where many of our trading partners were before COVID.
We've underinvested in infrastructure for decades. Interest is at all time lows. I'm not so bothered about the spend - it's what its going to be spent on that I'm interested in.
There has been a worrying increase in dogma creeping into the conversation. All the "e"s equality, equity, environment. Don't get me wrong sorting those out would be a good thing. It's how they get sorted that I might take issue with.
I'd like to see less big fancy roading projects and more stuff that we can do pretty much within NZ. Shovel ready? Sort out our water infrastructure. Build more pipes separate out waste water so it doesn't discharge into our harbours. A digger, guys with shovels and pipes All sourced locally.
-
@dogmeat said in NZ Politics:
@JC Govt debt will still be below where many of our trading partners were before COVID.
It doesn't matter what the trading partners' position is. Each has their own structural strengths and advantages they can leverage to service the debt. Their citizens also have different expectations about what their quality of life will be like. And most of them are starting from a baseline cost of living that is lower than NZ's to start with. When there are a decent number of people who already struggle to make ends meet how will they cope with inflation on staples with a static - at best - income? Because there will be many employers who won't realistically be able to offer a pay rise to their staff for a good while yet.
This needs to be part of a grown up conversation about what it will mean. We've got an ageing population who are expecting generous pensions (and one of the government partners keeps flogging that horse for all its worth) that will have to be funded by the same people who will have to bear the brunt of the effect of this debt. How will that happen? Nobody knows. We're just expected to trust "them". Well I don't. I wouldn't trust Bill English if he was suggesting this either BTW. I need to understand the plan, and there isn't one.
We've underinvested in infrastructure for decades. Interest is at all time lows. I'm not so bothered about the spend - it's what its going to be spent on that I'm interested in.
That's true. But those were choices. We chose to invest in other things instead, with the decision being taken that we could only live within our means so if we wanted to have generous and early pensions, decent healthcare and benign if unexciting fiscal policy we might have to do without some flash shit. If we want to invest in infrastructure, fine, but put it in your manifesto, explain the costs and how you intend to pay for it, and let people vote. Nobody voted for a fifth of a trillion bucks in debt and I don't think most people realise what the implications of that are. It has simply not been addressed, spending it is just a fait accompli and we're apparently going to worry about the bill later.
There has been a worrying increase in dogma creeping into the conversation. All the "e"s equality, equity, environment. Don't get me wrong sorting those out would be a good thing. It's how they get sorted that I might take issue with.
I agree
I'd like to see less big fancy roading projects and more stuff that we can do pretty much within NZ. Shovel ready? Sort out our water infrastructure. Build more pipes separate out waste water so it doesn't discharge into our harbours. A digger, guys with shovels and pipes All sourced locally.
Yep, and guys with shovels don't cost billions at a time.
-
@Godder said in NZ Politics:
@JC in essence, the budget plan is part of the manifesto whether they say it in so many words or not.
You’re right. I guess my problem is I expect parties to get the mandate before they spend the money and made the mistake of believing the most open and transparent government ever would go about it that way. Instead we got an opportunistic land grab.
-
@JC said in NZ Politics:
@Godder said in NZ Politics:
@JC in essence, the budget plan is part of the manifesto whether they say it in so many words or not.
You’re right. I guess my problem is I expect parties to get the mandate before they spend the money and made the mistake of believing the most open and transparent government ever would go about it that way. Instead we got an opportunistic land grab.
I'm not ready to be so harsh. These are extraordinary times and they are trying to do their best. Doesn't mean I have to like it or agree with it. These extended subsidies don't encourage people to get back into it and I am sure they will be a massive target for exploitation
-
New Zealanders will be comforted to know that everything is going to be alright ...
Today in The Australian lead article:
*“Ardern dines out on virus ratings Even an awkward cafe moment has turned to gold for the Kiwi PM, whose handling of coronavirus has her party on track for a record election win.”*
I for one look forward to more from Saint Jacinda - clip, clop, clip, clop - in her lecture series to Australians on how their country should be run, and to the USA and such. She surely knows about stuff.
-
Had to laugh this morning.
I saw an article on social media which was talking about how Bridges didn't have as much platform as needed to get his profile up etc etc.
Old school friend of mine posted "Unashamedly right-wing Herald continues on with it's bullshit".
1 article in 100 not fawning over Cindy and hence the paper is labelled as right-wing. I'm sure he'll be happy to read this morning the lead article questioning if Cindy is the most popular leader in over 100 years ...
Thought this chasm blinkered political divide was just over here and the US. Seems not.
-
Anyone able to say whether Winnie’s appeal of his loss in the High Court is going to be funded by the taxpayer? Of course he has no choice, as the most principled man in the nation he has to stand up for the rule of law. Personally I feel great satisfaction in my taxes getting used in such a productive way.
-
Todd Muller (challenging Bridges for National leadership): "Group Director Cooperative Affairs for Fonterra"
Governance, Risk and Audit, Farm Source, Global Stakeholder Affairs, Maori Strategy, Communications, Legal, and Purpose teams.
Great Fonterra successes with the foreign acquisitions and the botulism false positive debacle.
Looks like he was there in that position from at least 2013 to 2018. Failed out of Fonterra and into parliament.
-
@Tim said in NZ Politics:
Maori Strategy,
What does that mean? Is it really necessary - seems a bit racist. Do they have a strategy for people identifying as New Zealanders?
Actually that whole job description is stupid - we used to call it management in my day. -
-
@Tim said in NZ Politics:
Todd Muller (challenging Bridges for National leadership): "Group Director Cooperative Affairs for Fonterra"
Governance, Risk and Audit, Farm Source, Global Stakeholder Affairs, Maori Strategy, Communications, Legal, and Purpose teams.
Great Fonterra successes with the foreign acquisitions and the botulism false positive debacle.
Looks like he was there in that position from at least 2013 to 2018. Failed out of Fonterra and into parliament.
He's been an MP since 2014, so...
-
@Smudge said in NZ Politics:
Todd Muller
My mistake, I read an NBR article published in 2018 about him leaving Fonterra.
https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/fonterras-muller-leaves-campaign-national-ahead-election-bd-157164
The Beingmate deal was announced in 2014 (looks like he left mid 2014, so the deal would've been evaluated during his tenure), and the botulism disaster was in 2013 (again under him).
-
-
@taniwharugby Yep, that one! I heard earlier he wants to keep the system honest. My irony alert went stratospheric.
NZ Politics