Refer posts 6669
6679 & 6680
very clear what you were referring to.
Avoid shooting yourself in the other foot, justakiwi with tim23's other rusty revolver!
Printable View
Refer posts 6669
6679 & 6680
very clear what you were referring to.
Avoid shooting yourself in the other foot, justakiwi with tim23's other rusty revolver!
Well NZers have just voted strongly in favour of a Labour lead Government and support for Jacinda is massive not just here but all over the world. So lets give them and her a chance and see how things go.
And yes I agree Jacinda will in all likelihood end up working at the UN. She is a clever articulate woman, she will be very very good at what ever she does. Good luck to her I say
Articulate, yes.
Clever, no. Cunning & cynical - absolutely yes, that’s Cindy.
Can’t deliver on all the transformative election promises she promised :
Affordable housing,
Eradicating child poverty,
Upgrading infrastructure,
Capital Gains Tax,
Etc etc.
Luckily not all of us are fooled by her & her team of incompetents.
BTW, RB - You hink she will need to wear the hijab more often to join the UN now she missed out on the Nobel Peace Prize?
Luckily there are savvy voters in NZ.
Compare and contrast with the suckers in Venezuela who voted and made Chavez the most popular President ever in that once most wealthy of country - that country is now a basket case.
Popularity? Keep it for the suckers who cannot differentiate between spin and competency.
Hard to know how many National people voted for Labour to keep the Greens out, I am sure quite a few did but it doesnt explain the massive shift in favour of Labour IMO. I think Jacindas popularity had something to do with it plus in these uncertain times I think people tend to want some consistency in their lives and voting Labour back in may have given them a sense of security. But who would know, we will just have to see how things pan out.
Like Chavez of Venezuela, Cindy will flame & burn NZ with her ‘popularity’.
A show dog paraded by a bunch of incompetents is no race horse.
BTW, RupertBear - trust you note what the hijab is about in Iran and how your Cindy decided to spite the oppressed women of Iran by wearing the hijab, when she was asked not to?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...o=taboola_feed
Under Islamic law in force in Iran since its 1979 revolution, women must wear a hijab that covers the head and neck and that conceals their hair.
Yes Balance I know what the hijab is about. It was my understanding Jacinda first wore it as a sign of empathy. Which was a gesture I believe people accepted and appreciated at the time. However, and it pains me to say this, I agree with you she did over do the wearing of it and it did become a bit cringe worthy IMO
4 things which will decisively change the ‘poverty’ trap in NZ - true & tried methods :
1. Free Quality Education
2. Affordable housing
3. Jobs
4. Personal & parental responsibilities
1, 2 & 3 are already readily available if spending is prioritised but there is no will or desire to impose personal & parental responsibilities on all parents in NZ.
Parents having more children than they can afford for eg but they expect the state to provide! As long as that is the case, child poverty will never be eradicated.
Why even bother?
Teach a person to fish etc etc
Sometimes I really wonder whether you actually understand the meaning of some of the words you use. The absolute LAST thing Jacinda is, is cynical. Not in any shape or form. If anyone is cynical its you.
Why do you get so worked up all the time? Politicians come and go. As individuals we will like some politicians and dislike others. None of them are perfect and we shouldn't expect them to be. But seriously, your aggressive attitude towards Jacinda is off the scale crazy. Just suck it up and let her get on with it. It's 3 years, not forever. Either she will prove herself worthy of the role or she won't. Which is no different from any other politician we have had in the past. Geez, I had to tolerate Muldoon, John Key and Simon Bridges. Yes I moaned from time to time but I didn't let it consume me or my life. If you hang on to your anger and continue like this for the next three years you will send yourself to an early grave. Seriously.
That's actually a reasonable good and sensible list, but what would you do if you were the PM/government to achieve them? How would you provide/ensure the quality education, affordable housing and jobs? You can't just magic them up from nowhere.
The parental responsibility thing however is something you are making a judgement about. People in poverty are not all irresponsible parents. As I said in my previous post, some of those parents are working multiple jobs trying to support their families. Not all of them have large numbers of children. Are you proposing that we restrict the number of children we can have? China tried that. Do you really want us to go down that track?
1. I suppose incentivising uni graduate students to pay off their loans interest free while resident in New Zealand is at least better than burdening them with interest. At the earlier primary through to high school levels of education there's plenty of quality education around at say the lower decile schools - But the stigma associated with lower decile schools is that being lumped in with all the poor people is bad.
The teachers and resources are just as good as med-higher deciles, just the parents need to get over themselves IMO.
2. RMA? 3D printed housing - An entire house frame built from within a few hours to a few days? In September, Auckland Council removed the need of building consents for sleepouts, carports, sheds etc so that may incentivise the tiny house movement further?
3. The ongoing fruit pickers saga - Robotics will put that to rest in the near-med term as the costs go down and the uptake steadily increases. Perhaps incentivise apprenticeships for the mechanical/electrical engineering side of the robotics at high school level?
4. Man - That's an entirely new thread on it's own on!
How Vaughan Gunson sees the reasons why people voted Labour.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/vaughan-gunson-assessing-the-2020-election-through-risks-rewards-lens/G7QOYRQH75CFTLJUWBAKZ4YEBM/
The Government's handling of the Covid-19 crisis and the personal charisma and intelligence of Jacinda Ardern was a huge factor, undoubtedly.
Labour at least acknowledges the concerns of younger voters. That's in contrast to National in 2017 and again this time. Labour received many votes from under-30s on Saturday. The way the party presents itself, the way the Prime Minister behaves and articulates herself, appeals to younger voters, particularly women.A strategy of appealing to the concerns of our young people (and the "youth adjacent") is core to Labour's identity.
Stressing their handling of Covid-19 brought many older voters to the party, perhaps for the first time.
I don't think it's true that hordes of National supporters switched to Labour purely to keep the Greens out. A small number, maybe. The more likely scenario is that many switched to Labour as a genuine endorsement of the Prime Minister's leadership through a global pandemic.
Taking a very centrist manifesto into the election, particularly on tax, also reaped rewards.
The Prime Minister's message of compassion and cultural inclusion has been powerfully transformative, even though tax policy, housing policy and economic policy hasn't been.
Is immigration preferable to natural NZ population increase? Who will look after the grey tsunami?
More parents could perhaps look after their children without state aid if accommodation were cheaper. Often it is the grandparents who have the big house whilst young families are struggling to get a foothold. However there have always been Big expenses for young families yet those with higher incomes and greater wealth are older. So yep young families will need more help as not everyone has wealthy grandparents to help out financially.
People are concerned about child poverty but if addressing it affects them personally by paying more taxes or house prices falling their support wanes, because of nimbyism.
Transforming social issues can come first e.g. changes to abortion, cannabis and assisted dying.
Vaughan Gunson talks about transformation of attitudes too – “The Prime Minister's message of compassion and cultural inclusion has been powerfully transformative, even though tax policy, housing policy and economic policy hasn't been.”
There has to be general public acceptance of policies. If Jacinda had pushed ahead and passed a capital gains tax National said they would have rescinded it if elected. There was not as much support for capital gains tax compared to cannabis reform, and a lot of neutrals and did not knows (22%) so a lot of people didn’t know much about it.
The nationwide Horizon Research Poll - taken between February 28 and March 15 2019 - found 44 per cent of New Zealand adults supported introducing a capital gains tax and 35 per cent opposed it.
A further 16 per cent are neutral on the new tax, while 6 per cent did not know.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/more-kiwis-support-capital-gains-tax-than-oppose-in-new-poll/7WGICVGTR6DISJXD5ZTCDG2G5U/
The UMR research – an online survey of 1,129 people aged 18 years and over – shows 49% support for the Cannabis bill, with 45% against. Of the undecideds, a further 2% leaned towards voting in favour of the bill when pushed, while another 2% go the other way.
https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/06-...lisation-vote/
Sorry to burst your bubble justakiwi, but Ardern is as cynical as they come....just a little better at masking it. Pragmatic as well perhaps.
Examples?.....early days of lockdown when she threw clinicians under the bus over lack of testing, when the issue was her governments mixed messaging and lack of kits at that time.
The immediate "social distancing" she undertook from Bloomfield when she sensed he was on the outer.
The stated claim that she would ease off on the daily propaganda....only to be back within a week. I wonder how often she will appear now that the election is out of the way?
Her refusal to say where she stands on the cannabis bill because she knows it is on a knife edge.
The constant framing of the narrative whenever she makes a major announcement in the daily propaganda briefings.
The cynical manipulation of the virus situation, ramping up the fear etc
The "reset" of Kiwibuild.
The "Year of Delivery" that never eventuated.
I could go on....but you get the picture
And I ❤️ It!
BONANZA time - all that lovely wasteful spending! Just make sure you get more than your share as I have and will do in the next 3 years.
Think of the wage subsidy - the multinationals are still laughing their heads off with the hundreds of millions of dollars they took off this government & NZers. 🤣🤣🤣
I have no idea what you do for a job or what you are referring to in the highlighted part of your post, but whatever it is, it simply shows us yet another aspect of your disturbing personality and ethics.
As for your new, cringe-worthy “And I ❤️ It!” tag line - that’s just a cover for your behind-the-scenes fuming, over Labour’s win.
I suggest you shut down your computer, forget about politics and get outside and enjoy an awesome weekend :)
One prediction, I believe is quite possible, is that Jacinda Ardern will not serve out the next three years as Leader of the Labour Party and Prime Minister. I believe that she will stand down toward the end of 2022
Chill, justakiwi!
Why would I fume over Labour's win or National's big loss?
Governments come and go - along the way they formulate & implement some pretty dumb policies which are there to be taken advantage of.
In the case of Cindy's incompetent government, there is already and will continue to be a legacy of building up humongous debts from the wasteful spending for future generations to carry and be burdened with.
The only way you can counter it is to make sure you get more than your share and provide for your own future generation. And one can choose to donate to worthy causes of one's choice - no point getting worked up over the government's wasteful ineffective spending.
Fair enough?
You have spent the last god knows how many months/years fuming over labour and Jacinda. So it stands to reason you are now fuming over the fact that they won the election.
Nope. Not in my book. It simply makes you an absolute hypocrite.Quote:
The only way you can counter it is to make sure you get more than your share and provide for your own future generation.
Fair enough?
Again ... no conscience and no ethics. Watch this space my friend, because I think the next few years will be telling. This election result was not simply about covid. People, especially the younger generation, are turning their attention to different ways of doing things politically. Globally, not just in NZ. People want politicians and leaders who demonstrate personal qualities, integrity and connection with them. People like you are going to find that politics in the future will be vastly different from what you want or are used to. And that, my friend, is one reason National didn’t stand a chance this time round.Quote:
I do LOVE this government's naive and wasteful spending - our group just booked a six figure $$$$$ arrangement fee for a lender this week thanks to Cindy's dumb housing policies! So sweet!
Carry on playing your game of hypocrisy if that’s what you choose to do. I’m sure you won’t be the only one. It doesn’t effect me in any way, other than to confirm who you are as a person. Loving something you despise is the height of hypocrisy.
Not a fan of Cindy as I believe she is a UN puppet and is dancing to their tune where she will land herself a nice job in due course, shutting the Greens out was however a good outcome. National was never going to win this time and probably not next time either but eventually they will get their turn again, such is the cycle of politics, how many politicians have pure motives anyway, answer none.
Sounds like you are the one fuming, justakiwi.
Too bad really as I have a clear conscience warning you all about what Cynical Cindy is about in the last so many months but like Chavez of Venezuela, she was voted in on her popularity - all based on spin and BS.
Her government has delivered on Nothing! Where’s the affordable houses, why are there more in the queue for state housing and why have child poverty numbers increase? Because she is all talk and no delivery!
But she knows how to spend wastefully! Spends like a shopaholic with an unlimited state credit card.
Shrugs my shoulders and let’s move forward with getting the most out of the BONANZA!
I ❤️ It!
House prices rising out of control and out of reach - https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/h...-rising-prices
Cindy was going to sort out rising house prices, remember? 🤣
What happened?
Meanwhile, the queue for state houses grow longer and longer & neighbourhoods resist state houses being built within their midst - https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/123145429/residents-in-leafy-christchurch-suburb-called-classist-for-opposing-social-housing-development
Cindy was going to sort that one out too with heaps of kindness and consideration! 😜
Come to Auckland and observe developers building cramped & substandard terrace houses for Kainga Ora - reaping the bonanza of uncontrolled and desperate government spending while delivering slums in the making!
It will also be small apartments. Because over half of those on the waiting list are single people. I understand mostly men. Buyers should buy carefully as they will not want to be living next to a high density complex designed for more than a few low income single men.
I'm not sure whether it's nimbyism, but the innate selfishness in humans.
We see similar behaviour when it comes to 'supporting local'. Consumers indicate their preference to support local, however if they can obtain the same product cheaper (typically from an overseas retailer that does not need to cover CGA costs etc.) then that's what they'll do, in many cases from experience not before loudly chastising you in front of others.
Your response to my comment above.
Here is some evidence that people who would no doubt be concerned about child poverty, and yet they are opposing social housing in their leafy suburb. A lack of low cost housing is one of the contributors to child poverty. This was in today’s news and it is not unusual for residents to oppose social housing initiatives in their suburbs.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/123...ng-development
Residents in leafy Christchurch suburb called 'classist' for opposing social housing development
No, I don’t get the picture - that Ardern is cynical as they come.
You are the cynical one and it shows in how you interpret her actions as in the comment below.
The cynical manipulation of the virus situation, ramping up the fear etc
Most of us saw her acting out of genuine concern to a real threat. I couldn’t see any cynicism in the other examples you gave.
Balance is talking about predatory capitalism and he loves it. He is encouraging others to join in and get more than your share. Exploiting others including the taxpayer is something to be proud of. If you can rip someone off you'd be a fool not to do it, is the attitude. Honesty, integrity, ethics is sadly lacking in the business world today. Greed is good. Money is power.
http://regnet.anu.edu.au/news-events...d-institutions
Predatory capitalism refers to cultural acceptance of domination and exploitation as normal economic practice. Examples include not only corporate and financial fraud and political corruption that goes unchallenged, but also the undermining of trade unions, the suppression of wages, the promulgation of economic slavery, and wealth creation through imposing debt on vulnerable entities.
Less well scrutinized is how predatory capitalism has disrupted non-economic institutions, particularly cultural, social and democratic institutions.
There are rules, set by those actually in power. If people and organisations stay within those rules how is that predatory? Individuals and business owners have always, and will always, look out for their households and stakeholders. If they stray outside the rules there are consequences.
Households and business owners might be well off or they might not. But to suggest they should not act within the rules and in their own interests because that is lacking honesty, integrity and ethics? Really?
You have a sad attitude. There is no need to envy success. It should inspire you, but appears to make you envious. I've been hovering around the business world for decades and have rarely encountered this lack of honesty, ethics and integrity that you speak of. On the contrary, I have found those who have attained success, either through self employment, or have climbed high on someone else's ladder to generally be helpful with a joyful spirit. Of course there are exceptions, but they're not common in my experience. You reek of the green eyed monster.
Call out hypocrisy where you see it artemis. I decided to among family members a while ago (as gently as possible). I decided if I was to feel comfortable in a family setting I shouldn't bite my lip while others trod all over my sensibilities. Obviously has to be done with tact, but you have to make a stand sometimes....even with friends and family members.
I think perhaps I know Moka somewhat better than you do. If you seriously believe moka’s comments and motivation for sharing information, is because moka is envious - you are so off base its laughable. The same applies to me. Compared to many of you, I pretty much have nothing in terms of financial or other assets. I don’t have an economics or accounting degree, or any other degree for that matter. I am however, educated and reasonably intelligent. I have chosen to live a minimalist lifestyle in my caravan because that is the life I want to lead. I have never been materialistic. Up until recently Money has simply been a necessary evil. In actual fact, it still is. I got back into investing not because I have an overwhelming desire to “make money” but purely as a way to build myself a little more financial security for retirement. My life isn’t perfect but I am so much happier and more content living in my caravan and working part time in my caregiving role. Money is not my life and my life is not about material possessions. Not having “stuff” has given me more freedom than you would ever comprehend. I am not in any way envious of you or anyone in your position. The exact opposite actually. I can’t think of anything worse.
You know nothing about moka. Your comments are nothing more than incorrect assumptions.
The housing crisis which Cindy pledged to tackle and overcome has become a housing chaos (thanks to her government's total incompetence).
In the next three years, housing will become a total disaster - house prices are currently going up by $10,000 a month in Auckland! Try saving that kind of money even if you are earning $180k a year!
But you can be sure that ever more money by the billions of dollars will be thrown at the problem without Cindy having a clue how to solve the problem - because she is USELESS - all talk and no solution or delivery.
The billions of dollars of borrowed money will be her legacy - a burden to be borne by future generations.
The total disaster is NOT going to stop the multitude of consultants making hundreds of millions of dollars in fees, and definitely not going to stop property speculators and developers making billions of dollars - ENJOY!
Just make sure you get more than your share to protect your future generations - because the government will be incapable of looking after them.
I ❤️ It!
Interesting post thanks Moka. I am not familiar with the term predatory capitalism and will do some research into it.
I find the sentiment that we should try and get more than our fair share quite distasteful and the word exploitation also came to mind. They say people are motivated by either need or greed and greed was the other word that came to mind reading that post. But that is clearly how some people choose to live their lives. My upbringing and values are quite different so that is not how I choose to live my life.
I dont agree that Moka has a sad attitude and reeks of the green eyed monster fungus. I think Moka was simply pointing out that striving to attain more than your fair share and encouraging others to do so as well was exploitative. I did not detect any envy in Moka’s post quite the contrary I have always found Mokas post to have a strong academic slant usually backed up with references and links to supporting articles.
Tell that to the Cindy & the dozens of highly paid consultants (including ex Labour ministers & MPs) contracted by Cindy to prepare hundreds of reports on all manner of matters, simply to kick the bucket down the road - tens of millions of dollars of fees. They are getting more than their fair share out of the government's spending but whose fault is it?
Tell that to Andrew Little & the Pike River Recovery team - spending an ever increasing amount to 'bring the boys back' and after blowing out the budget by tens of millions of dollars, have bugger all to show. They are getting more than their fair share of the government's wasteful spending but who is to blame?
Tell that to James Shaw & the Green School who received $12m when other schools are crying out for $100k to fix old classrooms. They are getting more than their fair share but who is to blame?
Thing is, RupertBear - you & the likes of Moka & justakiwi seem to have no appreciation of just how wasteful Cindy has been with her frivolous & ineffectual spending but bugger all accountability - but you are very quick to condemn those who play to the government's rules and benefit from the rules.
The hypocrisy of your farcical one-eyed opinions is one reason why things are going to get a whole heap worse - housing being a prime example.
Anyway, such is society and that's why the housing crisis is now a housing chaos to become a total disaster within the next 3 years.
ENJOY!
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/ind...wage-subsidies
Moka would of course describe these companies receiving tens of millions of wage subsidies as predatory capitalists - McDonalds, Coca-Cola, The Warehouse etc etc.
Government made the rules (loose and fancy free) and these companies followed the rules, qualified for the wage subsidies and now, they are being pilloried publicly for taking care of their businesses & staff.
I am not being farcical nor am I a hypocrite Balance. The world you describe is just not my world and not my experience of life. I am not a business person. I dont condemn those who play by the rules and are rewarded for doing so. I do however condemn the attitude that it is ok exploit the rules to obtain more than your fair share, I find that a distasteful concept and its not something I would choose to do. But you come from a different perspective to me and if your conscience allows you to take advantage of the rules and the rules allow you to do so so be it.
I don’t envy success if it deserved, and I see people who work hard who do deserve success.
I am talking about predatory capital and an obvious example was finance companies around GFC.
You are assuming that my attitude is envy, and it is not envy I feel when I look at homelessness and child poverty with the rich getting richer and the poor poorer. I am talking about the big picture with increasing inequality because of neoliberalism and freemarket policies which transfer wealth from the have-nots to the haves.
The free-market economy assumes trickledown economics works when it does not.
The extreme wealthy can actually resource and fund themselves to avoid paying things like fair tax, whilst 75 percent of New Zealand's economy - small business - they are actually paying tax.
It's not fair if multinationals and the extreme wealthy around the world are not paying their fair share of tax.
It is predatory because there is a power imbalance between capital and labour and the rules to protect both workers and consumers have been weakened by neoliberalism through the mantra of less government and less regulation.
People interpret the rules to suit themselves e.g. employers with the wage subsidy. The Council of Trade Unions received a staggering 2100 complaints by 17 April 2020, with people often being forced to take annual leave, redundancies being progressed improperly, so proper consultation not happening, and health and safety concerns.
Wage subsidy complaints soar, including employer fraud - Labour Inspectorate
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/414453/wage-subsidy-complaints-soar-including-employer-fraud-labour-inspectorate
A lot of the time there are not consequences if people stray outside the rules. Certainly with white collar crime you aren’t as likely to be prosecuted as someone who is not in a trusted position and steals money. Often fraudsters are asked to leave with their reputation intact, and their next employer is unaware of their history. Being tough on crime for the National Party meant targeting gangs not corporate crime.
There is a double standard in attitudes to tax avoidance and benefit manipulation: while around half or more regard both as wrong, benefit recipients are judged more harshly than tax offenders for what might be considered similar ‘offences’. People are often judged more on who they are than their behaviour.
There have been changes in the last three years, and more promised for the next three. Let's see how they work out.
As an example, we have already seen some results of government dealing to the 'power imbalance' between tenants and landlords. It has actually been pretty good for landlords, tenants not so much.
Some asset owners will take their ball and go home. Others will adjust their processes and investment to minimise cost and risk. WHS being just one recent example, in the news because of scale. But not the only one. And most asset owners are not required to tell the market, they just quietly do what they do.
There is a quiet revolution based on automated systems, AI and robotics. It has been going on for decades and ain't stopping any time soon.
I watched a vid recently about an automated picking system in the US - taking goods from warehouse shelves and funnelling them to packers for shipping. It is designed for smaller enterprises, takes just days to get up and running for that part of the order and ship process. Not talking scale of Amazon or Ocado here but with online shipping and dark distribution centres increasing, there is a market here for sure. Low wage jobs gone.
It depends on your definition of "works".
Trickledown works in an overall sense. The human race has never enjoyed such a high standard of living and life expectancy. In fact in first world countries this has resulted in a number of self inflicted health problems around dietary choices etc (I realise that invites another discussion).
What Trickledown doesn't do is diminish the "gap" between rich and poor, in fact it can exacerbate it. That is where the tension arises. I'm not saying it is fair, but it is more nuanced than just saying it doesn't work.
China and other once upon a time third world countries like Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and Japan (totally devastated after WW2) are proof that trickledown economics work - as long as the people are prepared to work hard and be self reliant.
Compare and contrast with NZ today where handouts are more attractive than working on a farm - you have your answer why the wealth gap in NZ will never close.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/money...cheme.amp.html
And the result is that few employers and businesses were found to have abused the wage subsidy scheme when the complaints were investigated.
You are seriously going to use China as a “good” example? Yes, the Chinese are incredibly hard working people but the gap between wealthy and poor is huge. China’s poor, see no benefit whatsoever form your trickle down economy. The same applies to Japan and probably to the other countries you have mentioned.
Trickle down: That is the only way money can travel, so that's what it does. As living standards rise throughout the world, which they are doing, the gap grows. It shouldn't matter as long as the poor are getting richer, which they are. Clobbering 'the rich' will always have consequences on the poor, generally reducing their living standard. Strangely enough various studies have shown people generally accept poverty well as long as others aren't seen to be better off. Envy is a strange animal.
Open your eyes and ears, justakiwi and review the China situation from the perspective of the Chinese, not the biased Western commentaries which cannot rise above the West vs Communism narrative.
You are right about the wealth gap in China where there are some very very wealthy individuals (sounds similar to the US, UK and NZ, right?) but never in the history of mankind have so many people been lifted out of abject poverty and basic existence as in China over the last 30 years.
https://www.business-standard.com/ar...1300027_1.html
But don't take my word for it, have a read of the article above.
Several of my business contacts are from China and they have nothing but praise for the way that their leaders have lifted their country out of the miserable state China was right until the 1990s.
Meanwhile, in NZ we have gone from first world during the 1950s to the 1970s to school children needing to be provided with lunches these days so they do not go hungry & can focus on their studies - what happened? What an absolute disgrace!
You need to stop presuming you know what or how I think. Contrary to what you seem to believe, I am perfectly capable of forming my own opinions and views on things, based on my own research and learning. I am not the blind, brainwashed puppet, you continually accuse me of being. You need to stop treating women as gullible, brainless twits incapable of an original thought, because we are not.
I am not disputing the fact that things have improved in China. But there are still millions of people living in abject poverty, which is a fact you shouldn’t ignore.Quote:
You are right about the wealth gap in China where there are some very very wealthy individuals (sounds similar to the US, UK and NZ, right?) but never in the history of mankind have so many people been lifted out of abject poverty and basic existence as in China over the last 30 years.
https://www.business-standard.com/ar...1300027_1.html
But don't take my word for it, have a read of the article above.
Several of my business contacts are from China and they have nothing but praise for the way that their leaders have lifted their country out of the miserable state China was right until the 1990s.
We are a country of three little islands located far away from the rest of the world. As a result, our every day costs are significantly higher than most countries. Our cost of living is, and always has been, high. No government has ever managed to solve this problem, or the problems of poverty. Least of all National. I have never said that things are perfect in NZ. We have significant area of major concern such as the high rate of domestic violence and associated child abuse/neglect. And before you respond with more beneficiary bashing, domestic violence and child abuse/neglect occurs in families from all walks of life. As someone who worked for 8 years in an admin role for what was then CYF, I can tell you this for a fact. You would probably be shocked to know just how many families we “worked with” were not in the beneficiary/low income category. I worked there under both National and Labour governments and neither party ever managed to solve the multitude of problems we were dealing with. You have no idea.Quote:
Meanwhile, in NZ we have gone from first world during the 1950s to the 1970s to school children needing to be provided with lunches these days so they do not go hungry & can focus on their studies - what happened? What an absolute disgrace!
Balance, you make some comments in your posts that I don’t disagree with. But you rarely contribute any concrete solutions to the issues you are angry about. Take housing for example. We know what you think about KiwiBuild, so no need to repeat it, but what is your solution to the housing problem? If you were PM what would you do to solve it? I have my own ideas about how to solve some of this, but it’s an “outside the square” idea, that very few people would take seriously, let alone implement. Regardless of which government is in power, I think the time has come to move on from traditional ways of resolving issues like housing. We need to get creative, seriously look at what is actually needed, and be prepared to do something entirely different. We can’t just keep doing the same old same old and hope that it fixes things. The world is changing. NZ is changing.
I don’t have all the answers, but neither do you.
1. You are making a huge assumption yourself about how some of us view Cindy as indicative of how we view women as a whole.
We view Cindy for who she is - all style and no substance (all talk and no delivery) and that does not mean that we view women all the same way. Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir, Angela Merkel, Tsai Ing-wen and Margaret Thatcher are but some examples of real leaders who are/were all substance rather than style. Take a step back and differentiate between real leaders and popular leaders - Chavez was hell of a popular and he completely ruined a wealthy country with his populist policies.
2. China lifted 800m (yes, 87% of its population - source World Bank) out of poverty in less than 30 years and you are still busy trying to downplay that astounding achievement by looking at the wealth gap - which actually is smaller than that of the US or NZ! Sure there are millions there still living in abject poverty but nothing compared to what it was like 30 years ago. Look at the beam in NZ's eyes before you look at the speck in the eyes of others.
The huge mistake made out there is for anyone of us to blindly buy into the US narrative that it’s all about capitalism vs communism out there.
Different countries have the right to pursue whatever mix of policies appropriate to lift their standards of living & look after their people.
China & Russia adopted Communism economic policies to the horrendous detriment of their people’s wellbeing for decades.
They saw the light and introduced free market policies (call it capitalism) and few of their citizens would complain about how that has lifted living standards for their people.
First define the problem. No point in saying there's some sort of a problem and here's a solution. How does a government, or anyone, know they are solving the real problem? There is an answer to that question, and it is formal root cause analysis.
So, what is the 'housing problem'?
That is a cop out.
NZ used to enjoy one of the highest standard of living in the world right through the 1950s to the mid 1970s. You need to assess why NZ has gone backwards in such a big way since then to understand why school children need lunch handouts and there are homeless & beggars in the street today.
The simple answer can be provided by this question :
"How can there be tens of thousands of jobs a begging in the agricultural sector when there are several hundred thousand NZers unemployed and on the benefit?"
Yes, you treat anyone who disagrees with you despicably, but whether you realise it or not, you are even more condescending and contemptuous when speaking to women. You are more than a little misogynistic and pretty arrogant. But you don’t need me to tell you that. It is your way of making you feel like a tough guy, when you’re really the opposite.
Tell me ... are you like this in “real life” or is this just a persona you have created because you get your rocks off by winding people up intentionally, just for your personal entertainment? You actually quite fascinate me to be honest. You would make interesting subject material for a psychology class.
The school lunch program is just a cop out, even though I grew up in poverty I still had food for lunch, parents would have been highly embarrassed to have the state providing lunch for their children when its the most basic of parental responsibility. I guess it just gives the many irresponsible parents more money for their personal vices.
My answer:
NZ farm and market gardening agriculture has to an extent become reliant on foreign seasonal workers, many of whom come from poor countries.
Covid control measures have restricted the supply of seasonal cheap foreign labour. Without offering higher pay and better conditions, NZ workers are not attracted to the jobs that had appealed to the poor seasonal foreign workers.
If this situation continues:
(1) other input costs will fall e.g. Land prices.
(2) the level of unemployment benefits will need to drop if unemployment levels rise unacceptably..
(3) orchard owners will have to accept that they will have to offer higher pay levels and receive a lower rate of profit.
(4) NZ will import more produce.
(5) the consumer will pay higher prices for produce.
(6) Agricultural land will be sold and new owners may turn it over for other uses.
(7) All or a combination of the above.
The answer is just like in the aged care sector they are in many cases simply too lazy and can't be bothered, why put in hard work when you can get paid for sitting on your arse, even when they were offering well above minimum wages for the tree planting enterprise, there were basically no locals interested.
Not everyone is suited to working in aged care as you well know. It may not be seen by society as a “skilled” job, but it is a damned sight harder than the general public probably appreciates. It is physically demanding - I spend 99% of a 7.5 hour shift, on my feet. A certain amount of lifting/bending/crouching is required, even with the use of hoists/lifting belts etc. It is probably not a job for somebody with genuine physical limitations eg: back, knee, shoulder injuries/issues.
Caregivers need to be able to deal with personal cares such as toileting, showering, assisting with continence products, catheter and stoma bags, bleeding, vomiting, applying topical/internal medications to genital areas and more. It takes a special kind of person to be able to do this, not to mention provide this care in a caring, respectful, patient, tolerant, consistent way. Some people simply can’t handle it. Not everyone is cut out to be a nurse. Neither is everyone cut out to be a caregiver. It is unfair and unrealistic to expect the general population of unemployed people to simply “suck it up” and do these jobs if it’s not something they can physically or emotionally handle.
Same goes for farming. I don’t want someone who is not passionate about caregiving, working with me in our rest home, or caring for my mum in hers. Farmers don’t want someone working for them who are not passionate about farming. Dairy farming is mentioned a lot. Yes, there are a lot of jobs going, but pay rates for dairy farm workers are low. My son works as a dairy farm manager but they can’t afford to pay their staff more than the minimum wage. They also can’t always provide accommodation. Hours are long and rosters vary greatly from farm to farm. There may well be unemployed people who would do this work, but how are they supposed to move their family to a new location, find accommodation, transport, work for the partner and childcare to enable them to do it for minimum wage? It is not always as simple as it seems, believe me.
(8) Switch to lower labour requirements. My cuz turned his dairy farm into growing spuds for a contracted client, for example. Get government funding, plant trees where the grazing or apple trees were, wait a couple of decades.
(9) Automation / robotics. Already here, quietly expanding, even being exported.
My go to question when someone tells me they can't find a job - Have you knocked on the doors of the aged care centres? Answer always - no. Pretty sure when higher rates were mandated some rest homes changed job duties for some roles to no client contact. And some closed completely as no longer financially viable.