Jump to content

muller walks, crusher to the rescue?


Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, armchairadmiral said:

A lot of that is vote buying and creating electoral dependency BP. Don't see much in those lists that assists those who help themselves. And for the umpteenth time my vote is up for grabs, like last time, so don't come back claiming I'm left ,right, sideways or upside down. A list of failures to effect electoral promises is illuminating reading too. Like the 100,000 homes. Dead stupid that one.

I don't disagree, but what did they not achieve that you are very disappointing about?

There is a narrative the right wing media (yes I said that ;-)) is getting going that they haven't achieved anything. I am genuinely keen to here what peoples view of this is (note, I already think that most views are different from reality, which is what I think you may have been getting at referring to the media thing earlier)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 163
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Judith has attracted my interest. The $31bn is over 10 years apparently and it will take that long IF she doesn't cancel the RMA gravy train. There will be a lot of very expensive consultants, lawyers

The rebuild of the National party should probably start with a meet and greet evening where they all stand up and introduce themselves to each other. Like hi, I'm Paul Goldsmith and I have no maori an

You sound irritated. Did you not get your dose of Mike Hoskin today? I get my news from crew.org, its the only place to go isn't it?  Don't watch TV, don't listen to radio news. What is a ne

Posted Images

Inflation.

That has always been the plan with public debt. You just let it sit there. All you need to do is be able to service it.

I understand the critiscm, but given the circumstances what else could you do? Would National have spent any less money? They say they would have spent it better, and smarter, but would they have spent any less?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, splat said:

It is highly debatable but is per head of population indebtedness an important metric... haven't we moved from something like $3000 per person to greater than  $28,000 per person in less than four months...This has to be paid for. Question is how?

https://commodity.com/debt-clock/newzealand/

I'm not an expert but I think your numbers are wrong. 

Our government debt to GDP ratio is forecast to reach 54% by 2023. A bit of half assed research suggests that that is up from about 20% pre covid.

Pretty stink but 54% is still low by international standards. 

https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/government-debt-to-gdp

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the Labour Party propergander document BP. They can chuck numbers around as much as they like but.

Child poverty hasn't reduced.

Homelessness hasn't reduced .

Houseing is still way behind the targets they set. An example of having no idea of what they were talking about.

Huge debt incured for vote buying social policies.

I could go on but don't have the time or inclination.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chariot said:

Thanks for the Labour Party propergander document BP. They can chuck numbers around as much as they like but.

Child poverty hasn't reduced.

Homelessness hasn't reduced .

Houseing is still way behind the targets they set. An example of having no idea of what they were talking about.

Huge debt incured for vote buying social policies.

I could go on but don't have the time or inclination.

This is a good post Chariot. I understand this is a view a lot of people hold. And it aligns with the 'haven't achieved anything' narrative.

But the thing is, this govt has set out to:

Tackle child poverty

Tackle homelessness, and

Tacking housing.

The last government would not even admit there was a problem on any of those, and went as far as trying to hide or muddle the data on a number of examples.

Yes, Labour was dreaming on the 10,000 homes goal, but it was effective as a headline grabber. But the thing is, this govt have stated these as priorities, and have set out on a journey. It is near impossible to get much done in a 3 year election cycle, you only have 2 yrs 6 months before you start campaigning again... Maybe a 2nd term will help nail a few of these things?

But I would like to pull you up on the "Huge debt incurred for vote buying social policies". What were those?

Pre-covid, Grant Robertson had as much or more constraint on debt to GDP than National. In-fact he was starting to be criticised on it from some business commentators.

The covid debt is different, and yes that is big. Are you linking that to 'vote buying social policies?' But I honestly don't know what the alternative was. I would be keen to hear views on what else we could have done there?

I'm not trying to be argumentative here (I acknowledge it may look like it). I am genuinely interested in how other people view all of this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...