Hard News: The perils of political confidence
632 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 22 23 24 25 26 Newer→ Last
-
Jackie Clark, in reply to
I am afraid I have resigned myself to a further 3 yrs of a Government I neither voted for, nor have any confidence in. In my very humble opinion, Labour took too long to get their shit together for this one. And that saddens me, greatly. That being said I will be spending election night with a very lovely friend, and her very lovely husband, and the other denizens of Labour Mt Roskill, and celebrating Labour's wins, whatever they may be. Hopefully, one of them will be that this very fine man who is attached to my very fine friend will be in Parliament after that night. Otherwise, I'm just holding on for 2014.
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
celebrating Labour’s wins, whatever they may be.
If the left and Winston can't hold the reigns this time we know they will come back to clean up the mess, like they always do. Because people are important and the left and Winston care. And before anyone baulks at Winston, he does care about the elderly constituents :)
-
As for next week and the week after, and the week after that etc.etc.
More of the same for job losses
Big stick hits out again. -
Hilary Stace, in reply to
I wouldn't be surprised if there was another election before 2014. Things are moving quickly in the world at the moment and the problems ahead pretty major.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
I am afraid I have resigned myself to a further 3 yrs of a Government I neither voted for, nor have any confidence in.
The power of positive thinking is not strong in this one. :-(
-
Islander, in reply to
+1!
And I am still positively hopeful that the re-election of Nats & that bland Mr Key, with his assassin's eyes, wont happen. -
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
And I am still positively hopeful that the re-election of Nats & that bland Mr Key, with his assassin’s eyes, wont happen.
-
It is not the blandness that worries me - my concern is that neither Labour nor National have a plan that even attempts to address the issues we are facing or about to face as a nation.
-
Islander, in reply to
I suppose if you keep reiterating this stuff for your comfort, Dexter X, you must believe it,
Labour has a plan. It’s publically out there- and I think it will work.Nats want their same old to continue – despite the failure of everything they said they’d do -which turned out to be – reward their cronies. Phuque that – and anyone who slothily, stupidly or unwittingly, goes & votes for them again. You’re burying this island nation by so doing, phuquewitz-
-
linger, in reply to
neither Labour nor National have a plan
If that’s how you really see it, then vote for one of the minor parties instead – but please do vote. The default result otherwise is a Parliament in which the major parties are not challenged either to produce a plan, or to adapt their policies to reality.
-
Nats focus on attacking Winston, with Act looking like toast.
-
And Key now making overtures about equal pay as a potential policy compromise with the Greens after dismissing it outright during the last 3 years.
Though his ongoing faith-based approach to evidence would make Alasdair Thompson proud.
"The reason there is a pay gap is because of the nature of the jobs, as I understand it.
-
You know the result here could be a minority National government unable to proceed on asset sales because of the majority in parliament against them
Which strangely may be exactly what the public (at this particular moment in time) want
-
Sacha, in reply to
Absolutely. Hence the noises from National about needing another election soon to unblock their divine right to govern without constraint. Given our system's lack of other checks and balances and the character of Joyce, McCully and others, that's a concern.
-
Radio NZ has a story about Key warning voters off Winston First (1m27, listening options).
-
merc,
"The reason there is a pay gap is because of the nature of the jobs, as I understand it."
Understanding reason fail. -
Sacha, in reply to
Even a one-page summary of the applicable evidence would disagree with his statement - which shows either how much attention the man has paid, or how prepared he is to say whatever interest groups like employers want to hear.
-
merc, in reply to
I think he is a person who stands for nothing and so everything is fair game.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Radio NZ has a story about Key warning voters off Winston First (1m27, listening options).
Which I wouldn’t argue with, really – and there’s also his lengthy track record of being a toxic, divisive douchebag. But in the end, if Winston First gets over 5% of the party vote that’s the end of the matter. I guess all we can do is start a pool on when Winston will find a pretext to flounce out of the room. Again.
(But, FWIW, I’m not sure the “instability” argument settles the matter as firmly as Key thinks it does. On one level, the whole point of MMP is to act as a brake on hyperactive governments of any stripe. is it really the end of the world if the Government of the day loses a bill, now and them - even one I strongly support. Nope.
The flip-side of that is that shagging around with confidence and supply is a real nuclear option, and something I’d like to think even Winston wouldn’t be that cavalier with.)
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
Though his ongoing faith-based approach to evidence would make Alasdair Thompson proud.
If only one word could sum up the prevailing orthodoxy, ‘faith-based’ would most certainly be it. It was most certainly the case with Dubya and Howard.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
It is not the blandness that worries me - my concern is that neither Labour nor National have a plan that even attempts to address the issues we are facing or about to face as a nation.
@Dexter (not Islander, soz K)
Actually they both have plans, and they're quite different. It really is quite clear, because both parties are saying it, that this is about whether to follow a neoliberal agenda of selling off state assets to balance books, and dropping wages, and gutting the public services, OR to keep the assets, change the tax regime, and ride it out.
However, I agree with you that neither of those is going to fix the major thing that is wrong with the NZ economy, that it is agragrian export based, in a time of world recession. I don't know what could fix that within my lifetime, frankly. We've pretty much missed the industrial revolution, with one exception - our farming is industrial, which is why it's so unsustainable.
The knowledge economy is a flop. I think the reasons for that are actually pretty obvious - knowledge can't provide any sustainable advantage, because it can be ripped off at a moment's notice. You could build up a massive knowledge economy, and find it all flies out to Australia, or is simply copied by whoever can do it cheaper. This is actually what's happening to our middle classes, who were heavily encouraged to build up this economy, and tertiary education skyrocketed. But the dividends of it are mostly not reaped locally.
This is an international phenomenon, practically the entire wealthy industrialized world fell prey to this fallacy, and it became a Ponzi scheme - we thought we were so fucking clever that it must be the source of our continual wealth, and those with a lot of wealth were certainly able to build it up massively during this period, but they very much did so by taking all the knowledge generated and moving it offshore. Wealth continued to flow towards the technical ownership of all this knowledge, giant corporations, and that wealth trickled down into the pockets of the technocracy that supported it, but mostly that had the effect of concentrating the wealth upwards, until it ended up mostly in the hands of organization which do nothing more than own ie financial organizations. Then, of course, the Ponzi scheme collapses, as the swollen sense of First World wealth became too great and people truly began to believe that a shitty old house in a posh Auckland suburb really is as valuable as the gigantic fuck-off mansion you'd be able to buy in any part of the Third World and live like a king for the rest of your life, for that amount of money. When things get that out of whack, they always crunch back eventually. It's funny to think that practically the whole First World has spent 40 odd years as a cargo cult, imitating the forms of industrial capitalism, but actually destroying it's industrial capital base.
Ironically, that meant that businesses that were based on concepts of a mixture of not-particularly-scarce-but-still-highly-skilled labour, the trades, have done extremely well, because they do still make something that can't just be taken away from them at a moment's notice. You do still need to have a working toilet, and a functioning electrical system. You can't outsource fixing that to China. You can hire a Chinese person to fix it, but they're someone who has to live in NZ, pay NZ prices and taxes, so they're not any more competitive than anyone else here. It ends up mostly being fair pay for fair work.
Conclusion in next post (word limit reached):
-
merc,
These are not the asset sales you thought they were /Jedi pulpit style/
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10767604 -
So, given that neither party, nor any party in the First World, has an answer to global capitalist redistribution towards the Third World (and I'm not even entirely sure I think it's such a bad thing in a global sense), the question doesn't become "how can we outcompete the rest of the world to grow our economy fastest, to stay on the mouse wheel of capitalist growth?". It is "Given that we can't outcompete, and it is a given, how can we organize our society fairly so that a far lesser level of growth will not destroy everything that is good about NZ's formerly egalitarian way of life?". The answer to that one is obvious, it's the same answer it has always been - society needs to aim to be strongly progressive, levying wealth and capital heavily to keep the bottom rising. To that end Labour does indeed have a much better plan than National. They also seem to have support for that plan from practically every other party than National and ACT.
So I think if you want to gut NZ, either vote National, or don't vote. If you think this can remain a fair society, while the world works out how the future of capitalism (however long that might take), vote pretty much anything else (other than ACT, who are quite open about gutting, and would like to accelerate it).
-
Rich of Observationz, in reply to
Absolutely.
Except that Labour are presenting things as "nothing much wrong, just need a few tweaks and a change of faces". There are some bits of a plan, but no acknowledgement that we have a bit of a problem.
Ok, so we don't see the issues that Europe does right now, but that's on a pretty slender thread - if people in Guangzhou etc. suddenly decide to stop buying expensive yoghurt, or get some of their own cows, we're screwed.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
This is actually what’s happening to our middle classes, who were heavily encouraged to build up this economy, and tertiary education skyrocketed. But the dividends of it are mostly not reaped locally.
Once again, my 3 under-employed post-grad friends are testament to that. We have no trouble producing the know-how, were it not for one not-so-small problem. Most of those with money don't have the vision, and most of those with vision don't have the money. And the two camps have polar opposite world views.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.