If National wins ...

[BlackPeter]

I think all of us on this thread are very patriotic, some of us, perhaps, are following the wrong political party, but never mind.

I was pointed to this video presentation by the late Sir Paul Callaghan. Maybe I've posted it before, but it bears watching again. Inspiring, even if some of the companies have folded or changed hands.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhCAyIllnXY

Now have a think about which political party is likely to help enable some of Sir Paul's ideas? We've gone backwards since this video was made.

Hi EZ, Thanks for sharing this link. Excellent speech, very worthwhile to watch.

Some of the data might not be quite correct, but I don't think that anybody can really disagree with the message.

We all want a more prosperous New Zealand, most of us (well - I do) want an environment where everybody gets a fair go and with a safety net to support the people who fail without being at fault, most of us (well - I do) want a humane society where all people get a fair go at education and healthcare no matter how much money they or their parents make - and I certainly would prefer a New Zealand without a lynch mob putting innocent people into prison only to have somebody pay for the crime (just in case anybody wonders why we are in the top group of countries which like to lock up their citizens).

How do we get there? Well certainly not by waiting for the next cyclical change in government. Yes, I agree - the current government has a lot to answer for (though they are not responsible for all the things the resident left tends to throw in this thread at them), but so have all the governments before them. Blaming the incumbent government is easy (and, yes, we all love to do it - if its "the other party"), but it never will fix things - it just changes from time to time the snots at the trough, not the quality of government.

I agree with Sir Paul .... what we need in New Zealand (and not just here) is real leadership. Now - obviously we can now all sit down and wait for the (new) messiah to come, but I don't think he (or she) will. It is certainly not Key, but it is certainly not Little either. What it would need is less effort from everybody in running the ideas of the respective opposition down just because they come from Labour or National or Green or ACT or whoever we choose to oppose. We might need as well a bit more critical thinking before we support the ideas of our chosen political party (for the people here who have a favourite).

I believe that as a people we need to become a bit more constructive - change the political fight into a political dialogue. We always will have the 30% (give or take) right wing people, we always will have the 30% (give or take) left wing people and we always will have the people in between (call them liberal or centrist or whatever you like). As long as politics in NZ is the left and the right beating each other up and the centre having to choose between bad and worse, it is unlikely that we are able to improve our lot.

Obviously - we on share trader can't change the world, but we could change this thread. Why don't we try to discuss in future political ideas based on their merit instead of based on which corner of the spectrum it is coming from? Why don't we stop the blaming game? Why don't we try to get the Left and the Right to work together to improve our lot instead of just having them fight for each of them getting for the next 3 years the best places at the trough?

Are you ready to improve NZ - or do you just want more power for the people who happen to run your chosen party?

[Daytr]

Good post BP. And I agree the more constructive the better, however & there is always a 'however' ;-), we do have government of the day & they have been in power for some time so I don't think its wrong to criticize the government of the day if deserved, which of course is subjective. What I do find annoying, is that if National being the government of the day, is criticized then its assumed by some on here, that its a lefty rant. Criticism I think is fine as long as the reason is outlined or alternative policy put forward.
In regards leaders I think Key is a leader, but not one I like & I suppose real leadership, well imo is someone who looks well into the future & creates policy for generations, not just the electoral cycle. Little, however I think needs to be given a fair hearing before being written off. I'm not saying he is going to be a great leader or not, but I do like giving people a little bit of time before writing them off, or praising them for that matter.

[winner69]

Blackpeter, you said 'We always will have the 30% (give or take) right wing people, we always will have the 30% (give or take) left wing people and we always will have the people in between (call them liberal or centrist or whatever you like). As long as politics in NZ is the left and the right beating each other up and the centre having to choose between bad and worse, it is unlikely that we are able to improve our lot.'


You could be interested in this little piece on much the same subject.
http://www.johnkay.com/2015/04/08/ic...party-politics

[BlackPeter]

... And I agree the more constructive the better, however & there is always a 'however' ;-), we do have government of the day & they have been in power for some time so I don't think its wrong to criticize the government of the day if deserved, which of course is subjective. What I do find annoying, is that if National being the government of the day, is criticized then its assumed by some on here, that its a lefty rant. Criticism I think is fine as long as the reason is outlined or alternative policy put forward.

Any fair criticism is great - and if it is constructive, it is even better! Sometimes though on this thread you see some one-eyed criticism along the lines "the evil government of the day is responsible for the inflated Auckland house prices" without recognising that the Auckland house price index did even rise steeper during the previous government (Just an example ... if we could avoid it, than I would prefer to not warm up this specific point again). A better way may be to just discuss what we as a people could do to make sure out children are still able to afford buying some acceptable place (not necessarily house) to live.

In regards leaders I think Key is a leader, but not one I like & I suppose real leadership, well imo is someone who looks well into the future & creates policy for generations, not just the electoral cycle. Little, however I think needs to be given a fair hearing before being written off. I'm not saying he is going to be a great leader or not, but I do like giving people a little bit of time before writing them off, or praising them for that matter.

Agreed - while obviously leading the National party, Key is in my view not really a leader of the Nation ... he comes more across as one of these modern "managers" who could manage (or mismanage) anything. If put under stress, he does not always appear to be open and honest - and in terms of leadership ... yes, he was in my view at election days so far a better alternative than the opposition of the day , but I couldn't really say where he is leading our country towards ... and I doubt that he could say that either.

Re Little - accepted, we have not yet seen him in a big political leadership role, so maybe we need to cut him still a bit slack. However - I remember him from previous times as a union leader, and I must admit that I find it hard to point to any occurrence where he exceeded my expectations in the past. All he said was stuff you would expect a union leader to say, no indication for a real reflection on issues. I must however as well admit, that while my expectation of union leaders are quite low, there are probably not too many contemporary union leaders who managed to exceed these expectations, though there are some. Remember Lech Wałęsa (Poland)? He was a real leader at his time ... he had guts, vision and was able to communicate. Would be great to have somebody like him in NZ ...

[BlackPeter]

Blackpeter, you said 'We always will have the 30% (give or take) right wing people, we always will have the 30% (give or take) left wing people and we always will have the people in between (call them liberal or centrist or whatever you like). As long as politics in NZ is the left and the right beating each other up and the centre having to choose between bad and worse, it is unlikely that we are able to improve our lot.'


You could be interested in this little piece on much the same subject.
http://www.johnkay.com/2015/04/08/ic...party-politics

Yes, interesting article. Not sure, though whether I suggested (or intended to suggest) that both big parties should occupy the space in the middle. I think they should stay where they think is right and serve there clientele. However ... I am saying they should be able to recognise that they have (hopefully) both similar targets (like prosperity, healthcare, education for everybody), even if they propose often quite different ways to get to this target. Grown ups of all colours should be able to rise from their ingrained way of thinking and be able to work together to reach a common goal. Sometimes they might take the left and sometimes the right way ... and who knows - often there might be even a still better way none of them individually has seen to get there?

[westerly]

Blackpeter, you said 'We always will have the 30% (give or take) right wing people, we always will have the 30% (give or take) left wing people and we always will have the people in between (call them liberal or centrist or whatever you like). As long as politics in NZ is the left and the right beating each other up and the centre having to choose between bad and worse, it is unlikely that we are able to improve our lot.'


You could be interested in this little piece on much the same subject.
http://www.johnkay.com/2015/04/08/ic...party-politics

On this forum everybody considers themselves either just right or just left of centre. Any one not in agreement is either a communist or a neo right libertarian.

westerly

[Daytr]

Spot on Westerly ;-) I think I'm a neo libertarian, not that I really know what that is, or if such a thing exists. I just like the sound of it.

[winner69]

Spot on Westerly ;-) I think I'm a neo libertarian, not at I really know what that is, or if such a thing exists. I just like the sound of it.

Neo-liberalism is just a bunch of powerful people doing things in their own self interest. Doesn't sound like you daytr so you not a neo-liberal

Compassion and empathy are the caring roots of a caring society. Socialism is a negative word with associations to totalitarianism. Socialism is really organised compassion, which everyone can relate to. It's not an ideology - its simply a starting point for a conversation about how we organise society. Thinking in these terms is a a good start to improving society for all. Hence I think you fundamentally really are a socialist daytr - but that's only a word eh.

[elZorro]

W69 hits on some interesting points. Neo-liberalism is across to the right of the two main parties in NZ. It is a political name for policies that often come out of think-tanks in USA. NZ Treasury had a good look over there before 1984, and wrote up a massive document that became Roger Douglas' mantra, almost by default it became a giant NZ Experiment (Rogernomics), the first of its type worldwide. Not all of the results were good, they needed a lot of correction, and eventually Labour did a fair bit of that, in their three terms from 1999 to 2008.

ACT would be a party that you could call neo-liberal, and Crosby-Textor with their firebrand campaign techniques, are also neo-liberals to the core. Note that the National Party deliberately ensures the survival of one, and pays for advice from the other. Their incremental policies are also along the neo-liberal track.

This week National spouted some general news that they would look into improving tax compliance rules and costs around provisional tax, a draconian system here, by world standards. However, in a probable bid to ensure more prompt tax compliance and at a time when they want to show they could maybe, just maybe, steer the govt budget into surplus for once, they've actually put the interest rate for late payment of taxes, up.

http://taxpolicy.ird.govt.nz/news/20...-rates-updated

[winner69]

EZ, I believe at the core there is fundamentally little difference between Nats and Labour (and ACT if you want to include them)

In spite of stated philosophy / policies I believe Labour don't really want to make any drastic changes to the status quo. Major or drastic changes would only see the rise of more radical parties like what is happening in Europe at the moment. Self interest implies preservation and Labour and National will work together to stop this happening. You sort of agreed with this supposition a few days ago.

So we are stuck for another 5 years at least with what we have now, after a Nat win in next election. And probably the current issues will only fester away and inequalities will only get greater.