Labour govt 2020-23

[Zaphod]

What the hell does 9 even mean?

5 & 10 have Ardern's and her minions fingers all over them. Identity Politics wherever she treads.

I think it is advocating to standardise the position titles & descriptions for IT sector jobs, which would need to be set at a national level. I've yet to read the full report, so this is pure conjecture on my part.

We have had a number of issues with INZ misinterpreting a foreign candidates prior position title & employment as being decidedly different from what we were offering, consequently refusing to issue a visa. Perhaps this is designed to resolve that? I don't know.

[fungus pudding]

Exactly.

Anyone with any property sense avoids buying anywhere near social housing - more so when they are looking at large scale apartment buildings which will house the three types of housing within the one building.

Imagine buying a unit and finding yourself with state tenants on both sides as a likely case scenario!

Shhhh! Hate speech police might overhear you.

[Sir Ten]

Time for Ardern to return to the site for one of her photo opps and show us the tremendous delivery of her policy.....

Remember her "Year of Delivery" for the second year of her first term? That's what had her heading for a one term exit prior to Covid and the daily propaganda briefings and helicopter money saving her. People have short memories when money is being thrown about. As usual, it will be her base constituency that will be most shafted. Is it any wonder so many Nats supporters voted her in? She was throwing them cash faster than Santa throws lollies!

I thought I'd take a look at Labour's Facebook page today... it was a painful experience, with "true-believers" unwavering in their support for the smiling liar. That said, there did appear to be some genuine criticism/concern of their performance across many of the qualitative issues - i.e. mental health. I think there's something in that. Trying to turn Labour's existing base on economics is futile. It needs to address things they think they care about (I say "think they care about", as many don't seem to be aware of the impact the economic failings will have on their day-to-day lives). I acknowledge its not the best measure of sentiment as most of the fine folk on these Facebook pages seem more vocal/activist/defensive than the balance of the population... but I was just boggled by how people defend this stuff?

Pretty much everything Jacinda does grates me because it's so disingenuous - but I think the thing that robs me of any faith in Labour is the complete lack of transparency. If they walked the walk on this I could probably show some more sympathy as owning your mistakes is often more important than the mistakes themselves, but this lot seems so ardent that they know best and that their failings are justifiable that it's insulting.

Anyway, I expect we'll see an extensive list of broken promises prepared for the campaign trail prior to the next election... but the list is only as effective as how it's delivered. And that at the moment seems to be the biggest problem - it just doesn't seem to get the any cut-through.

That is either an indictment on the ignorance and intelligence and of our population (which I think is a genuine consideration) or a sign that the opposition really needs some more/better advice.

Only other thing I'd add, is that I think the mental manipulation of the current Government's policies and messaging is extremely perverse... there is such a growing intolerance of any criticism (hate speech laws, "be kind", genuine criticism of the economics of women's rugby, etc.) of people in general, no matter how small or rational, that you run the real risk that you're marginalized by your peers, community and often your employer from having any opinion that isn't considered kind - i.e. it's becoming increasingly more prudent to shut-up than run the social-acceptance gauntlet (or risk-losing your job!). I work for myself, so am somewhat insulated from the last point, but even still, if people catch wind that you have an opposing view, you do risk losing clients/customers by virtue of their need to toe-the-line. Scary stuff.

[peetter]

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...DFSRI7EMXJUCQ/

Essentially we'll be providing more training for workers to head to overseas markets. The lead time to reform the sector participants, train staff and for them to gain skills in the industry (if at all possible given NZ's small IT market), will take a very long time and therefore will not solve the immediate need. Long term, these same people will depart NZ to earn more money in Australia, the USA, ior Europe.

The report outlines 10 key actions. These are worth reading even if you are not involved in the sector.

Action 1: A strong strategic focus on reskilling and upskilling
Action 2: Rapidly expand pathway options to industry
Action 3: Refine the Immigration system to be more targeted
Action 4: Industry must step up and lead the transformation
Action 5: Māori to be a crucial partner in skills
Action 6: Expand the tech Story to a domestic audience
Action 7: An All-of-Government strategic approach to skills
Action 8: Increased support for digital tech learning in schools
Action 9: Radically re-defined standardised job roles
Action 10: Strengthen the tech sector through greater diversity


From this article and the others I've read this lunchtime, I get the distinct impression that the borders are likely to be closed for the long term, combined with further sectors to be reformed in a centralised manner.

Datacom can't find people, because they don't pay well. That's the only problem.

Also to do IT on a level higher than 1st level helpdesk reading of KB articles, you actually have to have analytical brain. Person that has a brain capacity like that will manage to get a great job in many different industries regardless of education, race or gender. It mostly can't be taught.

[peetter]

Exactly.

Anyone with any property sense avoids buying anywhere near social housing - more so when they are looking at large scale apartment buildings which will house the three types of housing within the one building.

Imagine buying a unit and finding yourself with state tenants on both sides as a likely case scenario!

Friends live in newly developed apartments in Northcote, accross street from social housing. Screaming all times of day and people jumping in from of moving vehicles are on daily basis. The joy...

[Balance]

Friends live in newly developed apartments in Northcote, accross street from social housing. Screaming all times of day and people jumping in from of moving vehicles are on daily basis. The joy...

Property developer contact who builds for Kainga Ora (KO) loves dealing with them - reckons he is making the easiest low risk development money ever from them.

And they cannot get enough of developments to house as many state tenants (edict from Cindy no less in his opinion).

But he steers completely clear of mixed housing development which KO encourages - as he puts it, such a development is screwed (actually he used the f word) the minute people find out that there are state tenants in the mix.

Matter of time before ghettos and slums emerge from such developments.

[fungus pudding]

Property developer contact who builds for Kainga Ora (KO) loves dealing with them - reckons he is making the easiest low risk development money ever from them.

And they cannot get enough of developments to house as many state tenants (edict from Cindy no less in his opinion).

But he steers completely clear of mixed housing development which KO encourages - as he puts it, such a development is screwed (actually he used the f word) the minute people find out that there are state tenants in the mix.

Matter of time before ghettos and slums emerge from such developments.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyJUBlDv-rM

[artemis]

Property developer contact who builds for Kainga Ora (KO) loves dealing with them - reckons he is making the easiest low risk development money ever from them.

And they cannot get enough of developments to house as many state tenants (edict from Cindy no less in his opinion).

But he steers completely clear of mixed housing development which KO encourages - as he puts it, such a development is screwed (actually he used the f word) the minute people find out that there are state tenants in the mix.

Matter of time before ghettos and slums emerge from such developments.

Back in the day, the social housing waiting list was almost all families with children and some pensioner housing. The latter mostly delivered and managed by councils back then. Now more than half of the waiting list is single people, mostly men, and couples with no children, most working age. And the waiting list is massive and growing - nearly 2,000 households added in March for example.

According to the government the reasons are 9 years of neglect, and also that they are being kind making sure that people know what help is available.

Getting on to the waiting list is based on a points system - including broadly medical issues. And it is those issues that can cause problems especially in densely populated areas. There used to be options away from the community - very few now - and boarding houses, fewer now partly due to much higher compliance and costs required. Plus families who stepped up.

No simple answers now that responsibilities have moved from individuals and families to taxpayers, but big red flag for any buyers looking at mixed developments.

[Bjauck]

NZ has changed since Former National Party PM John Key grew up in a state house (which was sold under a National Government). We are a much more divided country, with respect to both wealth and social issues.

When even "affordable" houses cost so many multiples of annual income, buyers will be so wary of potential factors that will make resale difficult or potentially dampen values relative to other houses.

[artemis]

......
When even "affordable" houses cost so many multiples of annual income, buyers will be so wary of potential factors that will make resale difficult or potentially dampen values relative to other houses.

Most reporting compares house prices or rises to the average wage or average income. For individuals. Very occasionally there is a comparison using household income. Can't find it now but not long ago there was one of the latter over on interest.co.nz - it showed them tracking similarly on a household basis. Implication being DINKs have a much better chance of buying than households with a single income. 'Twas ever thus.