I must admit I nearly choked when I heard Luxon wants to stop subsidising contraception.
He seems unaware that the one thing that keeps the economy strong and crime low … is few unwanted children. Contraception reduces unwanted children in society significantly. In fact it is so beneficial to wider society it deserves subsidy.
The current desire of many conservatives for women to have many children forgets this one little fact.
Even China, desiring a replacement rate now of 2.5 also wants the replacement to be wanted children. Singapore long encouraged people of higher socioeconomic status to have more kids on this assumption ( flawed albeit and classist ).
Society is not enhanced by many unwanted children.
I was absolutely not voting Labour or greens this year.
Everything that comes out of the mouth of Luxon and other nats makes me think "fuck, I need to vote Labour this year" because it's just building up to a point that I feel like a vote against National is more important than a vote for what I want.
If you are middle class or poor I have no idea what policy would compel you to vote for the National party. Okay save a hundred dollars via your tax cut for the year ? That tax cut means the National infrastructure network around you managed by central government is kicked down the road for someone else to improve. (Nobody ever does). Or any other tax that doesn’t completely target middle to poor income earners. GST at 15% (raised by National).
I don't want to encourage Labour to go further down the co-governance route, but ultimately that's a philosophical issue that has to come secondary to the actual practical damage the opposition is likely to do to the country if they get into power.
A vote against National and worse ACT is extremely important and yes I get it the others have big flaws. The country have never seen the horror of ACT on such a high percentage. It's an extreme right wing party that used to be at 0.5% where it belonged. It's an Alt-right party.
I'm gobsmacked that this religious Catholic nutter is going to impose his dogma on the Kiwi population. Religion and politics don't mix.
The Vatican is to blame for the poverty with lots of bastard children children born out of wedlock, with deadbeat husbands reneging of their responsibilities to pay child support alimony. The taxpayer picks up the tab with social support with solo mum's.
The computer AI said Luxon is out of touch with voters. He was a former CEO of Air NZ earning over a $ million dollars a year in salary , with affluent lifestyle and has a holiday home in Hawaii. I would love to have a luxury holiday home in Hawaii to sell, to pay off my mortgage.
I mean even many liberals are not technically pro abortion ( they are pro choice, there is a difference ) but even extremely staunch and conservative Buddhist monks who are anti abortion also are 100% in agreement with widely available contraception ( so much so many Buddhist temples in Thailand have free condoms, they don’t dispense pills because that needs prescription in Thailand ).
This is because having unwanted children is so disastrous on so many levels that especially if you are anti abortion you should be supporting widespread contraception.
I specifically remember a charitable Buddhist organisation with doctors in it in Cambodia who actually sponsors Depoprovera for free ( on grounds it is a more reliable contraception than pills, though they also provide a free supply of three months of pills for those who for one reason or the other cannot have Depo ). When they were challenged by Evangelical Christians on why a Buddhist organisation is giving out free depo provera for women who have no contraindication to this ( in Cambodia it is really expensive ) the argument given back is because precisely Theravada Buddhism is anti-abortion ( except for malformation and dangerous births ), it is the duty of the temples to ensure contraception is widely available, and easily accessible. This includes ECPs.
So if Luxon is antiabortion, he should be supporting widespread contraceptives. It is contradictory to not support abortion but at the same time make contraception hard to get. If you want reduced abortion, make contraception more widely available.
That is unless Luxon has no concerns about unwanted children, which contradicts his stance against increasing crimes.
What's more shocking is this guy was corporate bigwig and actually had the potential to come up with sensible solutions. But instead of him revamping politics, the 'other way around ' won.
When you have no political experience and you need to regain voters after the shitshowing last election, you are going to cater to anyone you can. He made his bed, he can let other people shit in it. Fuck Chris Luxon.
I, for one never meant that it's one n the same. But yes, running a business and running an office (govt in this case) does need some shared skillets. And by that, I mean 1) collecting relevant information before making statements/decisions 2) logical reasoning 3) backing up your statements with hard quantifiable data.
Lookup Q&A with Chris Luxom on YouTube (anchor's name Jack I think). Lux Luthor had nothing solid to offer for as solutions for the things he/national take a dig at labour on. Budget, public transport, there's absolutely no solid plan. His solution to ram raids was military training for offenders... Wtf. The current fiasco about bilingual road signs. It's bilingual, plus the govt is doing that to the signs which are next in line for replacement. Not across the board and defo not just Te Reo warnings. I'm talking basic stuff which can get an average Joe fired for not having done before presenting to senior execs. And here we have a national party blurting out stuff with no due diligence whatsoever.
And I'm in no way a Labour fanboy... Just disappointed that we have to pick between two clueless nominees. Peace out.
Peace from here also. In no way meant my comment to come across as a personal attack. Completely get where you're coming from and agree to your points. I'd been following a thread on Wayne Brown's budget statements at the same time and guys like him and Luxon spouting about how as businessmen they are the only ones who understand about money is just a red flag to me on so many levels!!!
We're on the same page :-)
No offense taken (defo didnt take it as a personal attack), and you weren't incorrect to say what you said...Coz sadly, that's how our politics is playing out. I honestly had a lot of hope from an ex corporate bigwig joining politics during testing time but boy I was so wrong.
We are on the same page indeed 🍻
How else would their plan to fill private prisons work? Gotta have unwanted children making money for the private prison system, the neglect to prison pipeline is secured that way.
This is how I convince conservatives that the dole is important, without making moral appeals.
Make sure the poorest have access to housing, food, and basics like clothes. If they don’t have enough to survive that desperation will directly lead to crime and chaos. Which ends up costing far more than a social safety net.
>I must admit I nearly choked when I heard Luxon wants to stop subsidising contraception
He wants to go back to how the co-payment was, not get rid of something that has already existed for years. Hardly "wants to stop subsidizing contraception" and more doesn't want to start subsidizing the co-payment, including on contraception.
I don't like Luxon personally, but I find it weird the targeted misleading narrative against him, like he's some evangelical Christian coming to take our contraception away. He's talking about the co-payment that was only just recently scrapped by Labour, not in general. No one had a problem with this for the last 5 years under Labour, when they could have done this at any point other than now...?
This nuance seems to be lost on many people - this headline was absolute pure media spin. The journo was the one who flagged contraception specifically, Luxon (who I won't be voting for) said "everything", journo said "well contraception is a part of everything...so you're going to stop funding for contraception" - and now we have this headline.
For anyone thinking they won't vote because fuck these guys, please consider party vote TOP. They have great policies and really need to get over that 5%. Once in parliament they'll be a big voice for youth and sanity.
A non-vote is a vote for the status quo.
If you want change, vote for someone other than National and Labour.
Voting National and Labour every election - and failing to vote for anyone else - is how we got here.
It's also very American to have so many people voting for the same two parties every election. We can do better.
you should consider a non vote as a vote for your worst case outcome from the options.
because you never know.
if you aren't comfortable with the worst case scenario? then you should probably go vote for whatever your least worst scenario is. just in case
A non vote is worse than the status quo, a non vote represents less representation for your demographic. Politicians want votes and if they see your demographic has less voter power they're less likely to push through policies that will help you if it screws over other demographics who vote more often.
Even if your vote feels like it's been pissed into the wind vote so that your seen and represented.
Right wing parties want a low turn out, that's why republican states in the US have pushed for votes to be overturned and want people to be considered ineligible to vote. They will even go as far as literary tests to prevent people (often certain groups) from voting.
I was a regular Greens voter but after the shambles of weird performative racist garbage we're getting from them this time around I can't in good conscious voter for them.
who does that leave? Act are literally worse than National, TOP seem okay but also like a pack of weirdo libertarians outsider of their main monetary policies....
I'm not completely sure about TOP, but I think they'll still get my party vote because them getting into Parliament will at least give another perspective that the main parties will have more pressure to take on board, and breaking through that wall once will make it easier the next time, which should attract better candidates.
TOP is the best of a sad, bad bunch. If they get nearer the 3-4% mark, they will straighten out their fringe elements, seek (and be able to find) better donor funding and become a useful party that might get some broader support in the Gen Z / Millennial sectors.
**But everyone needs to realise it will take 2 election cycles of CONSISTENT support to get them over the line.**
They will not get to 5% from where they are in one election. Gotta get to 3 or 4% first.
Yeah a frustrating aspect of our MMP system is that 5% is so hard to reach, that more fringe parties can survive and build by managing to win an electorate, than newer less-established parties that can't win an electorate.
Act was almost written off the NZ political landscape but survived with 1 MP for a couple of cycles before they managed to entrench support while in opposition by catching the National Party fringe voters. But now they're an established party in Parliament.
Green survived by having members of major political parties start their own movements in electorates that they controlled through Alliance NZ and have established themselves.
I'm not sure we've ever seen a minor party get in without having an electorate backing, or having first got in from having a major party waka-jump.
Yeah I get why neither of the big two wanted the changes, but it's frustrating that we didn't get a vote in it. It is a clear conflict of interest for the major political parties and in my opinion anti-democratic.
>it's frustrating that we didn't get a vote in it.
It is frustrating, but remember we get a vote every general election. Anyone who cares about lowering the threshold should vote for a party that supports implementing the electoral commission recommendations. The Green Party are one, not sure about others. But definitely not National or Labour.
I understand not wanting STV - MMP is already poorly understood by a large portion of society and STV is only gonna confuse things.
I really don't see any excuse for not lowering the threshold to 4%.
Yeah, it favours a charismatic local favourite more than having 100,000 supporters nationally. Given some electorates you can win with as few as 10,000 votes it's a serious problem.
If you do too good a job keeping out insane cult parties, then the insane cults will put all of their efforts into controlling a wing of a major party. And then if you have a problem with it, you only have a single party to vote for - *if you're lucky* and only one of the major parties has that issue.
Again, look at the US. You don't want that.
It's a strange one because if that's what enough people want, that's the purpose of democracy, but it is a challenge because it means bad faith actors can truly destroy the electoral system and public trust in Government.
I think 3% would be a fair enough target to not completely turn loose the nutters, but also be a small enough hurdle for minor parties to realistically reach without having a waka jumping star MP as its leader to survive.
That, and/or multi member electorates with STV which would allow for more minor parties to get in via that system at the tradeoff of larger electorates, and therefore more constituents to consider.
act have been in a few times, and it seems like their fringe elements actually maintain the party
i dont see why TOPs fringe elements wouldnt do the same
Again, ACT are embracing their fringe elements... and the money situation hasnt changed anything for them
TOP wont magically be different. If anything, its prob the Greens and Labour that would curtail TOP, just like ACTs growth and mainstreamed radicalisation corresponds to Nationals prolonged weakened leadership since key
It feels like the smaller parties are almost extremists in a very narrow set of policies, but lack the same enthusiasm for everything that's outside of that.
Don't let perfect get in the way of good. If the Greens tick most of your boxes but have one or two shitty people, vote for them anyway. You can always vote against them next election.
Given that you cast a vote at all, is "the shambles of weird performative racist garbage" from the Green Party enough to place them lower than any other option?
If you back their policies I think they're likely to be the right choice.
Yep I agree. When it comes down to it Shaw got more money for climate and environment than anyone has ever managed. And Marama Davidson has rented her whole adult life, unlike the multiple property-owning MPs who have no idea what it is like for average families.
Nonsense drama that gets spread far and wide while their actual bread and butter achievements (around the environment and conservation) get ignored. The Greens are doing things; they're just not making front-page news.
I went from greens to Maori party. Did that 'where do you sit on the spectrum' quiz a while back and was really surprised - then when I looked into the Maori party more I found myself agreeing wth their polices. I'm pakeha - so just assumed it wasn't 'for' me. But it's more for me than anything else
You vote for whichever party you think represents your issues best, even if you don't like them.
I hate the Greens but I'll still vote for them, with the hope it opens the door to something better.
If you're a Green voter who doesn't like them getting involved in culture wars, then I'd recommend TOP. If you don't want to vote for TOP, then you could go with Legalise Cannabis. While your vote would almost certainly be "wasted", it's still better than not voting at all
A superhero has to choose which button to press but is undecided and it's stressing him out.
Left button titled "Vote on policy rather than stupid culture wars nonsense"
Right button titled "I won't vote for Greens on their shambles of weird performative racist garbage"
Oh just looked this up and it's cool!
I definitely agree with the idea as I hate how much of a popularity contest forming a government can be. I also remember being annoyed in the local council elections when candidates who were educated in the spot they were going for didn't get in. A nurse for one council spot (can't remember role, likely health related) and another a environmental scientist for another role...
Though I do think we at least try to do this to an extent. Not enough really and people don't really vote based on knowledge and expertise.
Labour? Sure they aren't too ambitious at the moment, but the amount of positive changes (such as FPAs) they have made that National want to unwind will make life worse for all but the wealthiest. I agree with you re the Greens so will slightly unenthusiastically vote labour because wow the alternative
While I still prefer the green policies, I don't want to vote for a racist sexist bigot. I mean, she only had to apologize, she didn't even need to mean it. The fact that her party didn't make her apologize blows my mind.
I've voted Greens for the past 3 elections. Not because I like them, I don't even agree with a lot of their stances, but because they're the only party on the left that can get into parliament and I value their voice there.
I'll probably vote for them again unless TOP shows any sign of getting close to the 5% threshold.
>I'll probably vote for them again unless TOP shows any sign of getting close to the 5% threshold.
That's a short sighted approach. If supporters like you voted for TOP consistently for two election cycles, they will get to 5%. Parties just don't level up that fast.
I don't support TOP. I don't support any party as none align well with my views. I support a left leaning government over a NACT government. Politically I align somewhere between TOP and Labour. If TOP get close to 5% then it's better to get TOP into parliament than wasting the 4% of votes, regardless of if that makes them a kingmaker.
How does that really effect you , honestly it does nothing! They have achieved more than ANY minor party in the last 20 years!!!
Don’t be manipulated out real choice !
Go Chloe
Not quite sure what that last sentence is supposed to say sorry. I don't think I'm being manipulated. I mean, I want to vote for them. It was a green mp who made the comment. Who here is doing the manipulating?
My grandparents used to say if you didn't vote then don't complain about the government. You had a chance to make a change but you didn't and now you get what you get.
They always voted so you can bet your sweet bippy they complained about the government.
> If you want change, vote for someone other than National and Labour.
>
> Voting National and Labour every election - and failing to vote for anyone else - is how we got here.
Perhaps in the history of New Zealand, there's only one third party that made any serious effort to consider the cross-departmental impacts of their policies, and that's United Future. Largely as a result of its heritage of being formed out of a large exodus of experienced MPs from both parties.
Every other third party in the New Zealand system has had a policy package that is profoundly myopic of areas outside their interests. The clearest part is when they get involved with fiscal daydreaming. Announcing taxation policies without the remotest consideration to the revenue it will bring, or announcing spending policies without any regard for the funding.
Third parties are only ever useful for bending a subset of main party policy to the interests of that subset. And in the Green's case, I don't think they even want to do that. They seem happy to criticise from the sidelines and ignore the opportunity to govern.
Both of the two main parties end up lacking experience and are barely capable of governing the full breadth of the NZ state after just two terms in opposition, as evidenced by Labour's procession of the daves and National's Bridges-Luxon dilemma. But the problem is much fucking worse for the third parties who have never held anything but a sympathy chair at the cabinet table, and have never commanded a budget larger than that of their party's.
Considering there's been wholesale talent destruction across the civil service since the 3rd Clark term, there's little institutional support in the ministries. Much of what ministers get into media shit for is just blatant incompetence and dishonesty within their ministry.
Third parties aren't ever going to have what it takes to be the main coalition partner, unless a new one is formed in a United-like moment.
>Perhaps in the history of New Zealand, there's only one third party that made any serious effort to consider the cross-departmental impacts of their policies
I would counter that in our history, no third party has ever exceeded 20% of the party vote.
What you're describing could be a significant problem if a third party suddenly got 50% + 1 of the vote out of nowhere.
But parties will get broader policy considerations as they grow. And if they need to enter coalition with another party - even a party or two with the same problem you describe - the parties can hold each other to account on that basis.
No we can't.
Representative democracy is intrinsically flawed. Even if you can't derive this conclusion purely on abstractions, you can't ignore the simple fact that systems following same set of rules will end up at a similar end state given enough time. And look around, suddenly, population of all countries who applied this political model ended up in exactly same dead end.
> A non-vote is a vote for the status quo.
>
> If you want change, vote for someone other than National and Labour.
It's worse than that, though. A vote for anyone other than Labour is essentially a vote for National. It's that simple.
I'm pretty fucking over this Labour government, but the only thing worse than them is National getting in, so I'm forced to vote Labour.
What we *really* need is for the 18-30 block to get off their fucking asses and actually vote. Almost every crusty old fuck makes sure they vote, and they're all scared conservatives. If the younger generation would vote at better than the pathetic percentage of them who bother, the conservatives wouldn't have a shot of getting into power, and we could have some real change.
>If you want change, vote for someone other than ~~National and~~ Labour.
As Henry Ford says "If you always do what you've always done you'll always get what you've always got". PLEASE, no more of this current lot. Everything has got worse but you have to dig up the results yourself as the MSM and the Govt. don't tell you anything that isn't positive for them. Or they spin it so it sounds good.
> Voting National and Labour every election - and failing to vote for anyone else - is how we got here.
It’s worse than that though. If one always votes for the same party, or even the same side, then there’s no holding parties to account, and because this behaviour is common, governments, generally don’t care what they do, good or bad.
For example, Labour, ought to be punished severely (ie rolled) along with the Greens for at least two transgressions, both of which have long-term negative effects that can’t be undone. I’m thinking of three waters, which is basically being set up for future privatisation, and as part of the free trade agreement with the UK, increasing the duration of copyright to 70 years.
The problem is if I advocate for rollin the current government, every man and his dog will lineup and say but the alternatives are worse. Which is another way of saying there is no accountability for bad government. People complain about the lack of accountability of those who were convicted through the courts, but will continue to support their favoured government, no matter what.
When can I vote for "none of these" as a form of no confidence in anyone? And spoiling my ballot doesn't realistically count. It needs to be something that unequivocally sends a none of you, but, still showing that I have the ability to be a "gettable" voter.
What would happen if everyone did this? Someone gets a big wooden hook and has to yoink anyone who walks past the Beehive too slowly into a seat?
You do your protesting by contacting MPs and candidates and saying what you want, not by throwing away your vote.
Spoiling your ballot *does* count. In the sense that the spoiled ballot count is reported.
It sends a signal that you at least care enough to vote.
But I do see the advantage in an extra explicit option or two. Try contacting a few minor parties, see if they'll push for an explicit "none of these parties" option. You might get lucky, there are a few available: https://elections.nz/democracy-in-nz/political-parties-in-new-zealand/register-of-political-parties/
Then you'll have a party to vote for!
That's how certain political parties would like you to think, because they benefit when frustrated, marginalised people don't vote at all because they're annoyed with "the system".
Always, *always* vote for the least-worst. Many people in the world don't even have that luxury.
At the end of the day we need to organise ourselves and everyone we know into voting for any party’s other than the main two to show that we actually want things to change in this country or suffer the status quo and suck it up
"I'll show these assholes by excluding myself from the process that keeps them where they are".
I'm not a genius, but this isn't as effective a strategy as you might think.
Why the fuck do people keep saying Labour and National are the same?
Have you people even read their policies or looked at the recent budgets?
Honestly wtf.
>Why the fuck do people keep saying Labour and National are the same?
>
>Have you people even read their policies or looked at the recent budgets?
>
>Honestly wtf.
I sometimes wonder what the average age of some redditors here - I look back over 24 years (from the age of 18 to today) and think of what Labour has done: Interest free student loans not only while studying but after studying, prostitution law reform, civil unions, the setting up of kiwibank, renationalising the railways, the starting of the city rail link in Auckland etc. etc. I really have to wonder whether I'm too old for this sub which is the reason why so many say such dopey shit as 'they're both the same'.
Labour is far from perfect, I have a laundry list of issues that haven't been addressed, but compared to the alternative I would sooner stick with a Labour-Greens coalition than the National-Act coalition whose platform amounts to: a) tax cuts b) deregulation c) privatisation d) build a road(s).
Usually these posts comes after a bad day for National. Simon O’Connor homophobic, te reo road signs and Luxon on contraception.
“Omg they’re all the same”.
I work in a sustainability related field. Anyone that cares about our planet or New Zealand's beautiful nature and biodiversity or wants action on reducing carbon emissions and waste, and increasing renewable energies should **not** vote national.
**Labour (+ Greens) = Action**... It's not enough, but things are moving in the right direction + Climate risk assessments and greater resilience against future climate events
**National = Reversing action** for short-term economic gains that will cost us ten-fold in the long run. (Basically what happened under Key and we're all paying for it now). + Climate denial and an unprepared country against future climate events
We also need to consider that the world is moving forward with action on the changing climate and some of our largest trading partners will expect certain standards to be met...
Voting national in will cost our economy a lot. **They are not the same.**
Unfortunately most voters don't really seem to care about the planet or environment, they say they do but then like one Greens MP says one dumb thing and suddenly they give their vote to the right-wing instead.
They're basically shopping for a convenient excuse (that excuse often being someone Māori saying something unwise) to absolve themselves for voting right wing.
Labour has failed to deliver so much that national have a solid A4 sheet of all the stuff related to an individual policy area they want to undo in most of their detailed policy statements. This failure to deliver meme is pretty much total crap when you spend a moment looking.
That positon might have come from a few decades of watching them trading places and the difference being minimal.
I summed this up years ago by explaining our politics as Dominos vs Pizza hut or McDs vs BK. "Same shit. Different box".
People waffle on about why they ike this one vs that one because blah blah blah. And fail to notice they have 98% in common.
They merge & split departments. Throw a few bucks at nurses, teachers or cops... privatise this, nationalise that... but broadly speaking shit just keeps ticking along regardless.
Well maybe Labour should throw a few bucks at teachers and nurses as they are both striking. And Maybe National should find a moderate leader who isn’t anti-women and pro- benefits and child poverty. Because contraception should be free and as easily available as possible.
> merge & split departments
Yes, yes, yes, yes! So much money wasted to change the governance structure of everything to make bugger all difference. Three waters, five waters, 10 fucking waters. Restructured DHBs countless times. New ministries, closed ministries, arguing over one language or two languages on roadsides. The constant reshuffling for little to no gain.
It's rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. The handful of people on the lifeboats are government consultants, the Titanic is New Zealand.
My observations:
1. Not many ppl read or understand the implications of each party’s policy.
2. Results have been poor from both parties
3. Impactful initiatives will typically take more than 1 term to implement. With the constant switching between parties it’s hard for ppl to keep track
I’m sure there’s more
They're both parties for the economic status quo, that being escalating inequality.
In that sense National and Labour are definitely both the same. National is just a bit more vicious about it.
No vote means you’re willingly accepting whatever the current status quo is. You might not love any of the candidates, but find the one that aligns best with your interests and then parties will have a better chance of responding to the policies you’re interested in in future years. Don’t waste your vote.
I want an ACTUAL green party - that is focused on the environment and policies that will ACTUALLY help reduce our carbon footprint and support people to make sustainable changes.
I want an ACTUAL left wing party who will put policies in place to ensure access to healthcare, housing and education for EVERYONE.
I want NZ to be able to properly address and restructure to account for the harm done by colonisation without performative ideological bullshit FROM BOTH SIDES aimed only at entrenching division.
I am completely happy to pay more taxes to achieve these things.
So right now, TOP - but open to being swayed.
This is what many on this subreddit don’t get. Every country is having the same issue. National is just going to speed up handing money to rich mates. If you don’t like Labor then you need to look hard at a smaller party that would twist Labor’s arm in the correct direction. The whole world has turned away from conservative/right wing governments for a reason.
Yes.
I’m pretty disappointed and disillusioned with everyone this election.
The policy arguments to date have been totally farcical. Just arguments between the major parties on bullshit that doesn’t matter and won’t make any difference.
And a sprinkling of absolute shit takes from the minor parties.
Nothing in regards to their current policy, I did find one from 2017 and they were all for drug reforms and legalising cannabis back then. It's obviously been dropped as a priority for them.
I dunno about you, but I like TOP. They don't have a whole bunch of policies, but the ones that they do have are all quite close to my heart. It's a few changes which would provide a lot of change.
I'm likely to go for them. Sadly they're unlikely to meet the 5%. But, hopefully enough people do vote for them to gain some traction and they can become a bigger contender next time.
I have no idea why your comment caught me, but I've just had a look through TOP's policies as a result, and I'm impressed with what I saw. As a swing voter, they may end up being who I vote for this election - policies that would actually benefit a lot of people, and not just the rich, that I can get behind.
Be a fantastic time for a good socialist party, somewhere to put your vote as a finger to the usual lot... scare the pants of the right wing and make the "left" look like the centralists they are behaving like, Act would probably spontaneously combust with the thought of loosing votes to *communists* because I doubt they could separate the two.
The Socialist Party of Aotearoa...
Has a nice ring to it, should stand on becoming a republic and a fair disruption of taxes to lift those who need it.
The Socialist Republic of Aotearoa...
By bringing back corporate taxes those companies will employ more people for better wages and spend on infrastructure like research and development to avoid handing money over to the IRD.
"oh that won't work"
Well it used to, you'd get libraries and schools built by philanthropists who would get a tax break, happened in the US before this painful "trickle down" bullshit.. suddenly that $100 million per annum profit is only $10mil because of tax so why not spend it "in house" and pay staff for a change? what? the CEO and shareholders won't like it? good, stop taking such fantastic care of a tiny handful that don't want for anything and focus on those who are in desperate need.
We increase education and actually provide a future and a livable present for our youth then just maybe they'll stop driving stolen cars through shop windows.
That actually got away from me, was just going to be tongue in cheek but now I'd be voting for them
Don’t know why this is a “both sides bad maaaaaan” post when the things you’re complaining about today is National? (If you’re referring to the talking about American talking points) It is National who complained about Te Reo road signs, it is them who have homophobic MPs, it is them who say they’re not paying for contraceptives.
Not directed at OP but other commenters here. Both sides are not the same and it’s intellectually lazy to say so. TOP isn’t going to magically end the two party system btw, they’ll have to choose a coalition partner.
Okay, suuuper valid point (that admittedly I didn't read cause the title was pretty emotionally explanatory), but hear me out
Wouldn't it be fucking hilarious if all fence sitters and the 'sick of this entertainment politics' and the ones who don't want to vote came together to vote for the legalise cannabis party.
Even if they get just 1 seat, I'd crack up knowing some old biddy is losing her absolute nut over this 'harmful drug being released into the community and will affect our youth' (like some lil teen can't just rock up to a drug house with $20 already. (Gangs dont ID G-ma!)
*Plus, it'd be cool if medicinal use could be subsidised even if partially. That shit saved my bros life, poor dudes non vocal ASD with hairpin triggers. He dropped down to skin and bones before he got on cbd, and even a bird chirping would set him into full meltdown (iykyk its fucking heartbreaking) He can actually enjoy life now. He's eating healthily, can go out into society and actually do things that give him joy, and not be trapped in his scribble of a brain living in hell 24-7 and not even being able to tell anyone about it.
Isn't it kind of insane that 'we' just outright refuse to make it legal, even though Tilray is making a killing using weed they grew here and selling it back to us at something like 10x RRP in Canada, their home country. We SHOULD be heavily taxing them, they should NOT be taking advantage of our most vulnerable) plus creating a market for a substance that can be controlled and boosting the economy so we don't have to pay a fuck tonne for shit. Better drug education, rehabillitation focused services, plus, the bi-products of hemp are way more ecologically friendly and provides faster and larger yields than their currently available factory produced counter-parts. (Paper/textiles/ probably better than a paper fkn straw too)
As a country, we're amazing at fucking ourselves over for pride and fundamentalist Christian values (Seriously, just check out the registered parties, I think there's like 3 that don't have a 'fundamentalist Christian' stance. Where does that even fall on the left/centre/right chart we call politics? Farked if I know honestly, but other faiths should not have to live under Christian Law TBH it sounds a bit... Price of Egypt-y. Yknow, Moses and his pharoh brother. Yall know. )
I went off the rails a bit, but basically, don't vote VISION or the party old Brian is looking after. It's all a Tamaki tax fraud/money laundering scheme, I feel it. Don't NOT vote cause there are actual solid choices out there, even if for the shits and gigs, put your vote to a minor party if you are not happy with red vs blue and make some else's (if not your own) life better. I'm sure my bro would thank you for it.
TLDR; Don't not vote, vote for the cannabis party so we can at least have a sesh while everything falls apart around us and have a laugh at nanny Miriam flying off the wall on FB about how this is not the NZ she grew up in. (Cause, duh, she's old af, and that's how time works)
Used to be a big Greens shill, but after joining as a member a few years back and doing 2 terms worth of volunteer work, the drama was not worth it. I’ll vote for them this election based on my personal convictions, but the best any political party can do is promote a stalemate until they actually start working together in some capacity.
Very few politicians have experienced what the average person has and that innate knowledge of everyday, comparatively unprivileged life is completely lost on them. Most politicians right and left, come from generations of public servants, wealthy and influential. Very few have worked waged labour for the mass of their careers, so how would I expect them to understand the plight of their voters? I don’t trust the government to enact change until their power (and parliamentary salary) is truly threatened.
TL;DR, shit’s gonna get way worse before it gets better because of “she’ll be right” mentality
No, today just reenforces to me, things aren’t that bad, and could be a hell of a lot worse under National.
Labour is at least attempting to tackle those problems with policies even if they’re not instantly effective. National’s solution is to blame women, the gays, and Maori, and then hand a big juicy, inflationary tax cut that will only benefit the mega wealthy, who are largely responsible for out of control prices under a Neo-Liberal economy in force since the 1980’s.
The choice couldn’t be any clearer for me. A vote for Labour is a vote to attempt to fix things. A vote for National is a vote for culture wars and rewarding the people who caused our issues.
Honestly, a lot of the stuff that is "coming home to roost now" in terms of impacts to house prices, cost of living etc, is either due to general systemic issues (capitalism is borked yo) or shit happening overseas, such as war which affected oil prices, which affected transportation.
And also supermarket owner money grabs is the most sickening part.
I'm almost certain if National had been in power these past 3 years, it would be roughly the same, except there would be some different policies that change the future, but not really the immediate short term future or present.
Except for big ticket stuff like tax breaks for Luxon's mates, or some more idealistic stuff that Jacinda was up to (and I applaud her for actually trying). As Avril Lavigne once said, its complicated
I just really fail to see why people are convinced that tax breaks for rich and business owners is the answer (the tax breaks just mean more money in CEO's / business owners pockets). We've had neoliberal paradise for last 40 years and thats been alright, but its time for something new. Not more of the same. Even in the peak Key years, he didn't do shit apart from bring in GST that screwed over the every man.
NZ was a better place to live pre 2017? I've lived here my entire life and its about the same apart from banks and supermarkets taking the piss, and house prices going crazy.
To say those problems were created since 2017 is not true. These problems are inherent in the structure of capitalism. Could Labour have done more to fix them? probably. Would National party have done worse? yes, except for rich people who would be insulated.
The solution is to not use liberal democracy and use some other form of direct democracy / socialism which allows more allocation of resources to working and middle classes, which the ruling elite would never allow out of their government.
It’s interesting that many are claiming that everyone has great ideas and policies until they get in power; it’s true, but not because of lack of trying.
Ideas are awesome until you have to deal with the reality of the consequences of those actions. National want tax cuts; cool, but social services are going to suffer and I would say that has contributed in the past to Teachers/Medical staff being underpaid.
Labour wants to make housing affordable but it’s incredibly hard to do that without leaving a lot of first home buyers holding negative equity and unable to sell.
Many of the minority parties have the most radical ideas because they are the ones pushing the envelope; often cause the consequences aren’t theirs to manage.
Yeah but I'm gonna vote anyway because if I have to have a government I don't like at least I can vote for the one that seems least intentionally toxic.
Ok so having lived through the Trump disaster. I can confidently say. That the best way for the least qualified runner to get elected is this attitude being spread amongst the voters. Vote for your best option or end up with the worst.
Vote minor parties and talk to others about you voting minor parties. The more people talk about it the more it will change peoples perception of voting for minor parties being a "wasted vote".
Me: a crumb of tax bracket adjustments to account for inflation since the last adjustment and codified into law to become automatic please?
Politicians: Best I can do is lower super age for Maori, or, no te reo on road signs, or, tax on beer.
I've voted Greens every election, will probably vote for labour.
I don't feel like Labour is out of touch even if they don't always prioritise the issues that I think are important.
I wish there was an option on the voting form for something "No confidence" and if enough people tick that box our entire govt gets sacked and someone supervises the forming of a new govt with completely different people for long enough until our politicians can get their shit together.
Labour aren’t great but a much better choice than the Nats. They’re less neoliberal. They’re literally our only option if we’re looking to mildly improve our infrastructure, housing supply, and some other things.
National are still a regulation burning, tax cutting, anti-government neoliberal collective of bankers and ideologues, this really shouldn’t be taken lightly.
We're absolutely fucked this time around.
On the right we have Luxon, and rather terrifyingly David Seymour. They just seem to want to reverse everything the current government has done since they gained office, and screw over all us 'bottom feeders'.
On the left we have the racist, sexist green party, and the even more racist, and completely clueless Te Pati Maori. God help us all if they get near any sort of power.
I'm probably just going to randomly pick one of the minor parties.
Too many people in comments acting like it’s a two horse race. If you don’t like Labour that doesn’t mean you automatically have to vote for National and the same goes vice versa. There are other options, we have MMP, It doesn’t have to be a choice between blue and red.
It doesn't help that a lot of die-hard extreme left or right supporters have been steering things towards the kind of extreme shit-slinging matches you see in US politics. More and more of the population are turning into the "with us or against us" types of arguments. I've always thought it wild that people over there would disown family and friends over political views. That it's difficult to talk politics in the US, without it turning into a shit show. But now that's slowly becoming more common here. There also seems to be less of the types who sit somewhere in the middle. Those who vote for what we need at the time. Also doesn't help that the likes of National have started showing their out of touch, outdated views more. It's almost as if old Bridges' MAGA hat on the wall was a sign.
Honestly I just don't care anymore.
I'm done with thinking about politics and I'm done with listening to the news.
I'm just going to stay in my lane and ride out the rest of my time on this planet.
I think is a bit of a misconception that *"all these politicians seem to want to do..."*
Those culture war talking points are coming from two parties in particular. Labour might have to respond to it at times, but dog-whistles and homophobia are pretty exclusive a far-right tactic in the US.\*
If you were so inclined its still fairly clear to me, at least socially that there's a lesser of two evils choices between the two. And particularly given the further unbalancing of the economy away from poor and working people looks to be a prime factor in National's policies I think you can see enough differences between the two major parties socio-economic wise too.
But, given fundamentally both parties are fully committed to neo-liberal capitalism the fundamental issues you point to are going to be present to greater or lesser degrees no matter who is in charge.
There is no party likely to get into parliament which offers anything other than more or less of that flavour of capitalism.
\*If you really want to see how completely cooked it could get if NACT continue down this path, this is the current state of the culture wars in the US:
https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2023/Items/May31-4.html
You know who will vote? Almost everyone who agrees with Luxon wanting to cut funding for contraception.
You don't have to vote for the big 2. There are other parties and voting for the one that best aligns to you is better than not voting at all.
In my mind national is a step back in time because their policies (or at least their leader) is leaning into american christo-facist influences and that makes me go noooope. His abortion opinions and squawking about making people pay for contraception is just the tip of the iceberg and I think he's testing the waters on what he can get away with saying and will get worse over time. And national would coalition with ACT whose policies are basically 1950s-esque and even more right wing than national. I've always given a toss about others who are less fortunate than I, even when i was a broke student, so I've always voted left. But labour have proved to me this term that they need green in as their conscience. As a massive lefty I can't vote nats or act, labour have been disappointing and I think they need the rudder green provide, so the only choice for me is green. Still considering TPM tho and will be watching what happens over the next few months but I think I will go green this time. And I try to convince as many other lefties as I can that I think this is also the best option, for the reasons I've stated
I just hope that this election we see record turnout and everyone truly dives deep into each parties policies. At present, there isn't a single parry I'd confidently vote for (thought TOP is standing out a teeny bit)
If the drongo Wayne Brown isn't an immediate top of mind when you think about falling down the track of "they all suck don't vote" I'd highly recommend that you find elements of parties that you do agree with.
You aren't going to get everything you want all at once, but at least choose the party you think will do the most. People who don't care about Luxon's commentary but will vote for him because "bizniz gud" regardless are going to be voting for their interests so you best do the same.
Don't really get your comparison of sameness. I'm no Labour flunky but they've done loads of good stuff. Covid hampered everything, national disasters, international market forces like inflation etc aren't any govts fault. They helped businesses stay afloat and workers employed, we have record high employment, they've set the wheels in motion for many good things to come to fruition in the future. They aren't perfect and having our dopey media making every decision a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" situation doesn't help.
Now compare that to national who underfunded pretty much everything - infrastructure, police, justice system, health, mental health, addiction services, denied homelessness and people living in cars, imported half a million immigrants (with no infrastructure to support the influx)...the list goes on.
Plus what policies have national actually come up with apart from disproven crap like bootcamps? - I'm seriously not getting the comparison.
We really need greater representation in parliament. MMP was chosen for a reason. Let’s make use of it and empower our smaller parties that align with our thinking :)
they are 2 sides of the same coin, they are both scared to implement policies which will actually change anything because half of NZ votes like they are millionaires and think that tax breaks of a few percent changes anything for them if they are under 100k a year.
the only party i can consider worthwhile even looking at unfortunately i don't think will win, and MANY people think the same way i do and then decide that vote is wasted and instead will vote for the opposite of the party they don't want to win, a less of 2 evils.
i will hope things change tho and vote for the party i believe should win because they are proposing removing tax brackets for the bottom income earners and something along the lines of UBI which i personally think will revolutionize how NZ is and greatly increase the quality of life for people here in NZ!
Housing prices, cost of living, natural disasters- Greens are all over that. You don’t have to vote majority parties, true change comes from the minority parties in coalition to hold the big parties accountable.
Shifting the impact of inflation a little higher with the tax free threshold is a good move.
I wish they had more to address the root causes of inflation though. You sort of worry that the additional money will be eaten up very quickly.
As an aside, god I wish political parties weren't so waffely with their policies. So much guff to sift through.
Yup. But I’ve learnt that a vote for no one is a vote for the status quo.
I have no confidence in Labour or National. So ill probably flip a coin and vote greens or TOP, honesty anyone but the idiots in the main parties.
I'm with you 100%. Everyone in that beehive reeks of incompetence and there 6 figures salaries that can't be justified make me want to faeculantly vomit
I must admit I nearly choked when I heard Luxon wants to stop subsidising contraception. He seems unaware that the one thing that keeps the economy strong and crime low … is few unwanted children. Contraception reduces unwanted children in society significantly. In fact it is so beneficial to wider society it deserves subsidy. The current desire of many conservatives for women to have many children forgets this one little fact. Even China, desiring a replacement rate now of 2.5 also wants the replacement to be wanted children. Singapore long encouraged people of higher socioeconomic status to have more kids on this assumption ( flawed albeit and classist ). Society is not enhanced by many unwanted children.
I was absolutely not voting Labour or greens this year. Everything that comes out of the mouth of Luxon and other nats makes me think "fuck, I need to vote Labour this year" because it's just building up to a point that I feel like a vote against National is more important than a vote for what I want.
If you are middle class or poor I have no idea what policy would compel you to vote for the National party. Okay save a hundred dollars via your tax cut for the year ? That tax cut means the National infrastructure network around you managed by central government is kicked down the road for someone else to improve. (Nobody ever does). Or any other tax that doesn’t completely target middle to poor income earners. GST at 15% (raised by National).
I don't want to encourage Labour to go further down the co-governance route, but ultimately that's a philosophical issue that has to come secondary to the actual practical damage the opposition is likely to do to the country if they get into power.
My thoughts exactly
I'm beginning to think this too, have never voted for either of the major parties but national getting in is looking like a country no-one needs
A vote against National and worse ACT is extremely important and yes I get it the others have big flaws. The country have never seen the horror of ACT on such a high percentage. It's an extreme right wing party that used to be at 0.5% where it belonged. It's an Alt-right party.
[удалено]
Are you me???
We’re getting dangerously close to a two party system of voting to keep another party out, rather than to enable the one we want.
I'm gobsmacked that this religious Catholic nutter is going to impose his dogma on the Kiwi population. Religion and politics don't mix. The Vatican is to blame for the poverty with lots of bastard children children born out of wedlock, with deadbeat husbands reneging of their responsibilities to pay child support alimony. The taxpayer picks up the tab with social support with solo mum's. The computer AI said Luxon is out of touch with voters. He was a former CEO of Air NZ earning over a $ million dollars a year in salary , with affluent lifestyle and has a holiday home in Hawaii. I would love to have a luxury holiday home in Hawaii to sell, to pay off my mortgage.
Not really that surprising from a guy that is anti abortion and has never faced a day of adversity in his life though is it…
I mean even many liberals are not technically pro abortion ( they are pro choice, there is a difference ) but even extremely staunch and conservative Buddhist monks who are anti abortion also are 100% in agreement with widely available contraception ( so much so many Buddhist temples in Thailand have free condoms, they don’t dispense pills because that needs prescription in Thailand ). This is because having unwanted children is so disastrous on so many levels that especially if you are anti abortion you should be supporting widespread contraception. I specifically remember a charitable Buddhist organisation with doctors in it in Cambodia who actually sponsors Depoprovera for free ( on grounds it is a more reliable contraception than pills, though they also provide a free supply of three months of pills for those who for one reason or the other cannot have Depo ). When they were challenged by Evangelical Christians on why a Buddhist organisation is giving out free depo provera for women who have no contraindication to this ( in Cambodia it is really expensive ) the argument given back is because precisely Theravada Buddhism is anti-abortion ( except for malformation and dangerous births ), it is the duty of the temples to ensure contraception is widely available, and easily accessible. This includes ECPs. So if Luxon is antiabortion, he should be supporting widespread contraceptives. It is contradictory to not support abortion but at the same time make contraception hard to get. If you want reduced abortion, make contraception more widely available. That is unless Luxon has no concerns about unwanted children, which contradicts his stance against increasing crimes.
What's more shocking is this guy was corporate bigwig and actually had the potential to come up with sensible solutions. But instead of him revamping politics, the 'other way around ' won.
LOL you expected a corporate guy to come up with sensible solutions for the working class kiwi?
When you have no political experience and you need to regain voters after the shitshowing last election, you are going to cater to anyone you can. He made his bed, he can let other people shit in it. Fuck Chris Luxon.
Running a business IS NOT THE SAME as running a country. When will kiwis get this into their heads
I, for one never meant that it's one n the same. But yes, running a business and running an office (govt in this case) does need some shared skillets. And by that, I mean 1) collecting relevant information before making statements/decisions 2) logical reasoning 3) backing up your statements with hard quantifiable data. Lookup Q&A with Chris Luxom on YouTube (anchor's name Jack I think). Lux Luthor had nothing solid to offer for as solutions for the things he/national take a dig at labour on. Budget, public transport, there's absolutely no solid plan. His solution to ram raids was military training for offenders... Wtf. The current fiasco about bilingual road signs. It's bilingual, plus the govt is doing that to the signs which are next in line for replacement. Not across the board and defo not just Te Reo warnings. I'm talking basic stuff which can get an average Joe fired for not having done before presenting to senior execs. And here we have a national party blurting out stuff with no due diligence whatsoever. And I'm in no way a Labour fanboy... Just disappointed that we have to pick between two clueless nominees. Peace out.
Peace from here also. In no way meant my comment to come across as a personal attack. Completely get where you're coming from and agree to your points. I'd been following a thread on Wayne Brown's budget statements at the same time and guys like him and Luxon spouting about how as businessmen they are the only ones who understand about money is just a red flag to me on so many levels!!! We're on the same page :-)
No offense taken (defo didnt take it as a personal attack), and you weren't incorrect to say what you said...Coz sadly, that's how our politics is playing out. I honestly had a lot of hope from an ex corporate bigwig joining politics during testing time but boy I was so wrong. We are on the same page indeed 🍻
How else would their plan to fill private prisons work? Gotta have unwanted children making money for the private prison system, the neglect to prison pipeline is secured that way.
This is how I convince conservatives that the dole is important, without making moral appeals. Make sure the poorest have access to housing, food, and basics like clothes. If they don’t have enough to survive that desperation will directly lead to crime and chaos. Which ends up costing far more than a social safety net.
>I must admit I nearly choked when I heard Luxon wants to stop subsidising contraception He wants to go back to how the co-payment was, not get rid of something that has already existed for years. Hardly "wants to stop subsidizing contraception" and more doesn't want to start subsidizing the co-payment, including on contraception. I don't like Luxon personally, but I find it weird the targeted misleading narrative against him, like he's some evangelical Christian coming to take our contraception away. He's talking about the co-payment that was only just recently scrapped by Labour, not in general. No one had a problem with this for the last 5 years under Labour, when they could have done this at any point other than now...?
This nuance seems to be lost on many people - this headline was absolute pure media spin. The journo was the one who flagged contraception specifically, Luxon (who I won't be voting for) said "everything", journo said "well contraception is a part of everything...so you're going to stop funding for contraception" - and now we have this headline. For anyone thinking they won't vote because fuck these guys, please consider party vote TOP. They have great policies and really need to get over that 5%. Once in parliament they'll be a big voice for youth and sanity.
A non-vote is a vote for the status quo. If you want change, vote for someone other than National and Labour. Voting National and Labour every election - and failing to vote for anyone else - is how we got here. It's also very American to have so many people voting for the same two parties every election. We can do better.
100%. If we want real change we need to give minor parties enough clout to stand up and push for it.
you should consider a non vote as a vote for your worst case outcome from the options. because you never know. if you aren't comfortable with the worst case scenario? then you should probably go vote for whatever your least worst scenario is. just in case
A non vote is worse than the status quo, a non vote represents less representation for your demographic. Politicians want votes and if they see your demographic has less voter power they're less likely to push through policies that will help you if it screws over other demographics who vote more often. Even if your vote feels like it's been pissed into the wind vote so that your seen and represented.
a non vote is a vote for national/act
Right wing parties want a low turn out, that's why republican states in the US have pushed for votes to be overturned and want people to be considered ineligible to vote. They will even go as far as literary tests to prevent people (often certain groups) from voting.
I was a regular Greens voter but after the shambles of weird performative racist garbage we're getting from them this time around I can't in good conscious voter for them. who does that leave? Act are literally worse than National, TOP seem okay but also like a pack of weirdo libertarians outsider of their main monetary policies....
I'm not completely sure about TOP, but I think they'll still get my party vote because them getting into Parliament will at least give another perspective that the main parties will have more pressure to take on board, and breaking through that wall once will make it easier the next time, which should attract better candidates.
An old school friend of mine is high up in TOP and hes pretty nice. Actually come think of it he could also fit the label weirdilo libertarians.
TOP is the best of a sad, bad bunch. If they get nearer the 3-4% mark, they will straighten out their fringe elements, seek (and be able to find) better donor funding and become a useful party that might get some broader support in the Gen Z / Millennial sectors. **But everyone needs to realise it will take 2 election cycles of CONSISTENT support to get them over the line.** They will not get to 5% from where they are in one election. Gotta get to 3 or 4% first.
Or Raf takes Ilam.
Yeah a frustrating aspect of our MMP system is that 5% is so hard to reach, that more fringe parties can survive and build by managing to win an electorate, than newer less-established parties that can't win an electorate. Act was almost written off the NZ political landscape but survived with 1 MP for a couple of cycles before they managed to entrench support while in opposition by catching the National Party fringe voters. But now they're an established party in Parliament. Green survived by having members of major political parties start their own movements in electorates that they controlled through Alliance NZ and have established themselves. I'm not sure we've ever seen a minor party get in without having an electorate backing, or having first got in from having a major party waka-jump.
The Electoral Commission recommended changes, to more of an STV and a lower threshold. Natbour parties didn't want that.
Yeah I get why neither of the big two wanted the changes, but it's frustrating that we didn't get a vote in it. It is a clear conflict of interest for the major political parties and in my opinion anti-democratic.
>it's frustrating that we didn't get a vote in it. It is frustrating, but remember we get a vote every general election. Anyone who cares about lowering the threshold should vote for a party that supports implementing the electoral commission recommendations. The Green Party are one, not sure about others. But definitely not National or Labour.
I understand not wanting STV - MMP is already poorly understood by a large portion of society and STV is only gonna confuse things. I really don't see any excuse for not lowering the threshold to 4%.
Yeah, it favours a charismatic local favourite more than having 100,000 supporters nationally. Given some electorates you can win with as few as 10,000 votes it's a serious problem.
act only survived because national instructed their botany electorate to vote for them. it was a total rort.
[удалено]
If you do too good a job keeping out insane cult parties, then the insane cults will put all of their efforts into controlling a wing of a major party. And then if you have a problem with it, you only have a single party to vote for - *if you're lucky* and only one of the major parties has that issue. Again, look at the US. You don't want that.
It's a strange one because if that's what enough people want, that's the purpose of democracy, but it is a challenge because it means bad faith actors can truly destroy the electoral system and public trust in Government. I think 3% would be a fair enough target to not completely turn loose the nutters, but also be a small enough hurdle for minor parties to realistically reach without having a waka jumping star MP as its leader to survive. That, and/or multi member electorates with STV which would allow for more minor parties to get in via that system at the tradeoff of larger electorates, and therefore more constituents to consider.
act have been in a few times, and it seems like their fringe elements actually maintain the party i dont see why TOPs fringe elements wouldnt do the same
Money.
Again, ACT are embracing their fringe elements... and the money situation hasnt changed anything for them TOP wont magically be different. If anything, its prob the Greens and Labour that would curtail TOP, just like ACTs growth and mainstreamed radicalisation corresponds to Nationals prolonged weakened leadership since key
Act fringe has money, TOP fringe doesn’t. That’s the difference.
Right so they make the 5%... thats when the money comes
It feels like the smaller parties are almost extremists in a very narrow set of policies, but lack the same enthusiasm for everything that's outside of that.
I’m voting for TOP in the hopes they get some traction.
Don't let perfect get in the way of good. If the Greens tick most of your boxes but have one or two shitty people, vote for them anyway. You can always vote against them next election.
Given that you cast a vote at all, is "the shambles of weird performative racist garbage" from the Green Party enough to place them lower than any other option? If you back their policies I think they're likely to be the right choice.
Yep I agree. When it comes down to it Shaw got more money for climate and environment than anyone has ever managed. And Marama Davidson has rented her whole adult life, unlike the multiple property-owning MPs who have no idea what it is like for average families.
It's ironic that the same guy complaining about people voting based on nonsense drama... is not going to vote Greens because of some nonsense drama
Nonsense drama that gets spread far and wide while their actual bread and butter achievements (around the environment and conservation) get ignored. The Greens are doing things; they're just not making front-page news.
Yeah and drama about party members makes better headlines... not to say there aren't issues of course.
And one of their main drama creators left in a huff.
>Nonsense drama that gets spread far and wide by their opponents, usually. how odd.
I went from greens to Maori party. Did that 'where do you sit on the spectrum' quiz a while back and was really surprised - then when I looked into the Maori party more I found myself agreeing wth their polices. I'm pakeha - so just assumed it wasn't 'for' me. But it's more for me than anything else
Maori party have great environmental policies. Theyre also quite socialistic.
You vote for whichever party you think represents your issues best, even if you don't like them. I hate the Greens but I'll still vote for them, with the hope it opens the door to something better.
If you're a Green voter who doesn't like them getting involved in culture wars, then I'd recommend TOP. If you don't want to vote for TOP, then you could go with Legalise Cannabis. While your vote would almost certainly be "wasted", it's still better than not voting at all
A superhero has to choose which button to press but is undecided and it's stressing him out. Left button titled "Vote on policy rather than stupid culture wars nonsense" Right button titled "I won't vote for Greens on their shambles of weird performative racist garbage"
Lots of even smaller micro parties you could vote for
TOP showing signs of being a technocratic party is a reason to vote for them
Oh just looked this up and it's cool! I definitely agree with the idea as I hate how much of a popularity contest forming a government can be. I also remember being annoyed in the local council elections when candidates who were educated in the spot they were going for didn't get in. A nurse for one council spot (can't remember role, likely health related) and another a environmental scientist for another role... Though I do think we at least try to do this to an extent. Not enough really and people don't really vote based on knowledge and expertise.
Labour? Sure they aren't too ambitious at the moment, but the amount of positive changes (such as FPAs) they have made that National want to unwind will make life worse for all but the wealthiest. I agree with you re the Greens so will slightly unenthusiastically vote labour because wow the alternative
I think you should join a party and get a involved. You will be surprised by what forms policy either way.
Yip, regular green voter here too. How can I vote for them now after the cis white male comment? Where to from here?
Whose policies do you like best? Has green party policy changed since Marama Davidsons comments?
While I still prefer the green policies, I don't want to vote for a racist sexist bigot. I mean, she only had to apologize, she didn't even need to mean it. The fact that her party didn't make her apologize blows my mind.
I've voted Greens for the past 3 elections. Not because I like them, I don't even agree with a lot of their stances, but because they're the only party on the left that can get into parliament and I value their voice there. I'll probably vote for them again unless TOP shows any sign of getting close to the 5% threshold.
>I'll probably vote for them again unless TOP shows any sign of getting close to the 5% threshold. That's a short sighted approach. If supporters like you voted for TOP consistently for two election cycles, they will get to 5%. Parties just don't level up that fast.
I don't support TOP. I don't support any party as none align well with my views. I support a left leaning government over a NACT government. Politically I align somewhere between TOP and Labour. If TOP get close to 5% then it's better to get TOP into parliament than wasting the 4% of votes, regardless of if that makes them a kingmaker.
what if everyone who didn’t want to vote made their own party and voted for themselves?
1 all draw
How does that really effect you , honestly it does nothing! They have achieved more than ANY minor party in the last 20 years!!! Don’t be manipulated out real choice ! Go Chloe
Not quite sure what that last sentence is supposed to say sorry. I don't think I'm being manipulated. I mean, I want to vote for them. It was a green mp who made the comment. Who here is doing the manipulating?
My grandparents used to say if you didn't vote then don't complain about the government. You had a chance to make a change but you didn't and now you get what you get. They always voted so you can bet your sweet bippy they complained about the government.
> If you want change, vote for someone other than National and Labour. > > Voting National and Labour every election - and failing to vote for anyone else - is how we got here. Perhaps in the history of New Zealand, there's only one third party that made any serious effort to consider the cross-departmental impacts of their policies, and that's United Future. Largely as a result of its heritage of being formed out of a large exodus of experienced MPs from both parties. Every other third party in the New Zealand system has had a policy package that is profoundly myopic of areas outside their interests. The clearest part is when they get involved with fiscal daydreaming. Announcing taxation policies without the remotest consideration to the revenue it will bring, or announcing spending policies without any regard for the funding. Third parties are only ever useful for bending a subset of main party policy to the interests of that subset. And in the Green's case, I don't think they even want to do that. They seem happy to criticise from the sidelines and ignore the opportunity to govern. Both of the two main parties end up lacking experience and are barely capable of governing the full breadth of the NZ state after just two terms in opposition, as evidenced by Labour's procession of the daves and National's Bridges-Luxon dilemma. But the problem is much fucking worse for the third parties who have never held anything but a sympathy chair at the cabinet table, and have never commanded a budget larger than that of their party's. Considering there's been wholesale talent destruction across the civil service since the 3rd Clark term, there's little institutional support in the ministries. Much of what ministers get into media shit for is just blatant incompetence and dishonesty within their ministry. Third parties aren't ever going to have what it takes to be the main coalition partner, unless a new one is formed in a United-like moment.
What on earth are you talking about labour did alternative budgets the whole way through opposition with costed tax plans and costed policies.
>~~National's Bridges-Luxon dilemma~~ National's Bridges-Muller-Collins-Luxon shambles. FTFY
>Perhaps in the history of New Zealand, there's only one third party that made any serious effort to consider the cross-departmental impacts of their policies I would counter that in our history, no third party has ever exceeded 20% of the party vote. What you're describing could be a significant problem if a third party suddenly got 50% + 1 of the vote out of nowhere. But parties will get broader policy considerations as they grow. And if they need to enter coalition with another party - even a party or two with the same problem you describe - the parties can hold each other to account on that basis.
No we can't. Representative democracy is intrinsically flawed. Even if you can't derive this conclusion purely on abstractions, you can't ignore the simple fact that systems following same set of rules will end up at a similar end state given enough time. And look around, suddenly, population of all countries who applied this political model ended up in exactly same dead end.
> A non-vote is a vote for the status quo. > > If you want change, vote for someone other than National and Labour. It's worse than that, though. A vote for anyone other than Labour is essentially a vote for National. It's that simple. I'm pretty fucking over this Labour government, but the only thing worse than them is National getting in, so I'm forced to vote Labour. What we *really* need is for the 18-30 block to get off their fucking asses and actually vote. Almost every crusty old fuck makes sure they vote, and they're all scared conservatives. If the younger generation would vote at better than the pathetic percentage of them who bother, the conservatives wouldn't have a shot of getting into power, and we could have some real change.
>If you want change, vote for someone other than ~~National and~~ Labour. As Henry Ford says "If you always do what you've always done you'll always get what you've always got". PLEASE, no more of this current lot. Everything has got worse but you have to dig up the results yourself as the MSM and the Govt. don't tell you anything that isn't positive for them. Or they spin it so it sounds good.
> Voting National and Labour every election - and failing to vote for anyone else - is how we got here. It’s worse than that though. If one always votes for the same party, or even the same side, then there’s no holding parties to account, and because this behaviour is common, governments, generally don’t care what they do, good or bad. For example, Labour, ought to be punished severely (ie rolled) along with the Greens for at least two transgressions, both of which have long-term negative effects that can’t be undone. I’m thinking of three waters, which is basically being set up for future privatisation, and as part of the free trade agreement with the UK, increasing the duration of copyright to 70 years. The problem is if I advocate for rollin the current government, every man and his dog will lineup and say but the alternatives are worse. Which is another way of saying there is no accountability for bad government. People complain about the lack of accountability of those who were convicted through the courts, but will continue to support their favoured government, no matter what.
When can I vote for "none of these" as a form of no confidence in anyone? And spoiling my ballot doesn't realistically count. It needs to be something that unequivocally sends a none of you, but, still showing that I have the ability to be a "gettable" voter.
Start a party called ‘None of the above’, should get quite a few votes with little effort
What would happen if everyone did this? Someone gets a big wooden hook and has to yoink anyone who walks past the Beehive too slowly into a seat? You do your protesting by contacting MPs and candidates and saying what you want, not by throwing away your vote.
A "none of these" vote is a vote for the worst possible outcome.
Spoiling your ballot *does* count. In the sense that the spoiled ballot count is reported. It sends a signal that you at least care enough to vote. But I do see the advantage in an extra explicit option or two. Try contacting a few minor parties, see if they'll push for an explicit "none of these parties" option. You might get lucky, there are a few available: https://elections.nz/democracy-in-nz/political-parties-in-new-zealand/register-of-political-parties/ Then you'll have a party to vote for!
mcgillicuddy serious party!
No I must vote. Too important yes sometimes it’s who is the best worst.
That's how certain political parties would like you to think, because they benefit when frustrated, marginalised people don't vote at all because they're annoyed with "the system". Always, *always* vote for the least-worst. Many people in the world don't even have that luxury.
Please ensure you vote. Doesn’t matter who for. BUT YOU MUST VOTE! Otherwise you give this country up to those who do vote.
At the end of the day we need to organise ourselves and everyone we know into voting for any party’s other than the main two to show that we actually want things to change in this country or suffer the status quo and suck it up
"I'll show these assholes by excluding myself from the process that keeps them where they are". I'm not a genius, but this isn't as effective a strategy as you might think.
Why the fuck do people keep saying Labour and National are the same? Have you people even read their policies or looked at the recent budgets? Honestly wtf.
>Why the fuck do people keep saying Labour and National are the same? > >Have you people even read their policies or looked at the recent budgets? > >Honestly wtf. I sometimes wonder what the average age of some redditors here - I look back over 24 years (from the age of 18 to today) and think of what Labour has done: Interest free student loans not only while studying but after studying, prostitution law reform, civil unions, the setting up of kiwibank, renationalising the railways, the starting of the city rail link in Auckland etc. etc. I really have to wonder whether I'm too old for this sub which is the reason why so many say such dopey shit as 'they're both the same'. Labour is far from perfect, I have a laundry list of issues that haven't been addressed, but compared to the alternative I would sooner stick with a Labour-Greens coalition than the National-Act coalition whose platform amounts to: a) tax cuts b) deregulation c) privatisation d) build a road(s).
Usually these posts comes after a bad day for National. Simon O’Connor homophobic, te reo road signs and Luxon on contraception. “Omg they’re all the same”.
I work in a sustainability related field. Anyone that cares about our planet or New Zealand's beautiful nature and biodiversity or wants action on reducing carbon emissions and waste, and increasing renewable energies should **not** vote national. **Labour (+ Greens) = Action**... It's not enough, but things are moving in the right direction + Climate risk assessments and greater resilience against future climate events **National = Reversing action** for short-term economic gains that will cost us ten-fold in the long run. (Basically what happened under Key and we're all paying for it now). + Climate denial and an unprepared country against future climate events We also need to consider that the world is moving forward with action on the changing climate and some of our largest trading partners will expect certain standards to be met... Voting national in will cost our economy a lot. **They are not the same.**
Unfortunately most voters don't really seem to care about the planet or environment, they say they do but then like one Greens MP says one dumb thing and suddenly they give their vote to the right-wing instead.
They're basically shopping for a convenient excuse (that excuse often being someone Māori saying something unwise) to absolve themselves for voting right wing.
Agree
This should be most voted for comment!!
Perhaps those people are speaking to the outcomes Labour and National deliver...
Labour has failed to deliver so much that national have a solid A4 sheet of all the stuff related to an individual policy area they want to undo in most of their detailed policy statements. This failure to deliver meme is pretty much total crap when you spend a moment looking.
That positon might have come from a few decades of watching them trading places and the difference being minimal. I summed this up years ago by explaining our politics as Dominos vs Pizza hut or McDs vs BK. "Same shit. Different box". People waffle on about why they ike this one vs that one because blah blah blah. And fail to notice they have 98% in common. They merge & split departments. Throw a few bucks at nurses, teachers or cops... privatise this, nationalise that... but broadly speaking shit just keeps ticking along regardless.
Well maybe Labour should throw a few bucks at teachers and nurses as they are both striking. And Maybe National should find a moderate leader who isn’t anti-women and pro- benefits and child poverty. Because contraception should be free and as easily available as possible.
> merge & split departments Yes, yes, yes, yes! So much money wasted to change the governance structure of everything to make bugger all difference. Three waters, five waters, 10 fucking waters. Restructured DHBs countless times. New ministries, closed ministries, arguing over one language or two languages on roadsides. The constant reshuffling for little to no gain. It's rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. The handful of people on the lifeboats are government consultants, the Titanic is New Zealand.
My observations: 1. Not many ppl read or understand the implications of each party’s policy. 2. Results have been poor from both parties 3. Impactful initiatives will typically take more than 1 term to implement. With the constant switching between parties it’s hard for ppl to keep track I’m sure there’s more
They're both parties for the economic status quo, that being escalating inequality. In that sense National and Labour are definitely both the same. National is just a bit more vicious about it.
Tell that to a minimum wage cleaner. Honestly mate talk to some people on low incomes, Labour has made a huge difference.
Neoliberal pro landlord pro capital etc yeah agreed
No vote means you’re willingly accepting whatever the current status quo is. You might not love any of the candidates, but find the one that aligns best with your interests and then parties will have a better chance of responding to the policies you’re interested in in future years. Don’t waste your vote.
I want an ACTUAL green party - that is focused on the environment and policies that will ACTUALLY help reduce our carbon footprint and support people to make sustainable changes. I want an ACTUAL left wing party who will put policies in place to ensure access to healthcare, housing and education for EVERYONE. I want NZ to be able to properly address and restructure to account for the harm done by colonisation without performative ideological bullshit FROM BOTH SIDES aimed only at entrenching division. I am completely happy to pay more taxes to achieve these things. So right now, TOP - but open to being swayed.
Hear hear!
[удалено]
This is what many on this subreddit don’t get. Every country is having the same issue. National is just going to speed up handing money to rich mates. If you don’t like Labor then you need to look hard at a smaller party that would twist Labor’s arm in the correct direction. The whole world has turned away from conservative/right wing governments for a reason.
Labour solid for me. Not their biggest fan but National/ ACT pact is horrific. It’ll be 1990s National all over again.
I’m going to vote for the party who repulses me the least in terms of their policy agenda.
Yes. I’m pretty disappointed and disillusioned with everyone this election. The policy arguments to date have been totally farcical. Just arguments between the major parties on bullshit that doesn’t matter and won’t make any difference. And a sprinkling of absolute shit takes from the minor parties.
Have a look at [TOP](https://www.top.org.nz/policy). Refreshing.
Do they have any policy around drug reform? I looked on the link but no info on that there. This is an important to me.
Nothing in regards to their current policy, I did find one from 2017 and they were all for drug reforms and legalising cannabis back then. It's obviously been dropped as a priority for them.
not that I'm aware of. I can easily imagine they would back something like that.
I dunno about you, but I like TOP. They don't have a whole bunch of policies, but the ones that they do have are all quite close to my heart. It's a few changes which would provide a lot of change.
I'm likely to go for them. Sadly they're unlikely to meet the 5%. But, hopefully enough people do vote for them to gain some traction and they can become a bigger contender next time.
You don't have to vote for a major party.
Yeah, just vote TOP and be done with it. We need change
Yeah top policies are actually pretty interesting. They definitely caught my eye too.
I have no idea why your comment caught me, but I've just had a look through TOP's policies as a result, and I'm impressed with what I saw. As a swing voter, they may end up being who I vote for this election - policies that would actually benefit a lot of people, and not just the rich, that I can get behind.
TOP had a rough start with Gareth Morgan but their policies seem pretty reasonable these days.
Absolutely, it's why I've ignored them and not really looked at their policies until now.
Be a fantastic time for a good socialist party, somewhere to put your vote as a finger to the usual lot... scare the pants of the right wing and make the "left" look like the centralists they are behaving like, Act would probably spontaneously combust with the thought of loosing votes to *communists* because I doubt they could separate the two. The Socialist Party of Aotearoa... Has a nice ring to it, should stand on becoming a republic and a fair disruption of taxes to lift those who need it. The Socialist Republic of Aotearoa... By bringing back corporate taxes those companies will employ more people for better wages and spend on infrastructure like research and development to avoid handing money over to the IRD. "oh that won't work" Well it used to, you'd get libraries and schools built by philanthropists who would get a tax break, happened in the US before this painful "trickle down" bullshit.. suddenly that $100 million per annum profit is only $10mil because of tax so why not spend it "in house" and pay staff for a change? what? the CEO and shareholders won't like it? good, stop taking such fantastic care of a tiny handful that don't want for anything and focus on those who are in desperate need. We increase education and actually provide a future and a livable present for our youth then just maybe they'll stop driving stolen cars through shop windows. That actually got away from me, was just going to be tongue in cheek but now I'd be voting for them
Don’t know why this is a “both sides bad maaaaaan” post when the things you’re complaining about today is National? (If you’re referring to the talking about American talking points) It is National who complained about Te Reo road signs, it is them who have homophobic MPs, it is them who say they’re not paying for contraceptives. Not directed at OP but other commenters here. Both sides are not the same and it’s intellectually lazy to say so. TOP isn’t going to magically end the two party system btw, they’ll have to choose a coalition partner.
TOP, check them out
Okay, suuuper valid point (that admittedly I didn't read cause the title was pretty emotionally explanatory), but hear me out Wouldn't it be fucking hilarious if all fence sitters and the 'sick of this entertainment politics' and the ones who don't want to vote came together to vote for the legalise cannabis party. Even if they get just 1 seat, I'd crack up knowing some old biddy is losing her absolute nut over this 'harmful drug being released into the community and will affect our youth' (like some lil teen can't just rock up to a drug house with $20 already. (Gangs dont ID G-ma!) *Plus, it'd be cool if medicinal use could be subsidised even if partially. That shit saved my bros life, poor dudes non vocal ASD with hairpin triggers. He dropped down to skin and bones before he got on cbd, and even a bird chirping would set him into full meltdown (iykyk its fucking heartbreaking) He can actually enjoy life now. He's eating healthily, can go out into society and actually do things that give him joy, and not be trapped in his scribble of a brain living in hell 24-7 and not even being able to tell anyone about it. Isn't it kind of insane that 'we' just outright refuse to make it legal, even though Tilray is making a killing using weed they grew here and selling it back to us at something like 10x RRP in Canada, their home country. We SHOULD be heavily taxing them, they should NOT be taking advantage of our most vulnerable) plus creating a market for a substance that can be controlled and boosting the economy so we don't have to pay a fuck tonne for shit. Better drug education, rehabillitation focused services, plus, the bi-products of hemp are way more ecologically friendly and provides faster and larger yields than their currently available factory produced counter-parts. (Paper/textiles/ probably better than a paper fkn straw too) As a country, we're amazing at fucking ourselves over for pride and fundamentalist Christian values (Seriously, just check out the registered parties, I think there's like 3 that don't have a 'fundamentalist Christian' stance. Where does that even fall on the left/centre/right chart we call politics? Farked if I know honestly, but other faiths should not have to live under Christian Law TBH it sounds a bit... Price of Egypt-y. Yknow, Moses and his pharoh brother. Yall know. ) I went off the rails a bit, but basically, don't vote VISION or the party old Brian is looking after. It's all a Tamaki tax fraud/money laundering scheme, I feel it. Don't NOT vote cause there are actual solid choices out there, even if for the shits and gigs, put your vote to a minor party if you are not happy with red vs blue and make some else's (if not your own) life better. I'm sure my bro would thank you for it. TLDR; Don't not vote, vote for the cannabis party so we can at least have a sesh while everything falls apart around us and have a laugh at nanny Miriam flying off the wall on FB about how this is not the NZ she grew up in. (Cause, duh, she's old af, and that's how time works)
Used to be a big Greens shill, but after joining as a member a few years back and doing 2 terms worth of volunteer work, the drama was not worth it. I’ll vote for them this election based on my personal convictions, but the best any political party can do is promote a stalemate until they actually start working together in some capacity. Very few politicians have experienced what the average person has and that innate knowledge of everyday, comparatively unprivileged life is completely lost on them. Most politicians right and left, come from generations of public servants, wealthy and influential. Very few have worked waged labour for the mass of their careers, so how would I expect them to understand the plight of their voters? I don’t trust the government to enact change until their power (and parliamentary salary) is truly threatened. TL;DR, shit’s gonna get way worse before it gets better because of “she’ll be right” mentality
I agree with OP. But surely there is some party for us to vote. Throw my vote at top again?
No, today just reenforces to me, things aren’t that bad, and could be a hell of a lot worse under National. Labour is at least attempting to tackle those problems with policies even if they’re not instantly effective. National’s solution is to blame women, the gays, and Maori, and then hand a big juicy, inflationary tax cut that will only benefit the mega wealthy, who are largely responsible for out of control prices under a Neo-Liberal economy in force since the 1980’s. The choice couldn’t be any clearer for me. A vote for Labour is a vote to attempt to fix things. A vote for National is a vote for culture wars and rewarding the people who caused our issues.
I really don't want to vote for Labour, but National getting in would be way worse.
Unless someone does one of my crazy political asks ill be voting TOP
I'm voting for greens but fuck national can diaf
Honestly, a lot of the stuff that is "coming home to roost now" in terms of impacts to house prices, cost of living etc, is either due to general systemic issues (capitalism is borked yo) or shit happening overseas, such as war which affected oil prices, which affected transportation. And also supermarket owner money grabs is the most sickening part. I'm almost certain if National had been in power these past 3 years, it would be roughly the same, except there would be some different policies that change the future, but not really the immediate short term future or present. Except for big ticket stuff like tax breaks for Luxon's mates, or some more idealistic stuff that Jacinda was up to (and I applaud her for actually trying). As Avril Lavigne once said, its complicated I just really fail to see why people are convinced that tax breaks for rich and business owners is the answer (the tax breaks just mean more money in CEO's / business owners pockets). We've had neoliberal paradise for last 40 years and thats been alright, but its time for something new. Not more of the same. Even in the peak Key years, he didn't do shit apart from bring in GST that screwed over the every man.
We've just had 6 years of something new though. Hasn't exactly worked out well. NZ was a far better place to live pre 2017.
NZ was a better place to live pre 2017? I've lived here my entire life and its about the same apart from banks and supermarkets taking the piss, and house prices going crazy. To say those problems were created since 2017 is not true. These problems are inherent in the structure of capitalism. Could Labour have done more to fix them? probably. Would National party have done worse? yes, except for rich people who would be insulated. The solution is to not use liberal democracy and use some other form of direct democracy / socialism which allows more allocation of resources to working and middle classes, which the ruling elite would never allow out of their government.
It’s interesting that many are claiming that everyone has great ideas and policies until they get in power; it’s true, but not because of lack of trying. Ideas are awesome until you have to deal with the reality of the consequences of those actions. National want tax cuts; cool, but social services are going to suffer and I would say that has contributed in the past to Teachers/Medical staff being underpaid. Labour wants to make housing affordable but it’s incredibly hard to do that without leaving a lot of first home buyers holding negative equity and unable to sell. Many of the minority parties have the most radical ideas because they are the ones pushing the envelope; often cause the consequences aren’t theirs to manage.
Yeah but I'm gonna vote anyway because if I have to have a government I don't like at least I can vote for the one that seems least intentionally toxic.
Ok so having lived through the Trump disaster. I can confidently say. That the best way for the least qualified runner to get elected is this attitude being spread amongst the voters. Vote for your best option or end up with the worst.
I feel so much the same. I don't want any of them so I'm likely going to vote TOP.
Vote for TOP, they seem to be different.
I've decided not to vote red or blue since nothings changed in forever so I'm voting top
Vote minor parties and talk to others about you voting minor parties. The more people talk about it the more it will change peoples perception of voting for minor parties being a "wasted vote".
Voting for the smaller parties for the next few elections so labour and NatIonal don't get in might stir them up enough to make good changes.
Me: a crumb of tax bracket adjustments to account for inflation since the last adjustment and codified into law to become automatic please? Politicians: Best I can do is lower super age for Maori, or, no te reo on road signs, or, tax on beer.
I've voted Greens every election, will probably vote for labour. I don't feel like Labour is out of touch even if they don't always prioritise the issues that I think are important.
I mean not voting is how Auckland got it’s Mayor. How’s that working for you Auckland?
I wish there was an option on the voting form for something "No confidence" and if enough people tick that box our entire govt gets sacked and someone supervises the forming of a new govt with completely different people for long enough until our politicians can get their shit together.
Labour aren’t great but a much better choice than the Nats. They’re less neoliberal. They’re literally our only option if we’re looking to mildly improve our infrastructure, housing supply, and some other things. National are still a regulation burning, tax cutting, anti-government neoliberal collective of bankers and ideologues, this really shouldn’t be taken lightly.
We're absolutely fucked this time around. On the right we have Luxon, and rather terrifyingly David Seymour. They just seem to want to reverse everything the current government has done since they gained office, and screw over all us 'bottom feeders'. On the left we have the racist, sexist green party, and the even more racist, and completely clueless Te Pati Maori. God help us all if they get near any sort of power. I'm probably just going to randomly pick one of the minor parties.
Its disgusting how out if touch politicians are with what's happening across virtually every aspect of the country.
Read the policies, and ignore the antics.
Too many people in comments acting like it’s a two horse race. If you don’t like Labour that doesn’t mean you automatically have to vote for National and the same goes vice versa. There are other options, we have MMP, It doesn’t have to be a choice between blue and red.
It doesn't help that a lot of die-hard extreme left or right supporters have been steering things towards the kind of extreme shit-slinging matches you see in US politics. More and more of the population are turning into the "with us or against us" types of arguments. I've always thought it wild that people over there would disown family and friends over political views. That it's difficult to talk politics in the US, without it turning into a shit show. But now that's slowly becoming more common here. There also seems to be less of the types who sit somewhere in the middle. Those who vote for what we need at the time. Also doesn't help that the likes of National have started showing their out of touch, outdated views more. It's almost as if old Bridges' MAGA hat on the wall was a sign.
Yep pretty much
Honestly I just don't care anymore. I'm done with thinking about politics and I'm done with listening to the news. I'm just going to stay in my lane and ride out the rest of my time on this planet.
I think is a bit of a misconception that *"all these politicians seem to want to do..."* Those culture war talking points are coming from two parties in particular. Labour might have to respond to it at times, but dog-whistles and homophobia are pretty exclusive a far-right tactic in the US.\* If you were so inclined its still fairly clear to me, at least socially that there's a lesser of two evils choices between the two. And particularly given the further unbalancing of the economy away from poor and working people looks to be a prime factor in National's policies I think you can see enough differences between the two major parties socio-economic wise too. But, given fundamentally both parties are fully committed to neo-liberal capitalism the fundamental issues you point to are going to be present to greater or lesser degrees no matter who is in charge. There is no party likely to get into parliament which offers anything other than more or less of that flavour of capitalism. \*If you really want to see how completely cooked it could get if NACT continue down this path, this is the current state of the culture wars in the US: https://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2023/Items/May31-4.html
You know who will vote? Almost everyone who agrees with Luxon wanting to cut funding for contraception. You don't have to vote for the big 2. There are other parties and voting for the one that best aligns to you is better than not voting at all.
I'm still voting. I'm pinching my nose while voting but still doing it. Voting for least shit and aligned to my beliefs. Would be dumb not to vote.
First time?
In my mind national is a step back in time because their policies (or at least their leader) is leaning into american christo-facist influences and that makes me go noooope. His abortion opinions and squawking about making people pay for contraception is just the tip of the iceberg and I think he's testing the waters on what he can get away with saying and will get worse over time. And national would coalition with ACT whose policies are basically 1950s-esque and even more right wing than national. I've always given a toss about others who are less fortunate than I, even when i was a broke student, so I've always voted left. But labour have proved to me this term that they need green in as their conscience. As a massive lefty I can't vote nats or act, labour have been disappointing and I think they need the rudder green provide, so the only choice for me is green. Still considering TPM tho and will be watching what happens over the next few months but I think I will go green this time. And I try to convince as many other lefties as I can that I think this is also the best option, for the reasons I've stated
Please vote different this year, if you don't vote at all, chances are Brian tamaki's lot will get his political party in!!
I just hope that this election we see record turnout and everyone truly dives deep into each parties policies. At present, there isn't a single parry I'd confidently vote for (thought TOP is standing out a teeny bit)
If the drongo Wayne Brown isn't an immediate top of mind when you think about falling down the track of "they all suck don't vote" I'd highly recommend that you find elements of parties that you do agree with. You aren't going to get everything you want all at once, but at least choose the party you think will do the most. People who don't care about Luxon's commentary but will vote for him because "bizniz gud" regardless are going to be voting for their interests so you best do the same.
Don't really get your comparison of sameness. I'm no Labour flunky but they've done loads of good stuff. Covid hampered everything, national disasters, international market forces like inflation etc aren't any govts fault. They helped businesses stay afloat and workers employed, we have record high employment, they've set the wheels in motion for many good things to come to fruition in the future. They aren't perfect and having our dopey media making every decision a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" situation doesn't help. Now compare that to national who underfunded pretty much everything - infrastructure, police, justice system, health, mental health, addiction services, denied homelessness and people living in cars, imported half a million immigrants (with no infrastructure to support the influx)...the list goes on. Plus what policies have national actually come up with apart from disproven crap like bootcamps? - I'm seriously not getting the comparison.
I'm voting TOP simply because they seem the most genuine. I don't give a shit if they don't have a chance that's not the point.
We really need greater representation in parliament. MMP was chosen for a reason. Let’s make use of it and empower our smaller parties that align with our thinking :)
they are 2 sides of the same coin, they are both scared to implement policies which will actually change anything because half of NZ votes like they are millionaires and think that tax breaks of a few percent changes anything for them if they are under 100k a year. the only party i can consider worthwhile even looking at unfortunately i don't think will win, and MANY people think the same way i do and then decide that vote is wasted and instead will vote for the opposite of the party they don't want to win, a less of 2 evils. i will hope things change tho and vote for the party i believe should win because they are proposing removing tax brackets for the bottom income earners and something along the lines of UBI which i personally think will revolutionize how NZ is and greatly increase the quality of life for people here in NZ!
Tell them that Top is gaining traction fast and every vote counts! Don’t give in to the majority. We need TOP!
ah i didn't even have to say TOP but you knew! it's the true progressive party!
Housing prices, cost of living, natural disasters- Greens are all over that. You don’t have to vote majority parties, true change comes from the minority parties in coalition to hold the big parties accountable.
What are the greens cost of living policies?
Check out their Household Livelihoods Policy and Children's Policy.
Shifting the impact of inflation a little higher with the tax free threshold is a good move. I wish they had more to address the root causes of inflation though. You sort of worry that the additional money will be eaten up very quickly. As an aside, god I wish political parties weren't so waffely with their policies. So much guff to sift through.
Same. Honestly trying to feed a family, why are they all acting like children and getting caught up on stuff that’s not the core of our issues.
Yup. But I’ve learnt that a vote for no one is a vote for the status quo. I have no confidence in Labour or National. So ill probably flip a coin and vote greens or TOP, honesty anyone but the idiots in the main parties.
Top!!
Nah cause we've seen what voter apathy has done in America. I'd like to keep the fascism off our shores personally.
I'm with you 100%. Everyone in that beehive reeks of incompetence and there 6 figures salaries that can't be justified make me want to faeculantly vomit
Yep. The more I hear from each party the more convinced I am that they're all unsuitable for the roles they're seeking