Jacinda Ardern, Prime Minister of New Zealand

[HairyO]

You guys gobble up Trump's right wing, populist, racist, nutbar s**t, yet Winston Peters is a bad dude?

I think Trump is a clown and Sanders would have been a better President.

Plus, Im not the one calling Peters a racist and a bigot. That was the leader of the Greens. 4 months ago. Now suddenly he's a top bloke and they are in a coalition.

Given he is now siding with a bunch of lefties I assume anti immigration is the way to go? Unions are loving that.

 

[Lebbo73]

You guys gobble up Trump's right wing, populist, racist, nutbar s**t, yet Winston Peters is a bad dude?

There's a difference between protecting your borders and putting the 'We Are Closed' sign up. One day you might work it out. I don't have much hope that this is possible though!

 

[spinynorman]

Given he is now siding with a bunch of lefties I assume anti immigration is the way to go? Unions are loving that.

NZ First are an anti-immigration party who have stoked xenophobia for some time now. Unlike Trump and Hanson and Le Pen etc, they seem to legitimately have economic policies that would help the New Zealand underclass.

New Zealand Labour have also been a bit anti-immigration since Little was the leader. Ardern has been reasonably vague on a lot of policies. I'm not convinced she'll be a great New Zealand Prime Minister like Helen Clark or the pre-80s Labour Governments. But she will obviously be better than English. And hopefully Peters is given an economic portfolio where he can play to his strengths, rather than the more worrying aspects of his philosophy (which, again, is what the Nationals certainly would have given him).

 

[Lebbo73]

NZ First are an anti-immigration party who have stoked xenophobia for some time now. Unlike Trump and Hanson and Le Pen etc, they seem to legitimately have economic policies that would help the New Zealand underclass.

New Zealand Labour have also been a bit anti-immigration since Little was the leader. Ardern has been reasonably vague on a lot of policies. I'm not convinced she'll be a great New Zealand Prime Minister like Helen Clark or the pre-80s Labour Governments. But she will obviously be better than English. And hopefully Peters is given an economic portfolio where he can play to his strengths, rather than the more worrying aspects of his philosophy (which, again, is what the Nationals certainly would have given him).

Helen Clark was a pretty good PM. The Nationals under John Key followed up with a great government. They deserved one more term.

 

[HairyO]

NZ First are an anti-immigration party who have stoked xenophobia for some time now. Unlike Trump and Hanson and Le Pen etc, they seem to legitimately have economic policies that would help the New Zealand

NZ First want to ban everything and have the government pay for it all.

They are the 1930s Germany party with a slightly different name.

And Labour and the Greens sided with them.

If the Nationals won this place would be overflowing with condemnation of their offensive policies.

That is the wonderful hypocrisy.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Helen Clark was a pretty good PM. The Nationals under John Key followed up with a great government. They deserved one more term.

What was great about it?

 

[Lebbo73]

What was great about it?

What do you want me to say? You will only refute it anyway. You're trying to set up a exercise in futility. It isn't worth my time or effort discussing this with you.

 

[Maggie5]

What was great about it?

I was going to post that you wouldn't get any examples, seems I would have been right.

 

[spinynorman]

NZ First want to ban everything and have the government pay for it all.

They are the 1930s Germany party with a slightly different name.

I am not a fan of NZ first but I do not agree, it is a bit far. Their law and order policies are overly strict, and they are a racist party (rife among all NZ parties, but they are arguably worst of all). But I do not see where you are going with your first statement and think they are not fascist in the sense of Nazis or other recent far right parties.

And Labour and the Greens sided with them.

If the Nationals won this place would be overflowing with condemnation of their offensive policies.

That is the wonderful hypocrisy.

Probably, but people probably are not serious followers of New Zealand politics, just know they like Ardern (who is a very likable personality, which basically worked for Key for 8 years). And conservative posters would be here defending Peters - people tend to defend at all costs even when they should not, and take hypocritical stances. It is silly but oh well.

Still best outcome given the election result.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

I know the Key-English Government tried to * up the welfare system and did a good enough job of it the Abbott-Turnbull Government lifted their ideas.

English also knighted Key and for some reason this wasn't ridiculed.

 

[spinynorman]

Helen Clark was a pretty good PM. The Nationals under John Key followed up with a great government. They deserved one more term.

Tax cuts for the wealthy
Privatisation of public assets
Turning New Zealand into a tax haven
Mining in conservation areas
Punishing welfare recipients, deepening inequality and poverty
Attacking rights of workers

Really should have been one long ago, but Labour was too uninspiring and Key too charming. Replace him with a dullard and they suddenly fall apart.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

But I do not see where you are going with your first statement and think they are not fascist in the sense of Nazis or other recent far right parties.

He's pretending the Nazis were left wing.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

They had Todd Barclay * up what should've been a life on the gravy train.

 

[sherb]

Tax cuts for the wealthy
Privatisation of public assets
Turning New Zealand into a tax haven
Mining in conservation areas
Punishing welfare recipients, deepening inequality and poverty
Attacking rights of workers

Really should have been one long ago, but Labour was too uninspiring and Key too charming. Replace him with a dullard and they suddenly fall apart.

Most of that is standard conservative mo these days.

Their Australian counterparts get particularly aroused by the bolded in particular.

 

[Maggie5]

Most of that is standard conservative mo these days.

Their Australian counterparts get particularly aroused by the bolded in particular.

Think that is where they got the idea of the card and drug tests from. Hasn't been successful there which is why Aust thinks it is a good idea!

 

[medusala]

She is so far ahead of the two subsequent Liberal PMs it is not funny.

There really are some utterly ignorant people. May as well say Gough was a decent PM.

Gotta love your salty neo-con tears. LOL

If she ruins the lives of kiwis its neither here nor there to me. Its when an utter imbecile like Gillard gets in and decent hard working Australians have to pay more tax to support the no hoping, whining element so prevalent on here that I get annoyed.

 

[medusala]

Helen Clark was a pretty good PM.

So you are defending a woman so left wing her nickname was Helengrad?

Not entirely consistent with your usual efforts.

 

[Lebbo73]

So you are defending a woman so left wing her nickname was Helengrad?

Not entirely consistent with your usual efforts.

If you want to see left wing, watch the next three years of Labour ruling with The Greens in New Zealand! Plus, I was trying to be diplomatic. It's hard not to start a shitstorm around here at the best of times.

 

[Mofra]

If she ruins the lives of kiwis its neither here nor there to me. Its when an utter imbecile like Gillard gets in and decent hard working Australians have to pay more tax to support the no hoping, whining element so prevalent on here that I get annoyed.

Tax under Gillard peaked at 27.4% of GDP. It never reached even the lowest % years under Howard.
Under Howard it peaked at 30.3% of GDP, with a low of 28.9% of GDP.

The Libs under Howard were one of the highest taxing governments in Australian history, and Labor under Rudd the lowest with Gillard a little higher than Rudd but still much lower than Howard.

 

[Bradesmaen]

There really are some utterly ignorant people. May as well say Gough was a decent PM.



If she ruins the lives of kiwis its neither here nor there to me. Its when an utter imbecile like Gillard gets in and decent hard working Australians have to pay more tax to support the no hoping, whining element so prevalent on here that I get annoyed.

It's ok Meds.. Tony still knows you love him. No need to prove it to us.

 

[HairyO]

Tax under Gillard peaked at 27.4% of GDP. It never reached even the lowest % years under Howard.
Under Howard it peaked at 30.3% of GDP, with a low of 28.9% of GDP.

The Libs under Howard were one of the highest taxing governments in Australian history, and Labor under Rudd the lowest with Gillard a little higher than Rudd but still much lower than Howard.

https://tradingeconomics.com/australia/tax-revenue-percent-of-gdp-wb-data.html

That doesnt have any year over 25%. So it would be good to see your source(s). Particularly the 30.3%, because when you factor in State and local taxes it would be even higher. You were referring only to Federal taxes, BTW? My link above is all taxes in Australia.

Maybe its not including some things as taxes.

Though perhaps this is really only on topic if comparing our taxes to New Zealand.

Its higher there. Pretty much always has been.

https://tradingeconomics.com/new-zealand/tax-revenue-percent-of-gdp-wb-data.html

 

[medusala]

Tax under Gillard peaked at 27.4% of GDP. It never reached even the lowest % years under Howard.
Under Howard it peaked at 30.3% of GDP, with a low of 28.9% of GDP.

Hang on, werent you one of those hating Howard for his stupid wasteful tax cuts? Besides your numbers are incorrect. (And ridiculous lol at somehow correlation decreased revenue post gfc with tax cuts)

http://budget.gov.au/2015-16/content/myefo/html/16_appendix_d.htm

peak of 25.7 under Howard

spending when he left was 23.1% which is easily covered by revenue now

=> SPENDING IS CLEARLY THE ISSUE.

 

[Mofra]

Hang on, werent you one of those hating Howard for his stupid wasteful tax cuts? Besides your numbers are incorrect. (And ridiculous lol at somehow correlation decreased revenue post gfc with tax cuts)

http://budget.gov.au/2015-16/content/myefo/html/16_appendix_d.htm

peak of 25.7 under Howard

spending when he left was 23.1% which is easily covered by revenue now

=> SPENDING IS CLEARLY THE ISSUE.

I was against Howard for his explosion in middle class welfare and the fact he pissed an unsustainable once in a lifetime mining boom up the wall pork-barrelling for votes. Spending is ok as long as a conservative does it I guess?

PS I used an independent source - https://www.oecd.org/tax/revenue-statistics-australia.pdf not 're-cast' figures.

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Sworn in. Fancy living the first line of your obituary at 37. Could live long enough to see the 10 Prime Ministers after her.

 

[medusala]

He's pretending the Nazis were left wing.

Anyone within nodding distance of reality knows they were socialists. Saying they are right wing is on a par with saying Hird is totally innocent wrt Essendon drugs saga.