National leader questions public transport subsidies, but still wants mode shift and says hasn't thought about it much; 'Orange' & RBNZ decisions at 1pm & 2pm; Putin ends talks; China warns on growth
I would like you to share with everyone the article on Luxor’s comments about public transport. Include all the other parties comments to, this is a major policy for NZ
Hi Bernard, please make public. Funny that ex CEO of Air NZ does not understand transport. Reading the latest book by Guy Standing just released. Can you do a big public blog on Rentier Capitalism as most people just look at me blankly. Perhaps normal for me?
I think the Chris Luxon on transport should be shared with the public. National is high in the polls and its time for the National base to really think on the NZ they want in the future and transport options are a key element to it. Imagine not having to have a car to get around and being able to easily get on a train or bus. The dream.
Luxon's failure to understand public transport confirms that National is a one trick pony - all Luxon can offer is tax cuts for wealthy people like himself. Like all neo lib organisations, National is philosophically bankrupt - their sole motivations are greed & self interest.
Agree to share with public. It is concerning how little commentary there is on Luxon's limitations from the wider media. The amount of trashing of the government (albeit, often justified) doesn't seem to be balanced with criticism against Luxon. With the exception of the bottom feeders comment, that got a little bit of notice from the media.
Luxon may need to study up on Government 101, as letting slip more of these comments will raise eye brows from the rest of his team, and prowess journalists.
I haven't felt surprised about Luxon's apparent lack of depth on policy issues. His rapid ascent to party leadership by virtue of his CEO credentials is a corollary of the right-leaning logic that politics and governance should operate like business.
Few of National's bench can measure up in that line of thought, meaning Luxon was almost the only choice. The unforced errors in opposition leadership commentary don't seem to suggest Luxon holds any particular political insight or talent.
On the other hand, wonky critiques of Luxon's naive views might miss the popularity of his CEO-experience narrative with voters inclined to accept that story.
I don't doubt that Luxon's views indicate potential policy decisions with disastrous climate and economic implications. It's also important to fully understand and explain the implications of those views (which Luxon seems not to have considered at all). Yet, if those views play to conservatively-inclined voters anyway?
By all means Bernard open up this one. Ardern will be relieved for a day not to have you pointing out the Govts failing housing policy, increasing rates of poverty, cost of living crisis, Poto William’s ineptitude as Police Minister…..etc. etc.
The trouble with Luxon is that he can’t distinguish between being a Chief Executive Officer of a company and a wannabe prime minister. As a CEO removal of transport subsidies would reduce operating costs increasing the dividends payable to shareholders and probably getting a great bonus to boot. Removal of subsidies from a wannabe prime minister would increase the costs to members of the public who rely on public transport. However, obviously this wouldn’t be a problem for members of his caucus. Wonder where David Seamour is when this is being discussed probably riding on a subsidised bus?
When you cover the latest RBNZ increase, can you talk to the point about "maximum sustainable employment" and the implications of the interest rate on employment levels if possible? It is still bizarre to me that the system seems to encourage a certain level of unemployment but punishes those who are unemployed.
Luxon looks more like a seat warmer for Nicola Willis every time he opens his mouth
I would like you to share with everyone the article on Luxor’s comments about public transport. Include all the other parties comments to, this is a major policy for NZ
Hi Bernard, please make public. Funny that ex CEO of Air NZ does not understand transport. Reading the latest book by Guy Standing just released. Can you do a big public blog on Rentier Capitalism as most people just look at me blankly. Perhaps normal for me?
Patrick Medlicott
I think the Chris Luxon on transport should be shared with the public. National is high in the polls and its time for the National base to really think on the NZ they want in the future and transport options are a key element to it. Imagine not having to have a car to get around and being able to easily get on a train or bus. The dream.
Luxon's failure to understand public transport confirms that National is a one trick pony - all Luxon can offer is tax cuts for wealthy people like himself. Like all neo lib organisations, National is philosophically bankrupt - their sole motivations are greed & self interest.
Agree to share with public. It is concerning how little commentary there is on Luxon's limitations from the wider media. The amount of trashing of the government (albeit, often justified) doesn't seem to be balanced with criticism against Luxon. With the exception of the bottom feeders comment, that got a little bit of notice from the media.
no evidence of political neutrality in this article
it reads as though Luxon is the first ever politician to be caught short on fact
shock! horror!
And l’m sure if Luzon was still AIRNZ CEO, a job he took a pay cut for-
https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL2203/S00071/on-christopher-luxons-trashing-of-the-poor.htm
He’d by at the PM’s door wanting money! But I guess in his eyes Corporate Socialism is ok just no real a socialist policy.
Kia ora Bernard. I'm for opening this one up.
Luxon may need to study up on Government 101, as letting slip more of these comments will raise eye brows from the rest of his team, and prowess journalists.
I haven't felt surprised about Luxon's apparent lack of depth on policy issues. His rapid ascent to party leadership by virtue of his CEO credentials is a corollary of the right-leaning logic that politics and governance should operate like business.
Few of National's bench can measure up in that line of thought, meaning Luxon was almost the only choice. The unforced errors in opposition leadership commentary don't seem to suggest Luxon holds any particular political insight or talent.
On the other hand, wonky critiques of Luxon's naive views might miss the popularity of his CEO-experience narrative with voters inclined to accept that story.
I don't doubt that Luxon's views indicate potential policy decisions with disastrous climate and economic implications. It's also important to fully understand and explain the implications of those views (which Luxon seems not to have considered at all). Yet, if those views play to conservatively-inclined voters anyway?
Yes, share the info.
By all means Bernard open up this one. Ardern will be relieved for a day not to have you pointing out the Govts failing housing policy, increasing rates of poverty, cost of living crisis, Poto William’s ineptitude as Police Minister…..etc. etc.
Gary Dyall
The trouble with Luxon is that he can’t distinguish between being a Chief Executive Officer of a company and a wannabe prime minister. As a CEO removal of transport subsidies would reduce operating costs increasing the dividends payable to shareholders and probably getting a great bonus to boot. Removal of subsidies from a wannabe prime minister would increase the costs to members of the public who rely on public transport. However, obviously this wouldn’t be a problem for members of his caucus. Wonder where David Seamour is when this is being discussed probably riding on a subsidised bus?
When you cover the latest RBNZ increase, can you talk to the point about "maximum sustainable employment" and the implications of the interest rate on employment levels if possible? It is still bizarre to me that the system seems to encourage a certain level of unemployment but punishes those who are unemployed.