Poll shows National/ACT could govern alone after Green vote slides, but Luxon's popularity still weak, albeit less weak; Tower hiking insurance rates street-by-street on flood, slip & sea level risk
I wonder what the % time the MSM (I politely exclude you from this category Bernard), spend analysing polls over the course of an electoral cycle? I wonder if we did half the polls and redistributed the associated time and political energy to solving/debating some of our big problems whether the ROI would be favourable......???? I have a sneaking suspicion it might be ;-)
Thanks Peter. That’s a good reminder to me to avoid spending too much time on them. The horse race aspect of political coverage is a problem. The issue is that under MMP actual policy change is tough, so journalists look for where there might be change, which is when you have a change of personnel running the status quo…
Trivia. The intellectual capital of this country is incinerating and you sit on your privilege and ignore it, pulling up the drawbridge with your gatekeeper fellow traveller Hipkins.
I realise the Greens have had some issues lately, but I still can't quite wrap my head around the motivations of a stated Act voter in an average household in NZ. We just don't have enough multi-millionaires, financially-free of the need for strong public services, in this country to justify more than 50% support for a "multi-millionaires, financially-free of the need for strong public services" coalition.
National and Labour have, in the past 30 years, been pretty centrist (on a skewed scale from 'keeps a herb garden' to 'watches 24/7 Fox News'). In practice, that's meant the large majority of people have gone backwards over that period - and, especially so, if we consider how dependent they've become on a residential home for their retirement plan. But it also means, in practice, National and Labour have retained a pretty immovable base of relatively-disengaged, "always-Nat-bour", voters. That's not the case for their apparently 'natural' partners in The Greens and Act.
We know now, for certain, that climate change is a real-serious problem. Every single day we hear about the threats and costs (and commercial opportunities) from it. I have some problems with their relationship with Labour, but the Greens should (in theory) be the only party without a compromised position on this... This should be important to the vast majority of us. And yet, instead we're apparently still falling, in surprisingly high numbers, for David Seymour's ridiculous quasi-libertarian nonsense.
History should have taught us, scaredy-cats who fall for self-centered sloganeering to avoid shared problems, eventually become fascists. I'm not suggesting that's Act's intent, but I can't help worrying that's where the continuation of these sorts of short-sighted politics might lead, in a world tipping towards major disruption.
Absolutely agree re Seymour and Act supporters. Are they just the unhappy National voters who have nowhere else to go, but haven’t actually taken the time to read the Act policies, or something more concerning for Aotearoa in general. Also agree re the Greens, who already have the environmental and social policies that many people are asking Labour for. I wonder what influence msm political reporting has on busy people who dont have the luxury of time to read everything themselves.
May 25, 2023·edited May 25, 2023Liked by Bernard Hickey
Someone said (can't remember source sorry) that the US voters saw themselves as 'temporarily embarrassed millionaires' whatever their circumstances and so were inclined to favour policies that supported their aspirations rather than their actual conditions (and likely future conditions under those same policies). Same thing starting to apply here perhaps?
Yep, I expect not so much 'starting' here; it's just taken us a generation to embed. It feels like a planned consequence of Thatcherite economics (and our own Rogernomics) that transformed the definition of (middle class) prosperity from 'good job-having' to 'asset owning'.
May 26, 2023·edited May 26, 2023Liked by Bernard Hickey
I think I've worked something out. As a child I was bewildered (and very anxious) that adults often seemed so very stupid. .In the decades and decades since. I've come to the conclusion that hum beings are led by their bellies with their brains trailing along behind and often totally ignored. Sadly dangerous as we can see.
I believe the Greens who yes, should be environmentally/socially focused at every turn, have lost a dollop of their mandate. I actually raised this with Jan Logie a couple of years ago when I happened upon her at an event ie. that the Greens (unless you are a committed supporter or insider) really were coming across as weak, silent, submissive in the relationship with Labour they had signed into. Compromised their values too far for too long to remain credible. That's a perspective I still hold and it appears to have worsened. Our progress on planetary and social matters is very poor. So have they been effective? To the extent that once the Greens start to campaign for this election and bring out the passionate arguments again that have been on ice (presumably melting) their credibility is a real issue for general voters. Despite the fact that this should not be the case (on paper).
Thanks Perfectly. I agree the partnerships with Labour are problematic. The Greens would argue they would carry out their policies if they were in the majority. The problem is the Green refusal to credibly threaten not to support Labour, in order to increase the real leverage in the vote share they do get.
Yep. I look at what the 'Greens' are achieving over in the EU and they're getting real traction by standing up for what they stand for and by not being afraid to make coalitions with unlikely partners for the good of the cause (this is a rough generalisation of course, but perceptions count). I also look at the degree of our environmental challenges and wonder why an environmentally-based party isn't aiming so much higher than around 7-10% support. It is a disconnect.
Thanks Tim. One issue is that the majority of households (just over 60%) do own their own homes and have done spectacularly well from the rise in house prices over the last 20 years. They’re the ones betting on keeping the status quo.
I know a poll is just a poll, but assume for argument's sake that the latest poll is the election result, 62 Right wing MPs, less 1 as Speaker, gives a NatAct government a majority of 1. A majority of 1 will not sustain an extremist NatAct government who are intent on slashing essential government services in order to pay for unnecessary & unaffordable tax cuts for the wealthy.
Thanks Dean. Interesting point. Defections can go both ways and ACT have actually managed to get through this term without too much drama. The drama has been with Labour and National. I think it’s quite possible that one seat majority could last a term.
When will Tower's change to insurance start to flow into the wider market? Not just with other providers, but also having it applied for commercial and industrial properties? Would you also expect it to flow into Council and infrastructure businesses?
Thanks. Those Council and infrastructure businesses don’t use Tower, I imagine. At some point though, the others will follow. The reinsurers will drive it.
While living in the Wellington bubble, I spend enough time in Auckland & Tauranga to know many people would rather have their teeth drilled than think or talk about politics. Of course, they love bitching about the outcomes of Government and Council policies - urban sprawl, endless traffic jams, high prices, faltering services like health and education. I think we're paying a price for a lack of civics education and lack of regulation of social media misinformation. Otherwise sensible people I know are talking about voting the current Govt out because life is difficult and surely a change in Govt will fix things. Ha, if only they knew. But there is little understanding of the policies and ideology of the right and how much more f**cked NZ could get if we gave the wealthy tax cuts and cut govt spending to deliver this. I have many difficult conversations to have before October. Hopefully Luxon keeps helping me...
I wonder where the 4% from Greens went? There wasn't a bump to Labour, and it seems unlikely they would have contributed to the bump in National. I guess they just went to the "I don't know" category. Come election time my guess is those "I don't know" votes would convert back to left-block votes again.
I wonder what the % time the MSM (I politely exclude you from this category Bernard), spend analysing polls over the course of an electoral cycle? I wonder if we did half the polls and redistributed the associated time and political energy to solving/debating some of our big problems whether the ROI would be favourable......???? I have a sneaking suspicion it might be ;-)
Thanks Peter. That’s a good reminder to me to avoid spending too much time on them. The horse race aspect of political coverage is a problem. The issue is that under MMP actual policy change is tough, so journalists look for where there might be change, which is when you have a change of personnel running the status quo…
Trivia. The intellectual capital of this country is incinerating and you sit on your privilege and ignore it, pulling up the drawbridge with your gatekeeper fellow traveller Hipkins.
Luxon: "I'd fill that hole with tax cuts ...and receipts"
https://www.slanecartoon.com/-/galleries/political-cartoons/political-cartoons-2023/-/medias/f2548eae-127f-42dd-b190-99976503c4b0-bailey-bridge-budgets
And AI...
Cracking cartoon. Will include it.
I realise the Greens have had some issues lately, but I still can't quite wrap my head around the motivations of a stated Act voter in an average household in NZ. We just don't have enough multi-millionaires, financially-free of the need for strong public services, in this country to justify more than 50% support for a "multi-millionaires, financially-free of the need for strong public services" coalition.
National and Labour have, in the past 30 years, been pretty centrist (on a skewed scale from 'keeps a herb garden' to 'watches 24/7 Fox News'). In practice, that's meant the large majority of people have gone backwards over that period - and, especially so, if we consider how dependent they've become on a residential home for their retirement plan. But it also means, in practice, National and Labour have retained a pretty immovable base of relatively-disengaged, "always-Nat-bour", voters. That's not the case for their apparently 'natural' partners in The Greens and Act.
We know now, for certain, that climate change is a real-serious problem. Every single day we hear about the threats and costs (and commercial opportunities) from it. I have some problems with their relationship with Labour, but the Greens should (in theory) be the only party without a compromised position on this... This should be important to the vast majority of us. And yet, instead we're apparently still falling, in surprisingly high numbers, for David Seymour's ridiculous quasi-libertarian nonsense.
History should have taught us, scaredy-cats who fall for self-centered sloganeering to avoid shared problems, eventually become fascists. I'm not suggesting that's Act's intent, but I can't help worrying that's where the continuation of these sorts of short-sighted politics might lead, in a world tipping towards major disruption.
Absolutely agree re Seymour and Act supporters. Are they just the unhappy National voters who have nowhere else to go, but haven’t actually taken the time to read the Act policies, or something more concerning for Aotearoa in general. Also agree re the Greens, who already have the environmental and social policies that many people are asking Labour for. I wonder what influence msm political reporting has on busy people who dont have the luxury of time to read everything themselves.
True, I'm certain the firehose of press releases and media appearances from Seymour is a factor
There are a lot. I’m on the list. He is the Quick Draw McGraw of press releases.
Someone said (can't remember source sorry) that the US voters saw themselves as 'temporarily embarrassed millionaires' whatever their circumstances and so were inclined to favour policies that supported their aspirations rather than their actual conditions (and likely future conditions under those same policies). Same thing starting to apply here perhaps?
Yep, I expect not so much 'starting' here; it's just taken us a generation to embed. It feels like a planned consequence of Thatcherite economics (and our own Rogernomics) that transformed the definition of (middle class) prosperity from 'good job-having' to 'asset owning'.
Thanks Andrew. I suspect that’s what Luxon is banking on. The (self) blame the victim approach is real.
I think I've worked something out. As a child I was bewildered (and very anxious) that adults often seemed so very stupid. .In the decades and decades since. I've come to the conclusion that hum beings are led by their bellies with their brains trailing along behind and often totally ignored. Sadly dangerous as we can see.
I believe the Greens who yes, should be environmentally/socially focused at every turn, have lost a dollop of their mandate. I actually raised this with Jan Logie a couple of years ago when I happened upon her at an event ie. that the Greens (unless you are a committed supporter or insider) really were coming across as weak, silent, submissive in the relationship with Labour they had signed into. Compromised their values too far for too long to remain credible. That's a perspective I still hold and it appears to have worsened. Our progress on planetary and social matters is very poor. So have they been effective? To the extent that once the Greens start to campaign for this election and bring out the passionate arguments again that have been on ice (presumably melting) their credibility is a real issue for general voters. Despite the fact that this should not be the case (on paper).
I say this out of real frustration and disappointment as we needed the Greens to stand up with courage over the last several years.
Thanks Perfectly. I agree the partnerships with Labour are problematic. The Greens would argue they would carry out their policies if they were in the majority. The problem is the Green refusal to credibly threaten not to support Labour, in order to increase the real leverage in the vote share they do get.
Yep. I look at what the 'Greens' are achieving over in the EU and they're getting real traction by standing up for what they stand for and by not being afraid to make coalitions with unlikely partners for the good of the cause (this is a rough generalisation of course, but perceptions count). I also look at the degree of our environmental challenges and wonder why an environmentally-based party isn't aiming so much higher than around 7-10% support. It is a disconnect.
Thanks Tim. One issue is that the majority of households (just over 60%) do own their own homes and have done spectacularly well from the rise in house prices over the last 20 years. They’re the ones betting on keeping the status quo.
I know a poll is just a poll, but assume for argument's sake that the latest poll is the election result, 62 Right wing MPs, less 1 as Speaker, gives a NatAct government a majority of 1. A majority of 1 will not sustain an extremist NatAct government who are intent on slashing essential government services in order to pay for unnecessary & unaffordable tax cuts for the wealthy.
Thanks Dean. Interesting point. Defections can go both ways and ACT have actually managed to get through this term without too much drama. The drama has been with Labour and National. I think it’s quite possible that one seat majority could last a term.
When will Tower's change to insurance start to flow into the wider market? Not just with other providers, but also having it applied for commercial and industrial properties? Would you also expect it to flow into Council and infrastructure businesses?
Thanks. Those Council and infrastructure businesses don’t use Tower, I imagine. At some point though, the others will follow. The reinsurers will drive it.
While living in the Wellington bubble, I spend enough time in Auckland & Tauranga to know many people would rather have their teeth drilled than think or talk about politics. Of course, they love bitching about the outcomes of Government and Council policies - urban sprawl, endless traffic jams, high prices, faltering services like health and education. I think we're paying a price for a lack of civics education and lack of regulation of social media misinformation. Otherwise sensible people I know are talking about voting the current Govt out because life is difficult and surely a change in Govt will fix things. Ha, if only they knew. But there is little understanding of the policies and ideology of the right and how much more f**cked NZ could get if we gave the wealthy tax cuts and cut govt spending to deliver this. I have many difficult conversations to have before October. Hopefully Luxon keeps helping me...
He’s trying hard. ;)
I wonder where the 4% from Greens went? There wasn't a bump to Labour, and it seems unlikely they would have contributed to the bump in National. I guess they just went to the "I don't know" category. Come election time my guess is those "I don't know" votes would convert back to left-block votes again.