With his dying comments, our greatest-ever social scientist wonders why Election 2023 is ignoring poverty reduction; NZ farmers face UK-style CBAM hit; Why not index NZ Super to CPI too, Nicola?
I disagree. I can't click on most of the links, but I value the pointers to who is saying what. If I really feel I need to know more, I can subscribe. But at least I know what I'm not reading about.
Thanks Janet. I try where I can to find free versions or give away my gift links. I subscribe to all those services to ensure I stay on top of things and can't help trying to give everyone else a heads up. I'll keep trying to find free versions.
The only problem with Sharon Murdoch's Cartoon is that it is not brutal enough.
Given potential damage of the proposed cuts & the impact on the children's future from lack of action on environment, infrastructure & services, National & Act have gone from literally kissing babies to figuratively picking them up by the leg & dashing them against a brick wall,.
Sunday program did us all a disservice last night. Very sorry for Dr Poulton and his family but what needed to be highlighted for the whole hour was his message that poverty is a poor parent. Concentrating on one man's mortality is typical of faux clickbait Journalism not addressing the issues involved in a grown-up way just concentrating on personalities. It did a disservice to Dr Poulton's monumental work for the Dunedin Study. Why not some information and data rather than tear-jerking journalism (I cried). I agree with David Mohring.
Sadly I agree, Dr Poulton’s monumental work got lost, I was wondering if there is a longer version available. It is a truth, that poverty is the most debilitating barrier to health, wellbeing, and the ability to positively and creatively contribute to society, yet in our country it is a reason to blame and punish.
Thanks Patrick. I understand those thoughts. All I'd say is there are ways to tell stories that connect to many more people that use those very human stories to draw people in. Also, Richie was know by so many. And loved. John decided with his framing to pay tribute to his work through the people who loved and supported Richie. I think he would have liked that. And John did have a good lash at the poverty issue in his article.
"I expect things will change more rapidly when the EU starts taxing polluters imports, to the point where local manufacturers can compete with low wage economies such as China.
Those business that adapt to changing requirements & environments can thrive."
Was waiting for the hook to come out from stage left, to remove the inappropriate actor. Winston Peters pantomime performance on Q&A came across as plain old desperate behaviour to avoid committing to any detail at all. I think Jack Tame's question to James Shaw re: a Greens - Nat Govt was the most interesting by far. And James Shaw's continued insistence to be tied to Labour no matter what - makes little sense if the environmental/social emergencies are to be seriously addressed starting October 15th.
I hear what you say and have heard this reaction repeatedly. Yet, the time really is now to put planetary and social crises ahead of political histories or perceived norms. In the bigger picture we are in fact, out of time. For the next two weeks I accept this tribalism is all part of the election campaign and unlikely to change. But after that, for the sake of this and future generations, for the sake of business owners, farmers, and everyone else we have to find pathways to work together on solutions. My view is that whoever enters Parliament after the election will be forced, within a reasonably short timeframe, to take part in re-making policy in all sorts of directions to cope with what is coming at us. I'd like to trust that the common good will prevail.
What policies the Greens are promoting do you see National agreeing to? I see none and if the Greens will be willing to sell their voters cheaply that would be the end of the Green party.
If there will be a govt lead by National (or Winston Peters 😛) the Greens can still work with them if they so happen to stumble upon a policy to protect the environment.
National is only interested in the Green polling numbers to enhance their chance to get into power. They have zero interest in negotiating policy post election.
It is not a lack of data in NZ that causes us to fail to deal with poverty - the Dunedin Study is an amazing example. Nothing is done about it because this is a grubby little country where the power is with those who have the biggest houses (-may they all fall off their cliffs!!)
This is where we live. Cheerfully helpfully smiling John Key has continued to inch us along to that country he envisaged we could be way back before he became PM. Remember?? Playground of the south pacific or something ?
Oct 2, 2023·edited Oct 4, 2023Liked by Bernard Hickey
"may they (the biggest houses) all fall off their cliffs!!"
Key and Luxon and their cronies are full of terrible greed and will wreak horrendous/horrific damage on/to a substantial percentage/proportion of New Zealanders but please do not allow that to poison your mind and soul and wish harm to them.
I noticed that donation story too. Sickens me... The utter lack of any of the values that could take us where we need to go. Grubby (love how you used that word) fat, grabby fingers on whatever might be in reach.
'One of the features of National’s fiscal plan on Friday was the confirmation of a return to inflation indexation from wage indexation for people on the main benefits, but not New Zealand Superannuation. The measure saves $2 billion over four years. NZ Super at $19 billion per year is a vastly larger expense than benefits at $3.5 billion. National could easily pay for its tax cuts by indexing NZ Super to inflation…just saying. The unfairness could not be more obvious.'
True, but the unfairness would not be resolved by indexing NZ Super to inflation. The unfairness is National's attack on the poor by switching benefits away from wage-indexation.
Many people on NZ Super, including an increasing proportion of renters, need every dollar they get, just as other beneficiaries do, and would steadily descend into paupery if NZ Super were changed from wage to inflation indexation.
The answer, as every party in Parliament knows but refuses to discuss, is to bring back the surtax on NZ Super abolished in 1998, so that NZ Superannuation goes to those who need it, not to the many wealthy retired with bountiful other income, who don't.
Winston has stated New Zealand First will NOT have any part of a government which includes the Labour party, and he will not.
the Labour government has enacted terrible water and sewage legislation and consequently will lose the election.
the National Act (New Zealand First) government will wreak terrible damage on New Zealand society and will reignite/relight/restart the raging inferno of increasing housing prices. my soul weeps with distress at the terrible poverty that is going to be inflicted on an increasing percentage of New Zealand families, mainly by the banks grossly excessive profits and the residential property investors and speculators greed. there was an article on TV earlier today that the biggest financial contributor to election campaigns was the property industry and the contributions went mostly to two political parties....not surprising.
Thank you Bernard, will watch Sunday John Campbell interview. The children are the future as is the environment for them. Two issues that are not being considered in this election (children & environment) by the majority of candidates. All children in our nation are as important as are those in my whanau. I individually love my own but within our world they are no more important than children who are forced into poverty in our nation.
Funny idea. Do you think people who are progressives at 30 suddenly become conservatives on their 65th birthday? I suspect there are a few of Bernard’s paid subscribers that you’d be popping in the rubbish.
I imagine that you’re had experiences that are relevant to today and tomorrow, as I have. I’m happy for 16 to be voter age. But they are automatically limited in life experiences.
Not sure how strong negotiation on behalf of the natural and social environment would be selling Green voters short. Wouldn't the lack of trying to directly influence policy be selling voters short? Bowing out in advance, preferring to sit on opposition benches and letting some type of NZ First/Act influence dominate - isn't this actually selling Green voters short by making transformative futures even tougher to attain? I very much do understand your perspective but still, am suggesting that urgent times demand radical action. Options for king/queenmakers never mention the Greens but actually by numbers, the Greens could be in a strong position and ruling themselves out just places a warped sense of power in the wrong spot, prematurely. What if a cabinet position or two may be negotiated? Nothing is impossible (or is it! :))
Yes . I wonder if ,after the election ,National made a phone call to Greens ..what ACT /NZF would do ?? I too feel James Shaw would 'answer the phone ' because he is a polite person and who knows what might follow ... but yes, it would give them some influence for the future.
Thanks Chris. Performative dross. I'd prefer Labour actually do something useful, such as lifting its debt ceiling and using its balance sheet to reduce emissions, build affordable homes and reduce the uncosted liabilities on the young. But that would put up mortgage rates and and drive down land prices so...
I disagree. I can't click on most of the links, but I value the pointers to who is saying what. If I really feel I need to know more, I can subscribe. But at least I know what I'm not reading about.
Good journalism isnt always free and these days struggles to make money so thats the price you have to pay sometimes
Thanks Janet. I try where I can to find free versions or give away my gift links. I subscribe to all those services to ensure I stay on top of things and can't help trying to give everyone else a heads up. I'll keep trying to find free versions.
The only problem with Sharon Murdoch's Cartoon is that it is not brutal enough.
Given potential damage of the proposed cuts & the impact on the children's future from lack of action on environment, infrastructure & services, National & Act have gone from literally kissing babies to figuratively picking them up by the leg & dashing them against a brick wall,.
Hi Bernard,
Sunday program did us all a disservice last night. Very sorry for Dr Poulton and his family but what needed to be highlighted for the whole hour was his message that poverty is a poor parent. Concentrating on one man's mortality is typical of faux clickbait Journalism not addressing the issues involved in a grown-up way just concentrating on personalities. It did a disservice to Dr Poulton's monumental work for the Dunedin Study. Why not some information and data rather than tear-jerking journalism (I cried). I agree with David Mohring.
Patrick Medlicott
Sadly I agree, Dr Poulton’s monumental work got lost, I was wondering if there is a longer version available. It is a truth, that poverty is the most debilitating barrier to health, wellbeing, and the ability to positively and creatively contribute to society, yet in our country it is a reason to blame and punish.
Thanks Patrick. I understand those thoughts. All I'd say is there are ways to tell stories that connect to many more people that use those very human stories to draw people in. Also, Richie was know by so many. And loved. John decided with his framing to pay tribute to his work through the people who loved and supported Richie. I think he would have liked that. And John did have a good lash at the poverty issue in his article.
Point taken
P
Good to see the CBAM narrative entering the discourse, another exposure of the magical thinking/policy/treaty ignorance from the likely next Govt
Free via Politico EU
https://www.politico.eu/article/europe-climate-fight-global-carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism-cbam-tax/
https://twitter.com/NZheretic/status/1625731761589329921
"I expect things will change more rapidly when the EU starts taxing polluters imports, to the point where local manufacturers can compete with low wage economies such as China.
Those business that adapt to changing requirements & environments can thrive."
Was waiting for the hook to come out from stage left, to remove the inappropriate actor. Winston Peters pantomime performance on Q&A came across as plain old desperate behaviour to avoid committing to any detail at all. I think Jack Tame's question to James Shaw re: a Greens - Nat Govt was the most interesting by far. And James Shaw's continued insistence to be tied to Labour no matter what - makes little sense if the environmental/social emergencies are to be seriously addressed starting October 15th.
Agree, it is called being principled.
I hear what you say and have heard this reaction repeatedly. Yet, the time really is now to put planetary and social crises ahead of political histories or perceived norms. In the bigger picture we are in fact, out of time. For the next two weeks I accept this tribalism is all part of the election campaign and unlikely to change. But after that, for the sake of this and future generations, for the sake of business owners, farmers, and everyone else we have to find pathways to work together on solutions. My view is that whoever enters Parliament after the election will be forced, within a reasonably short timeframe, to take part in re-making policy in all sorts of directions to cope with what is coming at us. I'd like to trust that the common good will prevail.
I also would like to trust that the common good will prevail but the possibility of that seems highly unlikely.
Transformational change in pursuit of the common good requires transformational leaders in the mold of Norm Kirk eg.
What we have now now seems to be more incremental mediocrity or the return of Ruth Richardson.
True. An alternate to transformational leadership from one icon is to ramp up
the citizen voice. Create opportunities for constructive engagement around the common good that then point the way for paid leaders to track along.
"I'd like to trust that the common good will prevail."
no chance/hope whatsoever of that happening with a National-Act government.
That's fair. But then Greens need to sit on the cross benches and attack Labour at every turn. They were captured totally in this term.
What policies the Greens are promoting do you see National agreeing to? I see none and if the Greens will be willing to sell their voters cheaply that would be the end of the Green party.
If there will be a govt lead by National (or Winston Peters 😛) the Greens can still work with them if they so happen to stumble upon a policy to protect the environment.
Oops I did reply to you but its in the wrong thread below :)
National is only interested in the Green polling numbers to enhance their chance to get into power. They have zero interest in negotiating policy post election.
It is not a lack of data in NZ that causes us to fail to deal with poverty - the Dunedin Study is an amazing example. Nothing is done about it because this is a grubby little country where the power is with those who have the biggest houses (-may they all fall off their cliffs!!)
From RNZ about 7.00 am today - 'Property Industry Tops Political Donations" - https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/499176/property-industry-tops-political-donations#:~:text=and%20NZ%20First.-,Since%202021%2C%20people%20aligned%20with%20the%20property%20industry%20have%20donated,Labour%20received%202%20percent.
This is where we live. Cheerfully helpfully smiling John Key has continued to inch us along to that country he envisaged we could be way back before he became PM. Remember?? Playground of the south pacific or something ?
"may they (the biggest houses) all fall off their cliffs!!"
Key and Luxon and their cronies are full of terrible greed and will wreak horrendous/horrific damage on/to a substantial percentage/proportion of New Zealanders but please do not allow that to poison your mind and soul and wish harm to them.
excellent link WendtK
I noticed that donation story too. Sickens me... The utter lack of any of the values that could take us where we need to go. Grubby (love how you used that word) fat, grabby fingers on whatever might be in reach.
Bernard writes:
'One of the features of National’s fiscal plan on Friday was the confirmation of a return to inflation indexation from wage indexation for people on the main benefits, but not New Zealand Superannuation. The measure saves $2 billion over four years. NZ Super at $19 billion per year is a vastly larger expense than benefits at $3.5 billion. National could easily pay for its tax cuts by indexing NZ Super to inflation…just saying. The unfairness could not be more obvious.'
True, but the unfairness would not be resolved by indexing NZ Super to inflation. The unfairness is National's attack on the poor by switching benefits away from wage-indexation.
Many people on NZ Super, including an increasing proportion of renters, need every dollar they get, just as other beneficiaries do, and would steadily descend into paupery if NZ Super were changed from wage to inflation indexation.
The answer, as every party in Parliament knows but refuses to discuss, is to bring back the surtax on NZ Super abolished in 1998, so that NZ Superannuation goes to those who need it, not to the many wealthy retired with bountiful other income, who don't.
https://cdn.auckland.ac.nz/assets/business/about/our-research/research-institutes-and-centres/RPRC/PensionBriefing/Pension-briefing-2021-2-NZS-as-basic-income.pdf
John’ I don’t think that Bernard was saying that should be done to superannuation as well as benefit but
I pressed the wrong button..... I read that he was showing how inconsistent it was and how that it only attacked the poor.
I know. Thanks.
Thanks John. Quite right. I'd prefer both stayed on wage indexation.
Winston's answer to social problems from poverty is to build special prisons for gangs. This guy could select the next government.
🫣😖😵💫
Winston has stated New Zealand First will NOT have any part of a government which includes the Labour party, and he will not.
the Labour government has enacted terrible water and sewage legislation and consequently will lose the election.
the National Act (New Zealand First) government will wreak terrible damage on New Zealand society and will reignite/relight/restart the raging inferno of increasing housing prices. my soul weeps with distress at the terrible poverty that is going to be inflicted on an increasing percentage of New Zealand families, mainly by the banks grossly excessive profits and the residential property investors and speculators greed. there was an article on TV earlier today that the biggest financial contributor to election campaigns was the property industry and the contributions went mostly to two political parties....not surprising.
see WendtK's excellent link above.
Thank you Bernard, will watch Sunday John Campbell interview. The children are the future as is the environment for them. Two issues that are not being considered in this election (children & environment) by the majority of candidates. All children in our nation are as important as are those in my whanau. I individually love my own but within our world they are no more important than children who are forced into poverty in our nation.
Perhaps we should lower the voting age to 16 and pass legislation that stated nobody over the age of 65 could vote.......
Funny idea. Do you think people who are progressives at 30 suddenly become conservatives on their 65th birthday? I suspect there are a few of Bernard’s paid subscribers that you’d be popping in the rubbish.
Including me. I am 83. Surely the future is for the young not us oldies
I imagine that you’re had experiences that are relevant to today and tomorrow, as I have. I’m happy for 16 to be voter age. But they are automatically limited in life experiences.
Fine that you and I keep on voting.
And me!
Not sure how strong negotiation on behalf of the natural and social environment would be selling Green voters short. Wouldn't the lack of trying to directly influence policy be selling voters short? Bowing out in advance, preferring to sit on opposition benches and letting some type of NZ First/Act influence dominate - isn't this actually selling Green voters short by making transformative futures even tougher to attain? I very much do understand your perspective but still, am suggesting that urgent times demand radical action. Options for king/queenmakers never mention the Greens but actually by numbers, the Greens could be in a strong position and ruling themselves out just places a warped sense of power in the wrong spot, prematurely. What if a cabinet position or two may be negotiated? Nothing is impossible (or is it! :))
Yes . I wonder if ,after the election ,National made a phone call to Greens ..what ACT /NZF would do ?? I too feel James Shaw would 'answer the phone ' because he is a polite person and who knows what might follow ... but yes, it would give them some influence for the future.
Hi Bernard
What's your thoughts on the latest statement from labour for a minister of just transition?
see link below https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/09/25/climate-change-labour-pledges-new-minister-for-just-transitions/
PS Keep up the great work.
Thanks Chris. Performative dross. I'd prefer Labour actually do something useful, such as lifting its debt ceiling and using its balance sheet to reduce emissions, build affordable homes and reduce the uncosted liabilities on the young. But that would put up mortgage rates and and drive down land prices so...
I've opened this one up now because it had such great engagement and over 50 likes.