Hipkins rules out wealth tax, says National's plan for value capture tool a 'land tax'; prefers fiscal prudence to much larger extra investment to cope with very fast population growth
I think you are being very narrow in your focus and completely ignoring global context. Aotearoa is not acting in isolation, and given news out of UK and US its unfair to claim we have greatest rental distress for example. Far rather a cautious approach, acknowledging a range of external factors, without grandiose uncosted bilious promises and "personal guarantees" whatever that means. Disrupted global supply chains, including key workforce skills are a reality and unprecedented unpredictable events also. People are really struggling and its temptingly human to try and find someone to blame, but it's disturbing to constantly hear media "professionals" beat up on the same narrative. We face complex ongoing issues as a nation and a planet. To act as though one man, or one government can unilaterally "fix" everything, or is responsible for it all is a sham. I overheard someone yesterday blame the government for the dairy payout! Ffs. Media need to be responsible and stop lazy sneering
Opportunist that I am, I can't resist pointing out that The Opportunities Party, TOP, is the only political party that argues for a low-rate annual land tax in exchange for lower income tax rates (and to change all local-body rates to land value from capital value).
I don't think Bernard is looking for one person to unilaterally fix everything, but looking for an acknowledgement that doing the same things over and over again for so long with the results being the same or worse, perhaps warrant a different way of thinking.
I was surprised to hear that in our health system, only the buildings are an investment but the rest is consumption. Seriously? Having more Drs and nurses is consumption?
He talks about not wanting to use immigration as a way to fudge the GDP numbers but that is exactly what they are doing.
The entire economic theory doesn't make sense, the elephant is in the room and very few journalists are willing to point out the the emperor has no cloths.
Thanks Bernard! Will listen to the interview this weekend. You touched on it in your text, but Hipkins has had to wind back the ambition because it Seems voters are disillusioned by the complete non delivery of the Ardern ambitions. Perhaps voters don’t believe anything ambitious that politicians say because of her failure to deliver.
Thanks Bernard, for another persistent and revealing interview. For me, again, it exposes the reality of Tweedledum and Tweedledumber in this election cycle. The fact that they have no answers and expend most of their political energy and resources dodging the core issues is telling: the parliamentary process doesn’t run our society, the banks, construction corporations and agribusiness elites are not up for election. Not a reality unique to Aotearoa. For me, the elections are a chance to explore new approaches. Like the discussion here, at least partly independent of the ruling ideas: questioning, acknowledging our real differences and struggling for points of change. There’s room for optimism if we lift the discussion out of the election swamp. Kia kaha.
In NZ the 4 biggest banks, the bigger electricity companies, the supermarket duopoly and many old peoples homes/retirement village owners are making grossly excessive profits while low to middle income families are in serious poverty and struggling to exist. Therefore the humanitarian action is: enact legislation that takes from the excessive profits of businesses/companies/corporations and enact legislation that improves existence for low to middle income working people.
You might have heard this explanation on RNZ yesterday about how and why banks are raising interest rates despite the Official Cash Rate not going up. An obvious example of an oligarchy profiteering in clear view.
"Consumption now won't benefit future generations".
That's a loaded statement that needs unpacking.
Splitting dental off from other "early intervention" health initiatives is nonsensical. And it sounds particularly moronic when he says it in the very next breath.
Waxing lyrical about fixing teens teeth before they end up in hospital all the while ignoring the guy who misses work because he ends up in hospital with heart issues because his gum disease has worked its way into his bloodstream.
We all know who ACT would prioritise.
Defering discussions by deflecting commitments to the next few budgets - are farming omissions properly pricied?
Of course they're not! We know they're not.
What should we doing to drive those prices down?
Really? That's the question?
"Transport is still going to be a big challenging area. Our investments in rail and our investments in mass rapid transport that are essential if we are actually going to achieve some of our longer run goals around climate omissions". I paraphrase.
Again. What a ridiculous thing to say after you have just announced tunnels and more roads for cars.
His "cassic example" a scheme where people trade in old combustion engine cars for evs that was going to reduce our emissions by such a negligable amount - so instead they chose (because there's always choice) work with NZ Steel to reduce emissions by 1% every year.
So they won't "shift the dial a fraction" on trade in combustion engines but they'll give elites a pay-off for buying a new Tesla 🤹♀️
"Superficially attractive". You said it, Hipkins.
"It is a climate emergency. let's make sure that everything we are doing is achieving the best bang for buck."
Yeah, nah.
He avoided answering your last question. Like an admission that he knows Labour don't have a sensible plan, so their response in the future will be - it's not our fault, we had to respond to an emergency....and National are worse.
The cognitive dissonance seems to result from Hipkins wanting to acknowledge the need to deal to the obvious issue (climate change, affordable housing, a sensible immigration policy) while making it clear that he's decided to "stick with the status quo because it works well for median voters", as you say. He's hoping that different groups will hear what they want to hear rather than pick up on the obvious contradictions.
He can't ignore the heard of elephants in the room, but he's decided that it is easier to let them knock over all the furniture than it is to try to ride them. And way more politically expedient.
Once upon a time the country owned the banks and the electricity companies. Just think if we did that again all our economic problems would be solved. Such a simple thing to do.
Feels like I just finished listening to an interview with some nice guy down at the pub... not the PM! Seems he just thinks he's powerless to do anything
One of the reasons neoliberalism has been so successful at moving wealth from the poor to the rich is that our work force has been deliberately de-unionised. The removal of these key defence organisations has left most workers in Aotearoa with no means of collectively bargaining with employers and the state. A good question for electoral candidates is to ask if they support unions and collective bargaining as a part of our community life. And much more importantly, to ask ourselves what practical things we do to help build unions in Aotearoa. Here’s an example of Amazon workers organising and fighting back: https://x.com/wrkrsstrikeback/status/1700180710215111077?s=46&t=P2PMLXkOM3pvZEWMzGHZyQ
I think you are being very narrow in your focus and completely ignoring global context. Aotearoa is not acting in isolation, and given news out of UK and US its unfair to claim we have greatest rental distress for example. Far rather a cautious approach, acknowledging a range of external factors, without grandiose uncosted bilious promises and "personal guarantees" whatever that means. Disrupted global supply chains, including key workforce skills are a reality and unprecedented unpredictable events also. People are really struggling and its temptingly human to try and find someone to blame, but it's disturbing to constantly hear media "professionals" beat up on the same narrative. We face complex ongoing issues as a nation and a planet. To act as though one man, or one government can unilaterally "fix" everything, or is responsible for it all is a sham. I overheard someone yesterday blame the government for the dairy payout! Ffs. Media need to be responsible and stop lazy sneering
The idea that National was going to drop a 'land value' tax on residential land due to government activities was, in my view, very weak .
Imagine what a 0.5-0.75% land tax on all residential zoned land introduced 6 years ago would have done to the coffers for infrastructure and housing !
One must keep hoping .
Nice interview .. chuckled at your .."and the problem is ?".
Chris H is a likeable chap .but my vote is still going to that little party with bold ideas .
good to see you are sending this out to the public . Thanks .
Opportunist that I am, I can't resist pointing out that The Opportunities Party, TOP, is the only political party that argues for a low-rate annual land tax in exchange for lower income tax rates (and to change all local-body rates to land value from capital value).
https://www.top.org.nz/affordable-housing
I don't think Bernard is looking for one person to unilaterally fix everything, but looking for an acknowledgement that doing the same things over and over again for so long with the results being the same or worse, perhaps warrant a different way of thinking.
I was surprised to hear that in our health system, only the buildings are an investment but the rest is consumption. Seriously? Having more Drs and nurses is consumption?
He talks about not wanting to use immigration as a way to fudge the GDP numbers but that is exactly what they are doing.
The entire economic theory doesn't make sense, the elephant is in the room and very few journalists are willing to point out the the emperor has no cloths.
He’s a very inspiring leader isn’t he... Nawt. 😑
Thanks Bernard! Will listen to the interview this weekend. You touched on it in your text, but Hipkins has had to wind back the ambition because it Seems voters are disillusioned by the complete non delivery of the Ardern ambitions. Perhaps voters don’t believe anything ambitious that politicians say because of her failure to deliver.
Thanks Bernard, for another persistent and revealing interview. For me, again, it exposes the reality of Tweedledum and Tweedledumber in this election cycle. The fact that they have no answers and expend most of their political energy and resources dodging the core issues is telling: the parliamentary process doesn’t run our society, the banks, construction corporations and agribusiness elites are not up for election. Not a reality unique to Aotearoa. For me, the elections are a chance to explore new approaches. Like the discussion here, at least partly independent of the ruling ideas: questioning, acknowledging our real differences and struggling for points of change. There’s room for optimism if we lift the discussion out of the election swamp. Kia kaha.
In NZ the 4 biggest banks, the bigger electricity companies, the supermarket duopoly and many old peoples homes/retirement village owners are making grossly excessive profits while low to middle income families are in serious poverty and struggling to exist. Therefore the humanitarian action is: enact legislation that takes from the excessive profits of businesses/companies/corporations and enact legislation that improves existence for low to middle income working people.
Excellent point.
You might have heard this explanation on RNZ yesterday about how and why banks are raising interest rates despite the Official Cash Rate not going up. An obvious example of an oligarchy profiteering in clear view.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2018905910/ocr-is-on-hold-so-why-are-home-loan-rates-still-rising
The banks could shoot up mortgage rates and kill home affordability without losing a single (major party) politician.
"Consumption now won't benefit future generations".
That's a loaded statement that needs unpacking.
Splitting dental off from other "early intervention" health initiatives is nonsensical. And it sounds particularly moronic when he says it in the very next breath.
Waxing lyrical about fixing teens teeth before they end up in hospital all the while ignoring the guy who misses work because he ends up in hospital with heart issues because his gum disease has worked its way into his bloodstream.
We all know who ACT would prioritise.
Defering discussions by deflecting commitments to the next few budgets - are farming omissions properly pricied?
Of course they're not! We know they're not.
What should we doing to drive those prices down?
Really? That's the question?
"Transport is still going to be a big challenging area. Our investments in rail and our investments in mass rapid transport that are essential if we are actually going to achieve some of our longer run goals around climate omissions". I paraphrase.
Again. What a ridiculous thing to say after you have just announced tunnels and more roads for cars.
His "cassic example" a scheme where people trade in old combustion engine cars for evs that was going to reduce our emissions by such a negligable amount - so instead they chose (because there's always choice) work with NZ Steel to reduce emissions by 1% every year.
So they won't "shift the dial a fraction" on trade in combustion engines but they'll give elites a pay-off for buying a new Tesla 🤹♀️
"Superficially attractive". You said it, Hipkins.
"It is a climate emergency. let's make sure that everything we are doing is achieving the best bang for buck."
Yeah, nah.
He avoided answering your last question. Like an admission that he knows Labour don't have a sensible plan, so their response in the future will be - it's not our fault, we had to respond to an emergency....and National are worse.
Trump was worse. He was still elected.
🌏
The cognitive dissonance seems to result from Hipkins wanting to acknowledge the need to deal to the obvious issue (climate change, affordable housing, a sensible immigration policy) while making it clear that he's decided to "stick with the status quo because it works well for median voters", as you say. He's hoping that different groups will hear what they want to hear rather than pick up on the obvious contradictions.
He can't ignore the heard of elephants in the room, but he's decided that it is easier to let them knock over all the furniture than it is to try to ride them. And way more politically expedient.
Once upon a time the country owned the banks and the electricity companies. Just think if we did that again all our economic problems would be solved. Such a simple thing to do.
Feels like I just finished listening to an interview with some nice guy down at the pub... not the PM! Seems he just thinks he's powerless to do anything
One of the reasons neoliberalism has been so successful at moving wealth from the poor to the rich is that our work force has been deliberately de-unionised. The removal of these key defence organisations has left most workers in Aotearoa with no means of collectively bargaining with employers and the state. A good question for electoral candidates is to ask if they support unions and collective bargaining as a part of our community life. And much more importantly, to ask ourselves what practical things we do to help build unions in Aotearoa. Here’s an example of Amazon workers organising and fighting back: https://x.com/wrkrsstrikeback/status/1700180710215111077?s=46&t=P2PMLXkOM3pvZEWMzGHZyQ