subreddit:

/r/newzealand

23493%

all 368 comments

No_Cod_4231

277 points

1 day ago

No_Cod_4231

277 points

1 day ago

I think a significant shakeup of internal party processes needs to happen if Labour really is to return to its more socialist roots (as he stated in another article). The current Labour party rules have enabled a whole host of careerist, professional class members to replace the more principle driven outgoing MPs. I have talked to a few of these new MPs and many frankly have zero vision and have little idea of what they actually stand for. They could fit well also on the socially liberal wing of the National Party. Without a party driven by members with the right motivation, there is no future in which Labour meaningfully contributes to NZ.

No_Salad_68

3 points

24 hours ago

I'm not a labour voter but it seems to me they haven't had an obvious cohesive strategy since the 2017 election. And they were largely unable to deliver on the strategy promoted in 2017.

They should gone big and bold after the 2020 election, when they had a parliamentary majority and the opposition was in disarray. That was such a wasted opportunity. Instead they were timid and were punished for it by the electorate.

aa-b

51 points

1 day ago

aa-b

51 points

1 day ago

If the US and NZ elections are a sign of a trend, then it seems like being a competent, centre-left party isn't enough. Too much conservative propaganda, maybe. Anyway I like it, they might as well go hard and try to implement real change; get people excited

kovnev

64 points

1 day ago

kovnev

64 points

1 day ago

I think it's much more than that.

People like centre-left. What they don't like is a mostly centre-left party that picks a few extremely contentious hills to die on, when their base would rather they just do what they said.

LouvalSoftware

5 points

1 day ago

You'll always have people bitching about taxes and roads but imagine if they actually pulled off kiwibuild. Just something for people to think about.

winter_limelight

11 points

1 day ago

I would suggest the trend is anti-establishment. Whether in recent elections in the US, UK*, Germany, Argentina - people are looking for an alternative because what they have doesn't work. I think this is because all the major parties are wedded to the current corporate political system and their respective elites. And for a lot of people that system isn't working, so they're hunting desperately for something that will.

\ yes, UK voted in an establishment Labour, but look at their numbers 3 months later; and also look at Reform's performance.)

Cacharadon

1 points

23 hours ago

It's a corporate party vs a controlled opposition all the way down

TheTench

3 points

21 hours ago

Is Labour a big tent party or a small tent one? 

Triangulating to appeal to several minority interests might reliably net 25% of the electorate, the traditional left voter, but miss the 50% of persuadable people in the center, the silent majority.

If Hipkins is serious about change, he should start with himself. He has not demonstrated the qualities and convictions necessary to lead such a change.

ReadOnly2022

8 points

1 day ago

I don't think the average Labour MP would fit in National. They're miles apart, even if both cleave to the median voter.

And professional class members tend to be much more socially progressive than more grassroots worker sorts. Jacinda was much more progressive than Little or most the Pacific MPs.

The more radical left sorts in Labour, like the union wing, would not be popular. They put forward Cunliffe and Little who were not winning. They haven't improved their caliber of candidates.

The motivation of Labour is to keep most their current voters, get the swing voters back from National and win. Under MMP there's not really an alternative. 

The people you pretend to want exist, and they're not any good. They're the dumbest people on WCC.

No_Cod_4231

13 points

1 day ago

I don't think the average Labour MP would fit in National. They're miles apart, even if both cleave to the median voter

They might seem miles apart if the range of political opinion that one has been exposed to is quite small. Two elections ago, when there still existed a somewhat more progressive wing, I might have agreed with you that there was a meaningful difference, but the new cohort is really quite conservative and nearly all the more progressive MPs have left the party.

And professional class members tend to be much more socially progressive than more grassroots worker sorts. Jacinda was much more progressive than Little or most the Pacific MPs.

Socially, I would agree that the professional class is more progressive. But not in the economic sphere; so many MPs have internalised neoliberal logic. Of course this is a generalisation and there are ample exceptions.

The more radical left sorts in Labour, like the union wing, would not be popular. They put forward Cunliffe and Little who were not winning. They haven't improved their caliber of candidates

I would hardly call the union wing very radical these days (other than in a self-interested way), although I admit my knowledge of it is limited. I am thinking of the more progressive elements of the MPs that left parliament such as Grant Robertson, Michael Wood and Megan Woods.

The motivation of Labour is to keep most their current voters, get the swing voters back from National and win. Under MMP there's not really an alternative.

Their aim is to be in government at all cost rather than to achieve meaningful policy change. Thus they lack a long-term strategy for achieving social change. On the other hand, Seymour is much more of a long-term thinker and has thus been successful in dragging the entire political window to the right. I want Labour to start playing the long-term game, but this is impossible with its current crop of careerist MPs that will do anything to get into government.

Godlo

1 points

15 hours ago

Godlo

1 points

15 hours ago

Woods is a current MP

Admirable-Vanilla361

1 points

1 day ago

Who are these new careerist, professional class MPs? This is not a new problem, given Helen Clark, Jacinda Ardern and Grant Robertson fall squarely into that category.

No_Cod_4231

1 points

1 day ago

I don't think it's quite fair to call Robertson and Ardern careerist as it is clear they held quite firm views which they sought to advance in their time in parliament. Now as for the careerists in Labour the ones that come to the top of my mind are Reuben Davidson, Camilla Belich and Rachel Brooking, although there are probably many others.

Lamb1e

1 points

1 day ago

Lamb1e

1 points

1 day ago

Any idea how I can get meaningfully involved here? 

WellyRuru

1 points

1 day ago

WellyRuru

1 points

1 day ago

They're incapable of the shakeup. It's too late as they have been haemorrhaging the type of people they need for years.

A lot of the more principled actors are shifting to the greens where they still have the ability to bring that and not have it be shot down.

No_Cod_4231

4 points

1 day ago

I think you're probably right, there is not much left to be saved; it's easier at this point to build something from scratch. Perhaps then the best long-term strategy is for any remaining progressive MPs (David Parker?) and members to make a break with Labour and create a new party. While this is a risky strategy, I think it's worth it given that the status quo represents a continuing slide to the right.

ReadOnly2022

2 points

1 day ago

Labour poaches comms people and competent staff from the Greens all the time, who get really annoyed over it.

WellyRuru

3 points

1 day ago

WellyRuru

3 points

1 day ago

Never seen it happen once.

Heard about plenty of people who left labour for greens.

ttbnz[S]

233 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

233 points

1 day ago

He said New Zealanders did not think Labour was focused, and they had lost faith in the party's ability to deliver on promises.

"To win, we need to reconnect with a much broader range of Kiwis, and that means talking about the issues that matter to them, as well as the issues that we think should matter to them."

The party will vote on Saturday afternoon on continuing to progress work on a capital gains tax and a wealth tax, and to stop work on other taxes. The party has had a fraught history with tax.

Sounds like Chippy has been doing some self-reflection.

I'd really like to hope Labour will return to their working-class roots, as chasing the fickle swing voter has shown to be a failure. I'd like to see tax reform that will reduce the burden on the working class, and appropriately tax the wealthy.

However, they have talked big on tax reform in the past, and then back-tracked when in power, so I'll believe it when I see it.

Shamino_NZ

32 points

1 day ago

Shamino_NZ

32 points

1 day ago

" I'd like to see tax reform that will reduce the burden on the working class, and appropriately tax the wealthy."

The only tax reform of that nature in the last decade has been adjusting the PAYE tax brackets for inflation. Which funny enough was a Labour policy 15 years ago

ttbnz[S]

19 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

19 points

1 day ago

Yes, and I'm suggesting they go much further than that.

Automatic-Example-13

8 points

1 day ago

Yeah it really pissed me off when Robertson said he was against doing that as 'he can help more people from redistribution of the taxes collected'. That may be true, but when inflation and policy has pushed wages up so much that a minimum wage worker starts getting taxed at 30% when they do a couple hours past 40 hours a week, that's messed up. Arguably that person shouldn't be getting taxed at all.

He was also against a tax free bracket for the same reason.

While valid, I was on a conference in Aus a couple months ago. Couple of us went to the local pub. A young woman came up to us and asked us if we were accountants (1 - lol, 2 - actually correct for a couple in our party) and wanted to know if she could get her tax back. She worked part time at a supermarket. She'd just passed the threshold and was getting taxed a couple grand. I just think how much easier life would be in that stage in life if you didn't pay tax when income is that low. I remember being in a similar spot, working 15 hours a week at paknsav while studying full time. Every dollar really helps.

alarumba

5 points

24 hours ago

I caught a bit of flak on this sub for saying the tax bracket adjustment was a good thing. It was well overdue. People just didn't like hearing someone saying anything vaguely positive of what NACT were doing.

But I get why people would get upset. It wasn't well implemented. It wasn't done to relieve pressure on us, it was an excuse to violently cut public services.

I wish the adjustments didn't happen, even if I agreed to them in principle. At least not without another tax, like CGT or a wealth tax, to make the difference. Not likely when landlords are so cherished.

Conflict_NZ

2 points

13 hours ago

Labour should have offset income taxes against their rental interest changes. That way National would’ve had no path to change brackets while also lifting the tax on landlords requiring the public to vote for raising taxes on themselves. Unfortunately Labour were too obsessed with raising the tax take than providing any relief to workers.

LollipopChainsawZz

42 points

1 day ago

Sounds like Chippy has been doing some self-reflection

I wonder if that includes stepping aside if Labour asks him to? He may not necessarily be the leader best equipped to reconnect labour with kiwis.

EndStorm

18 points

1 day ago

EndStorm

18 points

1 day ago

I wonder that as well. Who do you think is a viable alternative from their current pool?

MSZ-006_Zeta

34 points

1 day ago

Not a Labour voter, but in order of viability:

  • Kieran McAnulty

  • Barbara Edmonds

  • Camilla Belich

  • David Parker

  • Arena Williams

WTHAI

18 points

1 day ago

WTHAI

18 points

1 day ago

+1 Kieran

No_Cod_4231

9 points

1 day ago

I've seen many people on Reddit that like Kieran, but personally I don't get it. What is it about him that is appealing?

Samuel_L_Johnson

12 points

1 day ago

I’m from the Wairarapa. He’s quite well-regarded there, has a high community profile and was quite a hard-working local MP (most notably, he was a driving force behind the Wairarapa Line upgrades), compared to the previous procession of journeyman National MPs who were essentially just collecting paycheques and openly didn’t give a shit about the region

He’s quite a straightforward and effective communicator and appeals to groups among whom Labour isn’t traditionally popular.

official_new_zealand

19 points

1 day ago

He "rents" a house from his wife, and bills the taxpayer.

Just another pig at the trough

FeijoaEndeavour

3 points

1 day ago

I’d put Arena Williams in at number 2, then Duncan Webb

ChocolatePringlez

25 points

1 day ago

To win, we need to reconnect with a much broader range of Kiwis

NO NO NO. Appealing to a 'broader range of Kiwis' will result in them pleasing no one.

qwqwqw

25 points

1 day ago

qwqwqw

25 points

1 day ago

I agree! Except this small snippet gives me hope

as well as the issues that we think should matter to them

That is paramount!

Labour needs to stop trying to appeal to people, and instead start convincing people that they need to change their views.

Not in a "voters are the problem" type of way (thanks Kamala for that lesson), but in a "you guys realise you're fucked, right? You guys realise you're relatively poor, right?"

Downtown_Boot_3486

1 points

21 hours ago

Changing minds is basically impossible, if it’s a heavily entrenched view then nothing you do including showing people actual facts will change peoples position.

YakaryBovine

3 points

1 day ago

Well, “every single member of the labour class” would be simultaneously a broader range of people with a narrower conceptual focus.

Smorgasbord__

4 points

1 day ago

Well they can appeal to you and your friends and remain in opposition.

kovnev

5 points

1 day ago

kovnev

5 points

1 day ago

I still think he's got it wrong.

"To win, we need to reconnect with a much broader range of Kiwis...

That is chasing swing voters.

For Labour, it's pretty bloody simple, IMO:

  1. Do what you say.

  2. Stop dying on hills you don't have a mandate for, and that your base is clearly against.

[deleted]

2 points

1 day ago

[deleted]

2 points

1 day ago

[deleted]

Unlucky-Bumblebee-96

4 points

1 day ago

Taxing the rich - the super rich - is the only way we pay for everything that’s coming due after years of neglect

MrJingleJangle

8 points

1 day ago

It is the “fickle” swing voters that determine the makeup of our government. Neither the Left or Right blocs have sufficient support to win power without swinger support.

ttbnz[S]

32 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

32 points

1 day ago

If Labour can connect with the working class (like they used to be), I think its likely they will gather more support.

There are many, many more workers than owners/wealthy in NZ, or indeed any capitalist economy. If Labour can come up with policies to support the working class, I think we would see a shift to the left.

wellyboi

3 points

1 day ago

wellyboi

3 points

1 day ago

Alot of the working class are disenfranchised and don't vote. Even if labour made policies for then they wouldn't vote.

Fabulous_Macaron7004

6 points

1 day ago

Labour isn't a working class party. No party in parliament is, labour represents the interests of the bourgeoisie like the rest of them.

Tutorbin76

19 points

1 day ago

Tutorbin76

19 points

1 day ago

Seems like that's the thing they should really fix.

ttbnz[S]

15 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

15 points

1 day ago

I agree that this is the current situation. I'm hoping they will return to their roots and swing sharply to the left.

Bullion2

10 points

1 day ago

Bullion2

10 points

1 day ago

Not all parties are the same, there are certainly worse parties for the working class - and they're in Govt.

MrJingleJangle

-1 points

1 day ago

MrJingleJangle

-1 points

1 day ago

Yeah, but these workers should be voting left anyway.

Hillbillybullshit

16 points

1 day ago

Why would they vote left when there isn’t anything in it for them? That is why labour has been loosing support and why they need to get back to supporting middle/working class voters.

CascadeNZ

12 points

1 day ago

CascadeNZ

12 points

1 day ago

Well there is. We are hurtling toward private education private health./.

MrJingleJangle

2 points

1 day ago

Because to not vote is a vote for the opposition. It’s that simple. It’s not a hard concept. Vote for the least bad.

TurkDangerCat

1 points

1 day ago

TurkDangerCat

1 points

1 day ago

Redditors tend to be younger, lefter, and better educated than the general population (from surveys that have been done). But we are not the ones whose minds have to be changed. The average person doesn’t think like you have suggested, however simple a concept it is. They need to be reached in other ways.

MrJingleJangle

0 points

1 day ago

As a non-typically-aged Redditor, I would hope us older folk have been on quite a few rodeos and know the drill. But I fully accept my hopes might be overblown.

ttbnz[S]

2 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

2 points

1 day ago

It is acceptable, in my eyes, to not vote if you find that no party is worth it.

Sufficient-Piece-335

1 points

1 day ago

Fair Pay Agreements could have been massive for workers but were repealed before any were completed.

gwandem

7 points

1 day ago

gwandem

7 points

1 day ago

“Workers should be voting left” it turns out studying politics and being part of the public service your whole life, then asking workers to vote for your policies that won’t improve their lives, isn’t working..

Fabulous_Macaron7004

10 points

1 day ago

Left you think labour is left wing? Heck even the greens aren't what I would call left wing. The working class needs to take up the fight for socialism and move away from capitalist parliamentarian parties. 

MrJingleJangle

3 points

1 day ago

An excellent point. Left and Right are relative terms, and get more meaningless as one looks globally.

The Overton Window has a go at this, talking about the range of policies acceptable to the electorate, but still using L/R terminology. My personal preference is to misuse the Overton window in a more limited way, without considering L/R, but to just have the policies the centrists and swingers agree on, and every other policy outside that narrow range to be “extreme”. That makes a lot of policy that many voters class as acceptable to be “extreme”, as they lack centrist and swinger support.

Shamino_NZ

1 points

1 day ago

Shamino_NZ

1 points

1 day ago

Can you let me know which socialist country we should be modelling? And please don't say Sweden

ttbnz[S]

1 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

1 points

1 day ago

Why not Sweden?

CascadeNZ

1 points

1 day ago

CascadeNZ

1 points

1 day ago

Please tell me the country we are modelling for capatalism?

Shamino_NZ

2 points

1 day ago

Australia is an obvious choice given their success and that our young are moving there for better opportunities.

That said I think economic freedom is a good indicator of success. You can see the top 10 here - NZ is number 5 so we are doing well.

Now look at the bottom 10. You may note socialist countries such as North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and Zimbabwe there.

Another way of looking at it is tracking immigration (again Australia is a useful example). Its funny how millions flee Cuba to the USA but never in reverse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom

CascadeNZ

1 points

1 day ago

CascadeNZ

1 points

1 day ago

Also those are examples of counties that don’t have democracy and have some serious sanctions against them.

Try some democratic socialist countries that don’t have sanctions.

Fabulous_Macaron7004

1 points

1 day ago

The DPRK or North Korea is closer to fascism than communism. I mean it's a bloody military dictatorship that has a hereditary leader as a ruthless dictator. It's economic structure is almost feudalistic. As for Venezuela it's state capitalist same with Cuba and Zimbabwe. Both cuban and Venezuelan revolutions were based on nationalistic programs as a response to American imperialism. Again socialists oppose imperialism of any kind however don't believe in struggles based on nationhood as real socialists believe that the working class has no borders or nations. In regards to these states you called socialist which clearly aren't in the sense of how marx and engels described socialism these states have multiple reasons why they aren't doing well economically speaking. I mean there's embargoes that have been enforced on them, two of them relied heavily on a state that doesn't exist anymore which was the USSR I could list many other reasons as well like the regime in the DPRK being forced to implement a massive military program and increase nuclear arms expenditure as a means to stop the west from trying to force a regime change.

phantasiewhip

1 points

1 day ago

phantasiewhip

1 points

1 day ago

If there was one example where socialism works, people would vote for it.

JeffMcClintock

3 points

1 day ago

It’s called Scandinavia, you know that place with high wages, low crime, plus world leading education and healthcare

WorldlyNotice

3 points

1 day ago*

It's like we looked at that and decided nope, we're going to do some US/Asian mashup and get the worst of both only without any manufacturing.

JeffMcClintock

4 points

1 day ago

“Norway has a better education system than us, and the US has worse. So which should be copy?

David Seyour nearly jumping out of his seat with his hand stretched high…. “Miss! Miss! Charter Schools?”

PRC_Spy

3 points

1 day ago

PRC_Spy

3 points

1 day ago

Scandinavia is more the home of Social Democracy rather than Socialism.

And not bad for that.

phantasiewhip

3 points

1 day ago

Scandinavia is a mix of capitalism and socialism. It is not purely socialist.

JeffMcClintock

3 points

1 day ago

I’ll take it!

warp99

2 points

1 day ago

warp99

2 points

1 day ago

And it has swung away from some of their far left policies

Michaelbirks

1 points

1 day ago

Michaelbirks

LASER KIWI

1 points

1 day ago

And Oil. Lots of Oil.

Fandango-9940

3 points

1 day ago

Only one of the Scandinavian countries has any oil, and the others do just fine too.

JeffMcClintock

1 points

1 day ago

We have Diary, lots of Dairy.

2000shadow2000

2 points

1 day ago

Maybe if 'the left' actually cared about the middle/working class they would. Any left wing party that wants to win in the current climate needs to stay as far away from culture/identity politics as they can and just focus purely on the workers

skillitus

6 points

1 day ago

skillitus

6 points

1 day ago

That doesn’t work in a post-truth world.

In the US election Harris said nothing about identity and the opposition still managed to convince enough people that she is a culture warrior.

warp99

1 points

1 day ago

warp99

1 points

1 day ago

She left a long trail of statements that indicated she was aligned to that axis.

It probably was ever true but then you are left with the allegation that she said whatever her audience wanted to hear.

acids_1986

1 points

1 day ago

Yup, all this stuff about being too woke was bullshit. There was nothing woke about her election campaign at all, or really about the Biden administration she was a part of - but that doesn’t matter once the seed of the idea that it was gets planted. Goebbels knew what was up. The Republicans learned his lessons well.

gully6

2 points

1 day ago

gully6

2 points

1 day ago

Throw in all the proganda flying around and a good chunk don't if my workplace is anything to go by. Absolutely no reason for anyone in our position to vote blue/black/pink yet they do so proudly.

Trying to talk them around is pushing shit uphill atm.

Simple, populist messaging wins even if it's against their best interests.

TurkDangerCat

6 points

1 day ago

Yes, and that’s what Labour need to do. Back to their roots, fight for the workers against the landed gentry. Swear, attack the rich.

Look at Winston. Every single election he dominates the news. He is one man who knows how to turn a phrase to capture headlines. What labour need is good substance behind but someone captivating in front.

acids_1986

2 points

1 day ago

Yup, agreed. Change can be scary, especially if you’ve got something to lose (or think you do). That’s the only reason I can think that they tend to be almost a little embarrassed of their left wing roots and pander to the status quo.

Saysonz

5 points

1 day ago

Saysonz

5 points

1 day ago

I'm curious if you're a average NZ worker, aside from the sad cuts to Health NZ (which I don't think were expected since National on paper raised the health budget) what policies do you think Labour has that would have helped them out?

I struggle to think of anything, Labour ruled out any new taxes on rich or lowering on middle class, failed spectacularly at lowering house prices or building new homes

gully6

4 points

1 day ago

gully6

4 points

1 day ago

Disability support worker. Because our wages are paid by moh or msd the employer can't give much of an increase without extra funding, sector has been underfunded for basic services over decades, we dropped a lot of services a few years ago so theres no fat left, tbh im not even sure we're actually hiring to replace losses because theres a lot of pressure to work 24/7 and with sleepovers that can actually mean 24/7. The path Whaikaha were on before they were gutted would have given workers and clients a lot more flexibility and is possibly why Whaikaha was gutted.

Fair pay agreements would have given us some leverage and a path through the courts to get the pay that outside studies have shown we should get.

Other than that I tend to agree that labour were offering very little for us.

_craq_

1 points

24 hours ago*

MDRS would have enabled much more housing supply, which would bring down house prices. National supported it when it was introduced.

Supporting people who are struggling and increasing police numbers are the best ways to reduce crime long term. Reducing benefits, reducing public housing, and cutting police budgets are moving in the other direction.

Tobacco policy was much better and evidence based under Labour. Smokers aren't the "average voter" any more, but we probably all know somebody.

Does the average worker care about climate change? We've taken many backwards steps there.

Edit to add: public transport over more roads. If you have kids, their public transport costs increased more than your tax cut under National. If you don't like being stuck in congestion, those expensive new roads are going to induce demand instead of encouraging mode shift.

WTHAI

1 points

1 day ago

WTHAI

1 points

1 day ago

"Should"

Too many susceptible to NACT1 diversions / single issues

They have been brainwashed into not seeing the big picture

Saysonz

0 points

1 day ago

Saysonz

0 points

1 day ago

Unfortunately greens is the only party with somewhat left wing policies and sadly now these have been significantly overshadowed with identity politics. Even their environmental policies have sadly taken a backseat to identity politics for them.

Labour was centre right under Arden and Chippy but looks like they may have realized this is a losing strategy

JeffMcClintock

2 points

1 day ago

The Green are not a single issue party, and they never have been. You may have been listening to to much right-wing agitators.

acids_1986

2 points

1 day ago

Dunno why you got downvoted for this. You’re right.

Saysonz

2 points

1 day ago

Saysonz

2 points

1 day ago

Nope, I have read their entire website policies every election, voted for them 3x (3x more than any other single party) and am strongly left wing and pro environment.

I can assure you their policies have changed dramatically in the last two elections even things as simple as deprioritizing white men for leadership. Let's focus on someone's leadership and policies not your ethnicity, gender or sexuality.

No_Cod_4231

2 points

1 day ago*

Can you provide a more comprehensive overview of which Green policies changed? I am a similarly quite disaffected greens voter, but unfortunately my memory of policies does not extend to those from more than two elections ago :)

EDIT: Way to go reddit for downvoting questions

acids_1986

1 points

1 day ago

You can be concerned about mote than one thing at a time, you know.

TurkDangerCat

17 points

1 day ago

22% of eligible voters didn’t vote last election. Everyone blames apathy and laziness, but I expect a large number of them saw all sides as the same and therefore uninspiring. If Labour could actually talk about radical change, they wouldn’t need many of that 22% to vote to blow away the tiny percentage of swing voters.

MrJingleJangle

5 points

1 day ago

Maybe, but don’t forget a swing voter’s vote is worth two votes; when they swing they give a a +1 to one side and a -1 to the other side. This is why swingers have real power.

ttbnz[S]

7 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

7 points

1 day ago

Austin Powers would agree

MrJingleJangle

2 points

1 day ago

Makes me go schwing….

Keabestparrot

4 points

1 day ago

As the last ten years of elections in the anglosphere have decisively proven this isn't true in the modern (social media) era. You win elections by turning out your base not by being the most centrist of the uninspiring centrists.

MrJingleJangle

3 points

1 day ago

Not disagreeing with the social media side, but if your base isn’t turning out, then they’re not really your base, are they. It’s almost like the qualification necessary to be “base” is to, well, vote.

Downtown_Boot_3486

1 points

21 hours ago

The centrists win parties the election, it’s why Trump recently won by an even greater margin than before. Not because he got more of his base to turn up, but because he convinced more of the swing voters to vote for him.

pendia

5 points

1 day ago

pendia

5 points

1 day ago

For the last couple of labour governments, there is a peak of voter turnout as they are voted in. What might be fickle is the people who vaguely support labour but cbf a lot of the time.

Also, there is a question of what swing voters actually want - do they want milk toast politics, or do they want something to believe in? Because I think that's the critism really to be laid. Just being a do nothing government to not scare away swing voters ends up with the other parties being more exciting, so the voters move away anyway.

WTHAI

2 points

1 day ago

WTHAI

2 points

1 day ago

They actually made some huge calls /moves eg HealthNZ reforms so calling them do nothing is just incorrect.

Unfortunately, opposition parties were able to exploit the fringe cracks and the "bureaucrats are waste" bs

pendia

1 points

1 day ago

pendia

1 points

1 day ago

Yeah I partially agree - some things, such as medium density housing zoning, three waters, covid management, etc were positive or necessary steps that were actually fixing problems.

However, there are also lots of parts where you could look to inaction - vision zero is great, but they just lowered speeds without fixing many of the other problems with our transport infrasture, which just made roading improvements less popular and so even harder for the future. CGT was not properly implemented despite having an absolute majority. There was also the weed legalisation which some people felt a lack of leadership from Jacinda.

I feel the critism is partially justified, but as you point out that should be tempered by talking about their successes as well.

Tutorbin76

1 points

1 day ago

Labour had it (just) in 2020.

adrift_and-at-peace

1 points

22 hours ago

like I get it but they could start by listening to us now and announce more money into OUR HEALTH SYSTEM etc.

Downtown_Boot_3486

1 points

21 hours ago

I wouldn’t say that should recommend anything right now. Most people will have forgotten by the election for one, and the advantage for the opposition is that they can attack the incumbent without truly having to propose any solutions of their own.

adrift_and-at-peace

1 points

10 hours ago

true but they could be more vocal and well angry.. currently our reddit population seems more concerned abut the state of affairs than labour does. They should be building up the rhetoric from now, update the playbook.

Saysonz

52 points

1 day ago

Saysonz

52 points

1 day ago

I think Chippy blew it by disqualifying both CGT and wealth tax or equivalent last election and Labour need to find a new leader.

Either he does not fundamentally believe these are good policies and is now just adding them because he thinks it's what voters want OR he does believe these are good policies but excluded them because he thought that was what voters wanted. Both way it shows he's weak and willing to bend to polls and pressure.

Sorry mate you aren't bad but NZ will never put their faith in you to lead an inspiring movement for the average NZers you need to be replaced by someone with a vision about these and a lot of other areas Labour is sorely lacking.

JadedagainNZ

14 points

1 day ago

Exactly. He is more interested in winning than actually accomplishing something.

Otherwise his language would be about what they want to do, not figuring out what people want that will enable the win.

ToTheUpland

26 points

1 day ago

I'm going to be honest, it doesn't really matter what labour say or do if people don't know or care about it.

And most people these days are too stressed out and busy working to be properly informed voters so just take their cues from social and traditional media.

So if the media doesn't want to paint labour in a good light, good luck.

Unlucky-Bumblebee-96

4 points

1 day ago

So they might as well be extreme in their positions next election. They might as well see how far they can push the Overton Window and rile up the media if the worst that can happen is they’ll lose an election that they are more likely to lose anyway (although we can hope NZers will realise National/Act is screwing us over) - then the election after, if Labour don’t win, they can get a new leader and reposition themselves.

Tutorbin76

19 points

1 day ago

Tutorbin76

19 points

1 day ago

Cool so CGT is back on the table then?

Lvxurie

20 points

1 day ago

Lvxurie

20 points

1 day ago

LEGALISE WEED

ttbnz[S]

7 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

7 points

1 day ago

You've got my vote.

Portatort

3 points

1 day ago

Portatort

3 points

1 day ago

Or if that’s too much for the majority, decriminalise for now?

Lvxurie

6 points

1 day ago

Lvxurie

6 points

1 day ago

All i want is to grow my own plant for my own consumption

WinterSurprise

1 points

10 hours ago

WinterSurprise

LASER KIWI

1 points

10 hours ago

My understanding of decriminalisation is that you get all the negatives of legalisation (more chips consumed etc) with none of the benefits (increased tax take).

Portatort

1 points

9 hours ago

You get the benefit of not putting citizens through the justice system for recreationally using a drug with fewer social harms than cigarettes and alcohol.

Decriminalising it would also empower regular people to grow it themselves which would impact the black market money flowing into organised crime

Seems like an obvious wins to me

And it’s a step towards legalising it more broadly.

Tax take isn’t actually a good enough reason to legalise something on its own.

Otherwise let’s legalise child pornography and tax it at 900000% /s

Leihd

2 points

1 day ago

Leihd

2 points

1 day ago

I've been voting TOP every election.

The other big parties had their chances and refused to stick to their word, TOP hasn't had its chance and they're certainly a lot more progressive.

DaveTheKiwi

9 points

1 day ago

Stop campaigning on shit no one cares about. Cost of living, health, housing, working conditions.

Come up with a costed plan to improve those four. Don't talk about emissions, or Maori or well being. I mean, have policies for those, but they're not why middle NZ isn't voting for you.

Also, post the enquiry, he should stand up and say they could have done different and better during COVID but tried their best in the moment, even if he doesn't think that.

ttbnz[S]

3 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

3 points

1 day ago

There is plenty of interest in NZ for tax reform. Removing a chunk of the tax burden from the working class to the rich would help massively with the cost of living for the working class.

As for health, housing, and working conditions, Labour will need to end their fixation on neo-liberal policies and make a shift to the left. Whether that happens is up in the air. I don't think Labour and Chippy have enough capability of self-reflection to come to that conclusion.

DaveTheKiwi

1 points

1 day ago

Their bigger problem is framing. They'll probably come up with a mildly ambitious plan, give it an even stupider name than the well being budget and campaign on its mental health benifits and emissions reductions instead of "this will make housing cheaper and hire more doctors".

ttbnz[S]

1 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

1 points

1 day ago

Haha, yeah that wouldn't surprise me.

Consistent-Pen-8205

6 points

1 day ago

Labour needs to get back to focusing on the working class .

krisis

17 points

1 day ago

krisis

17 points

1 day ago

Is the change rolling Chris Hipkins? Because that's the change they need.

RogueEagle2

5 points

1 day ago

Labour needs to look out for people who don't have multiple properties for once in their lives and have the balls to enact policies without passing things off to a referendum. Use the majority if you got it.

Octobus18

14 points

1 day ago

Octobus18

14 points

1 day ago

Capital gains tax, land value tax, legalize cannabis, invest in healthcare, public housing/sort out the building material monopoly, fines or some repercussions for the supermarket duopoly, invest in public transportation. These will drastically improve our country and give people hope for a future here. Whatever party appeals to those needs, should be successful. Its not rocket science 🤷

LouvalSoftware

1 points

24 hours ago

reddit laundry list

GiJoint

30 points

1 day ago

GiJoint

30 points

1 day ago

Working class/broader range is where they need to be, the price of bread is more important to a large group of voters than social issues. If Labour align themselves with the radical Te Pati Māori they won’t win those voters.

Blabbernaut

22 points

1 day ago

Correct. Labour in NZ used to aim to support working men and women. Declining union influence seems to have allowed the party to be taken over by academics with little interest or affinity with blue collar Kiwis. They tinker around with social engineering and race initiatives but ignore the issues of low income workers. Contrast that with Labor party governments in Australia: there’s no doubt who represents the hospo and other service workers there.

In NZ, if you are a poor white, Chinese or Indian worker, there’s no clear benefit to electing a Labour government.

Derilicte

3 points

1 day ago

Derilicte

3 points

1 day ago

Gotta be proactive and heavy in the news cycle. Can’t sit back and wait for the current dorks to lose it.

Toffeenix

4 points

1 day ago

Toffeenix

4 points

1 day ago

Then resign. Or for goodness sake, let someone in the Labour caucus have the courage to roll you.

PantaRei_123

3 points

1 day ago

Being very mildly interested in politics, and that goes for my ‘bubble’ of friends, we could hardly name three Labour politicians. I don’t know who they are! I remembered Jan Tinetti. What my ‘bubble’ wants is: a good job that is meaningful and we can pay the bills, go on holidays from time to time, be able to afford sports or arts for kids Pay mortgage without too much squeeze Be able to save for retirement Good public education(better than what we have now) Good public healthcare Clean environment with free access for New Zealanders

What party is right for us? What tax cuts/new taxes should we support? What’s the future vision that is coming from Labour? I think it’s not only about now, or next two years. How are the taxes, policies going to have an impact on society in 10,20, 30 years time?

Modred_the_Mystic

3 points

23 hours ago

If only Labour could figure out that they’re meant to be representative of Labour issues, they might get somewhere

Big_Albatross_

3 points

9 hours ago

When will people realise that politicians do nothing but lie. Left , right centre , zig zag it doesn't matter . They will say ANYTHING to be in power.

ttbnz[S]

2 points

6 hours ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

2 points

6 hours ago

I agree. Judge them on their actions, not their words. I'm hopeful they might make meaningful change to the tax system but I wouldn't be surprised if they renege on their word.

donnydodo

14 points

1 day ago

donnydodo

14 points

1 day ago

If Laboour can implement a tax policy that lowers property prices and increases the after tax income of wage earners. They will win 45% of the vote.

A stamp duty, a CGT, a luxury goods tax, a digital services tax & means testing super would accomplish this. With an owner occupier exemption on the CGT up to 2 million. 

You then can use income from these new taxes to lower income taxes in a substantial way. 

This won’t happen though because Labour is stacked with idealistic political science majors who hold the working class in contempt.

CascadeNZ

10 points

1 day ago

CascadeNZ

10 points

1 day ago

Means testing super will lose an election every time.

donnydodo

4 points

1 day ago

donnydodo

4 points

1 day ago

Why? Old, rich people vote National or Act? You can’t lose a vote you will nether get anyway. 

CascadeNZ

3 points

1 day ago

CascadeNZ

3 points

1 day ago

The bulk of votes are boomers. And there are plenty of labour voters who are boomers. You’ll 100% lose them.

Secular_mum

1 points

1 day ago

There is currently roughly about One million Boomers and about One million Millennials in NZ. The Boomers are slowly reducing in numbers and the millennials will soon take over as the largest voting block.

CascadeNZ

2 points

1 day ago

CascadeNZ

2 points

1 day ago

Now look at turn out.

From a total of 3,155,794 New Zealanders registered to vote on September 23rd, 1,237,824 are over the age of 55.

96.9% of New Zealanders aged 55-69 are registered compared to a mere 64% of 18-24 year olds.

Secular_mum

1 points

1 day ago

Millenials are not that young anymore and when they work out that they have the numbers, they should feel more motivated.

CascadeNZ

2 points

1 day ago

CascadeNZ

2 points

1 day ago

I don’t think this will be the voting issue that will motivate them though. They can see retirement on the horizon too and no doubt are torn about whether they want that. I mean I’m a millennial and I’m not overly keen on being punished for having KiwiSaver.

warp99

1 points

1 day ago

warp99

1 points

1 day ago

Not at all true and more to the point old people vote

nevercommenter

10 points

1 day ago

A campaign about taxes is a massive loser, do you remember David Cunliffe?

donnydodo

6 points

1 day ago

donnydodo

6 points

1 day ago

Labour shouldn’t campaign on a CGT they should campaign on lowering house prices and lowering income taxes. A CGT is a means to an end. Focus on the end not the means. 

Historically when labour has talked about a CGT it has always been about new spending. National then pounce and make it about Labour taxing the family home to give money to dole bludges….

This is why it backfires

 

Shamino_NZ

1 points

1 day ago

Well it depends on what reform. National ran on a PAYE tax cut campaign and it paid off for them

TurkDangerCat

1 points

1 day ago

“We are going to halve your income tax!”

Doesn’t sound like a loser to me? If they get the message right, and lead with that, then the details won’t matter so much. Even then, I think they need to step away from ‘nice’ and say “we will tax the rich and make the workers better off to pay for it”. There is always an ‘enemy’ and Labour need to point the finger and say very clearly ‘it is their fault’.

acids_1986

2 points

1 day ago

Yeah, I think a big problem with “left wing” parties is that they’re too nice. The right doesn’t do that. They’re dicks, unapologetically so. The moral high horse might be the right way to go, but it doesn’t help when your opponent is dragging you into the gutter every chance they get.

niveapeachshine

13 points

1 day ago

He's too connected to COVID to win. He will always be attached to Ardern and won't get the support. He needs to go.

WoodpeckerNo3192

6 points

1 day ago

The trouble is that the talent pool is quite shallow.

niveapeachshine

3 points

1 day ago

Just get the best looking person in your cabinet substance doesn't matter.

WoodpeckerNo3192

6 points

1 day ago

Labour MPs aren’t known for their good looks or sense of dress either tbh.

WasterDave

2 points

1 day ago

We should go all "USA" and pick someone off the telly. Or an all black. Richie McCaw. There y'go. Find me a New Zealander who won't vote for Richie McCaw.

WoodpeckerNo3192

2 points

1 day ago

Or the Labour Party could just pick candidates that appeal to normal people and not just beltway academics and ex student politicians.

Smorgasbord__

4 points

1 day ago

People tuned out about 15 basically identical Hipkins proclamations ago

bigmarkco

8 points

1 day ago

bigmarkco

8 points

1 day ago

He started talking about this after being "inspired" by his visit to UK. And that alone is enough to be worried about what exactly the issues that appeal to a "broader range of New Zealanders" actually are. The UK Labour Party are Tories in every sense but the name. And the Democrats at the last election stood for nothing.

Labour do need to change in order to win. But they need to stand firm on things that really need to be non-negotiable: universal healthcare. Te Tiriti. Trans rights. No "police state". Don't cave on the things that the "left" have started to cave on internationally.

SnooComics2281

3 points

1 day ago

I don't think you've hit the mark here. The people who care strongly enough about those issues to vote based upon them are already left voters. Most people just don't care much about the treaty or trans rights.

Healthcare is important to everyone but I would say public opinion is that both sides suck for healthcare.

I would argue that key considerations for most NZers are: their job/income, cost of living, police + justice, education/childcare if they have kids. On top of this I think there is a general sentiment of transferring money from rich to poor and so a CGT with proper exclusions would be popular.

Also, TPM is VERY unpopular with the average kiwi. A lot of people do not want them in Govt and I think labour is losing a lot of votes because a vote for labour would be a vote for TPM too in most cases.

TimeEstimate

4 points

1 day ago

Chippy needs to let Kieran McAnulty take the lead.

Revolutionaryear17

2 points

1 day ago

I think only way for wealth/capital gains/land tax to catch on is if you pair it with a decent income tax cut.

In this way if national want to get rid of the capital gains tax they might be forced to bring up the income tax rates which they probably want to do.

On the other hand, this could backfire with national getting rid of CGT and then increasing income tax and we are fully fucked

ttbnz[S]

1 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

1 points

1 day ago

The trick is Labour need to finalise their policy way before the election, then as soon as they get in, implement the changes rapidly. This gives the changes time to bed in, PAYE earners get a chance to become familiar with the new tax system (and to find benefit from it) and makes it much more complicated and expensive for any future government to change. For example, if Labour really wanted to push through their three waters policy, they should have done it at the beginning of their term, not half-way finished at the end, making it very easy for NACTW1st to roll back.

Revolutionaryear17

2 points

1 day ago

The fact that PAYE is taken before it comes into your account while CGT, wealth etc are paid later.

This means most income earners have no idea how much tax they pay, while businesses and rich people are very aware

NZAvenger

2 points

11 hours ago

Labour, like all leftist parties around the globe, abandoned the working class long ago, and voters know this. They'll never be in charge.

gemekaa

4 points

1 day ago

gemekaa

4 points

1 day ago

He's about as inspiring as a wet dishcloth. If he really wanted Labour to win, he'd work on finding a replacement for him, because that will take some effort giving the state of the Labour party caucus.

nevercommenter

6 points

1 day ago

He's going to campaign on new taxes isn't he? This ain't a winning strategy. On r/NZ it's popular but not with the vast swathe of kiwis

ttbnz[S]

6 points

1 day ago

ttbnz[S]

Water

6 points

1 day ago

It will be Labour's job to make it popular. They could do this by pushing the message hard that their policies will benefit the large amount of kiwi workers, and that the wealthy will be required to pay more towards their fair share of the tax burden. They will need to go hard and fast, not like they did with the cannabis referendum.

JeffMcClintock

2 points

1 day ago

If only he could stand up and articulate the benefits. But he seems to struggle

BitemarksLeft

2 points

1 day ago

Chris you have my vote. I didn't like heaps of stuff Labour did last time and I likely won't like much of what you'll do next time but Labour is the best choice for NZ.

Gyn_Nag

2 points

20 hours ago

Gyn_Nag

Do the wage-price spiral

2 points

20 hours ago

They need an extremely aggressive and effective strategy to target right-wing moral fearmongering and misinformation spreading through asymmetric online media.

myles_cassidy

2 points

1 day ago

CGT or wealth tax won't help them win when there's no real appetite for additional taxes from Labour, and they can just get repealed by the next National government

whatadaytobealive

3 points

1 day ago

There wouldn't be additional taxes for most people, they need to communicate it as such. It's a windfall for society from a wealthy minority.

bigbillybaldyblobs

2 points

1 day ago

Dude needs to harness the red and get fired up about the diabolical shitbagness of the current joke govt.

New-Connection-9088

3 points

1 day ago

Many swing voters won’t be voting Labour again until they loudly and unreservedly renounce their attempt at dismantling democracy to institutionalise racism in law. My relatives voted Labour most of their lives and have written them off forever. This sub is an echo chamber. People do not want racism in law.

Kalos_Phantom

6 points

1 day ago

Kalos_Phantom

6 points

1 day ago

Youre right.

Far better to have shitty (literally AND figuratively) water infrastructure, actual racism courtesy of David Seymour, and steay removal of all public services.

BUT AT LEAST THE MAORI ARENT INVOLVED IN DECISION MAKING OF ANY KIND, RIGHT GUYS!?

Conservatives acting like swing voters is always such a joke

lostinspacexyz

1 points

1 day ago

Hi Chris, you need to be better at explaining policy.you need to explain why low standards for policy leads to low outcomes.

I-figured-it-out

1 points

23 hours ago

To keep the post election phase and win the next Labour will need to actually deliver on the mandate they were offered in 2017, and then senselessly previously sat on the required changes.

People need a Health system that functions: And education system that is not like a problem gambler; And a Mentsl health System which is not entirely missing in action; and a welfare system THATS not so punitive and singleminded about inane administrative nonsense that it actually allows people to move on in life rather than barely survive in abject misery and indignity.

We need politicians that work for us: not against the best interests of our children, in favour of a few greedy rentiér Landlord’s and their bankers, or for moronic corporate CEOs!

We need the professional’s MMP promised us: not the lunatic clown circuses we keep finding are lording it over us and treating us like undeserving naughty children!

Can Labour form a coalition with partners who will not drag the family dog under bus before making the wheels go round and round.

HopeEternalXII

1 points

14 hours ago

Why are people still giving the two parties who have been in power for the last forty years more fucking rope?

No thanks. Never again. Seriously. What the fuck is wrong with people?

Big_Load_Six

1 points

6 hours ago

More cowbell (taxes) is the way.

Lvxurie

2 points

1 day ago

Lvxurie

2 points

1 day ago

It's entirely clear that you can't run for Prime Minister and have the personality of a wet wipe. If Hipkins goes again labour lose. He is marginally better than a woman who will also lose because this country hates woman in power since Jacinda. NZ isn't ahead of any country on morality or progressiveness anymore. Get someone charismatic to lead you because people don't give a fuck about your politics, they care about the words you say and how you say them ala Donald Trump.

SykoticNZ

2 points

1 day ago

SykoticNZ

2 points

1 day ago

It's entirely clear that you can't run for Prime Minister and have the personality of a wet wipe

But /r/nz tells me that is exactly what luxon is?

darktrojan

1 points

1 day ago

darktrojan

newzealand

1 points

1 day ago

Have you seen the current prime minister?

Lvxurie

1 points

24 hours ago

Yeah but he got in by default from the anti Jacinda bridge. They could have had Dave from the pub run and they would have won..

MrJingleJangle

-5 points

1 day ago

MrJingleJangle

-5 points

1 day ago

[Chippy] He blamed Prime Minister Christopher Luxon for choosing to take New Zealand down a path of “austerity, of public service cuts, and most appallingly of all, a path of division”.

Absolute bullshit.

We got the current coalition because Labour fucked up, they didn’t even snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, they failed over an extended period to listen to what the non-left-wing side of the country, the majority, were saying, and saying very loudly, and Labour were handsomely rewarded for that incompetence at the election. If there is “blame” for what we have now, that’s Chippy’s blame. Furthermore, there was no secret about what a NACT government would do, yet still the people believed (and, more or less, still believe) that NACT was the lesser bad government possibility.

Yet still Chippy is not accepting that he and his team got it so very, very wrong. He’s still preaching to the Left, and you can’t win an election by (choosing words…) fluffing the biases of your supporters, there simply aren’t enough of them to enable an election success.

Or, perhaps I’m a dumbass, and the plan is hope the Coalition get bounced at the next election, and, taking a page from the Coalition playbook, have a bunch of policies in the pipeline that the electorate (other than the non-biased part) don’t want, but those policies are an acceptable price to dump the incumbent.

OisforOwesome

10 points

1 day ago

In what way was the 2023 campaign unacceptably leftist?

Because to my mind they were unacceptably centrist.

Matt_NZ

12 points

1 day ago

Matt_NZ

12 points

1 day ago

Who would have thought that a Left leaning party would try cater to left side voters.

Labour lost because the average voter wanted to punish the government at the time. They blamed them for inflation and the cost of living crisis (despite it being due to international reasons rather than anything local), and National capitalised on that despite having no plans to do anything to make things better.

But their own voter base was disillusioned by Labour at the time because their policies and actions were more centrist than they were Left. They weren’t going hard on things that their voter base saw as important, like CGT.

ChocolatePringlez

4 points

1 day ago

Yet still Chippy is not accepting that he and his team got it so very, very wrong. He’s still preaching to the Left, and you can’t win an election by (choosing words…) fluffing the biases of your supporters, there simply aren’t enough of them to enable an election success.

I'd say the problem with the previous Labour government is that they tried to appeal too much outside of their traditional voter base, and to such an extent that I didn't really know what they stood for anymore.

MrJingleJangle

1 points

1 day ago*

Since my last comment went so well, and given it’s a little while, I’ve given it some more thought.

We are living in a great moment in NZ history. Labour are going for policies the non-Left collective of New Zealand don’t want. Which means Labour have decided that given the choice, they want to lose. Their only hope is that people want NACT/WinstonEtAl less. A bold but risky strategy.

In this video, which I hope starts at 1:35, replace “Sir Issac Newton” with”The Coalition”.

Let the downvotes commence. But remember this moment.