OnPoint by Keith Ng

Read Post

OnPoint: PREFU 2011: "What credit downgrade?"

90 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

  • Bart Janssen, in reply to Keith Ng,

    And you know what? I can't prove him wrong

    Can you calculate how much growth is required to prove him right - if that is more than 3%, you can prove him to be wildly optimistic..

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3419 posts Report Reply

  • Angus Robertson, in reply to Sacha,

    How's that line been working for the opposition?

    Labour doesn't follow that line, Labour tries to portray everything the Nats do as a hard right-wing agenda. This isn't working out for them.

    Auckland • Since May 2007 • 984 posts Report Reply

  • Ian MacKay,

    The rotten incumbent party in power has left the cupboard bare for the incoming Labour lead government. How cruel is that!

    Bleheim • Since Nov 2006 • 498 posts Report Reply

  • Ian MacKay,

    Roads. New jobs. Savings. Growth. etc. All in the future and sometime in the never-never. A pretty good strategy in that by the time 2014 or 2020 or 2050 guess which politicians will be around to accept accountability of any of those predictions, and anyway what Bill/John/Stevie really meant was something quite different.

    One of my sons swears that when he was 8 and wanted to read while in the bath, I told him he could when he became a teenager. Promises, promises.

    Bleheim • Since Nov 2006 • 498 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Angus Robertson,

    Labour doesn't follow that line

    Respectfully, they and their supporters have many times complained about a 'do nothing' government. Alternated with the 'far right agenda' line, reflecting what can most charitably be described as strategic confusion.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16771 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Sacha,

    Labour doesn’t follow that line

    Respectfully, they and their supporters have many times complained about a ‘do nothing’ government. Alternated with the ‘far right agenda’ line, reflecting what can most charitably be described as strategic confusion.

    They're very much on the "do-nothing government" line now. Which I think is not an unfair assessment.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 18969 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Sigh. This government have been systematically hollowing out parts of the public service in wait for a second term (though they won't go as far as some fear). Saying they're 'doing nothing' is misleading at best.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16771 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    They been actively borrowing ;-)

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Sacha,

    Adopting the 'do nothing govt' line makes it's impossible to hold these clowns accountable for the very deliberate decisions they've made over the last few years - such as where to direct the benefits of their changes to the tax system or their usurping of local government.

    It also plays right into the line you'll notice the Nats running now - 'it's the world economy's fault, there's nothing we can do'. Joyce must be loving all the extra support for his campaign efforts.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16771 posts Report Reply

  • Angus Robertson,

    They're very much on the "do-nothing government" line now. Which I think is not an unfair assessment.

    If National are "doing nothing" new, it means that National are relying on the work of the previous (Clark) government and are content with the measures already in place.

    With a strategy attacking the Nats for not changing existing policy aren't Labour really implying the policies left over from the last Labour government were inadequate? Such a strategy would seem potentially counterproductive.

    Auckland • Since May 2007 • 984 posts Report Reply

  • 3410,

    Saying they're 'doing nothing' is misleading at best.

    I suppose. Sometimes "do nothing" is shorthand for "do nothing about about x", but it doesn't really matter much anyway, IMO.

    Auckland • Since Jan 2007 • 2618 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to 3410,

    Sometimes it seems to be short for "doing nothing that *I* want done".

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16771 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Angus Robertson,

    With a strategy attacking the Nats for not changing existing policy aren’t Labour really implying the policies left over from the last Labour government were inadequate?

    More that the situation has changed and an appropriate response is required, one would think. Labour would contend that of course it would have responded to changed conditions.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 18969 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Labour would contend that of course it would have responded to changed conditions.

    Their proposed mini-Budget in December 2008 sounded promising - including active investment in job creation rather than the laissez faire fantasy that Treasury and English continue to peddle.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16771 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen,

    Freezing science budgets isn't "doing nothing".

    Putting pressure on CRIs to freeze salaries isn't "doing nothing". Except for management salaries which have doubled in the last 3 years.

    That's just from my field. Actively stifling innovation in NZ is pretty damaging long term.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3419 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to Russell Brown,

    They’re very much on the “do-nothing government” line now.

    They got a new idea as well

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6268 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Sacha,

    This government have been systematically hollowing out parts of the public service in wait for a second term (though they won't go as far as some fear).

    Do you have some handy examples? I don't disagree, but they don't spring to mind, and it could be handy in arguments over the next 4 weeks.

    ETA: Cheers Bart, those will be useful ammo.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 8592 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz, in reply to Bart Janssen,

    Not to mention that keeping people in important jobs (like maritime regulation and oil spill response, just as a for instance) reduces unemployment, builds our skill base and ensures essential public services.

    Reacting to an economic downturn by sacking people from those jobs and employing others in filling Keynsian holes (cycle paths and fanzones, for instance) is irrational.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4463 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to BenWilson,

    Do you have some handy examples?

    Not without digging, no. There have been internal reconfigurations throughout government departments, and you'll start seeing that more obviously from the outside once this lot are safely re-elected, especially in the biggest departments like Health and Social Development. All with a handy dose of "we have no option but to cut services to balance the books" bollocks.

    They've been way better at keeping it below the radar than the last time Ryall, English and co were involved in doing the same in the 1990s. Joyce is a more competent political manager and an ineffective opposition and media has helped them tremendously.

    You'll recall English acknowledging earlier in the year for the first time that the govt has got rid of over 2,000 public servants since they were elected (after promising to "cap" their numbers). He recently talked about doing the same again in the next term.

    It's just more of the same tired, defective thinking that has plagued this country's managing classes - that improving productivity means sacking or underpaying staff.

    Sure, there are always bound to be some parts of the public sector that are ineffective and inefficient (just like the private sector), but do you really trust this lot to tell those apart from the essentials like mines, buildings and maritime quality staff, for instance?

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16771 posts Report Reply

  • 3410,

    Do you have some handy examples?

    Not without digging, no.

    Again, an absolute indictment on Labour that this information is hard to find.

    Auckland • Since Jan 2007 • 2618 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to BenWilson,

    Do you have some handy examples?

    Winz, Doc, Housing NZ .Military , NZ Transport Agency, MAF,IRD, the beehive, Universities, Zespri to name but a many.

    One really should check out 2010 and 2009.Think there was heaps more then too

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6268 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to Sacha,

    hold these clowns accountable for the very deliberate decisions they’ve made over the last few years –

    Would this be the “secret agenda” that only seems to be secret to the clowns who paid ACT’s former ad shop to come up with genius lines for Phil Goff like “vote National and kiss your ass-sets goodbye”? (Nothing screams "we're ready for Government" like too-lame-for-a-Tui-billboard bum puns. Ian D. could do better in a coma.)

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12034 posts Report Reply

  • 3410,

    Just saw a TVC for Party Vote: National.

    It had a man with a "stop" sign for Labour and a man with a "go" sign for National.

    Auckland • Since Jan 2007 • 2618 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    Would this be the “secret agenda”

    nothing secret about it.

    though that tag still seems to be framing some coverage.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16771 posts Report Reply

  • BenWilson, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,

    Winz, Doc, Housing NZ .Military , NZ Transport Agency, MAF,IRD, the beehive, Universities, Zespri to name but a many.

    I'd really have to do my research to have any clue what happened to all of those. A cheat sheet would be handy.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 8592 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.