worryingly jolly batman (
labellementeuse) wrote2008-11-04 10:03 am
(no subject)
Oh my god, y'all, if ONE MORE PERSON I know says that they care more about the US election than the NZ election*, I will FLIP OUT. I understand the perspective that feels that the centrist parties are much of a muchness but COME ON, guys, this IS going to affect us. I am TERRIFIED that we are going to become so complacent and so-so about this that we're just not going to vote. NOT COOL. WAKE UP.
- National wants to gut kiwisaver by half. That means the money you've been saving to buy a house won't be there. Oh, they also want to make it that employers can take into account Kiwisaver contributions when choosing pay rates - so they'll pay you less than your co-workers to avoid having to make a contribution.
- In National's previous tax cut plan (I'm not familiar with how they altered it post-economic disaster) 1% of the total money allocated to tax relief went to 50% of tax payers - the poor end, by the way. Labour had 11% - still not good enough, but that's a real difference.
- National's policies - hell, National's fucking Cabinet - haven't changed since the 90s, when they privatised health care, slashed benefits, cut funding to education. Lockwood Smith introduced means-testing for student allowances in that time, and (indirectly) raised university fees.
- John Key last night in a debate capitalised on the fucking Herceptin thing, claiming he'd fund treatment for breast cancer. HEY, ladies and feminists - he's hijacking our movement and using it as an excuse to compromise the neutrality of Pharmac. Because what we really, really want is politicians without a shred of medical training deciding what drugs should get funded! NOT.
- Oh, and hey, don't forget National will be in coalition with ACT - third on their party list being Roger Douglas. Wasn't the 80s Labour government SO much fun under Roger? Oh yeah! Oh, wait... between the 80s Labour government, and the 90s National government, child poverty tripled, health inequities increased dramatically, etc, etc... and this is basically THE SAME National government.
DON'T give them a second chance and DON'T believe that things won't change. THEY WILL. And, yes, whether Obama or McCain are in the White House will affect us too, hell yes, but this election we're picking the people who are going to help us deal with *whoever* is in the White House. And I don't want it to be a fucking merchant banker, tyvm.
*I mean Kiwis, and I'll even extend that to Kiwis living in New Zealand, obviously.
- National wants to gut kiwisaver by half. That means the money you've been saving to buy a house won't be there. Oh, they also want to make it that employers can take into account Kiwisaver contributions when choosing pay rates - so they'll pay you less than your co-workers to avoid having to make a contribution.
- In National's previous tax cut plan (I'm not familiar with how they altered it post-economic disaster) 1% of the total money allocated to tax relief went to 50% of tax payers - the poor end, by the way. Labour had 11% - still not good enough, but that's a real difference.
- National's policies - hell, National's fucking Cabinet - haven't changed since the 90s, when they privatised health care, slashed benefits, cut funding to education. Lockwood Smith introduced means-testing for student allowances in that time, and (indirectly) raised university fees.
- John Key last night in a debate capitalised on the fucking Herceptin thing, claiming he'd fund treatment for breast cancer. HEY, ladies and feminists - he's hijacking our movement and using it as an excuse to compromise the neutrality of Pharmac. Because what we really, really want is politicians without a shred of medical training deciding what drugs should get funded! NOT.
- Oh, and hey, don't forget National will be in coalition with ACT - third on their party list being Roger Douglas. Wasn't the 80s Labour government SO much fun under Roger? Oh yeah! Oh, wait... between the 80s Labour government, and the 90s National government, child poverty tripled, health inequities increased dramatically, etc, etc... and this is basically THE SAME National government.
DON'T give them a second chance and DON'T believe that things won't change. THEY WILL. And, yes, whether Obama or McCain are in the White House will affect us too, hell yes, but this election we're picking the people who are going to help us deal with *whoever* is in the White House. And I don't want it to be a fucking merchant banker, tyvm.
*I mean Kiwis, and I'll even extend that to Kiwis living in New Zealand, obviously.
no subject
I hate to say this, given that my partner has already riled you up recently, but is anyone on your friends list not already convinced that a National(/Act) Govt would be a bad thing? People may say that they think the US election is more important, but does that mean they aren't voting, or just that they see that it's very likely going to be a Nat/Act win, and they'd rather watch the US shift very slightly left?
no subject
no subject
Or did you convince him to vote?
no subject
Well, that + puns is basically his default personality, so. No, I don't think I did convince him to vote, but whatever, if he wants to abrogate a privilege he's very lucky to have he can go ahead.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
It's one thing to say that the American race is more interesting, it's quite another to say it's more important.
no subject
no subject
(But I am still *more* concerned about the American election. I am just now less complacent about the NZ one.)
no subject
no subject
Anyway. Now I only have one election to worry about!!!
no subject
no subject
no subject
Anyway, kind of irrelevant now, I think. I AM SO FUCKING PROUD RIGHT NOW. :DDD
no subject
no subject
no subject
heh
"I care more about the US election than the NZ election!"
Re: heh
no subject
UGH. SO TIRED OF IT. It's terrifying, I think I know more about the election going on here than my roommate does. Then again, she doesn't know anything about american politics either, so that's not too bad. BUT UGH.
no subject
There was totally, on the coverage on TV one today, there was totally a couple of interviews with these American girls at the US embassy in Welly who are doing an exchange here and ONE OF THEM ACTUALLY VOTED MCCAIN. I was like, where did they dig up a McCain supporter in freaking Wellington, under a rock? Anyway, thought of you.
no subject
Argh back to studying for my exam tomorrow :S
no subject
no subject
no subject
The NZ election I can't say the same for. It's become obvious that:
* Many NZ voters have a short memory or lack of knowledge of what various parties have down in office.
* Some of our media have political biases that they let influence their reporting.
* Our polling is questionable, with different polls producing different results, and few polls giving information on undecided or undeclared voters.
* We have elements in the community trying to bribe the political system.
* We have voters who will vote for a party without understanding what that party's policies are and who they're likely to form a coalition with.
How the voting will go in New Zealand on Saturday concerns me more because the result is much less clear.
no subject
I absolutely do not contest that. But I think that, for New Zealanders, they are going to be affected for the next four years by our actual government in a much more immediate sense. And so I'm frustrated by the way people don't even seem to be *thinking* about that, just because, what, Obama is good looking? But, you know, it's moot now, so.
* Many NZ voters have a short memory or lack of knowledge of what various parties have down in office.
* Some of our media have political biases that they let influence their reporting.
You're not wrong. I was talking to a friend about this (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz-election-2008/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501799&objectid=10541197) earlier and talking about how "someone has to be ready to make an unpopular decision about going to war" - which is more or less, I think, what English is saying - is a lot less innocuous when you know that English is talking about the Iraq fuckin' war, and when you know the National party's pro-Iraq pro-Afghanistan we-should-be-there-with-the-Merkins stance. And he said, well, I didn't know that history. And I was thinking first, WHY don't we know that history? and second, WHY doesn't the Herald mention this context? and third, WHY is the Herald letting National get away with not actually *talking about* what English is saying, and instead going "Waaaah, Labour is meeeean to us, mummy!"
You know, I don't support taping people without their knowledge and consent, but what you say when you think no-one is watching is telling, and when you get called on it you have to own it. And National really, really doesn't want to own what it's been saying lately.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject