(no subject)
Nov. 4th, 2008 10:03 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
labellementeuseOh 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.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-11-05 05:18 am (UTC)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.