Recent searches
Search options
Administered by:
"What we need to do is convince NZers that there is an alternative approach to managing the economy to the one that we've had for the last 30 or 40 years."
#ChrisHipkins, 2024
This a good start. But I want to see every Labour spokesperson giving speeches describing exactly how their portfolio has been conceptualised since Rogernomics and Ruthenasia, how it's failed, and how their approach would be fundamentally different.
"Inequality is a massive contributor to government costs. So ... if you get the economy rejigged, so that the playing field tilts a bit more towards equality, then government costs go down."
#ChrisHipkins, 2024
'Leveling the playing field' was a key message of the 1980s/90s coup. But as Hipkins says, if we care about democracy we don't *want* the economic playing field to be level. We want it slanted towards those with the least.
(1/2)
If someone is sleeping in a shop doorway, or even in their car, we want economic resources to flow naturally and effortlessly towards them, to help them get into a stable situation. Where they can consume less for a better quality of life, and contribute more to their family, their communities, and society as a whole.
That's better for everyone.
(2/2)
Beyond a certain level of comfort and security, you can't actually get qualitatively richer, only quantitatively. So why would we want acquisition to be endlessly linear? X work = X monetary gain. Let alone what we have now, where the more money you have, the easier it gets to get more money. It's crazy.
(3/?)
If someone is already a millionaire, we want to make them work twice as hard to get to their second million. 10 times as hard for the third one. 1000 times as hard to get to a billion.
We want people to get to a certain level of wealth and say to themselves; this 'net worth number go up' game is rigged. I'm going to find other ways to distinguish myself.
(4/?)
Think of all the kiwis we think of with pride, people like Apirana Ngata, Katherine Mansfield, Ernest Rutherford, Whena Cooper, Ed Hilary, Te Arikinui Te Atairangikahu, John Clarke, Georgina Beyer, John Kirwan. Are any of them famous for how much wealth they've been able to acquire? I think not.
Then think of all the kiwis who've made a fortune since the 1980s. Michael Fay, David Richwhite, Bob Jones, or that kiddy-fiddler Ron Brierly. Any of them remembered with pride?
(5/5)
I didn't stop to transcribe the exact quote. But Hipkins said that when he gives interviews, his target audience is the person who voted Labour in 2020, but switched to the Nats in 2024;
I have thoughts.
First, this dogma clashes directly with his more nuanced comment earlier in the podcast. That the centre is *not* the space between the two biggest parties, but rather the space of the uncommitted voter.
(1/?)
Second, it clashes with what the election results say. The big swing of voters away from Labour wasn't towards the NatACTs, although obviously Winston First soaked up a bit of it. But rather to the left (Greens, TPM) and the No Confidence party.
The people Hipkins needs to be speaking to on mainstream channels are not the mercenaries who swing left or right, depending on how it helps them and theirs. But the people who wanted the NatACTs to lose, but didn't see a credible alternative.
(2/2)
Food for thought for all, not just NZers.