Post by Crash Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 00:17:02 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Mar 2020 23:47:22 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Mar 2020 22:51:26 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony Post by John Bowes
So the government has purchased a seventeen unit motel to address a 1618
waiting list for emergency housing! Like KiwiBuild it's not going to achieve
Do you remember the bleating and outrage from the opposition when the last
government used motels?
Yes of course.
The outrage that National had until only weeks before that denied
there was a housing crisis at all.
The outrage that National had until weeks before that sold off a lot
of State Houses - some of them on large sections which were bought and
multiple dwellings converted to single privately owned dwellings
The outrage that National were lending people money to move to a motel
and were deducting repayments from benefit payments
The outrage that National had facilitated short term profits on
undeveloped land by creating special housing areas where the owner was
able to do nothing and still profit from the zoning
The outrage that National blamed local authorities for the pressure on
housing through high immigration
The outrage that National refused to help local authorities fund
infrastructure services for new developments because the government
priority was using debt to fund tax cuts and vanity projects
Yes, the outrage was well deserved - well done on prompting a recall
of how bad the last government was, Tony.
Your sarcasm is the retreat of a defenseless mind.
The point is, so that you can ponder on it, that there was outrage by the then
opposition about a government trying to help people.
That is all of value - everything else is rhetoric.
I saw no outrage at the government "trying to help" by using motels,
Tony - there was outrage that the situation got to that stage before
the government tried anything else!
Well you did not read the reports or watch the news or you deliberately ignored
There was outrage by you specifically and many of your fellow walkers that
motels should be used to house people that needed help.
You make up statements, assert that they are fact, but never provide
any evidence. Why should anyone believe you.
So far so good Rich - fair comment although my recollection is in line
with what Tony said.
Post by Rich80105
I do recall that it was
about the time that they found they needed to use motels for emergency
housing that they did admit that there were some difficulties with
housing. That supported the outrage at the lack of action that had
been evident from before John Key resigned; I have always suspected
his resignation was prompted by the realisation that they culd not
cover everything up until after the election.
Now its time for you to cite the connection between the two Rich. If
it is good enough for you to accuse Tony of unsupported opinions then
it is logical that you should support your opinion with fact.
The link is merely timing, Crash. Certainly the housing crisis was one
where it must have been obvious to the then government that their
claim that there was no crisis culd not be sustained, but there were a
host of other issues as well. Essentially Key had achieved what he
wanted, and knew that it was time to move on - a "trader"reaction that
he had followed his whole life. He knew that regardless of performance
he was not likely to get more than 9 years, but his government had
persistently failed to deliver the "surplus" that was billed as so
important in those days.
Post by Crash
My recollection was that at the time John Key resigned he was being
accused of hanging on for a record-equaling 4th term.
Speculation in the media was all over the place, but with hindsight,
we no w know that the government must have been getting disturbing
reports about the effects of the run down of police, nurses, doctors,
, increasing poverty, threats against minority groups such as Muslims.
There is always speculation. My comment above "I have always suspected
his resignation was prompted by the realisation that they could not
cover everything up until after the election. " is clearly personal
speculation from me, and I have not pretended to be able to prove it.
Post by Crash Post by Rich80105
No, the outrage was solely at the appalling treatment of the then
government to some of New Zealand's most vulnerable people - for which
they were putting some into debt that was clearly unrecoverable, and
making life harder by reducing current income.
And yet you still lie about legitimate outrage for lack of action . .
There was no outrage, because if there was the party would not have
received the level of support it did in the 2017 election. Your
claims are politically motivated and not supported by voters.
Yes there was considerable outrage, but it was not universally held.
We are a more polarised society than w were previously - the result of
30 years of neo-liberal policies has given us gerater inequality for
example. The recipients of most of the economic gains - the wealthy -
are much better off now, and also have the money to push their views;
many National supporters are wannabe wealthy or hangers on to the
wealthy; their livilihood depends on delivering what their boss wants;
and reportewrs who struggle to keep a good word count know what the
proprietors want . . .
Electoral support is similarly entrenched - as in the USA, the left
support the left and the righ support the right. The way polls are
reported over-emphasises that of course - they do not report the
"undecided" which in recent polls have been around 17% - far bigger
than the small movements in support for those close to the 5% MMP
As for the substance of my assertion - there were some concerns about
the suitability of motel accomodation - some families were put into
more than one unit; some units were substandard and provided
insuffient services for washing clothes for example, but the majority
of the protest was that National had finally admitted that they had
consistently understated housing problems and the proportion without
housing had become a scandal.