- cross-posted to:
- newzealand@lemmy.nz
- cross-posted to:
- newzealand@lemmy.nz
Gap between left and right blocks has opened up, but NZ first seems likely to make it to parliament, which could make coalition negotiations interesting.
Labour is the big loser, and they should be asking serious questions about their campaign. Most of the other parties are fairly stable, with departing Labour voters seemingly moving fairly evenly among the other major parties.
I mean, if every car has it, it’s not a feature, is it?
The housing claim is especially dishonest, if they claim to have built X number of houses, you’d be expect them to be a large part of the process, either building the house as an organisation, or at the very least being the ones ordering and paying for the property. Even claiming Kiwibuild homes is a tenuous claim, as they’re built for a customer, and the GOVT is merely the guarantor.
Labour has no right to claim those houses as an achievement.
So what you mean then is “this card does not have anything above what we expect”. This is not the same as "it has no features.
Labour has not done as much as you expected. Sure, to this i agree. But to claim they have done nothing is simply false.
Either the government has no hand in the building, in which case you cannot blame them for “not building houses”, or the government does have a hand in building houses, in which case you cannot accuse them of not building homes.
You cannot have it both ways.
I’m genuinely baffled as to what your point is here.
Wow I didn’t think I needed to spell it out any more simpler than that. I guess I gave you too much credit.
You said Labour didn’t build houses like they said they would.
I pointed out how many were built under Labour.
You claim the government has nothing to do with building houses.
If a government has nothing to do with building houses, then they cannot be held responsible for “not building houses”.
If a government does have something to do with building houses, then the claim that they didn’t build houses is false.
So which is it?
Are you feeling OK?
If the government had nothing to do with the process of building houses, then they can absolutely be held responsible for not building houses.
You do understand those are different, right? Built under Labour isn’t the same thing as by Labour.
deleted by creator
Oh I get it now, your whole argument is because they said “we will build” rather than something like “we will oversee the building of”. Fucking lol.
What a shit take. “The government LIED because it said it would build houses, but all of these houses were built by builders, not the government!”
Did you really expect “we will build” to mean they would physically build them? What, did you think the MPs would be out there hammering trusses together or something?
If you blame the government for things that happened under their watch, then you absolutely must credit them for things that happened under their watch.
They didn’t even oversee the building of them though, local councils are responsible for permits and inspections. They literally had nothing to do with the process.
No, I don’t think I will.
Deleted extra response above. Liftoff is being hinky.
$1 Billion housing acceleration fund is nothing? Changes to the building regulations act is nothing? Pushing forward medium density housing is nothing?
Got it. So it’s not their fault for the cost of living crisis either, right?
It is their fault, because they didn’t do enough to mitigate it.