Opinion polling for the 2023 New Zealand general election - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org

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.

  • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
    11·
    1 year ago

    I mean, if every car has it, it’s not a feature, is it?

    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.

    Labour has no right to claim those houses as an achievement.

    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.

    • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz
      11·
      1 year ago

      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.

      I’m genuinely baffled as to what your point is here.

      • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
        11·
        1 year ago

        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?

        • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz
          11·
          1 year ago

          If a government has nothing to do with building houses, then they cannot be held responsible for “not building houses”.

          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 said Labour didn’t build houses like they said they would.

          I pointed out how many were built under Labour.

          You do understand those are different, right? Built under Labour isn’t the same thing as by Labour.

          • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
            1·
            1 year ago

            If the government had nothing to do with the process of building houses, then they can absolutely be held responsible for not building houses.

            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.

            • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz
              1·
              1 year ago

              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.

              then you absolutely must credit them for things that happened under their watch.

              No, I don’t think I will.

              • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
                1·
                1 year ago

                Deleted extra response above. Liftoff is being hinky.

                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.

                $1 Billion housing acceleration fund is nothing? Changes to the building regulations act is nothing? Pushing forward medium density housing is nothing?

                No, I don’t think I will.

                Got it. So it’s not their fault for the cost of living crisis either, right?

                • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.nz
                  1·
                  1 year ago

                  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.

                  • Rangelus@lemmy.nz
                    1·
                    1 year ago

                    Ignoring my other point? Ok, sure.

                    The government didn’t cause it. In fact, practically every country around the world is having a cost of living crisis right now. New Zealand is even fairing pretty damn well compared to many countries. By your reasoning, they didn’t have anything to do with it so they aren’t to blame.

                    Or to put it another way, the government has the same responsibility to the cost of living crisis as it does to the building of houses. They have had some input and guided things in a certain direction.

                    Housing - you claim they have no hand in it, so you blame them for not building any of the houses that were built during their tenure.

                    CoL - they had nothing to do with it, but are blamed because did something but didn’t do enough?

                    Do you honestly not see the hypocrisy here?