New Zealand General Discussion: PM Jacinda

[mileslunn]

Will be interesting with how unpredictable Winston Peters is, it was almost a curse whomever formed government.  Interestingly enough Canada is no longer alone amongst the Anglosphere countries with a non-Conservative government although considering how close Australia, UK, and US were and the polls now I certainly wouldn't be surprised if those three swing leftwards next election but still too early to say for sure.  Interestingly enough if FTFP were used in all Anglosphere countries, only Canada would have a progressive government.  With PR however all might have progressive governments as in Australia on the first round, Labor + Greens > Liberals/National Party and only those four cracked the 5% threshold.  In US also Democrats would win while Britain would be a messy hung parliament with the Liberal Democrats holding the balance of power although assuming the 5% threshold would apply to each constituent country instead of the UK as a whole you would probably have on the right Conservatives + DUP + UUP slightly less than Labour + SNP + Plaid Cymru + Greens + SDLP but neither getting a majority and the Liberal Democrats flat out said they would support neither side.  Greens would win one constituent seat, but no list seats while UKIP would come up empty handed unless you had no minimum threshold like the Netherlands.  Canada would go progressive no matter which system was used.  For AV, US would have definitely gone Hillary Clinton if straight up popular vote, but if using the electoral college would have been a nail biter so in US, UK, and NZ could have gone either way under this system.

In the other thread someone was saying its been a bad year for social democracy.  That is true in Europe, but less so outside of Europe.  The only actual win so far in Europe was in Malta although Iceland looks like it might swing left on October 28th.  Germany was a disaster while in Netherlands and France, social democrats had worst showing ever, but further left parties improved somewhat although their improvement was weaker than the drop in social democratic parties.  Interestingly enough the right in those two was pretty flat, it was more the centre i.e. D66 and En Marche that saw bigger rises.  Austria was a bad showing, but not as bad as some thought and in theory the SPO still could form government but seems highly unlikely.  Norway was a disappointment especially after leading in the polls for most of the last three years but they also got screwed over by the minimum threshold being at 4%.  If it were 5% like New Zealand, Labour would have won as the Liberals and Christian Democrats would have not made it into parliament while if at 3% or 0% like Netherlands the Greens in the former and both Reds and Greens in the latter would have made it in and those two almost certainly would have thrown their support behind Labour even if they were outside the coalition.  Britain though was a good result for Labour as despite falling short, they vastly exceeded expectations and saw their biggest increase in popular vote in one election since 1945 never mind Labour in the UK is one of only a handful of social democratic parties that actually managed to crack the 40% mark anywhere, something NZ Labour couldn't even do.  More importantly if you want to live in a neighbourhood that is over 75% social democratic, I cannot think of any in other countries, but plenty in the large cities in the UK like parts of London, central Manchester, central Birmingham, and Liverpool.

But outside of Europe it was not as bad for social democratic parties.  In Australia, the only state election was Western Australia where Labor won a landslide in what is traditionally the most conservative state.  In Canada, the NDP underperformed in Nova Scotia but they did manage to form government in BC although much like in New Zealand they got fewer votes and seats than the BC Liberals and had to rely on the Greens to put them over the top.  But at least with a BC Liberal being the speaker it looks like Canada will have one NDP provincial government at the time of the next federal election whereas if they didn't win in BC, there would likely be no NDP governments in Canada at any level as it looks unlikely the Alberta NDP will get re-elected.

Another interesting trend is the number of young leaders under 40 elected.  Macron, Ardern, and Kurz in Austria are all under 40 and I don't think we've seen so many young leaders ever win in one year.

[mileslunn]

New Zealand may be about to face the biggest shift in economic gears since 1984

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/97662167/new-zealand-may-be-about-to-face-the-biggest-shift-in-economic-gears-since-1984

She may not have enough time in a single term, but I expect to see Ardern ruin New Zealand's economy with her post Keynesian and genuinely socialist (nationalization of industry) economic views just as Trump is tying to ruin the United State's economy with his incoherent economic views.

If Macron succeeds, it wouldn't surprise me if France has the best economic growth in a few years.

Interesting although I think she would look like a conservative if heaven forbid Corbyn wins the next UK election since if you want to talk about left wing illiterate he resembles it far more than Ardern.  And if he is not scary enough, Melenchon if heaven forbid wins in 2022 would turn France into a basketcase.  Yes more left wing than what New Zealand is used to, but there are worse options elsewhere.  At the same time the fact she scraped by might temper the government from going too far knowing if they do they will lose 2020 whereas if it was a landslide I think the reforms would be much bigger.

[mileslunn]

New Zealand may be about to face the biggest shift in economic gears since 1984

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/97662167/new-zealand-may-be-about-to-face-the-biggest-shift-in-economic-gears-since-1984

She may not have enough time in a single term, but I expect to see Ardern ruin New Zealand's economy with her post Keynesian and genuinely socialist (nationalization of industry) economic views just as Trump is tying to ruin the United State's economy with his incoherent economic views.

If Macron succeeds, it wouldn't surprise me if France has the best economic growth in a few years.

Interesting although I think she would look like a conservative if heaven forbid Corbyn wins the next UK election since if you want to talk about left wing illiterate he resembles it far more than Ardern.  And if he is not scary enough, Melenchon if heaven forbid wins in 2022 would turn France into a basketcase.  Yes more left wing than what New Zealand is used to, but there are worse options elsewhere.  At the same time the fact she scraped by might temper the government from going too far knowing if they do they will lose 2020 whereas if it was a landslide I think the reforms would be much bigger.

Maybe I've confused Corbyn's economic policies for Ardern's, but I don't remember much difference between the two of them.

No you are right on them, just more degree.  A few comparisons is re-nationalization.  Corbyn promises to re-nationalize railways, postal service, and utilities.  Peters who junior partner promises to buy back the 49% of shares sold for electricity generation companies, however no plans on renationalizing gas, while rail has already been renationalized and postal service and water is still government owned in New Zealand unlike UK.  As for other issues, Corbyn promises free tuition while Ardern will work towards it but over time.  On Corporate taxes, Ardern will not raise them whereas Corbyn will although it is 19% in UK and 28% in New Zealand and Corbyn will raise them to 26%.  On top marginal rates, Ardern will not raise them even though New Zealand is at only 33% which is one of the lowest in the OECD while UK is in the middle at 45% and Corbyn plans to raise to 50% which would put them on the high side and with his big spending will probably go even higher possibly as high as 60% which would be the highest in the OECD.  Ardern though did she would consider introducing a capital gains tax, but after the backlash which is probably why she didn't come in first in votes and the Labour + Green coalition was not viable, she promised to still consider but would not implement until after the next election.  She is though unlike Corbyn quite protectionist as she wants to pull out of the TPP and introduce a foreign buyer's tax as well as bring in tougher foreign ownership restrictions and cut immigration levels whereas Corbyn has always been lukewarm on EU membership but does favour free trade with other countries but wants more worker's rights chapters so there isn't a race to the bottom.

So in sum she is definitely left leaning, but seems less risky than Corbyn IMHO.  Melenchon is off the charts ridiculous and the fact he would have beat Francois Fillion in a head to head match is scary.  Against Le Pen I can maybe see although both would have been economic disasters for France.  I think the real problem with many progressive leaders is they have lost much of their traditional blue collar support from older voters thus why most social democratic parties are in disarray and the only way to compensate for this is to do well amongst millennials who unfortunately seem to like a lot of economic policies that were disasters in the 70s, but it seems each generation has to learn the hard way. 

[mileslunn]

Is it really that much tougher for millennials or is more expectations.  I think in the 70s with the great depression and World War II still fresh in people's memories people were happy that their standard of living and quality of life was significantly better than their parents.  There is the assumption each generation will be better off, but doesn't there come an upper limit and I think what you are seeing in the developed world is we have reached that so contrary to what some think, millennials are not worse off than parents although they face some challenges they didn't face but also opportunities too, but they aren't better off.  In the developing world it is off course a much different story and I suspect in places like China and India despite being much poorer than the West you probably see a strong degree of satisfaction amongst millennials since they are doing much better than their parents were.

[mileslunn]

University used to be free, for example Steven Joyce could to fail Economics and get a Zoology degree for free but now want to stop current youth from getting the same.

In UK I know it once was.  Was it also in New Zealand too.  In Canada and the US, we have never had free tuition and doubt it will come anytime soon.  While popular amongst students, generally has limited support amongst those over 30.

[mileslunn]

University used to be free, for example Steven Joyce could to fail Economics and get a Zoology degree for free but now want to stop current youth from getting the same.

In UK I know it once was.  Was it also in New Zealand too.  In Canada and the US, we have never had free tuition and doubt it will come anytime soon.  While popular amongst students, generally has limited support amongst those over 30.

Maybe I am not up on views elsewhere, but I know in Quebec which is one of the more socially democratic provinces in Canada, there were big protest against tuition fee hikes 5 years ago yet polls showed 2/3 supported the government's decision to hike them.  That being said there could be a generational change.  Although I think in Europe including UK, the idea of free tuition has always had more support than in North America.
In the US it is becoming Democratic Party policy so could well happen. Indeed the generational divide features here in the debate, but it will be made free under Labour. I think overall it will be beneficial politically(as well as good policy) as the students are most invested in it and it'll also held some older voters too.

[mileslunn]

Jacinda Ardern is now officially PM, just sworn in with her cabinet.