Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

🤖 Thread Summary

This political discussion thread shows New Zealand voters grappling with upcoming election choices, with recent posts revealing deep skepticism about all major parties' promises and capabilities. The conversation has evolved from initial enthusiasm for political debate to serious concerns about economic management and policy credibility. wizard of Tauranga #7 recently highlighted dramatic government spending increases, noting expenditure jumped from $99b to $151b under Labour - nearly 9% annual growth compared to just 1.5% previously.

Housing and economic policies dominate the recent discussions, with Bruce #8 sharing IMF findings that New Zealand housing values are 50% overpriced, suggesting anyone who bought since 2018 faces negative equity. dean #14 recently confirmed this housing crisis from personal experience, noting first-home buyers are suffering from FOMO while facing limited options of overpriced, poor-quality entry-level homes. The conversation reveals widespread concern about policy implementation, with miket12 #12 exposing how Labour's promised free dental care faces capacity constraints - only 60 dental students accepted annually despite 550 applications, while non-teaching staff increased 50% since 2017.

Political credibility has become a major theme in recent posts, with leaders facing scrutiny over their authenticity and competence. John Nick #17 recently criticized National's tax policy as being based purely on personal opinions about real estate markets, while Lord Gnome of Mooloolaba #24 and John Nick #38 expressed concerns about National's finance spokesperson's mathematical capabilities and qualifications. The discussion reveals voters feeling caught between failed Labour promises and potentially unprepared National alternatives, with many expressing frustration at having to choose between inadequate options while fundamental issues like housing, healthcare, and economic management remain unresolved.

NZWarriors.com

why would māori and pasifika students need a designated/safe space? to protect them from who?!
Probably started 30 years ago for mutual support in study, networking, speaking their languages, sharing unique struggles and problems, dunno if protection has anything to do with it. Was it ever called a "safe space"? That's recent American lingo.
 
A bit tongue in cheek.
I think having the facilities to help everyone when they need it is important. Making it exclusive is problematic but I accept it may well be the answer sometimes.
You probably know more than me on this, but don't all the Universities have Marae?
There are spaces available to anyone who needs them, there is a health and wellbeing office here at Otago - with various services available to students and staff. The Māori and Pacifica spaces were introduced years ago.
I don't think there is a Marae on site, but I could be wrong. Just encase Frank sees this and thinks I'm a mediocre academic - I don't actually work for the Uni, we lease office and lab space here.
 
Lol, I should have expected this. These aren't new spaces. Why do you think they might have been needed in past history @marv.?
being darker skinned than a lot of māori myself and growing up suffering more than my share of racism i absolutely understand why they might have been needed in past history, but today isn’t then.
we need to teach people to be strong and proud and encourage growth. we need to stop keeping people hamstrung and encouraging this victim mentality.

also, there is no mention of safe space on the sign. only designated area.
safe space implies that they’re otherwise unsafe.
māori and pasifika peoples as far as i’m aware are not ordinarily attacked, abused or preyed upon in NZ universities.

also my point wasn’t that anybody doesn’t deserve or need a space, my point was that newshub intentionally said the sign they viewed said safe space when it did not.
 
Last edited:
being darker skinned than a lot of māori myself and growing up suffering more than my share of racism i absolutely understand why they might have been needed in past history, but today isn’t then.
we need to teach people to be strong and proud and encourage growth. we need to stop keeping people hamstrung encouraging this victim mentality.

also, there is no mention of safe space on the sign. only designated area.
safe space implies that they’re otherwise unsafe.
māori and pasifika peoples as far as i’m aware are not ordinarily attacked, abused or preyed upon in NZ universities.

also my point wasn’t that anybody doesn’t deserve or need a space, my point was that newshub intentionally said the sign they viewed said safe space when it did not.
Problem is extremists still exist and right now we have examples like destiny church deciding they have the right to go and paint over public painted rainbow coloured pedestrian crossings and the flip side have swastikas painted on the prime ministers office. Always the same that often a minority fuck it up for everyone
 
Problem is extremists still exist and right now we have examples like destiny church deciding they have the right to go and paint over public painted rainbow coloured pedestrian crossings and the flip side have swastikas painted on the prime ministers office. Always the same that often a minority fuck it up for everyone
absolutely!
the country and world currently is a shitshow.
 
Why was there segregation in the past? To have your own space so you don’t have to mix and mingle with people you didn’t want to.

Isn’t that the same with these spaces but in reverse?

Haven’t we as a society decided exposing ourselves to different people is beneficial and brings us together. Doesn’t these areas do the opposite?

Who ends up better off - the geek/ fat/ introvert/ trump lover/ African/ etc person that is forced to integrate despite being a target or the ones that are enabled to hide from the world?

Why do we need them in todays age? Doesn’t it do more harm by sheltering those it try’s to help?
 
Why was there segregation in the past? To have your own space so you don’t have to mix and mingle with people you didn’t want to.

Isn’t that the same with these spaces but in reverse?

Haven’t we as a society decided exposing ourselves to different people is beneficial and brings us together. Doesn’t these areas do the opposite?

Who ends up better off - the geek/ fat/ introvert/ trump lover/ African/ etc person that is forced to integrate despite being a target or the ones that are enabled to hide from the world?

Why do we need them in todays age? Doesn’t it do more harm by sheltering those it try’s to help?
If you wanted to set up a designated electricians room to meet up and discuss wiring, what's the difference?
 
Who says māori, Rainbow community, etc need protection and sheltering?

Judging by parliament, they are over represented there indicating they are competent, tough and intelligent people.

Labelling an entire group vulnerable and needing help all the time just lowers the mana of that entire group with the general population and makes those groups seem below average. The lower expectations becomes a self fulfilling prophecy…

Example - doctors need lower grades to get in - who wants to be treated by a māori doctor?

I mean the 3 priority areas for the Ministry of Education is māori, Pacifica and disabled people. I don’t know why māori and Pacific allow themselves to be lowered to this level.
 
There's your answer then, if Pasifika feel the same way let them have a room. But it was never called a "safe space".
We eat some concrete and give as good as we get.

What happens when a Pacifica sparky meets a builder in the real world?

Should we start up Pacifica sparky safe places on building sites?
 
Back
Top Bottom