By Chris Trotter*
Kevin Goetz is hardly a household name, but his influence on popular culture is immense. He is the acknowledged master of movie audience research and very few big budget films make it to the screen without his input. Interviewed by RNZ’s Jim Mora on his Sunday Morning programme of 3 April 2022, Goetz’s observations about movie audiences produced a number of insights with distinctly political applications.
Take film festivals, for example, which, according to Goetz, have become almost exclusively the preserve of Baby Boomers.
Certainly, the excitement generated among young university students of the 1970s whenever the latest film festival programme appeared was palpable. Late night screenings sold out, matinees boasted full houses. And, after each screening, what then passed for cafes and coffee-houses were filled with earnest young people discussing the finer points of the latest movie by Bergman or Antonioni.
With Goetz assuring Mora that New Zealand audiences remain uncannily akin to American audiences, it’s safe to assume that the same film-festival-attending demographic profile holds true for this country. Likewise, his observations concerning millennials.
Whether it be film festivals or live television broadcasts – like the Oscars – the millennial generations no longer care enough about movies to attend or watch such events. Indeed, in the age of Netflix and its many imitators, it takes a blockbuster of jaw-dropping awesomeness to get millennial bums on cinemas seats.
Translating all this to politics is, of course, quite unscientific and speculative – but interesting nonetheless. Demographics (and their more sophisticated cousin, psychographics) have played a key role in political campaigning for decades. The reason for this is simple: demographic divisions are real.
Consider the latest findings from Research New Zealand. According to Managing Partner Emanuel Kalafatelis, 36 percent of New Zealanders aged 18+ were “happy” that vaccine mandates have, for the most part, been lifted. Those “unhappy” about their removal represent 27 percent. Break down the results demographically, however, and big gaps open up. Among those aged 18-34, only 20 percent are unhappy. But, among those aged 55+ the number declaring themselves unhappy with the move away from vaccine mandates rises to 36 percent.
One’s location on the generational time-line really does matter.
So, looking at the general election of 2020, what might Goetz have to say about the outcome? One of the first things the author of “Audience-ology” might note is the solid uptick in voter turnout. In 2017, itself a pretty interesting contest, the turnout was 79.8 percent. Three years later, however, that figure had climbed 2.7 percentage points to 82.5 percent – the highest turnout in 21 years.
Is there any serious doubt that the 2020 election result was the enthusiastic audience response to an electoral blockbuster called Unite Against Covid-19? There’s no disputing that, for the previous eight months, New Zealanders had been living through a sequence of historical events unparalleled since World War II. What’s more, they had won.
Compared to other countries, New Zealand had emerged from the Covid-19 pandemic practically unscathed. It had been a powerful drama, the star of which, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, had delivered an Oscar-winning performance. On the evening of 20 November, Ardern’s outstanding talent was recognised when the “Academy” returned her Labour Party to office with an absolute majority.
But, as any Hollywood director knows, the only thing more difficult than creating one cinematic blockbuster, is coming up with two blockbusters back-to-back. And as all cinema-goers know, the sequel to a hit movie is (with the obvious exception of Godfather II) is never as good as the original.
Unite Against Covid-19 was a hit across all the demographics: young and old; rich and poor; left and right; black and white. Audiences loved it. Reading the results, Goetz would have understood immediately that he was in the presence of a political phenomenon. His next thought, however, would almost certainly have been: “How do Labour’s producers top that?”
The brutal answer would seem to be: they don’t. True to form, the sequel to Unite Against Covid-19 is turning out to be a flop. Researching audience reaction, Goetz would be hard put to present the film’s producers with a formula for matching their original box-office success.
For a start, the script is a disaster. Where are winning lines like “Go hard, go early” and “The Team of Five Million”? Compared to these, “I totally reject the premise of your argument!”, just doesn’t cut it.
And the plot: who the hell came up with such an obvious train wreck!
How could anyone think that “traffic light system” would have the same impact as “elimination strategy”? The same person, presumably, who decided to make the movie about the Coronavirus’s comeback? Did nobody think to tell him that there’s absolutely no feel-good factor in hundreds of thousands of Omicron infections and a steadily rising Covid death toll?
Then there’s the lead character, herself, who has undergone a truly baffling transformation. No longer the resolute protectress of her team of five million, the sequel has Ardern giving in repeatedly to business lobbyists and bullying journalists. Not content with stripping the PM of her heroic virus-beating skills, the script has her failing at just about everything else she attempts. Fighting poverty, beating homelessness, grappling with climate change: she makes a complete hash of the lot.
Honestly, the sequel’s plot points to an entire shift of genre: from multiplex blockbuster, to dreary arthouse critique of neoliberal capitalism. In short, pure box-office poison.
Can it be rescued? Is there still time for a complete re-write? And, if so, into what?
Goetz would begin with the demographics. He’d point out that the audience for dreary arthouse movies is infinitesimal. The millennials – who Labour must draw out in unprecedented numbers to have the slightest hope of holding onto power – just don’t care about the bleak realities of neoliberal capitalism. They need something big and bold and existentially threatening to attract and hold their attention.
Like?
Like climate change and the right-wing political parties’ determined efforts to thwart all Jacinda’s attempts to fight it.
Or?
Or, making the next election a tooth-and-nail battle against those who would cast New Zealand into a devastating race war. Paint National and Act in the colours of Trump-like right-wing populism. Portray their leaders as crazies prepared to see the whole country set ablaze – just so long as they can watch it burn from the Ninth Floor of the Beehive. At the last possible moment, have the Prime Minister re-capture the indomitable spirit of Unite Against Covid-19 by pitching the best that is in New Zealand against the worst.
Helluva re-write! But Goetz, knowing how closely the psychographics of New Zealand audiences match those of the United States, would almost certainly advise Labour’s producers not to throw good money after bad.
From the perspective of the man who “gets inside the heads of movie watchers like nobody else”, back-to-back Labour blockbusters would just be too much to expect.
*Chris Trotter has been writing and commenting professionally about New Zealand politics for more than 30 years. He writes a weekly column for interest.co.nz. His work may also be found at http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com.
116 Comments
I'd consider this Labour Govt something like Avatar - a lot of hype, a lot of press, but in terms of substance? And we'll get the next bits, eventually, maybe, some day?
Nothing approaching a Godfather (Muldoon) or a The Star Wars saga, either 4-5-6 (Clark) or 1-2-3 (Key).
But we all know the best movie ever made was Johnny English, so it's all academic anyway.
Hi linklater01,
There is nothing cinematically appealing about how Jacinda's government has gone about wrecking this country. At least to those of us that aren't outside observers. The kind that get off on watching the world burn are very much dumber than me (and most other people).
If you don't have anything of substance to contribute to the discussion, at least sharpen up your ability to make lame ad hominem attacks.
Unite against covid hysteria
Unite against woke-ism, virtue signaling, cancel culture, and identity politics.
Unite against government policies that make us all poor.
I just started to do my taxes today and was flabbergasted by the aggressive stance towards trusts. It looks like they're gearing up to tax people on imputed income from living in their trust owned house. I can tell you one thing, I sure as heck won’t be voting for Labour.
I think at lot of people are starting to see through the lies that Jacinda peddles out as science.
While the rest of the world has known for a year that the Jabs dont stop you getting or passing on covid, the Govt rolled out these mandates in Nov last year promising to keep you and your whanau safe. Now everyone knows that was BS and are starting to see that the mandates where just a coercion tool.
So now they drop the mandates because "Omicron has changed the game" (LOL) but still keep it in health and education, and would rather have nurses who are covid positive come into work than healthy unvaccinated nurses... I mean the people are starting to wake up as the narrative crumbles.
Its going to be a walkover to National
Here you go again with your baseless drivel. I didn't vote for Labour, and won't be next election, to be clear (and DEFINITELY not National or ACT). But the vaccines work. You're obviously willfully ignorant of the evidence supporting this, or you just plain don't understand it. Nobody has ever said they stop you from contracting or passing on COVID, but they certainly reduce the risk of both substantially, and reduce hospitalisations and death.
Do you also think that there are tunnels of abducted children who're being harvested by 'the elites' for their adrenochrome? Serious question.
I would also like to point out that they did exactly say that it will stop you contracting and spreading covid when it first came out, they just had to change their message after they were obviously lying...
Sure, so let the at risk and old people that actually have a chance of dying from covid take it, but dont force it on the healthy younger population that already had a almost zero chance of serious effects.
E7EhdieX0AkeiKs (900×605) (twimg.com)
I notice that they dont continue the chart for under 30, I guess less than a 1 in 100,000 chance before vaccination for a 30 year old (let alone 1 in 1,000,000 chance if vaccinates) is already low enough.
While that is correct, let's try to keep it in perspective. The medical science community had very high hopes for the mRNA technology. Unfortunately it has been shown they were too high. I understand it would have taken longer to roll out a standard vaccine, although i don't understand why they didn't cover that base off as well (I have heard the conspiracy theory on that). But having said that while the message had to change, the vaccine is still effective in limiting the severity of the disease and the infection rate, which at the end of the day is the best we've got.
I don't want to be gaslit here. Prior to covid, the standard layman's definition of a vaccine was an innoculation to provide immunity against disease. Hence, the measles vaccine which actually prevents you from getting measles. The Pfizer COVID vaccine does not, has not, and was not intended to prevent people from getting COVID; its objective was to reduce the incidence of COVID symptoms. That simply does not meet the earlier definition of a vaccine. This should not be surprising; if we'd managed to pull off an actual vaccine against COVID within a year of the pandemic, that would be an incredible achievement. The grumble is that despite all this, it was still sold as a vaccine that would prevent us from getting COVID. This was, frankly, a lie.
"The Pfizer COVID vaccine does not, has not, and was not intended to prevent people from getting COVID; its objective was to reduce the incidence of COVID symptoms." - is this an accurate statement? My read of the situation was they expected the vaccine to provide immunity. My read of it now is that they don't quite understand why it hasn't worked the way they expected, but they have been forced to change their spin to account for that.
I base this position on what I read from Prof John Gibson https://theplatform.kiwi/opinions/how-vaccine-messaging-confused-the-pu…
Saying that the MMR vaccine will prevent you from getting measles is also misleading. We're also talking about viruses that mutate in completely different ways, that is if the measles virus even mutates???
One dose of MMR vaccine is 93% effective against measles, 78% effective against mumps.
Two doses of MMR vaccine are 97% effective against measles and 88% effective against mumps.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/mmr/public/index.html
How can my statement be misleading, when you yourself have just pointed out that it is 97% effective? Clearly MMR is not 100% effective at preventing measles, but it's evidentially a lot higher than the Pfizer COVID vaccine, and seems sufficiently high for my claim.
Sure, and surgery to remove cancer isn't 100% effective either, but it is intended to work, and often does. Pre-COVID vaccines intend to provide immunity, and usually do. The Pfizer "vaccine" neither intends to nor does provide immunity against COVID. I want to stress that being critical of this Pfizer's jab should not be taken as being critical of typical vaccines, and specifically your argument against MMR vaccination is on shaky ground.
The vaccine works extremely well against Alpha, well against Delta (effectively stopped the spread in NZ). I'd say it actually was an incredible achievement.
Doesn't work well against Omicron, but doesn't matter too much as it's so much milder.
Alpha vaccine vs Omicron is like eating soup with a fork. Well outside the design spec.
Why is the government pushing the vaccine on children if it targets the wrong variant? Further, why are they pushing two doses on children when Pfizer themselves say it isn't effective vs Omicron?
Why are they pushing a 3rd (and possibly 4th dose) of this vaccine on adults? Is this well supported with science?
Fact 1. Vaccinated and Boosted are making up 77% of new cases, unvaccinated 4%
Fact 2. Vaccinated and Boosted are making up 79% of new hospitalizations, unvaccinated 11%
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/450874/covid-19-data-visualisations…
So sure there is an advantage on the hospitalizations so the vaccinations are working for some but hardly a roaring success.
My point was however that the mandates were always pointless as clearly everyone is spreading it. 2 major studies last year where shown that Vaccinated and Unvaccinated spread and caught it at almost the same rate.
Anyone with half a brain knew that the festivals would end up being super spreader events amongst the vaccinated.
The mandates were only ever a coercion tool, but that is not how it was "marketed" by this govt.
I generally agree with your points above. Not the tone though - only a wilfully ignorant government would refuse to change its standard line on vaccination in the face of new evidence that it doesn't prevent infection. Re. Fact 2, unvaccinated have over double the chance of being hospitalised proportionate to their population. That's a pertinent point.
... fact : vaccinated people outnumber unvaccinated by a factor of 19 to 1 ... so , its misleading to show numbers as you have , in gross form ... more pertinent to present them as cases per 1000 ... in which case , it is clear that Covid vaccines do work ... they greatly reduce the risk of catching the virus , reduce the risk of hospitalization if one does catch it , and vastly reduce the risk of long tail covid , and of death : Fact .
My point was however that the mandates were always pointless as clearly everyone is spreading it.
You might want to reflect more on these words you've written, specifically the words "were" and "is".
"were" past tense, as in, happened in the past. "is" is present tense, as is, happening now.
Evidence of omicron spreading now amongst vaccinated people is not evidence that the "mandates were always pointless" as you state. Omicron is only the most recent variant.
The vaccines were very effective against alpha and delta.
Joe Biden himself said you won't get the virus if you get vaccinated. Ardern said we could reach herd immunity with sufficient vaccination (laughably without forcing anyone). What is herd immunity if not immunity from infection? You bought the lies. Now you're buying the lie that they never told you these things.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/09/coronavirus-jacinda-ard…
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/covid-19-coronavirus-jacinda-ard…
... agreed ... I dont have a problem with people who choose to not be vaccinated ... but I do get pissy with them when they spread misinformation ...
The medical science & the statistics clearly say that vaccines are safe , and they do mitigate the worst aspects of covid ...
Some way down the track, guess inevitable that some see fit to overlay today’s circumstances onto those that existed two years ago when what was unknown substantially outpaced, what was known. The government’s actions during 2020, were entirely fit for purpose. Sure mistakes were made, not isolating rest homes etc soon enough for example, but overall, the lockdown & closed borders were key, there was no alternative, given what had been observed overseas. I have many issues with the government’s management in the interim but the reality today is actually similarly based, with regard to Omicron now being the dominant strain. NZ has had the advantage been able to observe the progress in say Australia and react accordingly.
And the number of up-votes (for theglc) suggests either:
1. that people who are interested in financial news have terrible scientific literacy,
or, and I suspect this is more likely,
2. people who peddle misinformation have a strong motive to make their views appear popular, so either pile likes on to one another's comments, or have multiple accounts.
Compared to other countries, New Zealand had emerged from the Covid-19 pandemic practically unscathed
Battered, bruised, and barely standing, NZ slurs "Yeah, well, you should see the other guy!", before collapsing in a pool of it's own vomit.
How's that for a sequel?
the problem is everybody knows that those movies that appeal to the millenials, dont appeal to the boomers or Gen X , same with movies for women are totally different for men
the only movies that appeal to all ages are disaster ones like Titanic or romantic comedies. Either we need another disaster or somebody leading with a sense of humour.
The other problem (to stretch the analogy) is that blockbusters are like a comic book versus TV series which are like Dickens novels. If I go to the library I want something that will last me a few days versus 90 minutes, otherwise I have to go back to the library twice a day.
People want a government that will last and have good character development and narrative storytelling. This current government is a movie trying to be a TV series and failing at both. We'll return them to the library half read.
The virus battle has been a winner for most nzers we have come through it medically unscathed but financially bruised . The next election being fought on governance is going to be very damaging to the nation as well as highly divisive. This will be viewed internationally as NZ as far as I know was the only nation at least in the west stupid enough to sign up to the U.N proposal . Thank you JKey. The three waters is just a shot across the bows and the debate on it has hardly started, as people get to see more detail more alarm will set in . If Jacinda pulls off an electoral success from this I will be highly surprised and shocked , as a theme for a sequel it is doomed, I hope .
He's just another 50 cent army drone.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party
Ignore his braindead wumao drivel.
We can only hope that one day he eventually figures out that nobody is buying what he is selling.
These people that are "unhappy" about mandates being lifted are paralyzed by the fear and misinformation peddled by the media.
First they thought the vaccines would stop infection, it was a lie. Then they got infected. They thought it was a serious disease, then they recovered in a week, it was lie. The latest fear being peddled (with great subtlety I might add), is that reinfection is a serious threat.
The masks were nonsense. The vaccine was nonsense for those of us not seriously vulnerable. The social distancing was nonsense. The lockdowns were nonsense. The QR codes were nonsense. The MIQ was nonsense.
Im a recovering covid victim. Basically cold like symptoms, spent the week at home, back to work today. the bulk of the populace have exactly the same outcome as me. Yes Im vaxed and over 50.
I doubt there is a single death reported that is solely down to covid with this variant. Age and pre existing conditions are the problem.
Are the cold like symptoms because the virus is mild, or because you were vaccinated?
It's like coming out of a moderate car crash with bruising from your seat belt and saying that car crashes are mild, despite the seat belt preventing you from flying through the windshield.
My wife is immuno compromised, and her symptoms were no worse. Funnily enough, the fitness freaks I associate with were hammered by it.
I held the super spreader BBQ event, 6 infections (>30% of attendees), 1 still to recover. I also dont allow property chat at my BBQ's so maybe its the curse of Ash the church.
You do realise that the disease has changed? Omicron is much milder than the original strains. All the tools you mentioned did a great job earlier in the outbreak but are of less use now. The length of the Auckland lockdown was also a mistake. I would give the government 9/10 for the first year and 5/10 for the last 12 months.
Re-infection isn't a thing most probably. What is probably actually happening is that people are doing RAT tests and getting false positives. Then they isolate, have no symptoms, and think they had covid. Then they actually do get it, and have a mild cold for a few days and then they have had it twice (except they never actually had it the first time),
I suspect for millennials the issue is housing, housing and housing (with a subplot of rent, rent and rent).
I suspect, the harder the landing (should the market crash) - the better for Labour's re-election. They've been chipping away quite diligently around the edges of the problem, so will have plenty of initiatives to cite in taking credit for the decline.
How can the the other side of the House respond to falling house prices? They can't welcome it - but they can't bemoan it either.
Anyone can see that both major parties have been complicit in this. The idea that prices are only allowed to go up and should never go down has led to incredibly poor government and Reserve Bank actions over the last decades, and last few years.
Entitlement mentality seems to have been at the heart of it, with parliament infested by those expecting free money from houses and avoiding any action that would undo that.
"I suspect, the harder the landing (should the market crash) - the better for Labour's re-election."
Only if you're assuming that aspiring FHBs who can't buy are in recession-proof jobs, and a sudden drop in house prices won't affect their employment. Or that a hard-landing is instantaneous whereas the GFC showed us we can have our own domestic recession on top of an imported one to really drag things out. For most other people, I'm guessing it would be negative equity, torched retirement plans, a drop in consumer spending and living standards.
I mean I get it, you buy when you can and you have to move on with your life (families can't wait forever etc). But the idea that a sudden hard landing would have zero consequences other than cheaper housing really needs to be nipped in the bud. We really should have engineered our own soft landing during the Covid lockdowns - it should have been ready to go. But 'brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr' was the easier option so we took it.
Purely anecdotal, but here's my thoughts.
The millennials age makes them more job/recession-proof than their older and younger counterparts.
But more to the point - the massive capital gains of the last 3-4 years make a majority of the buy-to-live-in FHBs crash-proof as well. Negative equity is a long way off for most millennial homeowners. Higher interest rates are the bigger enemy than sharply falling house prices for millennials.
It's the buy-to-let purchasers over the last 4-5 years that will feel the most pain - but they can sell.
I just don't see a 30% (or more) fall being catastrophic economy-wise at all.
The problem is you're looking at a 30% + drop and the higher interest rates - not one or the other. Nothing hurts like punishing levels of cashflow on a rapidly devaluing asset you spent years living an austere hermit life to be able to afford in the first place. It didn't take much of a petrol price increase to see people wind back driving. Throw in continuing inflation and your net wealth being steadily eroded at the same time and you've got a recipe for severe mental health stress, if not people just giving up on NZ and seeking greener pastures.
Nothing hurts like punishing levels of cashflow on a rapidly devaluing asset you spent years living an austere hermit life to be able to afford in the first place.
What about punishing levels of cashflow on something that's not even your asset that you are living an austere hermit life to be able to afford? While watching your chances of ever being in a position to get one of the cornerstones of most people's net wealth in the first place? The majority of under 40s have been under pretty severe mental health stress from housing for at least a decade already. It's just more of the same.
What about them? They're all victims of the same problem - governments who have used their misery as a platform to get elected and then blow out prices while civil servants and working groups write reports to each other, and ministerial accountability dies in the dust. The only upside those frozen out have is that might escape the negative equity trap, the flipside is they'll probably face turbulent tenancies as landlords exit, because let's be honest, it's been about tax-payer underwritten losses while you hold out for untaxed capital gains the whole time, and you're pulling yourself if you think otherwise.
I'm not seeing how anyone wins here. There's just varying degrees of crappy, entirely predictable outcomes. I bet I know who gets handed the bill to unpick the massive social fallout too.
I absolutely agree! Just pointing out that severe mental health stress due to housing is not a new problem. And it wasn't considered catastrophic enough before for anyone in power to care about, so I don't see why anyone in power will care about it now. Somehow it's been decided as a country that we don't give a shit about the impact stupid housing policies have on younger generations, whether they are homeowners or not. Even for those who do own homes, it was entirely predictable that as soon as it got to your turn the gravy train of endless capital gains would screech to a grounding halt.
Oh 100%. The thing is, Kiwis have done all that is reasonable to expect of citizens in a peaceful democracy. They voted for slow change, they voted for faster change, they voted for reform on supply, demand and taxation, and got... well... SFA. If you want to be a deal DGM about this, I'd say housing AND super age reform are two examples where democracy has literally failed. Kiwis cannot vote for change and actually get it. And I'd suggest that peaceful democracies have limits as to what people can be expected to put up with and still have faith in them.
The wider support for the parliamentary protests make a lot more sense when viewed through this lens as opposed to 'Jacinda Ardern is kidnapping children and selling them in the Dom Post classifieds" or whatever garbage the rioters on the ground believed.
Oh, superannuation reform will definitely happen. You just need to work out when the worst possible time for millennials for it to happen will be, and the worst possible way. So I predict means testing will be announced in about 15 years time, to be phased in. Millennials will be just old enough then that means testing will really screw them - most will be in the position that they will have saved enough not to get any super, but not enough to do much more than replace what they would have got in super, and won't have long to try to catch up either.
I think you are right. And it will likely be means tested. And to prevent retirees spending up large to avoid the means testing, it will be compulsory to use your balance to buy an annuity until you die.
Remember that the government has ultimate control of your kiwisaver contributions, not you.
That's not entirely true - the contract you have regarding the conditions under which you can withdraw money and what you can do with it is with the financial institution you have the money with, not the government. The bank can't all the sudden say 'you can't draw this out until 70' any more than they can say 'you know that 1 year term deposit? We're not actually letting you have that for another 5 years.'
Means testing for super qualification though is entirely within the government's control, as is what happens regarding super if you appear to be deliberately disposing of assets in order to qualify.
That's about right. We tend to have voters who want socialism for me, free market capitalism for thee.
A universal benefit for me now; pay your own way for thee in 15 years time.
Cheap housing thanks to govt policy for me back then; expensive housing for thee now to enrich me.
I agree.
That is what I would expect from a left govt. But there are some catches...
Main issue, imho, is that current left govt is extremely conservative and prudent in trying to don't make too unhappy non-left people.
They know(think?) that in any ways their main electorate will not abandon them (cause the rather don't vote at all instead of voting right).
So the mission is to take home as much as possible the people on the center (the ones that don't really want anything too tranfsormative)
I don't see much space for anything curageous... but, on the other side, if most of the disappointed left, feeling abandoned, move more left, or just don't vote, Labour will be in very very big troubles.
Just now, what can you imagine them promise for the next election. How they can be credible at all, in any ways? Their ideals are trashed, sold for the vote of conservatives and old people, where the main drive of this group of voters is fear, not hope.
Bingo. I think they did a good job on Covid, all things considered (though obviously not perfect), but I don't thin I can forgive them for f**king up housing so badly. This isn't about my personal position - I own a house, have enough equity that a 20-30% drop in house prices won't really be a problem, and nor will a substantial rise in interest rates. But I know what spiralling house prices and rents have done to my generation, including close friends - it's really, really screwed people over in a number of ways. And for older millennials, it's just about too late to recover from the effects of that even if house prices do drop. You can't go back and decide 'no, I won't wait to have kids til it's too late because I was trying to buy a house first and prices kept getting stupider and stupider." I have older relatives who still haven't forgiven Labour for what they consider the betrayal of the working classes by the fourth labour government. I feel the same about this one on housing. They've just repeatedly sent the message through action that no matter what they say, they are repeatedly prepared to treat me and my cohort as economic cannon fodder.
My biggest wish for NZ is that someone takes up the founding of a political party that determines all policy based on the recent planetary boundary update for NZ;
Seems to me to be a perfect opportunity.
They need something big and bold and existentially threatening to attract and hold their attention.
I disagree, I think they/we are sick of threats and negativity. I would love to see some optimism. Why not paint a picture of what a thriving Aotearoa NZ looks like for all it's citizens. Set out a path of how to get there through improved education, health services, environment restoration and investments in the green tech sector. Focus on solutions rather than fear and stop picking scabs off the wounds of the past.
Good comment, where is Labour's vision for the country? They had it waaaaay back before they were elected, then failed to implement any of it.
I guess if they come out with a manifesto for the next election, they'll be laughed at? Should be. But of course team blue is no better.
The type of people who actually believed that the Vaccine was going to work and be safe and effective are the same type of people who believe interest rates will stay low for a very long time to come. They also believe property only goes up in value. I call then 6/40. They work 40 hours per week for someone else, then they come home and watch the 6 o'clock news at night. They are programmed. The MSM controls their lives, i guess this makes up most of the voters who think National and Labour are the opposite. But its just 2 wings to the same bird. Time for a Change.
Well I've had a flu vaccine for at least 15 years. Evidently its not a vaccine to some because it doesn't prevent you from getting it. Not sure why they call it a flu vaccine then. Covid vaccines are going to end up like the flu vaccines, a revised/improved one every year.
Prince Charlie 73/74 had Covids. He's vaccinated, don't know about booster. Back at work after 7 days or so. Queenie 95 had Covids. She's vaccinated, don't know about booster. Back at work after 10 days or so.
The sequel will be back to business as usual where the complete disaster of this pack of misfits will be truly appreciated. They have milked the covid sideshow for much longer than they should have. People have moved on. People don't follow the rules anymore. Covid hasn't been even almost serious since November last year when Omicron came along.
They should be removing all the restrictions completely, right now, but they can't, because to do so would be to admit what everyone already now knows. They were wrong, and they have overreached. They think that they can get away with it by slowly removing restrictions and making it look like some managed removal with an abundance of caution and keep everyone safe. Most people now see that for the BS that it is.
Cindy will now have to face up to co-governance stupidity, ridiculous three-waters proposals, massive failures in poverty, housing, education, and crime. You name it, she has failed miserably.
Add to that a record level of debt, businesses going under, and interest rates climbing steadily.
I do wish we could go back to the days when we heard endless waffle on sequencing of results (every day), and of how a man from an Emirates flight, brushed against an infected vending machine, and then picked up a packet of frozen peas at the supermarket, and then a storeman picked up the frozen peas and went home and the whole family caught the dreaded virus from the bag of frozen peas. I mean, that was really useful information and really meant something, didn't it ? Well no, it was useless twaddle from people with no clue what was going on, and it's a part of a lot of wasted time that people will just never get back. Luckily I never listened to the BS and just kept on with my life. People will reflect on this particular disaster over the next year and it will be a pretty unique sequel because the star of the show (the former star that is), is going to be the one eliminated, and the bad guys (the normal sensible NZers who saw this clown show for what it is/was) are going to win.
It would be interesting to know how many people felt coerced into taking these vaccines. Grinning away at the podium thinking 95% of people were in support could be a big mistake. I have spoken to plenty of people who say they felt they had no choice and did not really want to take it. The ones that had chest pains, itchy skin or rashes after the vaccine are truly angry. I did not take it as I knew people at the start that had the original Covid and they said it was mild virus illness. I had Omicron in late February I it was nothing apart from the fatigue. It is my belief that big pharma and its lobbyists were at work here.
As restrictions continue to be lifted, or eased, private and public post mortems will begin to be carried out.
In time, the latter part of the Covid saga will be seen as "The Great Segregation of NZ society". Ultimately no one will wish to be associated with having participating in this. Many stories from all parts of NZ, detailing the fallout, loss and unjust discrimination. Will begin to see the light of day, (when it's perceived to be 'safe' to do so)
Is it just me or is the media awfully quiet about the number of COVID deaths we are actually getting, while simultaneously relaxing all of the COVID restrictions it imposed over the last 2 years?
Just googled it and we had 13ppl pass away due to COVID on the 3rd April, during the whole of lockdowns we were panicking about 20ppl dying in total... and everybody became a broken record on keeping tabs on statistics like nothing else mattered
Interesting....
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.