Labour has done very well with its advertisements in the major papers over the last couple of days.
Labour's double full-page ads in many newspapers today: pic.twitter.com/BrL8VkHDWf
— Bryce Edwards (@bryce_edwards) September 21, 2017
A closer look at page 2:
National’s effort, like their whole campaign, was odd. Bill English in a hole in the ground. It’s a real hole this time, not an imaginary one, so there is that. But English trying to claim credit for a project initiated by Labour that National actually tried to cancel? What better summary of the Nats could there be.
National's relatively-small election ads in almost all newspapers today: pic.twitter.com/izXyFc0ZW8
— Bryce Edwards (@bryce_edwards) September 21, 2017
And a late breaking video from Labour. She’s an inspiring leader.
Help us make history. Vote. Get your family to vote. Get your friends to vote. #LetsDoThis https://t.co/A704HjwJ1Y pic.twitter.com/tSLnXOQFtX
— New Zealand Labour (@nzlabour) September 21, 2017
Go well friends. See you on the other side…
Here’s hoping the left gets up. Hope trumps hate?
I can’t see all the people inspired by Jacinda simply going back to what they were before if (heaven forbid) National remains in government. Like Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn, I think she and the Greens have ignited an emotion (hope?) that will not go back into a box now.
From this link: https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/budget-2017-tax-thresholds-changed-much-extra-you-get
The tax bracket changes look like they will benefit more people at the lower spectrum of the income bracket.
In the ad, is says that the $1000 goes to mostly the wealthy. Whats Labour’s definition of wealthy? Anyone with a job?
The ad reads like NZ will be in a committee stage under Labour for 3 years.
Anyone over $52000 gets the full benefit of the tax changes. Anyone under $52000 only partially benefits, or not at all if they earn less than $14000.
So under National as usual the ordinary person gets screwed
“In the ad, is says that the $1000 goes to mostly the wealthy.”
No it doesn’t. Read the ad – it says “Labour will cancel Bill English’s tax cuts that give $1000 to the most wealthy”. It’s perfectly true that those cuts will give $1000 to the most wealthy – it’s a point that’s been made many times on the campaign trail. Nothing in that ad says that most of the money will go to the wealthy – that’s a reading that you added in.
“The ad reads like NZ will be in a committee stage under Labour for 3 years.”
The ad reassures people about an issue the Nats have been scaremongering about. There’s plenty of other policy. I assume you know this and are just mischief-making. If not, you must have had your head in that hole with Bill E for quite a while.
What is the definition of “most wealthy”?
https://www.budget.govt.nz/budget/2017/family-incomes-calculator/index.htm is the calculator provided for the Budget.
The key point for why lower earners will not better off either way is that the Independent Earner Tax Credit is being repealed by National, but would not be repealed by Labour, so people earning between $24,000 and $44,000 are not significantly better off under National’s package ($0.77 per week).
Here me thinking were in a MMP party system, glad I voted like it was FPP, as that what everyone else is treating this election like…