David Cormack
patreon
Happy centrist Christmas!
🕑 Added 2020-12-24 02:11:25 +0000 UTCChristmas has always been the doorway to next year. Just one week separates Christmas from starting anew. And 2020 has been pretty universally shit.
It all started with insane wildfires in Australia, made worse by climate change and Scott Morrison. It ends with the world still suffering from Covid, climate change, and Scott Morrison.
The UK has been cut off from Europe due to a new strain of Covid and Brexit. The dickholes who sold Brexit as Britain taking back its own sovereignty need to be punished as the reality of what Brexit means will become manifest.
The US has rejected Trumpism, except for the 75 million who didn't. They've elected the centeriest of centrists as President, and hey he'll be better than Trump, but don't expect those of us on the left to bite our tongues and not criticise him.
Same as what's going on in New Zealand I guess. National and Labour fought a very centrist election, despite the opportunity Covid presents in rebuilding society in a brand-new way. Labour won the battle of the centrists and now we are ruled by a benevolent Prime Minister who can do anything she wants and so far chooses to do very little.
She's given plenty of interviews saying that criticism of her from the left is what stings the most, as she wants to make change that sticks, that can't easily be undone by a change of government, which I guess is plausible. So I'll hold off getting my pitchfork out just yet, but just know Labour, we're watching.
Those on benefits are still on shitty benefits. Yes, they are now indexed to wage growth, yay, but they also need a boost. The minimum wage is going up which is good, it forces businesses to innovate and gets more money into the hands of those who, after beneficiaries, need it most.
The housing crisis rumbles on. There doesn't seem to be a huge appetite to radically intervene, and really given everything the PM has ruled out the only thing she could do is organise a mass building exercise. But that didn't go too well last time Labour tried it. Demand side solutions are really tinkering around the edges, especially as we've effectively had a housing CGT since National implemented the Bright Line Test, and prices have still grown uncontrollably.
Maybe land taxes for land bankers? That hasn't been ruled out yet.
As I embraced leftism in my early 20s, I kept getting told that I would grow more right wing as I got older. In fact the opposite has been the case. I have become increasingly radicalised by *gestures broadly at everything*.
I think that people become more right wing as they accrue personal wealth, and my generation is not accruing personal wealth in the way that previous generations have. So it's not an age thing, it's a greed thing. Long may I not become greedy.
About 99 percent of people who are reading this are far closer to becoming desperately poor than to becoming obscenely rich, yet as a group we seem to side with the policies that benefit the rich far more than the poor.
There aren't many billionaires out there who support policies that benefit the needy, so why should we support billionaires? Jeff Bezos is my favourite plutocrat example. Bezos makes US$150,000 every minute. I say make and not earn because the bulk of Bezos' money is earned off the back of his workforce, a workforce he and his company work very hard to stop from unionising. What's good for the workers isn't good for Bezos. To put Bezos' level of obscene wealth in perspective, each time you spend a dollar, that's like Bezos spending $1.3 million.
This Government hasn't been great at looking after the neediest. It got a group together to review New Zealand's welfare system. It even called them the Welfare Expert Advisory Group, so you'd assume it was a group made up of experts. Except when the group reported back, suddenly the Government wasn't so keen on their expertise anymore.
The number of things implemented off the back of the Welfare Expert Advisory Group's report is not good. But that's because those recommendations contained things like "increasing main benefits by between 12% and 47%". Even though this might be the right thing to do, it isn't the most politically palatable thing to do. This Government has chosen expediency over decency.
Being poor is compounding. We built a system where so much opportunity is around money. And the opportunity to get more money is dependent on having a lot of money to start with. By design, this system entrenches elitism while if you have the misfortune of being born into a poorer household then you're odds on to stay poor throughout your life.
A factor that we don't often think about is that this trap goes both ways. It not only continues to cost you money, but it also stops you from earning more.
You might be short of money and then get a slight toothache. But dentists are expensive, so you hold off doing anything about it, hoping it'll just get better of its own accord. Except it doesn't. So next year you're in the can for what could be a thousand-dollar root-canal.
Or your power bill is paid by automatic payment, except this month there wasn't quite enough so your bank charges you a fee for being overdrawn. Who do you think is most likely to fall into overdraft? People who can easily afford overdraft fees, or those struggling?
Got a 20-year-old car? It's probably cheaper to keep doing those $600 repairs than it is to buy a new one that's less likely to break down.
And having no money means you're less inclined to take innovative risks that could lead to success and fortune. When you're poor, your temptation to take risks that could pay-off handsomely is greatly reduced, even if the odds are good. If the risk of failure is potential homelessness or starvation, you're going to play it safe, but keep yourself on the breadline. While someone who could afford for something to go wrong will often get the chance to cash in on it going right.
The way society is structured around money and assets means that your margin for error when you're poor is tiny, but that same margin for error when you're wealthy is much bigger. You might be earning enough to just scrape by, but if a surprise medical issue occurs, or a car breaks down, or your washing machine dies, then that can throw your entire budget out.
Come from wealth? Those surprise expenses will just be a speed bump as you sail along.
This has become a much longer rant than I intended.
I was going to do a big awards thing, that you'll read in just about every outlet, instead I'll give away three awards.
Politician of the year: without a shadow of doubt it's Jacinda Ardern. She is a colossus in New Zealand political terms. Nobody inspires the devotion and support she does. Having met her a few times I can tell you she is a genuinely nice person and does care. I just worry about her appetite for risk.
But taking Labour from the mid-20s in 2017, to over 50% just over three years later is an incredible achievement.
Runners-up: Chlöe Swarbrick, Grant Robertson.
Best political campaign: The Greens. I don't think enough is made of the Greens' success this year. ACT got a higher bump, but it was a) starting from a lower base and b) benefited from National completely sucking. The Greens had to contend with Labour going stratospheric in its polling. Everyone has always said that the Greens only benefit when Labour is weak. Well this year they flew in the face of that. They also were the first government support party to get over 5% in the election after going into government. They didn't just get above 5, they actually went up. Kudos my Green friends.
Most delightful surprise: Te Pāti Māori returning. I am excited to see what Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi do. I am now firmly of the view that what is best for Māori is best for all.
I want to wish you all a happy holiday. I hope next year brings us what we all hope for and need.
I'll not be writing for a week or two. I need to recharge and get fired up again about the plight of the world.
Thank you to all my subscribers, though I find it anxiety inducing having to produce a new column frequently, I am also immensely privileged that I get paid to write. I hope I bring you some joy and insight, or at least something to get angry about.
Cheers
Dave
Comments
David Cormack
Also, while I'm sure beneficiaries want lasting change, there's an emergency need now where people need money ... now
Isa
The thing with the "want to create lasting change" rationale is that it doesn't apply so well to tax. Bringing in sizeable new tax revenue is very hard for another govt to change since it means shortchanged themselves and cutting down their options for whatever they want to achieve. Tax cuts tend to be incremental for this reason (even when parties campaign on them). If a govt does bring in a proper wealth/capital tax I think it's likely to last a long time especially if they can get the "fairer tax system" narrative across to the public
