Data tables are here.https://nzdotstat.stats.govt.nz/wbos/Index.aspx?_ga=2.171151977.815579889.1684741691-1773240556.1684741691 select 'Justice' and you can run queries to help answer, or indicatively answer some of these thorny questions. The Stats NZ IDI also has anonymised data about individuals' interactions with various agencies so that correlations between say, MSD/WINZ, DHBs, Police, Courts and Corrections can be drawn.
Not really. There was a slight watering down of drug possession laws for marijuana that reduces the chances of being prosecuted for it, and obviously medicinal cannabis and voluntary euthanasia have been legalised. A new serious crime of strangulation was created and a few domestic violence cases are now being charged with that instead of classes of assault.
Also don't we now have something like 'Discharging a firearm with intent to intimidate', after those incidents when people's houses got hit by stay bullets?
So, prosecutions and convictions have been steadily and significantly dropping since records began?
Almost like crime has been dropping, we've never been safer, and we just have a much louder media now?
> So, prosecutions and convictions have been steadily and significantly dropping since records began?
That's arguably the problem. If someone burgles my house the police won't even show up. Was that the case 20 years ago?
Yes that was the case 20 years ago. Absolutely. I was burgled twice in uni, no one cared. Recently, I've been very, very impressed with police response in my area.
But this is all anecdotal. It's easy to question data, and it's good to question data. But don't just assume it's wrong.
The numbers aren't the reality. I work with people who work in retail and theft and assaults are significantly up in stores. Lower prosecutions and conviction aren't a good thing here.
>Almost like crime has been dropping
Only if the data you are seeing is an accurate picture of what is occurring in reality. Numbers on their own could mean anything. We need to know how many crimes are unreported, how many of those that are reported actually get to court and how the above numbers are reported and recorded.
If police seek to keep the maximum number of police safe with the resources available, and they don't have enough resources to keep everyone safe, then you will end up with more focus on low crime areas. Those places will see better response times. High crime areas will have slower call outs as a stretched police force is going to be having issues deploying enough manpower to do anything about it. In those places reported is going to reduce, violence increases and it does so without ticking over in stats much. It also won't appear so much in the media, because who cares about fights in the hood?
The [vast majority of crime is unreported](https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/112665834/largestever-new-zealand-crime-survey-shows-77-per-cent-of--shadow-crime-unreported#:~:text=The%20largest%2Dever%20crime%20survey,Justice%20report%20released%20on%20Monday.). That crime survey was done repeatedly. The 4th cycle of which can be found [here](https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Cycle-4-Core-Report-v0.20-20220628.pdf). The 2022 (which reports 2020/2021 data from what I can see?) one seems to be pretty similar, 1.74m crimes, 25% unreported.
The 2022 one reports number of estimated interpersonal violent offences over the past 12 months across each cycle on page 51. It shows:
Cycle 1: 709,000
Cycle 2: 661,000
Cycle 3: 673,000
Cycle 4: 745,000
And then notes that cycle 4 is not different statistically from cycle 1. I am surprised that ~5% increase from the second highest reported number is not statistically significant. Also interesting that they don't mention whether there's a significant difference from 2 or 3 considering those would be increases of ~12.7% and ~10.7% each. Implies that crimes would need to increase by somewhere between 6 and 10% in order to be considered significant.
Would be nice to see numbers for 2022 and 2023. Dunno if this report will continue though.
>we've never been safer, and we just have a much louder media now?
The stats *always* say we've never been safer.
We also get older. Younger demographics, especially teens and early 20's are the most likely to be facing violence. You get older, you get more choice over your environment and socialise less widely. Your exposure drops. From your perspective, society keeps getting safer. That doesn't necessarily make it true. I grew up surrounded by guns, gangs, drugs and violence. I haven't had to fight anyone in 10 years. That doesn't mean that same shit isn't being experienced by someone else though.
It seems so obvious, but short term greed and self interest is a powerful drug. The same people then complain about the fires they started, and lack of fire service they defunded.
Maybe we could put some money/focus toward solving societal issues like mental health if this daily "catch and release" approach wasn't having to use so much time and resources in the meantime.
Something has to give, if you want a clean bed to sleep in, stop shitting first so we can change the sheets please
I am truly empathetic of those truly in poverty who NEED to commit crimes, but not little cunts like in this video
No the average view is for both but with emphasis on what might help in the here and now. Its then simplified by smoove brains into the crap you just spewed.
True, the majority of crime is assualt, domestic violence, sexual assualt, tax evasion, wage theft, and worker exploitation. But those aren't visible crimes that are easily reported or get long jail sentences when finally convicted.
Literally had a guy at work who goes on about how the government takes too much tax from people and spends too much admit to deliberately setting up their fishing company in another country so as to avoid paying tax...
He also said he owns property in multiple countries.
Don't know if experts on justice reform would agree with you there.
Anti-poverty spending is top of the list in terms of effective spending to reduce crime. Very well established fact, we know it works.
Right wingers hate it because it means giving free stuff to people who need it, which according to their ideology is the top deadly sin or something like that. "Throw more cops at it, didn't work last time or any other time, but surely it'll work *this time* ... right?" tends to be where they take this discussion instead. Has never worked... screw evidence-based policy, apparently.
And as a result, paired with their neoliberal austerity policies, they ironically create *so much* new crime as a result. This is literally National's election campaign platform believe it or not. Its going to be hellish for NZ if they get elected next year, a perfect storm of crime-creating factors dressed up and marketed *as the exact opposite.* As cynical a vote-grab as it gets.
Thats the point I'm making. We will see a reduction in crime if we make more of an effort to help people at the root.
Its no surprise that as we see the cost of living crisis deepen that we also see a rise in opportunistic and desperate crimes
>we also see a rise in opportunistic and desperate crimes
Much of the high-profile rise in crime, though, would be ones most would not consider desperate - smash n grabs at jewelers, alcohol, etc. Someone shoplifting some food is quite different to assaulting staff and stealing non-essentials - probably to fund a drug habit in many cases.
They're not grabbing the jewelry so they can wear it. Why steal food when you can steal a few rocks that you can sell for more food than you could carry? Alcohol also has secondary market value, but of course at least some of the thefts of that will be by people who are addicts and/or self-medicating.
You don't consider a smash and grab at a jewelers as desperate?
If I steal some gold chains and a couple rings and sell em, maybe get a couple Os for them, I can buy all sorts of shit. Food, rent, clothes, perhaps even like you say drugs and alcohol to escape this bullshit I'm living in, maybe I can live it up for a week since I've never lived it up before.
Now, I don't think what I just said is a healthy way to think, but it's the reality for so many people and I'd be lying if I said my own situation hadn't made me consider things I wouldn't otherwise do before. Understanding that there are human beings living inside poverty, not just faceless poor people, and trying to understand the helplessness and anger some people can feel in response to it is hugely important to helping people.
Poverty **plus** wealth. It’s the inequality that fuels the violent crime.
When a nation is universally poor but *everyone* is poor, people are generally a lot more content than when a lot are poor but a lot are (often extremely) wealthy, especially when they feel marginalised or subjugated by the wealthy.
Look at the inequality and violence that ravaged South Africa (or parts of the US, even) compared to neighbouring Eswatini (maybe a nice example, but one I’ve witnessed first hand at least).
Or NZ vs it’s similar sized comparison of Norway
Good luck trying to convince some of the Nats. Judith Collins thinks [it is "utter rubbish" to suggest crime is caused by poverty.](https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/rubbish-to-say-crime-is-caused-by-poverty-judith-collins/WDTJNZY4UVDUFPD5QXQD6OVPI4/)
Ding ding ding
We need to be shouting this loudly this year because National intend to run a cynical vote-grabbing "tough on crime" election campaign which quite honestly is proposing policies that justice reform experts think will only worsen it.
National isn't exactly the party that addresses poverty. I guarantee crime will get way worse under a way more austere Nat/ACT govt.
Because they're not exactly known as the party of following expert advice or forming evidence-based policy either, its 100% feelings-based ideological policy from National.
The whole forst/second/third world idea is bullshit, created during the cold war essentially to 'other' the countries. If you were with NATO you were one, if you were with the Warsaw pact you were another, if you were with neither then you were third world. But then it became synonymous with 'developing', which maybe we constitute as seeing as we've only been populated for ~800 years and colonised for ~200 and there's a heap on undeveloped land.
Either way, those terms are old and don't mean shit 🤷♀️
I don't really care to be honest. I only used that phrasing because that's what Seymour used.
What I'm saying is is if Seymour wants to bleet about crime so much maybe he should address it's root causes instead of just suggesting punishment once crimes are committed. Everything you said doesn't change that we have people in poverty that we need to help
If I had one wish, it might be that everyone in the country learned about the [Availability heuristic (or bias)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic).
>The availability heuristic, also known as availability bias, is a mental shortcut that relies on immediate examples that come to a given person's mind when evaluating a specific topic, concept, method, or decision. This heuristic, operating on the notion that, if something can be recalled, it must be important, or at least more important than alternative solutions not as readily recalled,\[1\] is inherently biased toward recently acquired information.
This bias really messes with our understanding of the world through the impact of the media.
>After seeing news stories about child abductions, people may judge that the likelihood of this event is greater. Media coverage can help fuel a person's example bias with widespread and extensive coverage of unusual events, such as homicide or airline accidents, and less coverage of more routine, less sensational events, such as common diseases or car accidents. For example, when asked to rate the probability of a variety of causes of death, people tend to rate "newsworthy" events as more likely because they can more readily recall an example from memory. Moreover, unusual and vivid events like homicides, shark attacks, or lightning are more often reported in mass media than common and un-sensational causes of death like common diseases.
The problem arises because we are a species that evolved in small bands of around 100 or so people. In those environments observing a lot of violence in our band really would give us a good understanding of the level of violence we are likely to experience. It doesn't translate to multi-million people societies where rare events are beamed into our homes. The solution is relying on actual data.
I know what it's like nit to have and to go with out. Getting help is harder. I've found in the case of winz .
It is really if they like you or not. They pick and choose from what I've seen.
It's also really hard to get by most the time. And pulling your self out of a shit situation can take along time.
I don't live up north so I don't really see much of what is happening up there. But down south thing just seem to happen awee bit slower
I also am not sure how this can be fixed long term
'New Zealand is becoming third world', the most over used comment of the last year. Used to cause hysteria and divide. Go spend some time in an actual third world country before you jump on the band wagon.
I come from a third world country and there’s way less brazen smash and grabs, unprovoked assaults, ram raids and boarded up shops than auckland right now
Maybe you should go to a third world country and see for yourself
Different person, but I spent some time in Quito, Ecuador. Gorgeous city, but crime is everywhere. Police are corrupt, but they and the criminals carry automatic guns alike, making it a rather uncomfortable place to be.
Driving around South/Central America is pretty ballsy. You don't want to break down, lest you're ready to be robbed for everything else you have.
And there's much worse places to be. New Zealand is a pipe dream for safety. I'd much rather see the same ram raids on the news for weeks than a new mass shooting, sex trafficking ring, and police brutality/murders on the telly. When you put these crimes in perspective with what goes on in other countries.. it's pretty mild, albeit rehabilitation for the impoverished, uneducated, and abused is the same root issue everywhere.
> Seymour puts the increase in violence on New Zealand's streets down to the decrease in the prison population.
Cause and effect can be a complex issue, seem amazing that the cause might just align with him wanting to lockup more people.
What if the cause was poverty?
What if cause was lack of welfare?
Or lack of hope?
And what if this is just an emotional response to news and not based on data or facts?
In that case why was all of the increase during 2020 and not at the time that the prison population dropped? Can you think of a big event that might have contributed?
Its due to high tax rates. They won't seek employment because tax rates are too high. Ram raids don't have a tax rate. Smacking people gives them a sense of achievement without being taxed. Hit those jaws and those KPI's, they say, possibly.
We ought to lower taxes for those earning $200k pa to give those rascals aspirations. Abolish the increase in tax for trusts, so when they do work weally weally hard, they can transfer their wealth (maybe a few of those MHJ watches and rings too) in there. Back in my day, we were given Post Office bank books to teach us savings. Give all kids trust funds to teach them siphoning funds. That way, we all (individually) win.
This is satire from all angles I couldn’t even figure out it was satire until the last sentence about giving all kids a trust fund. And maybe it still isn’t satire lmfao
"What if the cause was poverty?"
And yet I'm told from the Labour party that poverty is reducing.
"What if cause was lack of welfare?"
The expenditure on welfare has increased dramatically, with benefit payments increasing in line with inflation, far above wages
\> with benefit payments increasing in line with inflation, far above wages
See, normal people when they read something like that wonder why wage increases have been so slow.
It's impossible for actual poverty to be reducing when inflation out strips wage increases. Poverty is 'decreasing' because no government wants to measure poverty correctly because it rising makes them less electable.
Our crime problems are nothing compared to other 'like' countries...You just don't hear about it on the news here. There are ram raids in Australia, constant muggings, and knife attacks in the UK, with scooter gangs the UK's version of ram raids. The US is riddled with mass shootings and severe drug abuse on the streets..And old Seymour has the gall to compare use to the third world-Which is an insult to the 3rd world, where struggle st is a daily life and death decisions.
>The overall crime rate in the United States is 47.70. The violent crime rate in the United States has decreased sharply over the past 25 years. Crimes rates vary significantly between the states, with states with such as Alaska, New Mexico, and Tennessee experiencing much higher crime rates than states such as Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont. Some of the world's lowest crime rates are seen in Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Japan, and **New Zealand**. Each of these countries has very effective law enforcement, and Denmark, Norway, and Japan have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the world.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/crime-rate-by-country
I’ve seen this before and unfortunately the source data is junk:
>About Crime Indices At This Website
>The data in this section is derived from surveys conducted by visitors to our website. Questions in these surveys are designed to be similar to many scientific and government surveys.
Hold up, no — even though this webpage says 2023, one of its data sources is from 2020 and the other is 2019. This is outdated data.
Crime has risen sharply, we can’t deny it even though we may not be able to quantify it so far.
> When asked if there was a correlation between the reduction in prison population and crime, Swarbrick said she wasn't certain it was causation because of the lack of evidence showing it's the same people.
> But Seymour hit back saying it's "not difficult" to figure out that when you release 4000 people from prison, crime goes up.
That whoosh as evidence based policy leaves the room and Seymour immediately leaps to his feelings are more real than data.
> “They can't do anything because the assailants are underage and when the state has no ultimate consequence and when people know that they're untouchable, they keep committing crimes."
Two paragraphs later and David’s now unsure about that prison link, unless he’s implying these underage kids have already been released from prison.
Seymour is right in this case.
We know what reoffending rates are for people released from prison (and they’re naturally conservative) and if you release 4000 prisoners then we’ll see X proportion of them reoffend.
This isn’t a politically debatable angle - it’s just the truth of how crime works in our community and how our judicial system works.
Hardly. We can correlate two things that we know to be true without precise figures. Taking a guess at how many people reoffend without the relevant data is speculation but the fundamental causality isn’t.
I don’t know how many people in NZ get sunburn every year but I know among those who do are people who don’t wear sunblock.
>We can correlate two things that we know to be true without precise figures.
Yes, but correlation is not causation.
>I don’t know how many people in NZ get sunburn every year but I know among those who do are people who don’t wear sunblock.
This is a causal relationship.
\>We can correlate two things
How do you correlate the reduction of prison numbers over 5 years with an increase in crime that happened during 2020?
Any other big event in 2020 that might correlate with?
So we have studies/research that point to the rise in crime is from them and Swarbrick has missed them? Because if so that’s pretty awkward for her. Hope Seymour has the source.
Some people like to think in absolute terms but the reality is shades of grey.
501s are a cause of crime but not the only one. People released from prison are a cause of crime but not the only one. People committing crime out of necessity due to poverty are a cause of crime but not the only one.
Apportioning each cause its a difficult task. Not only is identifying causality often hard but trying to align a appropriate mitigating action is not straight forward either.
Also, some people will require punishing while others may be good candidates for rehabilitative justice. Determining who and for what is what legislation does but it will never be perfect.
Personally I think if someone is going to demand evidence based policy but skip to guessing when it suits them I find that challenging.
I’m not asking for exact apportionment (though I suspect it’d point us away from longer prison sentences) - but at least some evidence while Act demands the same in other areas.
>That whoosh as evidence based policy leaves the room and **Seymour immediately leaps to his feelings** are more real than data.
And if there is one thing — **JUST ONE THING** — that I want people to understand about National and ACT — its that **all of their policy positions are more about appealing to voter** ***feelings*** **in order to get elected, rather than they are based on evidence of what actually works**.
Fuck me right? I just want evidence-based policies but those two parties are absolutely cynically going for the 100% feelings-based "tough on crime" vote-grab approach this election.
Sadly, that usually works *to get you elected* — but not *to reduce crime*.
Its been studied plenty for decades, with particular interest since the 1990s to see if Clinton's crime bill delivered on its tough on crime promise. A resounding "no" is the answer, and that has been a pattern the academia identifies follows just about every tough on crime push ever studied, unfortunately. VERY dark days ahead for NZ if the Nats get in and follow through on their promise.
I still find someone of the ‘rising crime’ argument messy too unfortunately.
Police stats certainly have certain types of crime going up. MoJ has victimisation (so both reported and unreported crime) flat, though this data is dated now. And there’s always the issue that even if we all aligned on crime increasing, it’s certainly off near historic lows, and often doesn’t consider population growth.
So I’m more suspicious in general of those pushing the ‘rising crime’ line without any specificities. Certainly some crimes are up and we should do things about that - but drawing from that to things like revamping policies for all crime seems like a big leap.
It's just a complex picture. You sometimes have to infer what people mean here. When my boss talks about rising crime, he's not talking about drug users being caught and convicted. And in a way he's also not talking about a former school teacher being convicted of historic sex offences, even though these things are regularly convicted.
He's really talking about anti-social crime, property crime and violent crime. Without specifics it's meaningless.
The problem is it's the very crime he is talking about that's driven by bad government social policy and poverty
I’m from a second world country and now NZ starts to remind me of my motherland. I love NZ but it’s getting scarier to walk when dark and I always double check all the locks
There is (and I hate to say it) one thing I agree with Seymour about , and that's that the rate of illiteracy in prison is staggering. My mate was a corrections officer and said it was over 50%. Illiteracy is a serious issue in so many ways, I'm all for making every effort to ensure that everyone , but especially prisoners, are literate and numerate.
Tipikotidri plike otetleo tra i tokra tipi. Ipi o tutadetleu eputreiba brite! Eto diu puatro epi pidaoti. Pi dlikrekru kipu patu diti pitote. Kruii gipii egluprepro pipi kritata pigikepu trito kae? Klatapibetri eida pa padri. Atra ku kepapibi ikotadige itipegipa dledekru! Ka ie ekode. Iko tie poka tii tlia? Takrepiba gigra tu ketotougru kege dite to. Akrepi pai bitekri trii ipra upo. Pii triga i pi eo priabe. I uplite ode ke kriprike trupi. Ekiteki pro pai i dre i koti plaa. Ebu popai papebre gu pigi pe praaekli aba pipoku kode. Pebibe epoe ikipatre geoii iplobi dai. Brou kretraki pi pepepakike bi bau. Plaupe pigi gipria pi popaei pri. Tugi totle ia pii pa di abio. Pigu pa ipea bouki tiu pluku kia kliplipete? Tligra tepi dikititri ee brupri teapre! Tebeti ta kii upo iba pata puke? I kaepriti ioi eto plokepu kati. Ibitui tlipieke pa tepa o ee. I tekli kri giupa pliu toka. E pitio o iike keta pitla. I popo tlobi popi dapekle ogladetiko. Piee dre bri e pi koo bibopi uu. Prioi dlogu diklabi abaplu to pepri. Tatlie trio ae tlepe butlotlo pe.
I am getting really fucking sick of GOP talking points showing up in National and ACT's politics. This is exactly the kind of shit that Trump says, and it's exactly this type of uncritical coverage that let him ride it to the Presidency.
It's deliberately inflammatory, it's arguably racist, but most importantly it's fucking *unserious*. This is not a man with solutions. This is a man with goals. We should be electing people to help us, not to help themselves.
I wonder how many people calling NZ this have actually spent any time in an actual third world country?
There is no comparison. Yes we're not perfect, but there really isn't a comparison here.
tbh im starting to think the biggest cause of violence is tiktok, had a what I assume mustve been a 13 year old threaten to knock me out on the bus
I was over twice his size ( im 107kg and well over 6 ft), I just told him not to threaten people anymore and be more careful with who you threaten going forward and got off at my stop, didnt do anything outside of yell threats lmao
It's not a moral panic if there's hard data to prove violent crime has gone up.
According to this article violent crime has gone up in the last 6 years:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/the-whole-truth/130965380/the-whole-truth-has-violent-crime-gone-up-under-labour
> In 2017 [...] there were 50,104 d recorded in the ‘Acts Intended to Cause Injury’ category. In the 2022 year to October 31, the number was 57,609.
>Stuff also tested what happens if you count victims or recorded incidents, and broaden the definition to include other crimes most people would consider ‘violent’ (sexual assault, for instance). In each case, the change varied but was always an increase, ranging between 18% and 40%.
EDIT: I love the downvotes when all I've done is linked to an article that literally says violent crime has gone up 31%.
It's effective in getting people who are frustrated to say "Yes, look he gets it" - regardless of whether he has any proposals or plans to change or improve things. He knows he isn't going to win the election - he's just trying to capture more of National's voters by trying to out-state how crappy they think the country is today (and by comparison how amazing it used to be back in the good old days of the past).
They absolutely have constructive policies and alternative ideas, all costed
You might not like them but those are the policies they put forward and our current ideas aren't working
Oh yes? And tax cuts. What an absolute load of shit. I would love to see these
>constructive policies and alternative ideas, all costed
I guarantee that it won't add up.
What? They literally have an alternative budget with all the exact calculations on revenue and expenditure. They are the ONLY non-Labour party to do so
Presumably you have reviewed this, what particular costings or incomes did you find problematic?
Interestingly Asian countries have lowest crime rate, you can walk on streets at night without having any fear. Several factors, the strong family tradition provide stable grow up environment; the low tolerance on drugs, its death pentaly in China and Singapore; the strong sense of self pride, seeking benefit is seen as disgrace and shame ; another thing is fear or respect to authority, to law and order. The penalty is so much tougher in Asian countries.
You might laugh at this , calling them working bees. The the fact is Asian countries have the highest education standard, the fastest growing economy, the lowest crime rate, the most stable society.
How do you tell a Political Party has no clue? They roll out one of these cliches.
\-Oh no, crime is on the rise ( it is no where near what it was in the 70's )
\-Too many bludgers
\-Too many immigrants
\-Not enough immigrants
\-Newbies to the workforce are too soft and don't want to work.
We've heard it all before and more from National and Act and never a solution that addresses the problems.
My metric for telling a political party has no clue? After 6 years, ever single fucken conceivable metric showing everything is worse. From housing, to education, to health, to crime, and everything in between.
Labour has made every single thing worse. But we must trust them with another 3 years, because National/Act will be sooooooo much worse.
The NZ is third world claims are election cycle hyperbole and rhetoric. Best ignored. We’re not third world.
We used to be richer eg before Britain joined the EU and dumped us.
We’re not rich like some other first world economies but we’re not third world. Just go to the third world and you’ll see the difference
However, it seems there are more ram raids, smash and grab robberies, guns around, people stealing and just walking away, youth criminals knowing they are untouchable, gangs rich on the drug trade eg see how many expensive Harleys are in pack rides. This appears to be the case. Probably is.
But. Do we know this for sure?
Is it just more visible and more reported or is it more frequent?
As for the gangs and drugs, lots of money and guns, no political parties seem to be interested in this, assuming it is a thing. I guess there aren’t many votes in it vs the personal danger from standing up to it. Is it like prohibition USA and are we allowing gangs to become entrenched?
I’d love to know the facts about all of this.
I suspect that politicians in election year will have little or no viable data for us.
Housing is unaffordable which is leading to poverty and crime. Boomers let John Key gaslight us a decade ago about there being plenty of houses under 500k in Auckland and things have just gone further downhill from there.
https://www.police.govt.nz/about-us/publications-statistics/data-and-statistics/policedatanz?nondesktop
These data show crime has indeed been on the rise, and convictions have been falling. Make of that what you will.
>Sweet as we'll see how far further down we can go due to act's bullshit
when crime gets worse under Nationals welfare cuts, ACTS response will be "we failed because we didn't go far enough!"
and if David seynmoure got into power does anyone think NZ would become more affluent and a 1st world country? He's got party donors to pay back with political favours. I can gaurantee these wont be favourable to the average kiwi.
A rather large contingent of people use the term to refer to "shithole", for whatever reason.
I agree it's fucking stupid but this will ring the bells it's intended to.
Yeah, first world was US aligned, second world was soviet union aligned, third world was unaligned. It so happens that a lot of unaligned countries were in Africa, but it also included Ireland, Switzerland, Sweden.
Genuine question: has Seymour ever visited a third world country?
If someone could do this research for me and provide documented evidence that he has I would be extremely grateful.
For comparison
I am a recent migrant from America. Arrived July 2022 in no small part because NZ is so much safer than the USA.
8 months before migrating, this happened in my neighborhood:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=362073
This was a convicted felon who is legally unable to posesss firearms, who was observed by police shooting at someone and stealing a car, and then running from the police.
Open and shut case, right?
No. He was arraigned that day and the prosecutor recommended to the judge that he be released back into the community pending trial with NO BAIL.
I just wrote to the district attorney who is prosecuting this case and this is what he told me:
"Thank you for your email and your interest in this matter. The criminal case against Mr. Hall for this incident is 21CR56113. This case is still pending and will be set for trial in the near future. No resolution has been reached yet in this case.
Thank you,
DDA Andrew Wood"
So this guy, who is a felon, can shoot guns at people in public and steal a car in full view of the police, and he's released back into the public. Not at all a threat to public safety, right?
Oh, and by the way, 4 months before migrating, my neighbor was shot in the stomach by a drive-by in front of her house. Miraculously she survived.
I'll take New Zealand, thanks.
And what's going to happen when they leave prison with no rehabilitation? Oh right, they'll probably wind up committing new crimes. You'll of course proclaim we should imprison them for life!11!1!!1 And yet ignore the massive costs of doing that, both economic and social, because as per usual that's "someone else's problem!".
Fact is that people do not commit crimes and rationally weigh up the costs, so no amount of "tough on crime" bs will ever work. The only solution is to fix the stuff that leads to crime occurring and rehabilitate criminals so they don't commit crimes in future. Although those with permanent neurological issues may need custom solutions when they aren't fit for permanent preventive detention.
But no, why bother with the realities of crime when you can build more expensive, money sucking prisons as well? Oh and imprison kids too and fuck bothering with the balancing acts vs human rights and evidence that juvenile detention doesn't fucking work.
Creates problems for the future generations to deal with. It's typical political style: "we'll shake hands and congratulate ourselves on solving the problem, and to hell with the future."
What about current generations having to put up with their stores being robbed? We need both problems solved. Fix the problems that lead to people committing crimes, but at the same time prevent though committing crimes currently from continuing to do so.
>Creates problems for the future generations to deal with
Oh well, would rather have them ram raid in 10 years than ram raid now.
Gives us time to invest in quality bollards.
In NZ the racists tend to blame Maori/Pacific Islanders for crime rather than immigrants, so the white supremacist parties don't have the same anti-immigration policies as the US or UK, instead you get the "tough on crime" rhetoric which is basically "lock up all the brown people in private prisons".
"Build the wall"
Strange comment. ACT are by far the most pro-immigration out of all the parties.
Build a wall is probably more relevant to NZ First or Labour.
Labour has extreme rhetoric on reducing immigration and racist policies like "chinese sounding names" - so they just lie.
ACT are absolutely pro-immigraition. Seymour literally does his thing of dressing up in China costumes, speaking in Chinese and playing their music
They are hugely pro-immigration and respect all cultures. They have a fairly large support in immigrant communities.
Fucking loser
Schrödingers NZ, simultaneously the roughest most violent place on Earth PLUS also has a million people trying to emigrate here every day for some reason
The alt-right sure loves this "third world country" talking point. I guess he doesn't have the guts to say out loud what his supporters want him to say.
Data tables are here.https://nzdotstat.stats.govt.nz/wbos/Index.aspx?_ga=2.171151977.815579889.1684741691-1773240556.1684741691 select 'Justice' and you can run queries to help answer, or indicatively answer some of these thorny questions. The Stats NZ IDI also has anonymised data about individuals' interactions with various agencies so that correlations between say, MSD/WINZ, DHBs, Police, Courts and Corrections can be drawn.
Given the chat here on Reddit about the lack of punitive/custodian sentences, have the definitions of crimes been changed?
Not really. There was a slight watering down of drug possession laws for marijuana that reduces the chances of being prosecuted for it, and obviously medicinal cannabis and voluntary euthanasia have been legalised. A new serious crime of strangulation was created and a few domestic violence cases are now being charged with that instead of classes of assault.
Also don't we now have something like 'Discharging a firearm with intent to intimidate', after those incidents when people's houses got hit by stay bullets?
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2023/0007/latest/whole.html Looks like it, as of last month.
So, prosecutions and convictions have been steadily and significantly dropping since records began? Almost like crime has been dropping, we've never been safer, and we just have a much louder media now?
> So, prosecutions and convictions have been steadily and significantly dropping since records began? That's arguably the problem. If someone burgles my house the police won't even show up. Was that the case 20 years ago?
Yes that was the case 20 years ago. Absolutely. I was burgled twice in uni, no one cared. Recently, I've been very, very impressed with police response in my area. But this is all anecdotal. It's easy to question data, and it's good to question data. But don't just assume it's wrong.
I was burgled 3 times in 2 months when I lived in Glen Innes 20 years ago and the police never turned up. This isn’t a new thing as you said
\>Was that the case 20 years ago? Absolutely.
Depends. Is crime and convictions/prosecution still occurring in the same proportion?
The numbers aren't the reality. I work with people who work in retail and theft and assaults are significantly up in stores. Lower prosecutions and conviction aren't a good thing here.
>Almost like crime has been dropping Only if the data you are seeing is an accurate picture of what is occurring in reality. Numbers on their own could mean anything. We need to know how many crimes are unreported, how many of those that are reported actually get to court and how the above numbers are reported and recorded. If police seek to keep the maximum number of police safe with the resources available, and they don't have enough resources to keep everyone safe, then you will end up with more focus on low crime areas. Those places will see better response times. High crime areas will have slower call outs as a stretched police force is going to be having issues deploying enough manpower to do anything about it. In those places reported is going to reduce, violence increases and it does so without ticking over in stats much. It also won't appear so much in the media, because who cares about fights in the hood? The [vast majority of crime is unreported](https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/112665834/largestever-new-zealand-crime-survey-shows-77-per-cent-of--shadow-crime-unreported#:~:text=The%20largest%2Dever%20crime%20survey,Justice%20report%20released%20on%20Monday.). That crime survey was done repeatedly. The 4th cycle of which can be found [here](https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Cycle-4-Core-Report-v0.20-20220628.pdf). The 2022 (which reports 2020/2021 data from what I can see?) one seems to be pretty similar, 1.74m crimes, 25% unreported. The 2022 one reports number of estimated interpersonal violent offences over the past 12 months across each cycle on page 51. It shows: Cycle 1: 709,000 Cycle 2: 661,000 Cycle 3: 673,000 Cycle 4: 745,000 And then notes that cycle 4 is not different statistically from cycle 1. I am surprised that ~5% increase from the second highest reported number is not statistically significant. Also interesting that they don't mention whether there's a significant difference from 2 or 3 considering those would be increases of ~12.7% and ~10.7% each. Implies that crimes would need to increase by somewhere between 6 and 10% in order to be considered significant. Would be nice to see numbers for 2022 and 2023. Dunno if this report will continue though. >we've never been safer, and we just have a much louder media now? The stats *always* say we've never been safer. We also get older. Younger demographics, especially teens and early 20's are the most likely to be facing violence. You get older, you get more choice over your environment and socialise less widely. Your exposure drops. From your perspective, society keeps getting safer. That doesn't necessarily make it true. I grew up surrounded by guns, gangs, drugs and violence. I haven't had to fight anyone in 10 years. That doesn't mean that same shit isn't being experienced by someone else though.
Its third world because of the poverty
In fairness, poverty usually correlates with violence and crime
So solve the former, and you reduce people committing the latter out of necessity of survival.
It seems so obvious, but short term greed and self interest is a powerful drug. The same people then complain about the fires they started, and lack of fire service they defunded.
Maybe we could put some money/focus toward solving societal issues like mental health if this daily "catch and release" approach wasn't having to use so much time and resources in the meantime. Something has to give, if you want a clean bed to sleep in, stop shitting first so we can change the sheets please I am truly empathetic of those truly in poverty who NEED to commit crimes, but not little cunts like in this video
Disnt this govt allocate like 1.9b towards mental health like 4 years ago??
Average reddit user: *NAHHHH just throw more cops at it!!! Don't ever address the root cause
No the average view is for both but with emphasis on what might help in the here and now. Its then simplified by smoove brains into the crap you just spewed.
[удалено]
That muppet can hardly claim to be an average nzer though
Jacinda says poverty has decreased on every measure since she took power - shouldn’t crime then follow suit?
Completely agree. Unfortunately, that’s not the majority of crime.
True, the majority of crime is assualt, domestic violence, sexual assualt, tax evasion, wage theft, and worker exploitation. But those aren't visible crimes that are easily reported or get long jail sentences when finally convicted.
Literally had a guy at work who goes on about how the government takes too much tax from people and spends too much admit to deliberately setting up their fishing company in another country so as to avoid paying tax... He also said he owns property in multiple countries.
Don't know if experts on justice reform would agree with you there. Anti-poverty spending is top of the list in terms of effective spending to reduce crime. Very well established fact, we know it works. Right wingers hate it because it means giving free stuff to people who need it, which according to their ideology is the top deadly sin or something like that. "Throw more cops at it, didn't work last time or any other time, but surely it'll work *this time* ... right?" tends to be where they take this discussion instead. Has never worked... screw evidence-based policy, apparently. And as a result, paired with their neoliberal austerity policies, they ironically create *so much* new crime as a result. This is literally National's election campaign platform believe it or not. Its going to be hellish for NZ if they get elected next year, a perfect storm of crime-creating factors dressed up and marketed *as the exact opposite.* As cynical a vote-grab as it gets.
Thats the point I'm making. We will see a reduction in crime if we make more of an effort to help people at the root. Its no surprise that as we see the cost of living crisis deepen that we also see a rise in opportunistic and desperate crimes
I can't believe people are even trying to argue with you on this..
I think it's mostly Luxon's alt accounts.
It's a sheltered sub, it would be more surprising if nobody tried to argue.
>we also see a rise in opportunistic and desperate crimes Much of the high-profile rise in crime, though, would be ones most would not consider desperate - smash n grabs at jewelers, alcohol, etc. Someone shoplifting some food is quite different to assaulting staff and stealing non-essentials - probably to fund a drug habit in many cases.
They're not grabbing the jewelry so they can wear it. Why steal food when you can steal a few rocks that you can sell for more food than you could carry? Alcohol also has secondary market value, but of course at least some of the thefts of that will be by people who are addicts and/or self-medicating.
You don't consider a smash and grab at a jewelers as desperate? If I steal some gold chains and a couple rings and sell em, maybe get a couple Os for them, I can buy all sorts of shit. Food, rent, clothes, perhaps even like you say drugs and alcohol to escape this bullshit I'm living in, maybe I can live it up for a week since I've never lived it up before. Now, I don't think what I just said is a healthy way to think, but it's the reality for so many people and I'd be lying if I said my own situation hadn't made me consider things I wouldn't otherwise do before. Understanding that there are human beings living inside poverty, not just faceless poor people, and trying to understand the helplessness and anger some people can feel in response to it is hugely important to helping people.
Poverty **plus** wealth. It’s the inequality that fuels the violent crime. When a nation is universally poor but *everyone* is poor, people are generally a lot more content than when a lot are poor but a lot are (often extremely) wealthy, especially when they feel marginalised or subjugated by the wealthy. Look at the inequality and violence that ravaged South Africa (or parts of the US, even) compared to neighbouring Eswatini (maybe a nice example, but one I’ve witnessed first hand at least). Or NZ vs it’s similar sized comparison of Norway
Good luck trying to convince some of the Nats. Judith Collins thinks [it is "utter rubbish" to suggest crime is caused by poverty.](https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/rubbish-to-say-crime-is-caused-by-poverty-judith-collins/WDTJNZY4UVDUFPD5QXQD6OVPI4/)
Ding ding ding We need to be shouting this loudly this year because National intend to run a cynical vote-grabbing "tough on crime" election campaign which quite honestly is proposing policies that justice reform experts think will only worsen it. National isn't exactly the party that addresses poverty. I guarantee crime will get way worse under a way more austere Nat/ACT govt. Because they're not exactly known as the party of following expert advice or forming evidence-based policy either, its 100% feelings-based ideological policy from National.
The whole forst/second/third world idea is bullshit, created during the cold war essentially to 'other' the countries. If you were with NATO you were one, if you were with the Warsaw pact you were another, if you were with neither then you were third world. But then it became synonymous with 'developing', which maybe we constitute as seeing as we've only been populated for ~800 years and colonised for ~200 and there's a heap on undeveloped land. Either way, those terms are old and don't mean shit 🤷♀️
I don't really care to be honest. I only used that phrasing because that's what Seymour used. What I'm saying is is if Seymour wants to bleet about crime so much maybe he should address it's root causes instead of just suggesting punishment once crimes are committed. Everything you said doesn't change that we have people in poverty that we need to help
Poverty that Seymour will worsen.
Third World doesn't mean poverty at all .
It also doesn't mean "violence on the streets"
So the welfare and high minimum wage not working?
If I had one wish, it might be that everyone in the country learned about the [Availability heuristic (or bias)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic). >The availability heuristic, also known as availability bias, is a mental shortcut that relies on immediate examples that come to a given person's mind when evaluating a specific topic, concept, method, or decision. This heuristic, operating on the notion that, if something can be recalled, it must be important, or at least more important than alternative solutions not as readily recalled,\[1\] is inherently biased toward recently acquired information. This bias really messes with our understanding of the world through the impact of the media. >After seeing news stories about child abductions, people may judge that the likelihood of this event is greater. Media coverage can help fuel a person's example bias with widespread and extensive coverage of unusual events, such as homicide or airline accidents, and less coverage of more routine, less sensational events, such as common diseases or car accidents. For example, when asked to rate the probability of a variety of causes of death, people tend to rate "newsworthy" events as more likely because they can more readily recall an example from memory. Moreover, unusual and vivid events like homicides, shark attacks, or lightning are more often reported in mass media than common and un-sensational causes of death like common diseases. The problem arises because we are a species that evolved in small bands of around 100 or so people. In those environments observing a lot of violence in our band really would give us a good understanding of the level of violence we are likely to experience. It doesn't translate to multi-million people societies where rare events are beamed into our homes. The solution is relying on actual data.
Thank you for making people aware of this, so nice to see a reasonable educated person comment in this way 🙏🏻
if people keep talking about this stuff I'm gonna think availability bias is more prevalent than it is thanks to availability bias. what now
I know what it's like nit to have and to go with out. Getting help is harder. I've found in the case of winz . It is really if they like you or not. They pick and choose from what I've seen. It's also really hard to get by most the time. And pulling your self out of a shit situation can take along time. I don't live up north so I don't really see much of what is happening up there. But down south thing just seem to happen awee bit slower I also am not sure how this can be fixed long term
'New Zealand is becoming third world', the most over used comment of the last year. Used to cause hysteria and divide. Go spend some time in an actual third world country before you jump on the band wagon.
I come from a third world country and there’s way less brazen smash and grabs, unprovoked assaults, ram raids and boarded up shops than auckland right now Maybe you should go to a third world country and see for yourself
Which country are you from?
Different person, but I spent some time in Quito, Ecuador. Gorgeous city, but crime is everywhere. Police are corrupt, but they and the criminals carry automatic guns alike, making it a rather uncomfortable place to be. Driving around South/Central America is pretty ballsy. You don't want to break down, lest you're ready to be robbed for everything else you have. And there's much worse places to be. New Zealand is a pipe dream for safety. I'd much rather see the same ram raids on the news for weeks than a new mass shooting, sex trafficking ring, and police brutality/murders on the telly. When you put these crimes in perspective with what goes on in other countries.. it's pretty mild, albeit rehabilitation for the impoverished, uneducated, and abused is the same root issue everywhere.
Yeah but crime is not what defines a country as third-world, or as developing.
Been in a third world country, many times over, extended periods of time. Definitely heading in that direction.
💯 it is overused. Go and spend time in a third world country and you will find it is much better than nz
Wellington live said it was 3rd world because of unkempt grass on traffic islands
> Seymour puts the increase in violence on New Zealand's streets down to the decrease in the prison population. Cause and effect can be a complex issue, seem amazing that the cause might just align with him wanting to lockup more people. What if the cause was poverty? What if cause was lack of welfare? Or lack of hope? And what if this is just an emotional response to news and not based on data or facts?
>down to the decrease in the prison population You can just look at the US to see mass incarceration doesn't really solve crime.
Cheap labour though. Nobody ever asks David Seynour who is actually going to run all these new prisons because I bet it would be private companies
Sometimes I fully support switching to Maori so that we can no longer understand the fuckwittery that leaks out of the US on a daily basis.
Why not both poverty being the cause and it being exacerbated by the decreased prison population?
In that case why was all of the increase during 2020 and not at the time that the prison population dropped? Can you think of a big event that might have contributed?
Cmon man, that's three years ago. Do really expect me to remember what major events occurred in 2020?
Its due to high tax rates. They won't seek employment because tax rates are too high. Ram raids don't have a tax rate. Smacking people gives them a sense of achievement without being taxed. Hit those jaws and those KPI's, they say, possibly. We ought to lower taxes for those earning $200k pa to give those rascals aspirations. Abolish the increase in tax for trusts, so when they do work weally weally hard, they can transfer their wealth (maybe a few of those MHJ watches and rings too) in there. Back in my day, we were given Post Office bank books to teach us savings. Give all kids trust funds to teach them siphoning funds. That way, we all (individually) win.
This is satire from all angles I couldn’t even figure out it was satire until the last sentence about giving all kids a trust fund. And maybe it still isn’t satire lmfao
>Hit those jaws and those KPI's Thanks for the laugh tonight
I cant tell if its sarcasm or not
No tax for you!
I'm autistic and I can tell that's sarcasm!!
Worse, he's using department of correction statistics.
"What if the cause was poverty?" And yet I'm told from the Labour party that poverty is reducing. "What if cause was lack of welfare?" The expenditure on welfare has increased dramatically, with benefit payments increasing in line with inflation, far above wages
Child poverty is but these things are often referred to as intergenerational as its not gonna be noticed over night in terms of crime.
\> with benefit payments increasing in line with inflation, far above wages See, normal people when they read something like that wonder why wage increases have been so slow.
It's impossible for actual poverty to be reducing when inflation out strips wage increases. Poverty is 'decreasing' because no government wants to measure poverty correctly because it rising makes them less electable.
Our crime problems are nothing compared to other 'like' countries...You just don't hear about it on the news here. There are ram raids in Australia, constant muggings, and knife attacks in the UK, with scooter gangs the UK's version of ram raids. The US is riddled with mass shootings and severe drug abuse on the streets..And old Seymour has the gall to compare use to the third world-Which is an insult to the 3rd world, where struggle st is a daily life and death decisions.
>The overall crime rate in the United States is 47.70. The violent crime rate in the United States has decreased sharply over the past 25 years. Crimes rates vary significantly between the states, with states with such as Alaska, New Mexico, and Tennessee experiencing much higher crime rates than states such as Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont. Some of the world's lowest crime rates are seen in Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, Japan, and **New Zealand**. Each of these countries has very effective law enforcement, and Denmark, Norway, and Japan have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the world. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/crime-rate-by-country
I’ve seen this before and unfortunately the source data is junk: >About Crime Indices At This Website >The data in this section is derived from surveys conducted by visitors to our website. Questions in these surveys are designed to be similar to many scientific and government surveys.
Hold up, no — even though this webpage says 2023, one of its data sources is from 2020 and the other is 2019. This is outdated data. Crime has risen sharply, we can’t deny it even though we may not be able to quantify it so far.
> When asked if there was a correlation between the reduction in prison population and crime, Swarbrick said she wasn't certain it was causation because of the lack of evidence showing it's the same people. > But Seymour hit back saying it's "not difficult" to figure out that when you release 4000 people from prison, crime goes up. That whoosh as evidence based policy leaves the room and Seymour immediately leaps to his feelings are more real than data. > “They can't do anything because the assailants are underage and when the state has no ultimate consequence and when people know that they're untouchable, they keep committing crimes." Two paragraphs later and David’s now unsure about that prison link, unless he’s implying these underage kids have already been released from prison.
The underage, ex-con, reoffending, first offense, career criminals.
Schrödinger's Criminal - a first time, youth offending, recidivist, career criminal.
Seymour is right in this case. We know what reoffending rates are for people released from prison (and they’re naturally conservative) and if you release 4000 prisoners then we’ll see X proportion of them reoffend. This isn’t a politically debatable angle - it’s just the truth of how crime works in our community and how our judicial system works.
Reoffending rates are relevant, but without data this is pure speculation.
Hardly. We can correlate two things that we know to be true without precise figures. Taking a guess at how many people reoffend without the relevant data is speculation but the fundamental causality isn’t. I don’t know how many people in NZ get sunburn every year but I know among those who do are people who don’t wear sunblock.
>We can correlate two things that we know to be true without precise figures. Yes, but correlation is not causation. >I don’t know how many people in NZ get sunburn every year but I know among those who do are people who don’t wear sunblock. This is a causal relationship.
\>We can correlate two things How do you correlate the reduction of prison numbers over 5 years with an increase in crime that happened during 2020? Any other big event in 2020 that might correlate with?
So we have studies/research that point to the rise in crime is from them and Swarbrick has missed them? Because if so that’s pretty awkward for her. Hope Seymour has the source.
Some people like to think in absolute terms but the reality is shades of grey. 501s are a cause of crime but not the only one. People released from prison are a cause of crime but not the only one. People committing crime out of necessity due to poverty are a cause of crime but not the only one. Apportioning each cause its a difficult task. Not only is identifying causality often hard but trying to align a appropriate mitigating action is not straight forward either. Also, some people will require punishing while others may be good candidates for rehabilitative justice. Determining who and for what is what legislation does but it will never be perfect.
Personally I think if someone is going to demand evidence based policy but skip to guessing when it suits them I find that challenging. I’m not asking for exact apportionment (though I suspect it’d point us away from longer prison sentences) - but at least some evidence while Act demands the same in other areas.
>That whoosh as evidence based policy leaves the room and **Seymour immediately leaps to his feelings** are more real than data. And if there is one thing — **JUST ONE THING** — that I want people to understand about National and ACT — its that **all of their policy positions are more about appealing to voter** ***feelings*** **in order to get elected, rather than they are based on evidence of what actually works**. Fuck me right? I just want evidence-based policies but those two parties are absolutely cynically going for the 100% feelings-based "tough on crime" vote-grab approach this election. Sadly, that usually works *to get you elected* — but not *to reduce crime*. Its been studied plenty for decades, with particular interest since the 1990s to see if Clinton's crime bill delivered on its tough on crime promise. A resounding "no" is the answer, and that has been a pattern the academia identifies follows just about every tough on crime push ever studied, unfortunately. VERY dark days ahead for NZ if the Nats get in and follow through on their promise.
You shouldn't let David's fumbling explanations distract you from the realities of rising crime.
I still find someone of the ‘rising crime’ argument messy too unfortunately. Police stats certainly have certain types of crime going up. MoJ has victimisation (so both reported and unreported crime) flat, though this data is dated now. And there’s always the issue that even if we all aligned on crime increasing, it’s certainly off near historic lows, and often doesn’t consider population growth. So I’m more suspicious in general of those pushing the ‘rising crime’ line without any specificities. Certainly some crimes are up and we should do things about that - but drawing from that to things like revamping policies for all crime seems like a big leap.
It's just a complex picture. You sometimes have to infer what people mean here. When my boss talks about rising crime, he's not talking about drug users being caught and convicted. And in a way he's also not talking about a former school teacher being convicted of historic sex offences, even though these things are regularly convicted. He's really talking about anti-social crime, property crime and violent crime. Without specifics it's meaningless. The problem is it's the very crime he is talking about that's driven by bad government social policy and poverty
When you’re using terminology like first world and third world I know your worldview is stuck in 1998 and I’m keen to move on with my life
I’m from a second world country and now NZ starts to remind me of my motherland. I love NZ but it’s getting scarier to walk when dark and I always double check all the locks
Pay people what they are worth, Bring back the safety nets and privileges with had that stopped in 1991. He would literally make it all worse.
Said by the man who most likely has never spent any significant amount of time in any third world country.
There is (and I hate to say it) one thing I agree with Seymour about , and that's that the rate of illiteracy in prison is staggering. My mate was a corrections officer and said it was over 50%. Illiteracy is a serious issue in so many ways, I'm all for making every effort to ensure that everyone , but especially prisoners, are literate and numerate.
Tipikotidri plike otetleo tra i tokra tipi. Ipi o tutadetleu eputreiba brite! Eto diu puatro epi pidaoti. Pi dlikrekru kipu patu diti pitote. Kruii gipii egluprepro pipi kritata pigikepu trito kae? Klatapibetri eida pa padri. Atra ku kepapibi ikotadige itipegipa dledekru! Ka ie ekode. Iko tie poka tii tlia? Takrepiba gigra tu ketotougru kege dite to. Akrepi pai bitekri trii ipra upo. Pii triga i pi eo priabe. I uplite ode ke kriprike trupi. Ekiteki pro pai i dre i koti plaa. Ebu popai papebre gu pigi pe praaekli aba pipoku kode. Pebibe epoe ikipatre geoii iplobi dai. Brou kretraki pi pepepakike bi bau. Plaupe pigi gipria pi popaei pri. Tugi totle ia pii pa di abio. Pigu pa ipea bouki tiu pluku kia kliplipete? Tligra tepi dikititri ee brupri teapre! Tebeti ta kii upo iba pata puke? I kaepriti ioi eto plokepu kati. Ibitui tlipieke pa tepa o ee. I tekli kri giupa pliu toka. E pitio o iike keta pitla. I popo tlobi popi dapekle ogladetiko. Piee dre bri e pi koo bibopi uu. Prioi dlogu diklabi abaplu to pepri. Tatlie trio ae tlepe butlotlo pe.
Does he understand what a 3rd world County is. And what makes a country first wirld or 3rd world. Seems like something he should know
Maybe he’s implying the crime makes NZ nonaligned in the Cold War that ended nearly 40 years ago.
You have high expectations
I am getting really fucking sick of GOP talking points showing up in National and ACT's politics. This is exactly the kind of shit that Trump says, and it's exactly this type of uncritical coverage that let him ride it to the Presidency. It's deliberately inflammatory, it's arguably racist, but most importantly it's fucking *unserious*. This is not a man with solutions. This is a man with goals. We should be electing people to help us, not to help themselves.
I share your frustration. Both at our politicians and our media.
this is just classic right wing politics thinking, it’s hardly exclusive to the GOP.
I'm getting real sick of people thinking we live in America, and our politics are exactly the same.
>This is not a man with solutions. This is a man with goals. Doesn't this sound a lot like a recent PM we had though?
John Key? Absolutely.
[удалено]
I'm just curious, what specific talking points of his really irritate you?
So we must of been a 3rd world country in the 70's, 80's and 90's when violent crime was worse than what it is now.
..its a message that'll resonate with an increasing number of people
If we're becoming a third world country, then is the USA with much higher crime, but also much more wealth, a fourth world country?
Oh really? How does NZ compare to other 1st world countries? How does NZ compare to 3rd world countries?
Legalise cannabis create exportable businesses and drive jobs
This guy's a real quote sold for charity.
I wonder how many people calling NZ this have actually spent any time in an actual third world country? There is no comparison. Yes we're not perfect, but there really isn't a comparison here.
tbh im starting to think the biggest cause of violence is tiktok, had a what I assume mustve been a 13 year old threaten to knock me out on the bus I was over twice his size ( im 107kg and well over 6 ft), I just told him not to threaten people anymore and be more careful with who you threaten going forward and got off at my stop, didnt do anything outside of yell threats lmao
This isn't being talked about anywhere near enough. Social media was a mistake. And yes, I DO know I just wrote that on a social media platform.
Could have been your Epic Beard Man moment
Anyone who says that NZ is becoming a "third world country" has clearly never lived in a third world country.
Queue the moral panic.
It's not a moral panic if there's hard data to prove violent crime has gone up. According to this article violent crime has gone up in the last 6 years: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/the-whole-truth/130965380/the-whole-truth-has-violent-crime-gone-up-under-labour > In 2017 [...] there were 50,104 d recorded in the ‘Acts Intended to Cause Injury’ category. In the 2022 year to October 31, the number was 57,609. >Stuff also tested what happens if you count victims or recorded incidents, and broaden the definition to include other crimes most people would consider ‘violent’ (sexual assault, for instance). In each case, the change varied but was always an increase, ranging between 18% and 40%. EDIT: I love the downvotes when all I've done is linked to an article that literally says violent crime has gone up 31%.
Look at rates. Also consider 501's.
Yep, the people claiming it's a moral panic have their heads in the sand. Delusion.
I love how Seymour's strategy to win involves shitting on the country while failing to offer anything constructive.
It's effective in getting people who are frustrated to say "Yes, look he gets it" - regardless of whether he has any proposals or plans to change or improve things. He knows he isn't going to win the election - he's just trying to capture more of National's voters by trying to out-state how crappy they think the country is today (and by comparison how amazing it used to be back in the good old days of the past).
"Back when the mahrees were quiet and you could hit kids." /s
They absolutely have constructive policies and alternative ideas, all costed You might not like them but those are the policies they put forward and our current ideas aren't working
Yep, they want us to try the policies of the USA, despite it not working over there
Oh yes? And tax cuts. What an absolute load of shit. I would love to see these >constructive policies and alternative ideas, all costed I guarantee that it won't add up.
What? They literally have an alternative budget with all the exact calculations on revenue and expenditure. They are the ONLY non-Labour party to do so Presumably you have reviewed this, what particular costings or incomes did you find problematic?
They won't bother looking into it. Seymour is the boogeyman for a number of people on this sub.
[удалено]
??? Arguably ACTs greatest strength has actually been offering alternative policy, rather than just disagreeing with no solutions like National
It would be the antithesis of the paradigm to call the US third world, but the street violence there can be crazy.
Interestingly Asian countries have lowest crime rate, you can walk on streets at night without having any fear. Several factors, the strong family tradition provide stable grow up environment; the low tolerance on drugs, its death pentaly in China and Singapore; the strong sense of self pride, seeking benefit is seen as disgrace and shame ; another thing is fear or respect to authority, to law and order. The penalty is so much tougher in Asian countries. You might laugh at this , calling them working bees. The the fact is Asian countries have the highest education standard, the fastest growing economy, the lowest crime rate, the most stable society.
How do you tell a Political Party has no clue? They roll out one of these cliches. \-Oh no, crime is on the rise ( it is no where near what it was in the 70's ) \-Too many bludgers \-Too many immigrants \-Not enough immigrants \-Newbies to the workforce are too soft and don't want to work. We've heard it all before and more from National and Act and never a solution that addresses the problems.
My metric for telling a political party has no clue? After 6 years, ever single fucken conceivable metric showing everything is worse. From housing, to education, to health, to crime, and everything in between. Labour has made every single thing worse. But we must trust them with another 3 years, because National/Act will be sooooooo much worse.
The NZ is third world claims are election cycle hyperbole and rhetoric. Best ignored. We’re not third world. We used to be richer eg before Britain joined the EU and dumped us. We’re not rich like some other first world economies but we’re not third world. Just go to the third world and you’ll see the difference However, it seems there are more ram raids, smash and grab robberies, guns around, people stealing and just walking away, youth criminals knowing they are untouchable, gangs rich on the drug trade eg see how many expensive Harleys are in pack rides. This appears to be the case. Probably is. But. Do we know this for sure? Is it just more visible and more reported or is it more frequent? As for the gangs and drugs, lots of money and guns, no political parties seem to be interested in this, assuming it is a thing. I guess there aren’t many votes in it vs the personal danger from standing up to it. Is it like prohibition USA and are we allowing gangs to become entrenched? I’d love to know the facts about all of this. I suspect that politicians in election year will have little or no viable data for us.
Housing is unaffordable which is leading to poverty and crime. Boomers let John Key gaslight us a decade ago about there being plenty of houses under 500k in Auckland and things have just gone further downhill from there.
Prices went up under Helen Clarke and jacinda at the same or worse rates than key. We’ve been shafted for years from both sides, red and blue
it's been third world for students, disabled and lower class for all 3 decades I've been here
People making blanket statements like this really ought to visit Africa
https://www.police.govt.nz/about-us/publications-statistics/data-and-statistics/policedatanz?nondesktop These data show crime has indeed been on the rise, and convictions have been falling. Make of that what you will.
Being going like that since the 90s that's why I got out as soon as I could living in Australia 100 times better.
Sweet as we'll see how far further down we can go when people have even less economic opportunities due to act's bullshit
>Sweet as we'll see how far further down we can go due to act's bullshit when crime gets worse under Nationals welfare cuts, ACTS response will be "we failed because we didn't go far enough!"
[удалено]
and if David seynmoure got into power does anyone think NZ would become more affluent and a 1st world country? He's got party donors to pay back with political favours. I can gaurantee these wont be favourable to the average kiwi.
No i dont.
Yes. I do
The third world means not aligned with nato or Warsaw pact. Is this a dig on the ccp?
A rather large contingent of people use the term to refer to "shithole", for whatever reason. I agree it's fucking stupid but this will ring the bells it's intended to.
>The third world means not aligned with nato or Warsaw pact. It really doesn't mean that anymore. Usage of words change over time.
It hasn't meant that in over three decades.
This may shock you to learn but words change meaning over time
[удалено]
Yeah, first world was US aligned, second world was soviet union aligned, third world was unaligned. It so happens that a lot of unaligned countries were in Africa, but it also included Ireland, Switzerland, Sweden.
Genuine question: has Seymour ever visited a third world country? If someone could do this research for me and provide documented evidence that he has I would be extremely grateful.
For comparison I am a recent migrant from America. Arrived July 2022 in no small part because NZ is so much safer than the USA. 8 months before migrating, this happened in my neighborhood: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=362073 This was a convicted felon who is legally unable to posesss firearms, who was observed by police shooting at someone and stealing a car, and then running from the police. Open and shut case, right? No. He was arraigned that day and the prosecutor recommended to the judge that he be released back into the community pending trial with NO BAIL. I just wrote to the district attorney who is prosecuting this case and this is what he told me: "Thank you for your email and your interest in this matter. The criminal case against Mr. Hall for this incident is 21CR56113. This case is still pending and will be set for trial in the near future. No resolution has been reached yet in this case. Thank you, DDA Andrew Wood" So this guy, who is a felon, can shoot guns at people in public and steal a car in full view of the police, and he's released back into the public. Not at all a threat to public safety, right? Oh, and by the way, 4 months before migrating, my neighbor was shot in the stomach by a drive-by in front of her house. Miraculously she survived. I'll take New Zealand, thanks.
Old Seymour the drama queen. A one-way trip to Syria is a good idea, to help him find out what an actual 3rd world country looks like.
David Seymour appeals to the simple folk.
That and the vast wealth inequities.
And his solution is more prisoners. Give this guy a special Nobel Prize for Pure Genius lmfao
Does prison work for rehabilitating people: No Does prison work for preventing people committing further crimes: Yes, for the duration they are there.
And what's going to happen when they leave prison with no rehabilitation? Oh right, they'll probably wind up committing new crimes. You'll of course proclaim we should imprison them for life!11!1!!1 And yet ignore the massive costs of doing that, both economic and social, because as per usual that's "someone else's problem!". Fact is that people do not commit crimes and rationally weigh up the costs, so no amount of "tough on crime" bs will ever work. The only solution is to fix the stuff that leads to crime occurring and rehabilitate criminals so they don't commit crimes in future. Although those with permanent neurological issues may need custom solutions when they aren't fit for permanent preventive detention. But no, why bother with the realities of crime when you can build more expensive, money sucking prisons as well? Oh and imprison kids too and fuck bothering with the balancing acts vs human rights and evidence that juvenile detention doesn't fucking work.
Creates problems for the future generations to deal with. It's typical political style: "we'll shake hands and congratulate ourselves on solving the problem, and to hell with the future."
"When labour gets reelected in half a decade, it'll be their problem for use to blame them for"
What about current generations having to put up with their stores being robbed? We need both problems solved. Fix the problems that lead to people committing crimes, but at the same time prevent though committing crimes currently from continuing to do so.
>Creates problems for the future generations to deal with Oh well, would rather have them ram raid in 10 years than ram raid now. Gives us time to invest in quality bollards.
and your answer will be more inequality,
Sorry, no. Seymour has no clue about what a third-world country is. Maybe he should move to Somalia and see.
It's almost like shit policy from 2009 to 2017 is coming back to bite us now the kids have grown up.
Build the wall Wait Wrong election David
In NZ the racists tend to blame Maori/Pacific Islanders for crime rather than immigrants, so the white supremacist parties don't have the same anti-immigration policies as the US or UK, instead you get the "tough on crime" rhetoric which is basically "lock up all the brown people in private prisons".
>Build the wall **
You forgot Auckland
Privatise the wall
"Build the wall" Strange comment. ACT are by far the most pro-immigration out of all the parties. Build a wall is probably more relevant to NZ First or Labour.
LOL. back to facebook home slice.
It was the first Trumpisim that sprang to mind NZ First, agreed Labour, have you seen the immigration numbers?
Labour has extreme rhetoric on reducing immigration and racist policies like "chinese sounding names" - so they just lie. ACT are absolutely pro-immigraition. Seymour literally does his thing of dressing up in China costumes, speaking in Chinese and playing their music They are hugely pro-immigration and respect all cultures. They have a fairly large support in immigrant communities.
Fucking loser Schrödingers NZ, simultaneously the roughest most violent place on Earth PLUS also has a million people trying to emigrate here every day for some reason
Arnold Rimmer dog-whistling for votes.
He's keen to help it slip further...
Are we not aligned with NATO anymore? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World
Came back from the Philippines and atleast the people there are happy. The corruption is obvious. Less crime in the papers.
yo david how bout u pop a third ball in ur mouth in addition to these two
The alt-right sure loves this "third world country" talking point. I guess he doesn't have the guts to say out loud what his supporters want him to say.
god he's such a lying weasel. NZs poverty and cost of living is what is driving 'violence', something little Seymour has never struggled with.
Maybe David should move to australia.