The generational voting divide

Ten days ago I wrote a post entitled "The Young Don't Vote"

Here are the latest enrollment stats:

And here are the actual voting percentages in 2017:

In raw numbers there are an estimated 450,500 18-24 year-olds with 277,151 or 61.5% enrolled at June 9. The figure will  increase but in 2017 the final enrollment number was 333,164 and 69.3% of them voted.

It is safe to say only between 4 and 5 out of all 18-24 year-olds vote.

For comparison 96% of voters aged 55 or older enroll and they turnout in the mid to high 80% range.

Chris Trotter is worried about this. He writes:

If voters aged between 18 and 25 registered and voted in anything like the same numbers as the centre-left’s core vote, Labour would long ago have become New Zealand’s “natural party of government”.

Pie in the sky. It is the young's prerogative to not vote if that's their inclination. I took no particular interest until I became a mother. People become increasingly involved as they age and are more invested, stable and life-experienced.

He is worried this divide opens the door for Collins. As my post suggested, I agree, but happily. And for those voting youth who are averse to National's new leadership team but not left-inclined, ACT fills the void. Collins v Ardern contrasted neatly by Seymour v Peters.

Two a penny scandals

My God I get sick of the 'scandals'. I put the word in inverted commas because who knows whether an action merits the word or not? Their occurrence is a plague across parties.

All I want is someone to tell their version of the truth directly and publicly. Politicians exist at our expense and our patronage.

But no. We get political management, employment law, the circling of self-interested wagons, despicable mental health excuses, all resulting in a vacuum fostering fertile imaginations and gossip.

While titillation and gratification consume and divert, we are being sucked down a debt vortex the likes of which we have never seen.

Fairness?

Isn't it intriguing that National AND Labour have suddenly become so solicitous of taxpayer's money:

“National’s policy is about fairness. Many Kiwis have only one or two overseas holidays in their lives. National won’t expect taxpayers to pay for other Kiwis returning from high-paying careers or expensive holidays in Europe,” deputy leader Gerry Brownlee said".

Fairness! That's opening a can of worms. Now what about taxpayer's funding universal winter heating payments, Super goldcards for the wealthy aged, Super for people who work, private schools where the wealthy send their children, etc. What else can we now expect?

It seems to me there are two quite different scenarios. New Zealanders returning home for the first time since Covid, often young and without means. And those who have chosen to leave NZ because the two week quarantine on re-entry is tolerable. There is a case for charging the second.

But I am opposed to people having to pay for their state-imposed isolation when they are returning because they have no choice. This could eventually apply to thousands of people currently supported by wage subsidies in Australia. 

If the collective demands protection from first-time returners they must fund their quarantine as part of the public health system.