Letters to the Editor: The billion-dollar question over morality; drug-testing beneficiaries; airfare refunds

By doing so, he would have also voted for Peter Theil, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg.

He would have voted for an Administration directed by billionaires and subservient to billionaires.

This is morally offensive and indefensible.

Billionaires tend not to enhance or encourage democracy. They distort, control and direct democracy, to retain and enhance their wealth.

Celebrating successful, risk-taking entrepreneurs who pay taxes is to be encouraged. Supporting political influencing billionaires, however, is not.

To quote Louis Brandeis (American Supreme Court Justice): “We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.”

Ian Findlay, Napier.

Success and morals

With all respect to Sir John Key and many others who find calling billionaires morally offensive “nuts”, I agree with them.

Hard-grafting and clever individuals become wealthy and good on them.

But that does not apply to all.

I can think of one internationally famous person, a leader, and many others who gained their wealth through being absolutely “morally indefensible”.

Paul Blakeney, Waihī.

Pentagon’s climate predictions

It would seem that Linda McGrogan (Oct 9) is unaware of the more than 30 climate predictions that have failed to come true. Just one example is a 2004 Pentagon analysis that warned major European cities would be underwater by 2020, at which point Britain would suffer from a “Siberian” climate.

The reality is that the world is warming at a slow and steady rate as it comes out of the Little Ice Age. It is also true that we cannot affect the climate as long as China and India are building lots of coal-fired stations. Therefore, we are better off building resilience against whatever an ever-changing climate visits upon us rather than squandering billions of dollars on a futile attempt to change the world’s climate.

Bryan Leyland, Pt Chevalier.

Drug testing? Check the data

Louise Upston and Christopher Luxton announced this week, as part of their election push, they want to drug-test beneficiaries.

The message I hear is “We’re not succeeding. Blame beneficiaries. They must be stealing from us.” In my opinion, there is nothing more pathetic than that.

They might want to check the data, which shows in New Zealand “cocaine users are likely to be employed and high earners” and are now using 7kg a week.

Drug-testing CEOs may reveal a serious loss of productivity there.

Keith Burgess, Sumner.

Opportunity ‘deafeningly silent’

Opportunity is receding as a game-changer.

National wants to drug-test beneficiaries, to slash the benefit for drug-users and introduce a raft of restrictions on all who seek or are receiving a social welfare benefit.

“Draconian” is the word that springs to mind.

It says much about who National (and Act, New Zealand First and Labour) expect to vote that so much energy is spent on trimming the social welfare benefit paid to people under 65, but that none of these parties will address the far, far greater cost of paying a universal social welfare benefit to millionaires over 65 who already have handsome incomes from other sources as well.

There’s an answer, of course: replace all social welfare benefits with the Universal Basic Income (UBI) that Opportunity has advocated. Whether that would be paid for by the land tax Opportunity proposes, or by wealth taxes and inheritance and gift taxes, or by setting a higher minimum income-tax rate, or some combination of those, would be for Parliament to decide.

Yet Opportunity, instead of loudly advocating its Citizens’ Income in response to National’s intended cuts, is deafeningly silent. Why?

It seemed bad politics for Opportunity to announce election bottom lines that skipped its flagship land-tax-for-UBI for five policies so bland that no other party could take offence.

But worse, Opportunity now seems to have buried its UBI. And if it fails to speak up now for all the beneficiaries that National intends to harm, what is the point of Opportunity and the citizens’ income it seems not really to believe in?

John Trezise, Birkenhead.

Airfare refunds

Well done, Chris Hipkins (Oct 9). If elected, he wants a law to provide automatic refunds if flights are cancelled. But he should extend it: if big events are cancelled before the flight, you get a full refund immediately.

I read in the Herald that demand for tickets from Air New Zealand to fly Warriors fans from Auckland to Sydney on the Friday, the day before the NRL Grand Final, was so enormous that they put on another plane to get them there.

I wondered at the time that when they surprisingly did not make the grand final if the hundreds of fans got a full refund? They absolutely deserve it for sure.

National looks after big companies and friendly billionaires. Labour looks after the ordinary people trying to survive, who at times go to top entertainment and sporting events.

Murray Hunter, Titirangi.

Gender on spectrum

Winston Peters appears to describe gender as “two variants – male and female”.

On the contrary, gender is best seen as on a spectrum or, in some cases, a zigzag.

I’d be willing to bet that almost all – if not all – of Peters’ coalition crew and wider party have some whānau or acquaintance connection who is or has been engaged in the hugely stressful transition from one “variant” to one they more closely feel.

Driven by his MAGA-influenced cruelty and Donald Trump’s contempt for the courts of law, Peters has lost touch with the young of this country and certainly with those of us who are older and who desire to see people move from repression, fear and pain to gender self-realisation.

Peter Beyer, Sandringham.

Execution hypocrisy

For a country that does a hell of a lot of hallelujah Bible-quoting, including by people like its Secretary of War and its President, those southern US zealots sure love a good ol’ long-awaited execution.

No worry to those fine “people of God and eye-for-eye justice” that the crime was committed 30 years ago ... which in most countries is deemed a life sentence if on good behaviour.

Throw in two botched lethal doses non-fatally administered while the doomed woman is still kept cuffed to her hospital bed.

Now they talk of another crack at killing her.

Oddly, 1500 warriors/patriots got complete pardons since Donald Trump re-judged those who ransacked the Capitol with “get out of jail” cards.

That infamous day on January 6 led to several deaths, including the maiming of police officers, yet no one was ultimately executed or held accountable.

The US is a weird, Wild West mob where I, thankfully, no longer dwell.

Rob Buchanan (US citizen), Kerikeri.

A quick word

Ryan Bridge’s hosting of the Herald/TV3 Future of NZ debate was indeed a breath of fresh air. Thank you. .

Steve Clerk, Meadowbank.

The massive US Air Force jets thundering over our countrywould send people in other parts of the world scrambling to bomb shelters and panic. In Aotearoa, we grab our sunnies, head outside, and admire the show. We’re pretty fortunate in this part of the pacific.

Chris Mann, Mt Albert.

It would be a very good idea if time was set aside for members of the audience who are present at the election presentation to ask questions as so far, the presentations give the impression that politicians have not been attending to the concerns that are foremost in the minds of the public.

Ross Harvey, Remuera.

Those billionaires who accrue their money from labour they pay less than a living wage for, are at best morally suspect. And Sir John Key is not a businessman, he’s a professional gambler who made money on the stock exchange, without producing any goods.

Gordon Bowers, Auckland.

Like many other citizens, I am disturbed by the appeal attempt being made by Malcolm Rewa – he has had his day in court already. Who is paying for the lawyers involved in this appeal?

Neville Cameron, Coromandel.