You can never, ever, have too many Teslas

Written By: - Date published: 9:29 am, June 21st, 2023 - 55 comments
Categories: Christopher Luxon, making shit up, national, same old national, spin, you couldn't make this shit up - Tags:

A week ago I wrote about the hypocrisy of Christopher Luxon and his request for a state supplied Tesla when his household already owns one.

Little did I know that a further example of jaw breaking hypocrisy would occur so soon this.

But this is what happened.

So Christopher Luxon’s household purchased a second Tesla AND claimed the clean car discount while doing so.  Yes that is the policy that National said was subsidising wealthy people to purchase Teslas.

His use of his wife as a shield against attacks of hypocrisy is rather jarring given past pronouncements by him faithfully preserved by the excellent Rugbyintel.

Pirouetting from proud Tesla owner to my wife owns it and you should not be including this into her and by the way I own a scooter takes some nerve.

I suspect that today gin will be served with lunch for the Opposition leader’s office.

55 comments on “You can never, ever, have too many Teslas ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. PsyclingLeft.Always 1
    21 June 2023 at 10:10 am

    Pirouetting from proud Tesla owner to my wife owns it and you should not be including this into her and by the way I own a scooter takes some nerve.

    Not sure about nerve so much…I did think a level of arrogance, but IMO he's just completely oblivious.

  2. Dennis Frank 2
    21 June 2023 at 10:12 am

    So Christopher Luxon’s household purchased a second Tesla AND claimed the clean car discount while doing so.

    Do you have proof of that? I haven't seen any. Could be she paid cash for it, huh? He wasn't savvy enough to point out that the scooter is electrical, so that means he can front as an authentic BlueGreen.

    Or maybe it isn't. Maybe it's the kind of scooter us kids used in the 1950s – you push it with your legs. In which case he's going for the geriatric vote to cut Winston off at the pass. But not savvy enough to point that out, to help slow learners get it quicker.

  3. tsmithfield 3
    21 June 2023 at 10:12 am

    This says more about the government policy that allows this to happen in the first place. If the government is going to allow a rebate for those who buy high-end cars, then of course it will be the wealthy who benefit from that.

    I don't see the relevance in criticising people for doing what the government is permitting them to do.

    • Bearded Git 3.1
      21 June 2023 at 11:26 am

      Bollocks tsmith. You don't seem to understand how this looks-let me explain it:

      Hypocrite (Britttanica Disctionary)

      "a person who claims or pretends to have certain beliefs about what is right but who behaves in a way that disagrees with those beliefs"

      Luxon's wife has bought a Tesla using the Clean Car Discount. It is National Party policy to scrap the CCD. Luxon has said in relation to this:

      "We've got a Government that is actually taxing people with utes and there is no alternative. And then actually subsidising wealthy Tesla drivers by giving them subsidies,"

      https://www.newsroom.co.nz/luxons-climate-policy-donut-no-anomaly

      It follows that Luxon is a hypocrite. In fact it is worse than that, he is also a liar by omission.

      “A lie of omission is an intentional failure to tell the truth in a situation requiring disclosure.”

      • PsyclingLeft.Always 3.1.1
        21 June 2023 at 11:29 am

        In fact it is worse than that, he is also a liar by emission.

        So true : )

        • Bearded Git 3.1.1.1
          21 June 2023 at 1:56 pm

          smileyI corrected that ….must have emissions on the brain….but you are so right Psych….either would do…in fact emission is better.

          • PsyclingLeft.Always 3.1.1.1.1
            21 June 2023 at 2:13 pm

            BG sorry, I did see you had corrected…( I had linked bit early,but thought quite apt ! ) but as you say…and I agree, Luxons omissions and/or emissions….

            His emissions seemingly brain farts. Best viewed at a distance : )

            Go Luxon ! And ride that 50 cc like you stol…”borrowed” it : )

            • In Vino 3.1.1.1.1.1
              21 June 2023 at 5:25 pm

              A pity he did not have that scooter when he had a Govt Limo drive him roughly 200m to parliament..

              Well, I can only assume he didn't.

    • lprent 3.2
      21 June 2023 at 1:14 pm

      sigh The reason for the policy isn't to benefit the wealthy.

      It was to increase the number of EVs and Hybrid cars in NZ. The numbers from stats clearly show that it has had that effect.

      Cars brought in and sold to the 'wealthy', including my last $15k 2nd hand hybrid, then get resold. Usually within a few years for new cars. They are then available on the second-hand market at a lower price.

      A subsidy or a tax-break like this is a classic and well-proven way to change the composition of the countries vehicle fleet. In this case to increase the numbers of EVs, HEVs, and PHEVs in second-hand market.

      This is why there are so many Ford Rangers around – because of a long-standing tax break on working vehicles for businesses.

  4. Tiger Mountain 4
    21 June 2023 at 11:06 am

    Keep up the good work Baldrick!

    Little of this would likely have mattered–if Mr Luxon had not just recently berated Tesla and by implication, other EV owners.

  5. Thinker 5
    21 June 2023 at 11:14 am

    Two questions that remain after your article (no blame intended)…

    1. They said JFK was a poor president as far as security goes, but Luxon must beat him hands-down. Does his security team also ride scooters, two in front on each flank, and two at back, ditto? Would put him a few tiers down from Biden, when travelling in convoy to the APEC summit, methinks…
    2. Your article doesn't specify what type of scooter Luxon uses. Maybe he didn't say. I'm wondering if it is a mobility scooter…
  6. Ad 6
    21 June 2023 at 11:33 am

    If I were Luxon I would drive a Rolls Royce Silver Ghost with the number plate FU ALL, pile the main Shadow Cabinet in the back to drive through Papakura, with the soundtrack to The Sopranos windows down.

    • Patricia Bremner 6.1
      21 June 2023 at 11:44 am

      Don't you think he is throwing stones from a glass house?

      Or are you playing Devil's Advocate.?? Again??devil

      Papakura?? Not his sort there, too many “Bottom Feeders” Face it he is a fudge artist. Do as I say not as I do.

  7. AB 7
    21 June 2023 at 11:45 am

    It's better for everyone if Mr Luxon's family drives an EV than if they don't – because it contributes to lower emissions. The universality of the clean car discount is absolutely the correct approach and it is what delivering outcomes for New Zealanders really looks like when done by serious people. Universality will drive the greatest uptake.

    There is an equity argument. Even with the clean car discount, new EVs are beyond the price range of ordinary people. Ordinary people will buy used hybrids and the like which get a lower discount – so rich people will get a bigger cash discount than poorer people. But if your concern is emissions reduction, then the largest discount should indeed go to the vehicles that reduce emissions the most. This is again completely the right thing to do from an emissions reduction perspective. The equity considerations should therefore be handled outside the policy itself – simply by taxing Mr Luxon's family's wealth and income more progressively. If you try to solve the equity issue inside the policy with some silly, childish attempt at targeting, that will cause injustices at the margins, be inefficient/cost more and limit how effective the policy is in reducing emissions.

    Luxon is therefore completely wrong about the policy being a bad one. Whether he really thinks it is, or figures that stoking resentments is his best chance of winning, I don't know. But I'm not all surprised that he (or his family) still pockets the savings from it anyway. Is it hypocrisy? Maybe – though not many people will turn down seemingly free money. The vulgarity and stupidity of it all annoy me more. In particular, it's the fact that what his family did tends to show that the policy actually works well in reducing emissions.

    • Patricia Bremner 7.1
      21 June 2023 at 9:09 pm

      Yes you are right AB. I let my annoyance with his forensic examination of the left, plus the playing down of a successful policy. Saving emissions is it!!yes

  8. Poldark 8
    21 June 2023 at 12:06 pm

    Yes it is like Trump getting medical treatment for Covid !

  9. alwyn 9
    21 June 2023 at 12:31 pm

    I had just a couple of thoughts about this post.

    Does Micky not accept the idea that says that a politicians family should not be regarded as fair game for attacks?

    Does Micky really hold the antedeluvian view that wives are owned by their husband and must only do the things their husband approves of? Free will is not allowed for married women?

    • lprent 9.1
      21 June 2023 at 12:53 pm

      Does Micky not accept the idea that says that a politicians family should not be regarded as fair game for attacks?

      That general rule applies if the politician doesn't pull their family into a political discussion and as an example. Which is exactly what his political ineptness, Christopher Luxon did. I was just impressed at the reserve on the part media and Micky about keeping the focus on Luxon.

      Unlike you, who has just managed to push the wife front and centre in your efforts to divert attention for a political fool.

      Any attack wasn't on the family – it was on a pretty inept politician and their apparent inability to be coherent. One with a strong tendency to throw others under a bus when it was convenient.

      The question was about the hypocrisy of a politician claiming a policy was wrong, and his household taking advantage of it. The hypocrisy used his exact words about the policy.

      Luxon by choice brought his partner and son into the interview(s) FFS. That was deliberate and really was rather inept and crass for any politician to do it.

      In effect he described his partner as taking a subsidy that in the view of the National party and himself was there solely to benefit wealthy Tesla drivers.

      Whereas the actual policy was to help the purchase of new and imported EV's. And its purpose was to increase the availability of second-hand EVs within the country in the future. Clearly the policy based on this example was working.

      Not a good look for the Christopher Luxon doing yet another dockup adn blagging someone else because of his incompetence, and speaks yet again to his lack of political credibility.

      • Thinker 9.1.1
        21 June 2023 at 3:24 pm

        Was thinking the same as lprent, Alwyn.

        It's Luxon who hid behind his wife and dragged her into his politics.

        Most politicians don't do that, other than the occasional "My wife's from Singapore" or "My husband's Samoan, so Talofa".

        If Luxon treats his family like that, how much does he care about the rest of NZ, IMHO.

  10. JohnO 10
    21 June 2023 at 2:21 pm

    Terrible hypocrisy by Luxon, who failed to prohibit little wifey from purchasing and claiming a rebate on a Tesla. It would be even worse if a Labour cabinet member, being part of a government critical of excessive bank profits, was profiting from holding undisclosed shares in an Australian bank though.

    Wait, WHAT?

  11. Reality 11
    21 June 2023 at 2:49 pm

    Luxon on a scooter? That would be as funny as the very ill-fitting suit he wore to the Coronation when he stood beside Richie McCaw and tried and failed to look statesmanlike. He just doesn't cut the mustard in so many situations.

  12. tWiggle 12
    21 June 2023 at 3:06 pm

    Spiderhoof examines Luxon's tesla

    Look at tiktok 1024, Luxon is morally corrupt.

    • tWiggle 12.1
      21 June 2023 at 3:10 pm

      Spiderhoof examines Luxon’s fiscal hole, see #2875 at the same page as above.

  13. Sabine 13
    22 June 2023 at 8:39 am

    The freeby for rich people to buy a EV was announced in May 2022. I left these comments

    https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-10-05-2022/#comment-1887573

    You know what, if i were a rich person who could spend 30.000 + on a car outright, i too would have the 8000 courtesy of the tax payer, i means like, take a family of five (a rich family of course) and that subsidy will get you a brand new car for free!!! What is not to like, maybe we should ask Mike Hoskin and his wife and the kids. I wonder if they all drive a brand new electric car

    and this one https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-13-05-2022/#comment-1887959

    a comment of funding public transport rather then

    But hey, buy an electric car if you are rich enough, you will get a nice juicy several thousand dollar subsidy so that that Stay at Home Mother of Athena and Tristan can now drive their children to private school in a tax payer subsidized EV. Now that is winning!

    so really, who cares that a rich person took a subsidy that was aimed at rich people, i mean heck, rich people were literally the only ones that could afford then and now a car that costs several ten of thousands of dollars in order to get a 8 grand tax payer hand out.

    Everyone who bought a EV since the subsidy was announced claimed that entitlement. The only one at fault here is the Labour Party who announced that tax payer funded give a way to the rich, and then not put a 'means test' on it to prevent those that they consider 'super rich' from claiming that entitlement.

    Btw, did you know that his Wife is no more in politics then the partner of the last PM? What about the families of politicians should be left in peace, or is that only another lip service / kindness demanded but not granted?

    Mrs. Luxon claimed a publicly announced entitlement of several grand for a EV because Labour granted that entitlement.

    • Incognito 13.1
      22 June 2023 at 9:06 am

      You should become Luxon’s Press Secretary or Spin Doctor, as you almost makes as little sense as he does – what many call ‘hypocrisy’ I’d call self-contradiction.

    • weka 13.2
      22 June 2023 at 9:26 am

      Everyone who bought a EV since the subsidy was announced claimed that entitlement. The only one at fault here is the Labour Party who announced that tax payer funded give a way to the rich, and then not put a 'means test' on it to prevent those that they consider 'super rich' from claiming that entitlement.

      You patently don't understand the point of the subsidy. It's not to give rich people some dosh. It's to help transition the NZ car fleet to EVs because climate change is going to turn very very nasty if we don't drop GHGs fast. And the way to transition the NZ car fleet to EVs is to encourage people who are about to buy a new car to buy an EV instead of an ICE one. One enough people do that, the secondhand EV car market will grow and the price of those will drop so that middle income and then eventually low income people will be able to afford them.

      If you have another way to transition the fleet, let's hear it. Otherwise you're just running yet another version of climate denial. The problem with the policy isn't the policy, it's that we don't have a transition plan because of the amount of climate denial on the left/liberal/progressives who still seem to think that somehow we can just muddle on through.

      And spare me any rhetoric about the problem of focusing on EVs. The reason we are doing that is because for 30 years people have been voting in centrist governments instead of the ones that understood the nature of the climate crisis and were developing more sensible transition plans.

      You can wave your hands around all you like about poor people, but you can't escape the massive hole in your position which is that poor people will get absolutely hammered as the climate crisis deepens. Which is will if we continue to have stupid fights about EV subsidies instead of doing the real mahi.

      • Sabine 13.2.1
        22 June 2023 at 9:49 am

        the real mahi would have been to use that money to make public transport an option, and currently public transport is in shambles pretty much everywhere.

        the real mahi would have been to use that money to pay bus drivers a decent salary some years ago, but we gave money to rich people who can afford a tesla on their own to pay for their own tesla with tax payers subsidies.

        the real mahi would have been to use that money to subsidize e-bikes, but we gave that money to Mrs. Luxon and those in her financial situation to buy a car she could wholesale afford on her own

        And we have yet to have a grown up discussion as to how we generate the electricity needed to ‘fuel’ all these E-gadgets. That too is real mahi that we refuse to do.

        I have pointed out that is was a stupid thing to do when it was done, and fwiw, i am comfortable with my position.

        And i would like to point out that Mrs. Luxon is not a Politian she is the wife of one, and did hte left not insist to not talk mean about the spouses?

        • weka 13.2.1.1
          22 June 2023 at 11:00 am

          the real mahi would have been to use that money to make public transport an option, and currently public transport is in shambles pretty much everywhere.

          The government did in fact put money into public transport.

          I'm sick of your faux political naivety, especially given your arguments against Labour and the Greens. For Labour to make real change on climate action they need enough people voting Green to give them the mandate, that's the real politik. You of course oppose that, and don't have any alternative solutions.

          I didn't read the rest of your comment, because if you can't get even the basics of politics right, it's just a bunch of hot air. Anyone can come online and moan about the government. I'm interested in meaningful analysis and solutions.

    • Molly 13.3
      22 June 2023 at 9:38 am

      I completely agree.

      Those that celebrated this scheme, are now complaining it was used as designed.

      • weka 13.3.1
        22 June 2023 at 9:49 am

        Those that celebrated this scheme, are now complaining it was used as designed.

        This misrepresents the point. The issue isn't that rich people take advantage of the subsidy. It's that Luxon is the leader of the party that opposes the subsidy but is happy to make use of it himself. As Incog pointed out, some people call this hypocrisy, or in Incog's view, self contradiction. It's worthwhile pointing this out about a political leader in election year, in part because of the bigger picture: Nact will block climate action and insist on making money while they do it. It's not just hypocrisy, it's dangerous.

        • Sabine 13.3.1.1
          22 June 2023 at 9:58 am

          No one is taking advantage of a situation.

          The subsidy is quite clear. Buy an E-vehicle and receive a government subsidy.

          That applies to all, if it was not intended to be used by all the Labour Party should have put a caveat on this, 'this applies not to people who are rich or the spouses of Politians on the opposition bench'.

          The subsidy worked as intended. Mrs. Luxon bought an e-vehicle and for that she got the e-vehicle subsidy.

          Now is that ethical? Who cares, she was entitled.
          And again, i was one of the few that pointed out that this subsidy would benefit those that needed it the least. And that is what you are now discussing, how that subsidy benefitted someone who did not need it, but got it because they were entitled to it.

          • weka 13.3.1.1.1
            22 June 2023 at 11:03 am

            You don't understand the critique either. Anyone can use the subsidy. If they're the leader of a political party with a policy that opposes the subsidy and they use the subsidy themselves, then they can expect to be criticised for that. It's not a hard concept to understand.

            I don't consider it an ethical issue, but good to know you don't care about ethics and think entitlements rule.

        • Molly 13.3.1.2
          22 June 2023 at 10:23 am

          "Nact will block climate action and insist on making money while they do it. It's not just hypocrisy, it's dangerous."

          Alternatively, the government claimed the Clean Car Rebate Policy was a good investment in addressing climate change when it was obvious to many it was not.

          That can also be viewed as misleading and dangerous.

          • weka 13.3.1.2.1
            22 June 2023 at 10:51 am

            I don't know what those many thing (you haven't said), but I explained to Sabine above what the point of the rebate is – to help change the NZ car fleet to EV. It's not the only thing they're doing obviously. If you have better ideas, then present them. But in this conversation we are talking about the leader of the opposition and why his positions and actions matter, and you clearly misrepresented critiques of him. And even you are right about the rebate policy, the point about Luxon remains independent of that.

            • Molly 13.3.1.2.1.1
              22 June 2023 at 11:09 am

              If politicians being hypocritical was consistently considered this newsworthy, that would barely leave space for the weather.

              The Clean Car Rebate was available to all those that could afford it – hypocrites and virtuous alike.

              The focus on Luxon misses the real failings of the policy – one of which I've highlighted in bold above.

              • weka …
                22 June 2023 at 12:03 pm

                If you think scheme is flawed, start a conversation in OM about it. Or write a Guest Post. But whatever flaws there are in the scheme the point here isn't about that, it's about Luxon.

                It's election year, climate matters and do does how MPs and leaders function. This is just another example of how Luxon leads and where his values are at. Of course that is of interest. Not as important as say climate itself, but then no-one wants to talk about that /shrug

                • weka …
                  22 June 2023 at 12:08 pm

                  Or, if you want to argue that critique of Luxon over his positions on the scheme are flawed because the scheme itself is flawed, then make the arguments. I don't see the relevance myself. He's still a hypocrite and climate denier.

            • Phillip ure 13.3.1.2.1.2
              22 June 2023 at 12:36 pm

              My 'better ideas' re e.v.'s ..(that was asked for..)..comes in the form of a question..

              Why are we not able to purchase those two-seater/side by side/cheap as city cars..that are available in so many other countries..?

              At the moment only corporates/middle class can afford e.v..

              At under 20 grand..why can't we buy these in nz…?

              Does anyone know the answer to this..?

              • Incognito …
                22 June 2023 at 12:57 pm

                At under 20 grand..why can’t we buy these in nz…?

                Where did you unearth this nugget?

                • Phillip ure …
                  22 June 2023 at 1:21 pm

                  Putting two and two together…

                  I have been harbouring this question for awhile..and I think I saw it mentioned in this forum first…

                  Then I googled electric city cars or some such thing…

                  When mentioned in this forum it was alleged that wood was blocking them..

                  And not wanting to kick a guy when he is down..I refrained from following it up here..

                  But now he is gone..so I feel freed to again raise the topic…

                  For a basic primer I would suggest googling electric city cars..

                  They are essentially two seater shopping trolleys..and as such perfect for many inner city dwellers…

                  I assumed they were being delayed because of safety issues..but I would note that countries that allow them…have already done that research…

                  Why can't we rely on that..?

                  As I said…they are cheap and cheerful…and would allow many more nz'ers to drive electric..

                  Seems like a no-brainer to me ..so I ask why the delay/blocking their import..?

                  • Incognito …
                    22 June 2023 at 1:44 pm

                    So, when you were whining about cars ‘under 20 grand’, you were really thinking about ‘electric city cars or some such thing’.

                    We’re not mind-readers here, so why don’t you make an effort to say what you mean and mean what you say? It would save us all so much time & effort …

  14. Phillip ure 14
    22 June 2023 at 2:47 pm

    In my first comment I talked about electric ' city cars'..

    So I am unsure what you are complaining about…

    And ‘ whining’..?..really..?

    Is my question not a valid one..?

    • Incognito 14.1
      22 June 2023 at 5:21 pm

      Ah yes, you did, amid the ellipses. My apologies for overlooking it.

      I withdraw my accusation of ‘whining’ and apologise.

  15. JohnO 15
    27 June 2023 at 7:50 am

    You can never, ever have too many Boeings.