I think Steven Joyce's claims of Labour's fiscal hole has caught my attention the most.
While the whole thing seems like a beat-up, I have been thinking about the wider implications of the tit-for-tat, lolly scramble policy wars between National and Labour.
Surely, the country can't afford this, no matter who eventually wins. I'm not sure the economy is stable enough for a big spend-up.
I also worried that I'm spending too much time preoccupied with the party vote at the expense of what's happening at a local level.
Local-level politics seems to be lost in the shadow of Ardern vs. English.
Has it changed who you're voting for? if so, how?
Part of me thinks there is merit in sticking to what we have already with National, but I would say I am undecided at the moment.
Peter Glidden, 53, company director, part of a couple with four non-dependant children, Waitomo
Business owner Peter Glidden says he has blue blood running through is veins. Photo / Doug Sherring
Voting for: National
What's the most significant development in the election campaign this week?
National seems to have a clear path and vision for the future whereas Labour doesn't have policy locked down and tend to tell listeners what they want to hear.
Tax cuts are not the answer for NZ and nor is crucifying farmers.
Has it changed who you will vote for? If so, how?
No I have blue blood running through my veins.
Morgan Morris, 30, corporate lawyer and electrical business owner (currently on maternity leave), married with a son, Raglan
Morgan Morris, with son Mason Frew, 8 months. Morris isn't happy with Labour's rental housing policy. Photo / Jason Oxenham
Voting for: National
What's the most significant development in the election campaign this week?
Labour's Rental Housing policy is once again an attempt to cripple Kiwi mums and dads trying to get ahead.
Do we really want to live in a complete paternalist society when the Government can say what we can and can't do with our own assets? Those assets which we have worked hard for and made sacrifices to get?
This rental policy is another example of a "vote-attracting" policy which would do more harm than good. How is this supposed to help with housing?
A mum and dad looking to buy or build a rental property is going to think twice if they are basically funding it but then have no say.
Personally, I am going through a situation with a tenant at the moment who within six months has completely trashed my husband and I's first home which we slaved away to buy and do up.
The tenant (who was 100 per cent subsidised by Winz) lived there with her two young children and just didn't care - she knew the system and knew as landlords we were powerless.
Court hearings, rental arrears, eviction notices, didn't faze her in the slightest.
I have never seen any house so disgusting in my life and she's the one that needs protection?
Labour said [renting] "families are living with a level of stress and anxiety", well what about the landlords, what about my sleepless nights, what protections are you going to put in place to protect what I worked my life for?
Labour's policies are nothing but a shopping list of "I wants" (Labour should be re-named "the I Want Party").
We want to eradicate child poverty, we want no homelessness, we want free tertiary education... Well Jacinda, we all want that, but how are you going to make this happen?
At the expense of those that work and have done well for themselves? I guess we'll find out the same time as your "transparent" tax plans are revealed after the election.
Has it changed who you will vote for? If so, how?
No
Charlie Young, 59, surf school owner, married, Whale Bay
I don't see this policy as either innovative or sustainable. it's lazy.
They are giving the opposition a handy argument that it can be classified as voodoo economics made up of smoke and mirrors - more people equals more economic growth.
I myself question the effects this hyper boom of immigration has had on the net long-term economy and living standards in NZ.
One has to take into account the resulting negative pressures this policy has had on housing affordability, schools and infrastructure.
To me this does not qualify as a visionary economic policy.
It could simply be that National's policy strategists have run out of ideas or are unwilling to step too far away from their own political party dogmas.
It's a shame they can't find the courage. They are playing too safe. I think they are misreading the mood of the people.
Has it changed who you will vote for? If so, how?
I still have not yet made up my mind on the party vote in this election. It's too soon. Chapters are yet to be written.
You would hope that more people would remain open-minded to new ideas. Why be stuck in the same way of thinking?
As a wise person once said: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results".
