Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

NZWarriors.com

Remove ads
I think by our not recognizing Palstine we managed to piss both the Israelis and Palastians off (Israel by mentioning illegal settlements).
Which I don't think is a bad place to be.
We could have mentioned that the two year war is making a mockery of how good the Israeli military are supposed to be ("Victory At Entebbe","Munich" etc maybe Hollywood's exaggerating their ability for their own ends, though) and calling out Hamas more for their habit of putting their rocket sites etc amongst civilians.
 
Last edited:
Govt rejects opportunity to privatise power companies and instead is prepared to invest more.

Still no evidence of any privatisation by the govt, even with the perfect opportunity…

The left propaganda campaign is proved false. 🤣
 

What you need to be among New Zealand’s richest people​

What counts as a “one percenter” in New Zealand these days?

The “1%” is often used as shorthand for the wealthiest people on the planet.

Last week, Stats NZ released updated net worth data that gives the opportunity to see what that looks like in NZ now.

Net worth is calculated as a measure of everything a person or household owns, minus their debts.

Here’s how it breaks down.

To be in the top 50%:

For households: At least $524,788

For individuals: At least $134,850

For the top 10%:

For households: At least $2.414 million

For individuals: At least $1.226m

For the top 5%

For households: At least $3.718m

For individuals: At least $1.883m

For the top 1%

For households: At least $8.727m

For individuals: At least $4.735m


The median wealth of a 1% individual is $7.191m, and for a household it is $11.5m. That means half the one percenters have wealth below that level, and half are worth more than that.

Three years earlier, the median for a 1% household was $11.2m.

In the year ended June 2024, the median net worth of all NZ households was $529,000. This was 33% higher than in the year ended June 2021, when the median household net worth was $399,000.

Infometrics chief executive Brad Olsen said it was “confronting” that the median wealth of a top 1% household was 22 times that of all households.

He said the top 50% had 93.3% of all household wealth.

The wealthier a household was, the less of their assets were tied up in owner-occupied real estate. The wealthiest 20% had more than twice as much in pension funds as the next 20%, and eight times as much as the poorest 20%.

The increase in property values between 2021 and 2024 was one of the factors cited by Stats NZ as driving the overall increase in household wealth through that period but sharemarkets have also performed strongly.

“A median household would have basically nothing in bonds, stocks, that sort of thing. But quintile five, the top 20% – 18% of their assets are coming from stocks, bonds,” Olsen said.

The middle group of households had 92% of their wealth in their own home.

“If you think about three groups in society – those that don’t have any substantial assets, don’t have any property or shares or anything, they haven’t shifted much at all over the last decade,” Olsen said.

“The most wealthy group has property and other investments and the middle group has more property than anything else, as property has increased in value the gap has become a bit smaller between the middle wealthy and the super wealthy.”

He said people should not think that $11.5m was the top of the wealth table in NZ, either. “There’s quite a long tail, we’ve got some households worth over $1 billion, not many but there is a long tail from $11.5m out to there.”

Council of Trade Unions policy director Craig Renney said the data showed 80% of people had wealth of less than $1m. “It doesn’t appear as if the problems facing NZ in terms of wealth distribution have moved at all.”

He said someone at the 40th percentile would have wealth of about $128,000. If both they and someone with wealth of $11.5m received 5% returns on their wealth each year, the person at the 40th percentile would grow their wealth by $6400 a year while the median richest one percenter would add more than $575,000.

He said that was one reason that his organisation called for a capital gains tax. A lot of the wealth in the richest households would come from capital gains. “Our tax settings on capital are probably helping to do that.”

He said most people’s wealth was in family homes that would not be affected by a tax.

“We have a very unequal society in NZ and the distribution of wealth is causing huge challenges – those who are able to accrue wealth are able to get even more of it in the future.”

-RNZ
www.nzherald.co.nz

What it takes to be in New Zealand’s top 1% of wealth

A household now needs at least $8.7m to be classed among the top 1%.
www.nzherald.co.nz www.nzherald.co.nz

What Craig Renney is forgetting to mention is that if the 5% he using in his example were subject to a 30% CGT, the person with the $128,000 Net Wealth would be hit with an additional $1,520 in tax, meaning the person with the $128,000 is even worse off and has little to no chance of ever closing the gap. Put is this way, at 5%, it would take just over 14 years for the person with $128,000 for their wealth to double with the help of compounding interest and the 72 Rule. With a 30% CGT, that 14 years has jumped out to near 20 and 1/2 years.... not bad you think. But if inflation averaged 3%, adding a CGT to the effect, and even once the money has doubled, inflation has destroyed the value of the money anyway.

What's also really bad is he's comparing the 40th percentile of an individual's net worth ($128,000) to the median 1% household net worth of $11.5m but saying that's the median net worth of an individual..... he's using a household net worth figure for one and an individual for another. That's manipulating the figures to try and gain support.... pretty much like National and the monetary holes in the proposed "budget" a few elections ago.

The CTU.... this is who they are.... wanting to take money from the rich but hurting everyone else in the process.... all for an ideology. This is what happens when you want a tax of envy!!!!

We're also hearing this morning, again from Reeney, and along with the likes of Hickey, that a CGT would stop the need for adjusting Super entitlements.... think the Treasury paper which has suggested that the age for Super be raised each year until it reaches 72 (okay for office workers but what about tradies, farmers, factory workers who won't be able to keep going). As we keep hearing, NZ is one of the only countries in the OECD without a CGT.... but countries with one are also worried about having to pay for their older generations as they retire. Sorry to disappoint you BUT a CGT isn't going to close the gap. Prove? The OECD countries which have one....

🇬🇧 United Kingdom
🇺🇸 United States
  • Pension strain: Public pension liabilities are ballooning, especially at state and municipal levels.
  • Capital gains tax: Federal CGT ranges from 0–20%, with additional state-level taxes.
  • Article: World Economic Forum – Global pension crisis
🇫🇷 France
🇮🇹 Italy
🇯🇵 Japan
 
Last edited:
miket12 said:

What you need to be among New Zealand’s richest people​

What counts as a “one percenter” in New Zealand these days?

The “1%” is often used as shorthand for the wealthiest people on the planet.

Last week, Stats NZ released updated net worth data that gives the opportunity to see what that looks like in NZ now.

Net worth is calculated as a measure of everything a person or household owns, minus their debts.

Here’s how it breaks down.

To be in the top 50%:

For households: At least $524,788

For individuals: At least $134,850

For the top 10%:

For households: At least $2.414 million

For individuals: At least $1.226m

For the top 5%

For households: At least $3.718m

For individuals: At least $1.883m

For the top 1%

For households: At least $8.727m

For individuals: At least $4.735m


The median wealth of a 1% individual is $7.191m, and for a household it is $11.5m. That means half the one percenters have wealth below that level, and half are worth more than that.

Three years earlier, the median for a 1% household was $11.2m.

In the year ended June 2024, the median net worth of all NZ households was $529,000. This was 33% higher than in the year ended June 2021, when the median household net worth was $399,000.

Infometrics chief executive Brad Olsen said it was “confronting” that the median wealth of a top 1% household was 22 times that of all households.

He said the top 50% had 93.3% of all household wealth.

The wealthier a household was, the less of their assets were tied up in owner-occupied real estate. The wealthiest 20% had more than twice as much in pension funds as the next 20%, and eight times as much as the poorest 20%.

The increase in property values between 2021 and 2024 was one of the factors cited by Stats NZ as driving the overall increase in household wealth through that period but sharemarkets have also performed strongly.

“A median household would have basically nothing in bonds, stocks, that sort of thing. But quintile five, the top 20% – 18% of their assets are coming from stocks, bonds,” Olsen said.

The middle group of households had 92% of their wealth in their own home.

“If you think about three groups in society – those that don’t have any substantial assets, don’t have any property or shares or anything, they haven’t shifted much at all over the last decade,” Olsen said.

“The most wealthy group has property and other investments and the middle group has more property than anything else, as property has increased in value the gap has become a bit smaller between the middle wealthy and the super wealthy.”

He said people should not think that $11.5m was the top of the wealth table in NZ, either. “There’s quite a long tail, we’ve got some households worth over $1 billion, not many but there is a long tail from $11.5m out to there.”

Council of Trade Unions policy director Craig Renney said the data showed 80% of people had wealth of less than $1m. “It doesn’t appear as if the problems facing NZ in terms of wealth distribution have moved at all.”

He said someone at the 40th percentile would have wealth of about $128,000. If both they and someone with wealth of $11.5m received 5% returns on their wealth each year, the person at the 40th percentile would grow their wealth by $6400 a year while the median richest one percenter would add more than $575,000.

He said that was one reason that his organisation called for a capital gains tax. A lot of the wealth in the richest households would come from capital gains. “Our tax settings on capital are probably helping to do that.”

He said most people’s wealth was in family homes that would not be affected by a tax.

“We have a very unequal society in NZ and the distribution of wealth is causing huge challenges – those who are able to accrue wealth are able to get even more of it in the future.”

-RNZ
www.nzherald.co.nz

What it takes to be in New Zealand’s top 1% of wealth

A household now needs at least $8.7m to be classed among the top 1%.
www.nzherald.co.nz www.nzherald.co.nz

What Craig Renney is forgetting to mention is that if the 5% he using in his example were subject to a 30% CGT, the person with the $128,000 Net Wealth would be hit with an additional $1,520 in tax, meaning the person with the $128,000 is even worse off and has little to no chance of ever closing the gap. Put is this way, at 5%, it would take just over 14 years for the person with $128,000 for their wealth to double with the help of compounding interest and the 72 Rule. With a 30% CGT, that 14 years has jumped out to near 20 and 1/2 years.... not bad you think. But if inflation averaged 3%, adding a CGT to the effect, and even once the money has doubled, inflation has destroyed the value of the money anyway.

What's also really bad is he's comparing the 40th percentile of an individual's net worth ($128,000) to the median 1% household net worth of $11.5m but saying that's the median net worth of an individual..... he's using a household net worth figure for one and an individual for another. That's manipulating the figures to try and gain support.... pretty much like National and the monetary holes in the proposed "budget" a few elections ago.

The CTU.... this is who they are.... wanting to take money from the rich but hurting everyone else in the process.... all for an ideology. This is what happens when you want a tax of envy!!!!

We're also hearing this morning, again from Reeney, and along with the likes of Hickey, that a CGT would stop the need for adjusting Super entitlements.... think the Treasury paper which has suggested that the age for Super be raised each year until it reaches 72 (okay for office workers but what about tradies, farmers, factory workers who won't be able to keep going). As we keep hearing, NZ is one of the only countries in the OECD without a CGT.... but countries with one are also worried about having to pay for their older generations as they retire. Sorry to disappoint you BUT a CGT isn't going to close the gap. Prove? The OECD countries which have one....

🇬🇧 United Kingdom
🇺🇸 United States
  • Pension strain: Public pension liabilities are ballooning, especially at state and municipal levels.
  • Capital gains tax: Federal CGT ranges from 0–20%, with additional state-level taxes.
  • Article: World Economic Forum – Global pension crisis
🇫🇷 France
🇮🇹 Italy
🇯🇵 Japan
Click to expand...
Median wealth of the top 1% households - $11.5m (up from $11.2m three years earlier).

$300k increase over 3 years is less that 1% annual growth, well below inflation.

Therefore, real wealth has declined by about 10% - the rich are not getting richer they have suffered significant loss of wealth.

A wealth tax / CGT would worsen this. Economic stagnation is partly because wealthy investors aren’t seeing gains to reinvest. Additional taxes would have significantly worsened the recession and current business activity.

What we have seen is trickle down in action (in reverse) where the wealthy are sneezing and everyone else has a massive cold.

The CTU has what they want - the rich not getting richer. Its staggering they can’t see the direct link to the rising unemployment rate 🤷‍♂️
 
miket12 said:

What you need to be among New Zealand’s richest people​

What counts as a “one percenter” in New Zealand these days?

The “1%” is often used as shorthand for the wealthiest people on the planet.

Last week, Stats NZ released updated net worth data that gives the opportunity to see what that looks like in NZ now.

Net worth is calculated as a measure of everything a person or household owns, minus their debts.

Here’s how it breaks down.

To be in the top 50%:

For households: At least $524,788

For individuals: At least $134,850

For the top 10%:

For households: At least $2.414 million

For individuals: At least $1.226m

For the top 5%

For households: At least $3.718m

For individuals: At least $1.883m

For the top 1%

For households: At least $8.727m

For individuals: At least $4.735m


The median wealth of a 1% individual is $7.191m, and for a household it is $11.5m. That means half the one percenters have wealth below that level, and half are worth more than that.

Three years earlier, the median for a 1% household was $11.2m.

In the year ended June 2024, the median net worth of all NZ households was $529,000. This was 33% higher than in the year ended June 2021, when the median household net worth was $399,000.

Infometrics chief executive Brad Olsen said it was “confronting” that the median wealth of a top 1% household was 22 times that of all households.

He said the top 50% had 93.3% of all household wealth.

The wealthier a household was, the less of their assets were tied up in owner-occupied real estate. The wealthiest 20% had more than twice as much in pension funds as the next 20%, and eight times as much as the poorest 20%.

The increase in property values between 2021 and 2024 was one of the factors cited by Stats NZ as driving the overall increase in household wealth through that period but sharemarkets have also performed strongly.

“A median household would have basically nothing in bonds, stocks, that sort of thing. But quintile five, the top 20% – 18% of their assets are coming from stocks, bonds,” Olsen said.

The middle group of households had 92% of their wealth in their own home.

“If you think about three groups in society – those that don’t have any substantial assets, don’t have any property or shares or anything, they haven’t shifted much at all over the last decade,” Olsen said.

“The most wealthy group has property and other investments and the middle group has more property than anything else, as property has increased in value the gap has become a bit smaller between the middle wealthy and the super wealthy.”

He said people should not think that $11.5m was the top of the wealth table in NZ, either. “There’s quite a long tail, we’ve got some households worth over $1 billion, not many but there is a long tail from $11.5m out to there.”

Council of Trade Unions policy director Craig Renney said the data showed 80% of people had wealth of less than $1m. “It doesn’t appear as if the problems facing NZ in terms of wealth distribution have moved at all.”

He said someone at the 40th percentile would have wealth of about $128,000. If both they and someone with wealth of $11.5m received 5% returns on their wealth each year, the person at the 40th percentile would grow their wealth by $6400 a year while the median richest one percenter would add more than $575,000.

He said that was one reason that his organisation called for a capital gains tax. A lot of the wealth in the richest households would come from capital gains. “Our tax settings on capital are probably helping to do that.”

He said most people’s wealth was in family homes that would not be affected by a tax.

“We have a very unequal society in NZ and the distribution of wealth is causing huge challenges – those who are able to accrue wealth are able to get even more of it in the future.”

-RNZ
www.nzherald.co.nz

What it takes to be in New Zealand’s top 1% of wealth

A household now needs at least $8.7m to be classed among the top 1%.
www.nzherald.co.nz www.nzherald.co.nz

What Craig Renney is forgetting to mention is that if the 5% he using in his example were subject to a 30% CGT, the person with the $128,000 Net Wealth would be hit with an additional $1,520 in tax, meaning the person with the $128,000 is even worse off and has little to no chance of ever closing the gap. Put is this way, at 5%, it would take just over 14 years for the person with $128,000 for their wealth to double with the help of compounding interest and the 72 Rule. With a 30% CGT, that 14 years has jumped out to near 20 and 1/2 years.... not bad you think. But if inflation averaged 3%, adding a CGT to the effect, and even once the money has doubled, inflation has destroyed the value of the money anyway.

What's also really bad is he's comparing the 40th percentile of an individual's net worth ($128,000) to the median 1% household net worth of $11.5m but saying that's the median net worth of an individual..... he's using a household net worth figure for one and an individual for another. That's manipulating the figures to try and gain support.... pretty much like National and the monetary holes in the proposed "budget" a few elections ago.

The CTU.... this is who they are.... wanting to take money from the rich but hurting everyone else in the process.... all for an ideology. This is what happens when you want a tax of envy!!!!

We're also hearing this morning, again from Reeney, and along with the likes of Hickey, that a CGT would stop the need for adjusting Super entitlements.... think the Treasury paper which has suggested that the age for Super be raised each year until it reaches 72 (okay for office workers but what about tradies, farmers, factory workers who won't be able to keep going). As we keep hearing, NZ is one of the only countries in the OECD without a CGT.... but countries with one are also worried about having to pay for their older generations as they retire. Sorry to disappoint you BUT a CGT isn't going to close the gap. Prove? The OECD countries which have one....

🇬🇧 United Kingdom
🇺🇸 United States
  • Pension strain: Public pension liabilities are ballooning, especially at state and municipal levels.
  • Capital gains tax: Federal CGT ranges from 0–20%, with additional state-level taxes.
  • Article: World Economic Forum – Global pension crisis
🇫🇷 France
🇮🇹 Italy
🇯🇵 Japan
Click to expand...
‘If someone with wealth of $11.5m received 5% returns on their wealth each year, the person at the 40th percentile would grow their wealth by $6400 a year while the median richest one percenter would add more than $575,000.’

Idiot - The same article shows that wealthy person only make $100k per year the last 3 years so trying to tell us they will make $575k every years is deliberate misinformation and trying to stoke jealous and bitterness based on lies.

Rennie and his Unions are so bent his Labour shadow needs a chiropractor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Shogun
Politics 🇺🇸 Joe Biden
Replies
3
Views
3K
Shogun
Shogun
Politics 🤡 Donald Trump
284 285 286
Replies
6K
Views
322K
Tragic
Tragic
Bruce
Current Affairs 🗳️ Is this the twilight of democracy?
7 8 9
Replies
160
Views
30K
Worried2Death
Worried2Death
Buzz Killington
Current Affairs Fake News Stories in the NZ Herald!
Replies
3
Views
3K
wizard of Tauranga
wizard of Tauranga
Back
Top Bottom