Of the rich, by the rich, for the rich
View: https://bsky.app/profile/norightturnnz.bsky.social/post/3mfx24cyzxc2v
View: https://bsky.app/profile/norightturnnz.bsky.social/post/3mfx24cyzxc2v
Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics
- Thread starter wizard of Tauranga
- Start date
Funnily enough, I do believe Rich Pricks should be paying their way. Whatever the colour of their ties.
Was just pointing out the hypocrisy of how they can get brownie points for being green and saving the planet with the left hand, while fucking it over with the right.
A CGT is a good idea but will need some serious work to get it right and applicable where it will have the most effect.
The tax suggested by Chippie is a waste of time and unworkable in my opinion, as far as a decent return for the cost of administration
Mrs Rick wants to know can if she can use the new legislation to "move on" some grandchildren back to their parents?This government has all but shut down emergency housing assistance. At the same time they are criminalising homelessness, while throwing more and more out onto the street where many of those affected have very complicated circumstances.
They have been responsible for the highest growth in unemployment in decades.
More and more people living in hardship and out of cars.
Yet the new law will now criminalise those whose circumstances are a direct result of this government's actions.
All the way down to 14 year olds.
No one will be able to afford to pay that fine.
There's a private prison to fill.
Oh and this is another creep towards the criminalisation of protest.
This is the right. This is who they are. You should all be angry, and fighting back.
And if they move on? To where?
National paves way to criminalise begging, homelessness and protests
Homelessness has doubled under the National Party, meth use has gone up 300% & police/mental health resources cut around NZ. Pleas by charities over the last 1.5 years have also fallen on deaf earsmountaintui.substack.com
View attachment 15960
Last edited:
Hey just out of pure curiosity does the IRD publish figures showing what % of tax payers pay what % of tax revenue?
Yes there are several charts around. Not sure if IRD produces them but they are there.
Haven't seen one for a while but I recall the % increasing
Absolutely
miket12
🏛️
Except he ignores the most obvious thing.... a capital gains tax won't help a person into house ownership... it just takes away from those who have built up enough equity to own an investment property.Long overdue.
It's a great article on cgt.
Stuff: Latest breaking news | New Zealand
www.stuff.co.nz
Proof.... Australia has a CGT... it's homeownership rate is 66% and going down.
UK has a CGT.... it's homeownership rate is 63-64.5% depending on which country you're looking at.
NZ doesn't have a CGT but has a homeownership rate of 66%... i.e. the same or better than two countries with a CGT.
A CGT hasn't improved homeownership there... why does he jump to the conclusion it would here?
The fact is, you can only take a certain amount of income tax from people before it becomes unsubstainable to tax their income anymore so you then look for things that aren't being taxed... wealth and captial gains.
What do I mean by unsustainable? Once the amount you tax people reaches beyond a certain level, tax payers then look for ways to avoid paying tax. It’s already happened with trusts, undeclared overseas assets, shell companies run at a loss, money held in tax havens. When Roger Douglas dropped the highest tax rate from 66% to 39%, the amount the government received in income tax went up. Why? Because those who thought it was excessive and hid their income, felt that was fairer and were happy to pay the income tax.
Question.... when taxing wealth or capital gains becomes unstainable and you've already maxed out on income and sales tax, what then will the left leaning economists want to tax? Because the needs will keep getting larger but the areas untaxed/under taxed will be less. That’s the problem when your answer is too tax more, what when there’s nothing left to tax?
miket12
🏛️
There are two ways it’s looked at…. Based on just income, over 25% of income tax received is paid by 2.4% of the population (those in the top tax bracket).
But, when you take into account untaxed wealth or capital gains plus income, the wealthiest families only paid 8.9% tax while those on the lowest tax grade paid 10.5% (assuming they made no untaxed capital gain).
Your perspective changes depending on how you look at untaxed capital gains or wealth.
- Thread starter
- #22,830
A CGT will achieve nothing. It may raise more tax for the govt bills does nothing for the country or the individual or closing the wage gap to Australia.
The wealth of individuals = the total output of the economy divided by all individuals.0
The only answers must be those two variables. Population and output. The only way to catch up to Australia is to massively increase output per person (productivity). Or decrease the population (unviable).
Prove me wrong and explain how a CGT will move NZ any closer to Australia’s wealth per person?
The whole economic debate is focused on irrelevancy.
The wealth of individuals = the total output of the economy divided by all individuals.0
The only answers must be those two variables. Population and output. The only way to catch up to Australia is to massively increase output per person (productivity). Or decrease the population (unviable).
Prove me wrong and explain how a CGT will move NZ any closer to Australia’s wealth per person?
The whole economic debate is focused on irrelevancy.
Did you read the article?
- Thread starter
- #22,832
I’m watching the knights/ cowboys… you know, what this sites about. Who do you think will win?
- Thread starter
- #22,833
Quick read, yes it misses the whole point. As Rizzah says it’s output per person and resources (productivity).
Again individual wealth = the total output of the economy divided by all individuals. Nothing to do with tax which is merely dividing up the pie.
If we double the economy size we all become rich irrespective of tax. If we stay stagnant but tax more, nothing at all will change.
As I said, prove me wrong.
I have two daughters in Oz. I own some property there. They Don't. They've been there for around 20 years have good jobs and earn reasonable coin.
Their children spend far to much time here (see above)
They rent. They have no inclination to buy property unless maybe a holiday home in NZ.
Their logic is, why encumber with a mortgage, when your super scheme payout if handled like mum tells you, will comfortably allow you a good income and security in a long term rental with no additional costs.
Other than a pass on effect, is there really any necessity to own property?
Their children spend far to much time here (see above)
They rent. They have no inclination to buy property unless maybe a holiday home in NZ.
Their logic is, why encumber with a mortgage, when your super scheme payout if handled like mum tells you, will comfortably allow you a good income and security in a long term rental with no additional costs.
Other than a pass on effect, is there really any necessity to own property?
This is the bit everyone misses. Nothing wrong with borrowing heaps as long as it is used to increase productivity.
We seem to have no problem in this country with Debt but a mammoth issue with being productive.
Sigh.
We're in a time of mass wealth extraction upwards. Neoliberalism has been the main mechanism, now they're not even pretending, it's just naked greed and corruption.
If you guys don't get that, you never will.
The middle class, which really isn't you Wiz, has been eroded to the point where there's a very obvious tiering in New Zealand.
A while back I raised the point of how much is enough wealth. The thing is, what we think is enough wealth is orders of magnitude below those who need taxing.
This is Gary Stevenson being interviewed by Jack Tame today
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO8dchbQDEE
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO8dchbQDEE
- Thread starter
- #22,838
Sign, my kids face all theses issues as they enter the workforce. Having a productive economy is the only way to provide a future with wealth and high wages for everyone.
The total GDP of NZ is about $420b divided by capita = $80k per person. Ie - if you took all the income of the rich and spread it evenly to the poor everyone would have $80k. That’s still only average in Australia. Distribution doesn’t work.
We have to have a bigger economy per person as distribution can’t fix anything - but despite all these facts, I expect you to faithfully keep repeating the left propaganda…
- Thread starter
- #22,839
Ill try to explain in a way you can understand.Sign, my kids face all theses issues as they enter the workforce. Having a productive economy is the only way to provide a future with wealth and high wages for everyone.
The total GDP of NZ is about $420b divided by capita = $80k per person. Ie - if you took all the income of the rich and spread it evenly to the poor everyone would have $80k. That’s still only average in Australia. Distribution doesn’t work.
We have to have a bigger economy per person as distribution can’t fix anything - but despite all these facts, I expect you to faithfully keep repeating the left propaganda…
If you work for a company or govt department with $500k income/ funding and 10 employees.
CEO earns $100k and 9 remainder earn $44,400.
Redistribution: all employees earn $50k equally
Double funding (size of economy): ceo earns $200k, all employees earn $88k.
Growing a productive economy does heaps more than redistribution ever can. Growing an economy through productivity makes everyone better off.
Understand? Your aiming for that $50k; I want NZ to have $88k wages
You need to double the economy to sustainably double wages. Simply increasing minimum wages, etc is a zero sum game if the overall economy stays the same size.
Last edited:
Noitall
👤
Gee that looked a bit schizophrenic when I haven’t been following the conversation and at a glimpse you’re saying I’ll try to explain in a way you can understand to yourself
