This government have screwed us, their only plan is to sell off our assets
Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics
- Thread starter wizard of Tauranga
- Start date
NZWarriors.com
Great posts rizzah
Whilst I think they are in it for their donors more than they are everyday kiwis, I'm not sure they plan to sell all the silverware. But never trust a Tory!
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
And yet here we are. It's simplistic to say that capacity problems causes inflation. I don't believe the previous government were investing well in many if any of those areas you mention and if they were it didn't appear to be effectively. We aren't in austerity levels either like we have seen in years gone by. It may seem that way to some given the levels of ineffective spending previously. Sure, there is a limit to what government spending can do but it's no coincidence that generally they run a deficit in a recession and a surplus when we aren't. I agree that business confidence isn't a good measure but it sure seems to be a good enough indicator.
Free trades & apprenticeship program (I think this is being cut), Kainga Ora build program (Cut). First year free tuition (cut). Investment in R&D (Cut), PT investment (reduced). Nurse pay rise, various other public sector pay rises. Investment in rail. Off the top of my head.
Reversal of the TD, is a big one. TD was still available to investors who were building new. Now we go back to horse trading existing houses (once interest rates come down).
It's there if you want to look.
I'm not saying they were perfect, they could have done a heap more.
Break up the Supermarket duopoly.
Finish their RMA reform.
Get a plan to fix the energy system/electify - solar subsidy.
Actually build light rail.
Capital investment in Kiwibank. 30-40% of our current account deficit is profit flight from bank profits and Multinationals.
A plan for rail. Electrify.
Make Kiwisaver compulsory, make it more like the Aus model.
Last edited:
I go back to ineffective spending. Kainga Ora has been shown that in an article just the other day about bang for buck. Add in the debt they are incurring for it. First year tuition has been changed to final year which is a good move in my opinion. Investment in R&D I agree with you on. Nurse pay rises? Haven't they just had one and also had historical holiday pay errors paid - something like $2 billion (I might have that wrong).
There are different priorities for this governments spending. Funding Pharmac for cancer drugs for example.
And remembering that all key areas were declining ie health, crime, education, the economy. It's not like we were getting results with what we were doing.
I think we are just on fundamentally opposing sides of where we were at and where to go. While I'm disappointed in some of the things that have been trimmed, I'm overall reasonably happy with the outcomes in terms of reigning in ineffective spending, getting inflation down and interest rates lowered. I'm optimistic for the future and it will be interesting to see what the next budget brings. From my point of view we really weren't in a good place last year and there didn't look to me like any plan or desire to change that. I get the political leanings of posters on here but that's the bit that I'm really struggling with.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Ineffective to who though? That KO is incurring dept? It's a house developer, that will always happen. They are also 50+ year investments.
KO is a good investment. It's a public good, alleviating two/three major problems. Homelessness, renewal of our shitty housing stock, and increasing overall housing supply.
Cutting social house building will lead to an increase in costs elsewhere. Health, justice system, construction sector shrinks, degradation in general social cohesion.
Yes, the previous govt increased nurses pay. We have a nursing shortage, pay rates need to be competitive. I don't think the holiday pay entitlement was an error. Perhaps something the incoming govt didn't realise was coming?
Lol, cut the public service to pay for cancer drugs. You do realise, healthcare/nursing numbers/doctors/GPs/specialists are included in those cuts?
And cutting public service funding is going to help those things? We'll see. Crime is up. Health is worse. Education will likely be worse - charter schools cost more for worse outcomes.
Why didn't they expand the lunches in schools. That would have made a material difference and probably increased achievement on it's own. Instead they chose to reduce funding.
They are also cutting funding to community groups and orgs that help people in need. And for what? To get into a magical surplus? Lol.
Again, there is a fundamental disconnect with how Govt spending/borrowing works within the wider economy.
Lots to go through there.
The holiday pay is historical going back quite a few years (maybe a decade) due to miscalculation by the payroll systems.
The Press
www.thepress.co.nz
Kainga ora is potentially a good investment. It can't be effective if it is developing property at such a disparate amount to private property developers and taking in that many staff to do it. Incurring debt isn't a bad thing but the level of debt can be and is. They are still building and renewing houses...
Kāinga Ora state housing projects under assessment :: Kāinga Ora – Homes and Communities
A number of Kāinga Ora projects are under assessment while we review our social housing delivery pipeline, with a focus on best value for money and areas of greater social housing need.
kaingaora.govt.nz
Did health, education, police get less funding in the budget than previously?
Health is worse? By what measure because the previous government removed them didn't they?
Watch: Health Minister announces details on government's new health targets
Shane Reti has laid out a plan for achieving the government's big health goals.
www.rnz.co.nz
Like I said, I think we are fundamentally opposed. (And always have been!). I can appreciate your viewpoint though. I just feel that things weren't better or going to improve under the previous government. Time will tell if your concerns about this one were warranted.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #11,929
Here’s the answer to many of our issues.
Our spend on a GDP basis on health, infrastructure, education, etc is appropriate, we don’t have austerity, the last budget increased spending on those key areas. We’re running a huge govt deficit so actually spending unsustainably. And yet we all know on all those issues we are in crisis and it’s been building for decades.
What’s the issue if you can’t spend more?
Clue is in the spending to GDP. Increase the GDP part. So obvious.
Norway has a $5m population like us. Their GDP is double ours ($579b US vs our $248b US)
That means with the same tax rate, and percentage spend on a GDP basis, the govt has double to spend on health, education, infrastructure, etc per person. Read that again and really understand it because it solves everything…
Imaging our health budget doubled…. THAT is our problem exposed so obviously.
I’ve said it for a long time. We need a huge increase in productivity and output in our country. Grow the pie and all our problems fix themselves. It feeds into higher wages, better social services, better infrastructure, etc.
I tire of all the people squabbling over how to divide the pie and wanting more taxes while at the same time supporting anti business policies.
If you are logically minded then National's aim to double the economy in 10 years is the best outcome for Health we can hope for (ie double health spend, doubled wages, etc.). A lot better than Labours taxing us 10% more and make us more miserable while only increasing the health budget by 10%. We will be in the same position as now fighting over dividing the pie in a future under Labour.
Spend based on GDP’s solution is so obviously to grow the GDP side.
www.national.org.nz
Our spend on a GDP basis on health, infrastructure, education, etc is appropriate, we don’t have austerity, the last budget increased spending on those key areas. We’re running a huge govt deficit so actually spending unsustainably. And yet we all know on all those issues we are in crisis and it’s been building for decades.
What’s the issue if you can’t spend more?
Clue is in the spending to GDP. Increase the GDP part. So obvious.
Norway has a $5m population like us. Their GDP is double ours ($579b US vs our $248b US)
That means with the same tax rate, and percentage spend on a GDP basis, the govt has double to spend on health, education, infrastructure, etc per person. Read that again and really understand it because it solves everything…
Imaging our health budget doubled…. THAT is our problem exposed so obviously.
I’ve said it for a long time. We need a huge increase in productivity and output in our country. Grow the pie and all our problems fix themselves. It feeds into higher wages, better social services, better infrastructure, etc.
I tire of all the people squabbling over how to divide the pie and wanting more taxes while at the same time supporting anti business policies.
If you are logically minded then National's aim to double the economy in 10 years is the best outcome for Health we can hope for (ie double health spend, doubled wages, etc.). A lot better than Labours taxing us 10% more and make us more miserable while only increasing the health budget by 10%. We will be in the same position as now fighting over dividing the pie in a future under Labour.
Spend based on GDP’s solution is so obviously to grow the GDP side.
National sets bold target for export growth
National will set an ambitious target to double the value of exports in ten years to help rebuild the economy so all New Zealanders can get ahead.
www.national.org.nz
Last edited:
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Why don’t you take time to read what they actually said about wanting a CGT and not the summary of a question asking if the government should include different measures like a CGT to reduce the deficit. I’ll give you a hint…. Only 41% (and not the 77% claimed by Wilson) want a CGT introduced.
Worse than that, less than 10% didn’t want the government to reduce the Brightline tax…. you remember what that is? It’s one of the tax breaks given to landlords you keep going on about. The majority also want the income tax brackets adjusted to match inflation…. you remember what that is? It’s the tax cut for the rich you keep going on about.
Capital gains tax debate heats up as wealth tax remains unpopular
Only 16% worry about Government spending efficacy, down from 85% last year.
I would be comfortable with a brightline test of five years for rentals. Landlords should invest based on yield not CG, but I know they don't.Why don’t you take time to read what they actually said about wanting a CGT and not the summary of a question asking if the government should include different measures like a CGT to reduce the deficit. I’ll give you a hint…. Only 41% (and not the 77% claimed by Wilson) want a CGT introduced.
Worse than that, less than 10% didn’t want the government to reduce the Brightline tax…. you remember what that is? It’s one of the tax breaks given to landlords you keep going on about. The majority also want the income tax brackets adjusted to match inflation…. you remember what that is? It’s the tax cut for the rich you keep going on about.
Capital gains tax debate heats up as wealth tax remains unpopular
Only 16% worry about Government spending efficacy, down from 85% last year.www.nzherald.co.nz
For owner occupied homes I think a brightline of three years is reasonable. Any more than two sales within a three year brightline period taints the seller as a flipper for life and is taxed irrespective of motive.
- Thread starter
- #11,932
This is pushing it into shower head territory and telling people how they will live their lives
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Just making the rule easy to interpret.This is pushing it into shower head territory and telling people how they will live their lives
If owners flip houses within a time frame they pay tax. It was easier to avoid being accessed for tax on house sales once but that has changed with AML. Inland revenue get everyones tax number and other details upon sale and from there it is only a tap of a keyboard before they ask questions.
I personally do favour a brightline test of five years for investment properties including new builds which are currently exempt. I'd also favour a CGT brought in on assets unrelated to a business... such as the capital gains on a holiday home which doesn't have a tenancy agreement longer than six months or isn't rented out for longer than six months. There would also need to be a check brought in that the owners didn't "rent" their baches to their neighbours for a $1 PW to get around the CGT.
It's interesting but I suspect most people favouring a CGT will probably never be in the position to own a rental property and most people who favour a wealth tax would never be over the threshold to have to pay it.... but both would love a reduction in their income tax (as long as those "rich pricks" also have to pay more income tax and not get "our" tax deduction).
I also hate the idea of it being a "neutral tax" position where income taxes are reduced by the same as the amount of tax being gathered by a CGT or wealth tax. Why? Because that doesn't increase the amount of money available to the government for social housing, education, infrastructure, health. But it does decrease the amount of money some will have to give to charities that provide these. "Closing the gap" by reducing the assets of the wealthy while not having corresponding increases in helping reduce poverty isn't actually "closing the gap" by lifting people out of poverty but by bringing other down.
Sure. But hiring thousands of public servant managers to do fuck all does not help the economy one bit. A govt could announce $1B funding to each of those sectors, but if its just hiring people who need to be baby sat, its a waste of money.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Whats your current supermarkets net profit margin??
That will destroy your electricity network. Better building more hydro
Should build HSR
This just makes the young poorer and the old richer
Damn.... I got that wrong. I was telling everyone that the tax cuts would cause inflation.
www.nzherald.co.nz
'End of crushing price rises' as inflation falls
Inflation was down significantly in the latest quarter.
The public service isn’t just bureaucratic managers; it includes teachers, nurses, doctors, specialists, police etc etc.
My point is Government funding should be used to expand economic capacity by investing in skills development through universities, polytechnics, trade apprenticeships and innovation via R&D and overall infrastructure investment.
All of which benefit both the public and private sectors. By supporting workforce skill training and innovation via grants for research, the government stimulates innovation and job creation, expanding economic capacity and drives long-term growth.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Commerce Commission tracked Weighted Average Cost of Capital (WACC) and Return on Average Capital Employed (ROACE) in their market study, completed 2022.
WACC: 6-7%
ROACE: 12-14%
Conclusion was the supermarket duopoly were more profitable than would be expected in a competitive market.
Do you mean it would destroy profitability for the electricity retail companies? Or the network itself? Explain.
Yes! We should ask Japan or China to do it for us. Japan runs some of it's slower HSR on the same gauge as NZ uses.
True - You could tweak the scheme to be more equitable. We could have had a SWF if previous govts had continued with the NZ super fund.
Last edited:
Thats like 3x Australia. thats fucked up. Im with you on that.
