Love National, wtf has Labour done ffs. hasn't helped my spelling.
Permalink
Permalink
Love National, wtf has Labour done ffs. hasn't helped my spelling.
Sigh. OK, I'll bite.
While I agree with you about Labour, answer me this: What have National done? Apart from slash budgets, and increase taxes?
If I hear "Labour broke it" or "the recession" one more time...(because National knew the economic situation as much as I did. they just politicised it rather well).
Mining our "100% pure" parks with big huge diggers is also a wonderful idea. Tourists and Backpakers don't do nothing for our mighty economy - but the chance of maybe striking something underneath the ground is worth it.
The optimism I had for this government disappeared the moment when the government gave me a $10 a week tax cut one week, then took it away the next week, then had the balls to say that they had delivered their promise of tax cuts. Nice move.
Central Hawkes Bay Nix
and tragic follower of Charlton Athletic
Permalink
Permalink
National Radio is the best major media outlet we have in this country. Attacking their budget is an absolute disgrace. It is such an important / loved thing for so many people that I think any real cuts to it will cost the Government more votes than they might realise.
Permalink
Permalink
Love National, wtf has Labour done ffs. hasn't helped my spelling.
Sigh. OK, I'll bite.While I agree with you about Labour, answer me this: What have National done? Apart from slash budgets, and increase taxes?If I hear "Labour broke it" or "the recession" one more time...(because National knew the economic situation as much as I did. they just politicised it rather well).Mining our "100% pure" parks with big huge diggers is also a wonderful idea. Tourists and Backpakers don't do nothing for our mighty economy - but the chance of maybe striking something underneath the ground is worth it.The optimism I had for this government disappeared the moment when� the government gave me a $10 a week tax cut one week, then took it away the next week, then had the balls to say that they had delivered their promise of tax cuts. Nice move.
haha, I did that just to try be a mini troll by the way. I thought a National Govt would be good so far I'm not impressed.
Permalink
Permalink
The optimism I had for this government disappeared the moment when the government gave me a $10 a week tax cut one week, then took it away the next week, then had the balls to say that they had delivered their promise of tax cuts. Nice move.
That's pretty funny, though, how cheap that is.
At least national gives us a couple of laughs (see Gerry Brownlee). I don't recall Labour making me laugh.
Permalink
Permalink
That's pretty funny, though, how cheap that is.
At least national gives us a couple of laughs (see Gerry Brownlee). I don't recall Labour making me laugh.
At least national gives us a couple of laughs (see Gerry Brownlee). I don't recall Labour making me laugh.
You don't laugh at Trevor Mallard? That guy is a munter.
Permalink
Permalink
Love National, wtf has Labour done ffs. hasn't helped my spelling.
Sigh. OK, I'll bite.While I agree with you about Labour, answer me this: What have National done? Apart from slash budgets, and increase taxes?If I hear "Labour broke it" or "the recession" one more time...(because National knew the economic situation as much as I did. they just politicised it rather well).Mining our "100% pure" parks with big huge diggers is also a wonderful idea. Tourists and Backpakers don't do nothing for our mighty economy - but the chance of maybe striking something underneath the ground is worth it.The optimism I had for this government disappeared the moment when the government gave me a $10 a week tax cut one week, then took it away the next week, then had the balls to say that they had delivered their promise of tax cuts. Nice move.
haha, I did that just to try be a mini troll by the way. I thought a National Govt would be good so far I'm not impressed.
As in you voted for them and it was your first or second time voting?
Yeh...and this internet filter is a tad nanny state too.
The Nats care about themselves and their mates, and often short term financial gain. Not so much the country as a whole. It's just that we've had enough time to forget about that. Also often a tad arrogant, like how we lost the rugby world cup first time around.
Then there's the plain old goofy Banksy wing of the party and their pet projects, cycleways and so on.
7.3% unemployment when Aussie is on 5.4 I think is bad.Very bad. There has been no plan- and if the plan is tax cuts why on earth did they not give us the ones they promised in the budget?
Labour would have brought forward a lot of infrastructure and done some Keynesian stimulus spending.
Permalink
Permalink
That's pretty funny, though, how cheap that is.
At least national gives us a couple of laughs (see Gerry Brownlee). I don't recall Labour making me laugh.
At least national gives us a couple of laughs (see Gerry Brownlee). I don't recall Labour making me laugh.
You don't laugh at Trevor Mallard? That guy is a munter.
Yes I do. In a horrendous failure on my part I thought of him as being part of National.
I stand corrected.
Permalink
Permalink
Protest trying to 'Save Radio NZ' has been organised on short notice for Parliament grounds tomorrow from 1pm - 2pm. Everybody taking a handheld radio along.
Permalink
Permalink
Joined Young Nats today.
Why? or are you trolling?
sorry I didn't really answer your question before.
Labour kept unemployment low, at record lows.
It reestabilshed a limited unionism in our workplace, and restored rights at work. This was part of what checked wage stagnation and productivity stagnation compared to Australia. During the last Labour government we kept pace with Australia in these measures, though we had previously fallen well behind.
The distribution of wealth was fairer, and people were given incentives and help to have a family.
They took the interest off student loans. They apologised for things we had done that were wrong such as the treatment of Chinese miners during the Gold Rush in Otago, our mishandling of a devasting flu epidemic in Samoa when we were in charge and I believe to the veterans of Vietnam.
They stopped the slapdash reform that seemed to go on previously, ceased asset sales, supported a sense of New Zealand identity through the arts and did their best to foster an inclusive society. New Zealand has a proud history, born of the Long and Great depressions of the past, of looking after those who are unable to look after themselves, and this government reaffirmed that tradition.
If we don't stick together and keep our national wealth we are very vunerable to being picked off by international companies and currencies. If we have little or no control over the assets of our country our democracy and parliament is pointless.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multilateral_Agreement_on_Investment This was proposed last time the Nats were around, and would have entitled companies to sue the government if laws hurt their earnings.
But also things like weak customs screening of Australians so they aren't inconvenienced. If their shoes aren't cleaned and bring the next didymo or varoa mite our economy could be badly hurt.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10616878
This is an example of Australia companies treating us like a 3rd world country, and AUSTRALIAN unions stepping in to fight for us. Please be aware that John Howard lost power because he wanted to bring down the Australian work rights and increase inequalty there. They weren't so silly as to fall for it.
martinb2010-02-24 12:51:56
Permalink
Permalink
Labour at it's base has a policy of keeping as many people in work as possible. National is happy to see a level of unemployment, beacuse this enables employers to drive wages down or stagnate them, with the fear of losing work.
Good employers (see productivity figures v Australia when we had the ECA) recognise that devaluing people and making them constantly fearful isn't the best way to achieve their best work and the best outcomes for everyone.
Good employers (see productivity figures v Australia when we had the ECA) recognise that devaluing people and making them constantly fearful isn't the best way to achieve their best work and the best outcomes for everyone.
Permalink
Permalink
That's pretty funny, though, how cheap that is.
At least national gives us a couple of laughs (see Gerry Brownlee). I don't recall Labour making me laugh.
At least national gives us a couple of laughs (see Gerry Brownlee). I don't recall Labour making me laugh.
You don't laugh at Trevor Mallard? That guy is a munter.
Yes I do. In a horrendous failure on my part I thought of him as being part of National.
I stand corrected.
He may as well switch parties and bring across the new party motto 'it's okay to have a bit of biff in the office'
I laugh at Phil Goff as well. He's a gappy, and an idiot. Bring back Auntie Helen, or Paston for PM :)
Permalink
Permalink
Mulligan for PM
Central Hawkes Bay Nix
and tragic follower of Charlton Athletic
Permalink
Permalink
Rrrrrrrrrrritchie Herbert's Yellow Party?
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
Permalink
Permalink
Wouldn't win Smithy, The Party makes too much common sense and doesn't give out Credit Cards.
Proud to have attended the first 175 Consecutive "Home" Wellington Phoenix "A League" Games !!
The Ruf, The Ruf, The Ruf is on Fire!!
The Ruf, The Ruf, The Ruf is on Fire!!
Permalink
Permalink
too much serious. blame the heat and a desire to be able to tackle like vince lia...
Permalink
Permalink
I was serious about joining Young nats and I joined because i'm interested in politics and dislike Labour more than National
Permalink
Permalink
I hate Labour. I dislike National. Sick of National sucking up to the Maori party.
What I really hate though - is the green party. Everyone time they complain against free trade really hits my buttons! Anyone who is against free trade doesn't understand it. End of. And there's no reason to have co-leaders and co-convenors etc etc just so they can have both a male and female at the position. Just f**king make up your minds. Oh, and they're communists who don't understand constant taxing of the rich will see them f**k off or simply not take the risk.
/Rant :)
What I really hate though - is the green party. Everyone time they complain against free trade really hits my buttons! Anyone who is against free trade doesn't understand it. End of. And there's no reason to have co-leaders and co-convenors etc etc just so they can have both a male and female at the position. Just f**king make up your minds. Oh, and they're communists who don't understand constant taxing of the rich will see them f**k off or simply not take the risk.
/Rant :)
Permalink
Permalink
@Clarke
you do know the main sponsor/owner of the Nationals in Queensland is big Clive Palmer??
anyway- I've done my rant. And 'sspose could say I had a fair amount of appreciation for what Labour achieved, especially considering what came before it.
so fair enough to ask wt has National done?
martinb2010-02-24 19:24:22
you do know the main sponsor/owner of the Nationals in Queensland is big Clive Palmer??
anyway- I've done my rant. And 'sspose could say I had a fair amount of appreciation for what Labour achieved, especially considering what came before it.
so fair enough to ask wt has National done?
martinb2010-02-24 19:24:22
Permalink
Permalink
Why? or are you trolling?sorry I didn't really answer your question before.Labour kept unemployment low, at record lows.[/QUOTE]Labour weren't in power during a recession.
[QUOTE=martinb]But also things like weak customs screening of Australians so they aren't inconvenienced. If their shoes aren't cleaned and bring the next didymo or varoa mite our economy could be badly hurt.
You complained about Tourism being effected five seconds ago.
The distribution of wealth was fairer, and people were given incentives and help to have a family.[/QUOTE]Fairer is in the eyes of the beholder. Why would someone take risks if they didn't receive the return? And besides this - it all depends on what side of the fence you are looking at it from. Many would quite fairly reply that the rich being richer actually would help NZ. As they can reinvest this and open up jobs etc. (Trying not too write a book!) And while we're at it - you're entitled to Life, Safety and Education. You're not entitled to every else's money more than they are. If you don't want to be paid $12.50 an hour, don't work and accept the benefit. If you want more than the benefit and don't want to work - come up with an idea, max out your credit cards, and start a company. I'd also like to remind everyone - while you may work in a factory all day, the wealth of this world didn't get rich by sitting on their arses. Richard Branson made his wealth after working huge hours a day from home packaging records!
My mum's in the top tax bracket, yet if she earned LESS money at work she would receive MORE. How about that for an incentive? (And btw, we live in a sh*tty house in Upper Hutt, and I will receive less university assistance because of her pay. Yet she cannot afford to give me any assistance, as the policy would assume)
[QUOTE=martinb]If we don't stick together and keep our national wealth we are very vunerable to being picked off by international companies and currencies.
National will win here hands down. One of the richest men in the country will do a fine job. (I also sense hypocrisy... if you want wealth then you need to use what you have. Minerals have a lot of wealth - look a Dubai)
My mum's in the top tax bracket, yet if she earned LESS money at work she would receive MORE. How about that for an incentive? (And btw, we live in a sh*tty house in Upper Hutt, and I will receive less university assistance because of her pay. Yet she cannot afford to give me any assistance, as the policy would assume)
They took the interest off student loans.[/QUOTE]Now no one pays them back. (This from a student)
[QUOTE=martinb]Supported a sense of New Zealand identity through the arts
Only because this was Helen's personal portfolio. She had as much resources as she wanted! [QUOTE=martinb]Supported a sense of New Zealand identity through the arts
[QUOTE=martinb]If we don't stick together and keep our national wealth we are very vunerable to being picked off by international companies and currencies.
[QUOTE=martinb]But also things like weak customs screening of Australians so they aren't inconvenienced. If their shoes aren't cleaned and bring the next didymo or varoa mite our economy could be badly hurt.
Edit: I'd like to reiterate my being a neutral.Michael2010-02-24 20:06:01
Permalink
Permalink
arggh quote tags! Hmmm..ok I wrote you a book, but I'm not the All White Believer of Off Topic soooo....instead of picking up all the points you made I'm going to try and focus 
It is true Labour wasn't in power in a recession. They would have brought major infrastructure projects forward, and had a much more Keynesian response to the downturn. Like Aussie and the US have- and they've been what has got our economy going again.
I think here is your main issue:
"you're entitled to Life, Safety and Education. You're not entitled to every else's money more than they are."
What is the state and its government? and why is it?
Also what are rich people? Certainly not a clone army of identical successful entrepreneurs, state house kids done good.
Will pick this up more in a bit. But private investors have overwhelmingly invested in property, with loans from Australian banks, while our stock market and finance sector is a notorious underperformer.
If you have this model of thinking you need to ask what incentive there is for John Key to protect New Zealand assets or things like National Parks, Radio New Zealand and other things that are part of what New Zealand is. There would appear to be much more incentive for him to help his backers and close supporters.
martinb2010-02-25 13:34:40
It is true Labour wasn't in power in a recession. They would have brought major infrastructure projects forward, and had a much more Keynesian response to the downturn. Like Aussie and the US have- and they've been what has got our economy going again.
I think here is your main issue:
"you're entitled to Life, Safety and Education. You're not entitled to every else's money more than they are."
What is the state and its government? and why is it?
Also what are rich people? Certainly not a clone army of identical successful entrepreneurs, state house kids done good.
Will pick this up more in a bit. But private investors have overwhelmingly invested in property, with loans from Australian banks, while our stock market and finance sector is a notorious underperformer.
If you have this model of thinking you need to ask what incentive there is for John Key to protect New Zealand assets or things like National Parks, Radio New Zealand and other things that are part of what New Zealand is. There would appear to be much more incentive for him to help his backers and close supporters.
martinb2010-02-25 13:34:40
Permalink
Permalink
They took the interest off student loans.
Now no one pays them back. (This from a student) You do realise there isn't a choice about whether you pay it back or not?
Permalink
Permalink
No, but you can certainly put it off.
Mrs News hasn't worked for years.
Mrs News hasn't worked for years.
Permalink
Permalink
My mum's in the top tax bracket, yet if she earned LESS money at work she would receive MORE. How about that for an incentive? (And btw, we live in a sh*tty house in Upper Hutt, and I will receive less university assistance because of her pay. Yet she cannot afford to give me any assistance, as the policy would assume)
I am about 99.9% sure this is a porky. An effective marginial tax rate greater than 100% is impossible.
Permalink
Permalink
No, but you can certainly put it off.
Mrs News hasn't worked for years.
Mrs News hasn't worked for years.
You got a bit of catching up to do then.
His quote said "no-one" pays it back. Nonsense. In fact 23.3% of borrower in 2003 had paid off their entire loan within 5 years.
2ndBest2010-02-25 14:51:57
Permalink
Permalink
I'm one of those who managed to pay back the student loan within 5 years, and will forever be grateful to Labour for writing off the interest because otherwise it would have taken me a long, long time to get rid of the loan.
Permalink
Permalink
My mum's in the top tax bracket, yet if she earned LESS money at work she would receive MORE. How about that for an incentive? (And btw, we live in a sh*tty house in Upper Hutt, and I will receive less university assistance because of her pay. Yet she cannot afford to give me any assistance, as the policy would assume) [/QUOTE]
I am about 99.9% sure this is a porky.� An effective marginial tax rate greater than 100% is impossible.[/QUOTE]Hello Mr 2ndBest. Its not. You have to factor in two Children, and the benefits gained from having two children in a lower tax bracket.
Aside from this, New Zealand did not need stimulus packages in the way other countries did (/do). New Zealand had plenty of "buffer" in the OCR, which lowering works exactly the same as say, building a new highway.
[QUOTE=martinb]Certainly not a clone army of identical successful entrepreneurs, state house kids done good.Indeed. But they're also not a clone army of of idiots who flaunt there money around. And if they inherited their wealth, then they're really just inheriting their parent's work.
[QUOTE=martinb]But private investors have overwhelmingly invested in property, with loans from Australian banks, while our stock market and finance sector is a notorious underperformer.
Labour had plenty of time to change this. Did they not? Such overseas investment can be blamed on lack of national investment. Perhaps more incentive to invest? Or we change the kiwi kids mindset... "Goto School, Pass Exams, Gain U.E., get a degree, find a job, retire" to "Goto School, Be Inspired, f**k it and go for life, find out you're pretty rich now, retire at aged 30."
I am about 99.9% sure this is a porky.� An effective marginial tax rate greater than 100% is impossible.[/QUOTE]Hello Mr 2ndBest. Its not. You have to factor in two Children, and the benefits gained from having two children in a lower tax bracket.
No, but you can certainly put it off.Mrs News hasn't worked for years.[/QUOTE]
I'm also not complaining about this at all... its just when one government sits there doing all the nice friendly stuff, someone else has to come a long and piss everyone off.
Also, I bet my left nut, that if a mine is opened in a National Park no matter how much Labour is against it now, if Labour come back into power, Labour won't close it.
[QUOTE=martinb]They would have brought major infrastructure projects forward
The second national tries to spend any money they're plagued with accusations that they're incurring national debt (etc etc)
You got a bit of catching up to do then.
�
His quote said "no-one" pays it back.� Nonsense.� In fact 23.3% of borrower in 2003 had paid off their entire loan within 5 years.
[/QUOTE]"No-one" is not literal. (Are you not familar with the way teens speak now days?)
I'm also not complaining about this at all... its just when one government sits there doing all the nice friendly stuff, someone else has to come a long and piss everyone off.
Also, I bet my left nut, that if a mine is opened in a National Park no matter how much Labour is against it now, if Labour come back into power, Labour won't close it.
[QUOTE=martinb]They would have brought major infrastructure projects forward
Aside from this, New Zealand did not need stimulus packages in the way other countries did (/do). New Zealand had plenty of "buffer" in the OCR, which lowering works exactly the same as say, building a new highway.
[QUOTE=martinb]Certainly not a clone army of identical successful entrepreneurs, state house kids done good.
[QUOTE=martinb]But private investors have overwhelmingly invested in property, with loans from Australian banks, while our stock market and finance sector is a notorious underperformer.
[QUOTE=martinb]There would appear to be much more incentive for him to help his backers and close supporters.
While national parks are a priority for myself, if we have minerals here we have to at least look at using them.
/phew. Longest post ever?Michael2010-02-25 20:05:43
Permalink
Permalink
My mum's in the top tax bracket, yet if she earned LESS money at work she would receive MORE. How about that for an incentive? (And btw, we live in a sh*tty house in Upper Hutt, and I will receive less university assistance because of her pay. Yet she cannot afford to give me any assistance, as the policy would assume)
I am about 99.9% sure this is a porky. An effective marginial tax rate greater than 100% is impossible.
I understand how our tax and benefit system works. If you are earning over $70,000 then there is no way you can drop you salary income, and have an overall higher income (from all sources), because our tax system has marginal tax rates, and we have abatement levels for benefits.
2ndBest2010-02-25 21:05:01
Permalink
Permalink
They took the interest off student loans.
Now no one pays them back. (This from a student) You do realise there isn't a choice about whether you pay it back or not?
The MSL tax bracket.
I have no choice but to pay nearly $75 a week on my student loan.
It sucks. But the interest right off is a god send. Thanks to this annoying pay as you earn style of student loan replayments, I'll have mine paid off in no time.
No one is paying them back?
Central Hawkes Bay Nix
and tragic follower of Charlton Athletic
Permalink
Permalink
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;
mso-font-charset:1;
mso-generic-font-family:roman;
mso-font-at:other;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:0 0 0 0 0 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"?? ??";
panose-1:2 11 5 3 2 0 0 2 0 4;
mso-font-charset:129;
mso-generic-font-family:modern;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-1879047505 165117179 18 0 524289 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"@?? ??";
panose-1:2 11 5 3 2 0 0 2 0 4;
mso-font-charset:129;
mso-generic-font-family:modern;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-1879047505 165117179 18 0 524289 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.Msonormal, li.Msonormal, div.Msonormal
{mso-style-unhide:no;
mso-style-qat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
text-align:justify;
text-justify:inter-ideograph;
mso-pagination:none;
text-autospace:none;
word-break:break-hangul;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"?? ??";
mso-ascii-font-family:"?? ??";
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"?? ??";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:"?? ??";
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
mso-font-kerning:1.0pt;
mso-ansi-:EN-NZ;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-:ex-only;
mso-default-props:yes;
mso-ascii-font-family:"?? ??";
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
/* Page Definitions */
@page
{mso-page-border-surround-er:no;
mso-page-border-surround-footer:no;}
@page Section1
{size:595.3pt 841.9pt;
margin:3.0cm 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;
mso-er-margin:42.55pt;
mso-footer-margin:49.6pt;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"?? ??";
mso-ascii-font-family:"?? ??";
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"?? ??";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:"?? ??";
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-font-kerning:1.0pt;}
<![endif]-->
martinb2010-02-25 22:04:26
Government
for who?
Starting with the last first. It's not very powerful or really contentious. We
have seen the government attacking ACC, which an independent Pricewaterhouse
Coopers report labled an immense benefit to everyone in New Zealand. (The report is no longer online, but this commentary is
)Insurance competition here will end up benefitting Australian insurers, and
eventually courts and lawyers when they refuse to pay out. It will damage
working families, sports players and all other flow ons from that such as
productivity and health. A massive change in culture, and loss of collective
value.
Investment culture
Labour was slow out of the blocks, but was working on the problem in several
ways. They were trying to build up a habit of saving that exists in most other
countries through Kiwisaver. An immensely popular scheme which was making more
money available to the stockmarket.
There was regulation legislation begun for the financial industry, but
unfortunately arrived too late for the financial company collapses.
In terms of companies Labour (and the previous National government) put our tax
base in to support LOTR, and Labour set up Fast Forward to help research and
development. They made an attempt to assist companies, through the Ministry of
Economic Development.
<!--[if !supLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->
Stimulus
On the front of spending I don't recall anyone complaining too much about the
national debt. I do remember seeing the crowds of people applying for a job at
Pak 'n' Save.
<!--[if !supLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->
The
virtue of wealth
People get rich for all sorts of reasons. Some of them are admirable, some of
them are private prisons or acting on both sides of asset sales or bundling up
non-performing loans and on-selling them or selling products to the mentally
disabled when they don't need them. Not all of these things create jobs, and
help build up a balanced economy and the productive sector.
<!--[if !supLineBreakNewLine]-->
<!--[endif]-->
Democracy
under attack
As regarding the mineral wealth- we haven't had an open discussion about this-
there has been no mandate developed, no suggestion of the benefits of doing it,
or of why we have National Parks or who they belong to. It's been done
like so many things with a disregard for democracy. Rather powerful? Not at
all- why was the ACC bill getting urgencied through the house? Where was question
time this week? Why has urgency been used more in a year by this government
than in nine years by Labour?
duuude. we gotta stick to one topic a post or even better a thread it's just
easier read- plus it makes the argument possible to follow....
martinb2010-02-25 22:04:26
Permalink
Permalink
My mum's in the top tax bracket, yet if she earned LESS money at work she would receive MORE. How about that for an incentive? (And btw, we live in a sh*tty house in Upper Hutt, and I will receive less university assistance because of her pay. Yet she cannot afford to give me any assistance, as the policy would assume)
I am about 99.9% sure this is a porky. An effective marginial tax rate greater than 100% is impossible.
Yeah, there's that really weird bit with a couple of kids where you pay "negative tax", you get a couple of thousand more back in Working for Families tax credits than you pay in regular tax. Early on it can abate at 100% from around $20k to 30k, then later on, between around $48k and 90k for a single parent, the WFF abates (gets clawed back) at nearly 60 percent, so it's not much incentive to do overtime or get a better job.
RE the Nat list above, it's like everything, you measure, assess and decide.
National Radio hasn't been touched for years and I am sure can be made more efficient. Sacred cow or just a cow?
National parks, jeez, mineral wealth is no use to us locked up under ground.
Imagine if Labour had spent the money on production, not consumption. We would be rolling in it. But no, they increased expenditure by another $24 billion a year. To what effect?
And now 10% of people pay 76% of net tax. Tax is skewed too far the wrong way.
My only disappointment is that the Nat party haven't gone far enough, I was expecting a real change.
Permalink
Permalink
I'm a gothy alt looking type and most assume I'm left but I swing either way depending on the particular topic but I really don't get all the kerfuffle about Nat Radio. I've never listened to it. I doubt I ever will - all my Facebook is up in arms re saving them frm the evil Nat baddies but we all listen to bloody Radio Active or other Techno or alternative based stations so it bugs me people are trying to save something outdated simply because its National attacking it
Permalink
Permalink
Yeah, there's that really weird bit with a couple of kids where you pay "negative tax", you get a couple of thousand more back in Working for Families tax credits than you pay in regular tax. Early on it can abate at 100% from around $20k to 30k, then later on, between around $48k and 90k for a single parent, the WFF abates (gets clawed back) at nearly 60 percent, so it's not much incentive to do overtime or get a better job.
Actually the only time the EMTR is greater than 100% is at a very low income as there is a minimum family tax credit (i.e. it ensure that every family has an income of X amount of dollars).
And the abatement rate is 20% not 60%.
Permalink
Permalink
I'm a gothy alt looking type and most assume I'm left but I swing either way depending on the particular topic but I really don't get all the kerfuffle about Nat Radio. I've never listened to it. I doubt I ever will - all my Facebook is up in arms re saving them frm the evil Nat baddies but we all listen to bloody Radio Active or other Techno or alternative based stations so it bugs me people are trying to save something outdated simply because its National attacking it
How do you know it is outdated if you haven't listened to it?
I can highly recommend National radio. Get far better news on Morning Report and Checkpoint than on any of the TV versions.
Permalink
Permalink
I'm a gothy alt looking type and most assume I'm left but I swing either way depending on the particular topic but I really don't get all the kerfuffle about Nat Radio. I've never listened to it. I doubt I ever will - all my Facebook is up in arms re saving them frm the evil Nat baddies but we all listen to bloody Radio Active or other Techno or alternative based stations so it bugs me people are trying to save something outdated simply because its National attacking it
How do you know it is outdated if you haven't listened to it?
I can highly recommend National radio. Get far better news on Morning Report and Checkpoint than on any of the TV versions.
Thats my point... I don't know anyone who listens to the radio for news... its antiquated. I read about 5 major international papers online ea day. Does anyone young listen to Nat Radio? I only listen to the radio at all whn driving and like most people I know listen to my own music frm my mp3 player at other times
Permalink
Permalink
well I'm 26 and have listened for 3 or 4 years. The main benefit is that they spend 4 or 5 minutes on the main stories, instead of 30sec for tv news, and reprinintg media releases for newspaper. Given you a far more indepth knowledge on current stories/issues.
Permalink
Permalink