General Debate 24 November 2011

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment93

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (93)

Login to comment or vote

ciaron

48 hrs out and for the first time I really don’t want to vote for any of the useless bastards.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:05am
Lazybum

Then vote National CIARON. At least it will be 1 useless bastard running NZ, not 3.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:06am
thedavincimode

ciaron

Its only election fatigue. We’ve all had enough and just want it over with so we can watch the fallout.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:09am
Elaycee

“We’ve all had enough and just want it over with so we can watch the fallout.”

Exactly. 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:13am
flipper

So will TV One be chasing Goffice today over his deliberate LIE relating to Police recruitment?
Not on your nellie.
Goff deliberatley lied to the public and he lied in public.
Of course he will say he was mis-advised and the MsM will sweep it all under the carpet – just like they did with red-melon vandalism
In the mean time, they will say, “Lets run with the lie and use Collins flat denial as an after-thought,. As for Marshall? No..that would spoil the story (lie!).
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:14am
Neil

Phil Goff made a desperate effort last night on the TV1 debate,with his announcement that the police were going to restrict recruiting because of financial concerns. Methinks he “knew” about that a week or so ago you have the minimum time for rebuttal.
Result this morning after Judith Collins dispatched that rumour for six sees Mr Goff in no mans land.
Labour are quite happy to distort the news to suit themselves.
When Greg O’Connor of the Police Association, indicates he’s quite happy with the situation,it puts Goff’s stunt into perspective. Low levels of police leaving the service and the police getting on top of the crime problem has altered the situation.
A cunning effort Phil but misleading and ultimately failed.
Last night Goff did produce a good performance but I still think that Key bested him by “looking Prime Ministerial”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:15am
Scott Chris

7 Arrested In Amish Hair Cut Attacks:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/6024858/Seven-arrested-in-Amish-haircut-attacks

Among those arrested were the group’s leader, Sam Mullet – I kid you not. Apparently they were arrested for hate crimes, not crimes against fashion.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:16am
Lance

Politics is the art of the possible.
So any leader who wants to ‘do the right thing’ must also bring along a vast collection of people with opinions much akin to herding cats. NZ is fundamentaly left leaning following decades of nanny state intervention and yet voice a desire to be prosperous and fully employed.
However mining is spurned, business leaders hated and sound economic policy seen as the work of the devil.

So on that score I consider JK has done a bloody good job to tread a fine line between the shrieking lefties and the needs of a modern economy.
ACT may be correct in their economic policies but no one is going to vote for them, so whats the point?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:17am
Lazybum

what is Hooten’s election website address?
Want to have a look.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:18am
Pongo

listened to Goff with Paul Henry, watched his debates and various other interviews and you have to wonder if Brian Edwards media training has left Labour incapable of actually answering a straight question with a straight answer. They just drone on in cliches endlessly and you just loose the will to live and are none the wiser at the end of it. Cosgrove, Dyson etc. etc. all operate like this. It’s quite clever and clearly good training but the trouble is its just not popular and monumentally boring and I just turn off.
Mr Edwards may be very good when you are in power but I don’t think it works all that well when in opposition and the polls for labour appear to have gone backwards since his appointment. I think Labour should dump the spin doctors and follow Russel Norman and Hone Harawira who,s poll ratings have increased.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:19am
Manolo

ACT may be correct in their economic policies but no one is going to vote for them,..

I am.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:25am
nasska

Manolo

That is very charitable of you….I can see John Banks looking over the results on Sunday morning after he has been beaten into eighth place by Water Woman, wondering who gave him the other vote.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:35am
Yvette

Chief High Court judge Justice Helen Winkelmann –
“It is difficult to escape the conclusion that the police would be deterred from pursuing not only the investigation but also any potential prosecution by the existence of such a declaration,” her judgment said.

They could only be deterred if the tape is not private – ipso factum, the tape is not private.
So why send the police on the path of a hiding for nothing?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:37am
KiwiGreg

@ nasska It’ll be at least 2 because he’s getting my vote too. I quite like John, but his politics (social and economic) arent really mine (or indeed Act’s) but being an Epsom voter my 2 ticks actually mean something, unlike the rest of you 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:39am
ciaron

Then vote National CIARON. At least it will be 1 useless bastard running NZ, not 3.
As much as I’d like to, I’m really struggling to put aside Keys dismissal of the Section 59 referendum.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:42am
ste3e

Given truth never goes out of fashion, unless you are John Key to whom even basic facts such as Bill English praising Labour for leaving the government books in surplus can be dismissed whenever it contradicts Key’s own ego, I represent an analysis of the situation. An analysis represented yet never rebutted; as Monty Python put it, the automatic gain saying of a statement is not an argument.

Even allowing that the government can borrow for less than you and I, the interest payment on the current $17 billion has to be some scary big number. Divide this number by 12 and you get the monthly bill the government must pay to simply cover interest on the debt. Add to that bill the monthly cost government must pay for education, health, welfare, justice, infrastructure, and disasters and you get close to the monthly expenditure government must meet. On the other side of the ledger government has money coming in from tax, dividends from state assets, and dividends from state savings funds such as ACC. Any shortfall between expenses and revenue the government meets by borrowing. At the current time National are borrowing money every day.

National’s plan is fourfold; sell state assets, reduce expenditure, increase foreign investment and increase export revenue, thereby they wish to increase revenue and decrease expenditure so they no longer have to keep borrowing, so let’s look at this.

Proceeds from sale of state assets are to go into a slush fund which will be diverted to pay for infrastructure. This will mean government borrowing to pay for infrastructure will not be needed, thus while the proceeds do not go directly to pay down debt, they do reduce expenditure. The question is, would removal of the need to borrow to fund infrastructure mean existing revenue would pay for existing interest on debt and government expenditure? My understanding is that it would not, and that National require either further reduction in government spending or increase in tax take to make it so.

Reduced expenditure is supposed to come from further efficiencies in the public sector. I doubt this is possible. In the first instance National have been paring back the public sector over the past 3 years and there comes a time when there is no more fat. And indeed, Pike River and the associated cost, it can be inferred, would not have occurred had the Labor department been adequately funded to ensure proper inspection of mines. One must also wonder at the Rena; would a fully functional and well funded public service have allowed the continuation of NZ’s legal position that sees us liable for foreign company’s accidents? Furthermore, and we have seen this in the past, demoralized public sectors seem to have a way of producing fraudsters that steal large amounts of money for long periods of time without getting caught. A further reason for doubting National’s ability to reduce expenditure is the 380 million upfront expenditure National are promising to remove beneficiaries from benefits; definitely not a saving in the short term, and depending on whether we end up like America, not a savings in the long term either.

The reason for increased foreign investment is to provide businesses. These make profits which are taxed, provide employment which reduces benefit expenditure and pays wages which are taxed, and introduce new skill sets that NZ business would not otherwise provide. The downside of foreign investment is that some investors demand tax and labour rates be low else they will not invest. And here rubbish has been spoken to the effect that foreign investors who demand low wage low tax provide skill sets. Any foreign investor that wants to employ educated people and train them in new skill sets is obviously going to expect to pay above minimum wage. Their incentive for being here is that comparatively, wages in their own countries cost more, tax in their own countries costs more (America and England around 50% top tax rate), both of which incentives held prior to National dropping top tax rates. The type of investment National are trying to attract by their dropping taxes and keeping wages low are the Super Cheaps, and the only skill sets they provide are the ability to wonder around after customers, occasionally operate a till, and stack shelves… now there is a brighter future!

But there is more to it than this. Setting the tax rate to attract foreign investors of this ilk has meant the government has had to borrow significantly more because it has not had the income required to cover expenditure. It has meant an exodus to Australia. Finally, while the majority of employees are paid minimum wage, the CEOs get million dollar salaries. Envy aside, the real objection is that a CEO living in NZ spends a certain amount of money in the local economy by way of living costs, the rest is banked/invested. Increasing CEO take home by reducing personal income tax does not mean the CEO suddenly lives bigger, they can already afford to live as big as they feel like, it means more money is invested. Most of which investment is offshore thus there is a further flight of money out of the local economy. The majority of people left to walk through the doors of small businesses are on minimum wage, and they inevitably walk through the doors of Super Cheap. So small business viability reduces, the tax take therefrom also, along with employment opportunity which leads to increase expenditure in welfare. Is not this precisely what we have seen with the adventure of The Warehouse into rural New Zealand?

In the final analysis, increasing foreign investment of this character means a tax rate too low to cover expenses. So National are left with increasing export revenue as the only way out of this mess. And this hope they set sail in the current world market. They tell us Treasury forecasts support their optimism. But these forecasts were calculated around the time American politicians decided to play Russian roulette with their debt repayment. That is before Italy and Spain started to quake, and before we heard whispers about France, definitely before American police were videoed pepper spraying unarmed non-hostile protestors in a scene reminiscent of “kneeling” Jews, and the latest American Super brain fart.

The situation for National is this. They will not significantly increase export revenue given the current world market, therefore they will not see a rise in tax revenue significant enough such that government expenditure can pay government bills, so they will borrow. This will mean the interest bill on the loan will increase which will require even larger growth in export revenue. It is a death knell, a downward spiral without a contingency plan.

Labour’s plan is to borrow to reinstate kiwisaver, remove gst on fruit and vege, and remove tax for the first $5000. They will increase the minimum wage to $15 per hour. Pay dole to employers and increase youth training. Increase top tax rates to levels prior to National’s reduction of them, and implement a capital gains tax that excludes private residence. They will not sell state assets. They will increase retirement age gradually from some future starting date. So how does their plan fare?

The removal of tax from the first $5000 and the increase in the minimum wage is not altogether a decrease in government revenue. An increase of $2 per hour is an increase of a little less than $5000 per year for someone working 40 hrs per week on minimum wage, and that $5000 is taxable. One would expect an increase in the minimum wage to bring about a desire in many employers to increase the wages of their staff. Although this would increase gains from personal tax, all else being equal it would reduce profitability for the company and therefore decrease tax there. But one would also expect there to be an increase in spending which is likely to offset increased business expenditure via greater sales, and to provide greater government revenue by way of gst.

As for youth loosing jobs, they will only loose those jobs that employers did not need done. If the employer needs a job done, and a youth is trained to do it then there is every chance that youth will be employed, especially in the case of trades where Labour will be offsetting employment costs by paying the dole to the employer. Furthermore, training of youth in fields youth are interested in has to make a better society than condemning them to the Super Cheaps.

Removing gst on fruit and vege is also difficult to quantify. Immediately it seems there would be a decrease in revenue as the government has simply quit taking gst on a range of goods. But if the reduction converts into increased demand for fruit and vege, which is the intention, then the viability of local growers selling into local markets increases. This means employment, including self-employment, and reduction of welfare expenditure. It means local businesses seeing money that generally tends to walk into Woolworths or New World, and the spending by local business in local economies.

For the long term, Kiwisaver is a no brainer, but even in the short term the increased borrowing to fund government contributions is somewhat offset. In the long term we just need to consider a fictional case of a 55year old who committed to Cullen’s fund and has just turned 60. For 5 years they contributed $1000 which was matched by the government (National’s wickedness never occurred in this world). The fund grew at 3% per year compounding. Most of the money was invested off shore. At 60 the retiree cashes in the fund and receives about $11,000 which is shipped from offshore to on shore where the retiree spends it in the local economy. Multiply this by years and by the amount of people in kiwisaver and we should be kicking ourselves that we never listened to Winston earlier.

But even in the short term government’s borrowing $1000 per kiwisaver is added to contributions from employer and the kiwsaver themselves, and the entirety is invested. A proportion of the investment will find its way to New Zealand companies strengthening their profitability and therefore the tax they pay. The kiwisaver investment companies themselves will turn taxable profits. The sale of shares as part of kiwisaver investment portfolios will have capital gains tax applied. But most importantly, as more and more people retire and cash in their funds there is more and more money coming in from offshore and being spent in local economies increasing the profitability of small businesses and the tax revenue government takes.

All of these plans are good for increasing the vibrancy of the local economy, but none of them deal with the problem of increasing government debt and the increasing size of the interest bill. In fact both debt size and interest bill are set to be larger under Labour’s plan, as Labour project to borrow more than National. The difference is, however, that National are totally screwed if export revenue does not significantly increase, for they will have to keep borrowing past a point where increased export revenue could rationally be expected to cover the generated interest bill. Labour, on the other hand, are setting in place streams of revenue that ensure a larger debt and consequent larger interest bill can be paid regardless of whether export revenue increases or not.

In the short term, government revenue is increased by revoking tax cuts National gave to the rich, and ETS compliance. One can add here the continuation of kiwisaver contributions whenever tax from return on that investment beats the interest government must pay on the loan to make the investment; and note, this is not a simple investment of a loan because it involves significant contributions from employers and kiwisavers. We can also add the continued full dividend provided by state assets that should never be sold, especially at the bottom of the market, and especially against the explicit wishes of the majority of the owners of those assets!

In the medium term capital gains tax snowballs expecting to return about $4 billion per year once settled. There will also be increasing numbers of retirees drawing down on offshore investments, including kiwisavers, and spending this money in local economies, most of which money meets the taxman sooner or later.

At the end of the day, under Labour, there will be pressure upon the government to reduce personal and company tax rates because government revenue is set to significantly exceed government expenditure. Confronted by this proposition it is difficult to conceive a scenario where Labour will not quit debt. Contrawise, given the current world economy, it is difficult to see how National will secure the export gains they require to cover expenditure, and this means it is difficult to see how National will not be trapped into a continued increase in debt.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:49am
nasska

Ste3e

If you think anyone is going to wade through all that crap written as a blog comment you are away with the fairies.

The scroll wheel is our friend.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:55am
thedavincimode

?????? 🙁
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:56am
Lance

@ste3e
If the truth never goes out of fashion, why did your mate Goff LIE about the Police recruiting?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:57am
thedavincimode

nasska

That was actually a ‘Page Down’ effort – x 3.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:58am
Lazybum

Ciaron, look at it this way, will the other mob remove it? The answer in no so this should not be a vote changer. Now work on the next issue such as, who will borrow less as the world turns to shit in the medium term? There is a difference here.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:58am
Elaycee

@Ste3e – this crap is word for word from your extremely long comment at 8.52am yesterday.

Zzzzzzz
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 9:00am
thedavincimode

“why did your mate Goff LIE about the Police recruiting”

Because it was Wednesday. He had some new material he’d been saving up for the killer blow on the telly (zzz), so he didn’t need to repeat Tuesday’s lie.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 9:01am
Lazybum

Was this Goff’s H-fee?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 9:02am
thedavincimode

No Lazybum.

That was killing solo mothers and kicking state house tenants out onto the streets.

I know its difficult keeping up as the fuckwit Goff has moved into turbo mode spitting out lies quicker than a tennis ball machine spits out balls, but you just have to try harder.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 9:05am
ciaron

It’s all about trust, remember? 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 9:09am
Pete George

@Ste3e – if you want to post that much detail set up your own blog and link to it from here with a brief summary.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 9:15am
freddos

Man Patrick Gower is dumb. All his focus on ‘dirty deals’ which he clearly doesn’t know what he’s on about. And he’s not exactly insightful – the Ohariu Act candidate got over 1000 votes in 2008; this time they’re not standing anyone. In a two horse race Dunne against Chauvel, how many Act supporters (whose party is tough on crime) will back Chauvel (who is the Labour man advocating scrapping prison sentences less than 12 months)? Particularly pertinent when the right may well need Dunne +/- a couple of bros. Surely this could be construed as a dirty deal if you were actually trying to find them. Also now with Act making Transmission Gully an issue again when both Labour and National support it – it suspiciously looks like they are trying to give Dunne more air.

Not that I’m complaining. A win for Dunne is a win for the right – that is a win for NZ this election.

(also a loss for Chauvel is a win for NZ no matter what the setting)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 9:22am
RightNow

ste3e; tldr, never mind
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 9:35am
Mick Mac

good points ste3e

don’t listen to the wankers, I enjoyed reading your summations.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 9:43am
Murray

Weirdo
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 9:54am
Lindsay Addie

The NZ Herald poll today on their election page is about asset sales:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/election-2011/news/headlines.cfm?c_id=1503012

Interesting results so far though it hasn’t been running for long.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 9:58am
Murray

Interesting 54% of people support asset sales. Well right up untill of the labout starfers are set to work stuffing the ballots.

Well its good practice for saturdays driving people to kfc thing isn’t it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 10:06am
Lindsay Addie

Murray,

Seems there are plenty of voters who have good business sense and understand the logic of what Key is proposing.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 10:12am
Murray

Somebody pass it on to Goff. Let him know why hes going to be unemployed for Christmas.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 10:17am
ste3e

In philosophy there is a known argument type called throwing sand. When confronted with a coherent argument to which you have no rejoinder you speak a load of nonsense which blinds people to the fact that you actually have no coherent response. So as boring as it is, I place it up regardless of the sand throwers. In fact, given that sand throwing defines National election strategy, any boring analysis becomes quite exciting, an oasis in a dessert of vacuity. Indeed, thank you vacuous lot for providing the white noise indicative of National’s stupidity, for upon this backdrop Labour’s policies show it to be the intelligent choice.

Maybe voters will wake up and realize niceness of tie does not a country leader make. Regardless, Labour have again set the agenda this country will follow in the years to come; kiwisaver, capital gains, super. That is unless you think Key is telling the truth, and unless, which is even more improbable, Key is actually telling the truth, in which case we are down the shitter.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 10:33am
Pete George

Lindsay – yes, that’s an interesting poll. I think it’s significant that there’s an option for “partial sales of some assets” rather than the simplistic assets sales versus no asset sales.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 10:33am
Nookin

“I enjoyed reading your summations.”

Shit, if that was a summation I would hate to see the full version
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 10:49am
Don the Kiwi

I’m with Manolo.

ACT is getting my party vote. Three reasons – scrap the ETS, stop the Waitangi Gravy Train, drastic review of Rescources Management Act.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 10:52am
travellerev

Here is what Gordon Duff senior editor of US Veterans today has to say about John Key, his tenure as a Merrill Lynch gambler and what he is going to do with NA if you vote him back in:

Here is an interview I did with US War veteran and ex banker and senior editor of Veterans today Gordon Duff thanks to Vinny Eastwood, Auckland internet radio host:

http://aotearoaawiderperspective.wordpress.com/2011/11/24/interview-with-gordon-duff-from-veterans-today-about-john-key-and-what-he-will-do-to-new-zealand-for-his-banking-mates/
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 10:52am
DavidC

Whale mentioned in his live chat that today might be the day for a bit of a bombshell on the gweenies vandalism, nothing yet tho !
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 10:55am
Manolo

Dutch genius, now tell us about the 9/11 inside job, will you?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 10:57am
travellerev

That would be NZ of course
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 10:59am
Elaycee

trivialrev – I can’t find any reference where you unearthed the reasons why the smelly bunch of dropouts is still squatting at BOC (Body Odour Central) in Auckland.

Did you leave that bit out?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 11:02am
side show bob

What’s the bet ste3e works in some obscurer government department housed in the broom locker in the beehive.
“Liarbore have again set the agenda in this country” , Oh fucking please, even Tui wouldn’t put that one up. My version, They are useless socialist fucktards that couldn’t run a bath. I sincerely hope they are put to the sword this Saturday. New Zealand will be a far better place if they all go away and boil their brainless heads.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 11:05am
Elaycee

ste3e says: “When confronted with a coherent argument…. ”

Coherent? Have you stopped taking your meds? What the hell have they put in your coffee?

Trying to read your version(s) of War and Peace is like trying to read the fog addled rants from Philu.

But without the … // ?? ..batman .. ?? ..eh?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 11:07am
thedavincimode

“When confronted with a coherent argument ”

That’s the problem right there. Best tear up that diploma in analytical reasoning from the waterwoman’s school of bollocks and innuendo.

If you want to write, then write to her mad mate Siemer. He’s probably feeling a bit lonely.

side show bob

Classic. Its probably the broomlocker in the parliamentary library – keys held by the second assistant to the deputy assistant staff librarian.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 11:32am
RightNow

travellerev, … nah, never mind
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 11:34am
mum

What really bugs me about the lies Labour keeps telling about Capital Gains Tax, is that no-one seems to pull them up for it. Last debacle, when Goff kept on and on about the poor taxpayers paying tax on income and then saying investors, business owners etc should have to pay on sales of their assets is just so much ###***. All the time the business (rental property, whatever) has been operating, tax has been paid on the INCOME. When the asset is sold, why pay a tax on your ‘intellectual property’? Sale od an asset is not income, we know this, Labour keep telling us so.

The other annoying thing, those idiots in Aotea stinkland, is: why can’t we put a twenty foor high fence around them, top it with barbed wire, put a really small gate in and patrol the perimeter to make sure no one throws food in to them. When anyone wants to leave, the gate is unlocked, they are told they MAY NOT re enter and let to go. I don’t believe any of those types are so dedicated that they would be prepared to do a “Bobbie Sands” and starve for their cause. Especially at Christmas. Best of all, it’s their choice!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 11:35am
Bevan

Put this in yesterday’s GD by mistake….

Wow, I’m shocked! The Herald actually has a decent question on Asset Sales!

Where do you stand on state asset sales?
Completely opposed to it (43%)
Agree with partial sales of some assets (52%)
Want outright sale of state-owned power companies (3%)
I’m undecided (2%)

I know these are unscientific, but considering Labour is no doubt rorting the poll so the completely opposed %age would most likely be lower – it seems the majority of respondents are supportive of National’s plan!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 11:43am
KevinH

One News Election Debate 7.00pm 23/11/2011

TV1’s Election Debate hosted by Guyon Espiner last night was a more successful and informative show without the theatrical distraction of a “worm” that detracted from the leaders debate held on Monday nights TV3’s Election11.

The 90 minute show was long thereby offering John Key and Phil Goff the opportunity to debate policy in more detail.

The informal table side format of the debate focussed more individual attention on the leaders and their respective policies and in contrast to TV3’s debate was more suited to John Key who looked more comfortable, confident and professional.

Throughout the debate John Key maintained the initiative more consistently whereas Phil Goff was more reactive and querulous.

The lenghty debate covered several topics, and in order they were:

The Economy, Asset Sales, Cost of living, Race Relations, Beneficiaries, Law and Order, The Brain Drain to Australia, Coalitions and finally MMP.

John Key was more effective discussing the Economy, Cost of Living and Beneficiaries.

Phil Goff was more effective discussing Law and Order only.

Both men were relatively equal on Asset Sales, Race Relations, the Brain Drain, Coalitions and MMP.

Phil Goff had the initiative on Law and Order when he surprised John Key with the allegation that no new police will be recruited in the following year.

John Key initially fumbled but recovered to counter that more resources had been already invested in the Police and that with other government departments the Police were expected to save money.

John Key surprised Guyon Espiner with his preference for the supplementary electoral system.

On the night John Key was the more successful politician communicating policy idea’s which was confirmed by the txt poll which awarded John Key with 63% approval rating as opposed to Phil Goff who recieved 37% of the vote.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 11:47am
mum

Another thing that bugs me – Labour and the Greens going on about the Holiday Highway. Have had a lot of experience with this road – not often for holidays, I might add. The father of my sons lives north of Wellsford, for many years, we travelled up to his place three weekends out of evry four, so the boys could be as much with him as possible. 100 kms one way, twice a weekend! We use HW16 mostly now and usually avoid Wellsford by popping out at Te Hana. Believe me, any relief to that would be good. Aside from that, the mail; bread; groceries etc all travle on HW1, to all pointys north. The northern economy, never very robust, relies on this road, commercial vehicles struggle on 16 and there are very few places to pass on that road. The views are wonderful, but truckies aren’t employed to gaze at views. Even those who are travelling the road to take a holiday are contributing to the economy in the north, be they locals or internationals. Is the Labour/Green plan to just cut Northland adrift?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 11:56am
Elaycee

Must admit that I burst out laughing at the comments made by Jon Johanssen immediately after the debate last night and laughed again when he reviewed the debate with Greg Boyed and Claire Robinson around 10.30pm.

During the debate, Key was asked about the referendum and his opinion / voting preference. He responded along the lines that he favoured SM / would vote accordingly and the reasons why. This response was similar to the question posed by Espiner to Goff and Goff responding that he wanted to retain MMP.

But Johanssen ripped into the PM and at the 10.30pm slot he even stated that his reference to SM was a ‘disgrace to the office of the PM’. If ever Johanssen outed himself as a raging lefty, this was it. Fancy – the PM is asked for an opinion and he gives it. But no similar outrage levelled against Goff. Of course not.

Even Boyed was caught by the outburst. So too the other guest – Dr Claire Robinson from Massey University.

Johanssen is a complete sock puppet.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 12:02pm
leftyliberal

@Elaycee: I haven’t seen the 10:30pm slot, but Johanssen’s comments immediately after the debate were correct: JK suggested that with SM you get better balance of gender, ethnicity etc (1:03:40 ish). This is wrong, so Johannsen was correct to point this factual error out. I suspect that JK didn’t actually mean “better balance” rather he meant “some balance” which may be more correct. Note that Johannsen was not commenting at this point on whether or not JK should be commenting on the topic either way.

I can’t seem to find the 10:30pm slot online so can’t comment on that one.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 12:20pm
labours a joke

“I’m with Manolo.
ACT is getting my party vote. Three reasons – scrap the ETS, stop the Waitangi Gravy Train, drastic review of Rescources Management Act”

Count me in as well. I have voted already and ACT have my party vote. I think people are going to surprised at how well ACT do this time around.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 12:53pm
Manolo

The scam continues: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/11/23/did-10-stand-in-way-climate-science/
Where is the incompetent Nick Smith, father of the ETS tax, to defend the “sciences”?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 12:57pm
Tauhei Notts

ste3e
You repeat should have been edited after the first time.
You think you might be a looser.
We know you are a loser.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 12:59pm
Johnboy

“National leader John Key’s final two days of the campaign kicked off at 7.30am, on the National Party bus leaving from Wellington Railway Station to blitz the North Island.”

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10768345

“It proved a faster ride than Labour candidate Charles Chauvel’s campaign caravan which it easily overtook on Ngauranga Gorge.”

Maybe chubby Chucky should go on a diet! 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 1:06pm
Tauhei Notts

Bugger,
Your instead of You
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 1:06pm
Fletch

Did a post over at NZ Conservative on this too, but…

Got an update email from Borders bookstore to say they are leaving New Zealand. I guess it wasn’t wholly unexpected, but it is sad to see them go. They had such a great selection of old and newer stuff. Whitcoulls is OK, but it doesn’t quite measure up to what Borders was. Looks like if I want specific things it will be via ordering over the internet, or through the Kindle…

Sad day for us booklovers 🙁
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 1:07pm
James Stephenson

I just can’t bring myself to tick ACT. Time for them to die and the party they should be to replace them.

Shoot me if we get the coalition of doom, but I’m voting Libz.

Two from the “Surprised? Not really.” file:

Global Warming kills caribou…or not… :http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/018444.html

A lesson for the PIGS – ditch the Euro and go Icelandic: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-23/iceland-s-outlook-revised-to-stable-by-s-p.html
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 1:14pm
Joseph Carpenter

Ste3e you’re full of crap mate. You want coherent argument, heres one: dishonest wankers like Labour, Greens and Mana keep on saying that a Capital Gains Tax (excluding the family home) will raise $4 billion+ per annum, in fact all these parties are absolutely relying on this revenue to help fund their extravagant spending plans. The fact is the proposed CGT won’t raise anywhere near this amount. Given you repeatedly cut and paste your comments I’ll do the same (sorry folks for the length):

Some facts:
Total number of residential sales for 2010 =56,000 (incl. sections).
Total value of residential sales for 2010 = $19.8 billion (incl. sections).
Proportion of housing that are investment properties = 35%.
Assuming similar ratio of sales, total number of residential investment properties sold in 2010 = 19,600 (i.e. to raise 4.5 billion = $230,000 tax paid per property = “Tell ‘im he’s dreaming”).

If the proposed rate is to be 15% on the realized gain:
Average residential hold time = 7 years.
Average house price Dec 2010 = $352,000, Dec 2003 = $259,000, average capital gain = $93,000 over seven years = 36% increase (over arguably the greatest boom increase in residential property prices in our history, the historical long term average over 100 years has been 2.5% PA = 18% over 7 years would be more normal and I believe probably optimistic for the next 10 years).
Therefore the total capital gain on investment properties sold for 2010 would generally = 1.8 billion, @ 15% = $270 million raised for 2010.

$270 million PA is more likely and I believe that is hugely optimistic due to:
1) Unprecedented and never to be repeated capital gains over the last decade.
2) No accounting for improvements, chattels, new construction, subdivision, multi-unit dwellings, multi dwelling allotments, etc (YAY more paperwork and tax bureaucracy).
3) Capital losses (definitely on the cards now days and in the future).
4) Most investment properties are low-end, i.e. their average sales price will be well below the total average plus the capital gain on the low end housing has been much lower (I remember something like 25% less for sub $300K properties to start of 2010).
5) Destruction of the new house build market already on its knees (lowest number of new residential consents since 1972).
6) Internal churn nett zeroes (Housing Corp, TPK, Education, NZDF, Landcorp, Local authorities, social housing, etc are all included in the total residential sales and will cop it).
7) Cost of extra bureaucracy (tax, register of owner occupied and investment properties, determination of values, subdivision and multi dwelling titles, transfer of losses, etc).
8) Government transfer payments to cover the rise in cost of rentals and new construction.
etc

All up if it makes NETT $150 million PA I’ll be surprised. Yip, big revenue raiser there idiots. Seriously who does their economic analysis or do they just pull it out of their arses?

Don’t believe me – then refer to the Jan 2010 review report of the Tax Working Group who are the experts and their subsequent comments re Labours’ CGT (really laughable since several will be on Labours “panel of tax experts”).
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 1:40pm
smttc

James, a vote for the Libz is a wasted vote. If you cannot bring yourself to party vote ACT, at least help shore up a National government even if, like most of us, you remain a little underwhelmed by their performance to date. A vote for the Libz is a vote for a Labour lead government.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 3:22pm
thedavincimode

Manolo

See what smttc said. 🙂

This is not a party political message.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 3:33pm
James Stephenson

smttc – I just can’t. I won’t vote for something just because it’s the least worst option. I’d rather my voice registered in whatever sub-threshold percentage for Libertarianz than give tacit approval to National’s mediocrity.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 3:51pm
leftyliberal

Congrats DPF regarding your latest post – great achievement 🙂
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 4:26pm
Viking2

side show bob (3,545) Says:
November 24th, 2011 at 11:05 am

What’s the bet ste3e works in some obscurer government department housed in the broom locker in the beehive.
“Liarbore have again set the agenda in this country” , Oh fucking please, even Tui wouldn’t put that one up. My version, They are useless socialist fucktards that couldn’t run a bath. I sincerely hope they are put to the sword this Saturday. New Zealand will be a far better place if they all go away and boil their brainless heads.

You might think that but if you bothered to think at all you would be able to see who has established the policies of the last 12 years and who has continued with almost all of them. How you could not understand that is hysterical after all your ranting. Thinking ain’t your brightest subject is it.

And you can go back to the 80’s and Labour set the agenda that remains in place today. The Nats. don’t have an agenda even today. they are Labours managers.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 4:36pm
Viking2

Thought of the Day.
Who created NZ’s debt?

I woke up this morning and found a National Party sticker on the newspaper promising “less debt”.

How times have changed from three or four years ago when John Key was opposition leader and told us “we don’t have a debt problem, we have a growth problem”.

He used to slam Michael Cullen for running huge surpluses, when Dr Cullen said we needed a buffer for the down part of the cycle.

When the global crisis hit, Finance Minister Bill English said it was lucky the books were in such good shape and we had no net debt.

Since then he has gone on the biggest debt binge in history.

The Government will spend $18.5 billion more this year than it will bring in. Only half that deficit is caused by Christchurch.

Over the last three years, they have borrowed 25 cents for every dollar they have spent.

So when National says it stands for “less debt”, it is making a statement that simply isn’t true. Yet it’s been the centrepiece of their dull election campaign.

Even looking ahead, National and Labour both promise to return to surplus in the same year.

The key to less debt is growth.

Setting aside the one-off cost of Christchurch, our debt has been going up because we are bringing in less tax money, while we are spending more on welfare.

The tax take is down partly because of tax cuts, and partly because of the recession. The welfare numbers are up entirely because of the slow economy, making a mockery of claims that welfare changes were going to move people off welfare and into jobs.

So the real issue is not so much debt as growth capable of producing jobs and bigger business profits.

Other than asset sales, National hasn’t come up with real ideas to grow the economy, though it has filled the air with a miasma of slogans.

Labour’s plan involves apprenticeships, changes to the Reserve Bank to better support exports, more research and development, a capital gains tax to divert investment away from speculation and more savings.

But it can’t make progress with these policies when the debate centres on debt instead of growth and jobs.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/blogs/john-pagani-left-leaning/6026710/Why-are-they-talking-about-debt
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 5:40pm
RRM

Since commenting is off for your “my personal goal for the election” thread:

That’s very very good work DPF. I have some appreciation of the effort that is involved.

Enjoy the results!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 5:58pm
labrator

Congratulations on achieving your “personal goal for the election” DPF. Best of luck also with the next part of the plan. Great stuff.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 6:10pm
Manolo

thedavincimode, your loyalty is fantastic. You sure live in a blue house with blue carpet and curtains, drive a blue car, wear blue clothes, and could feel very blue after the election. Nah, just kidding.

I do hope Labour lite wins and the socialists get a deserved bollocking. By the same token, I’d love to see ACT scoring one or more MPs, regardless of its terrible performance of late (Hide has a lot to answer for: the debacle started with him).
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 6:11pm
Pauleastbay

Fletch Says:
November 24th, 2011 at 1:07 pm

A pity, but Unity Books in Auckland is still the best, and 2nd hand wise Archway Books at Pukerua Bay Wellington, a gem
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 6:24pm
Viking2

Looks like the first of the insurance co’s to ditch their responsibilities. Precursor to going belly up?
Cheap policies without proper risk management.

Church and rest home insurer Ansvar will cancel all NZ policies from December 31 after massive earthquake losses and reinsurance cost blowout
Posted in News November 24, 2011 – 05:18pm, Bernard Hickey
Share
Ansvar insured the Christchurch cathedral

Church, heritage building and rest home insurer Ansvar Insurance, which announced on September 29 that it would stop offering earthquake insurance, has announced a complete withdrawal from New Zealand with the cancellation of all policies from December 31.

http://www.interest.co.nz/news/56881/church-and-rest-home-insurer-ansvar-will-cancel-all-nz-policies-december-31-after-massive
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 6:49pm
Viking2

1. A new phase in the crisis – It’s hard to under-estimate the importance of the failure of the German government bond auction overnight.

The European sovereign debt crisis has now spread to a place no one ever thought it would go: Germany.

This says investors both within and outside Europe are so nervous about European sovereign debt and the continent’s banking system they won’t or can’t even buy its safest debt.

The fact the Bundesbank had to step in to buy the bonds is devastating for market confidence.

We are in a dangerous place now.

Yet no one is talking about it on the campaign trail.

New Zealand may well wake up on Monday morning to a government about to do things it gave no indication it would do before the election.

Ready for that?

http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/56875/thursdays-top-10-nz-mint-europes-slow-motion-train-wreck-goes-viral-and-global-china-s
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 6:52pm
Viking2

AUSTRALIAN banks are preparing for a potential freeze in global funding markets as Europe’s worsening stresses threaten to send the world’s financial markets into a tailspin. Renewed funding pressures for the big banks, which need to raise $16.3 billion over the next two months, are likely to make it tougher for business and some consumers to access credit.

Finance executives from at least two of Australia’s big banks have reviewed forward funding plans. This has involved shelving scheduled raisings, with the focus to remain on ”opportunistic” fund raisings in US and Australian capital markets.

Australia’s four major banks need to refinance a total of $48 billion in bonds by June next year, according to figures prepared for BusinessDay by Deutsche Bank. Of this, $16 billion needs to be refinanced by the end of January, the figures show.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 7:00pm
Pauleastbay

There come a time for me in every election year when frustration turns to despair and finally to saddness

I have reached the sadness stage. What makes my pre-election sadness so acute is that people who serve as Ministers in a New Zealand governement are granted the title ” The Honourable”. Now I have seen nothing by Goff and the rest of his “friends”, (thats the friends that will stick it to him in about three weeks ) that would even remotely see them deserving of this title.

Our MP’s should be people of some intestinal quality, but I have seen nothing less than school yard bully tactics, immature and desperate and it has dawned again why I loath politicians.

So roll on Saturday, no more desperate grinning fools beaming out from bill boards, I hope the labour party in this present incarnation is bombed back to the stoneage.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 7:03pm
nasska

Apologies if you’ve seen this one before. I posted it a few months ago but the election is in a few days & it will be new to some readers…….

It started out innocently enough. I began to think at parties now and then — just to loosen up.
Inevitably, though, one thought led to another, and soon I was more than just a social thinker.
I began to think alone — “to relax,” I told myself — but I knew it wasn’t true. Thinking became more and more important to me, and finally I was thinking all the time.
That was when things began to sour at home. One evening I had turned off the TV and asked my wife about the meaning of life. She spent that night at her mother’s.
I began to think on the job. I knew that thinking and employment don’t mix, but I couldn’t stop myself.
I began to avoid friends at lunchtime so I could read Thoreau and Kafka. I would return to the office dizzied and confused, asking, “What is it exactly we are doing here?”
One day the boss called me in. He said, “Listen, I like you, and it hurts me to say this, but your thinking has become a real problem. If you don’t stop thinking on the job, you’ll have to find another job.”
This gave me a lot to think about. I came home early after my conversation with the boss. “Honey,” I confess, “I’ve been thinking…”
“I know you’ve been thinking,” she said, “and I want a divorce!”
“But Honey, surely it’s not that serious.”
“It is serious,” she said, and her lower lip began to aquiver. “You think as much as college professors, and college professors don’t make any money, so if you keep on thinking, we won’t have any money!”
“That’s a faulty syllogism,” I said impatiently. She exploded in tears of rage and frustration, but I was in no mood to deal with the emotional drama. “I’m going to the library,” I snarled as I stomped out the door.
I headed for the library, in the mood for some Nietzsche. I roared into the parking lot with NPR on the radio and ran up to the big glass doors. They didn’t open. The library was closed.
To this day, I believe that a Higher Power was looking out for me that night. Leaning on the unfeeling glass, whimpering for Zarathustra, a poster caught my eye, “Friend, is heavy thinking ruining your life?” it asked.
You probably recognize that line. It comes from the standard Thinkers Anonymous poster. Which is why I am what I am today: a recovering thinker.
I never miss a TA meeting. At each meeting we watch a non-educational video; last week it was Porky’s, the week before, it was Animal House.
Then we share experiences about how we avoided thinking since the last meeting. I still have my job, and things are a lot better at home. Life just seemed… easier, somehow, as soon as I stopped thinking.
I think the road to recovery is nearly complete for me.
Today I made the final step. I registered to join the Labour party.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 7:28pm
Elaycee

@nasska – very good.

But, of course anyone referring to Labour’s membership as thinkers, must have a serious lisp! 😛
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 7:34pm
nasska

Elaycee

…”referring to Labour’s membership as thinkers”…..

The word you were looking for is ‘wankers’.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 7:39pm
nasska

Another repost:

An old priest lay dying in hospital. For years, he had faithfully served the people of Auckland. He motioned for his nurse to come near.
“Yes, Father?” she said.
“I would really like to see Phil Goff & Trevor Mallard before I die,” whispered the priest
“I’ll see what I can do, Father,” said the nurse. The nurse sent the request to the House of Representatives & waited for a response.
Soon the word arrived that Phil & Trevor would be delighted to meet the priest.
As they went to the hospital, Phil commented to Trevor: “I don’t know why the old priest would want to meet us, but it certainly might help our images & even get me elected to Prime Minister. Trevor agreed that it was very good especially if they got press coverage.
When they arrived at the hospital bed the old priest took Phil’s hand in his right hand & Trevor’s hand in his left.
There was a silence & the look of serenity on the priest’s face.
Finally Phil spoke. “Father, of all the people you could have chosen why choose us to be with you as you near the end?”
The Old priest replied slowly: “I have always tried to pattern my life after our Lord & Saviour, Jesus Christ.”
“Amen” said Phil.
“Amen” said Trevor.
The old priest continued: “He died between two lying bastards. I would like to do the same…”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 7:48pm
Viking2

http://screencast.com/t/rgeFfzX4p
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:15pm
Viking2

Golf Club Sign

Here is an actual sign posted at a golf club in Scotland :

1. BACK STRAIGHT, KNEES BENT, FEET SHOULDER WIDTH APART.
2. FORM A LOOSE GRIP.
3. KEEP YOUR HEAD DOWN!
4. AVOID A QUICK BACK SWING.
5. STAY OUT OF THE WATER.
6. TRY NOT TO HIT ANYONE.
7. IF YOU ARE TAKING TOO LONG, LET OTHERS GO AHEAD OF YOU
8. DON’T STAND DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF OTHERS.
9. QUIET PLEASE…WHILE OTHERS ARE PREPARING.
10. DON’T TAKE EXTRA STROKES.
WELL DONE.. NOW, FLUSH THE URINAL, GO OUTSIDE, AND TEE OFF
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:16pm
Viking2

Cowboy: GIVE ME 3 PACKETS OF CONDOMS PLEASE.

CASHIER: DO YOU NEED A PAPER BAG WITH THAT SIR?

Cowboy: NAH… SHE AIN’T THAT UGLY!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:16pm
Viking2

For dime

http://upchucky.org/JukeCity/1990/OldJukes/player.htm
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:17pm
Anthony

Did anyone see the story on Campbell Live how the voting form in Epsom is rigged to support Act and National! Beyond belief that they would run a story on something that can be entirely explained by simple process rules – candidates listed by alphabetical order by surname and where they are independent no party name is shown!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:20pm
Lindsay Addie

Anthony, I watched and listened to that story about the Epsom voting paper and was left shaking my head. What a load of crap.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:28pm
Mike Readman

Does the Police Minister do ANYTHING at all? If not, why do we have one? If so, what is it???
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:29pm
nasska

People learn from history.

Which is why you should always delete it.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:34pm
Elaycee

“I watched and listened to that story about the Epsom voting paper and was left shaking my head. What a load of crap.”

The problem can easily be solved by using the thing with several coloured and numbered buttons on it. Its called the TV remote.

TV3 – gone!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 8:48pm
ste3e

Joseph Carpenter

What about CGT on shares and businesses?

Viking2 @ 6.40

Agree entirely.

The rest

White noise. An insult is not an argument. And an insult from one who cannot make an argument is not worth worrying about.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 24, 2011 11:01pm
Joseph Carpenter

Ste3e what about them?
Shares: total turnover for 2010 = $19.1 billion, what of capital gains? assume on average shares held one year, all sales are gains (no losses), average gain, NZX All Index @ 31/12/2009 = 3242.6 and at 31/12/2010 = 3347.6, i.e for 2010 shares gained 3.2%. Therefore the total CGT @ 15% for 2010 would be around
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 25, 2011 3:58am
Joseph Carpenter

Sorry comment reloaded.
Therefore the total CGT @ 15% for 2010 shares would have been around $92 million (and 2010 was a good year, probably on average will be a loss for 2011, CGT on shares = $0. Which highlights another huge problem with a CGT – it’s extremely variable, worse than Company tax even. As an example 8% of Spain’s tax revenue came from CGT in 2010 and in 2011 they will extremely likely incur a loss which has totally rooted the Government finances, the country is now in real peril of sovereign default). Also most share turnover is by traders who ALREADY PAY CGT. Possible new nett gain from wider net I would estimate at only $30 million.

Private business sales: hard to say here, the latest figure I can find is $3.9 billion total sales turnover from IRD for 2008. Lets be very generous and say $4.2 billion turnover for 2010, that the average capital gain was 100% and only 25% fell under the small business exemption: therefore total CGT raised would be approx $236 million. There would also be a huge problem actually enforcing this part of CGT. Plus of course depending on the structure again some will be deemed to be trading and thus already paying CGT.

So we would have got around 270 mil (property) + 30 mil (shares) + 200 mil (private business) – 100 mil (admin cost) = approx $400 million would have been raised in 2010 if already fully implemented. Not $4000 million+. And 2010 was a reasonably good year, 2011 would have probably raised only $50 million. You’re a full order of magnitude out (x10). And thats not even accounting for the tax avoidance and negative effects – which will be huge, the CGT would be the most complex and difficult tax to administer by far – and the more room for smart lawyers, accountants, businesses, individuals, etc to get loopholes. And ignoring of course the biggest degrading effect – lock in – which will be massive at 15%.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 25, 2011 5:03am
leftyliberal

IMO CGT is better billed per-annum (i.e. indexed against average government bond return) – pay CGT if your return from the asset is less than the government rate. Pay income tax if it’s more.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 25, 2011 8:21am

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Karl du Fresne on TV3

Goff lies over Police »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.3K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Links

Professor Jerry Coyne: Move over, modern medicine - it’s time to collaborate with Rongo? M?ori
Breaking Views
In politics, imitation is the only form of flattery
Point of Order
Woman of the day
Hompaddock
How The MSM Lost People’s Trust
No Minister
Bill Maher on the election and “progressophobia”
Utopia
THE BIG DAY
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
Is David Seymour’s new school lunch provider involved with Christchurch Uni mass poisoning?
The Daily Blog
Open mike 05/11/2024
The Standard
Sabotaging justice
No Right Turn
What would Sumner say about Trump and Vance’s pro-tariff rhetoric?
Not PC
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
NZ media’s “propagandisation” of the US Election
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
US military-industrial-sports complex.
Kiwipolitico
The Battle for Democracy
NZCPR
Pretty (il)legal
Croaking Cassandra
Where are the food carts?
Offsetting Behaviour
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d