OnPoint: Budget 2010: What’d you expect?
275 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 11 Newer→ Last
-
I can’t get worked up about the Bryers sentence, because the charges he was facing were relatively minor ones. The court never realistically had the option of imposing a savage sentence on him. But the SFO is looking into the collapse of Blue Chip, so there may be more to come.
As for the Budget, at a personal level I am considerably better off, being within the higher tax bracket. But I’m also expecting childcare costs to go up. While we will be able to afford that increase, I know plenty of other parents who will struggle. With ACC levies increasing, GST going up and the emission trading scheme kicking in, I suspect those at the bottom will not feel any better off.
The money will be useful, though I don’t feel that happy about those who are missing out.
Those on $150,000 are, rarely, working by the hour, sure some may charge billable hours but those hours are so ridiculously expensive they cant work the 9 to 5 shift without embarrassment, so they have long working lunches and expense accounts to ease the pain. Poor dears.
You forgot the bit about eating babies
Eating babies is just so last year. Pickled kakapo is the only dish for the serious connoisseur.
-
I didn't put it that way, PJ did, which I found after you mentioned it.
Anyway, I did a good job of deflecting aye? You can tell me to fuck off now too if it makes you feel better. I'm just waiting for Craig to do the same.
-
Pickled kakapo is the only dish for the serious connoisseur.
Guess I'm not up there with the great and the good then. I prefer simpler fare, such as tuatara eggs on a bed of Cyathea dealbata - obviously served by the poor (when they're not too busy rorting the welfare system. Because that's what they all do.)
Edit: Oh very well, here's a '/sarcasm'.
-
No, because these people, the non-aspirational, are the problem. They're not getting rich and wonderful. They're not people, in the sense that media needs people it can identify with.
can we have their oxygen then, please...
those guys working on converting sewerage to biodiesel are smart cookies.
converting pipes n drains to fuel,
now that is clever...
:- )re NZ borrowing... this $240 million NZ borrows every week, some naive questions perhaps,
but...
who do we borrow it from?
and where do they get it from?
and how much is the interest?
and why aren't we all tightening our belts more?and can I have one of these 190,000 new jobs ...please
-
Like kiwi, kakapo seem to leave an unpleasant earthy aftertaste - heavy pickling as described above is a great idea - we prefer the 'stone soup' method and indeed eventually found that leaving out the kiwi or kakapo provides the best tasting pickled ground fowl
-
Eating babies is just so last year. Pickled kakapo is the only dish for the serious connoisseur.
what happened to the Black Robin Egg Omelette?
-
Don't they only go black if you overcook them?
-
I didn't put it that way, PJ did
But you laughed!
Look, I'm not trying to pick fights, just expressing dismay. And it's been a very long week of dealing with the aforementioned public services, so the disconnect between the commentary and reality seems particularly strident.
-
Not at you Gio. In spite of what you might think, or my words might imply, I do empathise with your situation. I have not said, I don't think, that I support the measures this government has made in this regard, in fact in many cases the opposite. My position is that while I voted for it, this is not what I had hoped for.
If there was a way I could reverse the tax cut in order to maintain the services you and many others have lost, I would gladly do it, although I suspect Craig, and others, will think me disingenuous. Whatever.
Wishing you well.
Jack -
It seems that the whole underlying premise of this budget (and many others before it) is: 'What tax cuts can we give to make us more popular?' and then the next step is to look at the services that have to be cut to fit the tax take (give or take a few billion).
imho, it should be the other way around, i.e. 'What public services are appropriate to provide?' and then look at what level of taxation is needed to fund those services.
As with Stephen above, I was hit with the 39% rate that Cullen introduced, and didn't have a problem with it. For me, lower taxes is not the end objective, but creating a society that respects and provides for those less well off is what we should be aiming for.
-
For me, lower taxes is not the end objective, but creating a society that respects and provides for those less well off is what we should be aiming for.
I dispute that it's just the less well off who benefit. Suppose you found that your child was autistic: even if you're on a pretty good income, having to pay out of your pocket for all the services she isn't receiving is going to peg your income down a notch or two. Hey, didn't we all hustle for Russell because he could use the cash? And you could say the Rae-Browns are probably not amongst the least well off.
It's about social insurance, spreading the risk and the benefit. It's not charity.
-
Mike: I'll go one further - I welcomed my 39% marginal rate (it was less that what I was paying in California) and happily pay it, I believe in a progressive tax system.
For years my accountant has been trying to sell me on various ways to avoid paying tax at that rate, mostly because my wife and I own a company - so far I've resisted for purely ideological reasons - and today there was spam from the accountancy firm in my inbox talking about how I should change my affairs to make the best of the new tax regime ....
-
Gio - totally agree with you. My poor choice of words when trying to put something succintly - the 'less well off' was meant to imply something more than just financial.
Edit: and that sounds sort of patronising, but hopefully you'll forgive my poor vocab.
-
I'll echo that sentiment.
There is this ridiculous portrayal of tax as something evil that must be minimised. Whereas the truth is tax is what we as a society agree to pay to the government to allow the government to do things we can't effectively do ourselves. eg pay for a police force, pay for a public health system, pay for a free education system.
Taxation is good because it allows the government to buy things we simply could not buy as individuals.
If as a society decide we want and need better health care then increasing taxation to achieve that is the right and proper thing to do.
It is complete nonsense to argue we should try and reduce tax when the evidence of the last century is that those nations that embraced the value of tax and the benefits of government spending are the nations with the best standard of living.
As for that 39% bracket - of course those that earn the most should and will pay more tax. Keith's last analysis showed quite clearly that the tax system as it was meant the richest people who earned 40% of the income paid 40% of the tax. I doubt that is true any more.
-
what happened to the Black Robin Egg Omelette?
Don't they only go black if you overcook them?
That's the difficulty. If you get them wrong they taste bitter. My personal Michelin-rated chef says the secret is in to sprinkle a little gold dust into the mixture before you heat it.
-
Try them sous vide. Beautiful!
-
It is complete nonsense to argue we should try and reduce tax when the evidence of the last century is that those nations that embraced the value of tax and the benefits of government spending are the nations with the best standard of living.
With the exception of Singapore? Although the compulsory savings help the equation a little bit.
Mind you, they do understand the benefit of government spending, particular as their government has the luxury of actually having money to spend.
-
I do have to agree with my fellow plutocrats that eating babies is overrated.
The children of the undeserving poor are so malnourished these days that they are either quite flavourless, or having been fed or a steady diet of junk food since birth, tend to leave a slightly chemical aftertaste, and give one gas.
I suspect that with the increase in gst, this situation will only get worse as more families struggle to put the wholesome, nutritious food on the table that is required to produce the delicious nippers I have come to expect. Still, one has one's crosses.
-
If as a society decide we want and need better health care then increasing taxation to achieve that is the right and proper thing to do.
To be fair, though: Rob might respond that cutting taxes is the way to increase tax receipts, and Treasury projects that this will happen in three years' time. I have my doubts, I'd also point out that it's been tried before, but hey, it's impossible to be sure in advance. The thing that angers me is that the ground for the cuts was prepared by cutting a lot of jobs and services - many through attrition, therefore by stealth - for a supposed gain we might see in a few years' time, when the economy might have recovered all on its own anyhow, and this simple fact - and the material difference it has made in people's lives - is simply omitted from the discussion. And so Rob can go on National Radio and give his view from the right - to which he's more than entitled - and who sits on the other chair? Fran Freaking O'Sullivan. That is simply inexcusable.
-
I'd also point out that it's been tried before
Doing the same thing and expecting different results ... isn't that definition of something or other...
-
There's a Neil Gaiman short story invovling a society of extreme gastronomes (Sunbird) that I think mentions Kakapo in passing. I forget if there is a preparation method.
-
I forget if there is a preparation method.
Ah, I see what you did there....
-
So who's going to be more productive on October 2nd then? All of us, right? And we're all going to make more money straight away yeah? So tax receipts go up? Right? Guys?
-
There is this ridiculous portrayal of tax as something evil that must be minimised. Whereas the truth is tax is what we as a society agree to pay to the government to allow the government to do things we can't effectively do ourselves
Gordon Campbell makes the excellent point that [a]s for attracting prize immigrants, our stoic faith in the 1980s notion that tax cutting results in sustainable economic growth will probably deter as many bright people as it attracts. The rest of the world got over its brief fling with voodoo economics a long time ago.
He's got something there. When the only country in the OECD with a lower tax burden than NZ is Mexico, and still we're being told that we must cut taxes, it points to some interesting absence of lateral thinking on the part of our politicians. If taxes are what holds an economy back, we should be going absolutely gang-busters. Instead we're trailing the OECD on most of their other measures of economic performance. Maybe Key has realised that the only OECD ranking at which we have any shot of being number one is the lowest tax burden, and he's acting accordingly?
-
So who's going to be more productive on October 2nd then? All of us, right? And we're all going to make more money straight away yeah? So tax receipts go up? Right? Guys?
F**kin' stepchanges, how do they work?
(Poss NSFW for language, obviously)
Post your response…
This topic is closed.