Hard News: Yes we canny
146 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
What I DO mind is a party - any party but in this case it happens to be Labour - decides to simply take some of my money and give it to someone else, in exchange for that persons vote. From my perspective that's what happened with WFF.
Yes. This isn't new though - we've had family assistance, Muldoon and superannuation promises etc. WFF is more of that.
At least what the Herald called 'pork' isn't really pork as you'd see it overseas, where it literally does buy the votes of elected representatives.
Personally once the money leaves my pay cheque and goes to the government, I don't regard it 'mine' anymore. It's the governments. I think tax cuts are as much buying votes with government money as WFF.
-
Yes. This isn't new though - we've had family assistance, Muldoon and superannuation promises etc. WFF is more of that.
I know its not new - what I object to is being told that WFF is the socio-economic dike straining to hold back a torrent of poverty and famine instead of a largely superfluous election year bribe.
Personally once the money leaves my pay cheque and goes to the government, I don't regard it 'mine' anymore.
I wonder if you'll feel the same way once the Nats start handing out wheel-barrows of your former cash to private prisons, hospitals, schools and whoever else writes Key a big check in the next few months.
-
After venturing that "even $70,000 is a modest income these days"
Off in fucking la-la land.
It's hard to imagine any of New Zealand's major papers running this rather witheringly accurate piece, which, I guess, just shows how out-of-touch they are.
-
"even $70,000 is a modest income these days"
So modest that only 11% of the population earn more, according to the latest data.
-
Please Miss, if Russell's not allowed to say "butt" for "bum", then Danyl is not allowed to write "check" for "cheque".
I'm culturally offended, Miss.
-
Special education gets a desperately-needed boost with an additional $18.4 million over four years for students with high needs.
It irks me the way they frame that increase in funding, though. To wit:
This initiative, which is demand-driven, increases the number of students provided for by the Ongoing and Reviewable Resourcing Schemes (ORRS) from 6,700 students in 2007/08 to 6,950 students in 2008/09. (my emphasis)
In theory ORRS funding should be bottomless: so long as your child fits the criteria, the funding should be provided. Now they're not saying that they're relaxing the criteria, just that they're providing for more children, which means (as well we know) that currently the ministry is not fulfilling its obligations. I welcome the extra money but it's still galling that so many eligible kids are made to miss out.
More good news on the special eds funding not covered in the press release you linked to, Russell: 14.2 million over four years for non-ministry ORRS providers, 2.67 million in extra money for teacher aide support for students with high health needs, 2.4 million to maintain "maintain levels of learning support for students with physical disabilities" and 6.1 million for the visually impaired.
-
Yeah well..*.shamelessly lifted from The Standard* Peters' post budget address...:
Did you know that John Key himself in his Wellington parliamentary office employs has 36 people?… they cost the taxpayer, every year… over seven million dollars… Teams of PR people and spin doctors and policy advisers and what for? There is no policy! …
That had better not be spent just on salaries...because that would be in the out of touch zone.
-
At least what the Herald called 'pork' isn't really pork as you'd see it overseas, where it literally does buy the votes of elected representatives.
No, overseas (and here, one hopes) "buying" the votes of elected representatives is called bribery, influence peddling, etc. 'Pork' is when elected representatives engage in "government spending for projects that are intended primarily to benefit particular constituents or campaign contributors". In other countries, it's called patronage but that's a whole other barrel of over-salted meat.
-
Thank you for mentioning that giovanni.
2.67 million in extra money for teacher aide support for students with high health needs, 2.4 million to maintain "maintain levels of learning support for students with physical disabilities"
As a parent of a child who receives ORRS funding...and whose child requires a teacher aide this is indeed good news. I wonder if it will allow my son to attend school on a full time basis...or if I will be required to pay for the extra aide time as is expected now.
-
A S,
So modest that only 11% of the population earn more, according to the latest data.
Which to be fair, is a fair bit higher than the 5% of the population who got hit with the 39c rate when it first came in. It does suggest that based on the link you provided, having the top tax threshhold kick in at 100k would effectively capture the highest earning 5%.... Which would maintain alignment with the original premise for the additional tax on high earners.
Just in terms of the whole cuts in services bogeyman that seems to be constantly raised when anyone talks about national policies, in the education sector, Chris Carter talked about how school funding has increased by 80% since 1999. My question is, at what point should the general public start expecting to see some returns on this investment in terms of a greater proportion of kids leaving school who are equipped to onto further study (or at the very least being able to read and write)?
Has the extra investment in health cut waiting lists as much as the increase in $ might have led people to expect? I don't know the answer to this, but again, perhaps it is relevant to wonder at what point should people start to feel like they are contributing to solving problems, rather than throwing money into an apparent black hole?
I wouldn't have that many begrudge extra spending/tax if it actually delivers (reduced waiting lists, kids succeeding at school, kids with special needs getting the support they need to be able to participate etc.)
Might the whole tax cut thing at heart boil down to the concern that in a lot of areas, progress in addressing issues has been quite a bit less than might have expected for the amount of investment that has been made?
-
I wonder if it will allow my son to attend school on a full time basis...or if I will be required to pay for the extra aide time as is expected now.
Quite. The extra 18 mil for ORRS is supposed to add 250 kids to the scheme, but makes no mention of the fact that the 6,700 students currently on it are not fully funded, and schools and parents have to fork out the difference.
-
A S,
D'oh. That second to last para should read:
I wouldn't have thought that many begrudge extra spending....
-
Yeah well..*.shamelessly lifted from The Standard* Peters' post budget address...:
Did you know that John Key himself in his Wellington parliamentary office employs has 36 people?… they cost the taxpayer, every year… over seven million dollars… Teams of PR people and spin doctors and policy advisers and what for? There is no policy! …
Hmm, so John Key's happy to promise to slash the number of beaurocrats, yet also be surrounded by dozens of flunkies? I doubt he'll put his money where his mouth is and cut the number of people on his office staff.
-
...but hasn't Three News and Campbell Live been finding recently that dumbing down is doing it no good in the ratings?
I've been baffled by Campbell Live's recent dip into dumbed down articles as well. Campbell himself looks uncomfortable presenting them; he puts on a facial expression that suggests he knows it's a crap story, but that it's been foisted on him and he knows it's crap, but has to just trudge on stoically.
-
I know National hasn't released any policy announcements yet (I find it annoying, but hey)...but have I missed all the major policy announcements from any of the other parties?
NZ first,ACT,Greens and Maori(partially)and United Future have all rolled out policy .The transcript from Parliament yesterday should help give an idea. It appears that all t'other parties are aware that policy is helpful to my vote at least.
-
Thanks Sofie, so it appears I have missed them...*blush*...
-
In theory ORRS funding should be bottomless: so long as your child fits the criteria, the funding should be provided.
Cannot agree with this enough. I'm looking at this ORS funding release, wondering if it'll get my daughter her itinerant back, and thinking probably 'fat chance'.
-
Question: do cuts to benefits (unmoved, inflation adjusted, since the Richardson budget of 1991), while cutting taxes for the rich, constitute a successful Labour Government budget?
-
Answer: winning is everything.
-
The Maori Party delivers a take on the budget that makes more sense than all the noise I'm hearing in the papers and airwaves.
-
My question is, at what point should the general public start expecting to see some returns on this investment in terms of a greater proportion of kids leaving school who are equipped to onto further study (or at the very least being able to read and write)?
Our best students are amongst the best in the world, and getting better. Our problem is the similarly-sized group at the other end of the scale (~8%) who aren't attaining at the lowest level.
But even so, New Zealand students outperform the OECD average at every attainment benchmark. In maths, the proportion of students who achieved at the high or very high benchmarks increased by about a quarter between 1994 and 2005, and the number that failed to achieve the low benchmark fell.
The improvement was more significant in science, where the proportion of students failing to meet the low benchmark halved to around 8% between 1994 and 2005.
And the average length of time New Zealand students stay in education ("school life expectancy") increased sharply between 1999 and 2005.
I'm sure there's more, but you get the picture.
Sources here, here, here and here.
Has the extra investment in health cut waiting lists as much as the increase in $ might have led people to expect?
Despite their prominence in the media and in political spin, elective surgery waiting lists are not the only health benchmark, and I think that's not actually where the greater part of the expenditure has gone.
-
I wonder if you'll feel the same way once the Nats start handing out wheel-barrows of your former cash to private prisons, hospitals, schools and whoever else writes Key a big check in the next few months.
I don't like a number of things that the government does with money that it takes off me in taxation. That doesn't mean that it suddenly becomes 'my' money again just because I don't like where it's going.
We cede direct control over money once we live in a country that taxes it off us. We are left with indirect control through elections, lobbying, public opinion, select committee processes etc etc etc. Surely that's at the philosophical basis of a representative government.
-
A S,
Good points Russell.
I'd also suggest having a look at the school leaver stats that you'll also find on the education counts site, they don't make for such rosy reading.
Table 2 effectively says that in 2005, 28% of school leavers had less than level 1 NCEA, and in 2006, 24% of school leavers had less than level 1 NCEA. Neither of those is a particularly great achievement.
In Table 3, it shows that 45% of Maori school leavers left with less than level 1 NCEA in 2006, as did 32% of Pacific school leavers.
You'lll also note that the stats are trending downwards (and in fact they were when National was in too), but the question remains, at what point can the public legitimately start expecting to feel that they are getting a good return for their tax dollars? If Carter was right, funding has increased by 80%, whereas school outcomes haven't improved by a similar margin.
As to health waiting lists, I suspect that a similar question remains. Do people feel that the multi-billion increase in investment is bearing fruit? If not, is there a problem?
Again, I'd suggest that no-one really begrudges paying tax if it leads to improvements, is perhaps the issue around tax cuts simply a reflection that people don't feel that their contribution to making NZ a better place to live (via tax) isn't being well spent?
-
Campbell himself looks uncomfortable presenting them; he puts on a facial expression that suggests he knows it's a crap story, but that it's been foisted on him and he knows it's crap, but has to just trudge on stoically.
Exactly, I don't expect Paul Henry to do anything other than masturbate on air, so it doesn't shock me when Clark and Key on Breakfast is the televisual equivalent of warterboarding. Campbell can do a lot better than he did last night, and like you I just can't fathom WTF is going on. But a steady diet of dumbed down Campbell, Duncan Garner's increasingly desperate 'gotcha' non-reporting etc. isn't closing the deal.
-
I don't expect Paul Henry to do anything other than masturbate on air, so it doesn't shock me when Clark and Key on Breakfast is the televisual equivalent of warterboarding
Honestly, Craig, sometimes I wished you stopped sugarcoating your opinions and started telling us how you really feel.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.