an automatic pension being paid to anyone aged 65+, funded by general taxation by a shrinking workforce (notwithstanding those over 65 still paying tax) is going to put immense strain on government coffers in coming decades.
But won't the people paid this pension be spending it back into the economy?
It's not like they are getting it and going out the back and burning it in the incinerator or in some other way taking it out of circulation...
There are sections of the NZ populace where welfare is a way of life and is intergenerational- however that runs alongside the intergenerational mismanagement of the economy and general lack of gumption by successive government starting, in my view, from 1984.
The problem presently is the economy - when the economy is in growth mode there is sufficient cake to meet the Nat Super other benefits without having to tinker.
Of all the benefits the DPB is the one that people - other than short-term unemployment - - spend the least amount of time on.
We have an election on and the hate and self-righteousness is bubbling to surface. It is not as if either a Labour or National Government will do anything, except tread water and pursue a ideologically driven agenda, until the economy improves of its own accord.
Phil Goof has balls - apparently - I haven't seen them - and he has after two or more decades learnt his lesson on Asset Sales - John Key smiles relentlessly and hasn't learnt his lesson from assets sales.
Phil wants CGT - John doesn't.
Phil will raise the Nat Super entitlement age over a long time - John won't.
That is about all there is - pretty lack lustre – Phil Will & John Won’t.
People put too much faith in politicians - they both blow.
...borrow and spend, borrow and spend.
I'll plant the tree, you make the book and we can both be happy :)
But won’t the people paid this pension be spending it back into the economy?It’s not like they are getting it and going out the back and burning it in the incinerator or in some other way taking it out of circulation…
A point that is sadly lost on the beneficiary bashers.
There are sections of the NZ populace where welfare is a way of life and is intergenerational
Farming, the banks, Telecom, Air NZ - that sort of thing? You did mean corporate welfare - the really expensive kind?
But won’t the people paid this pension be spending it back into the economy?
It’s not like they are getting it and going out the back and burning it in the incinerator or in some other way taking it out of circulation…
True, but with NZ's persistent current account deficit (which will get significantly worse if we go ahead with planned asset sales), much of this money will be flowing overseas.
Another point is the opportunity cost of money that could be spent elsewhere by the government - if nothing else, consider the impact of pension payments taking an ever-large slice of the fiscal pie to the detriment of everything else.
Farming, the banks, Telecom, Air NZ – that sort of thing? You did mean corporate welfare – the really expensive kind?
Yep, it's funny how 'welfare' = DPB & unemployment benefits in common usage - it now has a very narrow definition. Kind of the opposite of 'political correctness' which has grown to engulf everything anyone doesn't like, for whatever reason.
Yeah add NZ Bus to that
Intergenerational mismanagement it is a pretty wide catchment- everything gets sold off and phucked over, some of it gets bailed out and bought back other bits just rort the subsidy gravy train and never have to open up their books or deliver an effective service – they just chug along .
The working person pays for it in rates and taxes and user pays.
Can't wait for them to do PPP with schools - go hard.
Look at how ruthless Labour were with power generation and how little they did to secure the rights of working people in their term. They even voted to exclude some classes of drivers from the meal break legislation.
It really doesn't matter who the Govt is - the agenda is implemented and you are on the receiving end.
Tell me how can a poor man stand such times and live?
You really vote not to support one but to keep the other out.
Vote out Nacts to prevent ASSET sales.
Vote in Labour & cohorts (because it will be cohorts) and at least look at a revivifyed Superann & fiscally responsible endeavour.
Can I tell you how much I truely, viscerally HATE Muldoon & his Nat government?
I think he totally stuffed/his government stuffed/ our futures way back then.
ANYBODY who voted Nat in that election should strew themselves in ashes and slink off into the dark. Because that was when the pole-axing was done.
As well, anyone who profited from asset sales at later dates is also in the evil basket. Suck it up, shits-
Islander: Contact is looking an new parts of the Clutha to dam, old plans are being dusted off, etc etc - if we sell Contact to the highest bidder who's going to protect our valleys for the next generations
(besides it's time some of those North Island rivers were dammed for a change - how about the Whanaganui, a nice high dam would go down well, and you wouldn't lose a third of the energy getting it across Cook Straight)
If you want more electricity Comalco's up for sale - buy that and shut it down it might be cheaper than building new dams, or the Clyde dam fit generators to those incomplete penstocks and only run them when the wind isn't blowing
Fuck o dear – okay my language deteriorates the more my heart is engaged/enraged- I thought we had fought these battles – and WON them in the 1970s/80s-
The Comalco thing has always bewildered me: what pollies got paid off for what?
Because sure as shit ANZ lost out, in all ways (especially environmetally) and hasnt gained much-
the country buying back our own resource is bloody sick but buying it & shutting the phuque thing down, may be a Very Good Idea-
The only thing about that is that the world will keep using aluminium. If Tiwai Pt closes, then the production may be taken up by a fossil fueled smelter in China or Australia and world CO2 production will actually increase.
It can be seen as a way of exporting sustainable electricity.
We can actually get to 100% sustainable electricity (including Comalco) just by building *some* of the identified, current technology renewable sources, which would stand us in very good stead for future crises. Selling the power companies takes us in utterly the wrong direction, of course.
We are talking wind/wave tech?
Selling power companies? = utter stupidity - but fun& games for merchantbanker types...
the slogan used to be "kill all the lawyers" (thanks Bill!) but I'd disagree with that: the rule of Law (rather than temperamental monarchs, oligarchs or - worst!- religious cretins) is our best bet as a species - in as long as it has democratic input & direction.
Kill all the merchant bankers etc. has considerable appeal -especially if you stuffed their overstuffed pillows with a botulist blight (this IS a metaphor.)
I don’t agree with you – there has never been any detailed analysis of Think Big effect. One view is that if NZ had not thunk big the balance of payments problem in the late 1980s would have been devastating to the economy with out the income derived from the think big projects.
The thing that just is not on anyones radar this election cycle, is the economic elephant in the room, the amount of the deficit (current account) that results from flow of income to the Aussie owned banks. During the late 1990s it was around a third and on the cusp of the GFC, 2008, it was around 2/3rds or more. The term for this is the “investment income imbalance” – so rather than have interest and banking charges reinvetested by locally owned bank we send it overseas.
Part of what is holding back NZ’s economy is that the Australain banks don’t see us as good a proposition at present and they are limiting their exposure to our percieved bad risk and so the lending that drives the economy is not as it was. Interest and other charges being paid to Australlian bankers does not need to get reinvested in NZ as far as the OZ banks are concerned.
This is not an issue for either main party – it is an issue that is affecting most NZers – but it just doesn’t rate. What we are going through is a settling period as we move to a lower level of economic activity and lower standard of living. It doesn’t matter to either party as, face it, they do well regardless of whether the economy is going up or down one of them wins and pursues its agenda – a good punt for doing sweet FA and patting yourself on the back.
But by all means argue over Phil Will and John Won’t or John Will and Phil Done it Already.
Can’t wait to see the fabric of NZ devasted further by PPP in schools and all manner of things – We will move to a more defined and unequal split two tier society. Not that this will worry Labour or National that much - they will do what they have always done since the mid 1980s and that is look after number one.
Frankly, your comments are nonsensical as far as I am concerned. And, you still still sound/write as a non-Anzer. I dont apologise for this inference.
Simple form - it is the economy and not much is being done about it or will be done about it regardless of the election result.
Let's wait and see-
They've operated under an increasingly low tax environment post Rogernomics
Someone pointed out on Twitter that the top tax rate alongside Muldoon's non-means-tested super scheme was 66%. Funnily enough the 1984 government halved the tax but not the retirement package.
Intriguing (with the usual Twitter facts grain of salt etc etc).
And unfortunately just another example of how the "boomer" generation (many of whom are dear people I love BTW!) have dealt themselves into an absolute sweetspot - slash back their tax contribution to Government revenue but continue to spend Government funds like they haven't and mortgage the entire mess out a generation or two. Superannuation is the obvious face of that, but it goes a little wider and deeper.
Someone pointed out on Twitter that the top tax rate alongside Muldoon’s non-means-tested super scheme was 66%. Fu
I paid that phuquing tax for the one time in my life I earned a really large amount of $$$ (for me.)(And for the next two years of my highest earning period.) I’ve have never earned anything like it since. I have never been a participant in any return (e.g health/ ANYTHING else) since.
Am I sour about this?
When people start accusing people of my generation of free-loading, I think of my $160,000 plus tax bill, and think “You are know-nothing fucking wankers.”
When my eyesight deteriorated dramatically, because of cataracts, I could not obtain a place on the public list for over a year – despite my opthalmologist saying I was in the highest category, and was unfit to drive. (If you live in a remote area, being able to drive is an absolute necessity.) I had to pay (roughly $5000) for a private operation for my dominant eye. I still cannot afford the 2nd operation.
with the usual Twitter facts grain of salt etc etc)
It's a dead straight fact, that one. Just hadn't seen the connection made so clearly.
See my post above. There are *always* a large number of exceptions.
That there was a 66% top tax rate when Superannuation was introduced is what it is.
It didnt translate to any benefit (especially including the timing of The Pension) for people like me.
A lot of us are actually in the lose/lose generation, and we will continue to remind others of this.
Let’s wait and see-
weight and sea
rimes with anchors
slime n ankles
way dandy sieze
crimes that rankle
whey dance seed
cries spilt milk
I'll do the right
thing and retire
with this great
Shaun Tan book
its like Frans Masereel
& Jim Woodring
& Leunig had
a dream baby
and like nothing
else as well...
I enjoin you to
seek and enjoy