Posts by Gareth Ward
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Nah mate, no slight taken, I'm just failing at le jokes...
-
A capital gains tax on property speculators? Bring it on!
Do you mean an equally applied capital gains tax across all investment asset classes?
-
In due respect, where was Micheal Cullen warning NZers to tighten their belts when it was blindingly obvious that this was all coming to a head?
Really? I remember him commenting it on it a number of times, plus that whole setup the Cullen Fund, Kiwisaver and run big surpluses schtick he had going on.
And frankly I don't want my Minister of Finance telling me how to spend my money. -
The alternative, since Key's going to play around with it, is to remove the tax incentives that make housing so appealing... How does the PAS crowd feel about that?
Do it. I'm all for simple, level tax fields...
-
Stewart - the implicit suggestion that I'm NOT a kiwi in the street is going to make my walk home difficult =>
I'm not a poll-watcher like many on here but given the huge swings we've seen in recent ones, and the significant percentages of undecided/not-voting people that get removed from those polls, I can't see how the result can be as solid as you suggest?
-
I said:
Forcing the fund to invest in NZ isn't about the current crises of course. It's a permanent decision for a very very long term fund to be investing in such a way.
From Stuff re the 40% plan: "Mr Key said it would help to ease recession"
OK, if that's true then I'm (yet again) incredibly disappointed - stop fucking with long-term savings, retirement and innovation policies in the name of short term economic conditions or tax breaks!!!!!
These things need careful thought, good planning and stability to be useful... -
It's reasonably pricey - $150 for up to 500 slides, I think. But *so* worth it, if you're into that stuff.
Completely agree - thanks for the info.
-
anyone who thinks the Cullen Fund wasn't a "political plaything" from it's inception is being a wee bit naive
Well it's certainly true that I'm a wee bit naive, but I'm not so sure. I will conceed that there may been some element of "good politics" in it's initial creation but it was intentionally setup in such a way as to not be politically charged once it was running.
-
Paul you've raised some very interesting points there - personally I hope the way around it is VC funds setting themselves up in such a way that multiple Kiwisaver fund can invest 1% of theirs funds under management. As such they expose themselves to some upside growth without risking it all, and we get professional VC organisations with decent funds to run the 1-succeeds, 2-do-okay, 7-fail model...
Then you have Kiwisaver funds like Fisher Funds who are that level above VC but still actively and specifically investing in small businesses. The more of them we have in this economy the better.
I agree that the NZSF shouldn't be playing much in that sort of market though...
-
I agree in general with Gordon Campbell there Russell - National has recently put themselves out of the running for me because of the mentality that runs counter to establishing an innovative, export-focussed, sustainable economy in the medium-term. Labour ain't doing a great job in that realm, but when you compare the policy positions they seem to be the lesser evil.
But I'm not so sure that this Super Fund policy is quite in the same vein - there is certainly an argument (which would come from the Skilling's and the Weldon's) that actively encouraging NZ investment is a longer-term play. Of course Weldon runs the capital market that will receive much of that but the argument still stands.