Posts by Paul Williams
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The Cullen Fund isn't there to prop up our economy, it's there to ensure that we can afford to have an aging, retired population in 20, 30, 40 years' time. Propping up NZ's under-performing markets isn't compatible with that goal.
That's certainly been my understanding. Forecast growth in dependency/worker ratios means we either pay more for benefits or we require people to save more; it is a zero-sum game isn't it?
But then if our problem is also about growth, is relying on foreign capital alone going work? I don't see how that doesn't put pressure on the interest and exchange rates and on the balance of payments? Key's talked about PPPs, or at least hinted at them, I understand that it leverage's whatever modest funds government might have but the experience in Australia is mixed plus there's a growing body of commentary that suggests the model's broken - at least the Macquarie model anyway.
What to do?
-
Late to party, you all been talking about National's plan to mandate 40 per cent domestic investments right... just thought you might be interested to note that the Australia Future Fund posted only 1.5 per cent growth for 07/08 (CPI was 4.5) compared with 7.4 per cent in the previous year... perhaps John know's better however as they have only 9 per cent domestic holdings (excluding cash and Telstra - the latter which is in escrow so can't be counted on the same basis as other holdings) compared with roughly 20 in global equities.
Former Treasurer Peter Costello changed the tax rules back in 06/07 to encourage additional contributions of up to $1million. I can't say he's feeling happy - nor are those who'd planned to retire soon. Frankly, though none of this was completely foreseeable, it does raise fundamental concerns with Key's approach. How are politicians qualified to manage your super? How will they manage the need for infrastructure growth compared with investment returns?
-
Wishart will surely run out o adjectives when the Rapture arrives (in a couple o hours, innit?)
Other than "ouch, ouchy, it burns, it burns"?
<link-whoring>How's this for dubious but, games the fundies play where the unbelievers get toasted</link-whoring>
-
One NZ University and direct the marketing budget to the Library.
One of the many things that I like about Lincoln is that it is (was?) the only university in New Zealand where the oldest and grandest building on campus wasn't the VC's office and admin, it is the Library. As it damn well should be!
-
Re Wishart
His teaser mp3 indicates that it's a passport scandalDamn, I had money on it being The Rapture.
-
(In any case, I was mostly referring to a Terry Pratchett quote which asserts that multiple exclamation marks are "a sure sign of someone who wears his underpants on his head".)
Hah! I'd not heard this; good funny!
-
Rodney was a University Lecturer at Lincoln (yes it is although I'm not sure that it should be a Uni) in economics.
<sensitive>You think a country dependent on agri-business can't justify a specialist agri-business University? Why not? If it's economies of scale, I can understand, but Lincoln's got some of the country's (world's) leading research scientists doing precisely the research we need to add-value to our otherwise commodity-based exports.</sensitive>
Disclaimer: I briefly worked at Lincoln in the '90s.
-
__I could be wrong - I can't think where I heard this - but don't a lot of advocates for a capital gains tax often suggest the first property be exempt? Start buying and selling multiple properties and yeah, the onus goes on you to show why you shouldn't be subject to the tax.__
Yup. Because generally, if you're living in a house, it hasn't been purchased with the primary aim of resale.
As it is in Australia for instance.
the Cullen Fund was not the only option. It was created through an intensely political process (parliamentary democracy works like that), and nothing is written in stone. You can argue it shouldn't be.
Perhaps so Craig, but it's the best arrangement NZ's been able to manage since the 1970's and I'd be wary of how quickly it could be undone.
The gummint in Queensland gave my mate AU$1500 towards installing a solar hot water heater on the roof of his Sunshine Coast home.
Each state/territory has different arrangements - NSW had a universal rebate but it's now means tested.
-
Sorry, that LAQC comment was a bit flippant.
What I mean is that Key will hue and cry and then do... bugger all.
We've got an open economy, we've got parallel imports, we're a profligate bunch... it's all very well to complain about the deficit, but what to do?
I thought the point of the Cullen fund was to provide precisely the kind of investment alternative intended to slow demand for housing. 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?
-
John Key is dead right when he suggests that something needs to be done to address the alarming current account deficit--the result of borrowed money funding a mindless property boom.
But I bet that doesn't include tightening up on LAQCs...