National Thus Far

[A Corpse]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

I really hope middle & low income earners aren't solely targeted to fund the rebuilding of Christchurch.

Nope. Middle and low income earners are targeted by National. The CHC quake is just a convenient excuse to shut down any arguments against doing what they were going to do anyway.

This way, anyone who objects is a Christchurch-hating quake-fanboi.

[Golden Teapot]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

I really hope middle & low income earners aren't solely targeted to fund the rebuilding of Christchurch.

No need to worry here. It's only labor governments that imposes enormous costs on only part of the taxed workforce. You can be sure National will be fairer and have everyone contribute something.

[Lightspeed]

^^

[Golden Teapot]

Originally Posted by A Corpse

Middle and low income earners are targeted by National.

There's a need to unwind the inequity introduce by labor. In that sense there's a target here but in no other.

[Ab]

Originally Posted by cyc

.... on your way out, Simon Power

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...ower-to-retire

Worst fucking Minister of Justice ever. All of the criminal law reforms have been giant fucking jokes under this clownboat.

Not to mention bending over backwards to keep Labour happy (!!) on electoral reform, and asking the Law Commission to deal with the unwelcome reality that people posting on blogs aren't bound by regulation.

Good riddance, the guy may have worn a blue suit but he sure seemed like he wore red undies.

[cyc]

Originally Posted by Ab

Not to mention bending over backwards to keep Labour happy (!!) on electoral reform, and asking the Law Commission to deal with the unwelcome reality that people posting on blogs aren't bound by regulation.

Good riddance, the guy may have worn a blue suit but he sure seemed like he wore red undies.

What sealed it for me was when he went and lectured the Chief Justice on the proper role for the judiciary after she pointed out the obvious regarding our failing penal system. The Herald, for once, had it right -- Power probably wasn't even a young fellow when Sian Elias was building a distinguished legal career. I also once had the misfortune of hearing this airhead at a meeting and his understanding of the legal system was about as sound as Winston Peters'.

[fixed_truth]

Originally Posted by Golden Teapot

No need to worry here. It's only labor governments that imposes enormous costs on only part of the taxed workforce. You can be sure National will be fairer and have everyone contribute something.

How's raising the threshold for WFF not targeting only part of the work force?

[fixed_truth]

Originally Posted by Golden Teapot

There's a need to unwind the inequity introduce by labor. In that sense there's a target here but in no other.

After the Queensland floods their Govt. introduced a progressive levy on people earning above A$50 000 a year.

I agree that sharing the costs across those who can most afford to pay is fair.

[Lightspeed]

Doesn't it seem too obvious though that the IMF was asking Key to cut things like student loans and family support last March, now that the earthquake happened and we're in need of money, that's exactly what the government is suggesting we cut?

Seems like a country only gets to be sovereign while it can afford it.

[Golden Teapot]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

How's raising the threshold for WFF not targeting only part of the work force?

This is unwinding of freeloading; I've no problem with this happening.

[[LvN]N3misiS]

The working for families scheme is exceptionally genourous in its current form.

If someone earns $50,000 they pay $9550 in tax per annum.
$9550/52 = $183.
Through working for families tax credits they would recieve a tax credit of $158 a week so they would effectively be paying $25 dollars a week in tax.

[[LvN]N3misiS]

Originally Posted by [LvN]N3misiS

The working for families scheme is exceptionally genourous in its current form.

If someone earns $50,000 they pay $9550 in tax per annum.
$9550/52 = $183.
Through working for families tax credits they would recieve a tax credit of $158 a week so they would effectively be paying $25 dollars a week in tax.

Edit: based on two kids

[fixed_truth]

For four people to live on I wouldn't call that a lot. I guess it's an incentive not to have to dump young kids in daycare.

[A Corpse]

Based on a single income of $72,000 PA, a family with two kids gets $144 per fortnight ($3744 per annum) from WFF and pays $16910 in tax.

I have no idea where the numbers go so radically different for you. Maybe two incomes of $25k, as that would result in less tax paid, but I still don't see how that would more than double WFF.

[[LvN]N3misiS]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

For four people to live on I wouldn't call that a lot. I guess it's an incentive not to have to dump young kids in daycare.

Are you trying to tell me that 4 people living on $936 (in the hand) per week is a big ask?

[fixed_truth]

Originally Posted by [LvN]N3misiS

Are you trying to tell me that 4 people living on $936 (in the hand) per week is a big ask?

No I'm saying it's enough that families don't have to put young kids in daycare. edit: where did you get your numbers from btw?

Originally Posted by A Corpse

Based on a single income of $72,000 PA, a family with two kids gets $144 per fortnight ($3744 per annum) from WFF and pays $16910 in tax.

Yeah that sound right.

[Saladin]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

No I'm saying it's enough that families don't have to put young kids in daycare. edit: where did you get your numbers from btw?

Numbers are right - can check them yourself on the IRD calculator.

[fixed_truth]

Mr Key was asked this morning if the figures would make a reduction in the official cash rate this week inevitable.
"That's a matter for the Reserve Bank governor and it's for him alone to decide what happens on Thursday," he told Breakfast on TV One.
"But certainly the markets have factored in a likely cut in the official cash rate. You've got to say lower interest rates probably help the country, but that ultimately is a matter for the governor."
Mr Key said he was not attempting to influence the process but was stating facts.

http://m.nbr.co.nz/article/drop-ocr-...n-key-nn-87578

[ZoSo]

#WINNING

[Ab]

Originally Posted by ZoSo

#WINNING

Lt Gen Mateparae is currently the director of the Government Communications Security Bureau.

whoa back on up there... what?

[A Corpse]

Look, at least he's not some fucking indian, right!

[Ab]

Call me crazy but I don't think the head of the state intelligence service should also BE the Head of State.

[doppelgänger of someone]

Hey, it worked out ok for Egypt.

Wait...

[Ab]

Just saw an update in the Herald - Mateparae is retiring from the GCSB in July and takes the G-G's job in August. Nothing to see here, as you were...

[CCS]

What's the problem? Knows too much? Conflict of interest? It's not like he's doing both jobs at the same time.

[Saladin]

Originally Posted by A Corpse

Look, at least he's not some fucking indian, right!

He's lucky he's an army guy - seems to be the only sort of "bloody maari" the RWNJs tolerate.

[fixed_truth]

Poor old Paul Henry.

[SID|DensitY]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/poli...orgets-to-vote

lawls

[chubby]

awesome.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10714414

Telecommunications Users Association of New Zealand head Paul Brislen said customers would greatly benefit from the increased speeds of the fibre-to-the-home network.

Brislen expressed concern over the long period of price-fixing and regulatory holiday that accompanies the UFB.

"We don't know what will happen over the 10-year life span of the project, whether that goes down, whether that goes up, whether that includes international bandwidth."

"So trying to predict what I'll be doing in 10 years, let alone what I'll be paying for it seems odd."

[chubby]

or how bout this python-esque bullshit from Q&A....
(the bill providing the'answers' is of course the nact economics whizz bill english.)

GUYON Let’s talk about the logic of moving those assets on in terms of the ones that you actually want to sell. In 2010, you got $831 million in dividends from the state-owned enterprises and Air New Zealand. Now, $802 million, almost all of that, came from the five companies that you want to sell. I mean, aren’t you killing the goose that laid the golden egg here?

BILL Well, under the model the government has proposed, we would be maintaining at least 51% ownership in those companies, so we still have a right to the dividends that would come from it.

GUYON Well, half the dividends, presumably.

BILL Well, the dividends that come to our 51% share, that’s right. Half the dividends. And we believe in the long run we’re going to get better performance and more value out of those companies by having the opportunity for Kiwis to buy a share in it, get better performance from the market pressure that would be on them.

GUYON But is that true? Your own Treasury says, and I quote, in the paper that you requested on this issue, ‘There is no clear evidence to suggest that financial performance of the SOE companies is better or worse than private-sector comparables.’ It says, ‘There’s little evidence to suggest that privatisation would significantly improve the financial performance of many of the SOE companies.’

BILL Well, we simply don’t agree necessarily with Treasury on that, and we have a number of—

GUYON But Treasury aren’t exactly left-wing sort of hand-wringers on this, are they?

BILL Well, they’ve had no experience of these kind of asset sales now for 10 or 15 years, so it’s not something they’ve dealt with.

GUYON Where are you taking advice from? Is it just you and a few other Cabinet ministers? I mean, if Treasury don’t even believe, and they say there will be ‘modest economic gains’, where has your evidence come from?

BILL Well, we are of the view that the model, like Air New Zealand, has worked very well – mixed ownership where a combination of market pressure, an arm’s-length relationship with government has allowed that company to go through considerable changes and achieve what’s very difficult to achieve anywhere in the world, and that is be a successful regional airline. So we’re more convinced than Treasury that we’ll get better performance out of those companies, but we have other objectives as well, which are to provide some kind of investment opportunities that New Zealanders think would be useful for them, particularly longer term solid investments after all the negative experiences that they’ve had.

GUYON Can I talk about the real economy for people? They see the cost of living keep going up. They see wages really not— if not quite keeping pace with that, certainly not outstripping it much. I mean, you said at the weekend to the Australia New Zealand Leadership Forum that one of our advantages over Australia was that our wages were 30% cheaper. I mean, is that an advantage now?

BILL Well, it’s a way of competing, isn’t it? I mean, if we want to grow this economy, we need the capital – more capital per worker – and we’re competing for people as well.

GUYON So it’s part of our strategy to have wages 30% below Australia?

BILL Well, they are, and we need to get on with competing for Australia. So if you take an area like tourism, we are competing with Australia. We’re trying to get Australians here instead of spending their tourist dollar in Australia.

GUYON But is it a good thing?

BILL Well, it is a good thing if we can attract the capital, and the fact is Australians— Australian companies should be looking at bringing activities to New Zealand because we are so much more competitive than most of the Australian economy.

GUYON So let’s get this straight – it’s a good thing for New Zealand that our wages are 30% below Australia?

BILL No, it’s not a good thing, but it is a fact. We want to close that gap up, and one way to close that gap up is to compete, just like our sports teams are doing. This weekend we’ve had rugby league, netball, basketball teams, and rugby teams out there competing with Australia. That’s lifting the standard. They’re closing up the gap.

GUYON But you said it was an advantage, Minister.

BILL Well, at the moment, if I go to Australia and talk to Australians, I want to put to them a positive case for investment in New Zealand, because while we are saving more, we’re not saving more fast enough to get the capital that we need to close the gap with Australia. So Australia already has 40 billion of investment in New Zealand. If we could attract more Australian companies, activities here, that would help us create the jobs and lift incomes.

GUYON The last headline I saw said Australian had dropped its unemployment rate to 4.9%, added 37,800 jobs. Unemployment here pushing 7%, wages 30% higher over there – why wouldn’t you go?

BILL Well, some people will, and that’s fine, but why would we sit round being mesmerised by the fact that some Kiwis go to Australia? We’ve got a long-term plan to lift the performance of this economy, because we need higher incomes and we need more jobs.

L O L.

[Golden Teapot]

I'd like an option to not have a "review post" button; sometimes a moment of weakness grabs me but I always regret seeing what Chubby has posted.

[chubby]

hurts to see what level of douch-baggery you vote for, huh?


you could ignore me again.

[CCS]

IF WE'D ALL VOTED FOR THE LEFT WINGERS THIS WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED!

[chubby]

yet again cocksucker.... substantive.

[ZoSo]

To be fair, to have "Eleven telcos, consumer groups unite against Crown Fibre bill", it doesn't bode well. Joyce better not fuck this up.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/eleven-...-bill-ck-90449

[chubby]

"to be fair"??
dude- its past that point.
joyce already fucked it up.

wake up and stop giving yourself time to forget all about it.

[chubby]

an example of joyce's reasoned and rational approach to our country's collective future..

http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2011...alism-iii.html

that will be updated for those interested.

[adonis]

There is no logic behind the kind of asset sales National are proposing. Retaining 51% means there will be no operational differences, this "market pressure" line is pure unadulterated bullshit.

The reason a person buys shares is to make money, all this means is less money for the public sector and more for private investors, over the long term this'll just add to the deficit.

The reasoning for neoliberal reforms actually had a line of argument behind it, not that I agreed with it, but at least it was there. The line Bill's pushing atm is just idiotic.

[zeekiorage]

Originally Posted by ZoSo

To be fair, to have "Eleven telcos, consumer groups unite against Crown Fibre bill", it doesn't bode well. Joyce better not fuck this up.

http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/eleven-...-bill-ck-90449

If I remember correctly there was a point in time when Telecom wasn't even allowed to bid for UFB because they couldn't prove the structural separation and now they are going to get 20 years rape-the-consumer-with-fibre license? In any case 20 years without any oversight for a company such as Telecom is fucked up.

[fixed_truth]

Crusher Collins tops Minister petrol list

With a chauffeur and a busy job you wouldn't expect Ministers to do too much driving.
But the rules allow Ministers' family members and staff to use their cars.

It infuriates me that despite getting paid over $250,000 this greedy pig of a woman thinks it's ok to let the tax payer cover her families petrol costs. Because she can.