Random Politics - Page 12

ZoSo · 4th May 2011, 12:40

Why do they still advocate Government-backed clinical trials here? Do they have to do it to move forward? Surely we can piggyback on other work, it has to have been done to death already. It's ridiculous.

cyc · 4th May 2011, 12:49

I don't have a huge problem with this. Provided the trials are properly done, they will lend legitimacy to whatever policy choice the results support and will also get rid of any cheapshot arguments to the effect that "Oh those other trials weren't done in NZ conditions!".

DrTiTus · 4th May 2011, 12:56

I'd happily volunteer for those clinical trials!

:r~

Golden Teapot · 4th May 2011, 21:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

Over 4 years this top one-third income group will pay approx. 14.6 billion less in income tax. What "extra tax paid" is funding this?

The basic problem with communicating here is that you'll not accept anything I write and so it's not worth my time writing anything beyond this.

Lightspeed · 4th May 2011, 22:11

I wonder what CCS would call that...

adonis · 4th May 2011, 22:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Teapot

The basic problem with communicating here is that you'll not accept anything I write and so it's not worth my time writing anything beyond this.

I'll accept verifiable evidence. Why would you even offer the point if you're not prepared to back it up? Why is it "worth your time" to post anything at all?

I hopped on google as soon as I read what you'd posted to see if the 2 billion in tax cuts the top 10% got could have been offset by other changes. So far I have failed, but hey, the internet's a big place, help a brother out?

adonis · 4th May 2011, 22:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

I wonder what CCS would call that...

He wouldn't call it a cop-out, that's for sure, that's reserved for you apparently. Feel special?

chubby · 5th May 2011, 00:08

^^you dont get it.
everything gt says is a given.if you dont get it you are too stupid to get it.
no need for links to that which is self-evident.

chubby · 5th May 2011, 00:11

http://www.scoop.co.nz/multimedia/tv...ics/50249.html

Nothing · 5th May 2011, 00:16

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...roposal-alarms

Golden Teapot · 5th May 2011, 08:25

Are you crying over the irrational fear of those complaining? These folk sure do make a nuisance of themselves.

GRiM ReeFer · 5th May 2011, 09:13

Last thing we want is Chinese gaining resources from our waters....

next thing you know the UN will be bombing Key's palace in Auckland.

adonis · 5th May 2011, 17:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Teapot

Are you crying over the irrational fear of those complaining? These folk sure do make a nuisance of themselves.

Which irrational fear are you talking about? The fear of an incident like the one in the gulf of Mexico or the fear of more AGW? Or both?

xor · 6th May 2011, 09:27

What is national planning on doing with kiwi saver?

Saladin · 6th May 2011, 11:08

Looks like they're going to axe the $1000 (approx) a year tax credit you get for making Kiwisaver contributions - because their polling has indicated most punters don't even realise they get it.

Which is odd though since it was one of the incentives advertised extensively on the telly back then "The government will match your contributions up to 1024 dollars a year" or somesuch, guess people have short memories.

Jodi · 6th May 2011, 11:47

You still get the company matching your 2%, so while It'll piss people off they miss out on the $1k/year from the govt, it wont stop them topping up their kiwisaver.

No, what scares me is if they make kiwisaver compulsory.

Saladin · 6th May 2011, 11:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jodi

You still get the company matching your 2%, so while It'll piss people off they miss out on the $1k/year from the govt, it wont stop them topping up their kiwisaver.

Yes, but the employer is now legally allowed to deduct that 2% from your salary so it's not always an incentive. Not sure how many employers are douchey enough to do that though.

adonis · 6th May 2011, 17:34

http://www.greens.org.nz/press-relea...-pay-oil-spill

"The Government confirmed today that New Zealanders will carry full financial liability and responsibility for containment and clean up if there is a catastrophic oil spill in deep water off the Canterbury Coast, said the Green Party."

-Statik · 7th May 2011, 09:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saladin

Yes, but the employer is now legally allowed to deduct that 2% from your salary so it's not always an incentive. Not sure how many employers are douchey enough to do that though.

I know of several companies that do it, including the one I work for.

So basically you get a total salary package of say, 70k, and if you choose to do kiwisaver then your contributions come out of that 70k. If you don't opt in to kiwisaver then you get that paid out. I don't have a problem with it.

I'm doing 2% so I get that free 1k from the government.

Lightspeed · 7th May 2011, 11:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by adonis

http://www.greens.org.nz/press-relea...-pay-oil-spill

"The Government confirmed today that New Zealanders will carry full financial liability and responsibility for containment and clean up if there is a catastrophic oil spill in deep water off the Canterbury Coast, said the Green Party."

Holy crap. Which minister is responsible for working these deals out for us? Does anyone have any ideas why this might be a good thing?

fixed_truth · 7th May 2011, 12:53

We'll easily be able to cover the cost of a spill with the massif royalties we'll be getting.

zeekiorage · 7th May 2011, 15:00

Labour has been dropping leaflets in our area. They just wanted to remind me that David Cunliffe is my MP and I should let him know if there are any issues in the area.

Thank you for remembering us commoners David.

adonis · 8th May 2011, 04:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

We'll easily be able to cover the cost of a spill with the massif royalties we'll be getting.

Oh come on, take a look around, what does this look like? Australia?

fixed_truth · 8th May 2011, 11:13

Nothing · 8th May 2011, 16:18

Interesting piece in the herald:
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/new...ectid=10724090

Basic gist of it: Stop letting people avoid taxes by sticking stuff into family trusts. Stop letting corporations avoid paying taxes by setting up 'structures' that incur lower tax rates.

In a sense, I kinda think fair enough. On the other hand, I know that my family has a trust... *shrug*

fixed_truth · 8th May 2011, 21:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nothing

Bernard Hickey: Havens for rich tax avoiders will cripple NZ.http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/new...ectid=10724090

Quote:

Anyone looking for a sneak preview of the public pressure to crack down on tax cheats just needs to look to Britain, the United States and Europe. The public mood is turning feral and the powers-that-be are responding.

Could this be the end of the great right lie that lazy Maaries are crippling NZ?

madmaxii · 8th May 2011, 21:38

fixed_truth · 8th May 2011, 22:27

Maybe. I'm hoping less & less people are getting sucked into the lie.
Spending on unemployment for those on the UB longer than 26 weeks is approx. 175 million per annum. Tax evasion is approx. $3.2 billion + per annum and the hidden economy approx. $10billion and $12billion per annum.

linkys:
http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/16/welfare.png
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/4...uration200.png
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...ase-compliance

Golden Teapot · 8th May 2011, 23:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

175 million per annum.

It's always conveniently forgotten in calculations like this that these people should be paying tax. So, the cost is the tax they should be paying plus the benefit they are receiving. With the same type of calculation done on all the other costs they rack up too.

As an example of a second-order cost think of the cost of educating the excessive number of children born purely to increase benefit payments in the short term.

Lets call the real number something north of a billion a year.

On the flip side the other numbers are always calculated in a manner akin to the way the MPAA does it's calculations on lost revenue from downloading.

fixed_truth · 8th May 2011, 23:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Teapot

It's always conveniently forgotten in calculations like this that these people should be paying tax.

Low wage families with kids pay tax?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Teapot

Lets call the real number something north of a billion a year.

If you say so. Amiright?

cyc · 8th May 2011, 23:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

Low wage families with kids pay tax?

The problem wih your reply is that you assume that paying/not paying tax is the sole determinant of a person/collection of persons' costs to society. The reason why low wage families with kids don't pay tax is because of Working For Family credits, which does impose a cost on all other taxpayers.

I actually agree with you generally that the so called "dole bludgers are killing us" argument is scaremongering but the costs associated with so called "bludgers" or those collect welfare is more than what the state pay them directly, which was GT's point. Of course, I'd also say that a lot of critics of the welfare system also under-estimate the extent to which they are also welfare recipients.

fixed_truth · 9th May 2011, 00:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyc

The problem wih your reply is that you assume that paying/not paying tax is the sole determinant of a person/collection of persons' costs to society.

The intent of my original post was only a $$$ comparison between unemployment benefits vs tax-evasion. Sure this group costs society in other ways though the same could be argued of the cost of administrating a serious clamp down on tax-evasion.

Golden Teapot · 9th May 2011, 09:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

The intent of my original post was only a $$$ comparison between unemployment benefits vs tax-evasion.

I guess my point was you're comparing the minimum possible cost of benefits versus something closer to the maximum possible cost of evasion. This type of comparison has no place in informed discussion. We'll here more of this from the extreme left though as we get closer to the election.

Tax evasion is terrible without a doubt. Moves to help ensure all pay a fair amount of tax don't necessarily make people happy. Take for example the recent re-balancing of the tax collection from all but the poor. The left still complain about this every breathing moment. This isn't surprising since the scheme labour ran required only some of those who could comfortably pay tax to actually pay tax; the notion of all paying their fair share is foreign to them.

fixed_truth · 9th May 2011, 10:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Teapot

I guess my point was you're comparing the minimum possible cost of benefits versus something closer to the maximum possible cost of evasion. This type of comparison has no place in informed discussion.

It's not at all the maximum possible cost. If you want to look at wider costs at least be consistent. How about the cost of tens of billions of dollars not being available for our healthcare system, children's education, welfare programs, law enforcement, infrastructure etc etc etc?

And further if we're talking about tax 'evasion', then shouldn't we be only looking at benefit fraud? Don't let the political rhetoric fool you, the cost of those at the bottom ripping off the system are insignificant in comparison to those at the top.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/crime/news...ectid=10700339

fixed_truth · 9th May 2011, 10:46

Interesting article by a guy in a Californian prison who was sentenced as a juvenile to life without the possibility of parole.

Hope for prisoners sentenced as juveniles to life without parole

Saladin · 9th May 2011, 11:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

Tax evasion is approx. $3.2 billion + per annum and the hidden economy approx. $10billion and $12billion per annum.

But if you suck 15 billion p/a out of the economy that's a lot of dosh that's not trickling down from the rich to the poor!

Lightspeed · 9th May 2011, 13:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Teapot

I guess my point was you're comparing the minimum possible cost of benefits versus something closer to the maximum possible cost of evasion. This type of comparison has no place in informed discussion. We'll here more of this from the extreme left though as we get closer to the election.

Tax evasion is terrible without a doubt. Moves to help ensure all pay a fair amount of tax don't necessarily make people happy. Take for example the recent re-balancing of the tax collection from all but the poor. The left still complain about this every breathing moment. This isn't surprising since the scheme labour ran required only some of those who could comfortably pay tax to actually pay tax; the notion of all paying their fair share is foreign to them.

With this type of rhetoric, I struggle to see your interest in informed discussion. You seem more interested in creating a polarity and then painting a particular end of that polarity as exclusively ranting and extreme.

Notice how what I shared was my perception, rather than a statement of fact about who you are and what you think. Which leaves room for you to correct my perception without the need to be defensive or attacking, if you so choose.

Nothing · 9th May 2011, 13:29

I was going to post something else, but then I saw Lightspeed's post, and didn't want to post what I was going to post directly after Lightspeed. So instead I'm just posting posting after Lightspeed.

Golden Teapot · 9th May 2011, 14:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

If you want to look at wider costs at least be consistent.

I didn't want to nor need to. All I was doing was showing that your comparison was invalid. Job done - now lets move on.

pervy · 9th May 2011, 14:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golden Teapot

I guess my point was you're comparing the minimum possible cost of benefits versus something closer to the maximum possible cost of evasion. This type of comparison has no place in informed discussion. We'll hear more of this from the extreme left though as we get closer to the election.

Tax evasion is terrible without a doubt. Moves to help ensure all pay a fair amount of tax don't necessarily make people happy. Take for example the recent re-balancing of the tax collection from all but the poor. The left still complain about this every breathing moment. This isn't surprising since the scheme labour ran required only some of those who could comfortably pay tax to actually pay tax; the notion of all paying their fair share is foreign to them.

Spotted: Appeal to authority as logical fallacy.

I especially like the part where you state that, "This type of comparison has no place in informed discussion". Way to stamp your authority home on that one!

4th May 2011, 12:56	#443
DrTiTus HENCE WHY FOREVER ALONE	I'd happily volunteer for those clinical trials! :r~ __________________ Finger rolling rhythm, ride the horse one hand...

4th May 2011, 12:40	#441
ZoSo	Why do they still advocate Government-backed clinical trials here? Do they have to do it to move forward? Surely we can piggyback on other work, it has to have been done to death already. It's ridiculous.

4th May 2011, 12:49	#442
cyc Objection!	I don't have a huge problem with this. Provided the trials are properly done, they will lend legitimacy to whatever policy choice the results support and will also get rid of any cheapshot arguments to the effect that "Oh those other trials weren't done in NZ conditions!".

4th May 2011, 22:11	#445
Lightspeed	I wonder what CCS would call that... __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

5th May 2011, 00:08	#448
chubby	^^you dont get it. everything gt says is a given.if you dont get it you are too stupid to get it. no need for links to that which is self-evident. __________________ "Take four red capsules, in ten minutes-take two more. Help is on the way."

5th May 2011, 00:11	#449
chubby	youve gotta laugh. http://www.scoop.co.nz/multimedia/tv...ics/50249.html __________________ "Take four red capsules, in ten minutes-take two more. Help is on the way."

5th May 2011, 00:16	#450
Nothing	You've gotta cry. http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...roposal-alarms

5th May 2011, 08:25	#451
Golden Teapot Love, Actuary	Are you crying over the irrational fear of those complaining? These folk sure do make a nuisance of themselves.

5th May 2011, 09:13	#452
GRiM ReeFer	Last thing we want is Chinese gaining resources from our waters.... next thing you know the UN will be bombing Key's palace in Auckland.

6th May 2011, 09:27	#454
xor	What is national planning on doing with kiwi saver?

6th May 2011, 11:08	#455
Saladin Nothing to See Here!	Looks like they're going to axe the $1000 (approx) a year tax credit you get for making Kiwisaver contributions - because their polling has indicated most punters don't even realise they get it. Which is odd though since it was one of the incentives advertised extensively on the telly back then "The government will match your contributions up to 1024 dollars a year" or somesuch, guess people have short memories.

6th May 2011, 11:47	#456
Jodi	You still get the company matching your 2%, so while It'll piss people off they miss out on the $1k/year from the govt, it wont stop them topping up their kiwisaver. No, what scares me is if they make kiwisaver compulsory.

6th May 2011, 17:34	#458
adonis	http://www.greens.org.nz/press-relea...-pay-oil-spill "The Government confirmed today that New Zealanders will carry full financial liability and responsibility for containment and clean up if there is a catastrophic oil spill in deep water off the Canterbury Coast, said the Green Party."

7th May 2011, 12:53	#461
fixed_truth	We'll easily be able to cover the cost of a spill with the massif royalties we'll be getting. __________________ Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong.

7th May 2011, 15:00	#462
zeekiorage	This must be an election year... Labour has been dropping leaflets in our area. They just wanted to remind me that David Cunliffe is my MP and I should let him know if there are any issues in the area. Thank you for remembering us commoners David. __________________ The surest sign that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us. -- Bill Watterson

8th May 2011, 11:13	#464
fixed_truth	__________________ Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong.

8th May 2011, 16:18	#465
Nothing	Interesting piece in the herald: http://m.nzherald.co.nz/business/new...ectid=10724090 Basic gist of it: Stop letting people avoid taxes by sticking stuff into family trusts. Stop letting corporations avoid paying taxes by setting up 'structures' that incur lower tax rates. In a sense, I kinda think fair enough. On the other hand, I know that my family has a trust... shrug

8th May 2011, 21:38	#467
madmaxii	No __________________ Carpe Diem

8th May 2011, 22:27	#468
fixed_truth	Maybe. I'm hoping less & less people are getting sucked into the lie. Spending on unemployment for those on the UB longer than 26 weeks is approx. 175 million per annum. Tax evasion is approx. $3.2 billion + per annum and the hidden economy approx. $10billion and $12billion per annum. linkys: http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/16/welfare.png http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/4...uration200.png http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/indu...ase-compliance __________________ Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong.

9th May 2011, 10:46	#475
fixed_truth	Interesting article by a guy in a Californian prison who was sentenced as a juvenile to life without the possibility of parole. Hope for prisoners sentenced as juveniles to life without parole __________________ Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong.

9th May 2011, 13:29	#478
Nothing	I was going to post something else, but then I saw Lightspeed's post, and didn't want to post what I was going to post directly after Lightspeed. So instead I'm just posting posting after Lightspeed.