Politics NZ Politics
- Thread starter wizard of Tauranga
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #8,322
NZ is simply struggling to keep its standard as a first world country because we haven’t increased our GDP to match our population.
We have a productivity/ income problem that is exposed by our inability to pay for what’s needed.
Don’t get caught up in the costs (which every country has); realise it’s a lack of income (that other first class countries are able to address).
We are currently making decisions about what we can’t afford to pay (eg inter island ferries) for with the same people complaining on here choosing dolphins over revenue generating events
How come they could reinstate the interest deductibility for landlords then? (nothing to do with the property industry donating to certain parties & where ex National MPs get hired... nah not at all)NZ is simply struggling to keep its standard as a first world country because we haven’t increased our GDP to match our population.
We have a productivity/ income problem that is exposed by our inability to pay for what’s needed.
Don’t get caught up in the costs (which every country has); realise it’s a lack of income (that other first class countries are able to address).
We are currently making decisions about what we can’t afford to pay (eg inter island ferries) for with the same people complaining on here choosing dolphins over revenue generating events
I know you have a weird obsession with the dolphin situation but the event went ahead & it's pretty straight forward that the promoters scheduled it in breeding season and totally agreed to the plan well in advance. Keep being a plonker just like Coutts though.
Cos Luxon is dumb potato that could easily be persuaded in 60 sec of a sales pitch. Doesnt change the fact the NZ is a backward shithole full of landlords and beneficiaries. And the only viable businesses are the ones that cater to those markets.
The only good thing Luxon has done is started slashing the bloat at ministries. However that will be cocked up and middle managers will find a way to survive like the cockroaches they are.
my point was that it is easy to cherry pick one element of something that happens elsewhere, and wave it up as a success and ignore everything else that goes on in that place
Australia has CGT yes. They also are very rich and have great infrastructure and have shafted their indigenous population. Has CGT worked in Sydney? Has stamp duty? I personally have no idea. But I do know houses are very expensive there.
So should we copy Australia because they have it? Or because it has worked?
Having said all that, Australia is wealthy compared to us and taking a policy that they have and pasting it into NZ skates over a lot of factors that are also at play. You can probably quite easily tax Australians because they have economies of scale with everything. And they pull cash out of the ground. And everyone in the world wants to live there.
We, on the other hand, are a different kettle of fish. We aren't wealthy. We have opposition to a lot of things that could generate wealth (nuclear, mining, fishing, roading etc). It would be great if we could cut and paste a policy and make it work, but doing so just because Australia has it and does better than us ignores a lot of factors that help Australia to do well
Tragic
Contributor
Investing in the right infrastructure can help grow gdp. E.g. Better roads, rail and ferry and you can move more, quicker, cheaper, Modern hospitals, cheaper to run, better outcomes. It's only a part of the solution but a big part.NZ is simply struggling to keep its standard as a first world country because we haven’t increased our GDP to match our population.
We have a productivity/ income problem that is exposed by our inability to pay for what’s needed.
Don’t get caught up in the costs (which every country has); realise it’s a lack of income (that other first class countries are able to address).
We are currently making decisions about what we can’t afford to pay (eg inter island ferries) for with the same people complaining on here choosing dolphins over revenue generating events
Last edited:
Living in Aus I can say.
Pulling cash put of the ground is not popular with a majority of informed people.
The fact thar Gina Rhinehart + Clive Palmer etc. Are obscenely wealthy whilst most people scrape by is a great injustice. GdP is one thing but people are just about as good of in NZ.
- Thread starter
- #8,328
Just read the whole article and it repeatedly says about Australia being richer, stronger economy and productivity and you take more tax as the answer?
NZ almost doubling our tax take over the last 6 years with less social outcomes hasn’t taught us anything?
What’s doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results called?
- Thread starter
- #8,329
Agree. Grow the economy to invest back into ourselves. Socially left; economically right.
But it’s driven by a solid economic plan driving more tax.
Not crippling the economy through plundering tax with no economic vision to the point the economy stalls through lack of R&D and investment.
That’s NZ the last 6 years with only 3% growth in 6 years and going backwards the last year and a half. Solid evidence the economy has been mismanaged to the point it’s failing to deliver with massive lost opportunity cost.
- Thread starter
- #8,330
Good old NZ shooting itself in the foot again… this is our dolphin attitude in effect and will cost us hospitals and benefit increases in the real world:
New Zealand Cruise Association chief executive Jacqui Lloyd attended the Seatrade cruise industry conference in Miami last week and said signs were pointing to fewer port visits next season.
Reasons for the drop in bookings included increased operating costs in New Zealand, higher port fees and regulatory fees from central government, difficulties around hull cleaning regulations, global competition, and concerns about access through the Red Sea, Lloyd said from the United States.
“It’s a big concern for the nation. Preliminary numbers we’re looking at are 150 to 200 port calls reduced for the country, that’s about 54,000 passengers. The risk for some of the cruise lines is just too high.”
Lloyd also cited the incident in November when Border Control denied the Pacific Adventure, en route to the Bay of Plenty, entry to the country as bad weather had prevented the ship’s hull from being cleaned.
www.nzherald.co.nz
New Zealand Cruise Association chief executive Jacqui Lloyd attended the Seatrade cruise industry conference in Miami last week and said signs were pointing to fewer port visits next season.
Reasons for the drop in bookings included increased operating costs in New Zealand, higher port fees and regulatory fees from central government, difficulties around hull cleaning regulations, global competition, and concerns about access through the Red Sea, Lloyd said from the United States.
“It’s a big concern for the nation. Preliminary numbers we’re looking at are 150 to 200 port calls reduced for the country, that’s about 54,000 passengers. The risk for some of the cruise lines is just too high.”
Lloyd also cited the incident in November when Border Control denied the Pacific Adventure, en route to the Bay of Plenty, entry to the country as bad weather had prevented the ship’s hull from being cleaned.
Why Tauranga could see a 'significant drop' in cruise visits next season
Increased operating costs in New Zealand among reasons for predicted drop in bookings.
www.nzherald.co.nz
You can't have been paying very much attention then. These are the figures from KO.
Northcote: 470 new state houses - 300 existing state houses to be removed = 170 net gain in state houses
Mt Roskill: 4,400 new state houses - 2,732 existing state houses to be removed = 1,668 net gain in state houses
Porirua: 2,300 new state houses - 2,000 existing state houses to be removed = 300 net gain in state houses
Mangere: 5,000 new state houses - 2,700 existing state houses to be removed = 2,300 net gain in state houses
Tamaki: 3,500 new state houses - 2,800 existing state houses to be removed = 700 net gain in state houses
Oranga: 440 new state houses - 400 existing state houses to be removed = 40 net gain in state houses
For the first major developments for the Piritahi Alliance over the next 25 years, it will provide a total of 16,110 new state houses - 10,932 existing state houses to be removed = 5,178 net gain in state houses.
Are you pretending to be stupid on prupose?
Rizzah
Contributor
Tax cuts: Finance Minister maintains commitment to no extra borrowing
"What we can tell you very conclusively is that we're sticking to our commitment."
www.newshub.co.nz
miket12It's all semantics.... and, personally, I hate it.Hmmm I wonder how they will achieve thisTax cuts: Finance Minister maintains commitment to no extra borrowing
"What we can tell you very conclusively is that we're sticking to our commitment."
Governments always borrow money except for the few times they're in surplus. While Willis says there won't be extra borrowing to fund tax cuts, they're doing extra borrowing to fund their other promises. They should at least be honest and saying that they are borrowing money and that includes funding tax cuts but they need to say that they feel they should be providing tax relief by adjusting the thresholds. At least then they would be owning up to the truth of the situation.
While I've always thought that the tax thresholds should be adjusted, it should happen when the state of the economy allows it but also with an upwards increase in the 39% bracket to ensure the total tax revenue doesn't fall. Or, as
Lord Gnome of Waiheke suggested, provide another bracket at say $250,000.Australia is all about the circles you move in. Real estate and luxury vehicle sales strong as ever.
My musician buddies are forever broke moaning about billionaires. My tradie / miner mates are taking trips and buying houses.
if you can't accept that the net number of state houses is only increasing by only just over 5,000 new houses from the 40,000 KO have said in their seven largest developments, your problem isn't with me.... it's with the people you shared a table with.
And for those who don't believe me, read pages 32-34 of the report below and compare the figures I've posted to the figures prepared for the incoming Housing Minister. Oh, and then think of how Labour said in February that they weren't aware that the net number of houses wasn't rising by how much they said they were because the Housing Ministers wasn't aware that houses were being demolished.
Theres no error in his logic, you would have to find the error in the numbers.
If you demolish 99 houses and build 100 houses, how many houses have you increased by?
I need to double down on this and say Australia is home to the worst champagne socialists rivalling UK, NZ etc.
The amount of under 30s who entire lives exist via fossil fuels and proclaim "No More Drilling" is staggering. These people cant go more that 1min without emitting carbon. A friend is an "environmentalist" ,a trust fund baby, who tours with a travelling show and globetrots on international holidays for weeks at a time. These are deeply unserious people.
Yes , all types of assholes and narcissists exist
The funny thing is I had exactly the same debate six years ago when a poster was defending the number of state houses built by KO when John Key was PM. I guess how you want to interpret the net increase of state house vs the number of state houses built depends on if you support the previous government or not. Pity the Turks destroyed the archives as it would be fun to repost those discussions from back then.
