Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
8:20 am, May 26th, 2013 - 8 comments
Categories: 1938 -
Tags: 1938
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
So that roundup … Clearly ineffective in the longer term. The problem is the complexity in the tax legislation rOb. It seems having a uniform collection rate and targeted welfare is too simple…. And so we get to have this pretend war against evaders.
Personally I think that it’s shameful that not much has changed since 1938. Clearly neither our red or our blue team have been motivated to actually change much.
The first thing that hit me was how, if you substitute a few names of people, the story reads almost identically to a newspaper story from 2013. It seems virtually nothing has changed in 80 odd years with the tories attacking the poor and redistributing that extra wealth back to the rich and powerful employers exactly as Key does these days.
asd
This tories redistributing wealth seems a constant as you say. And is only partly limited by a democracy with a left wing party. Then when that is subverted by comfortable cats where are the limits then.
The tories have numbers of ways of chanelling wealth towards themselves which they have legitimated. Think Brierley and his asset stripping of companies. Predation of one company of another can be a much faster wealth creator than actually starting, developing, running expanding and employing. Which is what is needed for sufficient tax to be generated in the country.
So you guys seem to imply that Labour governments are useless and unable to constrain the nasty tory parties… I share that view but also think that like I first said;
“Clearly neither our red or our blue team have been motivated to actually change much.”
It’s not just National “allowing” or “creating” this situation….
Perhaps I’m a bit different to you guys – I don’t think it’s just one party that is self serving and useless with regard to reasonable and fair tax legislation over time. Arguably Cullen and his ideological $60K is rich did more than any finance minister has done for years to encourage the rich pricks to restructure their affairs… Of course Cullen couldn’t admit his policies were a failure – actually I think he believed they were working right till the time he finally conceded that to have any chance of wining an election he might need to acknowledge fiscal drag was real and not some thing nasty tory people and journalists made up.
I made my mind up a few years back that taxing businesses at gross income, same as workers, is the simplest system, would mean that expenses and profit would be a matter for the owners, including shareholders, of a company, there would be productivity gains from people not wasting time and effort in layering businesses simply for tax purposes as well as from easier assessment and compliance, no-one could pay no tax (which is fair as no one doesnn’t benefit from services provided from taxation), the tax base would be wider, etc.
It would also allow e transactions to easily be taxed at source, including overseas companies such as iTunes for NZ purchases.
We have already dabbled with taxing at gross with GST and we already tax workers at goss.
Yep. As burt says, simpler is better, with less scope for avoidance and evasion. Must be why all the tax experts and consultants insist on complex layering of tax law upon other complex layers of tax law.
Sounds good Doss. Style your hair and apply for Minister of Revenue. you’re a winner, or should be.
Also in beneficiaries allowances once there is income, the gross amounts are the lever on which the benefits are decreased. So the needy suffer from heavy taxation effect while the wealthy have means of avoidance.