Open mike 23/05/2015

140 comments on “Open mike 23/05/2015 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Michael 1

   23 May 2015 at 7:02 am

   so I was doing a bit of thinking about how the Government could better protect NZ Superannuation from the rising costs without changes to the age of eligibility nor sacrificing universal entitlement.

   The Government could bring in a ‘pension levy’ on high-income earners. It could be a marginal rate of 2% on incomes between $75,000 and $150,000 and 4% on incomes above $150,000. This would raise about $650million per year.
   That $650m could go directly into the NZ Super (Cullen) fund.

   Based on continuing contributions, wage inflation, and the Cullen fund rate of return, by 2030 the Cullen fund would have an extra $30 billion to pay for superannuation, a number that’d continue increasing as the levy continues to be paid. The Government is planning to begin withdrawing from the fund around this time.

   This is almost like a reverse-means test: it asks the top 10%, and especially top 1% of income earners to make a special contribution to the cost of NZ super whilst protecting universal entitlement to NZ super at age 65.

   This is probably the most progressive way of protecting this entitlement, as 90% of people would see no change in their working-age living standard nor their old-age living standard.
   • Colonial Rawshark 1.1

     23 May 2015 at 8:51 am

     Great ideas

     But stop hitting wage and salary earners

     Start hitting owned wealth, corporate super profits and financial capital

     Thanks

     PS by seriously discussing means testing of Super, the NZ Labour Party has shown that it is not fit for purpose, and that it does not understand “the future of work” in the fucking slightest.
     • Ron 1.1.1

       23 May 2015 at 9:05 am

       Don’t worry it was just an annoying blip by Andrew. It’s now off the agenda
       Amazing what a little public backlash will do
       • Chooky 1.1.1.1

         23 May 2015 at 9:47 am

         …well if the idiots have changed their minds it is too late ….it has already been broadcast widely…damage done ….and they look incompetent and flakey
         • millsy 1.1.1.1.1

           23 May 2015 at 2:36 pm

           IMO Labour probably lost the 2017 election there and then. One of the reasons why Labour is losing election is because they cannot be trusted on super. Little can back track all he likes, the damage is already done.
       • Colonial Rawshark 1.1.1.2

         23 May 2015 at 10:10 am

         Amazing what a little public backlash will do

         This is a Labour Party that we will have to work hard to keep in line.

         They knew that raising the Super age was an election loser. Took them two elections to figure that one out. Then they progressed to discussing putting a means test on Super instead? Utterly moronic. At this moment I’m calling advantage NATs to win a fourth term.
         • marty mars 1.1.1.2.1

           23 May 2015 at 5:16 pm

           you write like you aren’t part of labour
       • James 1.1.1.3

         23 May 2015 at 11:21 am

         A blip? Thats not a blip – it just show that stuff is being made up on the spot, and that he dosnt have either the support for his ideas, or he dosnt know what he was talking about.
     • Chooky 1.1.2

       23 May 2015 at 9:46 am

       CR+100….totally agree …re:.”PS by seriously discussing means testing of Super, the NZ Labour Party has shown that it is not fit for purpose, and that it does not understand “the future of work” in the fucking slightest”

       It is almost as if this Labour Party does not want to win an Election!…austerity on its own constituency!

       ….there are many super age people who still work but earn a pittance…..for the New Zealand Labour Party to deny those still working their super is pitiful!

       ..it is a PR gift to jonley Nact!…at very least the Labour Party should be matching Nactional on this issue …they just dont learn do they?

       ….the NZLP shows a lack of understanding of its own constituency …( imo the corporate Labour Party MPs of Labour Party Inc should have their salaries halved for this mistake)
       • b waghorn 1.1.2.1

         23 May 2015 at 9:53 am

         Robinson has just said that means testing super is not part of there policy revue. On the Nation
         • Colonial Rawshark 1.1.2.1.1

           23 May 2015 at 10:08 am

           So where did Little get the idea from?
           • b waghorn 1.1.2.1.1.1

             23 May 2015 at 10:15 am

             Robinson said “that little was asked a question about fairness around super and little said its because we need to have a conversation about it”
             Or words to that effect.
             Littles right of course but you mess with peoples money at you’re peril.
             • Draco T Bastard …

               23 May 2015 at 10:23 am

               It’s not their money but that of the country.
               • b waghorn …

                 23 May 2015 at 10:30 am

                 I did think that after I put that up that I should of said ‘what they believe is there money”
                 • Scotty …

                   23 May 2015 at 6:52 pm

                   I have to disagree. Those of us who pay our taxes (and I have paid mine for many years), have had an understanding with the government, that a portion of the taxes we have paid will fund our pension when that time comes. We have paid our money up front, on the promise of a pension later in life.
                   I can only speak for myself, but I have paid my dues. I began work as a young teen, still at school, in the mid sixties. I worked right through high school – book shop, paper run, department store. I’ve never been on the dole, on the DPB, on the sickness benefit, never been sick in hospital, never had a student loan, never needed to be subsidized in any way. I’ve been an employee, and an employer, creating jobs for others. I raised my kids to be good, contributing citizens who now pay their taxes. I’ve earned my pension. I’ve kept my part of my bargain with the government and more besides. I expect my government to honour it’s part of the bargain it has with me.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     23 May 2015 at 7:05 pm

                     that a portion of the taxes we have paid will fund our pension when that time comes.

                     There’s never been anything in NZSuper about paying up front. It’s always been paid from current taxes and that makes it the countries money and not yours.

                     I’ve been an employee, and an employer, creating jobs for others.

                     You’ve never created a job for others in your life – the community did and you just capitalised on that.

                     Nick Hanauer “Rich people don’t create jobs”
                   • Anne …

                     23 May 2015 at 8:09 pm

                     I agree with most of what you say Scotty. I, too, am now on the pension and I’ve earned it – every penny of it. But something that perhaps is not fully understood by Labour is that… while our parents could live comfortably on the pension many people no longer can do so because of exorbitant rates, insurance and power bills – to name just the most obvious. We are forced to supplement our income by taking on part-time work just to be able to make ends meet.

                     I suspect Andrew Little didn’t have us in mind when he made his comment, but rather those who have been able – or lucky enough – to acquire a fortune over the years and don’t need a pension. If that was the case then he should have been more explicit. I hope he has learned a lesson not to expect the MSM to fairly or accurately report him.
             • Colonial Rawshark …

               23 May 2015 at 10:23 am

               Little is NOT right at all.

               Labour is gutless going after individual Kiwis instead of the foreign corporations who take $10B or more per year out of NZ.
           • whateva next? 1.1.2.1.1.2

             23 May 2015 at 10:22 am

             …..didn’t someone just ask him if it was on the agenda, and he tried to remain open and calm, saying it was a good question??? or did I actually miss something important, not just a media stitch up. (Nat plan working well, and Labour go into “eating their young” when under stress mode)
             • Colonial Rawshark …

               23 May 2015 at 10:27 am

               If we don’t have a Labour Party willing to defend the inviolability of key foundations of our democratic social welfare state, then what good are they.
               • weka …

                 23 May 2015 at 10:31 am

                 + zillion. Labour’s big issue is regaining trust, this isn’t the way to do it.

                 On the other hand, let them settle into being a centrist party (better them than UF or the Peters party), and the Greens will take the left and leave room for a new party to take the radical left. We don’t have time to wait for Labour to sort its shit out.
                 • whateva next? …

                   23 May 2015 at 11:27 am

                   Labour’s big issue is factions/division, against a National machine as organised as Hitler’s Panza divisions.
                   It’s all very well telling the leaders what people in Labour want, but if we don’t get into power by finding about what the “vast majority of Nuzilland” want, we will continue to watch National stripping the country of any values, cohesion, connection etc.
                   • weka …

                     23 May 2015 at 11:35 am

                     I’m a GP voter, the core values have to stand, otherwise it’s just about the power. The idea that getting power is the most important thing is why we no longer have a left at the party political level.

                     I agree about the factions, and that’s something that’s only going to be solved internally within Labour if enough people want it. Having core values and sticking to them would help.

                     We don’t need to know what that vast majority want in order foe the left for form govt, we just need 50% of voters. That’s not enough to to run a country though, for that you have to know what you believe in and gain the trust of voters to support you.
                   • Colonial Rawshark …

                     23 May 2015 at 1:36 pm

                     It’s all very well telling the leaders what people in Labour want, but if we don’t get into power by finding about what the “vast majority of Nuzilland” want

                     Labour prides itself on being a “broad church”, inclusive and there for the 99%. How can it be that they don’t understand what NZers in general want?

                     Unless of course, they are socially, culturally and economically disconnected from the people they say they serve.
               • whateva next? …

                 23 May 2015 at 1:33 pm

                 but not a federation of separatist interest groups?
                 • whateva next? …

                   23 May 2015 at 1:58 pm

                   “disconnected from the people they say they serve.”
                   The relationship is not that simple, it goes both ways.
                   Labour caucus has to organise/galvanise people with less power into a big enough group to gain power over those with financial/economic power.
                   Not an easy task, and made harder if they are expected to be looking behind them all the time. at the fighting factions.
     • Michael 1.1.3

       23 May 2015 at 11:49 am

       My personal opinion is that investment income and earned income should be taxed completely equally and that there should be no distinction. So I’d apply the levy to both in my ideal world. So I definitely agree with you there.

       I think a levy on high incomes (both earned and unearned) that goes directly into the Super Fund makes sense because it is essentially the rich paying extra for the Super that they’ll be claiming as part of the universal entitlement to Super at 65.
   • AsleepWhileWalking 1.2

     23 May 2015 at 9:57 am

     They already do a great job by adding halides to the water supply.

     You know it’s a plan right?
   • vto 1.3

     23 May 2015 at 10:03 am

     What is the argument by rich pensioners that they should receive full taxpayer funded super?

     That they paid their taxes?

     That they built the country?

     That they just, um, want it?

     That they deserve it?

     It all just seems incredibly hypocritical and greedy. Always has.
     • Colonial Rawshark 1.3.1

       23 May 2015 at 10:13 am

       Universal entitlements are powerful expression of socialist thought. What are you going to do next? Put a surcharge on rich people who go to GPs and use A&E?

       Shall we start asset testing the dole and the DPB?
       • Chooky 1.3.1.1

         23 May 2015 at 10:29 am

         CR +100 …that should bring Labour down to under 20% of the Electorate vote i would think
         • Colonial Rawshark 1.3.1.1.1

           23 May 2015 at 10:30 am

           The NZ Labour Party should engage a few consultants and advisors from Scottish Labour, I’m thinking
       • Stephanie Rodgers 1.3.1.2

         23 May 2015 at 11:55 am

         Um … we *do* asset-test the DPB (or as it is now called, Sole Parent Support):
         http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/individuals/a-z-benefits/sole-parent-support.html

         You may be able to get Sole Parent Support if you’re a single parent or caregiver with one or more dependent children aged under 14 years.

         You must also be:

         aged 19 or older
         not in a relationship
         without adequate financial support
         a New Zealand citizen or permanent resident who has been here for at least two years at any one time since becoming a citizen or permanent resident, and who normally lives here.
         • weka 1.3.1.2.1

           23 May 2015 at 12:03 pm

           Pretty sure that’s an income test not an asset test.
           • Kay 1.3.1.2.1.1

             23 May 2015 at 12:30 pm

             Weka, I can assure you on every single application and review form for every type of benefit and supplement they ask about your cash and non-cash assets. There’s a limit to how much you can have before they won’t let you have certain benefits/grants. Can’t remember what it is now because I’ve never had anywhere near the amount so moot point.
             • Blackcap …

               23 May 2015 at 12:39 pm

               Weka is correct. Its an income test. The asset test is for any extra things like accommodation supplement etc.
             • weka …

               23 May 2015 at 5:24 pm

               I responded here Kay,

               http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-23052015/#comment-1019263
           • Stephanie Rodgers 1.3.1.2.1.2

             23 May 2015 at 5:00 pm

             Good point, I was reading asset-test in the wider sense of means-test.

             ETA: The wider point being that the DPB is not a universal payment to parents the way superannuation is a universal payment to over-65s.
             • weka …

               23 May 2015 at 5:20 pm

               Yep, and earlier I was taking means test to mean asset test only when I think Little was talking about income testing (as in means test = income and/or assets).
       • Hateatea 1.3.1.3

         23 May 2015 at 1:30 pm

         The ‘dole’ and Sole Parent Benefit are already examined for assets that may provide cash eg caravans, boats, bonus bonds. Housing isn’t counted unless you have more than one. You also have to declare investments and cash in the bank.
         • weka 1.3.1.3.1

           23 May 2015 at 5:23 pm

           Assets affect Accommodation Supplement and TAS, afaik they don’t affect the base benefits. Investments are assets, but interest from investments is counted as income.

           At least that’s what it’s been historically. Are you saying that pressure is being put in beneficiaries to sell assets? That would normally only happen if they were after one of the supplementary allowances, which let’s face it, is most beneficiaries (although I think Disability Allowance is exempt).
           • Hateatea 1.3.1.3.1.1

             24 May 2015 at 5:27 pm

             I am not sure about ‘pressure’ as such, mostly because I have never had anything that qualified, lol, but I know that you get the message in subtle and not so subtle ways, that realisable assets such as bonus bonds, caravans, boats etc should be the first call rather than the resources of the state.
   • Draco T Bastard 1.4

     23 May 2015 at 10:21 am

     The problem with those ideas are that they rely upon the system remaining the same and it’s actually the system that’s the problem. What we need to do is:

     1. The government become the sole creator and source of NZ$
     2. Full UBI
     3. Comprehensive capital taxes. That means taxes on property, on capital gains and financial transaction

     This will create a situation where we don’t need different rules for retired people compared to working people – everyone will get the UBI and all income and wealth will be taxed. But the most important aspect is that it will put the government in the position where it doesn’t need an income or borrowings to pay for anything thus it will always be able to afford everything.

     The tax system could then be redesigned upon a more feasible understanding of the flow of money. Specifically, that money always comes from the government and that taxes destroy that money.
     • Colonial Rawshark 1.4.1

       23 May 2015 at 10:31 am

       Largely agree. I do see chosen roles for private sector credit creation however.

       But we see where Labour’s head is at. They won’t agree to a UBI because there are “fairness” issues with rich Kiwis getting it along with poor ones.

       The whole concept of an “unconditional” or “universal” benefit seems to be beyond Labour’s comprehension.
       • weka 1.4.1.1

         23 May 2015 at 11:15 am

         That would certainly solve quite a few problems in NZ 😈
         • weka 1.4.1.1.1

           23 May 2015 at 12:04 pm

           hmm, weird, that’s supposed to be a reply to,

           “The NZ Labour Party should engage a few consultants and advisors from Scottish Labour, I’m thinking”
           • Colonial Rawshark 1.4.1.1.1.1

             23 May 2015 at 12:46 pm

             Well, you’re right, that would solve a few roadblocks for the Left heh
       • Draco T Bastard 1.4.1.2

         23 May 2015 at 11:27 am

         I do see chosen roles for private sector credit creation however.

         I don’t as it always results in runaway money creation. That’s why such private money creation was made illegal 300 years ago and why crypto-currencies are also a failed system.
       • Stephanie Rodgers 1.4.1.3

         23 May 2015 at 12:00 pm

         There was a comprehensive presentation on the UBI at the Region 4 conference earlier this month, but no remit was put forward. How do we expect the party to adopt a policy without using the democratic processes to push for one?

         That’s how all those terrible progressive “identity” issues you hate so much get through, after all.
         • b waghorn 1.4.1.3.1

           23 May 2015 at 12:07 pm

           Is there any way of accessing that presentation?
           • Colonial Rawshark 1.4.1.3.1.1

             23 May 2015 at 12:25 pm

             Max Rashbrooke here references some of the work Perce Harpham has done on the UBI. Perce, one of NZs first and most successful tech entrepreneurs, has done a massive amount of work on the UBI.

             http://www.inequality.org.nz/universal-basic-income-how-it-could-work-in-nz/
       • b waghorn 1.4.1.4

         23 May 2015 at 12:05 pm

         In regards to a ubi I just did a quick search and I came up with a total benefit spend including super and WFF of 30 billion(please correct me if my figure s are out.)
         Covered by 4 million people it was about 7 thousand each so there would have to be a lot more money found to support those that can’t top this up themselves .
         • weka 1.4.1.4.1

           23 May 2015 at 12:09 pm

           Do a search on the standard for UBI. There have been some good posts and lots of discussion, including what level it could be set at and how that would be paid for (there are various ideas and proposals on that).
         • Colonial Rawshark 1.4.1.4.2

           23 May 2015 at 12:29 pm

           You don’t have to “find more money” the money is already there in the current income of the people of the nation, and of the nation itself, it is simply redistributed. And if required, a small amount of additional liquidity no more than 1% of GDP can be introduced by the Reserve Bank to the government’s accounts.
         • Draco T Bastard 1.4.1.4.3

           23 May 2015 at 12:50 pm

           Covered by 4 million people it was about 7 thousand each so there would have to be a lot more money found to support those that can’t top this up themselves .

           This is actually incorrect but it’s the fear that everyone focuses upon because everyone looks at government needing an income first which it doesn’t. The government must become the sole creator and source of NZ$ in the economy. The UBI then becomes the primary funding of the economy and taxes become the drain that prevents excessive money buildup. Essentially, inflation would be controlled by taxes rather than the OCR (which doesn’t work anyway and, in fact, causes other problems).
           • b waghorn 1.4.1.4.3.1

             23 May 2015 at 12:54 pm

             “””The government must become the sole creator and source of NZ$ in the economy.””
             Is there any country doing this and does it work?
             • Colonial Rawshark …

               23 May 2015 at 1:10 pm

               No, in all the countries which are part of the agreed central banking system, the commercial and investment banks have a lot of power to create money/bank credit (they are not quite the same thing, but are often treated as such).

               BTW countries which do not belong to this international central banking system tend to end up militarily destroyed.
               • b waghorn …

                 23 May 2015 at 1:15 pm

                 ”BTW countries which do not belong to this international central banking system tend to end up militarily destroyed”
                 Is that what Giddarfi was up to.
             • Draco T Bastard …

               23 May 2015 at 1:16 pm

               No there isn’t and yes it does.

               EDIT: You should probably also read this:

               A system of law can be anything from a concerted effort to establish justice in our human world, to a system of robbery and murder (Nazi law is an extreme example). When a banking lawyer described modern banking as ‘the greatest system of kleptocracy foisted upon the human race’ he was agreeing with many previous eminent and knowledgeable commentators. The American Founding Fathers were particularly vocal on the subject: banking is the enrichment of ‘swindlers at the expense of the honest and industrious part of the nation’ (Thomas Jefferson, 1813). ‘Every dollar of a bank bill that is issued beyond the quantity of gold and silver in the vaults represents nothing, and is therefore a cheat upon somebody’ (John Adams, 1809). Even more bluntly, the banking system supports a ‘tyranny of fraud’ (John Taylor, 1814).

               Maintaining a ‘tyranny of fraud’ isn’t the way to maintain a prosperous economy.
           • Maui 1.4.1.4.3.2

             23 May 2015 at 1:08 pm

             This sounds like a complete overhaul of our financial system. Is there an explanation for financial dummies (like me) on how this would work on the net?
             • Colonial Rawshark …

               23 May 2015 at 1:15 pm

               Modern Monetary Theory.

               Stephanie Kelton:

               https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbM3crOcmR0

               Also Randall Wray:

               https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=949JLYr2L90

               Warren Mosler
               • Maui …

                 23 May 2015 at 2:42 pm

                 Cheers, got a bit of watching to do now :).
             • Draco T Bastard …

               23 May 2015 at 1:22 pm

               Is there an explanation for financial dummies (like me) on how this would work on the net?

               There’s a number of systems proposed. The most well known would probably be the Chicago Plan and Positive Money.
       • weka 1.4.1.5

         23 May 2015 at 12:06 pm

         “But we see where Labour’s head is at. They won’t agree to a UBI because there are “fairness” issues with rich Kiwis getting it along with poor ones.”

         Where did you get that from specifically?

         “The whole concept of an “unconditional” or “universal” benefit seems to be beyond Labour’s comprehension.”

         Little seems to be in favour.
         • Colonial Rawshark 1.4.1.5.1

           23 May 2015 at 12:31 pm

           Yeah except the closest thing we have to a UBI now – NZ super – he reckons we should consider questions of means testing

           That tells me that he doesn’t understand the concept of the universality of benefits.
     • Chooky 1.4.2

       23 May 2015 at 10:32 am

       DTB….sounds good…definitely on capital gains and financial transaction tax…and full UBI
2. travellerev 2

   23 May 2015 at 8:31 am

   Just some screendumps of the daily dose of war propaganda from the Daily Mail site.
   • travellerev 2.1

     23 May 2015 at 8:47 am

     Bugger, Screendumps here
3. Facetious 3

   23 May 2015 at 9:06 am

   Andrew Little is attacked by Grey Power because of his super slip-up

   https://nz.news.yahoo.com/top-stories/a/28199670/pension-comments-not-so-super-grey-power/
   • Paul 3.1

     23 May 2015 at 9:12 am

     Three hit and run comments this morning, facetious.
     I really admire people who write on behalf of the powerful….
   • Ben 3.2

     23 May 2015 at 9:29 am

     http://www.nzherald.co.nz/budget-2015/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503822&objectid=11452961

     Why announce something, then turn around and denounce it on the same day? Was this ‘policy on the fly’ or actually discussed with his colleagues? I just don’t get the strategy here. Groundhog day in the Labour camp, and easily pulled to pieces by Peters and Key.
   • Colonial Rawshark 3.3

     23 May 2015 at 10:15 am

     An utter fucking mess
4. dv 4

   23 May 2015 at 9:12 am

   Just a point.
   Super is taxable, so there is some claw back (means testing)

   Lab introduced a surcharge back in the late 80s. That did NOT go well.
   • Colonial Rawshark 4.1

     23 May 2015 at 10:16 am

     Labour is attracted to austerity; National keeps spending on the poor and disadvantaged even in the face of government deficits.
5. lefty 5

   23 May 2015 at 9:31 am

   The number of older people as percentage of the population is rising.

   Old people are more likely to vote and younger people are rapidly giving up doing so.

   This makes the older vote important now and very likely more so in the future.

   By the time they are in their middle 50s most people are starting to think about retirement and how they will cope financially in their old age.

   Andrew Little”s musings on the pension are a recurring theme among Labour politicians, and despite what activists may say, are an indication of the warped ideas on fairness held by many of the technocrats who control Labour.

   No older person in their right mind would trust Labour unless they were already very financially secure.

   Good luck with ever winning an election in this situation – no matter how bad the opposition is.
   • Chooky 5.1

     23 May 2015 at 10:00 am

     +100 lefty…the NZLP Inc is gobsmackingly inept
     • ianmac 5.1.1

       23 May 2015 at 10:13 am

       Heaven help us if any topic raised for musing or discussion is rubbished as toxic. Surely in a democratic society, the issues such as aging population and Super must be discussed.
       It is a Right wing tactic to seize on any comment from an opposition member and twist it and malign the speaker. Dirty Tricks I say. But for Lefties to put the boot in makes it worse.
       • Chooky 5.1.1.1

         23 May 2015 at 10:16 am

         i am just stating the obvious…to everyone outside the Labour Party that is…i do not believe in blind allegiance or loyalty

         …Andrew Little was incompetent in what he said…dont care if you spin it as “musing” or “discussion” …it makes me wonder how well he understands Labour’s grassroots constituency

         ( and I was once an active member for the Labour Party…and my Mother a branch chairperson….in fact my whole family have voted Labour for generations…with emphasis on “have”)
         • Colonial Rawshark 5.1.1.1.1

           23 May 2015 at 10:18 am

           Any party which considers taking away basic state support and services for the people must be rubbished.

           Further – does the Labour Party not understand that NZ Super is paid out in NZ dollars? And that the NZ Government is the sole legal issuer of NZ dollars in the world? And that the NZ Government can therefore choose to never run out of funds for necessary and important activities?

           It’s utterly idiotic to promote austerity measures because you think you are about to run out of electronic numbers in computerised account scorecards.
           • Chooky 5.1.1.1.1.1

             23 May 2015 at 10:37 am

             +100 CR…I would vote for you!
             • Colonial Rawshark …

               23 May 2015 at 12:49 pm

               😀 yours is the vote I need!!!
               • Chooky …

                 23 May 2015 at 1:02 pm

                 well I would if I could ….(cos unfortunately i have jumped ship)

                 …good luck with turning the tanker Labour around before it hits the rocks and beaches…with people with the smarts like you steering Labour, it could form a very viable coalition with the Greens and NZF and Mana/Int and defeat jonkey Nactional

                 Labour needs some think tanks pre-plotting the coordinates and steering policy so the captain doesnt run amok..imo
           • Draco T Bastard 5.1.1.1.1.2

             23 May 2015 at 12:56 pm

             Further – does the Labour Party not understand that NZ Super is paid out in NZ dollars? And that the NZ Government is the sole legal issuer of NZ dollars in the world? And that the NZ Government can therefore choose to never run out of funds for necessary and important activities?

             It’s not just the Labour party who gets that wrong – it’s everybody and we get it wrong because we’ve been taught over the generations, but especially over the last 40 years, that wealth comes from rich people rather than the community.
             • Colonial Viper …

               23 May 2015 at 3:28 pm

               yep, the BS “wealth creators” meme. Labour in NZ refers to them as wealth generators.
       • weka 5.1.1.2

         23 May 2015 at 10:23 am

         Universal entitlement is a pretty core left wing value. It’s not so much a topic being slammed as Labour yet again proposing centrist values instead of left wing ones. If Labour were discussing lots of policy that made left wing people feel better about the party they might get away with discussing superannuation means testing, but in the very large void that has been left on the left, it’s just going to turn people away to do it now.

         The utmost priority for Labour should be regaining trust and remedying the damage done by Labour’s betrayal in the 80s. That stuff’s not going to go away.
         • Colonial Rawshark 5.1.1.2.1

           23 May 2015 at 10:37 am

           It’s not so much a topic being slammed as Labour yet again proposing centrist values instead of left wing ones.

           ?

           Centrist values? You are being very generous. You want to show me a group of centre voters, or even a mid-right voters, anywhere in NZ who would support means testing on NZ Super?
           • weka 5.1.1.2.1.1

             23 May 2015 at 11:20 am

             neocentrist/kind austerity ones then. It’s Labour saying, we only have so much money, we want to create a fair society and that means not paying out the limited pie to people who don’t need it. That’s fair right? etc. I don’t agree with that, but I can see that they could pitch it to ‘middle nz’ so long as the means test was high not middle. I think they’re wrong, but it is part of that whole lets be left and centrist at the same time thing.

             btw, base benefits aren’t means tested, but Accommodation Supplement and the hardship grant are. That was true under Labour as well.
             • Colonial Rawshark …

               23 May 2015 at 12:50 pm

               I think Labour are pitching to a centrist voting constituency that they don’t understand in the slightest. No one in the centre of NZ politics wants to see Super turned into just another means tested asset tested benefit.
               • weka …

                 23 May 2015 at 12:54 pm

                 That’s probably true and true.
       • whateva next? 5.1.1.3

         23 May 2015 at 10:31 am

         Phew, someone else saying it, I responded above but wrong place..
         “…..didn’t someone just ask him if it was on the agenda, and he tried to remain open and calm, saying it was a good question??? or did I actually miss something important, not just a media stitch up. (Nat plan working well, and Labour go into “eating their young” when under stress mode)
         Don’t fall for it guys!!!!!
         • Rodel 5.1.1.3.1

           23 May 2015 at 1:01 pm

           whateva next
           You are correct. It is a media stitchup just like wotsisname (The reporter who looks like Alfred E Neumann) trying to engineer answers so he can create his own news. I heard the interview and what is reported is nothing like what was said.
           Little agreed that the issue had to be confronted. I would have told the reporter to F**k off and stop trying to make news where none existed…or maybe just told him to cut the crap.
           • whateva next? 5.1.1.3.1.1

             23 May 2015 at 1:30 pm

             yep, the same with MSM (National) picking up on ONE of the issues Young Labour raised, “gender reassignment ops being provided free”
             Same trap (abyss) Cunliffe fell into, defending yourself against rabid hounds of the press, backed against a wall with nowhere to go.
       • logie97 5.1.1.4

         23 May 2015 at 11:35 am

         ianmac – I agree it is disheartening and demoralising when the left starts attacking itself – particularly in this period when there is so little traction being made in focussing on the right – but Little made it a whole lot worse yesterday.

         You are right to raise the point that a healthy democracy should be encouraging debate.
         A healthy democracy is not one where a political philosophy can be foisted on a nation just as a result of a ballot box every three years. A healthy democracy is one where nearly 100 percent of eligible voters cast their votes and at least 51 percent (a clear majority) give a mandate to a party to govern. (not cobbled together coalitions).
         Of course there is a huge discussion to be had around that.

         Our problems in New Zealand and for most democracies is the power of the Multinationals and the growing lack of sovereignty (if we ever had it completely).

         You will remember the period of Thatcher (and followed here by Douglas a few years later) – their biggest anti-left action was to remove exchange controls. With a stroke of the pen, the multinationals and big business could shift their monies at will and with that potential radical left-wing policies could never be included in manifestos.

         You will also remember Thatcher say to the great unwashed – do not worry about the short term affects of our decisions – there will be a trickle down affect. And you will enjoy the opportunities that the service industries will offer.

         She also promised that the new technologies would provide us all with greater leisure time. The new technologies have certainly created a huge pool of unemployed who have subsequently be labelled as lazy by the right. And, of course, who controls the new technologies that are creating the massive pool of “unwashed” – yep and creaming off the profits. The multinationals – e.g. the banks for starters.
         • Colonial Rawshark 5.1.1.4.1

           23 May 2015 at 12:52 pm

           A healthy democracy is one where nearly 100 percent of eligible voters cast their votes and at least 51 percent (a clear majority) give a mandate to a party to govern. (not cobbled together coalitions).

           If you want a healthy democracy, then party based politics is probably not the way to go. If it has to be party based politics, then coalitions of parties are more likely to reflect the will of the people rather than single party rule by decree terms.
           • Draco T Bastard 5.1.1.4.1.1

             23 May 2015 at 1:02 pm

             +1
         • adam 5.1.1.4.2

           23 May 2015 at 1:34 pm

           Logie97 – “I agree it is disheartening and demoralising when the left starts attacking itself ”

           Really I thought it was our greatest strength – robust debate and thrashing out of ideas. Not some stalinist wet dream of following the party line. The overbearing weight of the old left was what crushed the left in the west – the blind obedience and dogmatism – were a heavy blow for aspirations and new thinking. Indeed freedom and fraternity were crushed under strict adherence to one set of ideas. Did you miss 1968 and the questions raised?

           Liberalism as the dominant economic idea is back in force and is very destructive. Both locally and globally. Everyone here gets that basic premises – well maybe not the usual suspects of liberals like Gossy and Hotts .

           There is no magical left solution to the damage, and destruction wrought by liberal economics. There are some very good ideas on how to deal with a world postliberalism – and we need to trash those out.
   • Colonial Rawshark 5.2

     23 May 2015 at 10:17 am

     and despite what activists may say, are an indication of the warped ideas on fairness held by many of the technocrats who control Labour.

     yep

     the Labour MPs with their property portfolios, generous parliamentary Kiwi Saver schemes and top 2% income musing on ways to cut back NZ Super.

     Disgusting.
     • Chooky 5.2.1

       23 May 2015 at 11:35 am

       +100
   • weka 5.3

     23 May 2015 at 10:27 am

     GP Super policy, in case anyone is looking for someone else to vote for (or another party to join)

     4. Supporting Older People

     The Green Party will:

     Maintain universal New Zealand Superannuation for all New Zealanders 65 years and older, adjusted annually in accordance with movement in the Consumer Price Index, and within the constraints that:

     The rate for a couple cannot fall below 65% of the average ordinary time weekly earnings (after the deduction of standard tax and the earner premium payable on those earnings) as determined by the Department of Statistics.

     The rate for a couple cannot exceed 72.5 % of the average ordinary time weekly earnings (after the deduction of standard tax and the earner premium payable on those earnings) as determined by the Department of Statistics.

     The rate for a single person living alone is 65% of the rate for a couple.

     The rate for a single person not living alone is 60% of that for a couple.

     Identify ways to allow flexibility in the age a person may receive New Zealand Superannuation.

     Oppose compulsory retirement savings.

     https://home.greens.org.nz/policy/income-support-policy
     • Chooky 5.3.1

       23 May 2015 at 11:36 am

       thanx…seems like a good policy….generally the Greens are more intelligent than Labour ( smirk)
       • Colonial Rawshark 5.3.1.1

         23 May 2015 at 12:53 pm

         No surprise so many Labour supporters and activists have switched Green over the last decade.
     • b waghorn 5.3.2

       23 May 2015 at 12:57 pm

       What’s the greens plans on how to fund what’s said to be the looming disaster wlth funding super?
       • Colonial Rawshark 5.3.2.1

         23 May 2015 at 1:04 pm

         There is no looming funding disaster FFS. the NZ government can simply choose not to run out of the electronic one’s and zero’s that it uses to pay superannuitants with.

         This “looming crisis” is a fucking neoliberal/orthodox monetary fiction.

         Exactly like Labour/National in the past declaring that ACC is severely underfunded just because they put their own stupid discretionary requirements on ACC, and they trying to use that as justification to fuck with ACC.
       • weka 5.3.2.2

         23 May 2015 at 3:13 pm

         b waghorn, one thing they want is to put Super investments into ethical and safe investments.

         https://home.greens.org.nz/press-releases/super-fund-should-divest-140-million-high-risk-coal

         Their general economic policy is based on changing how we measure and create wealth, and changing the tax system to take the burden off individuals (esp those who earn less), make all income taxable, and put the onus on polluters and waste creators via ecological taxes (which makes sense in the transition to a post-carbon world).

         https://home.greens.org.nz/policysummary/economic-policy-summary

         https://home.greens.org.nz/policy/economic

         But what CV said. I don’t believe there is a crisis in the way conventionally presented. The real crisis is going to be around physical resources, not unlimited ones like ones and zeros.
         • b waghorn 5.3.2.2.1

           23 May 2015 at 3:20 pm

           Cheers yes government should be leading the charge on environmental issues coal is so 1800s
           • Colonial Viper 5.3.2.2.1.1

             23 May 2015 at 3:32 pm

             as Weka intimates, real resources: energy, materials, the quality of our people and our infrastructure, thats the stuff which really matters. Not electronic ones and zeroes manufactured by keyboard strokes. All our politicians have been entranced by the BS that it is electronic spreadsheet bookkeeping entries which constrain it all.

             Its a kind of collective delusion.
             • marty mars …

               23 May 2015 at 5:23 pm

               + 1
6. halfcrown 6

   23 May 2015 at 10:30 am

   You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth.

   It appears the right can’t

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11453375
7. halfcrown 7

   23 May 2015 at 10:35 am

   You want the truth?, but you can’t handle the truth.

   It appears the right can’t

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11453375
   • Maui 7.1

     23 May 2015 at 11:58 am

     Well, who would of guessed..

     “A replacement show, with two yet-to-be-cast co-hosts, is understood to be shaped by these criticisms and will have more of an ENTERTAINMENT focus and more OVERSIGHT by MediaWorks executives.”
8. Craig H 8

   23 May 2015 at 11:32 am

   Currently at the Region 5 Labour Party conference. The basic message is very good so far – party vote is critical, the party needs to modernise, and be unified, disciplined and, most importantly, win.
   • weka 8.1

     23 May 2015 at 12:14 pm

     How would they do those things?
     • Colonial Rawshark 8.1.1

       23 May 2015 at 12:59 pm

       This is just the usual motherhood and apple pie “our values are Labour values” rhetoric. Labour have very little room to move or modernise at the moment because of the short 3 year electoral cycle and resulting concerns that any real upheaval will negatively effect the chances of being elected in 2017. Don’t expect any dead wood MPs to go.
       • weka 8.1.1.1

         23 May 2015 at 2:41 pm

         Maybe, but it would be good to hear from someone who was actually there.
     • Craig H 8.1.2

       23 May 2015 at 10:10 pm

       Smarter volunteer management
       Better packaging of policy
       Fewer headline policies
       Better candidate selection
       Better use of existing resources

       Policy is tomorrow.
9. Maui 9

   23 May 2015 at 12:07 pm

   Don’t have a very good feeling about this, we’ve sent our troops into a quagmire. Looks like they’ll immediately be on the front line.

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/68761120/kiwi-troops-deployed-to-iraq-face-any-number-of-threats–david-shearer
   • Molly 9.1

     23 May 2015 at 12:14 pm

     Anyone know of any movement/protest to try and bring our troops back earlier?
     • Chooky 9.1.1

       23 May 2015 at 12:33 pm

       Labour Party should be demanding this!

       …and working on it with the Greens and NZF and Mana/Int
       ( who loudly opposed sending NZ troops there in the first place!)…our NZ troops lives should not be put on the line or wasted for this mess…they are too valuable!
   • Colonial Rawshark 9.2

     23 May 2015 at 1:02 pm

     Chicken hawks like TRP within the establishment Left and Right are responsible for supporting our troops off into an Iraqi civil war which the US has stoked for years and years.
10. swordfish 10

    23 May 2015 at 1:16 pm

    Andy Burnham being touted as the ‘Left’/Union candidate in UK Labour’s leadership contest, with Liz Kendall the most conspicuously Blairite (after her fellow carrier of the ‘moderniser’ torch, Chuka Umunna, suddenly pulled out) .

    Despite a general assumption that the Blairites will retake control of the Party, indications are they’re well and truly on the back foot. Polls suggest Burnham leads amongst both Labour voters and the British public in general, albeit with a relatively high Don’t Know factor. Yvette Cooper second, with Kendall well behind (admittedly, some early polls also recorded considerable support for Umunna and David Milliband before they ruled themselves out). Burnham and Cooper also have the lion’s share of nominations from decided Labour MPs, in the process upsetting a number of leading Blairites who can see power slipping away.

    With an up-coming contest to replace Labour’s leader in Scotland and the race for the Party’s London Mayoral candidate, UK Labour faces three simultaneous power struggles.
11. whateva next? 11

    23 May 2015 at 1:45 pm

    Canon Media awards serving as a balance against the NZ Radio awards?
12. Draco T Bastard 12

    23 May 2015 at 1:46 pm

    More proof that the market system just doesn’t work:

    French supermarkets will be banned from throwing away or destroying unsold food and must instead donate it to charities or for animal feed, under a law set to crack down on food waste.

    The French national assembly voted unanimously to pass the legislation as France battles an epidemic of wasted food that has highlighted the divide between giant food firms and people who are struggling to eat.

    One of the ideas of the market system is that it always clears the produce from the shelves and yet it creates this waste where huge amounts of edible food is thrown away amongst hunger and starvation.
13. Dan1 13

    23 May 2015 at 1:50 pm

    There was a recent news item (TV3 I think) on Ron Mark using the F word in Parliament. The translator for the deaf in the background did a remarkable translation. Any chance someone could upload the small section for wider enjoyment. It is classic.
    • Tautoko Mangō Mata 13.1

      23 May 2015 at 4:53 pm

      For your pleasure
      
      • Dan1 13.1.1

        23 May 2015 at 6:03 pm

        Brilliant! Many thanks.
14. ianmac 14

    23 May 2015 at 1:52 pm

    The Swiss have a referendum on UBI due next year 2016. The Swiss Government oppose UBI but referendum will still go ahead. Many people believe that it would work.
    http://www.basicincome.org/news/2014/08/switerland-government-reacts-negatively-to-ubi-proposal/
    • ianmac 14.1

      23 May 2015 at 1:58 pm

      But imagine the fury which would be visited on an Opposition Party in NZ if they had the courage to suggest UBI for consideration. The spite and ridicule would spew out at any such spokesman.
15. ianmac 15

    23 May 2015 at 2:04 pm

    “Meanwhile, Labour’s Grant Robertson denied party leader Andrew Little wants to means test superannuation, saying Mr Little was only answering a question about fairness in the system.”
    So the outrage pointed at Andrew for the “reported” comments was not quite fair. Funny that.
    • Karen 15.1

      23 May 2015 at 6:12 pm

      Yep, this is another media beat up.

      Means testing superannuation is not Labour Party policy and, although Andrew Little should have been a bit more careful in how he responded to questioning, he at no time said he wanted it to become Labour Party policy.
16. Weepus beard 16

    23 May 2015 at 2:22 pm

    Tried to click an interesting article titled, “Why current affairs matter”: Without good journalism, Aotearoa will never become the nation it has the potential to be.

    http://www.preview.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/11826323/Opinion-Budget-Live-National-hit-two-birds-with-one-stone

    When I clicked the link it asks for your login details just to read the thing, i.e., Stuff want to know who is reading it, or they’ve been told they must…

    Ironic much?

    Anyone else been asked for authorisation to read a Stuff article before?
17. Clemgeopin 17

    23 May 2015 at 2:23 pm

    Tanishq Mathew Abraham

    An astonishing 11 (or 12?) year old prodigy!

    3 Associate college degrees -Awesome feeling- completed my first few baby steps to my BIG goal- @NobelPrize med doctor/researcher & @POTUS— Tanishq Abraham (@iScienceLuvr) May 21, 2015

    Read all about this fascinating child below!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanishq_Abraham
    • ianmac 17.1

      23 May 2015 at 3:02 pm

      Brilliant kids. But what about their socialisation? It is pretty hard for a kid to be different.
      • Draco T Bastard 17.1.1

        23 May 2015 at 4:45 pm

        And probably more so if that difference isn’t recognised.
      • Clemgeopin 17.1.2

        24 May 2015 at 1:41 pm

        That was my first fleeting thought too. However, he has brilliant, highly educated parents who seem to be comfortable about their son. Besides, I think the boy himself is smart enough to figure all that for himself and knows what is important for him. Also, he seems to have a bevy of friends and admirers from all walks of life.
18. Karen 18

    23 May 2015 at 2:48 pm

    A simple illustrated story about how the wealthy get to stay rich while the poor get poorer no matter how hard they work.

    http://thewireless.co.nz/articles/the-pencilsword-on-a-plate
    • weka 18.1

      23 May 2015 at 3:14 pm

      It’s very good, getting attention on social media, maybe it could go up as a post on ts?
19. The Murphey 19

    23 May 2015 at 2:57 pm

    http://corporateeurope.org/sites/default/files/toxic_lobby_edc.pdf

    How the chemical lobby blocked action on hormone disrupting chemicals

    Apply to [name the industry]
20. Reddelusion 20

    23 May 2015 at 3:50 pm

    Karen your link is simply a cartoonist with a political bent, doesn’t make it true unless stereotype is the test for truth
    • Draco T Bastard 20.1

      23 May 2015 at 4:48 pm

      It is true. There’s been a number of studies that prove it to be true. Piketty is probably the most detailed such study but there are others as well.

      Capitalism doesn’t work the way you believe. It’s essentially feudalism.
    • joe90 20.2

      23 May 2015 at 5:53 pm

      Yeah, people should get ahead the old fashioned way.
      //

      LEWIS: Tell us a little bit about you and your business experience and how you got here.

      RAESE: I made my money the old-fashioned way, I inherited it. I think that’s a great thing to do. I hope more people in this country have that opportunity as soon as we abolish inheritance tax in this country, which is a key part of my program.

      http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/09/24/120661/raese-money-inheritanc/

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS