We are all socialists now II

18 comments on “We are all socialists now II ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Peter 1

   10 April 2020 at 8:47 pm

   Apparently Jordan Williams is a lawyer. I say that in context of his dealings with Colin Craig and Craig's press secretary Rachel MacGregor. The sort of behaviour that was in the category of, "I'm never going to show my face in public again I'm so embarrassed with how I acted. Especially given I'm a bright bugger, I'm a lawyer."

   I always like that photo of him. It's the "I've got it sussed. I'm a bright bugger, I'm a lawyer, I'm a success" sort of photo. And I know, we all know that further down there's actually the metaphorical pooey nappy.

   There aren't 30 pieces of silver in the other part of the picture. Doesn't need to be.
   • KJT 1.1

     10 April 2020 at 10:19 pm

     A Lawyer?

     If you could pick the job that is most dependent on a tax payer funded State, that would be it.

     A Lawyer supporting the tax dodgers club. Complete, cognitive dissonance.
   • Morrissey 1.2

     11 April 2020 at 12:56 pm

     Jordan Williams, lawyer and incredibly subtle thinker….

     https://morrisseybreen.blogspot.com/2018/01/jordan-williams-fertile-mind-was.html
2. patricia 2

   10 April 2020 at 11:02 pm

   It pained him to accept our money. It pains me that he received it. I'd rather he had not!!
3. anker 3

   10 April 2020 at 11:34 pm

   He is done for now. His organisation will have zero credibility when they start to criticize govt handouts
   • tc 3.1

     11 April 2020 at 7:28 am

     They'll still get coverage from the likes of granny etc as it's a rigged game
   • observer 3.2

     11 April 2020 at 1:46 pm

     That's a cleverly ambiguous line!

     If you mean "He is done … for now" then yes. If you mean "He is done for" then sadly I doubt it. The TU gets coverage based on availability, not credibility. They put a press release in the inbox on a slow news day, and somebody picks it up. Beats working.

     Jordan Williams will be popping up on a radio panel sharing his "wisdom" soon enough.
4. William 4

   11 April 2020 at 12:03 am

   Hmm. From the newshub story

   "The wage subsidy is intended to keep staff paid for at least 12 weeks."

   Sadly their most recent financial statement on the Incorporated Society Register is for the year ending 31 Dec 2017. In that year their total expenditure on 'Personnel & Contractor Expenses' was $163,585.01 so 12 weeks worth would be about $37,750

   They've now received $60,000, business must have really been booming recently.

   Their website lists four part time employees, one full time, two possible full time, a research fellow, plus board members.

   It is entirely possible that their subscriptions & donations have declined, their release on 16th March urging the government to take equity in companies rather than giving a bailout would have pissed off many of their supporters.
   • Molly 4.1

     11 April 2020 at 7:21 am

     I had recently looked at their incorporated society return, and thought that they are running it on the barest minimum in regards to paying for workers. I also thought that they seem to have dropped off regarding the number of workers and hours, and considered that to be reflective of their value.

     When I saw this news article thought that the amount they had claimed seemed excessive. Thanks for posting.
   • RedBaronCV 4.2

     11 April 2020 at 9:55 am

     I looked at their statements too. Looks like they may have tried to upload 2018 but it failed. I also had the impression that the personnel expenses (2016 2017) may include payments to third parties for specific contractors for particular campaigns. Anyway the subsidy looks like some 9 staff.

     The revenue is interesting too. Subscriptions are $120k but I assume these are annual -so could you honestly say that these will be down over the three months?

     The balance of the income is donations and there are some fund raising expenses. Maybe they do a dinner and a speaker or something similar – don't know. Again can you honestly say that this is down over the short time period?

     My question about this – while I'm sure they take general donations – is there a smaller group of "donors" who helped to underwrite & set this up who make up the shortfall annually and who will take a contribution holiday this year so the taxpayer takes up the slack.
     • AB 4.2.1

       11 April 2020 at 11:54 am

       "My question about this – while I'm sure they take general donations – is there a smaller group of "donors" who helped to underwrite & set this up who make up the shortfall annually and who will take a contribution holiday this year so the taxpayer takes up the slack."

       And a great question it is. Essentially these are ideological workers who are not actually producing goods and services for sale in any sort of a normal market. The closest parallel might be advertising agencies – whose clients are their funders and they are paid to push funder-friendly messages onto a long-suffering public. You could argue on the basis of this ad agency comparison that therefore they are entitled to the money if their funders become cash-strapped. The up-side is that this does expose the reality of their mission as propagandists, and the hypocrisy about their mission actually having some noble purpose.

       It's certainly possible to imagine their glee at collecting money they don't need – and their sheer delight at contributing to the large government deficit that is coming as a result of C-19. They will be able to tut tut about the deficit and demand austerity for the poor and middle class in response. A win/win for them really.

       Have to say though – I do admire the high-trust model that the government has used in dishing out this funding. Social welfare should always have been like this too.
       • Ed1 4.2.1.1

         11 April 2020 at 12:56 pm

         If "Donations" are regarded as "Income" and if the "business" is 'representing' a very large group of Ne Zealanders without their consent, does this mean any political party who has had a reduction in donations could claim a subsidy?

         Looked at another way however, I guess an "employee" in entitled to consideration regardless of what we may think of the employer – a principle that the Taxpayer Union would I am sure robustly deny had validity!
         • RedBaronCV 4.2.1.1.1

           11 April 2020 at 5:22 pm

           The employees are entitled to consideration absolutely unless the principals have just recently employed themselves. But should the employer be able to knowingly shift income to another part of the financial year ( by say invoicing late not asking for donations until later in the year) or forgo income that in any other year would have been brought in to account. In a high trust model that would be at the very least, moral fraud.

           Perhaps we could have a sheet put up on the govt sites and we could all sit around checking and crowd sourcing the claims while we are bored.
           • RedBaronCV 4.2.1.1.1.1

             11 April 2020 at 5:27 pm

             I'd also like to think that the givers of the donations are not deducting it for tax purposes.
       • Gabby 4.2.1.2

         11 April 2020 at 1:35 pm

         Ah, if beneficiaries only had the sense to wear nice suits, they'd be trusted too.
     • William 4.2.2

       11 April 2020 at 2:45 pm

       "Looks like they may have tried to upload 2018 but it failed.

       That's very generous of you, but the failed one I can see was for the 2016 year. It was succesfully uploaded again at the same time.

       Their financial year runs 1 Jan to 31 Dec. Their practice looks to be to hold the agm which will approve the accounts in the following December, ie nearly 12 months after any year ends. Then they get uploaded to the Incorporated Society Register sometime in the following year, e.g. the 2017 accounts were uploaded in Sept 2019. Hardly a timely release of information, just another example of their hypocrisy!
5. I Feel Love 5

   11 April 2020 at 8:32 am

   Comrade Williams!
6. Siobhan 6

   11 April 2020 at 9:28 am

   Low hanging fruit…we've had "Socialism" for the most vehement non Socialists for a long time now..'socialism' is what keeps Capitalists going through each and every Crash we've had …I prefer to call it "Wealth Transferal" or 'The Trickle Up Theory"..

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS