- Date published:
2:48 pm, April 29th, 2013 - 26 comments
Categories: class war, national, workers' rights - Tags: choices, excuses, no right turn, paid parental leave
I/S at No Right Turn on the Nats’ excuses and choices as they oppose the extension of paid parental leave.
So, despite massive public support for the bill, National is still threatening to veto the extension of paid parental leave. Their reason? We can’t afford it. Bullshit. To point out the obvious, National has spent billions on tax cuts for the rich. It plans to spend billions more on non-cost-effective roads. It is spending hundreds of millions more on private prisons, on charter schools, and on subsidising the snob schools its MPs send their kids to. hell, they’re even promising to blow millions on a convention centre in Queestown which doesn’t actually need the money. It is a question of priorities, not unaffordability. But its pretty clear that National’s priorities don’t include ordinary kiwi families. They are solely interested in helping out the ultra-rich, at the expense of everybody else.
But because National needs the votes of ordinary kiwis, it won’t say any of this out loud. So it pretends its “unaffordable”, but holds out the possibility of an extension after 2015, when they expect to return to surplus (assuming Treasury’s numbers work out, and assuming the cuts they make to get there don’t crash the economy even further). Sue Moroney should call them on that bullshit. Currently, the extension of paid parental leave will come into force immediately. Changing the date to 1 April 2015 strips National of its excuse, and forces them to say clearly whether they support ordinary kiwi families or not. And if they don’t, we can all vote accordingly for a government which will.
Shouldn’t the title be , THE GREENS AND FOREST AND BIRD HATE FAMILY’S.
If you care that much ,and I doubt if the left really do, perhaps this could help.
$1451 million ($302 million per year).
• Value added or GDP of $806 million ($168 million per year).
• Gross wages and salaries of $127 million ($26 million per year).
• The equivalent of 1082 full-time equivalent job years (on average 225 jobs per year).
It is broken down into:
• $9 million payments to DOC for pest control.
• $11 million royalties paid to government.
• $125 million paid in other taxes to government.
• $321 million in dividends paid to shareholders, of which 8% ($26 million) would go to New Zealand owners
How stupid are you people , what’s wrong with you ,this would cover the cost.
The returns of just one mining project on the west coast.
The extreme green combined with forest and bird are stalling this development in the courts.
NZ is full of opportunity’s like this.
Isn’t it time for a change in attitude .
Simpler, cleaner solution: claw back the top tier tax cuts that Bill English and John Key got.
asked Dick Carboncopy that very question just yesterday CV, still waiting for the answer
Just for you freedom, for the second time.
The problem with the tax cuts is the same as with asset sales, they were both major election policy’s and both election winning policy’s, people wanted tax cuts, they got them.
Don’t blame me , I tried to convince a friend of mine that the tax cuts were a rort , he’s on the minimum wage but all he saw was $10 a week.
I voted labour , he voted nats, hard to believe but true.
“I voted labour , he voted nats, hard to believe but true.”
Not that hard to believe, Rich. I’ve met people like that as well. Suffice it to say, they’ve woken up to the rort now.
and again, it was a really simple yes/no question. I am asking you, not the country.
Repeal the tax cuts that are costing NZ $2 billion a year ?
And how did he feel when his 10 bucks a week was rorted back via the GST increase and the general round of price increases, that everyone had been holding onto just for that occasion? Not a happy camper me thinks.
opportunities like what?
theres no links or anything to tell what exactly your on about.
Sure theres lots of things that if you just plopped some figures on the table you can go “see – look! that pays for it!” – but youll have to do better than the poor effort you just did.
“,and I doubt if the left really do”
didnt you know? – the left are all about keeping people ignorant and on a benefit so that they will vote labour (or some such other stupid bollocks)
ps: you forgot “communist” – cmon, we all know you wanted to say it
Says who? Why should anyone take the word of rightwing trash like RTO as to the supposed “benefits”? This is the creep that was calling for protesters to be killed the other day.
Scum like RTO drag this country down.
Pay attention Knucklehead, you will learn something.
The figures were presented to the environment court and published on the nbr website, forest and bird v buller coal.
Framu , the topic is how do we pay for more paid parental leave, perhaps you didn’t read the article at the top.
Projects like this can be very helpful to our economy, but the extreme green would rather inflict poverty on family’s than do something positive.
And last but not least viper,
The problem with the tax cuts is the same as with asset sales, they were both major election policy’s and both election winning policy’s.
Don’t blame me , I tried to convince a friend of mine that the tax cuts were a rort , he’s on the minimum wage but all he saw was $10 a week.
I voted labour , he voted nats, hard to believe but true..
Good to see your all paying attention .
Oh, so on top of having wet-dreams about dead protesters, you believe “reports” bought and paid for by lawyers. Pitiful trash.
spreadbullsheet incorporate the cost to our 100% 90% 75%“dynnamikly” Pure tourism brand?
Didn’t think so.
“but the extreme green would rather inflict poverty on family’s than do something positive.”
Would really like to see this absurd statement of yours, qualified. Even a little bit would be entertaining for all I am sure.
p.s. dick, we all need help sometimes and I am no scholar, but you may want to read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostrophe
yeah i know what the topic is.
display some intelligence and figure out that im talking about your list of figures – there was nothing saying what they were
and for the record – you dont have a clue about what the so called extreme greens want. when you peddle tired old cliches devoid of any fact you just confirm it
PS: i call BS on you voting labour
My fucking GOD! :”……and I doubt if the left really do….” as you quote a few (rather pathetic figures). Pathetic when you put that which could be loosely regarded as social/public/community welfare up against that already given AND proposed for corporate welfare.
Just for e.g. :anyone remember that ‘fiscal envelope’ – the figure that, at the time was considred AWESOME – provoking outcries of Murry privlij etc.
Then ….. well, the along comes Southern Cross Foinence.
Maaaaaate! You’re a fukwit, and the right really ARE getting desperadoes.
If we had a decent, predominant Left Party (actually a truely CENTRE party that hadn’t been hijacked by the pendulum swing over 25+ years), I’ll pick that you’ll be squeeling like pigs when those that are truly rorting are held to account.
Thankfully, I probably won’t be around but your willingness to prop up the greedy at the expense of your serfdom these days just amuses me. The inevitability – just on the basis of mathematical evaluation no longer astounds me. I bet you probably profess to support ‘democracy’.
Not quite sure I understand all of that but hey…. Just increase my taxes by the appropriate amount and get on with it. Next idea, same solution, and after that…. same again. It won’t run out, I will just work harder for you so as you can take some more. Much fucking easier than getting your green mates to approve some mining, eh!
Shit, the Greens and Forest & Bird have a governmental policy veto? Why haven’t we been USING this???
Rich the Other – “How stupid are you people , what’s wrong with you ,this would cover the cost.”
Oh, after 4 years of Nats broken promises; economic mis-management; surreptitious tax increases – I think we’re fairly clued up by now.
Because one thing you’ve left out of your comments? The State recieves only a 1-2% royalty from mining and taxes from a few dozen/hundred people. Most profits are remitted overseas. Hence our piss-poore balance of payments.
Tourism, on the other hand, is one of our biggest earners. But that tourism will suffer if we don’t protect the reason people come here in the first place. Clue; it ain’t to see a mine pit.
Rich, you seem to still be a Believer. Good luck with that. But instead of seeing these issues in black and white (as most right wing believers do) – have a look at the Big Picture. Not just what validates your preconceptions.
PS: Citation for those figures please?
Frank ,just for you.
Figures from nbr website,
Type in Bathurst resources ,
under heading ,Bathurst mine will generate millions, but
Date Thursday march 28.
Plenty of history to read .
For me the big picture is very clear, we can have the best of everything.
With the correct controls in place this type of development must go ahead.
Putting things into perspective , more than 30% of nz land is conservation land , what’s a couple of hundred of hecs where nobody goes.
This case is a good example of the damage the green extreme including forest and bird is doing.
It’s these people who hate family’s.
Baby steps. Are Bathhurst Mining the source of the figures? Isn’t that a bit like asking John Minto if Socialism is good politics?
Germany has longer parental leave, longer annual and stronger unions, also strong manufacturing sector, is that why the nats and others never make reference to these factors not destroying that nation?
Well, when you’re exporting 2.2t…
Sorry they have 14 weeks but at 100% of earnings
Only people who don’t care about their children’s and grandchildren’s future think it is OK to make money by mining fossil fuels. Burning coal adds to climate change. John Key is inviting oil companies to drill in our oceans for fossil fuels, that is a climate crime. National doesn’t care about our NZ families futures.
“Projects like this can be very helpful to our economy, but the extreme green would rather inflict poverty on family’s than do something positive.”
Yeah cause it’s the Greens cutting people’s benefits and getting rid of state housing and reducing funding so people no longer have jobs.
Methinks that’s real inflicting of poverty rather than your theoretical notion.
The King Country used to have coal mining and forests. The easy coal was extracted, the forests cut down. Water was taken from the river.
When I was growing up there we had weka come out of the bush and wander around at dusk on our back lawn. We had glowworms in our back yard and geckos and skinks running all over our lawn.
That’s all gone now and funnily enough so are the jobs. The exploitation of those resources had a short-term not a long term gain.
Some of the jobs of course also went via deliberate government policy to close down hospitals, railways, and so on. More jobs went as government was forced to tender out business meaning the local businesses missed out to out of town larger firms often resulting in no business of that type left in town. More people in poverty. Often the reason those big firms could undercut was because they paid lower wages or subcontracted so they were not paying in the downtime. Small local businessmen knew their staff personally and wouldn’t treat them in the same way as the bigger firms. In effect we had a economic prioritisation of poor owners over good owners, a prioritisation of corporates over SME, a prioritisation of shareholders over the workers who actually do the work.
The most disadvantaged in this prioritisation was with those who had illness and disability to cope with. Those that private enterprise rarely employed or employs. Many of those people were provided work in the public service and had a state house for life so they had security of both income and housing.
The notion of that security was to give the next generation a better chance at succeeding. Free education, family benefit, etc were all part of that picture. The higher tax paid supported those collective socialist notions.
Indeed many of those people who did succeed prior to the neo-liberal reforms did so from that state of security – the PM included.
The neo-liberal promises much but delivers little to the collective benefit of the country. The evidence is all around you.
Give us tax cuts and we’ll create more jobs.
Tax cuts occurred but there are fewer jobs and a continual push for less and for more return to shareholders. The reality is for the private sector is that they have no concern for anything other than continual productivity increase and profit. It doesn’t actually matter if they are making a loss, a small profit or an enormous profit they will not invest in jobs they will find ways to destroy them. Take the recent losses announced at Telecom. They are making massive profits and could invest in those staff via training and innovative practise to create new jobs. They choose not to do this. No-one is forcing them to lay those staff off.
We’ve seen a continual move of GDP from wages to profit.
Remember 70% of GDP used to be paid in wages. 70% is now paid in profit.
So if private enterprise has got what it asked for shouldn’t we have more jobs not less. Shouldn’t we have more skilled people amongst the population not less. Shouldn’t we have more disabled peope employed not less.
In short the private sector has totally failed to deliver on it’s promises of give us more and we’ll do more.
And to go full circle to the start of this post having done all the private sector asked, having allowed them to dominate the economy, having reduced their tax, increased their profit, de-regulated what do we get.
Not innovation, not new products and services, not investment in people and technology but a request for more of the old – give us your trees, your coal, your gold.
The insatiable appetite for more comes from the private sector but they somehow purport it comes from those who the private sector have failed. It’s the private sector who have created poverty despite, particularly since 84 having been given more wealth, more sweat and more freedom than they have ever had.
Face it the private sector has failed this country and it should have no opportunity to further pillage either this country’s people or it’s land.
NRT comment – So, despite massive public support for the bill, National is still threatening to veto the extension of paid parental leave. Their reason? We can’t afford it. Bullshit. To point out the obvious, National has spent billions on tax cuts for the rich.
The problem is how to prise it out of the crevices they hide their excess income in. There was a mention that Britain had less tax money coming in than expected after they had put up rates. So
got some links of varying value to shedding light. (The NZ government is happy to take cents in
tax from me for the interest on my bank savings!)
Three years of British 40% tax on income bands. The 40% threshhold has come down from 35,001 pounds to 32,011 which is quite low for this rate. The over 150,000 pounds threshhold had a higher tax of 50% which has been reduced to 45%. So the pressure is high on the middle income earner on relatively moderate salaries considering housing appears to be very dear.
£35,001 – £150,000 £34,371-£150,000 £32,011- £150,000
In the 2009-10 tax year, more than 16,000 people declared an annual income of more than £1 million to HM Revenue and Customs.
This number fell to just 6,000 after Gordon Brown introduced the new 50p top rate of income tax shortly before the last general election.
(Since a reduction to 45% top tax the numbers have risen to 10,000.)