Open mike 06/02/2025

100 comments on “Open mike 06/02/2025 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Tony Veitch 1

   6 February 2025 at 6:07 am

   More on (https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-04-02-2025/) appeal for lefties – how about taxation reform?

   Let’s shift the burden of taxation from the poor to the wealthy!

   Such as:

   *. the first $X,000 tax free – giving an immediate boost to low income families

   *. a capital gains tax AND a wealth tax

   *. shift the emphasis of the economy away from property into research and development.l

   *. a higher top tax on the progressive scale (even at say, 70% on the top $, the wealthy are still wealthy).

   *. a financial transaction tax

   *. removal of GST off all fruit and vegetable (to encourage healthier diets)

   *. maybe even an inheritance tax

   When one NZer is worth 11,000 millions, and 300+ families pay half the effective tax of ‘bottom-feeders’ there’s something askew with our taxation system. Sociopaths like Luxon mightn’t like it, but he’ll still be ‘wealthy and sorted,’ just contributing a bit more to make NZ a better place for ALL Kiwis.

   In the 1890s the Liberal Government of Ballance and Seddon broke up the large estates to redistribute the land into small farms. Is it time to do the same to our mega landlords?
   • SPC 1.1

     6 February 2025 at 8:12 am

     1.*unaffordable at the moment, as it goes to all taxpayers and we have a budget problem.

     The options

     a.to restrict it to low income earners requires adjustment to the 'independent earner' and WFF tax credit.

     The IETC goes up to the median wage ($66,000 in 2024) – it is $10 a week and could go to $20.

     2.*I'd go with a wealth tax and CGT on property.

     3.*I'd apply a 1% mortgage surcharge on property mortgage loans on existing housing stock (exempting new builds). And use the money for state housing.

     A progressive tax regime for companies to afford a lower rate on small ones.

     4.*a move to higher rates of income tax at the top level on the Oz model (they have 32,5 cents up to 120,000, 37 cents above that and 45 cents from $180,00 to afford an adjustment to the threshholds.

     I'd go with moving the 30 cents threshold here from 78,000 to $100,000, and 35 cents over $100,000 and 39 cents from $150,000 (down from 180,000) and 45 cents over $200,000 to fund that and more.

     5*.A stamp duty on houses over $2M as Oz does (at 5%). And a gift duty.

     6*.Better food regulation – as per salt and sugar added to drinks and food.

     7.*I'd have an estate tax, but make all wealth tax payments a credit against future liability.
     • Mike the Lefty 1.1.1

       6 February 2025 at 10:47 am

       Broadly agree but in 3. would only make it for second or more homes because putting it on all existing homes would hurt the unwealthy.
       • SPC 1.1.1.1

         6 February 2025 at 10:58 am

         My bad, I should have specified rental property.
   • gsays 1.2

     6 February 2025 at 8:39 am

     Landlords on this site may want to look away…

     Acknowledging that secure housing is critical to individuals, family/whanau and communities, tier the tax rebates a landlord receives.

     Minimal rebates for the 2nd property owned, none for the 3rd and then it costs money to own a 4th etc.

     Vacant property taxes.

     My gut tells me we don't need too many more dwellings, they just need to be better allocated.
   • Michael Scott 1.3

     6 February 2025 at 9:22 am

     It is important to understand that currently the lowest 50 % of taxpayers pay no net tax whatsoever. The top 10% already pay 25% of all tax collected according to the Treasury (2021)

     We are dependent on a small group of high earning salaried professionals.

     A wealth tax would drive many of these high tax paying individuals overseas to countries wit no wealth tax.

     Wealth taxes are often introduced to reduce inequality but in NZ we do not have an increasing inequality problem

     Research shows that wealth taxes are costly to run and raise little revenue.

     Most countries that have tried them have got rid of them because they discovered that high taxes on capital and wealth damage economic growth.

     https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/eu/wealth-tax-impact/
     • Drowsy M. Kram 1.3.1

       6 February 2025 at 9:42 am

       https://www.greens.org.nz/ending_poverty_together

       

       https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/16-08-2022/the-side-eyes-two-new-zealands-the-table

       Wealth taxes are often introduced to reduce inequality but in NZ we do not have an increasing inequality problem

       It’s not difficult to see why a few Kiwis have less of a problem with inequality than others, and our CoC govt is doing a pretty good job of driving Kiwis overseas. No doubt their growth strategies will begin to trickle down soon – going forward. (/sarc)

       

       Nicky Hager: Beware the smooth talker with a forked tongue
       David Seymour and Act know exactly what they’re doing.
       …
       Act billboards say End Division by Race, but it is
       actually more like Defend Division by Wealth.
     • Tony Veitch 1.3.2

       6 February 2025 at 9:57 am

       but in NZ we do not have an increasing inequality problem

       Seriously, what planet do you live on?
       • Michael Scott 1.3.2.1

         6 February 2025 at 10:33 am

         Tony I really don't believe inequality is rising in NZ. Last year I heard Chloe Swarbrick claim that inequality has never been worse in NZ so decided to research it.

         I found some research by a well known ecomomist and there was a phone number at the end so I called and he kindly answered my questions and made some comments.

         He said that it was difficult to get good stats before 2015. In that year Stats NZ began tracking the net worth of NZ households. He told me to look at Max Rashbrooke " A history of NZ inequality"

         He said that our problem is not inequality but persistent poverty. Poor education, the large amount of sole parents in NZ compared to other OECD countries getting caught in the inter generational poverty trap.

         https://www.inequality.org.nz/understand/what-is-the-history-of-inequality-in-new-zealand/

         https://www.inequality.org.nz/understand/what-is-the-history-of-inequality-in-new-zealand/

         https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/distribution-of-wealth-across-new-zealand-households-remains-unchanged-between-2015-and-2021
         • Tony Veitch 1.3.2.1.1

           6 February 2025 at 11:34 am

           A simple Wikipedia search:

           Economic inequality in New Zealand is one of the social issues present in the country.

           Between 1982 and 2011, New Zealand's gross domestic product grew by 35%. Almost half of that increase went to a small group who were already the richest in the country. During this period, the average income of the top 10% of earners in New Zealand (those earning more than $72,000)[1] almost doubled going from $56,300 to $100,200. The average income of the poorest tenth increased by 13% from $9700 to $11,000.[2]
           • Michael Scott 1.3.2.1.1.1

             6 February 2025 at 11:57 am

             Tony my point is that since 2011 this has turned around and inequality is lessening. My claim was that inequality is no longer rising in NZ.

             We don't have an inequality problem we have a housing problem.

             Rents are so high the government has to subsidise them by paying those renting over 2 billion annually to top them up. I'm no economist but I'm pretty sure this allows landlords to charge higher rents because the govt is has a big pot of money to top them up.

             It is extremely difficult for the young to buy property because it has become so expensive. We have allowed our young people to become disenfranchised and unable to realistically save a deposit for a house and because of this we risk their futures and endanger the future of our society.

             Unaffordable housing divides the nation into homeowners and those permanently locked out of the housing market.

             A large rise in home ownership would raise living standards, reduce inequality, increase social mobility, promote economic growth, reduce homelessness and benefit the environment.

             And much much more.

             We need more New Zealanders owning houses- not renting them.
             • SPC …

               6 February 2025 at 12:47 pm

               Only income before and after tax inequality.

               But there is no adjustment for higher rent to income (those on higher incomes own).

               And those on fixed incomes owning property on super, face higher insurance and rates to their income.

               And wealth inequality is higher still. House values higher in real terms and fewer owning property.
             • Tony Veitch …

               6 February 2025 at 1:11 pm

               What we do have is people excusing the rampant inequality – first by suggesting we have a poverty problem, then that we have a renting problem.

               Neither of which denials disguise the fact that inequality is a major issue – and we need to tax the problem to bring it back into line.

               I'd be up for a UBI as well – means tested, of course, so everybody can have a life of dignity, not just the "wealthy and sorted."
               • Michael Scott …

                 6 February 2025 at 5:27 pm

                 Tony I have shown that income inequality has been trending down for the past 10 years. But lets agree it is stable- unless you have any data to dispute this.

                 I'm not sure what your problem is with inequality. We are proud of our successful business people. Peter Jackson, Ian Taylor, Peter Beck etc. Surely the more successful and richer Kiwis become the better.

                 We choose to have a market based economy which I think is a good thing because over the last 100 years it has been proven to be a great mechanism for getting the poor out of poverty.

                 It's not inequality that is the problem its poverty.

                 And as for the UBI you favour unfortunately it can't be means tested.

                 What you propose is simply a welfare system.
                 • KJT …

                   6 February 2025 at 11:31 pm

                   "What is the problem with inequality?

                   Excessive inequality is poverty!

                   What has been successful in getting the poor out of poverty is measures to reduce inequality, such as transfer payments. You only have to play monopoly, to understand how the "market" works to increase poverty and inequality.

                   Trump and his puppet masters using their wealth and power to ensure they have more wealth and power, is a prime example of why excessive wealth is a problem.

                   Interesting that you use some of our very few entrepreneurs as examples of wealthy people. In fact most of New Zealands very wealthy are simply rent takers, if not downright thieves, like those who bought and sold rail. The people that fund the current Coalition of Cockups.
                   • Michael Scott …

                     7 February 2025 at 8:41 am

                     Excessive inequality is poverty!

                     Inequality does not mean there must be poverty in a society.

                     There will always be inequality and sadly there will always be poor.

                     In NZ if you need any essential we have agreed as a society to provide it. If you lose your income we help you out till you get back on your feet.

                     Everyone child in NZ can get to a school if their parents value education. Here are some simple rules for a good life.

                     These are rules to avoid poverty that most parents I know follow and teach their children

                     1. Turn up to school
                     2. Get a job with your education
                     3. Use contraception unless you want a child
                     4. Stay away from the welfare system except for short term need.
                     5. Save a deposit and buy a house
                   • SPC …

                     7 February 2025 at 9:08 am

                     Many parents now know that has become a myth, if they cannot help their children raise a deposit they will struggle to realise home ownership.
                 • SPC …

                   7 February 2025 at 9:06 am

                   First we do not tax all income – CG.

                   And second Oz has more tax on higher incomes than us and a CGT.

                   And thus we have poorly funded public state and infrastructure. That is a relative inequality in taxation of income across the Tasman and for that we all pay.

                   And if there is no wealth/estate tax (or gift duty inheritance) there is generational inequality – a class system then develops.

                   That looks like a nation with 50% home ownership.
                   • Michael Scott …

                     7 February 2025 at 9:32 am

                     Yes I agree we need a CGT but it won't raise much money.

                     The key to economic success is to build an educated working population that are net contributors to our economy. Like Singapore.

                     For the last 20 years I have been helping mainly young people to start their own businesses and it's been fulfilling- and sometimes heartbreaking.

                     Recently I have pivoted to work to get the young into a position to purchase their own homes. I believe that if we could increase the home ownership rate in NZ from 50% to 80% it would revolutionise our society.
             • SPC …

               6 February 2025 at 1:29 pm

               It was a National Party choice to not increase the number of state houses while in government – 1990-1999, 2008-2017 and 2023- .

               The rise in rent price and cost of subsidy is the consequence.

               We coped in 1990-1999 because of the exodus to Oz. But with the migration tap on since then (2002-2007 house price boom) and the return of the no state house building 2008-2017 a post GFC recovery boom in values.

               A third boom caused by having the OCR too low for too long (COVID).
     • adam 1.3.3

       6 February 2025 at 10:28 am

       Link to a far right think tank – classy.

       Of course it's going to hate on tax, that's the game from the far right. Get down, gobble on the cock of the mega wealthy, and do their biding.

       Most countries that have tried them have got rid of them because they discovered that high taxes on capital and wealth damage economic growth.

       But this, this is the most turgid regurgitation of propaganda I've read on the standard in a very long time. It's a the type of lie people proclaim who think they understand how liberalism works as an economic model .
       • Michael Scott 1.3.3.1

         6 February 2025 at 11:10 am

         Adam which research in the paper do you disagree with?

         I don't know if the researcher/ organisation is left or right wing but surely it is the quality of the data that matters and not their political persuasion.
         • KJT 1.3.3.1.1

           6 February 2025 at 8:03 pm

           In fact all Western countries had their periods of greatest growth and prosperity when they had their highest taxes on wealth. And the greatest share of the economy by the Government. Scandinavian countries until very recently. Though now also getting bitten by the Neo-Liberal virus.

           The USA is a noteable example. As is NZ and Australia.

           Don't take my word for it however.

           Are taxes a barrier to prosperity? > Check the facts – The Australia Institute

           A negative relationship means higher tax ratios are associated with lower GDP per person. This is not the case.

           There is obviously a limit, but the sweet spot appears to be about 60% State share of the economy. Ours is 30% and it is apparent in our failing infrastructure, lack of Government investment in research, education, health and housing and soaring private debt.

           https://www.amazon.com.au/dp/0393345068?ref_=mr_referred_us_au_nz
     • tWig 1.3.4

       6 February 2025 at 11:08 am

       Well shift that tax away from salaries (and how many of those people hide wealth in trusts), and shift it to assets, then.

       Richer people with financial and legal nous can shift their housing costs into family trusts or businesses, and dick round with rental investment structure to (legally) take advantage of things like government income-capped allowances, eg,to claim allowances for children in tertiary education.

       I caught the chat between the owner of the rental property next door and his friend, who was fixing the boundary fence " how much tax do you pay, d'ya reckon?" "Oh, about 10%" "Me too [snigger].

       So your TPU propaganda, by mentioning only salary income, and not GST, or tax avoidance, rather smothers our real tax inequity.

       Income-support measures, such as accomodation allowance, were brought in as a balance to the big increase in proportion of tax paid :income for poorer NZers when GST was introduced.

       In the 60s and 70s, salaries apparently contributed ~20% of our tax take, with 80% from business. I realised yesterday that a lot of this must have come from the high tariffs on imported goods, particularly consumer goods. Which is a form of goods tax on non-local items. But that sales tax was targetted, and not on local goods and services.

       Back to a world with tariff wars, is this a direction to look at?
     • SPC 1.3.5

       6 February 2025 at 1:17 pm

       Every other nation in the OECD has a CGT.

       24/36 also have an estate/inheritance tax.

       Oz does not but they have stamp duty (5% for a house over $2m). And they tax those on higher incomes more than we do.

       If they go to the UK – CGT/inheritance tax and gift duty and stamp duty.
       • Michael Scott 1.3.5.1

         6 February 2025 at 1:42 pm

         SPC wealth taxes have two things in their favour.

         1. They deliver a lot of tax very quickly in their first years.

         2. They reduce inequality.

         But they almost always end up killing the goose.

         CGT is a fair tax and I have no idea why the Labour party pulled the pin on it. I'm guessing that when Robertson saw how little tax a CGT would deliver in the first 5 years he decided it wasn't worth the bother.

         I don't like stamp duty on property as it is my mission to get more people owning homes and not renting. If we have to have it exempt the first home buyer as some Oz states do.
         • SPC 1.3.5.1.1

           6 February 2025 at 1:48 pm

           I prefer a wealth tax that is a down payment (credit) on a future estate tax liability. Basically because we need money now.

           I prefer a stamp duty at the same level proposed for foreign buyers – at over $2m only. And at the Oz rate for that amount 5%.

           My only concern about going to a CGT outside of property is that we need a period changing the mind-set to one where people make money investing in start-ups/share issue finance/business partnerships etc. The real economy.

           Maybe at the persons income tax rate for rental property CG and a lower rate for business activity (including new builds).
           • Michael Scott 1.3.5.1.1.1

             6 February 2025 at 2:57 pm

             SPC No country wanted a wealth tax to work as much as the French.Tractors were driven and demonstrators demanded the tax.

             Polls showed that everyone who was not affected by the tax was for it.

             I was living in the south when the actor Gerard Depardieu led an array of mainly business people leaving in opposition to the tax.

             The newspaper aand TVwere full of "Brussels welcomes new citizens" and a photo of Depardieu being handed a Russian passport by Putin himself.

             The tax – called the ISF (impôt sur la fortune) – stayed in place until 2017 when it was abolished by current president Emmanuel Macron.

             The rate was charged on individuals with a net worth over €1.3m (£1.14m), with the rate ranging from 0.5 per cent to 1.5 per cent (on assets over €10m). While it might have helped social solidarity in France, the revenue it raised was paltry. In 2015, a total of 343,000 households paid €5.22bn, an average of about €15,200 per household, according to the Financial Times. It accounted for less than 2 per cent of France’s tax receipts.

             What’s more, it led to an exodus of France’s richest. More than 12,000 millionaires left France in 2016, according to research group New World Wealth. In total, they say the country experienced a net outflow of more than 60,000 millionaires between 2000 and 2016. When these people left, France lost not only the revenue generated from the wealth tax, but all the others too, including income tax and VAT.

             French economist Eric Pichet estimated that the ISF ended up costing France almost twice as much revenue as it generated. In a paper published in 2008, he concluded that the ISF caused an annual fiscal shortfall of €7bn and had probably reduced gross domestic product (GDP) growth by 0.2 per cent a year. What's more ISF fraud mainly involving an underassessment of property assets was estimated at around 28 per cent of total revenues.
             • SPC …

               6 February 2025 at 3:43 pm

               Ideally Labour her and in Oz should do one with payments made a credit on future estate tax.

               The French mistake was not to tie it to an estate tax.
               • Michael Scott …

                 6 February 2025 at 4:11 pm

                 Not even the French taxman would be bold enough to do that.

                 The French inheritance tax ( droit du succession) is already punishing.

                 Unlike the UK – and NZ's when we had one – the French tax the individual to whom the estate is bequeathed and not the estate itself if I remember correctly.

                 I have spent the day at Waitangi and it has been perfect. Families enjoying themselves. Music and all manner of activities.

                 I often read TS and wished I had the time to respond.- and today I did.

                 My wife asked why I was drinking so much coffee.
                 • SPC …

                   6 February 2025 at 5:15 pm

                   An inheritance tax is what they have – tax paid by beneficiaries. The different rates for children (0 to 20%) siblings (35%) niece/nephew (55%) and other (60%) is uncommon.

                   The value they place on that difference is why they have not adopted an estate tax.

                   For mine, a 1% wealth tax paid annually and as a credit on their estate tax liability is a better system. Thus dispersed tax paid.

                   Many would not meet the threshold to pay a wealth tax, or estate tax.

                   Only those wealthy in youth would pay more than required on their estate tax.
                   • Graeme …

                     6 February 2025 at 10:37 pm

                     Wealth taxes appeal to those who don't think they have to pay them, up to the point that the tax man thinks they might. Having to prove that you don't qualify, annually, is a goldmine for accountants, and a cup of cold sick to the taxpayer concerned. Also spawn all manner of avoidance schemes / scams.
                   • SPC …

                     6 February 2025 at 10:59 pm

                     They would impact only a small part of the population.

                     Mostly older ones. A wealth tax being an annual payment credited to an estate tax liability.

                     It's not that hard to make an online declaration of assets.
       • alwyn 1.3.5.2

         6 February 2025 at 2:19 pm

         "Every other nation in the OECD has a CGT".

         New Zealand has a CGT. It may not be a comprehensive one but it is still there. If anything it is a great deal more comprehensive that the one in Belgium. In New Zealand it is called the Brightline test.

         I can't think of any country that has a complete CGT system. Even New Zealand's most hard-core lefties aren't proposing one. They plan to exclude what is by far the largest item that should be included. That is a person's home.

         Are you proposing that we should tax that?
         • SPC 1.3.5.2.1

           6 February 2025 at 2:37 pm

           Not one nation in the OECD has a CGT on the family home.

           So why raise it?

           A bright-line test of 2 years is not a serious CGT, it is merely a buy and flip tax.
           • alwyn 1.3.5.2.1.1

             6 February 2025 at 6:42 pm

             Wrong.

             Four countries have CGT on the owner occupied home without any exemptions. Fourteen others have some exemptions and 20 have complete exemptions in place.

             https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2022/07/housing-taxation-in-oecd-countries_1ee79763.html

             By coincidence there are only 4 OECD countries that currently have wealth taxes. Can we say that since there are so few who do so we can ask, of the leftists in New Zealand "So why raise it?"

             https://taxfoundation.org/research/all/eu/wealth-tax-impact/
             • SPC …

               6 February 2025 at 7:36 pm

               Maybe you could quote from your link. I cannot find anything on it.

               In our survey, realized capital gains on land and other assets are generally taxed. Only owner-occupiers pay no capital gains tax and this position has not changed over decades. The four exceptions are Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the USA.

               I can find the "4" here.

               https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/lselondon/housing-taxation-across-europe-changing-for-the-better/

               The 4 without any exemptions?

               USA

               You can sell your primary residence and be exempt from capital gains taxes on the first $250,000 if you are single and $500,000 if married filing jointly.

               Average home price in the United States: $419,200. The median home sales price is $419,200 as of the fourth quarter of 2024. That's a 17% increase from the fourth quarter of 2020.

               Profits from the sale of an asset held for more than a year are subject to long-term capital gains tax. The rates are 0%, 15% or 20%, depending on taxable income and filing status. Per the IRS, most people pay no more than 15%

               The average house there was $250,000 in 2011.

               Spain

               No liability, if buying another property of same value or more, or if over 65.

               https://expatsmagazine.org/capital-gains-tax-on-property-in-spain/

               Portugal

               same.

               Reinvestment relief when rolling the proceeds over in a new main home

               When you sell your main residence and use the proceeds to buy your new home, the gain is exempt from Portuguese capital gains tax, provided you meet the conditions.

               Sweden.

               So you meant one.
               • alwyn …

                 6 February 2025 at 8:30 pm

                 No. I said 4 and I meant 4. I only considered countries that were in the OECD, since that was the group you referenced when you said "Not one nation in the OECD .. ".

                 At about page 135 in the report there is an "Annex A. Tax treatment of housing in OECD countries." There is a column under Disposal of asset the lists whether there are capital gains and, where there are, whether there are any exclusions from applying them. There are 14 where some exemptions apply and 4 where there aren't. The four are Colombia, Costa Rica, Japan and Slovenia.

                 I think that this link will narrow it down to the relevant pages

                 https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/housing-taxation-in-oecd-countries_03dfe007-en/full-report/component-7.html#annex-d1e13894

                 Yes, that seems to work. The limitations are explained in the notes.
                 • SPC …

                   6 February 2025 at 9:31 pm

                   I can't think of any country that has a complete CGT system.

                   Progress then, or do the 4 not place a CGT on something else?

                   They plan to exclude what is by far the largest item that should be included

                   So in any CGT debate you will argue for including the family home?

                   By coincidence there are only 4 OECD countries that currently have wealth taxes. Can we say that since there are so few who do so we can ask, of the leftists in New Zealand "So why raise it?"

                   We need the money (as presumably the 4 nations that have CGT on the family home did). But it would be best introduced along with an estate tax – with any wealth tax paid a credit in the future estate tax liability (and in concert with Oz doing the same).
                   • alwyn …

                     7 February 2025 at 9:20 am

                     I can understand the arguments for a CGT on realised gains and can see ways of implementing the tax. I can also see the tax can be avoided, mostly of course by not selling anything. However if you propose to have a CGT it must be complete, and therefore must include the main home.

                     Wealth taxes in my view are quite impossible to implement. How on earth can you determine somebody's wealth at the end of each year in order to charge the tax when a large part of the wealth is in assets that aren't traded? All a wealth tax will do is to shift ownership offshore. Even the TPM leader, who is pushing wealth taxes, didn't understand how it could work when Tame interviewed him.
                   • SPC …

                     7 February 2025 at 9:55 am

                     However if you propose to have a CGT it must be
                     complete, and therefore must include the main home.

                     No many nations choose to do otherwise because of the impact on labour mobility and unfairness.

                     A wealth tax is not hard administratively

                     It can be done via an on-line declaration portal.

                     Shares – number and current value.

                     Property – QV (the value of a property is updated each year)

                     Cash Assets –

                     Other Assets – value at purchase

                     Land (land banking) might be a complicated one.

                     People on welfare do it every year, as do those going onto super at age 65 (except they exclude the residence).

                     This would include assets offshore.

                     If the person moved offshore they would pay tax under offshore regimes. Thus CGT in Oz and stamp duty on their property purchases. In the UK they would be liable for a quite significant estate tax.

                     But it would be best if we and Oz introduced the wealth and estate tax at the same time.
                   • alwyn …

                     7 February 2025 at 10:40 am

                     "as do those going onto super at age 65 (except they exclude the residence)."

                     Do you live in New Zealand or Australia? Australia means tests their pension. New Zealand doesn't. The Australian approach is a terrible one. It leads Australians, as they near 65 to go on a splurge of travelling or upgrading their houses. You get a full pension if you have means tested assets of less than $470,000 and nothing if the assets exceed $1,045,000. Those are for a couple who own a house, which is the most common case for new pensioners.

                     It is a terrible scheme.

                     You talk as if it is easy to value people's assets. It is for things like traded shares but I'll ask you how you would value a small business, perhaps a panel beater who owns the building and equipment used and employs 8 people. Where are you going to start to do the evaluation? What is going to be the method you use?

                     You also talk about "Other assets. value at purchase" I remember when Nelson Rockefeller was nominated to become Ford's VP. He declared his wealth which included an incredible art collection that he valued at about $35 million. It was that low because he valued it all at what he had paid. That included some Picasso drawings that he had bought for $10 each which he had bought, while he was a child, during WW1. Is that a valid number when similar ones were selling for hundreds of thousands?
                   • SPC …

                     7 February 2025 at 11:22 am

                     On art wealth, valuing at cost. This is still useful, as the information is also required for assessing CG on sale.

                     And any unpaid wealth tax on such assets would just mean a higher estate tax later.

                     Business wealth determination (no public shares) – the same. It can be based on<strong> <em>equity input at foundation</em>,</strong> or based on a standard assessment<em> based on the balance sheet (allow the person to decide on or the other what the value is for wealth tax purposes). </em>

                     This is still useful, as it provides the basis for CG on sale.

                     And any unpaid wealth tax on (the rising value of the business) such assets, would just mean a higher estate tax later.

                     I have no great problem with a business thriving and growing faster (thus even more CG tax at some point).

                     As per Kiwis at age 65.

                     Some New Zealanders (low non super income) have to declare their non residence assets (shares and dividend income, rental and income as per income – this for the purpose of the CSC load onto the Super Card.

                     Over 63% of Australians who are of Age Pension age, receive either a full or part Government Age Pension.

                     The qualifying age for the Age Pension is 67 years or older.

                     Apart from your age, the Government uses an income and assets test to see if you’re eligible. The income test looks at all sources of income that you receive. This includes income from financial investments such as your super.

                     The assets test looks at both financial and non-financial assets. Non-financial assets include home contents, car or other personal property other than your home. For Centrelink purposes, home contents or personal assets should be valued at how much they would sell for second-hand, not their original purchase or replacement price. An asset like a car would be assessed at trade-in value.

                     https://aware.com.au/member/retirement/set-up-your-retirement/government-age-pension-eligibility
         • Tony Veitch 1.3.5.2.2

           6 February 2025 at 2:40 pm

           Ah yes, the Brightline Test, which can be manipulated so a sociopath can make about $900,000 tax free on the sale of three properties – that Brightline Test?
           • alwyn 1.3.5.2.2.1

             7 February 2025 at 9:22 am

             Did you really manage to do that? What a clever laddie you must be.
     • Georgecom 1.3.6

       6 February 2025 at 3:53 pm

       So i think then the answer is a fairly comprehensive CGT. Income not currently captured in the tax system can be incorporated. Given the figures from the Cullen group a few years back maybe $3 billion pa when fully implemented? Not massive but will give the state extra funding for health, education, rnd, climate change
       • Michael Scott 1.3.6.1

         6 February 2025 at 5:44 pm

         The Treasury reported a CGT as being proposed by the Labour Party would raise 400m in its first year a 5.9b by year 10.

         It is insignificant in comparison to existing taxes or the proposed wealth tax, or taxes on each financial transaction
         • Georgecom 1.3.6.1.1

           6 February 2025 at 5:54 pm

           So $6 billion when bedded in, double what i speculated. Very handy money for the govt to have
         • Incognito 1.3.6.1.2

           6 February 2025 at 6:08 pm

           You provided no links to support your assertions – you’ve copped a ban for this in the past.

           You’re deflecting and being disingenuous.

           From an OIA request to Treasury:

           If an existing tax base is narrow, then broadening the base is generally the optimal way to raise more revenue. However, besides taxing capital gains, base-broadening measures are likely to raise modest amounts of revenue.

           https://www.treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2024-12/oia-20240840.pdf
           • Michael Scott 1.3.6.1.2.1

             6 February 2025 at 6:32 pm

             Apologies for no link but it is from a note I made in 2023. I pretty sure it will be correct.

             Don't want to waste your time but can you explain how I am deflecting and being ingenuous. I am on record as supporting a CGT.
             • Incognito …

               6 February 2025 at 6:46 pm

               It’s correct, depending on assumptions made and model used by Treasury (cf. https://www.treasury.govt.nz/sites/default/files/2025-01/oia-20240917.pdf), but that’s not the point – you know to support your substantive assertions with links, not refer to obscure notes and rely on your unshaken belief in the infallibility of your own memory.

               You could’ve made an effort to find and provide the source material but you didn’t.

               If indeed you support CGT, as you claim, then you may want to re-read your comments to see if they’re as clear and unambiguous as you seem to think they are.

               I don’t intend to spend more time on this with you unless you ‘encourage’ me.
     • KJT 1.3.7

       6 February 2025 at 6:40 pm

       You need to get your information from a greater variety of sources.

       In-equality, which rose sharply in the 80'S and 90's and never got better since in NZ, is, as Joseph Stiglitz, Ha Joon Chang and other credible economists, (not Neo-Liberal or extreme right wing apologists for wealthy greed) prove, is a brake on a economic success.

       It is also a brake on economic and social sustainability.

       When we taxed the wealthy more we had the highest standard of living in the world.

       By the way, most 60% of total tax in NZ is paid by middle to higher income earners. Those on about 80k to 300k roughly. I.e. Skilled professionals and trades. The wealthy over that, pay stuff all in relation to their wealth. (Source IRD).
       • Tony Veitch 1.3.7.1

         6 February 2025 at 7:21 pm

         
       • Michael Scott 1.3.7.2

         6 February 2025 at 7:44 pm

         "When we taxed the wealthy more we had the highest standard of living in the world."

         Those days are gone and can't come back – just like our cozy trade relationship with the UK back then can't be revived.
         If we want to eliminate poverty we need to create as much wealth for everyone as possible
         • KJT 1.3.7.2.1

           6 February 2025 at 7:52 pm

           You think?
           • Michael Scott 1.3.7.2.1.1

             6 February 2025 at 8:10 pm

             Yes I think.

             Just say we had a wealth tax and Australia did not. And when NZ professionals did the math it was clear they would retain more of their income in Oz.

             I think many would make the move across the ditch.

             Same with company taxes and personal taxes. Globalisation and cheap travel and communications have changed the world.
             • KJT …

               6 February 2025 at 11:13 pm

               Professionals already pay much higher tax rates in Oz.

               Doesn't stop us from moving over there.

               Businesses, and individuals profiting from the New Zealand economy cannot easily shift their businesses. Rentiers can. But then they have to sell their assets in NZ. Hullo. Cheaper house and land prices if they go.
2. KJT 2

   6 February 2025 at 6:47 am

   Chris Bishop gave further gifts to developers and landlords at the expense of the housing poor.

   Govt to sell billions of dollars worth of state housing land

   1. Bishop detailed plans to add a net 145 new homes this year before capping the state housing stock at 78,000 for the next 30 years, with renewal and renovations of an already-tired housing stock paid for by land and home sales in leafier suburbs;
   • Georgecom 2.1

     6 February 2025 at 3:57 pm

     Seems to have been little comment on this? My immediate thoughts were the COC has given up on reducing homlessness, only thing keeping it in check is Willis driving kiwis to aussi3le in record numbers. The pathway ahead out of emergency housing seems to be a car, tent in someones back yard or a shop doorway.
3. Jenny 3

   6 February 2025 at 7:36 am

   Donald Trump has renamed the United States highest peak after, arch US imperialist, President William McKinley, who infamously colonised and brutally subjugated the people of the Philippines to the interest of US imperialist ambition in the Pacific region and beyond.

   For Trump's proclivity for re-naming things 'New Madagascar', anyone?

   On Trump's plan to relocate the Palestinians

   …..U.S., opposition politicians quickly rejected Trump's idea, with Democratic Sen. Chris Coons calling his comments "offensive and insane and dangerous and foolish.”

   The idea “risks the rest of the world thinking that we are an unbalanced and unreliable partner because our president makes insane proposals,”

   This is not the first time in history that a world leader has been described as 'offensive', 'dangerous' and 'insane', for a proposal to remove an entire population from one area to another.

   The Madagascar Plan:

   Wikipedia

   https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Madagascar_Plan

   The Madagascar Plan (German: Madagaskarplan) was a plan proposed by the Nazi German government to forcibly relocate the Jewish population of Europe to the island of Madagascar.

   The Madagascar Plan was Hitler's initial solution to the so-called Jewish problem .

   Trump has as much chance of clearing Gaza of Palestinians and relocating them to Jordan and Egypt, as Hitler had of clearing Europe of Jews and relocating them to Madagascar.

   Normalising Genocide

   When his initial version of the Madagascar Plan fails, as it will, what will Trump's Final Solution to the Palestinian problem be?

   With Netanyahu cheering him on from the sidelines, the answer is obvious.

   What will be the world’s response?

   What will be our response?
   • SPC 3.1

     6 February 2025 at 8:22 am

     McKinley was an economic isolationist – a man of tariffs. Trump went to hogWharton School, founded by a nickle and dime monopolist who promoted a tariff wall and related domestic oligarchy.

     Oligarchy at home and the threat of military conquest on the other.

     By the end of the 4 years there will be the luft balloon of a renaming, Mount Trump-McKinley.
     • Jenny 3.1.1

       6 February 2025 at 9:41 am

       SPC @3.1

       6 February 2025 at 8:22 am

       McKinley was an economic isolationist – a man of tariffs…..

       Hi SPC, if by 'economic isolationist' you mean imperialist, then you are right.
       Imperialism and tariffs go together, a dominant imperialist country can export its manufactured goods to other countries while at the same time preventing other countries exporting their manufactured goods to you. Crushing their economies n the process by preventing them from developing their own native industrial base. At the same time buying up their unprocessed raw materials and produce, to manufacture into finished products to sell back to them. Colonialism and neo-colonialism both follow this economic model of export dominance and trade barriers.

       Afterall is said and done, imperialism is an economic system. (backed up by force. As McKinley ably demonstrated in his take over of the Philippines)

       U.S. DEPARTMENT of STATE

       ARCHIVE

       …..The decision by U.S. policymakers to annex the Philippines was not without domestic controversy. Americans who advocated annexation evinced a variety of motivations: desire for commercial opportunities in Asia, concern that the Filipinos were incapable of self-rule, and fear that if the United States did not take control of the islands, another power (such as Germany or Japan) might do so.

       …..American opposition to U.S. colonial rule of the Philippines came in many forms, ranging from those who thought it morally wrong for the United States to be engaged in colonialism….

       ……Others were wholly unconcerned about the moral or racial implications of imperialism and sought only to oppose the policies of President William McKinley's administration.

       …..The war was brutal on both sides. U.S. forces at times burned villages, implemented civilian reconcentration policies, and employed torture on suspected guerrillas, while Filipino fighters also tortured captured soldiers and terrorized civilians who cooperated with American forces. Many civilians died during the conflict as a result of the fighting, cholera and malaria epidemics, and food shortages caused by several agricultural catastrophes.

       Even as the fighting went on, the colonial government that the United States established in the Philippines in 1900 under future President William Howard Taft launched a pacification campaign that became known as the "policy of attraction." Designed to win over key elites and other Filipinos who did not embrace Aguinaldo's plans for the Philippines, this policy permitted a significant degree of self-government, introduced social reforms, and implemented plans for economic development. Over time, this program gained important Filipino adherents and undermined the revolutionaries' popular appeal, which significantly aided the United States' military effort to win the war.

       In 1907, the Philippines convened its first elected assembly, and in 1916, the Jones Act promised the nation eventual independence. The archipelago became an autonomous commonwealth in 1935, and the U.S. granted independence in 1946.

       It's no wonder that Trump idolizes McKinley. Trump is a hyper-imperialist in the McKinley mold. Maybe Trump could name the new US colony in Gaza, 'New McKinley'after his hero.
       • SPC 3.1.1.1

         6 February 2025 at 10:06 am

         Trump is doing a Reagan – invasion of Grenada, removal of Noriega from Panama.

         And going Monroe Doctrine asserting hegemony over the continent.

         And as per James Polk, seizing land to the Pacific off Mexico, with ambitions for incorporation of Canada and Greenland.

         But not Puerto Rico or Mexico.

         Last term

         A space force is a military branch that conducts operations in space. The United States Space Force is a branch of the U.S. Armed Forces that was established in 2019

         Now revising the missile shield plan.

         

         The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), derisively nicknamed the Star Wars program, was a proposed missile defense system intended to protect the United States from attack by ballistic nuclear missiles. The program was announced in 1983, by President Ronald Reagan

         And now in a doggone minute, he is after the land of Gaza

         The Philistines populated the coastal regions of Canaan from the 12th century BCE to their disappearance in 604 BCE

         Wherever there is land without a people, some property developer turns up.
         • Jenny 3.1.1.1.1

           6 February 2025 at 10:35 am

           Wherever there is land without a people, with a murdered people, some property developer hideous vulture turns up.
           • tWig 3.1.1.1.1.1

             6 February 2025 at 11:13 am

             Which let's me share a morbid line from yesterday. 'The US hawks have been replaced by vultures'.
4. Jenny 4

   6 February 2025 at 8:49 am

   On September 11, 2001, box cutters were used to disable the crews of four domestic aircraft. The terrorists were able to get the box cutters through security because small knives were allowed on board at the time.

   What happened?

   • Some hijackers may have stabbed the crews with the box cutters
   • The hijackers moved passengers and possibly crew to the rear of the aircraft
   • At the Flight 93 crash site, the FBI found 14 knives and parts of knives, including a box cutter
   • A published report described a "stout fighting knife" with a locking, serrated blade that was found at the crash site

   On September 17, 2024, hundreds of pagers used by members of Hezbollah exploded across Lebanon, killing 12 people and injuring more than 2,800. The explosions caused horrific injuries, including.

   What happened?

   • Small amounts of explosives were added to the pagers after they were shipped from the manufacturer, Gold Apollo.
   • Eye injuries, including shrapnel in the eyes and ruptured eyeballs
   • Finger amputations
   • Open abdomen injuries, including intestines and bowels
   • Fractured mandibles and bones

   Doctors in Lebanon described the injuries as "horrific".

   An incredibly smug looking Benjamin Netanyahu gifts President Trump a golden pager to commemorate Israel's successful terror attack on Lebanon.

   In an alternate universe an extremely smug looking Al Qaeda leader gifts President Bush a golden box cutter to commemorate Al Qaeda's successful terror attack on the Twin Towers.
   • Belladonna 4.1

     6 February 2025 at 9:48 am

     For your equivalence to work, you'd have to have Netanyahu presenting the leader of Hamas (or Qatar, if you insist on a state leader) with the golden pager.

     I highly doubt that any US citizens were affected by the pager explosions.
     • adam 4.1.1

       6 February 2025 at 10:15 am

       Terrorism is terrorism – just to many apologists of the state sponsored kind for my liking.
     • Jenny 4.1.2

       6 February 2025 at 11:15 am

       Belladonna @4.1

       "I highly doubt that any US citizens were affected by the pager explosions."

       AI Overview

       No information is available about whether any US citizens were affected by the pager explosions in Beirut, Lebanon. However, the explosions killed 12 people, including two children and four health care workers. 2,800 people were also wounded.

       But hey they weren't Americans, so that's OK then?

       Under International Law, war crimes are war crimes no matter who commits them, or who the victims are.

       From the New York Times:

       Booby Traps, Pager Attacks and the Law of War

       …..a 1996 United Nations treaty that specifically bans explosive devices that have been manufactured to look like “apparently harmless” portable items. Israel signed it 24 years ago…..

       The treaty in question is the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby Traps and Other Devices, usually referred to as “Protocol II,” because it’s an addition to the 1980 United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.

       The treaty language is helpfully clear. Article 7(2) states, in its entirety:

       “It is prohibited to use booby-traps or other devices in the form of apparently harmless portable objects which are specifically designed and constructed to contain explosive material.”

       ……Nine-year-old Fatima Abdullah was in her kitchen in Lebanon when a pager on the table began to beep, her aunt told the Times. She picked up the pager to bring it to her father, but it exploded in her hands, killing her.

       While many of the laws of war turn on complex questions of knowledge and intent, Protocol II’s ban on manufacturing portable explosive devices does not: The rule is simply that such devices are prohibited…..

       Isaac Herzog, Israel’s president, has publicly denied that the country was behind the attacks…..

       So much for the international rule of law, now being mocked at the highest levels.
       • Gareth 4.1.2.1

         6 February 2025 at 6:32 pm

         What did Fatima Abdullah's father do for a living?
         • KJT 4.1.2.1.1

           6 February 2025 at 7:44 pm

           Why is that relevant?
         • Jenny 4.1.2.1.2

           6 February 2025 at 7:47 pm

           Gareth @4.1.2.1

           “What did Fatima Abdullah's father do for a living?”

           I wouldn't know what this little girl's Dad did for a living, any more. than the terrorists who boobytrapped the pager that killed his daughter would have know what he did for a living.

           Even if Fatima's father was a member of Hezbollah or Hamas, it was still an illegal act of indiscriminate terrorism prohibited by international law.

           The self proclaimed, 'Most moral army in the world' doesn't have to adhere to international law, or any law at all, for that matter.
           • Gareth 4.1.2.1.2.1

             6 February 2025 at 8:41 pm

             But I didn't mention Hezbollah or Hamas. What makes you think Fatima's father could be a member?
             • Jenny …

               7 February 2025 at 10:57 am

               Gareth @4.1.2.1.2.1

               But I didn't mention Hezbollah or Hamas. What makes you think Fatima's father could be a member?

               I wouldn't know what this little girl's Dad did for a living, any more. than the terrorists who boobytrapped the pager that killed his daughter would have know what he did for a living.
5. SPC 5

   6 February 2025 at 9:05 am

   Where has the PM gone,

   Gone south to Hakaroa.

   It is a long way to go to find a safe harbour.

   Fortunately, there is a marae (Onuku) nearby. And it is a place where the Treaty was signed.

   https://my.christchurchcitylibraries.com/ti-kouka-whenua/onuku-marae/

   https://nzhistory.govt.nz/keyword/akaroa

   Britomart arrives on time, in the South Island.

   https://nzhistory.govt.nz/french-pipped-at-akaroa-british-sovereignty-proclaimed-over-the-south-island-again
6. Sanctuary 6

   6 February 2025 at 9:35 am

   The reflexive sane washing of Trump in the legacy MSM does my head in. Just today in stuff we've got this bullshit:

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360572163/trumps-gaza-plan-has-stunned-region-heres-look-obstacles-it-faces

   Obstacles in faces? Obstacles? This is "Himmler stuns Wadensee with holocaust plan, here's a look at the obstacles it faces" level of sane washing.

   The "obstacle" is the Palestinian people, who main crime is to exist, made worse by their obdurate capacity to endure.
   • Belladonna 6.1

     6 February 2025 at 9:45 am

     I would regard this as an insane plan (if plan it is, and not just grandstanding).

     I can't think of anything more doomed to failure than an American occupation force in Gaza. The British learned this in the early part of the 20th century, when both Jews and Arabs attacked them, while they occupied the territory.

     In more recent history, the US occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan – should have cued Trump into understanding that this is an action doomed to failure (and a lot of bloodshed along the way). The US is notoriously bad at dealing with guerilla insurrections. And the American people are notoriously unsupportive when it comes to their sons being killed overseas. The spectre of Vietnam should be haunting any US president.
     • SPC 6.1.1

       6 February 2025 at 9:51 am

       They do not plan on there being any people there to resist (it is a tacit warning that Israel might resume bombing and force them out). BN does not want more than phase one of the cease-fire.
       • Belladonna 6.1.1.1

         6 February 2025 at 10:10 am

         Well, unless they plan on depopulating it in perpetuity (somewhat at odds with the 'Riviera' image) – then people will be present. And guerillas have lots of history of blending in with the population in order to attack.
     • KJT 6.1.2

       6 February 2025 at 7:50 pm

       Agree. Totally nuts.
   • SPC 6.2

     6 February 2025 at 9:47 am

     Real estate without a people, North America. They pardon themselves each Thanksgiving Day and await judgment falling on the world when one continent is not enough.

     Trump and Kushner see it as a gentrification opportunity – property developers need to move people on.

     All while we are confronting the continuance of settler government intent on betraying the Treaty in a new century to defend equality and democracy.

     PS Israel follows the USA in leaving the UNHRC, because of discrimination.
   • Subliminal 6.3

     6 February 2025 at 12:01 pm

     Very astute point you make there Sanctuary. What have we become in the west that we can look at a clear plan for ethnic cleansing, espoused by the leader of the "free world" and simply outline "practicle" obstacles. No expressions of horror at the implications, morality and racist death cult implied by it's articulation.

     In outlining parts of Trumps "plan" he is queried over the numbers involved. Trumps answer is 1.7 or 1.8 million with a clear statement that that will be all the current inhabitants of Gaza

     The internationally acknowledged Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics' count of the population of Gaza in 2023 was 2,226,544. Trump wants to remove all Palestinians from Gaza and gives their number as 1.7 or 1.8 million:

     Reporter: How many people are you thinking need to leave Gaza?
     Trump: “All of them. Probably a million seven, maybe a million eight. They’ll be settled in areas where they can live a beautiful life.” (video)

     This is an acknowledgement, by the president of the United States, that the genocidal Zionists have murdered up to 500,000 people in Gaza.

     https://www.moonofalabama.org/2025/02/trump-wants-to-take-over-gaza-announces-500000-dead.html#more
     • SPC 6.3.1

       6 February 2025 at 12:43 pm

       About 100,000 have left Gaza.

       Since the war with Israel began 16 months ago, Gaza's population has fallen 6% or by about 160,000 people to 2.1 million, according to Palestinian figures released in January. Around 100,000 Palestinians left the enclave while more than 55,000 are presumed dead, the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics said

       Reuters explainer

       https://www.reuters.com/world/us/what-know-about-trumps-gaza-strip-proposal-2025-02-05/
       • Subliminal 6.3.1.1

         6 February 2025 at 1:53 pm

         Correct. So up to about 400 000 dead. The Lancet said their estimation of nearly 300 000 was conservative. We are now getting a truer look at what happens when 85 000 tonnes of bombs are dropped into a very densely populated, defenseless, urban area. This is far more tonnage than that dropped on Germany and London combined in all of WW2. The abject, grovelling cowardice of the Israeli/US pact with the devil has been laid out in all its brutal depravity by Trump and Netanyahus little Riviera real estate deal.
7. adam 7

   6 February 2025 at 10:12 am

   Nearly 90% support the Te Tiriti o Waitangi as important

   Me thinks, national did not do any polling before they waded into this shit with act.

   https://horizonpoll.co.nz/page/711/90-honourin?
   • Populuxe 7.1

     6 February 2025 at 4:12 pm

     I don't imagine National expected it to get as far as it has.
8. adam 8

   6 February 2025 at 10:52 am

   United Health Care – remember them – scum who do private health care like the tory scum support.

   Now they have doubled down on their scummy behaviour.
   • Tony Veitch 8.1

     6 February 2025 at 11:54 am

     And this is the end result of predatory privatisation that Seymour wants to inflict on NZ!

     Fuck him!
9. Mike the Lefty 9

   6 February 2025 at 10:57 am

   I wonder if Trump's supporters have figured out by now that their messiah has both ADHD and Tourets.

   The land of opportunity where an unstable personality has a nuclear arsenal at his elbow ready to use at will, all he needs is someone to dare him to do it.

   I think the world is pretty f….d.
   • tWig 9.1

     6 February 2025 at 11:51 am

     Project 2025 was not some conspiracy theory, and is being enacted in Trump's first 100 days, by often illegal Presidential decree. I apologise for the length of the quotes, but the book captures the trump zeitgeist, and suggests why the US ‘lw’ struggle to counter it.

     Money Lies and God: Inside the Movement to Destroy American Democracy, written by a US journalist, by reviewed by The Guardian. From the book:

     “The best label I can find for the phenomenon – and I do not pretend it is a fully satisfactory label – is ‘reactionary nihilism’. It is reactionary in the sense that it expresses itself as mortal opposition to a perceived catastrophic change in the political order; it is nihilistic because its deepest premise is that the actual world is devoid of value, impervious to reason, and governable only through brutal acts of will. It stands for a kind of unraveling of the American political mind – a madness that now afflicts one side of nearly every political debate".

     It is a decades-long movement, like the Civil Rights movement, and found Trump and the SM bros, looking to hoard their wealth and power, as useful allies.

     “there are pro-democracy thinktanks and institutions and the like, but they tend to center on policy and issues: pro-democracy forces don’t seem to identify and mentor young talent in the same way, they don’t organize and collaborate in the same way.

     “They don’t operate with the same coordination of the right, they don’t think strategically about messaging, and about voter engagement and winning over the rank and file.”

     A goodreads reviewer of the same book writes 'Stewart describes in great detail how the hard-right (which has captured the Republican Party) is spreading political chaos and collective insanity through well-funded, well-organized channels skilled at propaganda, targeting a large segment of the American population most susceptible to such manipulation. You’ll meet the funders, thinkers, and influencers at the heart of this highly sophisticated campaign to spread disinformation, confusion, hatred, and doubt, all in the service of maintaining or exacerbating current levels of inequality.'

     Prosperity christianity is its public arm. No wonder Luxon laps up ACT's shitty agenda.

     And anti-trans messaging has been the figurehead for anti-woman and anti-diversity actions. $215 mi was spent in the US 2024 election on this issue in particular. A baited hook for anti-diversity action.

     GC links to this christian nihilist movement have been documented. Watch a little of youtube essayist Shaun. Kellie-Jean Minchin's Speak Up for Women tour to Australia and NZ was funded by them.
10. Reality 10

    6 February 2025 at 11:07 am

    A pithy post from Bernie Sanders on Instagram – "Mr President: instead of stealing Greenland from Denmark, I have a better idea. In Denmark, everyone is guaranteed health care, college education is free, parents receive 1-year of paid paternity leave & workers don't make less than $22 an hour. Let's steal those ideas."
11. joe90 11

    6 February 2025 at 12:42 pm

    ffs

    //

    Why did police shelve an investigation into a teenager’s sex abuse allegations about former Act Party president Tim Jago 25 years before he was eventually convicted?

    It’s a question the survivor’s parents want answered.

    Jago’s brother is a senior detective – something the couple only learned when the ex-political figure stood trial last year.

    While there's nothing to suggest he influenced the investigation into their son’s 1999 complaint in any way, they’re concerned about the relationship and want to know how any potential conflict of interest was managed by police.

    […]

    Reading from his handwritten notes made at the time, Veacock told the jury that Jago admitted sharing his bed with Brian on the night in question.

    When asked how much he’d had to drink, Jago told Veacock: “Hard to quantify because I had been going for several hours.”

    Asked what kind of state he was in, Veacock said Jago responded: “Drunk but not so drunk that I didn’t know what I was doing.”

    Asked what state Brian was in, Jago said: “Paralytic.”

    But he denied touching Brian and said he didn’t know why the teenager had made the allegation.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360569297/police-shelved-probe-sex-offender-tim-jago-25-years-he-was-convicted
    • PsyclingLeft.Always 11.1

      6 February 2025 at 1:47 pm

      they’re concerned about the relationship and want to know how any potential conflict of interest was managed by police.

      Yea, the whole case really gives off a Move along, nothing to see here feeling. And this certainly gives off a stink….

      Also in the link, now sentenced for sex assault crim Jago's lawyer, at the time Allan Roberts..seemed to become a bit of a hardnose Jail em Judge….

      I wonder if he felt like that about Jago ?
    • Populuxe 11.2

      6 February 2025 at 4:26 pm

      The incident at the Muriwai Surf Club in 2015 raises some questions in the light of Jago's recent conviction and the investigation in 1999 that was shelved. I find it difficult to believe that predators with the same predilections were active in the same place at the same time completely unaware of each other, especially when some of them were clearly working together,

      Muriwai Volunteer Lifeguard Service president Tim Jago said the club notified police as soon as it learned of the allegations.

      https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/67613250/inappropriate-surf-club-photos-investigated-by-police
12. Jenny 12

    6 February 2025 at 1:13 pm

    Massaging International Law

    Do Western countries like Australia, (and New Zealand) support the International Rule of Law, or not?

    Thuggish Ex-official IDF spokesperson, Jonathan Conricus, who publicly advocates that Israel and the US breach, in his words "massage" international law to ethnically cleanse Gaza, intends to visit Australia. This will be a test of Australia's immigration policies.

    Does Australia support the 'massage of International Law'?

    Sky News Australia

    Former IDF spokesperson Jonathan Conricus has weighed in on US President Donald Trump's comments about Gaza and the Middle East.

    Sky News presenter @2:43 minutes:

    ….Is it not a breach of International law?

    Jonathan Conricus @2:46 minutes:

    I think that there are a few issues that really need to be, how should we say it? 'massaged', when it comes to International Law.
    • Mike the Lefty 12.1

      6 February 2025 at 3:11 pm

      A breach of international law????

      Like those cretins care a flying…..

      Who is going to smack their fingers?

      International law counts for little because only those nations who are least likely to break it actually respect it.
      We have all these organizations and the UN based on international law which is unenfoceable.
    • Populuxe 12.2

      6 February 2025 at 4:29 pm

      If we're going to invoke international law, what was your position on New Zealand being involved in coordinating a military response to Houthi activity in the Red Sea?
13. Jenny 13

    6 February 2025 at 1:32 pm

    A meeting between a convicted felon and an internationally wanted war criminal takes place in Washington, makes you wonder what the world has come to.

    Both, like most criminals, are completely divorced from reality.

    Blueprint for Ethnic Cleansing: Trump proposes U.S. Take Over Gaza, Forcibly Remove All Palestinians

    
14. SPC 14

    6 February 2025 at 5:28 pm

    Starmer and Reeves going for growth – new oil and gas field development.

    https://bsky.app/profile/trend5.bsky.social/post/3lhi3wvuktk25

    Making it easier for small nuclear power plants in England and Wales.

    He wants AI data centres to use "modular' ones to provide their power.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/feb/06/keir-starmer-unveils-plan-for-large-nuclear-expansion-across-england-and-wales
    • tWig 14.1

      6 February 2025 at 8:48 pm

      God, they've bought into the 'modular nuclear' power plant story, which has so thoroughly been debunked. Starmer is a fool and Reeves a neo-lib shill.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS