Open mike 07/03/2010

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, March 7th, 2010 - 12 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

It’s open for discussing topics of interest, making announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

Comment on whatever takes your fancy.

The usual good behaviour rules apply (see the link to Policy in the banner).

Step right up to the mike…

12 comments on “Open mike 07/03/2010 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  2. Herodotus 2
    7 March 2010 at 9:57 am

    “Last month Bryers pleaded guilty to 31 charges brought by the Ministry of Economic Development but is unlikely to face a jail term.” from today Herald.
    Perhaps cases like this if found guilty they should be sentenced to 2 yrs, with good behaviour serve 6-12 months. But as I understand people like Bryers would be reminded of there crime everytime they wish to travel overseas. The investors are serving a life sentence of some description so shouldn’t the like of Bryers?

  3. Di 3
    7 March 2010 at 10:36 am

    VOR- re NAT aspirational goal to close Kiwi/Aussie wage gap

    One definition of aspiration-
    using a partial vacuum to draw up gas
    http://www.flowmeterdirectory.com/sensor_terminology_a.html

  5. Draco T Bastard 5
    7 March 2010 at 12:00 pm

    Stev Keen has this to say about the present GFC:

    The process can be countermanded to some degree by the government running a deficit, which counteracts the fall in aggregate demand caused by private deleveraging. But the government deficit would need to be far higher than current levels to return us to prosperity if nothing is also done about the astronomical level of private debt.

    With the deficits that are being contemplated today, I expect the outcome to be that the rest of the OECD will “turn Japanese’ and enter a long-running, low level Depression. Actions that limit those deficitsor even worse, force countries in crisis like Greece to impose austerity measures to reduce deficits back to zerowill turn this from a drawn-out Depression into a sudden and deep one.

    Personally, I’m in two minds about this. Printing more money doesn’t create any more wealth and neither does government or private borrowing. What it does is produce the illusion of wealth which then needs to be paid for by economic growth that is, for all intents and purposes, impossible (see my comment here). At the same time I’m quite aware of how many people will be much worse off if nothing is done and the normal practice is to borrow.

    What I think would be a better option would be to increase the tax take by creating a new tax bracket somewhere between $200k to $250k @ 50%. Use the increased government income to supplement low wages and bring back penal rates @ about 30 hours per week. This should get people back into work as well as ensuring that they have enough to live on.

    • Draco T Bastard 5.1
      7 March 2010 at 1:03 pm

      Gah, that link should have been this one.

      • RedLogix 5.1.1
        7 March 2010 at 8:10 pm

        Unless of course, as Keen also discusses, the Chartalists are right, that if the govt simply printed money, free of interest, that was used primarily to pay down excessive private debt…then essentially the root cause of problem could be made to go away.

        Like the biblical idea of a debt jubliee.

        • Draco T Bastard 5.1.1.1
          8 March 2010 at 12:54 pm

          Even if the government simply printed money you would still need taxes to remove excessive amounts of money and if the government did that then they would have to do one other thing – they would have to ban charging or paying interest. I do think that the general idea could work though. The government pays, with printed money, for the services and infrastructure needed to maintain and improve the community (would include a bank, telecommunications, factories, ie, the big stuff that an individual can’t afford). That money would then filter out through private services (the small stuff that an individual can afford) to the wider populace some of which would return through taxes. You probably wouldn’t need, or want, income taxes though.

          As for the jubilee idea – as I said when the GFC hit that the best thing the governments of the world could have done was forgive all debt. Instead, they bailed out the big banks and failed the small people by making even more debt.

  6. despairing 6
    7 March 2010 at 2:21 pm

    forget 200k +, start a new 50% tax bracket at $100k then perhaps those earning it might begin to consider if the job they are paid for is really worth doing for only half the money?

    but let’s face the truth and admit they would only find new creative ways to funnel the income so they get it all anyway

    and yes i am that cynical these days,
    a four year old could tell you the system is complicit and corrupt

    • Draco T Bastard 6.1
      7 March 2010 at 3:31 pm

      Agreed, the system is complicit and corrupt. It was, after all, designed by the capitalists to benefit capitalists and it’s only the capitalists that get to funnel the money in interesting ways so that they pay minimal tax. Workers certainly don’t get to claim tax deductions on their expenses of going to work. I suspect you’ll find that there are very few jobs that pay $200k+ per year either.

      then perhaps those earning it might begin to consider if the job they are paid for is really worth doing for only half the money?

      And then you’re making the basic mistake of thinking that the 50% would apply to the whole income. If the new tax bracket was set at $200k then anyone earning $200k wouldn’t pay a cent extra in tax.