Open Mike 08/12/2016

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, December 8th, 2016 - 144 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose. The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

144 comments on “Open Mike 08/12/2016 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Carolyn_nth 1
    8 December 2016 at 6:27 am

    With Shearer gone, who will be the contenders for the Mt Albert by-election early next year?

  2. Andre 2
    8 December 2016 at 6:35 am

    I’m interested in other people’s thoughts on the fair way to tax capital. Ianmac yesterday linked to The Opportunity Party’s release on their proposed capital tax (which doesn’t have much detail). On the assumption that it’s similar to the Comprehensive Capital Income Tax that Gareth Morgan has proposed before, I’d be worried about the following unintended consequences. http://www.top.org.nz/top1?utm_campaign=top1_members&utm_medium=email&utm_source=garethmorgan

    1) Social effects on the housing asset rich/cash poor. Suggested mitigations are unconvincing to me. While this is likely to be the focus of most debate, right now I’m more interested in other aspects listed below.
    2) May cause collapse of businesses that would otherwise survive, from the ongoing extra cashflow required to service the capital tax.
    3) Discourages foreign investment. Why would any business want to set up where they start getting taxed long before they earn a penny of profit?
    4) Favours low-capital businesses, and discourages businesses from investing more capital per worker. This is already a problem causing low productivity in New Zealand, do we want to make it worse?
    5) Because land is such a high-capital item, it would push farmers towards a high-intensity high-input farming model. Which is a high-pollution low-resilience model, exactly the opposite of what we want.
    6) No models to learn from elsewhere. Canada had some (at much lower rates), but those seem to have been abolished.
    7) Encourages the use of debt to reduce the amount of liable capital for taxation.

    Personally I favour a capital gains tax on all assets (including the family home, but with a rollover provision for family homes), payable whenever there’s any kind of change of ownership of the asset. There’s plenty of examples from other jurisdictions to learn from. It’s not much of a hassle to comply (I paid Capital Gains Tax on my primary home in the US), and while it’s slow to start collecting revenue eventually it reaches the point of fairly catching income from capital.

    • b waghorn 2.1
      8 December 2016 at 7:09 am

      tops plan sounds complicated and unsalable , he’s already lost my interest, i was hoping for a simplification of the tax system ,

      • Andre 2.1.1
        8 December 2016 at 7:33 am

        It also seems he’s not going to try to push UBI this cycle. Which is what I would have been really interested in.

        “As for a Universal Basic Income he hinted at earlier in the day, Morgan said it wouldn’t be on the cards this time.

        “[That would be in] phase two, if we’re still about,” he said.”

        http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/87330737/gareth-morgans-divisive-policy-to-tackle-inequality

        • b waghorn 2.1.1.1
          8 December 2016 at 7:38 am

          he just gave henry his pedigree in a mess of an interview , which was amusing but not helpful in selling his story.

        • saveNZ 2.1.1.2
          8 December 2016 at 8:39 am

          Yes I’m keen for a UBI and then look at how to tax it as a secondary issue. So it seems crazy to me that UBI is not the main focus.

          I think there needs to be a radical change to taxation to make sure that everyone has to pay their share. There are so many loop holes at present it makes it easy for those with more money and access to tax experts to avoid taxes. We need new ideas because the old ones only tax the middle and seem to avoid the super rich and global citizens.

          We are having situations when banks are causing GFC being bailed out by tax payers and then being allowed to go on as usual and still make the rules on what’s fair to tax.

          At the same time there seems to be a very punitive punishment approach to government taxation – at the end of the day it should be like a non profit co operative insurance scheme – you put money in – and then there is a basic level nobody is allowed to fall below (UBI) and then you need enough from everybody to make sure that the bills on health, education and so forth are met.

          The whole premise of governments seem to be skewed with neoliberalism – that’s why we can afford Saudi sheep bribes for millions but put more and more hoops in for the most vulnerable to stop them getting a basic benefit. Wellington council can afford to pay Singapore airlines 8 million, Auckland wants to steal the harbour and put it into COO hands, but at the same time they are obsessed with cutting basic services like libraries, rubbish and keeping the berms mowed – because we can’t afford it.

    • tc 2.2
      8 December 2016 at 7:09 am

      Tax on the gain at sale, arbitrary taxes on capital can penalise many for holding over a long term gain with zero intent to gain from any sale or sell at all.

      The funds exist from the sale and it clips the ticket as the punter has realised the profit. Effectively a transaction based tax, much easier to enforce as holdings can be hidden very easily.

      Oz has had this type of CGT since the 80’s and you don’t see their right rushing to repeal it being a lot more mature in their economic management than ours.

      • Andre 2.2.1
        8 December 2016 at 7:18 am

        “Tax on the gain at sale”

        Some other jurisdictions have loopholes that allow avoiding capital gains taxes by such means as gifting assets to a trust, gifting assets to a charity and claiming a tax credit for the full value of the asset. Which is why I said “payable whenever there’s any kind of change of ownership”.

    • Craig H 2.3
      8 December 2016 at 8:12 am

      I like it – it only charges tax for assets that aren’t already generating sufficient taxable income to meet the threshold, so people are encouraged to use capital better. Assuming GST or income tax are reduced to offset it, most people, including most homeowners, would be better off in terms of disposable income.

      • mikesh 2.3.1
        8 December 2016 at 9:11 am

        Agreed, though some provision would have to be made for businesses which, though they would normally run profitably, happen to make a loss, whether through bad luck or poor management. The trouble is, many will find ways of taking advantage of such provision to avoid the tax.

      • Andre 2.3.2
        8 December 2016 at 4:54 pm

        ” it only charges tax for assets that aren’t already generating sufficient taxable income to meet the threshold”

        Do you really think it’s good to further reinforce the idea that the only value anything has is for the income that can be generated from it?

        I’m also aware of several farms and small businesses where the owners are running them in a low key way just generating enough income to keep happy and not really trying to maximise returns. They’re also unusually good at looking after their staff and surroundings. Under a capital tax regime, they would become totally non-viable as is and would either need to close or start operating in a much more ruthless manner.

        Do we really want to force that choice? Particularly if the alternative CGT achieves the same result in the end of getting the beneficiaries of asset price growth to share some of the gains with the society that makes those gains possible?

    • DH 2.4
      8 December 2016 at 9:41 am

      I’ve only read his policy document Andre so I don’t know the finer points but it looks like typical Morgan to me where he gets a bee in his bonnet and takes it too far.

      With houses he appears to be targeting freehold owner-occupiers rather than investors/landlords or even those with a mortgage. His basic premise is that living in a freehold house is a form of income and should be taxed because the capital invested in the house would be taxed in any other investment scenario.

      Now for those who have a mortgage it would be rather complicated to work out what their capital actually is before you could tax it. The property itself isn’t the capital, they’ve borrowed to buy it. Their capital would either be the equity or the deposit plus principal paid off. Working out the equity would be a nightmare with oodles of loopholes that investors would exploit to minimise their tax…. like they do already.

      I can’t see it solving anything and it would make the system messier. A capital gains tax levied annually on investment properties is all that’s required IMO.

      • Molly 2.4.1
        8 December 2016 at 10:07 am

        “A capital gains tax levied annually on investment properties is all that’s required IMO.”

        A higher rates calculation on investment properties could be used to provide a social housing fund at local government level, and would be fairly easy to implement. If the owner is not occupying the property, the rates kick in at a different level. Rates are already taxing property owners, what this would do is increase that tax in recognition of the capital gains that landlords benefit from, that single home buyers and renters do not.

        • Molly 2.4.1.1
          8 December 2016 at 10:50 am

          The reason I would exclude the owner occupied property is that investors are able to claim maintenance and other expenses (including interest paid) on their properties that owner occupiers must meet out of their income.

          Rate are already a tax on property ownership.

          Increased rates on investment properties recognise the anomaly above, and provide a social housing fund that increases locally as number of renters increase.

          • Draco T Bastard 2.4.1.1.1
            8 December 2016 at 11:10 am

            The reason I would exclude the owner occupied property is that investors are able to claim maintenance and other expenses (including interest paid) on their properties that owner occupiers must meet out of their income.

            Have you considered that being able to claim expenses for tax purposes is the problem?

            Rate are already a tax on property ownership.

            So?

            • Molly 2.4.1.1.1.1
              8 December 2016 at 1:42 pm

              If tenants had better security of tenancy, and a comprehensive method of ensuring that all maintenance needs are met in a timely manner – I’d consider agreeing with you. But the likelihood is that if maintenance and repairs were not able to be expensed then a large number of landlords (especially in this housing climate) would avoid paying out for as long as possible.

              Not all homeowners are speculative purchasers.

              My partner and I bought a home for reasons other than capital gain. Stability of housing for one ( had been moved on from rentals due to increased rents more than once).

              But owning also provided the opportunity to do other things that are unable to be done in a lot of rented homes:
              – Planting trees and gardens,
              – Having several people staying with us over the years while they get on their feet,
              – Looking after family pets for friends and family while they go away.

              None of this would be possible in a rented home, unless we were very lucky to find a very relaxed and accommodating landlord.

              Any more taxing on a household like ours (especially for capital gains that we have no practical or financial benefit from unless we sell and don’t require another home), and our precarious balance of finances would break.

              I don’t think that would be an unusual scenario.

              • Draco T Bastard …
                8 December 2016 at 4:03 pm

                But the likelihood is that if maintenance and repairs were not able to be expensed then a large number of landlords (especially in this housing climate) would avoid paying out for as long as possible.

                They’re called slumlords and they already exist and are in NZ.

                None of this would be possible in a rented home, unless we were very lucky to find a very relaxed and accommodating landlord.

                And what if you had a state rental that was lifetime lease, allowed you to plant trees, gardens and do renovations as well as kept the place well maintained?

                Again, all the problems that people have with rentals and the tax regime that allows a few to dodge paying tax is private ownership.

                • Molly …
                  8 December 2016 at 9:17 pm

                  “And what if you had a state rental that was lifetime lease, allowed you to plant trees, gardens and do renovations as well as kept the place well maintained?

                  If that were possible Draco, I’d be living there.

                  But until we have a cross party consensus on the importance of affordable, healthy, secure housing, we will continue to have our communities broken up. For the moment, I – and many others do what we can with what we have.

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    9 December 2016 at 2:06 am

                    If that were possible Draco, I’d be living there.

                    It is possible if we all demand it.

                    But it will take a lot of work to bring it about.

        • DH 2.4.1.2
          8 December 2016 at 12:28 pm

          I don’t think that’s necessary Molly. Simply assessing them for tax each year, and collecting it, would do the trick IMO.

          As it stands investors are leveraging off their capital gains to borrow more money to buy more properties. If they had to pay tax on those gains they’d instead be borrowing a third of it to pay the tax. That would lower the demand for property and get the housing inflation down…. and boost the tax coffers.

          Morgan’s scheme looks unworkable to me, can’t say I’m taken with the theory either but its the practice that looks unwinnable.

    • Draco T Bastard 2.5
      8 December 2016 at 11:05 am

      1. Seems reasonable to me.
      2. Businesses are supposed to collapse if they can’t maintain themselves. That’s the whole point of capitalism. It’s not up to the rest of us to keep them going.
      3. Foreign investment needs to be banned as it’s detrimental to society.
      4. No it doesn’t. If anything, it encourages high capital investment as the high investment is more likely to return greater amounts. It’s our low wages that are encouraging low capital investment now.
      5. We already have that happening now. The solution is proper regulation.
      6. So we should never try new ideas?
      7. I’m pretty sure that Morgan has an answer to that as well.

      Personally I favour a capital gains tax on all assets

      I think that Morgan’s CCT is a much better idea. Done well it would make it impossible to be asset rich, cash poor which would be good for the economy and our society.

      There’s plenty of examples from other jurisdictions to learn from.

      Yeah, there are. One of those lessons is that a standard CGT doesn’t really work.

      • Andre 2.5.1
        8 December 2016 at 4:42 pm

        To be honest Draco, I was expecting you to advocate getting rid of private ownership completely and then the question becomes moot. 🙂

        “One of those lessons is that a standard CGT doesn’t really work.”
        What do you mean by works? No, a CGT on it’s own doesn’t prevent bubbles. All I really see it doing is helping make sure the owners of capital eventually contribute something towards the society that helps those assets increase in value. Collecting it at time of sale (when the sellers have the cash in hand) doesn’t feel punitive in the way the proposed CCT (or the existing FIF tax) does feel punitive by demanding the payment whether or not you’ve got the cashflow to support it. ( I realise you would be all for setting up systems that made asset-holders feel punished regularly, but trust me very few people agree with you on that).

        “So we should never try new ideas?”. When we try to reinvent a wheel, it seems we regularly come unstuck with all kinds of unintended consequences. If there’s models from elsewhere we can learn from, why not copy the best aspects?

        • Draco T Bastard 2.5.1.1
          8 December 2016 at 5:31 pm

          What do you mean by works?

          Doesn’t prevent bubbles and doesn’t prevent the rich from avoiding their obligations.

          All I really see it doing is helping make sure the owners of capital eventually contribute something towards the society that helps those assets increase in value.

          Do they truly increase in value?

          Collecting it at time of sale (when the sellers have the cash in hand) doesn’t feel punitive in the way the proposed CCT (or the existing FIF tax) does feel punitive by demanding the payment whether or not you’ve got the cashflow to support it.

          That’s part and parcel of our chosen market system. If you don’t have the cash then you just don’t have the item.

          I realise you would be all for setting up systems that made asset-holders feel punished regularly

          Completely wrong. I want to make it so that people can’t afford to have can’t assets in the first place.

          If there’s models from elsewhere we can learn from, why not copy the best aspects?

          I’d say that Morgan’s CCT is based upon the old CGT. What you’re saying is that we shouldn’t try this small change because it hasn’t been done before. Under such stupidity the wheel would never have been invented.

          • Andre 2.5.1.1.1
            8 December 2016 at 5:42 pm

            “I’d say that Morgan’s CCT is based upon the old CGT. What you’re saying is that we shouldn’t try this small change because it hasn’t been done before. Under such stupidity the wheel would never have been invented.”

            Morgan’s CCT is very close to the Foreign Investment Fund tax introduced by Cullen, as far as I can tell. I pay it every year, and it’s a real pain and I certainly wouldn’t make any new investment into anything covered by it.

            I’ve also paid Capital Gains taxes in the US (and will again in the future unless Trump manages to do away with them). It’s only a minor hassle, and doesn’t feel unfairly punitive the way the FIF tax does. Potential liability for CG taxes certainly wouldn’t stop me investing in something.

  3. Andre 3
    8 December 2016 at 6:43 am

    “Fake news” is a specific subset of the attempted deceptions around us all the time, but the pushers and beneficiaries of fake news are trying make the idea of fake news meaningless by calling everything fake news.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2016/12/stop_calling_everything_fake_news.html

    It all just reinforces the importance of fact-checking, researching the credibility of the source, keeping the bullshit detector on high alert at all times, looking at everything with a cynical view that some agenda is being pushed.

  4. marty mars 4
    8 December 2016 at 7:44 am

    sometimes I wish the news was fake

    “On Twitter, some were quick to suggest the President Elect followed in the company of Hitler, Stalin and Putin who had also received the iconic title.

    … The magazine’s annual award names the person who has had the “greatest influence, for better or worse, on the events of the year”.

    German Chancellor Angela Merkel, The Ebola Fighters, The Pope, President Obama, Mark Zuckerberg, Former President George W Bush, and Julian Assange have also won the title before.”

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11762705

    funny one that ‘TIME Person of the year’.

  5. Sanctuary 5
    8 December 2016 at 7:54 am

    A near perfect summation – from an Australian, in a British newspaper – of John Key and John Key’s New Zealand.

    “…Key was like a Tony Blair of the South Seas: a certain level of personal charisma and a socially inclusive façade allowed both Key and Blair to sell the nasty side of neoliberalism…”

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/07/john-key-was-known-as-the-smiling-assassin-and-people-still-liked-him?CMP=share_btn_fb

    You’d never get NZ political journalists with insight like this. As their reactions of shock indicate, most of them were firmly besotted by John Key’s cham right to the moment he basically told them to all fuck off.

  6. marty mars 6
    8 December 2016 at 8:02 am

    Good work The Green Party – potential candidates stepping forward early – this is good – get them sorted and then onward to victory!!!

    Matt would be a good candidate I think

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/87298578/nelson-city-councillor-matt-lawrey-seeks-green-party-candidacy

  7. ianmac 7
    8 December 2016 at 8:19 am

    Where are the Headlines? Surely there should be ones like:
    National Party Leadership Battle splits Caucus!
    Angry MPs Dispute Leadership Plans.
    Leadership Battles Rips Caucus Apart.
    Will be Years Before National Party Revives Credibility After Bitter Infighting.

    • Puckish Rogue 7.1
      8 December 2016 at 8:33 am

      Probably because its going to be over rather quickly, which is smart thinking on Nationals part. How can you really have those type of headlines when the result is going to be known on Monday/

      Sure the ructions after will prove to be more then interesting but theres simply not enough time for those type of headlines to be used.

      • saveNZ 7.1.1
        8 December 2016 at 9:22 am

        Love Granny propaganda (sarc) – even when the Leader resigned it’s all good press for Natz candidates. Not a peep about Collins and all her transgressions and Double dipper English!!

        “Bennett said her relationship with English was “fantastic” and described him as “awe-inspiring”. The two work together on finance and social housing, and they are part of the top tier of ministers, called the “Kitchen Cabinet”. But English has also worked closely with Bridges on Auckland’s transport problems.

        In a sign of a potentially tense contest, Bridges said he would make a better deputy than Bennett because he marked a complete generational change. Bridges came into Parliament three years later than Bennett, in 2008.”

        • saveNZ 7.1.1.1
          8 December 2016 at 9:27 am

          In spite of this they still have to run spiteful anti Labour articles such as Claire Trevett’s
          “100 not out: Labour party battles for its political future”

      • Robert Guyton 7.1.2
        8 December 2016 at 9:25 am

        It starts on Monday.
        fence
        post

        • Puckish Rogue 7.1.2.1
          8 December 2016 at 9:39 am

          Yes true, I’m assuming it will be sorted by Monday, like its a fait accompli kind of thing especially since the next budget surplus is supposed to be a whopper

          It might not of course, however if I was a betting man I’d bet it’ll be over on Monday…the puckish side of me would like to see it continue on for a while though 🙂

          • Robert Guyton 7.1.2.1.1
            8 December 2016 at 10:13 am

            Bill at the helm of a leaking, bloated tanker heading for the reefs. His crew! Oh dear! And First Mate! A cargo of rancid fat and snake oil. Oh dear, oh dear!

            • Puckish Rogue 7.1.2.1.1.1
              8 December 2016 at 10:40 am

              Fortunately (unfortunately) there’s just enough momentum for the good ship National to make it to the port of the 2017 election win, thanks to a budget surplus and the assistance of the tugboat of NZFirst and the tugboat of another bye-election Labour can’t afford

              After that there may be some slight cause for concern 🙂

              • Robert Guyton …
                8 December 2016 at 10:51 am

                It’s as though the All Blacks were facing their most critical test match and were reliant on their one star player upon whom success depended, let’s call him, “John Richie”, when an hour before kick off, John declares that he is not going to play, he’s talking his ball and going home, because his girlfriend want to spend quality time with him.

                The crowd goes wild.

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  8 December 2016 at 11:03 am

                  Yeah imagine what would happen to the All Blacks if Richie, Dan, Kevin, Tony, Ma’a and Conrad left all at the same time taking over 700 caps and all that experience with them 🙂

                  • b waghorn …
                    8 December 2016 at 11:53 am

                    what you are eluding to might be true , if it wasn’t for the fact that the rugby equivalents of parmjeet ,misa fia and tobbacy todd wouldn’t make the taumarunui eels team let alone the the all blacks up incomers

                  • mac1 …
                    8 December 2016 at 12:43 pm

                    They’d lose to Ireland?

                    • Puckish Rogue …
                      8 December 2016 at 1:41 pm

                      Well I was linking the tier 1 test record to a record fourth term for National but please tell me you aren’t suggesting Labour is like the Irish rugby team

                    • mac1 …
                      8 December 2016 at 6:15 pm

                      Well, the Irish team currently has a 50% win record against the All Blacks in its past two encounters (aren’t stats wonderful- a bit like Treasury and Budget figures).

                      The Irish team has charm, wit and size.

                      It embraces the whole of Irish society, north and south, inclusively.

                      Like the Left in general the Irish have got the best songs.

                      And lastly, they especially despise the English!

                      So, Puckish Rogue, in the best sense of fun, some great parallels between the NZ Labour Party and the Irish Rugby team of very recent history! 😉

                      Disclaimer: though my moniker is Mac1 there is no blarney or bias in this summation, at all at all at all.

    • Bob 7.2
      8 December 2016 at 4:49 pm

      No need for headlines, 2 days of discussions and it’s sorted, lessons to be learnt by other parties maybe?
      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11763085

  8. Molly 8
    8 December 2016 at 8:26 am

    Who knew that motels were going to be a fundamental part of the “wrap around” service that the Ministry of Social Development were going to provide?

    Used to house (and indebt) our ever increasing homeless, they are also a depository for our vulnerable children. ( Unless there is a free gang associate house available that is).

    I was speaking to a CYFS worker just yesterday, and those in her office are spending much of their time coming up to the holidays looking for motels to place children. When I asked who was there to provide caregiving, she shrugged her shoulders and said “Who?”.

  9. adam 9
    8 December 2016 at 8:37 am

    Did anyone else see the awful add in the herald yesterday.

    The solid energy add, Mansplaining at it’s worse. So condescending it was sickening.

    For a so called open letter – noticed no signature. How cowardly can you get.

    Funny anyone with half a brain realised it was out and out propaganda. Well I suppose solid energy will do anything for their political masters.

    This government is such a bunch of wankers, hiding behind a so call private company to lie and spin to New Zealand public.

    New low.

  10. Morrissey 10
    8 December 2016 at 8:56 am

    More grievous ignorance of sports history in the media.
    Morning Report, RNZ National, Thursday 8 December 2016, 8:25 a.m.

    This morning featured a report from Indira Stewart of the Pacific Radio Network, stating that Joseph Parker and David Tua are the “only two New Zealanders to have ever fought for the World Heavyweight title.”

    That is nonsense, of course. On Thursday 26 July 1928 Gisborne’s own Tom Heeney fought Gene Tunney for the title at Yankee Stadium. The fight was stopped in the 11th round.

    Neither Susie Ferguson nor Guyon Espiner seemed to notice, and simply carried on with the next item.

    For those who, unlike Indira Stewart, care to know something about boxing history, here’s a tape of the fight…

  11. Morrissey 11
    8 December 2016 at 9:23 am

    MEET THE CANDIDATES
    No. 3: Judith “Crusher” Collins

    Possibly the nastiest and most immature political candidate in New Zealand’s history—though not the stupidest.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/87288904/nicky-hager-takes-on-aspirant-pm-judith-collins

    “She has the integrity.”—Don Brash.

  12. saveNZ 12
    8 December 2016 at 9:36 am

    Ok then we’ll just turn a blind eye to the frauds then because somebody is making a short term buck and it will expose the governments underfunding of education, so they are doing nothing and leaving the short term housing issues and longer term problem of all our fraudster residents to another government … from Granny

    “Yet it seems no one can really tackle the student visa rort because we now depend on it.

    The country makes $4.28 billion a year from international students, our fourth biggest industry behind dairy, tourism and meat. Put aside legitimate questions over how much of that money stays in New Zealand and circulates in the wider economy, as opposed to the immigrants themselves. If we turned off the tap tomorrow – the Government’s nightmare scenario after the sudden collapse of the Chinese market in 2003 – many office buildings would be half empty and central Queen St would become a ghost town. Even reputable education providers would go broke and most polytechnics and universities could not make ends meet with domestic students alone. Economic activity would also take a hit, as international students are doing the difficult, low-paid jobs that most New Zealanders avoid – at least until the students get their residence visa.

    In short, fundamental changes are unlikely to come from the top because too many powerful interests are benefiting from the current system, despite its obvious flaws. The only hope is for more honest people within the student visa scam to stand up and be counted.”

    • Psycho Milt 12.1
      8 December 2016 at 10:27 am

      If we turned off the tap tomorrow … many office buildings would be half empty and central Queen St would become a ghost town. Even reputable education providers would go broke and most polytechnics and universities could not make ends meet with domestic students alone.

      Gosh, that would be a disaster! Good job there’s no proposal on the table to ban international education outright then, eh? Cleaning up the industry would make it worth less, but would still leave universities, polytechs and schools teaching a lot of international students.

      The actual reason the government won’t do anything about the scam is in this bit:

      …international students are doing the difficult, low-paid jobs that most New Zealanders avoid – at least until the students get their residence visa.

      That is, the success of this scam to bypass our immigration standards and ensure a supply of cheap, easily-exploited labour for National’s constituents, with downstream effects on local pay and conditions, is the government’s main reason for not cleaning up the international education “industry.”

      • Molly 12.1.1
        8 December 2016 at 10:44 am

        “many office buildings would be half empty and central Queen St would become a ghost town.”

        What happened to the cherished Number 8 approach to solving problems with innovation? Empty office buildings in Queen Street + homeless in Auckland should = conversion to family apartments and a community revitalisation of Auckland central.

        As for the other, fund education to sustainable levels.

        • saveNZ 12.1.1.1
          8 December 2016 at 2:44 pm

          Couldn’t all the empty buildings be given to solve the housing crisis????

          All solved. move on.

  13. Paul 13
    8 December 2016 at 9:40 am

    Gareth Morgan tells Paul Henry the truth.
    And Paul Henry hates being shown up for being the selfish git he is.

    Morgan to Henry…

    “You’re telling me that you don’t give a toss about New Zealand being fair. ‘Pull up the ladder, Jack, and the rest of you can get stuffed’. What sort of New Zealand values do you have, man?”
    “You’re just a tax loophole cowboy, that’s all you are,”
    “I’m about making New Zealand fair. You’re self-centred and you don’t give a toss about being fair in New Zealand.”
    “Don’t tell an economist what a reverse mortgage is mate.”
    “In media soundbytes are important, that’s why your sort of media is dying mate.”

    And Henry’s retort, with his expensive house, European car and entitled lifestyle threatened.

    Morgan is a communist.

    Watch it. It’s great to see the tosser Henry being dealt to.

    http://www.newshub.co.nz/politics/tax-policy-bust-up-gareth-morgan-trades-insults-with-paul-henry-2016120808

    • Draco T Bastard 13.1
      8 December 2016 at 10:52 am

      Morgan needs to become less defensive when he’s discussing his party’s policies.

      I certainly support his Comprehensive Capital Tax. If you have an asset that returns some benefit then it should be taxed at the commensurate income of that benefit.

      • Red 13.1.1
        8 December 2016 at 11:32 am

        I agree Morgan did not help his case, loosing his cool, playing the man not the ball, never a good look unless your of a Paul persuasion and just want to see Henery abused

      • KJT 13.1.2
        8 December 2016 at 6:41 pm

        I do not totally agree with Morgan, but at least he has us discussing these things, and his heart is in the right place.

        I don’t see what a CCT can do, that conventional inheritance, income and CGT combined, along with getting rid of private trusts immunity from claims, cannot.

        Only someone as truely ignorant as Henry, can have such confidence.
        I don’t blame Morgan for getting annoyed with the bumptious twit.

        • Draco T Bastard 13.1.2.1
          8 December 2016 at 7:10 pm

          I don’t see what a CCT can do, that conventional inheritance, income and CGT combined, along with getting rid of private trusts immunity from claims, cannot.

          1. Gets rid of land banking. The land will have to produce an income year to year else it’s just going to cost too much. A CGT may get the tax once the land is sold but it doesn’t prevent it.
          2. Encourages people living in large, expensive houses to shift into smaller houses with smaller land thus freeing up more land for housing thus encouraging density increases.

          I don’t blame Morgan for getting annoyed with the bumptious twit.

          Neither do I but he shouldn’t have shown it. His sitting back, hands tightly crossed before him shows that he’s on the defensive and is exactly the reaction that Henry was going for.

          He needs to be able to sit there, calm, arms open, answer the questions and, yes, call Henry a bumbling, selfish idiot.

    • ianmac 13.2
      8 December 2016 at 10:53 am

      It does sow why trying to debate with the “Haves” is so difficult. Why would a “Have” like Henry be in the least concerned about the “Havenots”?

      • Puckish Rogue 13.2.1
        8 December 2016 at 11:49 am

        If he can’t handle Henry how is going to handle the rest of the pressure that’ll come, its all well and good to say what you think should happen and get nice media fluff pieces but hes thrown his hat in the ring and now what he says is going to be picked over with a fine tooth comb and he’d better be ready with some answers

    • Naki man 13.3
      8 December 2016 at 12:24 pm

      Morgan wants retired people to get a reverse mortgage on their house so they can pay property taxes, he a communist arsehole.

      • Draco T Bastard 13.3.1
        8 December 2016 at 12:31 pm

        No he doesn’t. and he’s most definitely not a communist. He’s very much a capitalist – he’s just one that sees many of the limitations that the way capitalism operates and how it doesn’t pay it’s full costs and puts those costs on the poor instead.

      • Puckish Rogue 13.3.2
        8 December 2016 at 12:37 pm

        I’d have thought he wouldn’t have been stupid enough to include the family home in this, I can’t imagine any political party thinking that’s an idea the voters will go for, not even the Greens

        • ropata 13.3.2.1
          8 December 2016 at 1:44 pm

          Yes I’ve seen first hand how paranoid and touchy the entitled property class is about their inflating asset values.

          They expect to sit on their million dollar+ houses and bank capital gains of 80K per year for ever. If anyone suggests this model is neither sustainable nor fair then they are shouted out of the room.

          This unreasonable, greedy behaiour is sowing the seds of class war. I suppose this is the ugly side of Pakeha culture. They stole Aotearoa in the first place and now (like some kind of landed gentry), they expect the serfs to slave away paying high levels of tax and rent. Wealthy boomers have come to expect a well paid retirement with no means testing or CGT.

          What a pack of spoiled brats

          • Puckish Rogue 13.3.2.1.1
            8 December 2016 at 2:42 pm

            Well the average house price is $600 000.00 but please go ahead and suggest to the voters that taxing the family home, the house the retired have worked for entire lives to own (while paying taxes) is a really good idea

            http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/309978/average-nz-house-price-tops-$600k

            • ropata 13.3.2.1.1.1
              8 December 2016 at 3:50 pm

              Why should some people (who have also worked their whole lives) have to keep paying high rents for ever, while others who managed to climb into property ownership get free accommodation and tax breaks and full super without any form of means test?

              Not sustainable, not fair, and kinda gross in the middle of a housing crisis

          • saveNZ 13.3.2.1.2
            8 December 2016 at 2:49 pm

            what about Maori land Ropata… how many Maori (or Pakeha for that matter) have the income to pay yearly taxes on their capital?

            All that will happen is what is already happening, Kiwis can’t afford to live in their own country with all the taxes and the low wages and foreigners will buy us up cheap.

            That’s where Morgan’s ideas falls down.

            I’m more into the Sanders and Corbyn approaches on Robin hood taxes on banks and transaction style taxes.

            • Puckish Rogue 13.3.2.1.2.1
              8 December 2016 at 3:10 pm

              Don’t expect an answer, ropata jumped in with the chance to score a “hit” on a rightie and didn’t think through his reasoning

              • ropata …
                8 December 2016 at 3:18 pm

                I am not a policy analyst nor am I a spokesperson for Morgans TOP vehicle. I just think he talks a lot of sense and in principle I agree with his fair minded ideas.

            • ropata 13.3.2.1.2.2
              8 December 2016 at 3:24 pm

              Morgan’s tax is aimed at the top few% of wealthy property holders who are banking tax free capital gains. He reckons his LVT will be either neutral or advantageous for most people because he will also drop income taxes.

              Anyway I think this party is just a way for him to get the ideas of his Foundation into mainstream media. In the current volatile economic climate his is a vital counter narrative to the standard capitalist dogma we swim in.

              Remember this is in the context of an unprecedented housing crisis, Morgan’s ideas are not cooked up in a vacuum.

              I understand this is heresy against the national NZ religion of a quarter acre pavlova paradise.

    • tc 13.4
      8 December 2016 at 1:44 pm

      promising signs from gareth, perhaps he can come up with a public broadcasting policy as no one else seems to to sort that issue out.

  14. John up North 14
    8 December 2016 at 9:45 am

    Wow! a strange thing happened, somehow, somewhere, someone came to the conclusion that for true comparison of two different systems, they need to be measured with the same criteria.

    But our favorite hologram disagrees, seems if there’s money involved, and a contract to enforce well…………. it’s just a bit confusing for the average Joe/Jane and at that point we should bow out and leave it to him and the other “experts”.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/319865/charter-school-ncea-reporting-to-be-brought-into-line

  15. Rosemary McDonald 15
    8 December 2016 at 10:02 am

    I was going to put up a link to the interview on Natard this morning with Paula Bennett and how she will make a truly awesome Dep Leader of the Natzional Party but the website appears to be having access problems….but never mind, I’ll do a Morrissey and give y’all a transcript.

    Ms. Bennett….what qualities do you believe you have for the Deputy Leaders role?

    hahahahahahahahahahahah….pause for gurgling breathhahahahahahahahahahah

    gigglegigglegigglegigglegigglegigglegiggle

    and so on, ad nauseum.

  16. esoteric pineapples 16
    8 December 2016 at 10:05 am

    This is a fascinating article about how a gunman attacked a pizza parlour in Washington after conspiracy theorists claimed Hilary Clinton was running a child sex operation out of it. It argues that mis-information is being used as a political tool.

    https://theintercept.com/2016/12/06/disinformation-not-fake-news-got-trump-elected/

  17. Draco T Bastard 17
    8 December 2016 at 10:33 am

    No country with a McDonald’s can remain a democracy
    George Monbiot

    In 1938 President Roosevelt warned that “the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism.” The Democrats saw concentrated corporate power as a form of dictatorship. They broke up giant banks and businesses and chained the chainstores. What Roosevelt, Brandeis and Patman knew has been forgotten by those in power, including powerful journalists. But not by the victims of this system.

    One of the answers to Trump, Putin, Orbán, Erdoğan, Salvini, Duterte, Le Pen, Farage and the politics they represent is to rescue democracy from transnational corporations. It is to defend the crucial political unit that is under assault by banks, monopolies and chainstores: community. It is to recognise that there is no greater hazard to peace between nations than a corporate model that crushes democratic choice.

    Since the 1980s we’ve let the corporations rule and it’s become obvious that it’s detrimental to us as a community.

    • ropata 17.1
      8 December 2016 at 11:54 am

      So true, the NZ government was seduced and subverted in 1984 and now it’s become a schizoid institution that purports to represent the people of New Zealand, but is instead complicit in their exploitation.

      It’s not exactly secret, all this has been well documented (see cafca.org.nz), but since it has been a slow and ongoing process the sale of NZ piece by piece to foreign interests doesn’t make the news cycle.

    • ropata 17.2
      8 December 2016 at 3:39 pm

      Just read the whole thing — how depressing. Maybe democracy was just a temporary aberration and the natural state of the human race is feudalism and internecine tribal conflict.

      When the USA was founded corporations were deliberately outlawed because the founders had seen what they did to Europe. Sadly that didn’t last long

      • Draco T Bastard 17.2.1
        8 December 2016 at 4:26 pm

        Democracy does seem to be more of an aberration with dictatorships and oligarchies ruling most of the time. Of course, the oligarchies and dictatorships always collapse due to the hubris and greed of the rich. And when they do we go back to being a democracy which then builds up society which the rich then take over and destroy.

        It seems to be an iterative process as we learn more our democracy gets better but, unfortunately, we haven’t learned to prevent people from getting rich yet.

      • KJT 17.2.2
        8 December 2016 at 10:54 pm

        “Representative Democracy” was bound to fail.

        Putting that degree of power in the hands of a few people, is always going to be subverted.

        Democracy, however!

  18. xanthe 18
    8 December 2016 at 11:53 am

    Finally Assange is permitted to answer the slander against him on record.

    It has taken six years for this to occur. An outrageous abuse of legal power and process!

    https://justice4assange.com/IMG/html/assange-statement-2016.html

    • Morrissey 18.1
      8 December 2016 at 12:08 pm

      Thanks for that, xanthe. Don’t expect anything on this to appear on our television news this evening. (Time constraints due to extended banter between the autocue readers and the sports guy and the weather guy.)

    • ianmac 18.2
      8 December 2016 at 4:14 pm

      Thanks xanthe. Pretty awful in this day and age. What next?

  19. RTM 19
    8 December 2016 at 12:00 pm

    Some conservative Kiwis are very unhappy that the ugly side of their country’s Pacific history is being exposed: http://readingthemaps.blogspot.co.nz/2016/12/counting-victims.html

    • ropata 19.1
      8 December 2016 at 5:23 pm

      +1 fascinating and tragic tale. Absolutely should not be covered up. Love your work RTM and it deserves to be published widely.

  20. dv 20
    8 December 2016 at 12:36 pm

    What does brought in to line mean?
    Are the Charter schools just lying about there pass rates?

    Charter school pass rates plummet when brought in line with state schools

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11762756

    The report showed Vanguard Military School on Auckland’s North Shore and Te Kura Hourua O Whangarei Terenga Paraoa reported they had met their 2014 NCEA leaver targets – but when the figures were analysed, they did not.

    Vanguard reported a 100 per cent pass rate for NCEA Level 2. However, when revised in line with NCEA standards it dropped to just 60 per cent. It met Level 1 standards.

    At Te Kura Hourua, neither Level 1 or Level 2 NCEA standards were met once revised: Level 1 dropped from 82 per cent to 77.8 per cent, and Level 2 dropped from 80 per cent to 55.6 per cent.

    Labour Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins, who obtained the documents, said they showed charter schools have been “massively overstating” their pass rates when compared with the rest of the country’s schools.

    A trust with close ties to the Government – including former All Black and National Party supporter Michael Jones – was given a $500,000 charter school contract. Photo / Jason Oxenham
    Trust given $500,000 charter school contract without going to tender
    Minister of Education Hon Hekia Parata. Photo / Dean Purcell
    Charter schools getting performance bonus despite not meeting targets
    I hate the concept of charter schools, but then I met Alwyn Poole. Photo / Steven McNicholl
    Peter Lyons: Charter schools deeply flawed, but not this one
    “In one case a school reported a 93.3 per cent pass rate when the facts show only 6.7 per cent of leavers achieved NCEA Level 2,” he said.

    • repateet 20.1
      8 December 2016 at 1:36 pm

      “Brought into line” means there’s been a corrupt system working and now it’s been outed.

      Hekia Pariah and the Epsom Idiot have been spinning crap about it today to try to make people with ordinary intelligence believe it is something it wasn’t. I didn’t need to go to a charter school to recognise bullshit when I see it.

  21. ropata 21
    8 December 2016 at 4:01 pm

    A leaked memo from the Beehive 😉

    Judith Collins to Bill EnglishRE: This is not the end…#nzpol #Satire https://t.co/zDGx7i2GTw pic.twitter.com/BBXVyasr1d— Beehive Letters (@BeehiveLetters) December 8, 2016

  22. Puckish Rogue 22
    8 December 2016 at 4:04 pm

    Ok so Little was safe until the next election because, lets all be honest now, Little was going to lose to Key but that was keeping him safe because anyone else would have to lost to Key as well

    Now Keys gone and English is in charge, English who has lost before, English who isn’t exactly Mr Charisma, English who is beatable…Little might win and that’ll mean six years and then National will be back in so that’s a long time to wait if you’re an MP

    But Little hasn’t improved Labours numbers, in fact it’d be fair to say Labours numbers, being positive, stagnating and if National don’t drop below 40% and NZFirst stay above 10% then that’s another term for National

    So in light of the new developments is there someone in Labour that will answer the call to arms?

    On a completely unrelated matter, what are the chances Robertson is going to be firing up the ol’ BBQ over Summer? 🙂

    • Muttonbird 22.1
      8 December 2016 at 5:07 pm

      lets all be honest now, Little was going to lose to Key

      That’s not what Key himself thought. He said said he didn’t like losing which is why he jumped ship.

      Key is a coward and I believe he will be remembered for that.

    • ropata 22.2
      8 December 2016 at 5:15 pm

      If there’s one thing to be learned from the Trump, Key, Cameron phenomena it is that policy is totally irrelevant and in fact it switches people off. What people vote for is a smiley wavey confident snake oil sales person. Even Obama and Trudeau benefited from this mindless herd behaviour. (Scott Adams made some excellent observations of Trump’s persuasion techniques and NLP type shit)

      Maybe Labour needs to put up All Blacks and TV personalities instead of serious candidates.

      • chris73 22.2.1
        8 December 2016 at 6:44 pm

        I kind of agree with this but you’d be hard pressed to find a Labour supporting All Black although Chris Laidlaw is probably still hanging around if you want to use him

    • b waghorn 22.3
      8 December 2016 at 5:18 pm

      Labour is appearing more solid by the day, all the dead wood is being pruned game on pucky , the planet key lotus eaters will awake from their stupor in time for the right man to be the next PM.

      • ropata 22.3.1
        8 December 2016 at 11:11 pm

        i think they are addicted to the property price inflation koolaid and will keep drinking it until NZ sinks into the sea. or some other unthinkable disaster happens like “interest rates”

    • Kiwiri 22.4
      8 December 2016 at 5:20 pm

      Robertson has been sorting out things in the background and doesn’t have to

  23. joe90 23
    8 December 2016 at 4:05 pm

    CV will be delighted to learn Trump’s rumored pick for FDA director reckons big pharma should release new drugs, whether they work or not.
    /

    O’Neill also could push the agency in new directions. In a 2014 speech, he said he supported reforming FDA approval rules so that drugs could hit the market after they’ve been proven safe, but without any proof that they worked, something he called “progressive approval.”

    “We should reform FDA so there is approving drugs after their sponsors have demonstrated safety — and let people start using them, at their own risk, but not much risk of safety,” O’Neill said in a speech at an August 2014 conference called Rejuvenation Biotechnology. “Let’s prove efficacy after they’ve been legalized.”

    http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-12-07/trump-team-is-said-to-consider-thiel-associate-o-neill-for-fda

  24. rod 24
    8 December 2016 at 4:27 pm

    Who are you going to drool over now till the next election Puckerman? now that your beloved idol has spit the dummy.

    • Andre 24.1
      8 December 2016 at 4:59 pm

      I’m more curious whose leg the Hosk is going to hump now. It just won’t be the same if it’s English’s leg he latches onto.

      • rod 24.1.1
        8 December 2016 at 5:19 pm

        @ Andre brilliant + 100

      • North 24.1.2
        8 December 2016 at 11:52 pm

        Hosking’s done his “Best PM Ever” shit now he’s checking out the Blinglish (invented word) ‘rectalia’. He’s a bit shameless with his rat-up-drainpipe styles is Hosk’.

  25. North 25
    8 December 2016 at 10:37 pm

    FFS…….dork Max Snr. Couldn’t resist could he? http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11763286
    I don’t mean the ‘doing’…….the “lonely backbencher” line weren’t half bad akshully (well done CT!)…….no, it’s more the studied ‘telling’.

    No class. Aux Old Money must be immensely glad about The Leaving.