Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
6:00 am, March 10th, 2021 - 51 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
Some people should not be landlords.
Auckland landlord must pay $3k after making family share house with strangers | Stuff.co.nz
Shocking Jester. Disgusting.
Fall out from Meghan and Harry’s interview continues. Piers Morgan has left breakfast show after 40,000 complaints. The guy really had it in for Meghan, because apparently she went on one or two dates with him in the past, but then wasn’t interested. He got called out for his rant about the interview by a colleague and then stormed off the show.
queen has come out and said she takes racism very seriously. Good. Their PR machine has backed themselves into a corner by saying they take bullying seriously, a week before the interview.
if you didn’t watch the the interview, it is worth a watch. Even if your not interested in the monarchy, it is about how things get spun, by the firms PR and the British tabloids.
I have nothing but respect for Meghan and Harry. The Queen comes out of it looking pretty impressive too.
Yes. that is my take too Anker. Meghan was a victim of racism and it came from multiple sources. Good on them for having the courage of their convictions and getting out from under.
Like all bullies Morgan expected Markle to take his relentless harassment on the chin without complaint but when called on his behaviour, he flounced.
Seems he was all sweetness and light with arseholes, though.
https://twitter.com/NuuxCali1/status/1369074780889100291
Hell has no fury like a narcissist scorned
What an absolute child Morgan is.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/photo-shows-depth-of-piers-morgans-obsession-with-meghan-markle/TVLFYOYFKXDZXJAOGUCP2D7NUQ/
Why was Morgan allowed to get away with this?
I wonder if Mike Hosking will do a Piers Morgan and decide to leave One ZB?
Jimmy re Mike Hoskng……….it sounds perfect!
Nuh, take the whole ZB and jump into oblivion with him.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/lately/audio/2018786842/alarm-at-rocket-lab-s-next-payload
Can the govt control what rocket lab send into space?
Can the govt control what rocket lab send into space?
That would require them having the soul to sense the wrongness of participating in war games.
Sold their souls they have to the MIC.
It's not a New Zealand company.
So?
Anything launched from Mahia Peninsula has to pass through New Zealand territory. The New Zealand government has the right to control what passes through New Zealand territory, by passing laws and regulations. I s'pose there are some carve-outs for stuff like diplomatic pouches and the like, but a satellite seems unlikely to fall into that category.
Of course it's a lot easier to just shrug and say because it isn't already prohibited and there's not much national interest in urgently prohibiting it, no action will be taken. Given that it's claimed to be nothing more than a communications test satellite, I can't imagine there's much enthusiasm to whack a hornet's nest over it.
You're right let's just stick to grass.
Even if it was a full-fledged Star Wars satellite, what's the limit that would require regulation by the state?
Before we fall over ourselves while some commie beardie from Otago reaches for relevance, here's the permits and licensing stuff we do:
https://www.mbie.govt.nz/science-and-technology/space/permits-and-licences-for-space-activities/payloads-approved-for-launch/
Thanks for that. It provides quite comprehensive info answering wags' question "Can the govt control what rocket lab send into space?"
As for launching grass, space cows have rights and welfare needs, too.
From the earth, to the mooooo-n!
"commie beardie"
None of the online images of Prof Clements that I could see in about 3 seconds of looking (about as much interest as I could summon) show him with a beard. So clearly a "beardless commie" – though as yet we have evidence for only the first word of that pejorative. The merging of pogonophobia and hysterical anti-communism was a 1960's/70's phenomenon – and we really need to keep our insults contemporary.
Please may we get a referendum on a "wealth tax" – just one a bit less severe than the Green Party proposed
[TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]
I'd rather it was a referendum on a proper formal capital gains tax. Which really is the much better answer to bringing income from wealth into the tax system.
Absolutely.
That would be the wealth tax proposed by the Greens where if a couple had two million dollars in net assets they paid nothing?
Sounds far from radical to me.
So if their house in Auckland is worth $2m, when one passes away, does the surviving spouse end up with a $10k annual tax bill each year for the rest of their life?
Yup.
Just one of the many reasons a capital gains tax is better. Because a CGT doesn't hit until what was a home gets turned into a mere financial instrument at time of sale.
I agree, I think a CGT is better, wealth tax really seems like an envy tax to me.
Under almost all circumstances, the family home is exempt from tax such as bright-line tested income tax or CGT. This is unjust, unfair, and excludes a major factor (and awful lot of wealth) in the housing market, IMO. Inherited property is also exempt.
https://www.ird.govt.nz/property/buying-and-selling-residential-property/the-brightline-property-rule/exclusions-to-the-brightline-rule
That's a flaw in the implementation of the CGT, not an inherent flaw in the general concept. Whereas the wealth tax concept has many flaws beyond just the effects on the asset-rich/income poor, mostly to do with how it would affect investment and asset-management decisions.
Furthermore, any jurisdiction that is inclined to exempt family homes from CGT is very likely to also exempt family homes from a wealth tax. New Zealand probably even more so, because of the grossly inflated prices of our homes and the high numbers of people that would be liable or see themselves liable, purely because of the family home.
edit: Estate and gift taxes really should also be reinstated. We used to have them, and at least some of our peer nations have them, and they directly act to reduce one of the major causes of inequality.
A wealth tax has the advantage of being able to be levied on a regular basis: annually, say or half-yearly, or even quarterly. A CGT is taxed only occasionally, ie when the asset is sold, which seems unfair since most assets – remaining unsold – don't get taxed. However, by far and away the best tax on property would be a land tax.
A land tax is fair because the land ultimately belongs to all of us, and anyone claiming private ownership should be paying for the privilege. It can also be collected on a regular basis. And, as if that were not enough, it also picks up any capital gain since the tax take increases as land prices increase. It should be noted that most capital gain, within the property market, seems to be associated with land.
And on top of all that, a land tax would encourage an efficient use of land.
CGT would likely be removed by an eventual National government and as it takes quite a while for a CGT to wind up to a decent size there would be little apparent benefit to society – whereas a wealth tax would collect a significant amount early allowing for noticeable change for the better for the majority of nz society which would make it far harder to cancel
Errrm, exactly why do you think most countries have capital gains taxes, but don't have wealth taxes (many countries had wealth taxes but eliminated them), and why do you think New Zealand would be immune to the pressures that brought that about?
If the revenue from a wealth tax is returned to society in the form of reduced income taxation at the lower % end the benefit to the many would make it harder to reverse in favour of the few
Didn't prevent the great reversal in the 80's and 90's from progressive taxation on high incomes, and some wealth taxes such as stamp duty and inheritance taxes, to GST on low incomes. Plus the "paperboy tax", later on.
National would not remove a CGT since the banks love this tax. What the banks hate is a land tax.
Or in asset rich, cash poor cases like this you simply defer the tax until it's eventually sold or passed on in the estate.
Or we could do nothing with the main tax levels and wait for investment classes other than property to become more attractive. Sharesies and Kiwisaver for example.
I can’t wait for a low-risk, high-return, and tax-free investment option other than property that pays off bigly in the short-, medium, and long-term. Bitcoin?
If you're in the right classes, buying politicians seems to fit the bill.
Thats the actual argument behind the Greens wealth tax. As a society you probably need to tax away vast fortunes before they acrue enough to buy both sides of the political system.
About 40% of New Zealand should keep saving but forget about ever owning a house.
Kiwisaver on high growth is pretty good.
Sure it's the K shaped economy. That's Gen C for you.
There is actually quite a long history of Colonial Hut Taxes. Maybe something can be learned from it?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hut_tax
One of the main desired effects (yes, it worked) was to get the native population to work for the colonists.
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2014/06/tax-bads-goods.html
Scomo thinks NZ quarantine is about limiting tourists going to Queenstown lol.
Although to be a bit more fair, asking the Aussie PM about the latest NZ opposition stupidity relating to NZ govt policy is just lazy gotcha journalism. I guess the press conference was boring as muck and they needed some dramas..
Good to see pressure put on that supports our tourist, hotel and hospitality industry. And we need better snow than last year if we are going to compete against Japan's winter offering.
Because a tourist outbreak putting otago into L4 again will be better for the Q'town tourism industry than the current situation?
Hospo and tourism venues around the country are on bare life support relying soleley on local tourism. Everyone gets that.
But the rest of the world experience seems to indicate that trying to live with covid is worse for people in an economy than keeping covid out.
The leader of the opposition National party is either deliberately putting the safety of NZers at risk, or she is a fool. Probably both.
National party MPs love local COVID-19 outbreaks; prudent management during a global pandemic not so much. Collins would take zero responsibility for any local outbreaks and other consequences of open borders – what a ghastly creature.
"I don't understand" and "…get that money…" is Collins in a nutshell; good Lord!
Maybe wait until the vaccine roll-out is more advanced in Australia, and NZ.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-02/charting-australias-covid-vaccine-rollout/13197518?nw=0
Good to see our first AC36 win.
Would like to see the wind at 15knots.
Kris Faafoi said in the Dompost this morning that cannabis needs a champion. someone to write a proper bill and whip it through parliament. Andrew Little who never ever made it clear why he didn't support the referendum and then wimped out should be ashamed of himself. he let the fake christians and the ignorati get the better of him if he ever had any principles in the first place.
Unhappiness in Auckland – speaking for about 90% of them I feel sure. The rest of us against Auckland?
http://wellington.scoop.co.nz/?p=134625
If the current trajectory continues – if there are another couple of lockdowns that target Tāmaki Makaurau while the rest of the country gets off scot-free – Labour will get destroyed in Auckland at the next election.
Everyone wants the country to be safe; no-one wants COVID; everyone understands the need for lockdowns; and the Prime Minister’s leadership and mana is widely respected and well-deserved. But the latest episode shows there’s no longer any sense of common cause in Aotearoa; it feels like the rest of the country against Auckland, expecting us to carry the load whilst being insulted for our trouble. It’s not collective responsibility; it’s collective punishment. And no-one in their right mind is going to vote for the status quo in those circumstances.
So it’s time for Wellington to step up. Things need to change – and fast.
If, in Eden's opinion, no-one in their right mind is going to vote for the status quo, then please provide a viable (safe) alternative to lockdowns to prevent community transmission of COVID-19, and I'll vote for that. The idea that "lockdowns are a special form of torture" seems a bit OTT, but even if ‘torture‘ is accurate, I’d choose the ‘torture‘ of lockdowns in NZ over lockdowns almost anywhere else in the world. I wonder where Eden would choose to be?
Alternatively, a year in to this global pandemic, we could continue to do the responsible and frankly decent thing and hold it together for a few more months until everyone who is sufficiently community-minded has been vaccinated.
Could it be that Eden just doesn't know how lucky we are? Best not to foment unrest, imho – hang in there Kiwis.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-resilience-ranking/
It is a fair comment, though.
The issue isn't lockdowns as such. The complaint seems to be that Auckland is bearing the brunt of the risks of a community outbreak because it has the majority of MIQ.
There are outbreaks related to MIQ, for sure, but there are also outbreaks that seem to relate to Auckland as a port of entry, including for freight. So maybe having more MIQ facilities in wellington wouldn't shift much of the weight that Auckland is carrying.
But they are carrying more weight than the rest of the country. We could be more mindful of that sometimes, maybe.
I believe opinion pieces such as Eden's "The rest of us against Auckland?" may exacerbate regional divisions that are unhelpful at this (or indeed any) time.
Maybe Eden has his finger on the pulse of Auckland opinion, and is simply alerting "the rest of us" to existing widespread indignation stemming from a belief that other NZers are taking the 'COVID heavy lifting' of Aucklanders for granted. But, absent evidence of widespread indignation, current circumstances are certainly fertile ground for stoking resentment and division, and Eden's article contains a fair amount of inflammatory language, imho.
It will be interesting to see the effect of this and any similar articles on public opinion, COVID alert level compliance, and the geographical distribution of MIQ hotels, bearing in mind that any redistribution would come with it's own risks.
I think we have to take a hard look at ourselves in this country – not pussy-foot around everything controversial, that it doesn't suit some influential group to acknowledge. The feelings are there, they need to be recognised and that they are justified to an extent, and some measures taken to reduce the situation that is the background to them. 'Life happens when you are planning iother things'.'
The division between Auckland and the rest has pretty deep foundations. There is a presumption, among the public faces of that city, that it is somehow more important or interesting than the rest of the country. This is odd, because in terms of education the city is not a leader, nor is it a frontrunner in the arts. Its media 'personalities' do it no credit either. Before it goes long on lifting its credibility however, it needs to address neglected critical infrastructure, the sewers, and the water supply.