The discussion paper says a UBI would help to remove the insecurity associated with low wages or insufficient welfare benefits, which bred “personal shame, financial stress, poverty, mental health issues and the accompanying harms.
However, at $200 a week (less than the current adult job seeker payment) a UBI largely won’t produce increased security and the other benefits touted in its discussion paper.
Moreover, requiring people to seek additional top ups would require a lot of the current bureaucracy and its administrative costs to remain.
Of course, the affordability factor comes into play. At $200 a week (less than the current single adult job seeker payment) a UBI is considered far more attainable.
Nevertheless, to achieve increased security and the full benefits touted, a UBI would require to be set at double the $200 mark at the least.
Therefore, if Labour genuinely wants to achieve the goals and benefits touted, the focus has to be on how to overcome the affordability challenge enabling them to apply a higher set UBI rate.
It may be a UBI can’t actually be a full UBI. Meaning there may have to be a cut off rate. For example, no payments made to individuals earning $50,000 plus.
I think $200 is about right, at $400 a couple could ,in cheaper parts of nz bump along semi comfortably with out working.
Hell me and Mrs waghorn work 60 hrs between us and don’t clear much more than $800
I still think we would be better served to just make winz less of a miserable out fit.
$200 a week is insufficient to achieve many of the goals and benefits touted in the discussion paper, as laid out above.
Additionally, another of Labour’s goals is the living wage. Therefore, a higher UBI will put upward pressure on wages, thus helping Labour to also achieve that aim.
You and Mrs waghorn need to consider another business venture. You would both earn more on the minimum wage.
My point is if we were being given $800 I’d probably stop being full time and cruise along doing a little bit of casual to top up , I’m not driven by money and I can imagine a lot of others would drop out of fulltime employment.
This is an underlying issue with the UBI, it doesn’t challenge the future where there is less work available. A job guarantee would work so much better as it
*shows the government can always provide as many jobs as needed by the community
*allows a full time at the minimum wage income level be available to the community.
* automatically adjusts to the number of job guarantee jobs needed.
* gives job guarantee workers a sense of contribution to the community.
* puts no inflationary pressure as job guarantee workers are those not wanted by the wider economy.
Because thats all the work you can find? A job guarantee doesn’t preclude increasing the minimum wage to be a living wage. It also doesn’t preclude offering part time work.
What!!!!! Nazis cronies will never agree to a living wage
work your fucking arse off 7days a week to pay rent and put food on table, meanwhile your family don’t see you,
your life is fucked,
by the time your 45 your body is shot, (if some foreign low wage import hasn’t got your job years earlier)
the kids brought up by some freak at a day care who has nothing in common with you(maybe even a paedophile)(not uncommon)(or likes john keys morals)
is this the nz YOU want nic, the people who work for minimum wage don’t feel like they are contributing, they feel like they are being used, and they are
I dont know what your problem is here frankly, you seem to be going completely bizerk for no particular good reason.
Many people on benefits would rather have work, even at the lowest available rate. I see no problem with that being an alternative available to them. And full time is forty hours across five days a week. Some of what your saying is just bizare for example the problem with many zero hours jobs is not that they pay around minimum wage its that there is far fewer than full time hours available.
On a second look you clearly have no idea what a job guarantee is if you think that job guarantee work will be outsourced overseas. Look it up before commenting further.
You’re onto it gez. I know of a guy who has worked on some of the big infrastructure projects NZ has built over the years and spent his life busting his gut working and getting taxed. Now retired his back is screwed, he can’t stand for long periods without bad pain and has to sit down. He’s not eligible for a back operation currently because his pain isn’t deemed serious enough. Thats the kind of thanks he’s getting from the State.
Funny, my initial response to gez Godwin was where do we need to send the men in white coats.
Clearly what ever your guy was doing for a job is unsuitable work for inclusion into a JG program. If however you think that is a valid criticism of a JG program, you may be having trouble differentiating between a JG and a ‘forced labor camp’. A little background reading may help you
Not only is a job guarantee far from practical in a future with less work opportunity due to automation, it also overlooks the work of caregivers at home looking after kids, the elderly and disabled. Which, is a benefit touted in the discussion paper.
Moreover, it overlooks the fact that a number can’t work.
Nor (on the minimum wage) does it assist in achieving a living wage or giving those struggling on the minimum wage a little more to help get by.
Therefore, your suggestion would be lowering the bar, thus fails to meet many of the objectives touted.
A job guarantee does not become less practical in a future with more automation this only changes the nature of the work in such a programme.
It also raises the bar on the minimum wage front as now there is always an alternative to private sector work, a full time job (on minimum wage) on the job guarantee scheme. This then forces the private sector to bid higher (than full time at minimum wage). For example do you think zero hours contracts can survive such conditions?
Of course its also a good idea to increase the minimum wage to make it a living wage. Which can also be done while having a job guarantee.
People who cant work can still be covered by the existing benefits system and roughly the same for those who would rather be caregivers.
Automation will not only change the nature of work, it will also make many current forms of employment redundant.
Merely providing an alternative to private sector employment doesn’t raises the bar on the minimum wage.
If the public sector is also only paying the minimum wage, there is no wage competition.
Therefore, your argument that a guarantee scheme would put upward pressure on wages is flawed. The private sector would only have to meet or better the work security a guarantee scheme provides. Those that couldn’t would have to look at providing other sweeteners, not necessarily a higher wage.
Existing benefits don’t acknowledge all caregivers.
If you think automation will make jg work redundant then you dont understand what a jg is. If some jg work is made redundant by technology then a new less onerous occupation can be created to take its place.
What your describing about wage pressures is correct. And describes how a jg programme would immediately raise the minimum standard from where it is today (part time at minimum wage to full time at minimum wage). At that point raises in the minimum wage and jg wage need to take over.
No a jg doesnt deal with caregivers but it doesnt preclude programmes which do.
Once automation is feasible and fully self sufficient all employment opportunity will cease to exist.
Guaranteed jobs only provides extra work security. Therefore, there is no direct wage competition. I concur being full time opposed to part time would allow employees to earn a full time wage opposed to a part time wage. However, the private sector would only have to match that work security to continue to attract applicants, thus they wouldn’t have to increases wages, hence there would be no upward pressure on incomes.
“No a jg doesnt deal with caregivers but it doesnt preclude programmes which do”
By advocating guaranteed jobs instead of a UBI it’s doing just that, precluding a scheme that would acknowledge all caregivers.
“Once automation is feasible and fully self sufficient all employment opportunity will cease to exist.”
When is sky net scheduled to take over again?
The only upward pressure on the minimum wage comes from raising the minimum wage rate or providing a better paying alternative. But it seems pretty unlikely that a UBI will be set high enough to compete with the minimum wage.
Though one would expect a small upward pressure on low wage rates from having fewer applicants to jg level positions (as employers will seek to retain their employed staff being uncertain they can be easily replaced).
A UBI set at $400 a week would put upward pressure on the minimum wage.
And seeing as the living wage is also one of Labour’s aims, ensuring we get a decent UBI in place gives Labour the opportunity to also make some gains in this area (attaining the living wage).
As there is no wage competition in what you are advocating, employers would only have to match work security to retain applicants.
What i dont really understand here is why havent labour stated they will raise the minimum wage to match the living wage?
Why all this convoluted stuff about indirectly pushing it up via a high enough UBI?
400$ seems high i would be surprised if thats part of any announcement on this subject.
If you think the possibility of automation cancels out the possibility of job guarantee work you dont understand a job guarantee. Say everything is automated. You can still have a job guarantee just creating positions where the humans work at leisure activities such as street performers poets etc… obviously automation will never reach such levels but anyway automation doesnt undermine it.
To be perfectly honest, I don’t think there is anything wrong with cruising along. Slogging our guts out day and in day out , getting stressed out, doesn’t really help anyone.
Can you explain how a UBI puts upward pressure on the minimum wage?
There are for example cases where the government subsidises businesses so they dont need to pay a full wage to employees themselves. This looks similar to me and therefore puts no pressure on the minimum wage whatsoever.
Maybe. What if the govt introduces a UBI and drops the minimum wage to $5 (as a thought experiment). I would expect wages to fall in this case and conclude that the minimum wage is what actually drives the minimum wage rate.
It seems to me that setting a UBI at a level where it competes with the minimum wage will never be a govt goal.
No you’ve misunderstood me, my point in you’re link is unless its high enough to do away all other benefits its a pointless operation.
I’m far from convinced a ubi is the way to go.
As for my leader apart from kicking in a few dollars to labour for the good of democracy I’m not a Little follower yet, I’m more of an any one but key or collins or any of the horrible people they’ve had since shipley kind of guy.
I assume the figures being bandied about are from the Big Kahuna, since the discussion paper doesn’t really get into numbers. I’d like the figure to be higher, but there will be a limit somewhere. The Big Kahuna also retains the Accommodation Supplement and invalid’s benefits which are good plans IMO (I’d also keep state houses).
Andrew Little was on Morning Report talking about the possible “UBI”.
Did anyone really understand what he was on about?
It appears that we may get a UBI but it is going to be means tested. It will replace other benefits but we are going to keep the other benefits. We are also going to put up taxes on most people who work to pay for it.
Why doesn’t he simply say that he has no idea what Grant is trying to impose on the party?
He also had a swipe at John Key using taxpayer funds in Ambrose’s aborted defamation case. It was fine for Clark and Mallard but according to Little John Key was involved in an “Election Campaign” and nothing could be billed to the taxpayer.
He has a very selective judgement does Andrew. During the prolonged campaign for the leadership of the Labour Party he, and the other candidates, were only too happy to have the taxpayer pay for all their travel around the country. That was different of course. It was Andrew who was benefiting from it. Why doesn’t he really have the courage of his convictions. He and all the others should immediately refund, with interest, the total cost paid by the taxpayer for all of their travel during that campaign.
whatever, they are all the same, I am more than happy for them all to pay their expenses back. how about you A L W Y N ?
they did it too is not an excuse, even my 2 1/2 yr old knows better than that
how old are you, about time you grew up eh
labour did it too(said in a whining voice)
winnie did too(even more whiny)
johns ok though (suck suck swallow swallow)
You certainly have a vivid imagination, don’t you?
“labour did it too(said in a whining voice)
winnie did too(even more whiny)”
You can deduce the way I speak from written words?
I can see you being a great success in a TV program. One of those ones where the lead character can read minds, or has a perfect memory. Whatever. They, like you, have very little connection with the real world.
Why shouldn’t they charge these costs to the state? Key was only sued because he was PM. I am only pointing out how very selective Little is being. If he thinks it was OK for him to bill his costs in an election to the taxpayer he can hardly complain when Key puts the costs of a defamation case as well.
the real world is what I live in man,
the taxpayer should never have to pay that shit, wether it is national, labour, nzfirst, the greens, legalise marijuana party, or whoever
nz taxpayer money should be spent on infrastructure, health, etc
saying he is saving us money is crap, if just kept his fucking mouth shut, left the police out of it and just got on and done his fucking job it would have cost us
NOTHING
actually those tv guys get paid quite well, where do I apply, can I get a reference
“You certainly have a vivid imagination, don’t you?
“labour did it too(said in a whining voice)
winnie did too(even more whiny)”
You can deduce the way I speak from written words?”
So your assertion that he was sued because he was PM is frankly bullshit. I can’t remember where in the job description of PM it says he is required to defame people as part of his job.
Where is that personal responsibility people always harp on about. Key made defamatory statements. He got sued and agreed that he was incorrect in making those statements. We end up paying for his mistake.
This is in no way countered by “but but Aunty Helen did it tooooooo”. It is wrong when politicians use public funds for inappropriate means, no matter what side of the spectrum they sit. There is no way you can paint Little with the Clarke brush as he wasn’t even in government when that crap went down.
A few minor points.
(1) not “defamatory statements”. “alleged defamatory statements”
The case never went to trial did it?
(2) Her name is Clark. It is not “Clarke”.
(3) I never said anything about Helen Clark. I was talking about Little (and Robertson, Mahutu and Parker) competing to be leader.
According to Wiki “Between 22 October and 11 November, 14 hustings meetings were held throughout the country for members of the Labour Party”
Hardly general Parliamentary business was it?
Little of course thought it was just hunky-dory. http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/taxpayer-bankrolls-flights-labour-leadership-fight-ng-164086
He claimed they were to talk to the public. I understand they were closed meetings for party members only. How is that “the public”?
“Andrew Little was on Morning Report talking about the possible “UBI”.
Yes, and he raised another concern.
He implied tax would be used to claw a UBI back.
However, it was only the other day Labour were highlighting tax avoidance and how many high income earners minimize their tax burden.
Therefore, what he seems to be overlooking is this would effectively allow high income earners minimizing their tax burden to largely escape the government’s attempt (using the tax system) to claw back their UBI.
It would be far more efficient to set a cut off point, limiting who can receive a UBI, thus preventing tax minimisation structures allowing high income earners to escape the burden.
” set a cut off point, limiting who can receive a UBI”.
If it has a cut-off, and that seems to be what Little, and today, Robertson seem to be contemplating it is not a UBI. The U means Universal and as soon as you have any cut off at all it isn’t that. It is merely another form of means, or income, tested benefit and you have all the overheads of administering any other benefit.
One of the advantages of a real UBI is that administration is very simple. You only need to keep track of whether a person is still alive. That is one of the great advantages of National Super. The administration of that is a breeze compared to most other benefits.
Having a cut off is not going to have any effect on tax minimisation. The only real way to reduce your taxes is to reduce your taxable income. Anyone who does that successfully will become eligible for the quasi-UBI if the cut off is based on income.
If the cut off is based on assets there will be a lot of asset rich, income poor, elderly in Auckland who are going to miss out. I know a couple whose income is almost entirely National Super who still live in their Epsom house that is supposedly worth well over $2 million. Even their rates come close to forcing them to move. Are they going to have to shift away to some small, cheap housing, town where they know no-one if they have to sell their home and live off their savings?
“If it has a cut-off, and that seems to be what Little, and today, Robertson seem to be contemplating it is not a UBI”
I agree. Nevertheless it would be a WBI – a widespread basic income able (if set correctly) to achieve all the goals touted.
Income would be assessed by IRD who would also administer the allowance Therefore, there would be little extra bureaucratic burden.
Having a cut off will prevent the bureaucratic burden of dishing out the allowance only to attempt to claw it back through income tax.
I didn’t claim having a cut off is going to have an effect on tax minimisation. Nor did I advocate a cut off based on assets.
I pointed out how having a cut off will escape losses through tax avoidance/minimisation. But you are correct on minimisation and the eligibility point.
Apart from addressing tax minimization (such as ring fencing losses, etc…) a number will slip through, but only a few high income earners would be able to get down to a $50,000 cut off.
“claw it back”. You don’t claw it back. The way Robertson last tried to describe it is a tax credit. There is no burden.
“I didn’t claim having a cut off …”. In that case I don’t understand what you meant by your previous comment that talked about “set a cut off point, limiting who can receive a UBI, thus preventing tax minimisation” .
“cut off based on assets.” I just gave both ways of having any proposed “cut off”. I certainly wouldn’t have any cut off at all. Certainly such cuts are used. The Australian state super used to, at least when the New Zealand Government forced me to apply for it used both assets and income to limit access to the scheme. There was a 46 page form to fill in.
I had to apply, even though it was impossible to get it because I had worked there. New Zealand Super is much easier to administer because it doesn’t have to be abated.
” only a few high income earners”. I think you would be surprised. Wouldn’t anyone who owns a company and leaves the profits in the company get the UBI in their personal account? They wouldn’t be cheating either as the company could pay its taxes honestly.
I suggest you carefully look at what Lanthanide has been saying. I think he is giving really good explanations to your concerns.
The Big Kahuna has be acknowledged in the discussion paper. It has also been costed.
However, the Big Kahuna sets a flat tax rate of 30%, disadvantaging those currently on lower tax rates, this lower incomes. Effectively making the poor cover a percentage of the cost of a UBI, which largely defeats the purpose.
Moreover, it would tax the annual paper gain (not gain achieved) of housing. Leaving those such as pensioners (and others on fixed incomes) worse off.
Additionally, the set rate is far too low to achieve many of the other goals and benefits touted in the discussion paper, one of which is shifting away from benefits.
That all seems to match my own memory of the book. I read it when it came out so my memories are fading a bit of course.
It is however unfair to complain about the low rate of benefits AND the level of taxes. These numbers have been identified because they will match income and expenditure. Sure the amount to be paid may be lower than you want and the taxes higher than you desire but they match.
If you don’t identify real costs and real benefits you are not doing economics. You are just living in fantasyland. Putting in actual numbers and observing what happens is, unfortunately, why they call Economics “the dismal science”.
A lot of the discussion on this blog was, regrettably, of the fantasy kind.
“Sure the amount to be paid may be lower than you want and the taxes higher than you desire but they match”
Yes, it costed. However, it doesn’t enable many of the benefits touted. Leaving those cash poor worse off.
Moreover, the poor will only receive around half of the UBI as tax increases eat into it. Whereas, the rich will minimize/avoid their tax and get to keep it all.
That’s why I’m advocating that Labour acknowledge this and set their focus on finding a feasible way to allow a higher UBI set rate. While averting the extra tax burden on the cash poor and asset rich.
You don’t seem to understand what I am saying.
You are still saying you want higher benefits and lower taxes.
That is Fantasyland. Put down what you propose and work out what the numbers would be. Without that you are just dreaming and debate is impossible.
You also don’t seem to have appreciated how the UBI would work and how high incomes would have to go before taxes would increase. Lanthanide has worked some examples and you have to get up to about $100 k or so with $10,000 UBI and 33% flat tax to be worse off.
They are further down in this post.
I clearly understood what you were saying and I addressed it. It’s you that seems to be having difficulties.
Of course the affordability factor comes into play. But it’s also vital to get bang for our buck (maximizing and capitalizing the benefits touted) .
A higher UBI will enable better outcomes, but of course, taxes at the top end would require to be higher. I’ve never disputed this as you seem to be implying with your fantasy-land comment.
However, Labour could also look at redirecting expenditure. Making cuts say in the defense budget to help offset the cost of a higher UBI.
They can also look at charging and increasing royalties, oil, gas water and gold, etc…
Increasing tax on alcohol. Reducing consumption and its associated harm, which many would see as a win-win.
A financial transaction tax between financial institutions could also be considered.
These (above) are the things Labour should be considering and one would like to think they are.
Lanthanide points were also addressed. It’s not about incomes having to increase. It’s about a flat tax set higher than current lower rates negatively impacting on the poor and the asset rich you were so concerned about in your other post. Their higher tax payment would eat into their UBI. Leaving them with around half of the two hundred that’s been suggested (less for the asset rich) thus reducing the ability to achieve the benefits claimed in the discussion paper.
A tax free threshold (as was mentioned elsewhere in this discussion) could help offset this tax negative.
That is fine. It is still not really capable of discussion if you don’t put down some real numbers for what you propose. I, for example put some numbers together for a proposal that was floated of $400/week. That indicated we would have to double the tax take. That shows what is involved. You will have to do something similar if you want your ideas to be considered.
For example the Defence Budget is about $3 billion. What would you cut out? Would you do a Bob Jones and scrap the lot? There goes the fisheries protection vessels of course.
What level would you set the UBI at and how would you pay for it?
The tax on alcohol is about $900 million. What would you put it up to?
” Their higher tax payment would eat into their UBI. Leaving them with around half of the two hundred that’s been suggested”.
The UBI was meant to be a basic income. It isn’t meant to be additional to whatever they are getting now. You are only meant to get the lot and keep it if you have no other income.
If Labour genuinely want to achieved the goals and benefits touted, it’s up to them to look at the options and do the maths.
This is the point I’m raising.
The reason being, at less than the current single adult job seeker rate ($200 a week) that’s been suggested, it will struggle to meet the full potential of the benefits touted.
How much do you think a financial transaction tax between financial institutions could produce?
Charging and doubling our royalties will muster several billion.
I would consider doubling the tax on alcohol. Which would also produce savings from the reduced associated harm.
As welfare cost would be reduced, coupled with the other tax suggestions in the post above, the tax rate wouldn’t have to double.
A UBI is most relevant when one has no other income. It is supposedly being considered to deal with the future of work as more move in and out of work, thus have no income.
If Labour want this to go then they’ll have to be very tight and on message, I can’t see advocating for politicians getting more money (as an example) as going down well with the voters
I could see it working for the unemployed and those on other benefits, I’d market it as streamlining the whole system but where would be the cut off point for working people?
Would someone go from full time to part time etc etc
Do you think Labour have to people or skills to do that?, I certainly don’t
I even doubt National have the skills to market a UBI and convince every one it’s a great idea.
Most people are fairly simple and conservative in their outlook, just look at the flag debate, people getting so bent out of shape over a piece of cloth, completely ridiculous.
Trying to convince the sheeple that something as revolutionary as a UBI is a great idea hasn’t got a chance, all people will hear is Labour wants to make every one a bene and hike taxes.
Labour has shot its self in the face with this one.
John Key and Bill English potentially could but it’d be a tough ask but in this case you’d have to be on the money when it comes to calculations (dotting the eyes and crossing the tees so to speak)
You’d also have to get cross-party support on this as well
At the moment Andrew is just putting it out there for debate, he does admit it is a big contentious subject and it needs plenty of input from everybody as to how it could be implemented. Of course, he doesn’t have anything definitive to state about it – if he did you whinging Tories would say he was being a dictator – at least he is airing the subject, much as Gareth Morgan has and others. Instead of being a tin pot flash in the pan flag debacle, at least Andrew is wanting to have lots of ideas put forward. Why do you lot always rubbish him – he doesn’t mangle his words any more than your precious “no name” and doesn’t disgrace himself in public either- give the man a break.
We rubbish him firstly because, well hes rubbish. He can’t win an electorate seat, he changes positions almost daily and is uncomfortably close to being an out and out racist
Secondly while most of us on the right think John Key is center and edging close to center-left hes still a better option then the unions man Andrew Little so he has to be beaten
Thirdly are you serious? Give the man a break?? If you can’t handle some criticism on a web site how is he supposed to handle Winston Peters in full flight, trade negotiations or when if the media start taking him seriously?
The media will never take him seriously because they are in the pay of the right. What’s Winston got to do with it, did I mention him? I criticise the left a lot, they need to get their act together – but rubbishing everything Andrew Little does from you lot borders on paranoia. Now, your leader definitely does warrant criticism, if the hat fits wear it , he lies like there is no tomorrow and is nasty with it. He is an embarrassment to the country and dangerous to boot.
Your type of comment doesn’t bother me one wit sunshine.
Such first past the post thinking! I really don’t care if he wins in fairly conservative (and becoming more so) New Plymouth or not. I care whether or not he wins support across the country, because that is what determines seats in an MMP system.
Sure its FPP thinking but since, just like in FPP days, you can choose National with support parties or Labour with support parties its a moot point.
The argument (and thinking) is that if someone can’t convince an electorate to vote for them then why should a country and if (a very big if of course) that it comes down to Labour, Greens and NZFirst who’ll be the PM then?
I’d say the person that can win an electorate seat has the best claim to the throne
DoublePlusGood, because, as I have said the media doesn’t give anybody who is not National or Act any chance to put their ideas across , all they do is slag off the opposition with the likes of Hoskings and Hide, plus Audrey and Fran so how are the people going to hear anything positive that the other parties have to say. The law of averages does not mean that National/Act are perfect and correct all the time does it. Even the polls are never correct, people deserve to get a balanced press, why do you think heaps of us have cancelled out of MSM and never bother to access it. I had family here recently and they brought over from the States some periodicals for me to read, two come to mind “The Atlantic” and “Time” magazine – why can’t we access decent NZ grown stuff like this instead of drivel and trash.
New Plymouth is oil driven and I know is a conservative constituency and probably will be next time. He shouldn’t have stood there but that doesn’t mean he cannot be a decent leader – we are in the shit with this Government, he could do much better – hell’s bells it wouldn’t take much to do better.
Anyway I can’t follow your thread, where was I discussing FFP??
Good on you for referring these anti Labour types, to the “facts”, they much prefer to make stuff up and then tout it as as the truth, you can see how shallow they are.
john key also pulls ladies ponytails
pisses in the shower proudly
wanks himself(sorry bronagh) over ponytails
loves the cock
bends over in cages with soap and stuff
cant talk properly
pulls funny faces as he squirms(whats up his arse?)
walks like a fag(by fag I mean fag) on the catwalk
says a lot about his electorate eh?
Really – so there are no Chinese buyers? I rather think you’ll find that there are.
Not withdrawing from the TPPA is frankly pretty stupid – but Labour leaders, unlike Gnats, are not completely autocratic.
What you have here is only evidence of the bias inherent in your shrivelled and twisted excuse for a character – fit for treasons, stratagems and spoils; dull as night, dark as Erebus: Let no such man be trusted.
It’s just as well it’s not what you think – there’s just not much there. It’s not about ‘winning’ it’s about good governance. Key’s omnishambles has achieved so little at such cost it will take decades to recover.
In a good year Cullen could scrape up a surplus of about $2 billion. Key et al have run up $120 billion in debt – $150 billion by the end of this year. That’s 75 years of Cullen just to get us back to zero.
Hordes of folk are out of work and the economy is basically screwed. The international situation won’t be rescuing us. But the public are waking up to Key – they’re dumping his flag and pretty soon they’ll be dumping him.
Why don’t you take your whining to Whaleoil where you belong and stop pestering the folk here with your ill-informed and malicious nonsense? Have you no shame at all?
A baboon could have stood in Helensville and won if he represented National – that is no argument at all that if you can’t win a constituency seat you are not capable of winning over the country. Helensville is a safe seat, put him in somewhere like South Auckland or some other depressed area in one of the many depressed provinces and see how he would do. Ask the people of Helensville how often he visits his office out there – its a farce, he doesn’t even live there.
@alwyn “Did anyone really understand what he was on about?”
Never mind alwyn. Your Minder might find time to explain it to you in one syllable words. You must try harder.
1. UBI is a just discussion to be had by fair-minded non-partisan people.
2. Every adult would get an allowance regardless of employment (or maybe an income limit could kick in.)
3. A huge downsizing of WINZ would help pay for it. Taxes would be adjusted accordingly.
4. It is not Labour Policy. Gareth Morgan has been regarded as a right wing economist and he raised the idea a year or two ago.
5. Because of future employment uncertainties some plan will have to be developed regardless of Party Stripe.
Can I suggest that you can simplify this “explanation”
Point 1 should say
“Only people who love Andie and hate John are allowed to comment”
Point 2 could simply be worded
“2. Every adult would get an allowance regardless of employment, or maybe they won’t.”
And, from the way they are talking about it, point 3 should say
“3. A huge reduction in National Super levels would help pay for it”
3. That is right. Morgan pointed that out. “A huge reduction in National Super levels would help pay for it.” Mine would drop from $269pw to $200pw.
2. That’s right too. It might even include children.
1. alwyn would be welcome to comment on the pros and cons but if she just sneers because she thinks its a Labour issue she may as well not bother.
It is an issue for all society in view of the huge changes going on with employment around the World. What better way would there be alwyn?
Why do people insist on thinking that Alwyn is a female name?
I have never met any woman named Alwyn and I have, on a number of occasions pointed out that it is a male (Welsh) name. http://www.thenamemeaning.com/alwyn/
I don’t think it is a Labour issue at all. It was actually proposed by Thomas More in 1516 so it has a very long history.
If, however the Labour Party is going to propose such a scheme they should at least have a consistent view of what they are talking about. At a minimum can they get their Leader and Finance spokesman on the same page in the songbook?
They are behaving like idiots and doing a great injustice to New Zealand when Andrew and Grant are proposing radically different visions.
How can it possibly be discussed if there is nothing of substance?
This went on in a very large post a week or so ago on this site where every man and his dog was saying what was going to be in the Labour Party proposal. It was futile because nobody had, or has, any idea.
@alwyn:”If, however the Labour Party is going to propose such a scheme they should at least have a consistent view of what they are talking about.”
There is no policy to be consistent about, yet. So I would welcome, they would welcome, the whole country would welcome a discussion on all aspects. Pros and Cons. Please?
I see where you’re coming from and its true but considering how polarising this issue could become you’d have thought Little and Robertson would have gotten to together to discuss how to talk about it
Unless Robertson is setting Little up…not that he would of course 🙂
You mean, I assume, that Grant read Gareth’s book over his Christmas vacation and likes all the big words? If they are thinking about Morgan’s proposal we can discuss it. At least there is something more than smoke and mirrors to talk about.
So far however there isn’t anything real to come to grips with.
You’re kind of right in a way, labour seems to think people are capable of understanding that they just want to chuck the ubi idea out there for debate,
You and your mates prove that many aren’t.
Lefties tend to fall into the trap of thinking the best of people.
Stupidly optimistic is about right.
It’s part of the Future of Work commission. The paper, like all similar discussion papers, was deliberately long on concepts and short on details because policy will follow later after the discussion and feedback based on the discussion paper.
Therefore, if Labour genuinely wants to achieve the goals and benefits touted, the focus has to be on how to overcome the affordability challenge enabling them to apply a higher set UBI rate.
That’s actually easy but it requires a significant mindset change and a lot of work (It won’t be the fiddling at the edges that governments seem to have grown so fond of over the last couple of decades). All it requires is seeing the government as the source of all money in the NZ economy (This is actually BTW). Then the UBI just becomes the source of money into the economy.
The tax system would have to be rebuilt around that mindset change as well but, then, the tax system needs to be rebuilt anyway as it’s no longer fit for purpose.
It may be a UBI can’t actually be a full UBI.
Oh, it can be – it just requires that mindset change that I mentioned.
EDIT:
And according to the poll on that page the people are in favour of it.
@ Draco:” it requires a significant mindset change and a lot of work (It won’t be the fiddling at the edges that governments seem to have grown so fond of over the last couple of decades).”
Very true. But we can see above that battle lines are being drawn on political lines. Pity. Wonder how the angry ones reacted when Morgan floated the idea in the Great Kahuna a year or so ago?
“It may be a UBI can’t actually be a full UBI. Meaning there may have to be a cut off rate. For example, no payments made to individuals earning $50,000 plus.”
The defeats the entire point of a UBI.
All you need to do is structure the tax level to achieve the same outcome. A flat tax is by far the best option, but if that won’t work, a simple two-tiered progressive tax will.
The problem is a higher rate UBI given to all will cost far more, thus tax will have to increase far more, hence may not be such an easy sell to the general public.
A higher flat tax rate will disadvantage those currently on lower tax rates, thus lower incomes. Effectively making the poor cover a percentage of the cost of a UBI, which largely defeats the purpose.
The problem is a higher rate UBI given to all will cost far more
Stop thinking of the UBI as a cost and start thinking of it as the fuel that the economy needs to run. Do that and it, and everything else, falls into place. It tells us that not only can we afford the UBI at any level but that we actually can’t do without it.
The taxes will need to be adjusted but then the entire tax system is centuries out of date, not fit for purpose and thus needs replacing any way. Start from the ground up with redesigning it and include the UBI in that redesign.
Labour has bitten off a lot and they probably didn’t realise how much. They, and others, probably haven’t realised that you have to replace the current tax system with the introduction of a UBI and, in fact, build it around that UBI.
Think of the economy as an engine. Fuel goes in (government created money) and exhaust comes out (taxes).
The engine itself is the resources that a people have in their borders and what they do with them to provide for their needs.
For the distribution of those products we use a market system. People use money to buy what they want and money is also used to encourage people to work in particular fields.
So, the UBI now becomes that fuel. People have money to spend on the products that they want which encourages people to produce those products.
Close the loopholes. Our system has been designed to put the tax burden upon the poor. This is why we have the people with the greatest wealth paying, proportionally, the least tax.
We need to change that so that, because of taxes, no one can afford to be rich. Financial transaction taxes and capital taxes including a tax on money in the bank (demurrage).
Increases in taxes on high incomes up to 100%. The idea isn’t that people will be taxed at 100% but that they just won’t have an income that high, i.e, taxes used to limit income.
Direct taxes upon resources used. Basically, what I’m getting at here is that the resources that are extracted from the land are taxed. Although, in the case of extraction and processing of raw resources (Think iron, gallium, thorium, gold) I think the government should do it directly. The sale price of those resources then becomes the tax.
When you say government created money do you mean in tandem with the banks? Dual currency? Or Government takes back the sole right to create money?
“The engine itself is the resources that a people have in their borders and what they do with them to provide for their needs.
For the distribution of those products we use a market system. People use money to buy what they want…”
That largely takes place now.
How would you like to see money used to encourage people to work in particular fields?
So the money created now becomes the UBI to be spent into the economy creating demand and supporting commerce.
How will that impact on the dollar? Would you have a limit on money created, therefore,won’t this (UBI expenditure) limit other government expenditure? And how do you see it impacting on inflation?
When you say government created money do you mean in tandem with the banks? Dual currency? Or Government takes back the sole right to create money?
The government becomes the sole creator of money and no other money can be used for NZ products.
That largely takes place now.
In a fucked up system that doesn’t actually work. If it worked we wouldn’t have people saying that we couldn’t afford to keep people out of poverty.
How would you like to see money used to encourage people to work in particular fields?
They get paid.
So the money created now becomes the UBI to be spent into the economy creating demand and supporting commerce.
Yes.
How will that impact on the dollar?
That would depend upon how the government sets the exchange rate. I’m in favour of it being set by a maths formula tied to imports and exports.
Would you have a limit on money created, therefore,won’t this (UBI expenditure) limit other government expenditure?
I wouldn’t have a limit on the amount created but I would have the RBNZ setting the tax rates to offset the spending. The government sets where the taxes are, the RBNZ and probably in association with Treasury set the actual rates.
And how do you see it impacting on inflation?
On normal goods and services inflation would remain the same. Some would see deflation.
“A higher flat tax rate will disadvantage those currently on lower tax rates”
Yes, but only up to a point. Because of the mathematics of the current system, a flat tax rate can go up quite high before anyone on a lower income pays more tax under a UBI system than they would pay under the current system.
Eg, with a $10,000 annual UBI and a 33% flat tax rate, someone earning $30,000 from private employment would have this:
$10,000 UBI
$30,000 private income
-$10,000 tax
=======
$30,000 after-tax income
At the moment, someone earning $30,000 from private employment (and assuming no other benefits like accommodation allowance) would pay $4,270 in tax for an after-tax income of $25,730
With 33% tax, someone earning $50,000 through private employment would pay a net tax of $6,500 vs current tax of $8,020.
With 33% tax, someone earning $70,000 through private employment would pay a net tax of $13,100 vs a current tax of $14,020.
With a 33% tax, someone earning $90,000 through private employment would pay a net tax of $20,000, vs a current tax of $20,620.
These figures are all with a $10,000 UBI; if it’s $11,000, then subtract another $1k off the net tax paid.
So as you can see, a 33% flat tax rate results in a tax cut for the bottom 90% of workers. The Big Kahuna proposed a 30% income tax rate, but this is helped along by a capital tax which is the most politically fraught part of the deal.
A flat tax of 40% would still seem reasonable, although I haven’t done any numbers on that.
The concern with the capital gains tax is that it will be on annual paper gains, opposed to actual gains achieved. Disadvantaging those who are asset rich but cash poor, such as a number of pensioners.
It isn’t a capital gains tax, it is income tax charged on the deemed rate of return of fixed assets. The government sets the rate annually in the budget (Morgan’s view is that it should be based on the longterm average of 90 day or 10 year bill rates), and goes from there.
That doesn’t actually address Chairman’s concern, in fact it just reinforces it.
If you have a ‘deemed rate of return’, but don’t actually receive income from that asset (eg, your personal home in Auckland with no mortgage that is worth $2m on paper), then you have to find the money to pay the tax. For many pensioners, that money doesn’t exist.
‘It is income tax charged on the deemed rate of return of fixed assets”
Yes, assets taxed at the deemed accumulated value gained is a capital gains. tax. One that works by taxing paper gains and not actual gains achieved. Negatively impacting those that are asset rich and cash poor.
That’s the whole point of it – to stop people storing up wealth and not paying tax, or paying very little tax, despite having a much better standard of living than someone with a higher income but no or few assets. The aim is specifically to hit asset-rich people to force them to use their assets productively, not just accumulate them – the cash-poor aspect is unfortunate, so finding a way around that would be useful, but bear in mind that under a UBI, income-poor people are paying little to no income tax, so it’s not all bad news.
Also, it’s a deemed income tax, so most people won’t be affected because they will pay enough tax not to have to pay the CCT as well.
“That’s the whole point of it – to stop people storing up wealth and not paying tax”
First off, a lot of people worked hard and paid their taxes to attain their wealth.
Therefore, how do you think they are going to feel when they find what wealth they have accumulated is going to be taken from them by new taxes?
What sort of message are we giving the next generation? Don’t work hard and accumulate wealth, it will only be taken off you further down the line.
I totally disagree with any tax that taxes gains that have yet to been achieved. It leaves many struggling to meet the burden, thus it’s totally unfair.
Moreover, the estimated gains may never eventuate.
“The aim is specifically to hit asset-rich people to force them to use their assets productively”
If the aim is to get people to invest productively, then we need to encourage them to do so before they buy unproductive assets.
Additionally, some did invest productively, allowing them to buy and enjoy non-productive assets. And you support robbing them of this?
“The cash-poor aspect is unfortunate”
Indeed. Hence, it’s vital the problem is overcome. We don’t want to increase poverty with our enthusiasm to see a UBI introduced.
Therefore, it’s vital new tax settings are right. They can’t afford to further disadvantage the poor and cash poor.
In Aus , there is a $18200 threshold before you pay any tax at all, and applies to all, you could introduce this at a higher rate to replace the UBI, this system would be cheap to implement, changing to a flat tax rate would be disastarous, when 40% are on the minimum wage.
The biggest benefit would be the the extra money would be fed back through the economy, which would increase employment levels.
That (a tax free threshold) would certainly help. However, it wouldn’t achieve the wider benefits of a decent UBI of $400 a week. A combination of the two would be a good consideration.
As soon as a flat rate of tax exceeds the lowest tax rate it disadvantages those currently on the lower rate. The higher the flat rate is set, the more it disadvantages those currently on lower rates.
Which is one of the problems with The Big Kahuna.
At the moment, someone earning $30,000 is taxed at 17.5%.
Increasing their tax rate to a flat tax of 30% will almost double their tax burden.
So as you can, see it will put them at a disadvantage.
Double the tax when you get tax free payments of $200+ per week is only an issue higher up the pay scale – minimum wage earners will be better off in terms of money in the hand.
“Double the tax when you get tax free payments of $200+ per week is only an issue higher up the pay scale – minimum wage earners will be better off in terms of money in the hand.”
The thing is, they would be better off in the hand if the tax rate doesn’t become set at a higher rate than their current lower rate.
Someone earning $30,000 under a UBI with a 33% tax rate would not pay zero. Moreover, it’s yet to be decided if the UBI will be added to ones taxable income. Therefore, in that example one would be taxed 33% of $40,000. The thirty earned plus the ten UBI, giving a total income of $40,000.
Additionally, as I pointed out to Craig H above, individuals would be better off in the hand if the tax rate doesn’t become set at a higher rate than their current lower rate. Effectively forcing the poor to pay a percentage (in this case close to 50% of their UBI allowance.
Someone earning $30,000 under a UBI with a 33% tax rate would not pay zero.
They would pay a net of $0 income tax.
Moreover, it’s yet to be decided if the UBI will be added to ones taxable income.
In the Big Kahuna, which is what Labour are explicitly using as their basis for these early discussions, UBI is tax-free.
In fact the only reason to add a UBI to taxable income, would be if there were tax brackets. A flat tax does not require the UBI to count as taxable income. Even if there are tax brackets, the UBI could still be tax-exempt, and the tax brackets could just apply to income from all other sources.
Therefore, in that example one would be taxed 33% of $40,000. The thirty earned plus the ten UBI, giving a total income of $40,000.
Yes, but at the moment there is no suggestion that the UBI will be taxed that way by Labour.
Additionally, as I pointed out to Craig H above, individuals would be better off in the hand if the tax rate doesn’t become set at a higher rate than their current lower rate.
Everyone would also be better off if the government gave every person over the age of 18 a free car, too.
Effectively you’re saying “the UBI needs to be flat cash increase on top of what every single ‘low-paid’ person is already earning, eg everyone should get an additional $11,000 per year on top of what they already earn’.
Except there is no feasible model of a UBI that would allow that structure – it simply costs too much. Just as there is no feasible model of a UBI that pays every individual $22,000 a year while keeping the tax rate at 17.5%, or no feasible model of a UBI where the government gives everyone over the age of 18 a brand new car.
Instead of having theoretical conversations about “what might be” that are completely unrealistic, instead we should discuss what the current proposal is: $11,000 UBI per year with a flat-rate of tax set at 30%, as per The Big Kahuna. Under such a proposal, someone on a low-wage would get to keep several thousand more in the hand per year than they do currently, and even if the flat tax rate were increased to something like 45%, that would still be true.
Labour is not explicitly using the Big Kahuna. So again, it’s yet to be decided if the UBI will be added to ones taxable income.
Little has implied the tax system will be used to claw back a UBI allowance from high income earners, which, with current tax avoidance structures is flawed.
“Effectively you’re saying “the UBI needs to be flat cash increase on top of what every single ‘low-paid’ person is already earning, eg everyone should get an additional $11,000 per year on top of what they already earn.”
Indeed, Moreover, it would be required to be higher than that if it were to replace benefits (but could be tapered off as incomes increase) and one wanted to achieve the goals and benefits touted in the discussion paper.
“There is no feasible model of a UBI that would allow that structure”
Which is one of the main points I’m raising. This is the challenge Labour needs to focus on to make a UBI (with all it’s touted benefits) work.
Forcing the poor to cover a large percentage of it while allowing the rich to escape the burden (through tax avoidance thus tax minimization) is counterproductive to its aim.
“Instead of having theoretical conversations about “what might be” that are completely unrealistic, instead we should discuss what the current proposal is: $11,000 UBI per year with a flat-rate of tax set at 30%…”
The conversation is about the current proposal at $11,000 coupled with a flat tax rate and a CGT being unfair (on the those it’s meant to assist) and insufficient to achieve many of the goals and benefits touted.
Hence, the need for Labour to change the focus to how are they going to pay for a sufficient UBI amount that will achieve their aims.
You should listen to the interview with Grant Robertson this morning on National Radio, where he says that it “effectively a tax credit”, ie, they aren’t going to tax the UBI payment itself.
Labour haven’t said they’re basing this on the Big Kahuna, but it’s pretty obvious that they are, given the figures they’ve come up with just “by coincidence” being the same as the Big Kahuna’s.
Being a tax credit won’t help someone who has just become unemployed. They can’t afford to live on nothing till they wait to claim their tax credit. Destroying the suggestion that it would replace benefits.
Early days. It seems Labour are yet far from aligning the touted benefits with the structure of the UBI scheme.
It’s ambitious and complex, but I generally support the concept. It has the potential to do so much, one hopes Labour get it right in the end.
He said “effectively a tax credit” during a brief interview where he was trying to explain the concept to Guyon, not “it is exactly like a tax credit and someone who is out of work would get $0” – when he already said earlier in the interview that someone who did 40 hours work one week and 10 hours the next would get paid $200 each week from the government.
“Effectively a tax credit” means “this payment you are getting is not taxed, but there will be a higher flat rate of tax on earned income than there is presently”.
I feel like you’re deliberately mis-interpreting what Labour are saying when they talk about this proposal.
@Lanthanide
There has to be another major difference to a tax credit though.
All the current tax credits only become available after you have done your tax return in July the following year. Some (dividend imputation credit) don’t even allow a refund if they exceed the tax you owe.
That isn’t going to be of any use to anyone is it, and can’t possibly be what he means? Isn’t there some better way to describe them?
@alwyn:
Rather than describing it as a tax credit, he should have said it acts like a completely smooth progressive tax, where the bottom tax bracket is actually a negative tax rate.
If you listen to the interview, Guyon later says “well couldn’t you just scrap abatement rates for benefits” – but that’s actually what a UBI is. There is no abatement to the payment itself.
The obvious question becomes, of course, if someone who is on the unemployment benefit finds a full time job, and you have 0 abatement rate, then that person will permanently get a benefit from the government even while working full time. But why should that person get a permanent benefit, and his neighbor who always had a full time job, not get one?
So in some ways the UBI can be thought of as an unemployment benefit that is paid to everyone over the age of 18, with no abatement rate.
“I feel like you’re deliberately mis-interpreting what Labour are saying when they talk about this proposal. ”
Rubbish.
One can only work with what’s being communicated. He also said it wouldn’t be in the form of a payout when he stated it was going to be in the form of a tax credit.
Don’t jump on me for his contradictions.
Again, clearly it’s early days. Obviously, there is a lot more work to be done.
I ran the numbers on the Big Kahuna website calculators, and 15% GST, 40% income tax and 6% CCT pays for $250/week UBI for everyone 21+, $200/week for 18-20 year olds and $100/week for under 18s, so that’s not a bad effort for most people IMO.
It is a long time since they updated this website.
The going rate on a 6 month TD is about 3.2%.
I would love to know where you could get the 6% required return on capital, any capital.
Do you realise he was going to tax you this on your home? If, as is depressingly common, you owned a $2 million home in Auckland you would be treated as having an income of $120,000 per year and would have to find $48,000 to pay your tax each year? http://www.bigkahuna.org.nz/comprehensive-capital-tax.aspx
2/3rds of the minimum wage or nothing at all I reckon.
Even at that rate, it could only be for a single, healthy person and a bureaucratic structure would have to be developed for those suffering ill-health etc…unless, of course, health care (all aspects of) got back to being universal and free.
All aspects of health care have never been universal and free. There are people getting support for health and disability via WINZ that they would never get from the MoH. This is going to be one of the the trickier aspects of a UBI, how to improve the system for people with other needs.
So Audrey Young and the Herald get a so-called exclusive on the appointment of the next GG to run the day after it’s announced that the PM is using taxpayer funding to settle a five year old defamation suit. How convenient.
Hi Chooky
.
It is difficult to see why Trump is deemed an extraordinary phenomenon.
He is just doing what the Republican Congress and Senate have trained him to do. They have trained him by their shocking and despicable example.
By letting the Banks fiddle their books to the tune of Trillions. By allowing the Corporations to run riot and seize resources. By shipping millions of American jobs off to Asian slaves. By denying millions of Americans fair Health Cover. By slugging American students with gross Fees.
By dreaming up foul excuses (such as non existent Weapons of Mass Destruction) in order to slaughter hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children on the other side of the world.
By making sure that the Current President of USA cannot get his mandate through the American Parliament.
There is nothing exceptional about Donald Trump. He is just a stock standard greed ridden Republican politician. He stinks with the stench of the entire Republican movement.
I don’t really see how you can blame Republican Party faults on Trump, or Trump’s faults on the Republican Party.
He only joined the party last year I gather. In his only previous attempts at a political career he tried to get the Reform Party nomination in 2000.
It is also a trifle unfair to blame Trump for supporting the Iraq war. There is little evidence of his feelings prior to the war but two weeks after it started he was expressing unease. He greatly exaggerates the strength of his opposition then when he talks about it today of course. http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-war/
Hillary was strongly in favour at that time.
Trump is still a nutter though.
Clinton and Obama enabled both the banksters (by repealing Glass Steagal) and the ongoing bailout of the banksters after the GFC. Not the Republicans (GW was responsible only for the initial rounds of the banker bailouts, which Obama continued at pace for years).
This video is a must watch for anybody who wants to understand were John Key is coming from and how the international bankster criminals have effectively taken over the US justice system and hence the Federation.
Re the UBI, I’m posting some information on what Labour are doing and what the UBI options are below.
Alwyn is telling lies and doesn’t understand what a UBI is and doesn’t get that Labour have put up a report exploring various options. All alwyn’s comments today are misleading and IMO designed to undermine Labour and fuck with the debate here on ts. Don’t buy into it. Alwyn has one purpose here and that’s to destroy things.
Instead, how about we take the time to inform ourselves and see what the options are.
Little on Morning Report, pointing out that depending on the model used how tax is assessed means people on different incomes get an increase of different amounts. This isn’t means or asset testing. He doesn’t say much in the piece other than to point to the value of a UBI for people on variable work hours every week, and that no millionares won’t be getting $200/wk. Both are reasonable points and both are consistent with the general debates about UBIs. Starts at 2:50
“Alwyn is telling lies and doesn’t understand what a UBI is and doesn’t get that Labour have put up a report exploring various options”
In your favourite phrase weka.
“weka you are lying about me again”
Why do you have to do that when you find you cannot rationally answer my comments? I know very well what a UBI is and how it can work. However when nothing except the mantra “UBI” is declaimed it is quite impossible to even consider the subject of what Labour are talking about.
Like hell I am saying that Trump is an “he is an innocent little man. With innocent little polices”. He is crazy, and a danger to humanity I fear. You are attributing to me things I have never advocated. You can have your fantasies if you like but don’t ask me to accept the opinions you falsely attribute to me
“The Republicans never ever kill hundreds and thousands of innocent people”.
That is the Republicans in Iraq I assume. I am saying that there is little evidence, not none but little, evidence that Trump was in favour of the war.
On the other hand Trump has suggested that the US should kick out all “illegal” immigrants from Mexico. That was quite different to the policy George W advocated.
As I say Trumps policies, bad or not so bad have almost nothing in common with anything the bulk or Republican politicians have advocated.
Can you, for example see any real similarity between Trump’s views on immigration and the approach Bush advocated? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2007
Distraction politics from a PM caught using taxpayers money to pay for his electoral costs ?? ?
He wasn’t giving away much on Monday other than to say he wanted someone who “can carry out the duties and responsibilities of the Governor-General with the mana and respect that the office deserves”. Also in the “highly rare event there was a significant constitutional issue”, Key said he would want someone in the role who was “bright enough to understand themselves but also be able to take advice”.
What were we JUST saying about how Republican menfolk are a-scurred of Elizabeth Warren?
[…]
And now she’s taking aim at Republican presidential frontrunner Donald J. Trump, in a series of tweets that seem tailor made to cut him down to size, if you get the subtle dick joke we are going to be making all the way throughout this post.
She starts off in Nerd Land like she always does, saying hey maybe if Donald Trump The Terrific Doubloontillionaire was better with ahem! money, he might have way more Ameros than he currently has:
The corruption of main stream Republican Politicians and Government Officials is akin to total evil.
Donald Trump has copied the Republican techniques (selectively) and he is seeped in their disruptive criminally cruel policies and warmongering. It will be nothing to him to eliminate hundreds and thousands of Mexcans. It will be nothing to him to let down his wide eyed followers. The republicans routinely eliminate Hundreds and Thousands of innocent people.
They also relieve massive numbers of people of their money – via the USA Banks and Financial Institutions.
The Republicans have brought about the most severe hardship worldwide – ever in the history of the world.
It would be good for people to listen to the Video ! Our National party is a clone.
TO: WEKA
.
The contrived barrage against Andrew Little is a sure sign that he is troublesome to dishonest trolls and followers of Key and English.
So do not be surprised at the Alwyns, the BMs and the Hootons and the C Vipers (and the Press and TV muppets). They try and drag Andrew Little down. But the problem is his honesty.
Keep up your explications and support of Andrew in the lying quicksand of John Key and his friends.
They know Key and his caucus are steeped in dishonesty and Spin and they are terrified that New Zealanders will find out.
Actually, you would think the trolls would be out and about advising the schools and kindergartens when and where the PM will be visiting next. He needs all the assistance he can get to overcome his disgusting fetish for lil girl’s heads or hairs.
let the negative Greens and the negative Vipers know, that if they wrongfully sully Andrew Little, they will make sure that our devious and laughable PM will be voted in for a further anti- NZ term.
Really good comments, Observer (Tokoroa) – I totally agree.
And it was possibly Andrew Little being so clear this morning on Breakfast TV that the teapot tapes was an electoral issue – not the ordinary legal issue for a PM or MP going about their daily work – that has led to Key backing down on his attempt to get the taxpayer to front his payout to Bradley Ambrose.
I really enjoy your straightforward observations too ! Well done
It is hard for us to realise that John Key has numerous people working behind the scenes day and night to smokescreen his Lying and his Doubtful personal behaviour.
The smokescreen is forwarded to the muppets on Tv and Radio; and to the “falsehood departments” of The Sick Herald.
These people, in particular The NZ Herald senior journalists, have spent a large part of their miserable job of hacking down a profoundly good person named Helen Clark.
They crucified her over and over. Partly because she was a female; but mostly because she governed well.
They have spent lots of time trying to throw Winston Peters into the Herald dung heap. That’s what senior Journalists do at the Herald. Its all they do. They accused him and accused him and accused him
They then came across an honest and intelligent man called David Cunliffe. They hated Cunliffe because he was such a contrast to the highly dishonest low class leader called John Key.
Only one Journo from the desks of the sick Herald apologised to Cunliffe for what they did to him. That would be considered a pissy weakling by his Herald colleagues.
Now the guys and dolls at the Sick NZ Herald – and at the toe cutting radio stations – and at the trivial television Stations (does any other nation have worse TV than us?) have selected their role in life – as burying honest Andrew Little in 900 meters of printed and broadcasted concrete
Andrew Little is a better person than anybody working in the NZ Media. He is honest.
They will crucify him; they will rate him as so much dog poo and with other forms of faint praise. They do it because journalists are by occupation dishonest and egotistic – they cannot abide an Andrew Little.
Yeah – Observer ( Tokoroa ) at 11.2.1 – I just hope that Andrew Little is strong enough to withstand all the bricks and bolts that will be thrown at him. I think he is ….. but he’s in for a stormy time ahead.
By the way – today in Whanganui – a car with Chester Borrows Nat MP plastered all over it – and presumably with CB and Paula Bennett in the car – kept driving thru a small group of protestors who’d momentarily/ temporarily blocked the driveway ……… and in doing so, ran over one of the protestor’s feet. And they kept on driving ………
No waiting for the two cops who were there to clear the way for them
No stopping and checking to see if anyone had been hurt …..
Someone with a very good camera took a load of photos – I expect they’ll be all over Facebook by now.
It’ll be interesting to see what sort of spin the MSM put on this “incident” !
I would not wish Paula to stand on any part of me.
These bad companions of our bizarre and dodgy Prime Minister, have learnt so many rotten habits from the great fraudster.
In my experience of business – Corporations and the like as well as small Cafes and hardware shops – the staff are a mirror reflection of the CEO in character and behaviour.
Great historic observation, the points about Clark were spot on, Gillard had exactly the same problem.
Great to hear some defenders of the Labour Party, as their are so many trying to discredit them from both sides of the political divide, still blaming them for NZ’s current position, this is illogical after nearly a decade of Key. I sometimes wonder if a degree of brain washing has occurred through the medias persistent negative representations over a long sustained period.
” (does any other nation have worse TV than us?) ”
I don’t think so, TV in NZ has deteriorated over the last few years, it was shocking when I was there in January, but it was outside the rating period, so it may have improved.
Ratings are run continuously. Every morning there are viewing figures coming through for the previous day and the “profitability” of different programming decisions can be assessed. And that has been in place since at least 2002.
Anyone else experiencing this difficulty?
I cannot stand listening to Newstalkzb – it’s bevy of hosts are mostly impartial RWNJ’s. bordering on FoxNews calibre.
So I scan the online news outlets, including the Herald only to find that the same radio hosts now have regular column space there.
You can choose not to switch ZB on, not watch 7 Sharp and you can choose not to visit the ZB home page, but you don’t expect to see the likes of Williams and Hosking on your general news pages. How long before the Herald gives column space to Leighton Smith?
No surprises Newstalk was used at Guantanamo. You can practically pickup that station no matter where you are in the country. Just be thankful your workplace isn’t tuned into it for the whole day.
Really? I didn’t read the link to whaleoil’s site, as the fuckwit is a known liar with an admitted hatred for unions.
I’m sure if slater has evidence of a criminal act, he will forward it to the relevant authorities. Unless that would result in self-incrimination, of course.
IF the behaviour you describe is described accurately, then no it is not acceptable.
But equally, if you described the behaviour accurately then no, it would not be “typical behaviour from a union man”. The only person who would “have to day” such a thing would be a lying piece of shit with a compulsive hatred of unions that overwhelms their regard for reality.
Or someone being threatened by a lying piece of shit.
And it’s not “typical behaviour from a union man”, because then it wouldn’t be news, would it.
But typical behaviour from a lying piece of shit is to clickbait for whaleoil.
If I were to assume that your description of wo’s description of the event is an accurate description of the event, then yes, such behaviour is very very wrong. Go have yourself a lollipop.
But it’s not so much typical of “the left” or “a union man” as it is of “fuckwits” and, to a lesser extent, “society in general”.
Also, his office announced it “after taking advice from Parliamentary Service”. So he wanted to, but it wouldn’t be legal. And, more importantly from his perspective, he’d be caught.
“Why is this not a campaign expense?” sure you jest McFlock? you can’t be serious…
How would Key be “caught” if he used Parliamentary Service budget? it was no secret Key him self said it yesterday (either Parliamentary Services OR National Party will pay it). Taking advice is what normal people / organisations do to determine the right option to take.
He’d be “caught” because people would find out.
“Taking advice after throwing a couple of options out there is what tories do to determine the limit of what they can get away with, regardless of morality or legality.”
FIFY.
One major complaint (among others) was YOUI ‘demand’ cc nor or bank ac nos for a quote.
There are several example given where deductions have been made, without agreement.
The Consumer Protection representative said the cases cited by Interest.co.nz could raise issues as to whether the insurer used reasonable care and skill in supplying a service as a result of:
• asking for credit card or bank account details when a consumer is only seeking a quote;
• not explaining why payment details are required/misleading a consumer as to the reason;
• acknowledging (by email) that an insurance policy has been cancelled but later requiring a consumer to provide further cancellation notification;
• not advising a consumer that further cancellations would be required and in a different mode from the original form such as text instead of email. And;
• loading a consumer up to an insurance policy even when the consumer has cancelled – requiring the consumer to opt out.
“Shon-keyArrested at Pacifica.” So reads the headline.
Has this arrest of Penny Bright been noted?
“Anti-corruption campaigner Penny Bright wants to know why she was arrested at one of Auckland’s biggest festivals. Dressed in the persona of “Shon Key”, Bright was arrested at last weekend’s Pasifika Festival.”
Do you remember when Melania Trump got caught out using a speech that sounded awfully like one Michelle Obama had given? Uncannily so.Well it turns out that Abraham Lincoln is to Winston Peters as Michelle was to Melania. With the ANZAC speech Uncle Winston gave at Gallipoli having much in ...
She was born 25 years ago today in North Shore hospital. Her eyes were closed tightly shut, her mouth was silently moving. The whole theatre was all quiet intensity as they marked her a 2 on the APGAR test. A one-minute eternity later, she was an 8. The universe was ...
Skeptical Science is partnering with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. This fact brief was written by Sue Bin Park in collaboration with members from our Skeptical Science team. You can submit claims you think need checking via the tipline. Is Antarctica gaining land ice? ...
Images of US students (and others) protesting and setting up tent cities on US university campuses have been broadcast world wide and clearly demonstrate the growing rifts in US society caused by US policy toward Israel and Israel’s prosecution of … Continue reading → ...
Barrie Saunders writes – Dear Paul As the new Minister of Media and Communications, you will be inundated with heaps of free advice and special pleading, all in the national interest of course. For what it’s worth here is my assessment: Traditional broadcasting free to air content through ...
Many criticisms are being made of the Government’s Fast Track Approvals Bill, including by this writer. But as with everything in politics, every story has two sides, and both deserve attention. It’s important to understand what the Government is trying to achieve and its arguments for such a bold reform. ...
Peter Dunne writes – The great nineteenth British Prime Minister, William Gladstone, once observed that “the first essential for a Prime Minister is to be a good butcher.” When a later British Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan, sacked a third of his Cabinet in July 1962, in what became ...
Ele Ludemann writes – New Zealanders had the OECD’s second highest tax increase last year: New Zealanders faced the second-biggest tax raises in the developed world last year, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) says. The intergovernmental agency said the average change in personal income tax ...
We all know something’s not right with our elections. The spread of misinformation, people being targeted with soundbites and emotional triggers that ignore the facts, even the truth, and influence their votes.The use of technology to produce deep fakes. How can you tell if something is real or not? Can ...
This video includes conclusions of the creator climate scientist Dr. Simon Clark. It is presented to our readers as an informed perspective. Please see video description for references (if any). This year you will be lied to! Simon Clark helps prebunk some misleading statements you'll hear about climate. The video includes ...
It is all very well cutting the backrooms of public agencies but it may compromise the frontlines. One of the frustrations of the Productivity Commission’s 2017 review of universities is that while it observed that their non-academic staff were increasing faster than their academic staff, it did not bother to ...
Buzz from the Beehive Two speeches delivered by Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters at Anzac Day ceremonies in Turkey are the only new posts on the government’s official website since the PM announced his Cabinet shake-up. In one of the speeches, Peters stated the obvious: we live in a troubled ...
1. Which of these would you not expect to read in The Waikato Invader?a. Luxon is here to do business, don’t you worry about thatb. Mr KPI expects results, and you better believe itc. This decisive man of action is getting me all hot and excitedd. Melissa Lee is how ...
…it has a restricted jurisdiction which must not be abused: it is not an inquisitionNOTE – this article was published before the High Court ruled that Karen Chhour does not have to appear before the Waitangi Tribunal Gary Judd writes – The High Court ...
Lindsay Mitchell writes – One of reasons Oranga Tamariki exists is to prevent child neglect. But could the organisation itself be guilty of the same?Oranga Tamariki’s statistics show a decrease in the number and age of children in care. “There are less children ...
David Farrar writes: Graeme Edgeler wrote in 2017: In the first five years after three strikes came into effect 5248 offenders received a ‘first strike’ (that is, a “stage-1 conviction” under the three strikes sentencing regime), and 68 offenders received a ‘second strike’. In the five years prior to ...
Bryce Edwards writes – Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has surprised everyone with his ruthlessness in sacking two of his ministers from their crucial portfolios. Removing ministers for poor performance after only five months in the job just doesn’t normally happen in politics. That’s refreshing and will be extremely ...
TL;DR: These are the six things that stood out to me in news and commentary on Aotearoa-NZ’s political economy in the two days to 6:06am on Thursday, April 25:Politics: PM Christopher Luxon has set up a dual standard for ministerial competence by demoting two National Cabinet ministers while leaving also-struggling ...
Hi,Today I mainly want to share some of your thoughts about the recent piece I wrote about success and failure, and the forces that seemingly guide our lives. But first, a quick bit of housekeeping: I am doing a Webworm popup in Los Angeles on Saturday May 11 at 2pm. ...
It is hard to see what Melissa Lee might have done to “save” the media. National went into the election with no public media policy and appears not to have developed one subsequently. Lee claimed that she had prepared a policy paper before the election but it had been decided ...
Open access notablesIce acceleration and rotation in the Greenland Ice Sheet interior in recent decades, Løkkegaard et al., Communications Earth & Environment:In the past two decades, mass loss from the Greenland ice sheet has accelerated, partly due to the speedup of glaciers. However, uncertainty in speed derived from satellite products ...
Buzz from the Beehive A statement from Children’s Minister Karen Chhour – yet to be posted on the Government’s official website – arrived in Point of Order’s email in-tray last night. It welcomes the High Court ruling on whether the Waitangi Tribunal can demand she appear before it. It does ...
Mr Bombastic:Ironically, the media the academic experts wanted is, in many ways, the media they got. In place of the tyrannical editors of yesteryear, advancing without fear or favour the interests of the ruling class; the New Zealand news media of today boasts a troop of enlightened journalists dedicated to ...
It's hard times try to make a livingYou wake up every morning in the unforgivingOut there somewhere in the cityThere's people living lives without mercy or pityI feel good, yeah I'm feeling fineI feel better then I have for the longest timeI think these pills have been good for meI ...
In 1974, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in United States v. Nixon, finding that the President was not a King, but was subject to the law and was required to turn over the evidence of his wrongdoing to the courts. It was a landmark decision for the rule ...
Every day now just seems to bring in more fresh meat for the grinder.In their relentlessly ideological drive to cut back on the “excessive bloat” (as they see it) of the previous Labour-led government, on the mountains of evidence accumulated in such a short period of time do not ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Megan Valére SosouMarket gardening site of the Itchèléré de Itagui agricultural cooperative in Dassa-Zoumè (Image credit: Megan Valère Sossou) For the residents of Dassa-Zoumè, a city in the West African country of Benin, choosing between drinking water and having enough ...
Buzz from the Beehive Melissa Lee – as may be discerned from the screenshot above – has not been demoted for doing something seriously wrong as Minister of ...
Morning in London Mother hugs beloved daughter outside the converted shoe factory in which she is living.Afternoon in London Travelling writer takes himself and his wrist down to A&E, just to be sure. Read more ...
Mike Grimshaw writes – The recent announcement of the University Advisory Group, chaired by Sir Peter Gluckman, makes very clear where the Government’s focus and priorities lie. The remit of the Advisory Group is that Group members will consider challenges and opportunities for improvement in the university sector including: ...
Eric Crampton writes – The Reserve Bank of New Zealand desperately wants to find reasons to have workstreams in climate change. It makes little sense. They’ve run another stress test on the banks looking to see if they could find a prudential regulation case. They couldn’t. They ...
Rob MacCullough writes – Pundits from the left and the right are arguing that National’s Fast Track Bill that is designed to speed up infrastructure decisions could end up becoming mired in a cesspool of corruption. Political commentator ...
Looking at the headlines this morning it’s hard to feel anything other than pessimistic about the future of humanity.Note that I’m not speaking about the future of mankind, but the survival of our humanity. The values that we believe in seem to be ebbing away, by the day.Perhaps every generation ...
Swabbing mixed breed baby chicks to test for avian influenzaUh oh. Bird flu – often deadly to humans – is not only being transmitted from infected birds to dairy cows, but is now travelling between dairy cows. As of last Friday, Bloomberg News reports, there were 32 American dairy herds ...
On February 14, 2023 we announced our Rebuttal Update Project. This included an ask for feedback about the added "At a glance" section in the updated basic rebuttal versions. This weekly blog post series highlights this new section of one of the updated basic rebuttal versions and serves as a ...
What is it with the mining industry? Its not enough for them to pillage the earth - they apparently can't even be bothered getting resource consent to do so: The proponent behind a major mine near the Clutha River had already been undertaking activity in the area without a ...
Photo # 1 I am a huge fan of Singapore’s approach to housing, as described here two years ago by copying and pasting from The ConversationWhat Singapore has that Australia does not is a public housing developer, the Housing Development Board, which puts new dwellings on public and reclaimed land, ...
Buzz from the Beehive Reactions to news of the government’s readiness to make urgent changes to “the resource management system” through a Bill to amend the Resource Management Act (RMA) suggest a balanced approach is being taken. The Taxpayers’ Union says the proposed changes don’t go far enough. Greenpeace says ...
I’m starting to wonder if Anna Burns-Francis might be the best political interviewer we’ve got. That might sound unlikely to you, it came as a bit of a surprise to me.Jack Tame can be excellent, but has some pretty average days. I like Rebecca Wright on Newshub, she asks good ...
Chris Trotter writes – Willie Jackson is said to be planning a “media summit” to discuss “the state of the media and how to protect Fourth Estate Journalism”. Not only does the Editor of The Daily Blog, Martyn Bradbury, think this is a good idea, but he has also ...
Graeme Edgeler writes – This morning [April 21], the Wellington High Court is hearing a judicial review brought by Hon. Karen Chhour, the Minister for Children, against a decision of the Waitangi Tribunal. This is unusual, judicial reviews are much more likely to brought against ministers, rather than ...
Both of Parliament’s watchdogs have now ripped into the Government’s Fast-track Approvals Bill. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāMy pick of the six newsey things to know from Aotearoa’s political economy and beyond on the morning of Tuesday, April 23 are:The Lead: The Auditor General,John Ryan, has joined the ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Sarah SpengemanPeople wait to board an electric bus in Pune, India. (Image credit: courtesy of ITDP) Public transportation riders in Pune, India, love the city’s new electric buses so much they will actually skip an older diesel bus that ...
The infrastructure industry yesterday issued a “hurry up” message to the Government, telling it to get cracking on developing a pipeline of infrastructure projects.The hiatus around the change of Government has seen some major projects cancelled and others delayed, and there is uncertainty about what will happen with the new ...
Hi,Over the weekend I revisited a podcast I really adore, Dead Eyes. It’s about a guy who got fired from Band of Brothers over two decades ago because Tom Hanks said he had “dead eyes”.If you don’t recall — 2001’s Band of Brothers was part of the emerging trend of ...
Buzz from the Beehive The 180 or so recipients of letters from the Government telling them how to submit infrastructure projects for “fast track” consideration includes some whose project applications previously have been rejected by the courts. News media were quick to feature these in their reports after RMA Reform Minister Chris ...
It would not be a desirable way to start your holiday by breaking your back, your head, or your wrist, but on our first hour in Singapore I gave it a try.We were chatting, last week, before we started a meeting of Hazel’s Enviro Trust, about the things that can ...
Calling all journalists, academics, planners, lawyers, political activists, environmentalists, and other members of the public who believe that the relationships between vested interests and politicians need to be scrutinised. We need to work together to make sure that the new Fast-Track Approvals Bill – currently being pushed through by the ...
Feel worried. Shane Jones and a couple of his Cabinet colleagues are about to be granted the power to override any and all objections to projects like dams, mines, roads etc even if: said projects will harm biodiversity, increase global warming and cause other environmental harms, and even if ...
Bryce Edwards writes- The ability of the private sector to quickly establish major new projects making use of the urban and natural environment is to be supercharged by the new National-led Government. Yesterday it introduced to Parliament one of its most significant reforms, the Fast Track Approvals Bill. ...
Michael Bassett writes – If you think there is a move afoot by the radical Maori fringe of New Zealand society to create a parallel system of government to the one that we elect at our triennial elections, you aren’t wrong. Over the last few days we have ...
Without a corresponding drop in interest rates, it’s doubtful any changes to the CCCFA will unleash a massive rush of home buyers. Photo: Lynn GrievesonTL;DR: The six things that stood out to me in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, poverty and climate on Monday, April 22 included:The Government making a ...
Sunday was a lazy day. I started watching Jack Tame on Q&A, the interviews are usually good for something to write about. Saying the things that the politicians won’t, but are quite possibly thinking. Things that are true and need to be extracted from between the lines.As you might know ...
In our Weekly Roundup last week we covered news from Auckland Transport that the WX1 Western Express is going to get an upgrade next year with double decker electric buses. As part of the announcement, AT also said “Since we introduced the WX1 Western Express last November we have seen ...
TL;DR: The six key events to watch in Aotearoa-NZ’s political economy in the week to April 29 include:PM Christopher Luxon is scheduled to hold a post-Cabinet news conference at 4 pm today. Stats NZ releases its statutory report on Census 2023 tomorrow.Finance Minister Nicola Willis delivers a pre-Budget speech at ...
A listing of 29 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, April 14, 2024 thru Sat, April 20, 2024. Story of the week Our story of the week hinges on these words from the abstract of a fresh academic ...
The ability of the private sector to quickly establish major new projects making use of the urban and natural environment is to be supercharged by the new National-led Government. Yesterday it introduced to Parliament one of its most significant reforms, the Fast Track Approvals Bill. The Government says this will ...
This is a column to say thank you. So many of have been in touch since Mum died to say so many kind and thoughtful things. You’re wonderful, all of you. You’ve asked how we’re doing, how Dad’s doing. A little more realisation each day, of the irretrievable finality of ...
Identifying the engine type in your car is crucial for various reasons, including maintenance, repairs, and performance upgrades. Knowing the specific engine model allows you to access detailed technical information, locate compatible parts, and make informed decisions about modifications. This comprehensive guide will provide you with a step-by-step approach to ...
Introduction: The allure of racing is undeniable. The thrill of speed, the roar of engines, and the exhilaration of competition all contribute to the allure of this adrenaline-driven sport. For those who yearn to experience the pinnacle of racing, becoming a race car driver is the ultimate dream. However, the ...
Introduction Automobiles have become ubiquitous in modern society, serving as a primary mode of transportation and a symbol of economic growth and personal mobility. With countless vehicles traversing roads and highways worldwide, it begs the question: how many cars are there in the world? Determining the precise number is a ...
Maintaining a safe and reliable vehicle requires regular inspections. Whether it’s a routine maintenance checkup or a safety inspection, knowing how long the process will take can help you plan your day accordingly. This article delves into the factors that influence the duration of a car inspection and provides an ...
Mazda Motor Corporation, commonly known as Mazda, is a Japanese multinational automaker headquartered in Fuchu, Aki District, Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan. The company was founded in 1920 as the Toyo Cork Kogyo Co., Ltd., and began producing vehicles in 1931. Mazda is primarily known for its production of passenger cars, but ...
Your car battery is an essential component that provides power to start your engine, operate your electrical systems, and store energy. Over time, batteries can weaken and lose their ability to hold a charge, which can lead to starting problems, power failures, and other issues. Replacing your battery before it ...
In most states, you cannot register a car without a valid driver’s license. However, there are a few exceptions to this rule. Exceptions to the RuleIf you are under 18 years old: In some states, you can register a car in your name even if you do not ...
Mazda, a Japanese automotive manufacturer with a rich history of innovation and engineering excellence, has emerged as a formidable player in the global car market. Known for its reputation of producing high-quality, fuel-efficient, and driver-oriented vehicles, Mazda has consistently garnered praise from industry experts and consumers alike. In this article, ...
Struts are an essential part of a car’s suspension system. They are responsible for supporting the weight of the car and damping the oscillations of the springs. Struts are typically made of steel or aluminum and are filled with hydraulic fluid. How Do Struts Work? Struts work by transferring the ...
Car registration is a mandatory process that all vehicle owners must complete annually. This process involves registering your car with the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and paying an associated fee. The registration process ensures that your vehicle is properly licensed and insured, and helps law enforcement and other authorities ...
Te Pāti Māori are demanding the New Zealand Government support an international independent investigation into mass graves that have been uncovered at two hospitals on the Gaza strip, following weeks of assault by Israeli troops. Among the 392 bodies that have been recovered, are children and elderly civilians. Many of ...
Our two-tiered system for veterans’ support is out of step with our closest partners, and all parties in Parliament should work together to fix it, Labour veterans’ affairs spokesperson Greg O’Connor said. ...
Stripping two Ministers of their portfolios just six months into the job shows Christopher Luxon’s management style is lacking, Labour Leader Chris Hipkins said. ...
Tonight’s court decision to overturn the summons of the Children’s Minister has enabled the Crown to continue making decisions about Māori without evidence, says Te Pāti Māori spokesperson for Children, Mariameno Kapa-Kingi. “The judicial system has this evening told the nation that this government can do whatever they want when ...
It appears Nicola Willis is about to pull the rug out from under the feet of local communities still dealing with the aftermath of last year’s severe weather, and local councils relying on funding to build back from these disasters. ...
The Government is making short-sighted changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA) that will take away environmental protection in favour of short-term profits, Labour’s environment spokesperson Rachel Brooking said today. ...
Labour welcomes the release of the report into the North Island weather events and looks forward to working with the Government to ensure that New Zealand is as prepared as it can be for the next natural disaster. ...
The Labour Party has called for the New Zealand Government to recognise Palestine, as a material step towards progressing the two-State solution needed to achieve a lasting peace in the region. ...
Some of our country’s most important work, stopping the sexual exploitation of children and violent extremism could go along with staff on the frontline at ports and airports. ...
The Government’s Fast Track Approvals Bill will give projects such as new coal mines a ‘get out of jail free’ card to wreak havoc on the environment, Labour Leader Chris Hipkins said today. ...
The government's decision to reintroduce Three Strikes is a destructive and ineffective piece of law-making that will only exacerbate an inherently biased and racist criminal justice system, said Te Pāti Māori Justice Spokesperson, Tākuta Ferris, today. During the time Three Strikes was in place in Aotearoa, Māori and Pasifika received ...
Cuts to frontline hospital staff are not only a broken election promise, it shows the reckless tax cuts have well and truly hit the frontline of the health system, says Labour Health spokesperson Ayesha Verrall. ...
The Green Party has joined the call for public submissions on the fast-track legislation to be extended after the Ombudsman forced the Government to release the list of organisations invited to apply just hours before submissions close. ...
New Zealand’s good work at reducing climate emissions for three years in a row will be undone by the National government’s lack of ambition and scrapping programmes that were making a difference, Labour Party climate spokesperson Megan Woods said today. ...
More essential jobs could be on the chopping block, this time Ministry of Education staff on the school lunches team are set to find out whether they're in line to lose their jobs. ...
Te Pāti Māori is disgusted at the confirmation that hundreds are set to lose their jobs at Oranga Tamariki, and the disestablishment of the Treaty Response Unit. “This act of absolute carelessness and out of touch decision making is committing tamariki to state abuse.” Said Te Pāti Māori Oranga Tamariki ...
The Government is trying to bring in a law that will allow Ministers to cut corners and kill off native species, Labour environment spokesperson Rachel Brooking said. ...
Cancelling urgently needed new Cook Strait ferries and hiking the cost of public transport for many Kiwis so that National can announce the prospect of another tunnel for Wellington is not making good choices, Labour Transport Spokesperson Tangi Utikere said. ...
A laundry list of additional costs for Tāmaki Makarau Auckland shows the Minister for the city is not delivering for the people who live there, says Labour Auckland Issues spokesperson Shanan Halbert. ...
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi, and Mema Paremata mō Tāmaki-Makaurau, Takutai Tarsh Kemp, will travel to the Gold Coast to strengthen ties with Māori in Australia next week (15-21 April). The visit, in the lead-up to the 9th Australian National Kapa haka Festival, will be an opportunity for both ...
The Green Party has today launched a step-by-step guide to help New Zealanders make their voice heard on the Government’s democracy dodging and anti-environment fast track legislation. ...
The National Government’s proposed changes to the Residential Tenancies Act will mean tenants can be turfed from their homes by landlords with little notice, Labour housing spokesperson Kieran McAnulty said. ...
Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson is calling on all parties to support a common-sense change that’s great for the planet and great for consumers after her member’s bill was drawn from the ballot today. ...
A significant milestone has been reached in the fight to strike an anti-Pasifika and unfair law from the country’s books after Teanau Tuiono’s members’ bill passed its first reading. ...
New Zealand has today missed the opportunity to uphold the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment, says James Shaw after his member’s bill was voted down in its first reading. ...
Today’s advice from the Climate Change Commission paints a sobering reality of the challenge we face in combating climate change, especially in light of recent Government policy announcements. ...
Minister for Disability Issues Penny Simmonds appears to have delayed a report back to Cabinet on the progress New Zealand is making against international obligations for disabled New Zealanders. ...
Hundreds of New Zealand families affected by Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) will benefit from a new Government focus on prevention and treatment, says Health Minister Dr Shane Reti. “We know FASD is a leading cause of preventable intellectual and neurodevelopmental disability in New Zealand,” Dr Reti says. “Every day, ...
Regional Development Minister Shane Jones today attended the official opening of Kaikohe’s new $14.7 million sports complex. “The completion of the Kaikohe Multi Sports Complex is a fantastic achievement for the Far North,” Mr Jones says. “This facility not only fulfils a long-held dream for local athletes, but also creates ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters’ engagements in Türkiye this week underlined the importance of diplomacy to meet growing global challenges. “Returning to the Gallipoli Peninsula to represent New Zealand at Anzac commemorations was a sombre reminder of the critical importance of diplomacy for de-escalating conflicts and easing tensions,” Mr Peters ...
Ambassador Millar, Burgemeester, Vandepitte, Excellencies, military representatives, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen – good morning and welcome to this sacred Anzac Day dawn service. It is an honour to be here on behalf of the Government and people of New Zealand at Buttes New British Cemetery, Polygon Wood – a deeply ...
Distinguished guests - It is an honour to return once again to this site which, as the resting place for so many of our war-dead, has become a sacred place for generations of New Zealanders. Our presence here and at the other special spaces of Gallipoli is made ...
Mai ia tawhiti pamamao, te moana nui a Kiwa, kua tae whakaiti mai matou, ki to koutou papa whenua. No koutou te tapuwae, no matou te tapuwae, kua honoa pumautia. Ko nga toa kua hinga nei, o te Waipounamu, o te Ika a Maui, he okioki tahi me o ...
Paul Goldsmith will take on responsibility for the Media and Communications portfolio, while Louise Upston will pick up the Disability Issues portfolio, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced today. “Our Government is relentlessly focused on getting New Zealand back on track. As issues change in prominence, I plan to adjust Ministerial ...
Recreational catch limits will be reduced in areas of Fiordland and the Chatham Islands to help keep those fisheries healthy and sustainable, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones says. The lower recreational daily catch limits for a range of finfish and shellfish species caught in the Fiordland Marine Area and ...
Energy Minister Simeon Brown has welcomed an important milestone in New Zealand’s hydrogen future, with the opening of the country’s first network of hydrogen refuelling stations in Wiri. “I want to congratulate the team at Hiringa Energy and its partners K one W one (K1W1), Mitsui & Co New Zealand ...
The coalition Government is delivering on its commitment to improve resource management laws and give greater certainty to consent applicants, with a Bill to amend the Resource Management Act (RMA) expected to be introduced to Parliament next month. RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop has today outlined the first RMA Amendment ...
Overseas models for regulating the oil and gas sector, including their decommissioning regimes, are being carefully scrutinised as a potential template for New Zealand’s own sector, Resources Minister Shane Jones says. The Coalition Government is focused on rebuilding investor confidence in New Zealand’s energy sector as it looks to strengthen ...
Emergency Management and Recovery Minister Mark Mitchell has today released the Report of the Government Inquiry into the response to the North Island Severe Weather Events. “The report shows that New Zealand’s emergency management system is not fit-for-purpose and there are some significant gaps we need to address,” Mr Mitchell ...
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith is today travelling to Europe where he’ll update the United Nations Human Rights Council on the Government’s work to restore law and order. “Attending the Universal Periodic Review in Geneva provides us with an opportunity to present New Zealand’s human rights progress, priorities, and challenges, while ...
Associate Agriculture Minister, Mark Patterson, formally reopened the world’s largest wool processing facility today in Awatoto, Napier, following a $50 million rebuild and refurbishment project. “The reopening of this facility will significantly lift the economic opportunities available to New Zealand’s wool sector, which already accounts for 20 per cent of ...
Hon Andrew Bayly, Minister for Small Business and Manufacturing At the Southland Otago Regional Engineering Collective (SOREC) Summit, 18 April, Dunedin Ngā mihi nui, Ko Andrew Bayly aho, Ko Whanganui aho Good Afternoon and thank you for inviting me to open your summit today. I am delighted ...
The Government is delivering on its commitment to bring back the Three Strikes legislation, Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee announced today. “Our Government is committed to restoring law and order and enforcing appropriate consequences on criminals. We are making it clear that repeat serious violent or sexual offending is not ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters has today announced four new diplomatic appointments for New Zealand’s overseas missions. “Our diplomats have a vital role in maintaining and protecting New Zealand’s interests around the world,” Mr Peters says. “I am pleased to announce the appointment of these senior diplomats from the ...
New Zealand is contributing NZ$7 million to support communities affected by severe food insecurity and other urgent humanitarian needs in Ethiopia and Somalia, Foreign Minister Rt Hon Winston Peters announced today. “Over 21 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance across Ethiopia, with a further 6.9 million people ...
Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage Paul Goldsmith is congratulating Mataaho Collective for winning the Golden Lion for best participant in the main exhibition at the Venice Biennale. "Congratulations to the Mataaho Collective for winning one of the world's most prestigious art prizes at the Venice Biennale. “It is good ...
The Government is reforming financial services to improve access to home loans and other lending, and strengthen customer protections, Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Andrew Bayly and Housing Minister Chris Bishop announced today. “Our coalition Government is committed to rebuilding the economy and making life simpler by cutting red tape. We are ...
“China remains a strong commercial opportunity for Kiwi exporters as Chinese businesses and consumers continue to value our high-quality safe produce,” Trade and Agriculture Minister Todd McClay says. Mr McClay has returned to New Zealand following visits to Beijing, Harbin and Shanghai where he met ministers, governors and mayors and engaged in trade and agricultural events with the New ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has completed a successful trip to Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines, deepening relationships and capitalising on opportunities. Mr Luxon was accompanied by a business delegation and says the choice of countries represents the priority the New Zealand Government places on South East Asia, and our relationships in ...
New Zealand is demonstrating its commitment to reducing global greenhouse emissions, and supporting clean energy transition in South East Asia, through a contribution of NZ$41 million (US$25 million) in climate finance to the Asian Development Bank (ADB)-led Energy Transition Mechanism (ETM). Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Climate Change Minister Simon Watts announced ...
The Government is today releasing a list of organisations who received letters about the Fast-track applications process, says RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop. “Recently Ministers and agencies have received a series of OIA requests for a list of organisations to whom I wrote with information on applying to have a ...
Attorney-General Judith Collins today announced the appointment of Wellington Barrister David Jonathan Boldt as a Judge of the High Court, and the Honourable Justice Matthew Palmer as a Judge of the Court of Appeal. Justice Boldt graduated with an LLB from Victoria University of Wellington in 1990, and also holds ...
Education Minister Erica Stanford will lead the New Zealand delegation at the 2024 International Summit on the Teaching Profession (ISTP) held in Singapore. The delegation includes representatives from the Post Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA) Te Wehengarua and the New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI) Te Riu Roa. The summit is co-hosted ...
A stopbank upgrade project in Tairawhiti partly funded by the Government has increased flood resilience for around 7000ha of residential and horticultural land so far, Regional Development Minister Shane Jones says. Mr Jones today attended a dawn service in Gisborne to mark the end of the first stage of the ...
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters will represent the Government at Anzac Day commemorations on the Gallipoli Peninsula next week and engage with senior representatives of the Turkish government in Istanbul. “The Gallipoli campaign is a defining event in our history. It will be a privilege to share the occasion ...
Science, Innovation and Technology and Defence Minister Judith Collins will next week attend the OECD Science and Technology Ministerial conference in Paris and Anzac Day commemorations in Belgium. “Science, innovation and technology have a major role to play in rebuilding our economy and achieving better health, environmental and social outcomes ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon held a bilateral meeting today with the President of the Philippines, Ferdinand Marcos Jr. The Prime Minister was accompanied by MP Paulo Garcia, the first Filipino to be elected to a legislature outside the Philippines. During today’s meeting, Prime Minister Luxon and President Marcos Jr discussed opportunities to ...
The Government has announced that $20 million in funding will be made available to Westport to fund much needed flood protection around the town. This measure will significantly improve the resilience of the community, says Local Government Minister Simeon Brown. “The Westport community has already been allocated almost $3 million ...
The Government is proud to support the first ever Repco Supercars Championship event in Taupō as up to 70,000 motorsport fans attend the Taupō International Motorsport Park this weekend, says Economic Development Minister Melissa Lee. “Anticipation for the ITM Taupō Super400 is huge, with tickets and accommodation selling out weeks ...
Local Government Minister Simeon Brown has announced an increase to the Rates Rebate Scheme, putting money back into the pockets of low-income homeowners. “The coalition Government is committed to bringing down the cost of living for New Zealanders. That includes targeted support for those Kiwis who are doing things tough, such ...
The Coalition Government is investing in a project to boost survival rates of New Zealand mussels and grow the industry, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones has announced. “This project seeks to increase the resilience of our mussels and significantly boost the sector’s productivity,” Mr Jones says. “The project - ...
Benefit figures released today underscore the importance of the Government’s plan to rebuild the economy and have 50,000 fewer people on Jobseeker Support, Social Development and Employment Minister Louise Upston says. “Benefit numbers are still significantly higher than when National was last in government, when there was about 70,000 fewer ...
The Government’s commitment to doubling New Zealand’s renewable energy capacity is backed by new data showing that clean energy has helped the country reach its lowest annual gross emissions since 1999, Climate Change Minister Simon Watts says. New Zealand’s latest Greenhouse Gas Inventory (1990-2022) published today, shows gross emissions fell ...
The Government is bringing the earthquake-prone building review forward, with work to start immediately, and extending the deadline for remediations by four years, Building and Construction Minister Chris Penk says. “Our Government is focused on rebuilding the economy. A key part of our plan is to cut red tape that ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and his Thai counterpart, Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin, have today agreed that New Zealand and the Kingdom of Thailand will upgrade the bilateral relationship to a Strategic Partnership by 2026. “New Zealand and Thailand have a lot to offer each other. We have a strong mutual desire to build ...
RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop and Transport Minister Simeon Brown have today announced the Coalition Government’s intention to extend port coastal permits for a further 20 years, providing port operators with certainty to continue their operations. “The introduction of the Resource Management Act in 1991 required ports to obtain coastal ...
Today’s announcement that inflation is down to 4 per cent is encouraging news for Kiwis, but there is more work to be done - underlining the importance of the Government’s plan to get the economy back on track, acting Finance Minister Chris Bishop says. “Inflation is now at 4 per ...
Ngaio Marsh House is one of Christchurch’s best kept secrets – and contains more than a few mysteries of its own.Trust Ngaio Marsh to leave more than a few mysteries scattered through her house long after her departure. For a start, there’s the curious concrete portal in the garden, ...
Appointment viewing has been lost to the mists of time, but memories of Montana Sunday Theatre can still be conjured by hitting play on a particular piece of classical music. “You’re not going to be able to sell it.” Over 30 years on, Karen Bieleski still recalls how the task ...
Performance Review King Luxon sat behind His massive polished oak desk. It is Performance Review time. There is a knock on the door. “Enter!” says the King. In steps Minister of Disabilities and Carer Pedicures, Penny Simmonds. “I can explain everything …” she begins. “Fine,” says King Luxon, pressing the ...
The pair opened their first fully collaborative exhibition, Nina for Flowers, last Saturday. Gabi Lardies visited their studio to find out who Nina is and what working together was like.‘It didn’t start out like, ‘This is a show about Nina,’” says Josephine Jelicich, gripping a thermos of peppermint tea. ...
Thank you, Dr Maximilian Oskar Bircher-Benner, for your brilliant invention. I’m another mid-20s Kiwi who had an OE last year. I hopped on my bicycle where France meets the Atlantic and cycled east. I pedalled through the Loire Valley, down rivers lined with willows and ancient wisteria-draped chateaus. I relished ...
Asia Pacific Report From France to Australia, university pro-Palestine protests in the United States have now spread to several countries with students pitching on-campus camps. And students at Columbia and other US universities remain defiant as campuses have witnessed the biggest protests since the anti-Vietnam war and anti-apartheid eras in ...
Analysis by Dr Bryce Edwards, Democracy Project (https://democracyproject.nz)New Zealand Government’s Fast Track legislation. Many criticisms are being made of the Government’s Fast Track Approvals Bill, including by this writer. But as with everything in politics, every story has two sides, and both deserve attention. It’s important to understand what the Government ...
Tara Ward talks to presenter Naomi Toilalo about the new TV show that turns food waste into a three course feast. Naomi Toilalo is standing in the warehouse at Good Neighbour Tauranga, helping unpack the two-and-a-half tonnes of rejected food that will arrive at the community support hub that day. ...
Scout is our latest Dog of the Month. This feature was offered as a reward during our What’s Eating Aotearoa PledgeMe campaign. Thank you to Scout’s human, Avril, for her support. Dog name: Scout (named after the little girl in To Kill a Mockingbird – she inherited the independent spirit ...
Megan Alatini takes us through her life in TV, including ‘terrible’ daytime TV, the class of Carol Hirschfeld and her most embarrassing TrueBliss moment. When she responded to a vague newspaper ad asking “do you have what it takes to be a popstar?” 25 years ago, Megan Alatini never guessed ...
A new exhibition in Wellington showcases the faces behind your local goods and services. Back in 1977, when I was a fine arts student at the University of Canterbury, I took a series of photographs of Christchurch shopkeepers. The photos were for a calendar – a project for my end ...
Toomaj and his resistance to tyranny through his songs have become an icon for the youth of Iran, so his sentence has hit the nation hard. Toomaj Salehi is not the first artist to pay the price for standing with the people. ...
My cousin Dylan and I spotted these big eels under the bridge that summer. We watched them lounging under the dark weed, facing into the flow of water, their mouths frozen open. Dylan and I couldn’t stop thinking about those eels. The night we went down to the creek, we ...
Newsroom, home of satire. My long-running weekly satirical series The Secret Diary has moved to Newsroom and will appear every Saturday, with Victor Billot’s wildly popular satirical Odes continuing to appear every Sunday. Diaries, Odes – while serious political columnists toil at meaningful opinions and stroke their chins to an ...
Tara Ward unravels the many nuanced layers of a cartoon about talking dogs.This is an excerpt from our weekly pop culture newsletter Rec Room. Sign up here. It’s not often an episode of a children’s cartoon has adults sobbing into their sleeves, but that’s exactly what happened this week when ...
Working as a doctor in developing countries to help communities achieve better health outcomes is nothing short of a life goal for Jessica Tater. The University of Otago medical student has her sights firmly set on joining the international humanitarian organisation Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) when she qualifies ...
There’s an island in the far reaches of Auckland’s territory, sitting off the tip of the Coromandel Peninsula, 30 minutes by air from the city or four hours on the slow boat. Aotea Great Barrier is off-grid, it has a population of fewer than a thousand people … and most ...
Asia Pacific Report An Australian author and advocate, Jim Aubrey, today led a national symbolic one minute’s silence to mark the “blood debt” owed to Papuan allies during the Second World War indigenous resistance against the invading Japanese forces. “A promise to most people is a promise,” Aubrey said in ...
Asia Pacific Report The Freedom Flotilla is ready to sail to Gaza, reports Kia Ora Gaza. All the required paperwork has been submitted to the port authority, and the cargo has been loaded and prepared for the humanitarian trip to the besieged enclave. However, organisers received word of an “administrative ...
Pacific Media Watch Palestine solidarity protesters today demonstrated at the Auckland headquarters of Television New Zealand, accusing the country’s major TV network of broadcasting “propaganda” backing Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza. About 50 protesters targeted the main entrance to the TVNZ building near Sky Tower and also picketed a side ...
Opinion by Lynley Hood. Forty years on from my 1985 Fulbright Grant, my disquiet over the war in Gaza evoked some troubling questions. The answer to my first question – What is the primary purpose of the Fulbright Programme? – was on the Fulbright NZ website. It says: US Senator, ...
The ministers responsible for green-lighting major projects need to be open about potential conflicts of interest, says Transparency International. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anastasia Powell, Professor, Family and Sexual Violence, RMIT University It has been a particularly distressing start to the year. There is little that can ease the current grief of individuals, families and communities who have needlessly lost a loved one to men’s ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Moore, Senior Research Associate, School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, The University of Melbourne Lichen, the first described example of symbiosis.AdeJ Artventure/Shutterstock Once known only to those studying biology, the word symbiosis is now widely used. Symbiosis is the intimate ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kim Hemsley, Head, Childhood Dementia Research Group, Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University Olena Ivanova/Shutterstock “Childhood” and “dementia” are two words we wish we didn’t have to use together. But sadly, around 1,400 ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Whiteford, Professor, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University The government’s Economic Inclusion Advisory Committee has just published its second report. It was set up by Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Minister for Social Services Amanda Rishworth in 2022 to provide: ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne The Queensland state election will be held in October. A YouGov poll for The Courier Mail, conducted April 9–17 from a sample ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amin Naeni, PhD candidate at Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalisation, Deakin University There’s been much talk in recent months about what a possible second Donald Trump presidency in the United States could mean for Europe, Russia’s war in Ukraine, the ...
A brief round-up of submissions on the controversial proposed law. This is an excerpt from our weekly environmental newsletter Future Proof. Sign up here. Last week, submissions on the controversial Fast-track Approvals Bill closed just hours after the government released a list of stakeholder organisations who were sent letters advising how they could ...
A poem from Robin Peace’s new collection Detritus of Empire: feather / grass / rock. Cereal giving I see a woman’s hands, see her curious hands break a stalk as she walks through the tall prairie, the savannah, the steppe, wherever it was. See her idly bite the grass that ...
The only published and available best-selling indie book chart in New Zealand is the top 10 sales list recorded every week at Unity Books’ stores in High St, Auckland, and Willis St, Wellington.AUCKLAND1 Hemingway’s Goblet by Dermot Ross (Mary Egan Publishing, $38)A handsomely produced (debossed cover, lovely ...
The Commissioner's decision validates the longstanding efforts of the local community and ensures that Awataha Marae will be managed to serve the needs of the local community, particularly for hosting tangihanga. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tristan Salles, Associate professor, University of Sydney Examples of Australian landscapes.Unsplash Seventy thousand years ago, the sea level was much lower than today. Australia, along with New Guinea and Tasmania, formed a connected landmass known as Sahul. Around this time – ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Felicity Castagna, Lecturer, Creative Writing, Western Sydney University Day Day Market, ParramattaPhoto: Garry Trinh I live on the edge of Parramatta, Australia’s fastest-growing city, on the kind of old-fashioned suburban street that has 1950s fibros constructed in the post-war housing boom, ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Ryan, Teaching Fellow in Economics, University of Waikato GettyImagesfatido/Getty Images There is an ongoing global debate over whether the high inflation seen in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic can be lowered without a recession. New Zealand is not ...
The ‘Wicked Game’ heartthrob is in his late 60s now. That didn’t stop him putting on a lively, goofy and very sparkly show. Apart from ‘Wicked Game’, which graces a sultry playlist of mine simply called 💋, my last sustained Chris Isaak listening session took place when I was about ...
Analysis - Two ministers were stripped of portfolios in a warning to Cabinet, drama broke out at the Waitangi Tribunal, and the gang patch ban bill ran into opposition. ...
Tara Ward makes an impassioned plea for some vital pop culture merch. In April 1999, I became obsessed with a new reality television show called Popstars. Every Tuesday night, five strangers transformed into music royalty before my very eyes as Joe, Keri, Carly, Erika and Megan were chosen to form ...
PNG Post-Courier In the early hours of ANZAC Day, aerial photographs captured an impressive gathering of Australians and Papua New Guineans at Isurava in the Northern (Oro) Province. The solemn dawn service yesterday was held at a site steeped in history, where some of the fiercest battles of World War ...
The PSA is shocked that Oranga Tamariki has used the cost cutting drive to downgrade its commitment to Te Ao Māori and remove many specialist Māori roles. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Kemish, Adjunct Professor, School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry, The University of Queensland There can be no more powerful symbol of the relationship between Australia and Papua New Guinea than the prime ministers of these neighbouring countries walking together on the ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sharon Robinson, Distinguished Professor and Deputy Director of ARC Securing Antarctica’s Environmental Future (SAEF), University of Wollongong, University of Wollongong Andrew Netherwood Over the last 25 years, the ozone hole which forming over Antarctica each spring has started to shrink. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Viktoria Kahui, Senior Lecturer in Environmental Economics, University of Otago Getty Images/Amy Toensing Biodiversity is declining at rates unprecedented in human history. This suggests the ways we currently use to manage our natural environment are failing. One emerging concept focuses on ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Colin Bednall, Associate Professor in Management, Swinburne University of Technology marvent/Shutterstock Finding the best person to fill a position can be tough, from drafting a job ad to producing a shortlist of top interview candidates. Employers typically consider information from ...
Wondering where to host your next BYO? Whether its a small gathering or a massive party, we’ve got some recommendations. I was first introduced to the concept of BYOs at Dunedin’s India Gardens, a legendary but sadly defunct establishment, which purveyed enormous quantities of mango chicken to Aotearoa’s drunkest future ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julien Cooper, Honorary Lecturer, Department of History and Archaeology, Macquarie University Julien Cooper The hyper-arid desert of Eastern Sudan, the Atbai Desert, seems like an unlikely place to find evidence of ancient cattle herders. But in this dry environment, my new ...
The sector says it’s hopeful her replacement Paul Goldsmith will be able to throw it a lifeline, after six months with a minister deemed missing in action, writes Catherine McGregor in this excerpt from The Bulletin, The Spinoff’s morning news round-up. To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign ...
The government can't just rely on axing public sector jobs and has to do more to cut spending, says the chief economist at a free market think tank. ...
Rock The Vote NZ, known for its advocacy for minor party unity and its role within the Freedoms NZ Coalition during the 2023 General Election, celebrates this merger as a strategic enhancement of its operational strength and outreach. ...
Nearly everyone has experienced the frustration of something you use breaking and being difficult or expensive to fix. Proposed legislation could change that. It’s been raining on and off all Sunday afternoon but people are lining up outside a building in a corner of Gribblehirst Park in Sandringham, Auckland. In ...
What does a forever relationship look like when you don’t believe in marriage? And how do you celebrate it? This essay is part of our Sunday Essay series, made possible thanks to the support of Creative New Zealand.I’m going to do it, right now. I’m going to say ...
The Prime Minister has committed to resuming direct flights to Thailand. But it’s not a promise he will be able to deliver on anytime soon. The post Prime Minister jumps the gun in Thailand appeared first on Newsroom. ...
Disappointing to see the discussion on a UBI seems to be centered around the $200 mark.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/78100200/labour-party-considering-universal-income-of-11000-a-year-for-all-kiwis
The discussion paper says a UBI would help to remove the insecurity associated with low wages or insufficient welfare benefits, which bred “personal shame, financial stress, poverty, mental health issues and the accompanying harms.
However, at $200 a week (less than the current adult job seeker payment) a UBI largely won’t produce increased security and the other benefits touted in its discussion paper.
Moreover, requiring people to seek additional top ups would require a lot of the current bureaucracy and its administrative costs to remain.
Of course, the affordability factor comes into play. At $200 a week (less than the current single adult job seeker payment) a UBI is considered far more attainable.
Nevertheless, to achieve increased security and the full benefits touted, a UBI would require to be set at double the $200 mark at the least.
Therefore, if Labour genuinely wants to achieve the goals and benefits touted, the focus has to be on how to overcome the affordability challenge enabling them to apply a higher set UBI rate.
It may be a UBI can’t actually be a full UBI. Meaning there may have to be a cut off rate. For example, no payments made to individuals earning $50,000 plus.
Thoughts?
I think $200 is about right, at $400 a couple could ,in cheaper parts of nz bump along semi comfortably with out working.
Hell me and Mrs waghorn work 60 hrs between us and don’t clear much more than $800
I still think we would be better served to just make winz less of a miserable out fit.
$200 a week is insufficient to achieve many of the goals and benefits touted in the discussion paper, as laid out above.
Additionally, another of Labour’s goals is the living wage. Therefore, a higher UBI will put upward pressure on wages, thus helping Labour to also achieve that aim.
You and Mrs waghorn need to consider another business venture. You would both earn more on the minimum wage.
My point is if we were being given $800 I’d probably stop being full time and cruise along doing a little bit of casual to top up , I’m not driven by money and I can imagine a lot of others would drop out of fulltime employment.
In the future, there won’t be so much available employment, thus $400 a week will allow you to maintain your current living standard.
While you may cruise along, a number of others won’t. As pointed out in the discussion paper. Which I recommend you read.
This is an underlying issue with the UBI, it doesn’t challenge the future where there is less work available. A job guarantee would work so much better as it
*shows the government can always provide as many jobs as needed by the community
*allows a full time at the minimum wage income level be available to the community.
* automatically adjusts to the number of job guarantee jobs needed.
* gives job guarantee workers a sense of contribution to the community.
* puts no inflationary pressure as job guarantee workers are those not wanted by the wider economy.
why the fuck would you work full time for minimum wage
Because thats all the work you can find? A job guarantee doesn’t preclude increasing the minimum wage to be a living wage. It also doesn’t preclude offering part time work.
What!!!!! Nazis cronies will never agree to a living wage
work your fucking arse off 7days a week to pay rent and put food on table, meanwhile your family don’t see you,
your life is fucked,
by the time your 45 your body is shot, (if some foreign low wage import hasn’t got your job years earlier)
the kids brought up by some freak at a day care who has nothing in common with you(maybe even a paedophile)(not uncommon)(or likes john keys morals)
is this the nz YOU want nic, the people who work for minimum wage don’t feel like they are contributing, they feel like they are being used, and they are
I dont know what your problem is here frankly, you seem to be going completely bizerk for no particular good reason.
Many people on benefits would rather have work, even at the lowest available rate. I see no problem with that being an alternative available to them. And full time is forty hours across five days a week. Some of what your saying is just bizare for example the problem with many zero hours jobs is not that they pay around minimum wage its that there is far fewer than full time hours available.
On a second look you clearly have no idea what a job guarantee is if you think that job guarantee work will be outsourced overseas. Look it up before commenting further.
You’re onto it gez. I know of a guy who has worked on some of the big infrastructure projects NZ has built over the years and spent his life busting his gut working and getting taxed. Now retired his back is screwed, he can’t stand for long periods without bad pain and has to sit down. He’s not eligible for a back operation currently because his pain isn’t deemed serious enough. Thats the kind of thanks he’s getting from the State.
Funny, my initial response to gez Godwin was where do we need to send the men in white coats.
Clearly what ever your guy was doing for a job is unsuitable work for inclusion into a JG program. If however you think that is a valid criticism of a JG program, you may be having trouble differentiating between a JG and a ‘forced labor camp’. A little background reading may help you
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=23719
Not only is a job guarantee far from practical in a future with less work opportunity due to automation, it also overlooks the work of caregivers at home looking after kids, the elderly and disabled. Which, is a benefit touted in the discussion paper.
Moreover, it overlooks the fact that a number can’t work.
Nor (on the minimum wage) does it assist in achieving a living wage or giving those struggling on the minimum wage a little more to help get by.
Therefore, your suggestion would be lowering the bar, thus fails to meet many of the objectives touted.
A job guarantee does not become less practical in a future with more automation this only changes the nature of the work in such a programme.
It also raises the bar on the minimum wage front as now there is always an alternative to private sector work, a full time job (on minimum wage) on the job guarantee scheme. This then forces the private sector to bid higher (than full time at minimum wage). For example do you think zero hours contracts can survive such conditions?
Of course its also a good idea to increase the minimum wage to make it a living wage. Which can also be done while having a job guarantee.
People who cant work can still be covered by the existing benefits system and roughly the same for those who would rather be caregivers.
Automation will not only change the nature of work, it will also make many current forms of employment redundant.
Merely providing an alternative to private sector employment doesn’t raises the bar on the minimum wage.
If the public sector is also only paying the minimum wage, there is no wage competition.
Therefore, your argument that a guarantee scheme would put upward pressure on wages is flawed. The private sector would only have to meet or better the work security a guarantee scheme provides. Those that couldn’t would have to look at providing other sweeteners, not necessarily a higher wage.
Existing benefits don’t acknowledge all caregivers.
If you think automation will make jg work redundant then you dont understand what a jg is. If some jg work is made redundant by technology then a new less onerous occupation can be created to take its place.
What your describing about wage pressures is correct. And describes how a jg programme would immediately raise the minimum standard from where it is today (part time at minimum wage to full time at minimum wage). At that point raises in the minimum wage and jg wage need to take over.
No a jg doesnt deal with caregivers but it doesnt preclude programmes which do.
Once automation is feasible and fully self sufficient all employment opportunity will cease to exist.
Guaranteed jobs only provides extra work security. Therefore, there is no direct wage competition. I concur being full time opposed to part time would allow employees to earn a full time wage opposed to a part time wage. However, the private sector would only have to match that work security to continue to attract applicants, thus they wouldn’t have to increases wages, hence there would be no upward pressure on incomes.
“No a jg doesnt deal with caregivers but it doesnt preclude programmes which do”
By advocating guaranteed jobs instead of a UBI it’s doing just that, precluding a scheme that would acknowledge all caregivers.
“Once automation is feasible and fully self sufficient all employment opportunity will cease to exist.”
When is sky net scheduled to take over again?
The only upward pressure on the minimum wage comes from raising the minimum wage rate or providing a better paying alternative. But it seems pretty unlikely that a UBI will be set high enough to compete with the minimum wage.
Though one would expect a small upward pressure on low wage rates from having fewer applicants to jg level positions (as employers will seek to retain their employed staff being uncertain they can be easily replaced).
“When is sky net scheduled to take over again? “
Your above comment merely highlights your ignorance or denial to the technological advances taking place.
https://youtu.be/7Pq-S557XQU
A UBI set at $400 a week would put upward pressure on the minimum wage.
And seeing as the living wage is also one of Labour’s aims, ensuring we get a decent UBI in place gives Labour the opportunity to also make some gains in this area (attaining the living wage).
As there is no wage competition in what you are advocating, employers would only have to match work security to retain applicants.
What i dont really understand here is why havent labour stated they will raise the minimum wage to match the living wage?
Why all this convoluted stuff about indirectly pushing it up via a high enough UBI?
400$ seems high i would be surprised if thats part of any announcement on this subject.
If you think the possibility of automation cancels out the possibility of job guarantee work you dont understand a job guarantee. Say everything is automated. You can still have a job guarantee just creating positions where the humans work at leisure activities such as street performers poets etc… obviously automation will never reach such levels but anyway automation doesnt undermine it.
To be perfectly honest, I don’t think there is anything wrong with cruising along. Slogging our guts out day and in day out , getting stressed out, doesn’t really help anyone.
+1
Gives people a much better quality of life. And many of those people will also do things that make life better for everyone.
Can you explain how a UBI puts upward pressure on the minimum wage?
There are for example cases where the government subsidises businesses so they dont need to pay a full wage to employees themselves. This looks similar to me and therefore puts no pressure on the minimum wage whatsoever.
The higher a UBI is, the higher wages would have to go to attract applicants, hence employers concern regrading the disincentive to work.
Maybe. What if the govt introduces a UBI and drops the minimum wage to $5 (as a thought experiment). I would expect wages to fall in this case and conclude that the minimum wage is what actually drives the minimum wage rate.
It seems to me that setting a UBI at a level where it competes with the minimum wage will never be a govt goal.
And do you realise just how boring that is?
At $400 people could be creative whereas at $200 they’d be just as stuck as they are now.
That is a very quick change on your part, isn’t it?
About a week ago you were advocating what would have to be a much larger amount
http://thestandard.org.nz/go-technology-inequality-the-future-of-work/#comment-1145854
Falling into line behind the leader are you?
No you’ve misunderstood me, my point in you’re link is unless its high enough to do away all other benefits its a pointless operation.
I’m far from convinced a ubi is the way to go.
As for my leader apart from kicking in a few dollars to labour for the good of democracy I’m not a Little follower yet, I’m more of an any one but key or collins or any of the horrible people they’ve had since shipley kind of guy.
I assume the figures being bandied about are from the Big Kahuna, since the discussion paper doesn’t really get into numbers. I’d like the figure to be higher, but there will be a limit somewhere. The Big Kahuna also retains the Accommodation Supplement and invalid’s benefits which are good plans IMO (I’d also keep state houses).
Andrew Little was on Morning Report talking about the possible “UBI”.
Did anyone really understand what he was on about?
It appears that we may get a UBI but it is going to be means tested. It will replace other benefits but we are going to keep the other benefits. We are also going to put up taxes on most people who work to pay for it.
Why doesn’t he simply say that he has no idea what Grant is trying to impose on the party?
He also had a swipe at John Key using taxpayer funds in Ambrose’s aborted defamation case. It was fine for Clark and Mallard but according to Little John Key was involved in an “Election Campaign” and nothing could be billed to the taxpayer.
He has a very selective judgement does Andrew. During the prolonged campaign for the leadership of the Labour Party he, and the other candidates, were only too happy to have the taxpayer pay for all their travel around the country. That was different of course. It was Andrew who was benefiting from it. Why doesn’t he really have the courage of his convictions. He and all the others should immediately refund, with interest, the total cost paid by the taxpayer for all of their travel during that campaign.
whatever, they are all the same, I am more than happy for them all to pay their expenses back. how about you A L W Y N ?
they did it too is not an excuse, even my 2 1/2 yr old knows better than that
how old are you, about time you grew up eh
labour did it too(said in a whining voice)
winnie did too(even more whiny)
johns ok though (suck suck swallow swallow)
You certainly have a vivid imagination, don’t you?
“labour did it too(said in a whining voice)
winnie did too(even more whiny)”
You can deduce the way I speak from written words?
I can see you being a great success in a TV program. One of those ones where the lead character can read minds, or has a perfect memory. Whatever. They, like you, have very little connection with the real world.
Why shouldn’t they charge these costs to the state? Key was only sued because he was PM. I am only pointing out how very selective Little is being. If he thinks it was OK for him to bill his costs in an election to the taxpayer he can hardly complain when Key puts the costs of a defamation case as well.
the real world is what I live in man,
the taxpayer should never have to pay that shit, wether it is national, labour, nzfirst, the greens, legalise marijuana party, or whoever
nz taxpayer money should be spent on infrastructure, health, etc
saying he is saving us money is crap, if just kept his fucking mouth shut, left the police out of it and just got on and done his fucking job it would have cost us
NOTHING
gez the rev
That’s it gez, give him a rev
actually those tv guys get paid quite well, where do I apply, can I get a reference
“You certainly have a vivid imagination, don’t you?
“labour did it too(said in a whining voice)
winnie did too(even more whiny)”
You can deduce the way I speak from written words?”
I sure can
So your assertion that he was sued because he was PM is frankly bullshit. I can’t remember where in the job description of PM it says he is required to defame people as part of his job.
Where is that personal responsibility people always harp on about. Key made defamatory statements. He got sued and agreed that he was incorrect in making those statements. We end up paying for his mistake.
This is in no way countered by “but but Aunty Helen did it tooooooo”. It is wrong when politicians use public funds for inappropriate means, no matter what side of the spectrum they sit. There is no way you can paint Little with the Clarke brush as he wasn’t even in government when that crap went down.
A few minor points.
(1) not “defamatory statements”. “alleged defamatory statements”
The case never went to trial did it?
(2) Her name is Clark. It is not “Clarke”.
(3) I never said anything about Helen Clark. I was talking about Little (and Robertson, Mahutu and Parker) competing to be leader.
According to Wiki “Between 22 October and 11 November, 14 hustings meetings were held throughout the country for members of the Labour Party”
Hardly general Parliamentary business was it?
Little of course thought it was just hunky-dory.
http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/taxpayer-bankrolls-flights-labour-leadership-fight-ng-164086
He claimed they were to talk to the public. I understand they were closed meetings for party members only. How is that “the public”?
They did the same thing in 2013 as well
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9091759/Labour-leadership-campaign-you-re-paying
“Andrew Little was on Morning Report talking about the possible “UBI”.
Yes, and he raised another concern.
He implied tax would be used to claw a UBI back.
However, it was only the other day Labour were highlighting tax avoidance and how many high income earners minimize their tax burden.
Therefore, what he seems to be overlooking is this would effectively allow high income earners minimizing their tax burden to largely escape the government’s attempt (using the tax system) to claw back their UBI.
It would be far more efficient to set a cut off point, limiting who can receive a UBI, thus preventing tax minimisation structures allowing high income earners to escape the burden.
” set a cut off point, limiting who can receive a UBI”.
If it has a cut-off, and that seems to be what Little, and today, Robertson seem to be contemplating it is not a UBI. The U means Universal and as soon as you have any cut off at all it isn’t that. It is merely another form of means, or income, tested benefit and you have all the overheads of administering any other benefit.
One of the advantages of a real UBI is that administration is very simple. You only need to keep track of whether a person is still alive. That is one of the great advantages of National Super. The administration of that is a breeze compared to most other benefits.
Having a cut off is not going to have any effect on tax minimisation. The only real way to reduce your taxes is to reduce your taxable income. Anyone who does that successfully will become eligible for the quasi-UBI if the cut off is based on income.
If the cut off is based on assets there will be a lot of asset rich, income poor, elderly in Auckland who are going to miss out. I know a couple whose income is almost entirely National Super who still live in their Epsom house that is supposedly worth well over $2 million. Even their rates come close to forcing them to move. Are they going to have to shift away to some small, cheap housing, town where they know no-one if they have to sell their home and live off their savings?
“If it has a cut-off, and that seems to be what Little, and today, Robertson seem to be contemplating it is not a UBI”
I agree. Nevertheless it would be a WBI – a widespread basic income able (if set correctly) to achieve all the goals touted.
Income would be assessed by IRD who would also administer the allowance Therefore, there would be little extra bureaucratic burden.
Having a cut off will prevent the bureaucratic burden of dishing out the allowance only to attempt to claw it back through income tax.
I didn’t claim having a cut off is going to have an effect on tax minimisation. Nor did I advocate a cut off based on assets.
I pointed out how having a cut off will escape losses through tax avoidance/minimisation. But you are correct on minimisation and the eligibility point.
Apart from addressing tax minimization (such as ring fencing losses, etc…) a number will slip through, but only a few high income earners would be able to get down to a $50,000 cut off.
“claw it back”. You don’t claw it back. The way Robertson last tried to describe it is a tax credit. There is no burden.
“I didn’t claim having a cut off …”. In that case I don’t understand what you meant by your previous comment that talked about “set a cut off point, limiting who can receive a UBI, thus preventing tax minimisation” .
“cut off based on assets.” I just gave both ways of having any proposed “cut off”. I certainly wouldn’t have any cut off at all. Certainly such cuts are used. The Australian state super used to, at least when the New Zealand Government forced me to apply for it used both assets and income to limit access to the scheme. There was a 46 page form to fill in.
I had to apply, even though it was impossible to get it because I had worked there. New Zealand Super is much easier to administer because it doesn’t have to be abated.
” only a few high income earners”. I think you would be surprised. Wouldn’t anyone who owns a company and leaves the profits in the company get the UBI in their personal account? They wouldn’t be cheating either as the company could pay its taxes honestly.
I suggest you carefully look at what Lanthanide has been saying. I think he is giving really good explanations to your concerns.
The Big Kahuna has be acknowledged in the discussion paper. It has also been costed.
However, the Big Kahuna sets a flat tax rate of 30%, disadvantaging those currently on lower tax rates, this lower incomes. Effectively making the poor cover a percentage of the cost of a UBI, which largely defeats the purpose.
Moreover, it would tax the annual paper gain (not gain achieved) of housing. Leaving those such as pensioners (and others on fixed incomes) worse off.
Additionally, the set rate is far too low to achieve many of the other goals and benefits touted in the discussion paper, one of which is shifting away from benefits.
That all seems to match my own memory of the book. I read it when it came out so my memories are fading a bit of course.
It is however unfair to complain about the low rate of benefits AND the level of taxes. These numbers have been identified because they will match income and expenditure. Sure the amount to be paid may be lower than you want and the taxes higher than you desire but they match.
If you don’t identify real costs and real benefits you are not doing economics. You are just living in fantasyland. Putting in actual numbers and observing what happens is, unfortunately, why they call Economics “the dismal science”.
A lot of the discussion on this blog was, regrettably, of the fantasy kind.
“Sure the amount to be paid may be lower than you want and the taxes higher than you desire but they match”
Yes, it costed. However, it doesn’t enable many of the benefits touted. Leaving those cash poor worse off.
Moreover, the poor will only receive around half of the UBI as tax increases eat into it. Whereas, the rich will minimize/avoid their tax and get to keep it all.
That’s why I’m advocating that Labour acknowledge this and set their focus on finding a feasible way to allow a higher UBI set rate. While averting the extra tax burden on the cash poor and asset rich.
You don’t seem to understand what I am saying.
You are still saying you want higher benefits and lower taxes.
That is Fantasyland. Put down what you propose and work out what the numbers would be. Without that you are just dreaming and debate is impossible.
You also don’t seem to have appreciated how the UBI would work and how high incomes would have to go before taxes would increase. Lanthanide has worked some examples and you have to get up to about $100 k or so with $10,000 UBI and 33% flat tax to be worse off.
They are further down in this post.
I clearly understood what you were saying and I addressed it. It’s you that seems to be having difficulties.
Of course the affordability factor comes into play. But it’s also vital to get bang for our buck (maximizing and capitalizing the benefits touted) .
A higher UBI will enable better outcomes, but of course, taxes at the top end would require to be higher. I’ve never disputed this as you seem to be implying with your fantasy-land comment.
However, Labour could also look at redirecting expenditure. Making cuts say in the defense budget to help offset the cost of a higher UBI.
They can also look at charging and increasing royalties, oil, gas water and gold, etc…
Increasing tax on alcohol. Reducing consumption and its associated harm, which many would see as a win-win.
A financial transaction tax between financial institutions could also be considered.
These (above) are the things Labour should be considering and one would like to think they are.
Lanthanide points were also addressed. It’s not about incomes having to increase. It’s about a flat tax set higher than current lower rates negatively impacting on the poor and the asset rich you were so concerned about in your other post. Their higher tax payment would eat into their UBI. Leaving them with around half of the two hundred that’s been suggested (less for the asset rich) thus reducing the ability to achieve the benefits claimed in the discussion paper.
A tax free threshold (as was mentioned elsewhere in this discussion) could help offset this tax negative.
That is fine. It is still not really capable of discussion if you don’t put down some real numbers for what you propose. I, for example put some numbers together for a proposal that was floated of $400/week. That indicated we would have to double the tax take. That shows what is involved. You will have to do something similar if you want your ideas to be considered.
For example the Defence Budget is about $3 billion. What would you cut out? Would you do a Bob Jones and scrap the lot? There goes the fisheries protection vessels of course.
What level would you set the UBI at and how would you pay for it?
The tax on alcohol is about $900 million. What would you put it up to?
” Their higher tax payment would eat into their UBI. Leaving them with around half of the two hundred that’s been suggested”.
The UBI was meant to be a basic income. It isn’t meant to be additional to whatever they are getting now. You are only meant to get the lot and keep it if you have no other income.
If Labour genuinely want to achieved the goals and benefits touted, it’s up to them to look at the options and do the maths.
This is the point I’m raising.
The reason being, at less than the current single adult job seeker rate ($200 a week) that’s been suggested, it will struggle to meet the full potential of the benefits touted.
How much do you think a financial transaction tax between financial institutions could produce?
Charging and doubling our royalties will muster several billion.
I would consider doubling the tax on alcohol. Which would also produce savings from the reduced associated harm.
As welfare cost would be reduced, coupled with the other tax suggestions in the post above, the tax rate wouldn’t have to double.
A UBI is most relevant when one has no other income. It is supposedly being considered to deal with the future of work as more move in and out of work, thus have no income.
Sorry I’m not up to play on the UBI but does this mean every adult regardless of working or not gets the UBI?
Well yesterday, according to Robertson it did. But this morning, according to little it doesnt.who knows
If Labour want this to go then they’ll have to be very tight and on message, I can’t see advocating for politicians getting more money (as an example) as going down well with the voters
Little certainly didn’t, that was for sure. He came across as a babbling idiot.
This is where Labour will always fail, they completely lack the skills and people to market a idea or concept.
Andrew Little couldn’t convince a person dying of thirst to drink a glass of water.
I could see it working for the unemployed and those on other benefits, I’d market it as streamlining the whole system but where would be the cut off point for working people?
Would someone go from full time to part time etc etc
suck suck swallow swallow
bit of a competition today to see who gets the goodies tonight eh kids
Do you think Labour have to people or skills to do that?, I certainly don’t
I even doubt National have the skills to market a UBI and convince every one it’s a great idea.
Most people are fairly simple and conservative in their outlook, just look at the flag debate, people getting so bent out of shape over a piece of cloth, completely ridiculous.
Trying to convince the sheeple that something as revolutionary as a UBI is a great idea hasn’t got a chance, all people will hear is Labour wants to make every one a bene and hike taxes.
Labour has shot its self in the face with this one.
John Key and Bill English potentially could but it’d be a tough ask but in this case you’d have to be on the money when it comes to calculations (dotting the eyes and crossing the tees so to speak)
You’d also have to get cross-party support on this as well
At the moment Andrew is just putting it out there for debate, he does admit it is a big contentious subject and it needs plenty of input from everybody as to how it could be implemented. Of course, he doesn’t have anything definitive to state about it – if he did you whinging Tories would say he was being a dictator – at least he is airing the subject, much as Gareth Morgan has and others. Instead of being a tin pot flash in the pan flag debacle, at least Andrew is wanting to have lots of ideas put forward. Why do you lot always rubbish him – he doesn’t mangle his words any more than your precious “no name” and doesn’t disgrace himself in public either- give the man a break.
We rubbish him firstly because, well hes rubbish. He can’t win an electorate seat, he changes positions almost daily and is uncomfortably close to being an out and out racist
Secondly while most of us on the right think John Key is center and edging close to center-left hes still a better option then the unions man Andrew Little so he has to be beaten
Thirdly are you serious? Give the man a break?? If you can’t handle some criticism on a web site how is he supposed to handle Winston Peters in full flight, trade negotiations or when if the media start taking him seriously?
The media will never take him seriously because they are in the pay of the right. What’s Winston got to do with it, did I mention him? I criticise the left a lot, they need to get their act together – but rubbishing everything Andrew Little does from you lot borders on paranoia. Now, your leader definitely does warrant criticism, if the hat fits wear it , he lies like there is no tomorrow and is nasty with it. He is an embarrassment to the country and dangerous to boot.
Your type of comment doesn’t bother me one wit sunshine.
Such first past the post thinking! I really don’t care if he wins in fairly conservative (and becoming more so) New Plymouth or not. I care whether or not he wins support across the country, because that is what determines seats in an MMP system.
Sure its FPP thinking but since, just like in FPP days, you can choose National with support parties or Labour with support parties its a moot point.
The argument (and thinking) is that if someone can’t convince an electorate to vote for them then why should a country and if (a very big if of course) that it comes down to Labour, Greens and NZFirst who’ll be the PM then?
I’d say the person that can win an electorate seat has the best claim to the throne
DoublePlusGood, because, as I have said the media doesn’t give anybody who is not National or Act any chance to put their ideas across , all they do is slag off the opposition with the likes of Hoskings and Hide, plus Audrey and Fran so how are the people going to hear anything positive that the other parties have to say. The law of averages does not mean that National/Act are perfect and correct all the time does it. Even the polls are never correct, people deserve to get a balanced press, why do you think heaps of us have cancelled out of MSM and never bother to access it. I had family here recently and they brought over from the States some periodicals for me to read, two come to mind “The Atlantic” and “Time” magazine – why can’t we access decent NZ grown stuff like this instead of drivel and trash.
New Plymouth is oil driven and I know is a conservative constituency and probably will be next time. He shouldn’t have stood there but that doesn’t mean he cannot be a decent leader – we are in the shit with this Government, he could do much better – hell’s bells it wouldn’t take much to do better.
Anyway I can’t follow your thread, where was I discussing FFP??
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Plymouth_(New_Zealand_electorate)
Yet somehow Harry Duynhoven (1987, 1993 – 2005) managed it, maybe its something to do with the person?
We’ve been here before, babe.
http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-24092015/#comment-1074070
Whispering Kate
+1
Good on you for referring these anti Labour types, to the “facts”, they much prefer to make stuff up and then tout it as as the truth, you can see how shallow they are.
Yeah but that’s the difference between the left and the RWNJ BM – thirsty lefties don’t need to be told what’s good for them.
Its not that, its just that Little is so untrustworthy we couldn’t trust what was in the water
Yeah right. Let’s see a list of Little’s lies that comes close to Key’s.
The most abundant things in the universe are hydrogen, and stupidity. When RWNJs are involved the possibility of stupidity can never be ruled out.
John Key has been leader of NZ since 2008, Andrew Little is the leader of a (rapidly becoming) minor party
John Key won an electorate seat and then won three (soon to be four) elections
Andrew Little has failed twice in winning an electorate seat
john key also pulls ladies ponytails
pisses in the shower proudly
wanks himself(sorry bronagh) over ponytails
loves the cock
bends over in cages with soap and stuff
cant talk properly
pulls funny faces as he squirms(whats up his arse?)
walks like a fag(by fag I mean fag) on the catwalk
says a lot about his electorate eh?
It’s funny how you never answer a question PR.
You claimed Little is untrustworthy.
Evidence, troll.
Ok Stuart Muntroll
Little claims to be against the TPPA but won’t withdraw NZ from the TPPA
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/66292339/labour-leader-andrew-little-broke-law-over-spy-committee-pick
http://www.newshub.co.nz/nznews/little-unrepentant-over-chinese-buyer-claims-2015071306#axzz43aFEKOLq
Theres three for starters
Really – so there are no Chinese buyers? I rather think you’ll find that there are.
Not withdrawing from the TPPA is frankly pretty stupid – but Labour leaders, unlike Gnats, are not completely autocratic.
What you have here is only evidence of the bias inherent in your shrivelled and twisted excuse for a character – fit for treasons, stratagems and spoils; dull as night, dark as Erebus: Let no such man be trusted.
You just don’t get it though (as per usual) its not what I think, its not what you think its what the voting public think
Its why John Key will secure a fourth term and why Labour will have to wait until 2020, at the earliest, before they gain power
It’s just as well it’s not what you think – there’s just not much there. It’s not about ‘winning’ it’s about good governance. Key’s omnishambles has achieved so little at such cost it will take decades to recover.
In a good year Cullen could scrape up a surplus of about $2 billion. Key et al have run up $120 billion in debt – $150 billion by the end of this year. That’s 75 years of Cullen just to get us back to zero.
Hordes of folk are out of work and the economy is basically screwed. The international situation won’t be rescuing us. But the public are waking up to Key – they’re dumping his flag and pretty soon they’ll be dumping him.
Why don’t you take your whining to Whaleoil where you belong and stop pestering the folk here with your ill-informed and malicious nonsense? Have you no shame at all?
A baboon could have stood in Helensville and won if he represented National – that is no argument at all that if you can’t win a constituency seat you are not capable of winning over the country. Helensville is a safe seat, put him in somewhere like South Auckland or some other depressed area in one of the many depressed provinces and see how he would do. Ask the people of Helensville how often he visits his office out there – its a farce, he doesn’t even live there.
Yeah keep telling yourselves that, you probably even believe it yourself
Key made sure he stood in an already deeply Blue seat.
In stark contrast, far from lining up a safe Red seat, Little was prepared to stand in one clearly leaning Blue.
And did comparatively well …
… http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-24092015/#comment-1074070
lmao…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihReeJg08ns&ebc=ANyPxKrxYNwxjELcJ9IhKUJ3BY21kfUAXuiBsnKKb_I0upb65-wuPvt32GEqX5LffP86BG95MyN0OGJhTOREvk-fC6vgElcPqg
@alwyn “Did anyone really understand what he was on about?”
Never mind alwyn. Your Minder might find time to explain it to you in one syllable words. You must try harder.
1. UBI is a just discussion to be had by fair-minded non-partisan people.
2. Every adult would get an allowance regardless of employment (or maybe an income limit could kick in.)
3. A huge downsizing of WINZ would help pay for it. Taxes would be adjusted accordingly.
4. It is not Labour Policy. Gareth Morgan has been regarded as a right wing economist and he raised the idea a year or two ago.
5. Because of future employment uncertainties some plan will have to be developed regardless of Party Stripe.
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/201794162/opposition-parties-irked-by-decision-to-pay-pm's-defamation.
Can I suggest that you can simplify this “explanation”
Point 1 should say
“Only people who love Andie and hate John are allowed to comment”
Point 2 could simply be worded
“2. Every adult would get an allowance regardless of employment, or maybe they won’t.”
And, from the way they are talking about it, point 3 should say
“3. A huge reduction in National Super levels would help pay for it”
3. That is right. Morgan pointed that out. “A huge reduction in National Super levels would help pay for it.” Mine would drop from $269pw to $200pw.
2. That’s right too. It might even include children.
1. alwyn would be welcome to comment on the pros and cons but if she just sneers because she thinks its a Labour issue she may as well not bother.
It is an issue for all society in view of the huge changes going on with employment around the World. What better way would there be alwyn?
Why do people insist on thinking that Alwyn is a female name?
I have never met any woman named Alwyn and I have, on a number of occasions pointed out that it is a male (Welsh) name.
http://www.thenamemeaning.com/alwyn/
I don’t think it is a Labour issue at all. It was actually proposed by Thomas More in 1516 so it has a very long history.
If, however the Labour Party is going to propose such a scheme they should at least have a consistent view of what they are talking about. At a minimum can they get their Leader and Finance spokesman on the same page in the songbook?
They are behaving like idiots and doing a great injustice to New Zealand when Andrew and Grant are proposing radically different visions.
How can it possibly be discussed if there is nothing of substance?
This went on in a very large post a week or so ago on this site where every man and his dog was saying what was going to be in the Labour Party proposal. It was futile because nobody had, or has, any idea.
Why would Grant want to be on the same page as Andrew? Andrew has what Grant wants…
Naughty, naughty. Grant is completely loyal to the leader and has said he will never stand again.
“”Having now put myself forward for the Labour Party leadership twice, I can assure you I will not be doing it again,” he said.”
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/259612/little-man-for-the-job-of-labour's-big-rebuild
I’m sure he is a man of his word. Or not.
Of course there may be alternative interpretations of your comment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfHJDLoGInM
Seems appropriate
@alwyn:”If, however the Labour Party is going to propose such a scheme they should at least have a consistent view of what they are talking about.”
There is no policy to be consistent about, yet. So I would welcome, they would welcome, the whole country would welcome a discussion on all aspects. Pros and Cons. Please?
I see where you’re coming from and its true but considering how polarising this issue could become you’d have thought Little and Robertson would have gotten to together to discuss how to talk about it
Unless Robertson is setting Little up…not that he would of course 🙂
There is no policy to be consistent about
That’s ridiculous, why are they even talking about a UBI?
You mean, I assume, that Grant read Gareth’s book over his Christmas vacation and likes all the big words? If they are thinking about Morgan’s proposal we can discuss it. At least there is something more than smoke and mirrors to talk about.
So far however there isn’t anything real to come to grips with.
“That’s ridiculous, why are they even talking about a UBI?”
Read the report BM. It’s a discussion document. I’m sure you can figure out what that means.
funny your whining sounds like a 2 yr old girls to me
“At a minimum can they get their Leader and Finance spokesman on the same page in the songbook?”
theres that john and bill show where they often have different scripts as well.
Yes alwyn – its a joke – dont get too excited by it
You’re getting too excited now Trollwyn.
“Does this mean every adult regardless of working or not gets the UBI?”
It’s currently still in discussion. Nothing has been finalised.
Quite hard to build a case for a UBI when nothing has been finalised.
Why would they float the idea is such an unfinished state or was it leaked?
“Why would they float the idea is such an unfinished state…?”
To get the public discussing it, hence allowing for some public feedback.
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
You’re kind of right in a way, labour seems to think people are capable of understanding that they just want to chuck the ubi idea out there for debate,
You and your mates prove that many aren’t.
Lefties tend to fall into the trap of thinking the best of people.
Stupidly optimistic is about right.
fify
Stupidly naive is about right.
There seems to be a habit of Labour “chucking things out for debate” and it always seems to backfire yet Labour keep on doing it
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
It’s part of the Future of Work commission. The paper, like all similar discussion papers, was deliberately long on concepts and short on details because policy will follow later after the discussion and feedback based on the discussion paper.
hi chairman, it is well named, a universal basic income.
everyone receives it.
That’s actually easy but it requires a significant mindset change and a lot of work (It won’t be the fiddling at the edges that governments seem to have grown so fond of over the last couple of decades). All it requires is seeing the government as the source of all money in the NZ economy (This is actually BTW). Then the UBI just becomes the source of money into the economy.
The tax system would have to be rebuilt around that mindset change as well but, then, the tax system needs to be rebuilt anyway as it’s no longer fit for purpose.
Oh, it can be – it just requires that mindset change that I mentioned.
EDIT:
And according to the poll on that page the people are in favour of it.
@ Draco:” it requires a significant mindset change and a lot of work (It won’t be the fiddling at the edges that governments seem to have grown so fond of over the last couple of decades).”
Very true. But we can see above that battle lines are being drawn on political lines. Pity. Wonder how the angry ones reacted when Morgan floated the idea in the Great Kahuna a year or so ago?
“It may be a UBI can’t actually be a full UBI. Meaning there may have to be a cut off rate. For example, no payments made to individuals earning $50,000 plus.”
The defeats the entire point of a UBI.
All you need to do is structure the tax level to achieve the same outcome. A flat tax is by far the best option, but if that won’t work, a simple two-tiered progressive tax will.
The problem is a higher rate UBI given to all will cost far more, thus tax will have to increase far more, hence may not be such an easy sell to the general public.
A higher flat tax rate will disadvantage those currently on lower tax rates, thus lower incomes. Effectively making the poor cover a percentage of the cost of a UBI, which largely defeats the purpose.
Stop thinking of the UBI as a cost and start thinking of it as the fuel that the economy needs to run. Do that and it, and everything else, falls into place. It tells us that not only can we afford the UBI at any level but that we actually can’t do without it.
The taxes will need to be adjusted but then the entire tax system is centuries out of date, not fit for purpose and thus needs replacing any way. Start from the ground up with redesigning it and include the UBI in that redesign.
Labour has bitten off a lot and they probably didn’t realise how much. They, and others, probably haven’t realised that you have to replace the current tax system with the introduction of a UBI and, in fact, build it around that UBI.
“Stop thinking of the UBI as a cost and start thinking of it as the fuel that the economy needs to run. ”
Can you expand on that?
“Taxes will need to be adjusted”
Can you also expand on that? How do you recommend they are adjusted?
Labour are considering tax implications. Little implied the tax system could be used to claw back a UBI allowance (see my earlier post to alwyn).
Think of the economy as an engine. Fuel goes in (government created money) and exhaust comes out (taxes).
The engine itself is the resources that a people have in their borders and what they do with them to provide for their needs.
For the distribution of those products we use a market system. People use money to buy what they want and money is also used to encourage people to work in particular fields.
So, the UBI now becomes that fuel. People have money to spend on the products that they want which encourages people to produce those products.
Of course there is also other government spending and other reforms that makes money available.
I’m going to be very general here.
Close the loopholes. Our system has been designed to put the tax burden upon the poor. This is why we have the people with the greatest wealth paying, proportionally, the least tax.
We need to change that so that, because of taxes, no one can afford to be rich. Financial transaction taxes and capital taxes including a tax on money in the bank (demurrage).
Increases in taxes on high incomes up to 100%. The idea isn’t that people will be taxed at 100% but that they just won’t have an income that high, i.e, taxes used to limit income.
Direct taxes upon resources used. Basically, what I’m getting at here is that the resources that are extracted from the land are taxed. Although, in the case of extraction and processing of raw resources (Think iron, gallium, thorium, gold) I think the government should do it directly. The sale price of those resources then becomes the tax.
When you say government created money do you mean in tandem with the banks? Dual currency? Or Government takes back the sole right to create money?
“The engine itself is the resources that a people have in their borders and what they do with them to provide for their needs.
For the distribution of those products we use a market system. People use money to buy what they want…”
That largely takes place now.
How would you like to see money used to encourage people to work in particular fields?
So the money created now becomes the UBI to be spent into the economy creating demand and supporting commerce.
How will that impact on the dollar? Would you have a limit on money created, therefore,won’t this (UBI expenditure) limit other government expenditure? And how do you see it impacting on inflation?
The government becomes the sole creator of money and no other money can be used for NZ products.
In a fucked up system that doesn’t actually work. If it worked we wouldn’t have people saying that we couldn’t afford to keep people out of poverty.
They get paid.
Yes.
That would depend upon how the government sets the exchange rate. I’m in favour of it being set by a maths formula tied to imports and exports.
I wouldn’t have a limit on the amount created but I would have the RBNZ setting the tax rates to offset the spending. The government sets where the taxes are, the RBNZ and probably in association with Treasury set the actual rates.
On normal goods and services inflation would remain the same. Some would see deflation.
“A higher flat tax rate will disadvantage those currently on lower tax rates”
Yes, but only up to a point. Because of the mathematics of the current system, a flat tax rate can go up quite high before anyone on a lower income pays more tax under a UBI system than they would pay under the current system.
Eg, with a $10,000 annual UBI and a 33% flat tax rate, someone earning $30,000 from private employment would have this:
$10,000 UBI
$30,000 private income
-$10,000 tax
=======
$30,000 after-tax income
At the moment, someone earning $30,000 from private employment (and assuming no other benefits like accommodation allowance) would pay $4,270 in tax for an after-tax income of $25,730
With 33% tax, someone earning $50,000 through private employment would pay a net tax of $6,500 vs current tax of $8,020.
With 33% tax, someone earning $70,000 through private employment would pay a net tax of $13,100 vs a current tax of $14,020.
With a 33% tax, someone earning $90,000 through private employment would pay a net tax of $20,000, vs a current tax of $20,620.
These figures are all with a $10,000 UBI; if it’s $11,000, then subtract another $1k off the net tax paid.
So as you can see, a 33% flat tax rate results in a tax cut for the bottom 90% of workers. The Big Kahuna proposed a 30% income tax rate, but this is helped along by a capital tax which is the most politically fraught part of the deal.
A flat tax of 40% would still seem reasonable, although I haven’t done any numbers on that.
The capital tax made sense to me since it only gets paid if income tax does not cover it, but agree that selling it would be difficult.
The concern with the capital gains tax is that it will be on annual paper gains, opposed to actual gains achieved. Disadvantaging those who are asset rich but cash poor, such as a number of pensioners.
It isn’t a capital gains tax, it is income tax charged on the deemed rate of return of fixed assets. The government sets the rate annually in the budget (Morgan’s view is that it should be based on the longterm average of 90 day or 10 year bill rates), and goes from there.
That doesn’t actually address Chairman’s concern, in fact it just reinforces it.
If you have a ‘deemed rate of return’, but don’t actually receive income from that asset (eg, your personal home in Auckland with no mortgage that is worth $2m on paper), then you have to find the money to pay the tax. For many pensioners, that money doesn’t exist.
‘It is income tax charged on the deemed rate of return of fixed assets”
Yes, assets taxed at the deemed accumulated value gained is a capital gains. tax. One that works by taxing paper gains and not actual gains achieved. Negatively impacting those that are asset rich and cash poor.
That’s the whole point of it – to stop people storing up wealth and not paying tax, or paying very little tax, despite having a much better standard of living than someone with a higher income but no or few assets. The aim is specifically to hit asset-rich people to force them to use their assets productively, not just accumulate them – the cash-poor aspect is unfortunate, so finding a way around that would be useful, but bear in mind that under a UBI, income-poor people are paying little to no income tax, so it’s not all bad news.
Also, it’s a deemed income tax, so most people won’t be affected because they will pay enough tax not to have to pay the CCT as well.
“That’s the whole point of it – to stop people storing up wealth and not paying tax”
First off, a lot of people worked hard and paid their taxes to attain their wealth.
Therefore, how do you think they are going to feel when they find what wealth they have accumulated is going to be taken from them by new taxes?
What sort of message are we giving the next generation? Don’t work hard and accumulate wealth, it will only be taken off you further down the line.
I totally disagree with any tax that taxes gains that have yet to been achieved. It leaves many struggling to meet the burden, thus it’s totally unfair.
Moreover, the estimated gains may never eventuate.
“The aim is specifically to hit asset-rich people to force them to use their assets productively”
If the aim is to get people to invest productively, then we need to encourage them to do so before they buy unproductive assets.
Additionally, some did invest productively, allowing them to buy and enjoy non-productive assets. And you support robbing them of this?
“The cash-poor aspect is unfortunate”
Indeed. Hence, it’s vital the problem is overcome. We don’t want to increase poverty with our enthusiasm to see a UBI introduced.
Therefore, it’s vital new tax settings are right. They can’t afford to further disadvantage the poor and cash poor.
In Aus , there is a $18200 threshold before you pay any tax at all, and applies to all, you could introduce this at a higher rate to replace the UBI, this system would be cheap to implement, changing to a flat tax rate would be disastarous, when 40% are on the minimum wage.
The biggest benefit would be the the extra money would be fed back through the economy, which would increase employment levels.
That (a tax free threshold) would certainly help. However, it wouldn’t achieve the wider benefits of a decent UBI of $400 a week. A combination of the two would be a good consideration.
As soon as a flat rate of tax exceeds the lowest tax rate it disadvantages those currently on the lower rate. The higher the flat rate is set, the more it disadvantages those currently on lower rates.
Which is one of the problems with The Big Kahuna.
At the moment, someone earning $30,000 is taxed at 17.5%.
Increasing their tax rate to a flat tax of 30% will almost double their tax burden.
So as you can, see it will put them at a disadvantage.
Double the tax when you get tax free payments of $200+ per week is only an issue higher up the pay scale – minimum wage earners will be better off in terms of money in the hand.
“Double the tax when you get tax free payments of $200+ per week is only an issue higher up the pay scale – minimum wage earners will be better off in terms of money in the hand.”
The thing is, they would be better off in the hand if the tax rate doesn’t become set at a higher rate than their current lower rate.
I see you didn’t read my comment at all, or didn’t understand it.
A UBI acts as a negative tax rate.
Someone earning $30,000 under a UBI with 33% tax and $10,000 UBI payment pays $0 net tax.
$0 is less than what they currently pay, which is $4,270.
$0 < $4,270.
Therefore someone earning $30,000 a year is better off by $4,270 compared to the current system, so they are not "put at a disadvantage" as you claim.
Trying to deny the mathematics shows you don't understand what you're talking about.
Clearly, you failed to understand my comment.
Someone earning $30,000 under a UBI with a 33% tax rate would not pay zero. Moreover, it’s yet to be decided if the UBI will be added to ones taxable income. Therefore, in that example one would be taxed 33% of $40,000. The thirty earned plus the ten UBI, giving a total income of $40,000.
Additionally, as I pointed out to Craig H above, individuals would be better off in the hand if the tax rate doesn’t become set at a higher rate than their current lower rate. Effectively forcing the poor to pay a percentage (in this case close to 50% of their UBI allowance.
They would pay a net of $0 income tax.
In the Big Kahuna, which is what Labour are explicitly using as their basis for these early discussions, UBI is tax-free.
In fact the only reason to add a UBI to taxable income, would be if there were tax brackets. A flat tax does not require the UBI to count as taxable income. Even if there are tax brackets, the UBI could still be tax-exempt, and the tax brackets could just apply to income from all other sources.
Yes, but at the moment there is no suggestion that the UBI will be taxed that way by Labour.
Everyone would also be better off if the government gave every person over the age of 18 a free car, too.
Effectively you’re saying “the UBI needs to be flat cash increase on top of what every single ‘low-paid’ person is already earning, eg everyone should get an additional $11,000 per year on top of what they already earn’.
Except there is no feasible model of a UBI that would allow that structure – it simply costs too much. Just as there is no feasible model of a UBI that pays every individual $22,000 a year while keeping the tax rate at 17.5%, or no feasible model of a UBI where the government gives everyone over the age of 18 a brand new car.
Instead of having theoretical conversations about “what might be” that are completely unrealistic, instead we should discuss what the current proposal is: $11,000 UBI per year with a flat-rate of tax set at 30%, as per The Big Kahuna. Under such a proposal, someone on a low-wage would get to keep several thousand more in the hand per year than they do currently, and even if the flat tax rate were increased to something like 45%, that would still be true.
“They would pay a net of $0 income tax”
That is incorrect.
Labour is not explicitly using the Big Kahuna. So again, it’s yet to be decided if the UBI will be added to ones taxable income.
Little has implied the tax system will be used to claw back a UBI allowance from high income earners, which, with current tax avoidance structures is flawed.
“Effectively you’re saying “the UBI needs to be flat cash increase on top of what every single ‘low-paid’ person is already earning, eg everyone should get an additional $11,000 per year on top of what they already earn.”
Indeed, Moreover, it would be required to be higher than that if it were to replace benefits (but could be tapered off as incomes increase) and one wanted to achieve the goals and benefits touted in the discussion paper.
“There is no feasible model of a UBI that would allow that structure”
Which is one of the main points I’m raising. This is the challenge Labour needs to focus on to make a UBI (with all it’s touted benefits) work.
Forcing the poor to cover a large percentage of it while allowing the rich to escape the burden (through tax avoidance thus tax minimization) is counterproductive to its aim.
“Instead of having theoretical conversations about “what might be” that are completely unrealistic, instead we should discuss what the current proposal is: $11,000 UBI per year with a flat-rate of tax set at 30%…”
The conversation is about the current proposal at $11,000 coupled with a flat tax rate and a CGT being unfair (on the those it’s meant to assist) and insufficient to achieve many of the goals and benefits touted.
Hence, the need for Labour to change the focus to how are they going to pay for a sufficient UBI amount that will achieve their aims.
You should listen to the interview with Grant Robertson this morning on National Radio, where he says that it “effectively a tax credit”, ie, they aren’t going to tax the UBI payment itself.
Labour haven’t said they’re basing this on the Big Kahuna, but it’s pretty obvious that they are, given the figures they’ve come up with just “by coincidence” being the same as the Big Kahuna’s.
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/201794319/digital-equality-to-be-discussed-at-future-of-work-conference
Being a tax credit won’t help someone who has just become unemployed. They can’t afford to live on nothing till they wait to claim their tax credit. Destroying the suggestion that it would replace benefits.
Early days. It seems Labour are yet far from aligning the touted benefits with the structure of the UBI scheme.
It’s ambitious and complex, but I generally support the concept. It has the potential to do so much, one hopes Labour get it right in the end.
He said “effectively a tax credit” during a brief interview where he was trying to explain the concept to Guyon, not “it is exactly like a tax credit and someone who is out of work would get $0” – when he already said earlier in the interview that someone who did 40 hours work one week and 10 hours the next would get paid $200 each week from the government.
“Effectively a tax credit” means “this payment you are getting is not taxed, but there will be a higher flat rate of tax on earned income than there is presently”.
I feel like you’re deliberately mis-interpreting what Labour are saying when they talk about this proposal.
@Lanthanide
There has to be another major difference to a tax credit though.
All the current tax credits only become available after you have done your tax return in July the following year. Some (dividend imputation credit) don’t even allow a refund if they exceed the tax you owe.
That isn’t going to be of any use to anyone is it, and can’t possibly be what he means? Isn’t there some better way to describe them?
@alwyn:
Rather than describing it as a tax credit, he should have said it acts like a completely smooth progressive tax, where the bottom tax bracket is actually a negative tax rate.
If you listen to the interview, Guyon later says “well couldn’t you just scrap abatement rates for benefits” – but that’s actually what a UBI is. There is no abatement to the payment itself.
The obvious question becomes, of course, if someone who is on the unemployment benefit finds a full time job, and you have 0 abatement rate, then that person will permanently get a benefit from the government even while working full time. But why should that person get a permanent benefit, and his neighbor who always had a full time job, not get one?
So in some ways the UBI can be thought of as an unemployment benefit that is paid to everyone over the age of 18, with no abatement rate.
“I feel like you’re deliberately mis-interpreting what Labour are saying when they talk about this proposal. ”
Rubbish.
One can only work with what’s being communicated. He also said it wouldn’t be in the form of a payout when he stated it was going to be in the form of a tax credit.
Don’t jump on me for his contradictions.
Again, clearly it’s early days. Obviously, there is a lot more work to be done.
I ran the numbers on the Big Kahuna website calculators, and 15% GST, 40% income tax and 6% CCT pays for $250/week UBI for everyone 21+, $200/week for 18-20 year olds and $100/week for under 18s, so that’s not a bad effort for most people IMO.
It is a long time since they updated this website.
The going rate on a 6 month TD is about 3.2%.
I would love to know where you could get the 6% required return on capital, any capital.
Do you realise he was going to tax you this on your home? If, as is depressingly common, you owned a $2 million home in Auckland you would be treated as having an income of $120,000 per year and would have to find $48,000 to pay your tax each year?
http://www.bigkahuna.org.nz/comprehensive-capital-tax.aspx
Oh stop it, throwing figures like that around on here you will get the activist base all excited.
@Nic.
Oh dear. it is really time they got their sleep. I won’t do it again.
2/3rds of the minimum wage or nothing at all I reckon.
Even at that rate, it could only be for a single, healthy person and a bureaucratic structure would have to be developed for those suffering ill-health etc…unless, of course, health care (all aspects of) got back to being universal and free.
2/3rds of the minimum wage (at 40 hours a week) is almost $400 a week. Which is close to what I have suggested.
All aspects of health care have never been universal and free. There are people getting support for health and disability via WINZ that they would never get from the MoH. This is going to be one of the the trickier aspects of a UBI, how to improve the system for people with other needs.
Wait until Labour mention that super eligibility is going to have to be cut back to make a UBI affordable.
Maybe, but the Cullen Fund will help – the Big Kahuna suggests a transition period in which the Cullen fund is drawn down.
So Audrey Young and the Herald get a so-called exclusive on the appointment of the next GG to run the day after it’s announced that the PM is using taxpayer funding to settle a five year old defamation suit. How convenient.
Dont forget the ‘tough’ stand shonky is taking on taxpayers money for a waterfront stadium granny is running with….flag, teapot tapes, tppa, milk.
Distraction central the herald.
Putin says so long to Syria, Brazil sees a political shake-up and Trump just keeps going strong.
https://www.rt.com/shows/in-the-now-summary/336332-putin-syria-brazil-trump/
Hi Chooky
.
It is difficult to see why Trump is deemed an extraordinary phenomenon.
He is just doing what the Republican Congress and Senate have trained him to do. They have trained him by their shocking and despicable example.
By letting the Banks fiddle their books to the tune of Trillions. By allowing the Corporations to run riot and seize resources. By shipping millions of American jobs off to Asian slaves. By denying millions of Americans fair Health Cover. By slugging American students with gross Fees.
By dreaming up foul excuses (such as non existent Weapons of Mass Destruction) in order to slaughter hundreds of thousands of innocent women and children on the other side of the world.
By making sure that the Current President of USA cannot get his mandate through the American Parliament.
There is nothing exceptional about Donald Trump. He is just a stock standard greed ridden Republican politician. He stinks with the stench of the entire Republican movement.
I don’t really see how you can blame Republican Party faults on Trump, or Trump’s faults on the Republican Party.
He only joined the party last year I gather. In his only previous attempts at a political career he tried to get the Reform Party nomination in 2000.
It is also a trifle unfair to blame Trump for supporting the Iraq war. There is little evidence of his feelings prior to the war but two weeks after it started he was expressing unease. He greatly exaggerates the strength of his opposition then when he talks about it today of course.
http://www.factcheck.org/2016/02/donald-trump-and-the-iraq-war/
Hillary was strongly in favour at that time.
Trump is still a nutter though.
Pretty much all authoritarians are. Some are just better at hiding the nuttiness than others.
Clinton and Obama enabled both the banksters (by repealing Glass Steagal) and the ongoing bailout of the banksters after the GFC. Not the Republicans (GW was responsible only for the initial rounds of the banker bailouts, which Obama continued at pace for years).
This video is a must watch for anybody who wants to understand were John Key is coming from and how the international bankster criminals have effectively taken over the US justice system and hence the Federation.
Re the UBI, I’m posting some information on what Labour are doing and what the UBI options are below.
Alwyn is telling lies and doesn’t understand what a UBI is and doesn’t get that Labour have put up a report exploring various options. All alwyn’s comments today are misleading and IMO designed to undermine Labour and fuck with the debate here on ts. Don’t buy into it. Alwyn has one purpose here and that’s to destroy things.
Instead, how about we take the time to inform ourselves and see what the options are.
Little on Morning Report, pointing out that depending on the model used how tax is assessed means people on different incomes get an increase of different amounts. This isn’t means or asset testing. He doesn’t say much in the piece other than to point to the value of a UBI for people on variable work hours every week, and that no millionares won’t be getting $200/wk. Both are reasonable points and both are consistent with the general debates about UBIs. Starts at 2:50
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/201794162/opposition-parties-irked-by-decision-to-pay-pm's-defamation
Labour’s Future of Work UBI report, which looks at what a UBI is, what the NZ context is, and some of the models we could use (PDF),
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/nzlabour/pages/4208/attachments/original/1458272685/Background_Paper_-_A_Universal_Basic_Income_for_New_Zealand.pdf?1458272685
Previous posts on ts (not all of them)
http://thestandard.org.nz/universal-income-revisited/ (Red’s post that looks how a UBI can be paid via a negative tax system).
http://thestandard.org.nz/gareth-morgans-big-kahuna/
Three posts from KJT,
thestandard.org.nz/ubi-1-memes-and-paradigms/
http://thestandard.org.nz/ubi-2-why-should-we-push-for-a-ubi-universal-basic-income/
http://thestandard.org.nz/280342/
http://keithrankin.co.nz/krnknbyonpov.html
“Alwyn is telling lies and doesn’t understand what a UBI is and doesn’t get that Labour have put up a report exploring various options”
In your favourite phrase weka.
“weka you are lying about me again”
Why do you have to do that when you find you cannot rationally answer my comments? I know very well what a UBI is and how it can work. However when nothing except the mantra “UBI” is declaimed it is quite impossible to even consider the subject of what Labour are talking about.
Hi Alwyn
Whitewash Trump and the Republicans as you wish. You are telling me that he is an innocent little man. With innocent little polices ?
The Republicans never ever kill hundreds and thousands of innocent people. Never keep millions of Americans in poverty.
Well and good. You make me smile….
Like hell I am saying that Trump is an “he is an innocent little man. With innocent little polices”. He is crazy, and a danger to humanity I fear. You are attributing to me things I have never advocated. You can have your fantasies if you like but don’t ask me to accept the opinions you falsely attribute to me
“The Republicans never ever kill hundreds and thousands of innocent people”.
That is the Republicans in Iraq I assume. I am saying that there is little evidence, not none but little, evidence that Trump was in favour of the war.
On the other hand Trump has suggested that the US should kick out all “illegal” immigrants from Mexico. That was quite different to the policy George W advocated.
As I say Trumps policies, bad or not so bad have almost nothing in common with anything the bulk or Republican politicians have advocated.
Can you, for example see any real similarity between Trump’s views on immigration and the approach Bush advocated?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Immigration_Reform_Act_of_2007
Distraction politics from a PM caught using taxpayers money to pay for his electoral costs ?? ?
He wasn’t giving away much on Monday other than to say he wanted someone who “can carry out the duties and responsibilities of the Governor-General with the mana and respect that the office deserves”.
Also in the “highly rare event there was a significant constitutional issue”, Key said he would want someone in the role who was “bright enough to understand themselves but also be able to take advice”.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/78130827/Dame-Patsy-Reddy-to-be-named-as-new-Governor-General
Elizabeth Warren puts the needle in.
Allegra Kirkland Verified account
@allegrakirkland
Trump just referred to @SenWarren as “the Indian” twice during a press conference
https://twitter.com/allegrakirkland/status/711988057856221184
What were we JUST saying about how Republican menfolk are a-scurred of Elizabeth Warren?
[…]
And now she’s taking aim at Republican presidential frontrunner Donald J. Trump, in a series of tweets that seem tailor made to cut him down to size, if you get the subtle dick joke we are going to be making all the way throughout this post.
She starts off in Nerd Land like she always does, saying hey maybe if Donald Trump The Terrific Doubloontillionaire was better with ahem! money, he might have way more Ameros than he currently has:
http://wonkette.com/599866/elizabeth-warren-chops-off-donald-trumps-manhood-mounts-it-above-fireplace
TO: Travellerev
The corruption of main stream Republican Politicians and Government Officials is akin to total evil.
Donald Trump has copied the Republican techniques (selectively) and he is seeped in their disruptive criminally cruel policies and warmongering. It will be nothing to him to eliminate hundreds and thousands of Mexcans. It will be nothing to him to let down his wide eyed followers. The republicans routinely eliminate Hundreds and Thousands of innocent people.
They also relieve massive numbers of people of their money – via the USA Banks and Financial Institutions.
The Republicans have brought about the most severe hardship worldwide – ever in the history of the world.
It would be good for people to listen to the Video ! Our National party is a clone.
TO: WEKA
.
The contrived barrage against Andrew Little is a sure sign that he is troublesome to dishonest trolls and followers of Key and English.
So do not be surprised at the Alwyns, the BMs and the Hootons and the C Vipers (and the Press and TV muppets). They try and drag Andrew Little down. But the problem is his honesty.
Keep up your explications and support of Andrew in the lying quicksand of John Key and his friends.
They know Key and his caucus are steeped in dishonesty and Spin and they are terrified that New Zealanders will find out.
Actually, you would think the trolls would be out and about advising the schools and kindergartens when and where the PM will be visiting next. He needs all the assistance he can get to overcome his disgusting fetish for lil girl’s heads or hairs.
let the negative Greens and the negative Vipers know, that if they wrongfully sully Andrew Little, they will make sure that our devious and laughable PM will be voted in for a further anti- NZ term.
Do you not know how to use the reply button?
Really good comments, Observer (Tokoroa) – I totally agree.
And it was possibly Andrew Little being so clear this morning on Breakfast TV that the teapot tapes was an electoral issue – not the ordinary legal issue for a PM or MP going about their daily work – that has led to Key backing down on his attempt to get the taxpayer to front his payout to Bradley Ambrose.
Hello Jenny Kirk
I really enjoy your straightforward observations too ! Well done
It is hard for us to realise that John Key has numerous people working behind the scenes day and night to smokescreen his Lying and his Doubtful personal behaviour.
The smokescreen is forwarded to the muppets on Tv and Radio; and to the “falsehood departments” of The Sick Herald.
These people, in particular The NZ Herald senior journalists, have spent a large part of their miserable job of hacking down a profoundly good person named Helen Clark.
They crucified her over and over. Partly because she was a female; but mostly because she governed well.
They have spent lots of time trying to throw Winston Peters into the Herald dung heap. That’s what senior Journalists do at the Herald. Its all they do. They accused him and accused him and accused him
They then came across an honest and intelligent man called David Cunliffe. They hated Cunliffe because he was such a contrast to the highly dishonest low class leader called John Key.
Only one Journo from the desks of the sick Herald apologised to Cunliffe for what they did to him. That would be considered a pissy weakling by his Herald colleagues.
Now the guys and dolls at the Sick NZ Herald – and at the toe cutting radio stations – and at the trivial television Stations (does any other nation have worse TV than us?) have selected their role in life – as burying honest Andrew Little in 900 meters of printed and broadcasted concrete
Andrew Little is a better person than anybody working in the NZ Media. He is honest.
They will crucify him; they will rate him as so much dog poo and with other forms of faint praise. They do it because journalists are by occupation dishonest and egotistic – they cannot abide an Andrew Little.
Yeah – Observer ( Tokoroa ) at 11.2.1 – I just hope that Andrew Little is strong enough to withstand all the bricks and bolts that will be thrown at him. I think he is ….. but he’s in for a stormy time ahead.
By the way – today in Whanganui – a car with Chester Borrows Nat MP plastered all over it – and presumably with CB and Paula Bennett in the car – kept driving thru a small group of protestors who’d momentarily/ temporarily blocked the driveway ……… and in doing so, ran over one of the protestor’s feet. And they kept on driving ………
No waiting for the two cops who were there to clear the way for them
No stopping and checking to see if anyone had been hurt …..
Someone with a very good camera took a load of photos – I expect they’ll be all over Facebook by now.
It’ll be interesting to see what sort of spin the MSM put on this “incident” !
Crikey Jenny Kirk !
I would not wish Paula to stand on any part of me.
These bad companions of our bizarre and dodgy Prime Minister, have learnt so many rotten habits from the great fraudster.
In my experience of business – Corporations and the like as well as small Cafes and hardware shops – the staff are a mirror reflection of the CEO in character and behaviour.
Do you have similar experience?
You work with John Key; you become like John Key.
Regards .
Observer (Tokoroa)
Great historic observation, the points about Clark were spot on, Gillard had exactly the same problem.
Great to hear some defenders of the Labour Party, as their are so many trying to discredit them from both sides of the political divide, still blaming them for NZ’s current position, this is illogical after nearly a decade of Key. I sometimes wonder if a degree of brain washing has occurred through the medias persistent negative representations over a long sustained period.
” (does any other nation have worse TV than us?) ”
I don’t think so, TV in NZ has deteriorated over the last few years, it was shocking when I was there in January, but it was outside the rating period, so it may have improved.
Ratings are run continuously. Every morning there are viewing figures coming through for the previous day and the “profitability” of different programming decisions can be assessed. And that has been in place since at least 2002.
Anyone else experiencing this difficulty?
I cannot stand listening to Newstalkzb – it’s bevy of hosts are mostly impartial RWNJ’s. bordering on FoxNews calibre.
So I scan the online news outlets, including the Herald only to find that the same radio hosts now have regular column space there.
You can choose not to switch ZB on, not watch 7 Sharp and you can choose not to visit the ZB home page, but you don’t expect to see the likes of Williams and Hosking on your general news pages. How long before the Herald gives column space to Leighton Smith?
No surprises Newstalk was used at Guantanamo. You can practically pickup that station no matter where you are in the country. Just be thankful your workplace isn’t tuned into it for the whole day.
Well this charming, typical behaviour from a union man you’d have to say
http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2016/03/the-misogyny-of-the-left-2/
Wonder if its the same guy:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10898434
Why would I have to say that? Is it because if I don’t say it, whaleoil will do one of the many things he’s accused of?
Well hes a union guy and union guys have a reputation for unsavoury acts
I agree whaleoil has a reputation for unsavoury acts (starting with his his nom du wank), but I’m not sure he’s a “union guy”.
Yes very amusing pretending I’m talking about Cameron Slater instead of the union guy wanting to use a sex toy on Paula Bennett
The left love to talk about “rape culture” in NZ especially in linking it with the PM but when its one of their own, well the silence is deafening
Really? I didn’t read the link to whaleoil’s site, as the fuckwit is a known liar with an admitted hatred for unions.
I’m sure if slater has evidence of a criminal act, he will forward it to the relevant authorities. Unless that would result in self-incrimination, of course.
IF the behaviour you describe is described accurately, then no it is not acceptable.
But equally, if you described the behaviour accurately then no, it would not be “typical behaviour from a union man”. The only person who would “have to day” such a thing would be a lying piece of shit with a compulsive hatred of unions that overwhelms their regard for reality.
Or someone being threatened by a lying piece of shit.
And it’s not “typical behaviour from a union man”, because then it wouldn’t be news, would it.
But typical behaviour from a lying piece of shit is to clickbait for whaleoil.
I suspect my initial response is in moderation.
Something about your insistence that I’d “have to say” it was typical behaviour led to me saying quite the opposite.
Ok then how about male attempts to shame/silence female, because he disagrees with her views, by way of implied sexual violence and verbal harassment
Is that better?
If I were to assume that your description of wo’s description of the event is an accurate description of the event, then yes, such behaviour is very very wrong. Go have yourself a lollipop.
But it’s not so much typical of “the left” or “a union man” as it is of “fuckwits” and, to a lesser extent, “society in general”.
How’s that typical? The man’s a moron, and quite possibly brain damaged. It’s Col’n Crige level fuckwittism.
So now creepy key says that his defamation settlement won’t be paid with public money – just national party money or private donations.
Why is this not a campaign expense?
Also, his office announced it “after taking advice from Parliamentary Service”. So he wanted to, but it wouldn’t be legal. And, more importantly from his perspective, he’d be caught.
“Why is this not a campaign expense?” sure you jest McFlock? you can’t be serious…
How would Key be “caught” if he used Parliamentary Service budget? it was no secret Key him self said it yesterday (either Parliamentary Services OR National Party will pay it). Taking advice is what normal people / organisations do to determine the right option to take.
I am serious. And don’t call me Shirley.
He’d be “caught” because people would find out.
“Taking advice after throwing a couple of options out there is what tories do to determine the limit of what they can get away with, regardless of morality or legality.”
FIFY.
Interest .co has done a very long piece on YOUI insurers
I would be VERY careful before insuring with them.
http://www.interest.co.nz/insurance/80690/major-investigation-diana-clement-talks-youi-customers-ex-employees-about-insurer
One major complaint (among others) was YOUI ‘demand’ cc nor or bank ac nos for a quote.
There are several example given where deductions have been made, without agreement.
The Consumer Protection representative said the cases cited by Interest.co.nz could raise issues as to whether the insurer used reasonable care and skill in supplying a service as a result of:
• asking for credit card or bank account details when a consumer is only seeking a quote;
• not explaining why payment details are required/misleading a consumer as to the reason;
• acknowledging (by email) that an insurance policy has been cancelled but later requiring a consumer to provide further cancellation notification;
• not advising a consumer that further cancellations would be required and in a different mode from the original form such as text instead of email. And;
• loading a consumer up to an insurance policy even when the consumer has cancelled – requiring the consumer to opt out.
“Shon-keyArrested at Pacifica.” So reads the headline.
Has this arrest of Penny Bright been noted?
“Anti-corruption campaigner Penny Bright wants to know why she was arrested at one of Auckland’s biggest festivals. Dressed in the persona of “Shon Key”, Bright was arrested at last weekend’s Pasifika Festival.”
https://www.maoritelevision.com/news/regional/shon-key-arrested-pasifika
Seems a bit of a blow for Freedom of Expression?