I’m not close enough to the electricity industry to know for sure. But I suspect it’s because the companies that have huge sunk capital in fossil-fueled stations and don’t have to pay for their waste disposal and pollution are willing to sell power at a low enough price to make new geothermal uneconomic. Put a price on GHG emissions (ie require emitters to pay for the damage they cause) and we’ll probably see new geothermal plants built quite quickly.
Except many of them are sinking investment in wind power generation which suggests it isn’t fossil fuel alternatives which are stopping greater interest in geothermal generation.
That second link highlights one if the main reasons for a lack of development in this area. It states restrictions placed on use or underused government control are inhibiting development. Remove these and you are likely to get more generation via this source.
because we have a ‘laissez faire’ governement that can’t be bothered thinking/projecting and investing in the future. And we have a business world that can’t be bothered thinking/projecting and investing in the future if they can milk the ‘present’ cow till she dies.
In short, there is no political or economical will in NZ to switch from fossil fuel to renewables, and the current ‘oil exploration permits’ granted by the current National led Government is exhibit a.
Lots of people have responded to my question and have answered it in the way I expected. Geothermal energy generation is not as easy to develop as other renewable clean sources.
In under-developed countries and central north island areas, new geothermal needs truly substantial local partnerships. Which are hard work and take years. Needs high profitability to make that commitment.
The big problem that occurs to me when looking at the UBI is the need for rent controls (including state housing for life)..
Just like with accommodation supplement (or the extra money paid to those in Christchurch by both the state and the insurance companies) the first people with their hands out for that money will be landlords.
If the money is only circulating up to the owners of property then nothing is gained.
Yes, and we need to view a UBI as part of a range of social solutions. Housing, rent, wages, worker rights, top ups for those not working, all need to be addressed.
The Green Party vote is growing all through the years of neoliberalism.
A UBI isn’t dependent on a highly controlled state. It’s dependent on a govt that governs for everyone not just the people that it suits.
And it’s not like NACT aren’t an interventionist govt, they’re just intervening in teh wrong the things and in the wrong way (and incompetently a lot of the time too).
Wouldn’t everything have to be controlled though to keep expenses under control and in balance with the UBI?
Power companies, councils, rent, food, all these inputs would have to be set otherwise you’ll end up with people who can’t afford to live and no where to go for help.
Strong economies like Germany control rent already, and other things as necessary. It is only ragged ideologues like the Gnats that allow the free market to destroy their society.
The UBI will simplify the system so your comment is misguided if not disingenuous. Read the discussion paper and educate yourself and possibly even do some thinking before you post your ill-considered comments.
+1 A large part of the UBI conversation in the past day or so has been driven by regulars trolling who don’t understand the concepts, haven’t done their homework and/or are just posting bullshit diversionary comments. Completely disingenuous on both counts.
Well you can stop wasting your time talking about what the Labour Party are going to do weka.
Listening to Morning Report today I see that Grant Robertson has been slapped down and put in his place by his leader. He might have used the code UBI but that wasn’t what he was talking about. He told Guyon Espiner that it wasn’t going to be Universal. He even said that Guyon certainly wasn’t going to get it. He then said it would be introduced slowly, like the Old Age Pension/National Superannuation.
That took roughly 80 years to develop. Grant seemd to think that UBI would have a similar gestation period so anyone over the age of 10 can forget about it.
He probably read a bit more of the Morgan book and learnt what it would cost and how it would have to be paid for.
A pity Labour felt they had to give the Finance role to someone who knows absolutely nothing about the subject. http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/201794319
Anything you now post on the topic obviously has precisely nothing to do with what the Labour Party are thinking.
It is a shame you are one of those who is someone who “don’t understand the concepts, haven’t done their homework and/or are just posting bullshit diversionary comments” isn’t it?
Yesterday you lied about what Little did on RNZ. I’ll have a listen to MR later and see if you are lying again.
“Anything you now post on the topic obviously has precisely nothing to do with what the Labour Party are thinking.”
So says you, according to some trumped up nonsense you’ve mangled from listening to the radio. Labour have a discussion going on about the UBI, why not take part in it? Oh that’s right, because your purpose here is simply to destroy.
I’ve taken part in UBI conversation on the standard for years. I think I’ll let my comments be the record on that.
“It is a shame you are one of those who is someone who “don’t understand the concepts, haven’t done their homework and/or are just posting bullshit diversionary comments” isn’t it?”
Funny, that’s what I said about you yesterday. You really must be scraping the bottom of the troll barrell if you can’t even formulate your own critiques and instead try and troll me by repeating back my analysis of you.
So, please cite,
– where I don’t understand a UBI is conceptually
– something that indicates I haven’t educated myself on the UBI
– have posted bullshit diversionary comments in discussions about the UBI.
“Funny, that’s what I said about you yesterday”.
You have a very defective memory. Have you already forgotten that you said it TODAY and it is in the comment that I was replying to. That is why I put it in quotes. I thought your own words described you opinions quite nicely.
You, as usual claim that I lied about what Little said. Just how do you think that was the case, or is it merely another of your reflexive accusations when someone says something you don’t like?
By the way, you seem to be close to the Green Party. Can someone tell Meteria Turei that the Governor General is NOT our Head of State. You would think that after nearly 14 years as an MP she would have learned something about our form of Government.
Grant defines the realistic limits of a ‘UBI’ quite sensibly IMO.
“No Govt. is going to come in and just hand out $30b”.
“It is a guaranteed basic income.”
“It is a Tax credit, not a hand out”.
On those terms, I think the idea has a lot of merit, and will be reasonably salable to the voting public.
So call it a GBI?
As soon as you imply that everyone will receive it, you have framed it in a way that makes a nonsense of the idea, and have rendered the UBI unsaleable.
Clearly, we cannot afford to give it to everyone, (where does the money come from?), and so if it was ‘Universal’, at a certain level of income threshold you must have a mechanism for taking it back off those who do not need it.
Beside which, what possible point is there to giving it to people who already have perfectly adequate or very high income?
As soon as you imply that NOT everyone will get it you cannot possibly talk about a UBI. You merely have variations on all the benefits we have at the moment. You retain all the work and cost you have now in the admin work without even the benefits of careful targeting.
That is the worst of both worlds.
The great advantage of a genuine UBI is the ease of paying the money out. It is like the way that National Super is done. The only thing you have to know, once you decide that someone is eligible, is that they are still alive.
Grant seems to be having great difficulty in coming up with some way of making the scheme politically sellable. I think he may have read Morgan’s book and not understood those pesky little bits on paying for it.
You can pay for the scheme. However you really do have to decide what amount you want to pay out, and how you propose to raise that amount of money. If it is not Universal you may as well stick to what we have.
Grant seems to be having great difficulty in coming up with some way of making the scheme politically sellable.
It’s sellable simply by using the word universal. Grant seems to be having the same problems as other RWNJs: Where does the money come from and why are we giving it to rich people?
Just why would he talk about a UBI, which means “Universal Basic Income”, if it isn’t going to be universal? He has to mean Universal or he is trying to con people. If isn’t universal use a different descriptor.
Wait. You don’t mean we have misunderstood and he is really talking about plans for a “Unified Business Identifier” do you?
You do realise I was talking about what “The lost sheep” said and not what Robertson was saying? I was, after all, replying to that person’s comment.
The lost sheep said
“As soon as you imply that everyone will receive it, you have framed it in a way that makes a nonsense of the idea, and have rendered the UBI unsaleable.
Clearly, we cannot afford to give it to everyone, (where does the money come from?), and so if it was ‘Universal’, at a certain level of income threshold you must have a mechanism for taking it back off those who do not need it.”
Yep. I can’t figure out if that’s intentional mindfuckery or if he’s just stupid. I tend to think the former. It’s the same tactic he’s using on me at the moment and I’ve seen him use it on other people. I’m not sure it is quite gaslighting, but it’s close. He just keeps repeating a lie about someone with the intention of it being accepted that the person he is talking about is deficient, often mentally. That’s why I find him creepy in ways that I don’t find other RWers. He really is nasty as an online person as well as having nasty politics.
@weka.
You did read my comment at 4.59pm?
You don’t seem to have understood it if you did.
I wasn’t talking about Grant. I was talking about “the lost sheep”
Good synopsis lost sheep, and I agree the framing and terms need to be chosen carefully. I like the guaranteed income bit, with emphasis on income security. We have to stop looking at this as welfare benefits too.
“Beside which, what possible point is there to giving it to people who already have perfectly adequate or very high income?”
Because as soon as you start doing things like income and asset testing you have to have a whole bunch of bureaucracy which takes money and causes stress and is often unfair. If the entitlement is universal you can see how it plays out at various income levels (see my comment below, someone should check my maths). I guess you could pick a different tax rate to shift the fairness in another direction.
I don’t see how having a variable tax rate which takes back some or all of GBI is more or less complicated than having a variable threshold at which some or all of GBI is not paid out….
But I do think the idea is more saleable without the obviously empty gesture of giving it to people who you don’t actually intend to receive it and who also don’t need it.
But in general, I agree there are some very plausible arguments around potential efficiency gains in delivery.
That is, if the basic level is sufficient to meet the needs of most people receiving it? Or will it continue to be necessary to to make many adjustments to the Basic income on a case by case basis according to need above the basic level?
Which begs that much discussed question of what level you set the GBI//UBI at?
Is Labour or anyone else proposing this as a cost neutral or even cost saving measure, or does it presuppose a redistribution of wealth?
Quite aside from your individual moral stance on re-distribution, I would think that the voting Public is going to be highly sensitive to that particular detail, and it will turn out to be the devil in the discussion.
To clarify, I didn’t mean variable tax rates, I meant what the flat tax rate should be is up for debate and that playing with the figures might show a higher or lower rate is more fair. If Red is around we can ask him why he chose 40%. I assume affordability is part of it.
I agree re how it’s paid for and perceptions of that are important, although this worries me less than some because I think we should have CGTs and FTTs. I also think that once people get the idea of tax credits it gets easier. Plus frame it alongside a move back to a fairer society for *everyone, eg good solid social policy on health, education etc. Betterthat than simply here’s some more dish which feeds into the greedy selfish meme.
So, according to that logic, we can’t actually afford to have anyone living in NZ.
where does the money come from?
Where the money always comes from – it’s created. Of course, we’re talking about the government creating it and not the private banks who will be banned from creating money.
and so if it was ‘Universal’, at a certain level of income threshold you must have a mechanism for taking it back off those who do not need it.
Yeah, we’d have these things called taxes. Perhaps you’ve heard of them? But instead of being used to raise funds for the government to spend they’d be used to take excessive money out of the economy after it’s used.
Beside which, what possible point is there to giving it to people who already have perfectly adequate or very high income?
Fairness. Because it’s given to everyone it’s fair. Then there’s the savings of not needing a government bureaucracy that spies upon people and abuses them solely for the purpose of taking their income away.
You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back?
How do I perceive that as ‘fair’, rather than a completely meaningless farce?
Let’s say for simplicity’s sake that the UBI is 20k, and everything over 20k is flat taxed at 33%.
To give the value of the 20k “straight back”, a single individual would need to be earning three times the UBI rate plus the UBI. In this back-of-envelope illustrative example, 80k.
But if you were between contracts, or lost your job, or had to take unpaid leave, you’d still get that 20k every year, no paperwork, no humiliating judgement from social warfare caseworkers, no nothing. That’s your right. And that’s why it’s not a farce – your rent will always be paid.
By my calculations McFlock, under the current Tax scale, someone earning 80k per annum would be netting 62.7k after tax.
Under your back of the envelope tax scenario they would be still earning 80k per annum plus the 20k UBI. After paying 33% tax on the 80k above the UBI (26.4k), they would net 73.6k.
So they’d be 10.9k better off.
To ‘give back’ the UBI, you would actually have to make the flat tax rate on everything above the UBI somewhat higher than the current rate.
Around 48% by my calculation.
As I say, I think you will find that a much tougher idea to sell to the voting public than the UBI being something you simply don’t get until your income drops to a certain level.
my point is that no, the ubi is not “taken straight back” until the individual is earning a shitload. Not household income, individual income.
If the top 5 or 10% of income earners want to complain that they’re given a UBI with one hand and they pay it back in tax with the other, everyone else will ask why they have to fund an eligibility administration system simply so the very rich don’t have to pay their UBI to charity (lol, as if).
TLS’s “meaningless farce” suggestion only applies to the smallest minority of income earners. There are many reservations I still hold about a UBI, but tls’s bulshit isn’t one of them.
Bullshit
I think you’ll find my figures are accurate McFlock.
Let’s say for simplicity’s sake that the UBI is 20k, and everything over 20k is flat taxed at 33%.
Well, I’ve just had a wee play with your scenario…
If the top 5 or 10% of income earners want to complain that they’re given a UBI with one hand and they pay it back in tax with the other, everyone else will ask why they have to fund an eligibility administration system simply so the very rich don’t have to pay their UBI to charity (lol, as if).
Actually,
Under your scenario, someone currently earning….
40k – will be 13k / 27% better off.
100k – will be 17k / 22% better off
And even someone at the 1% threshold of 337k will be 21k / 9% better off!
It’s a giant lolly scramble!
And where does the money come from?
Draco going to print it for you?
Now you’re admitting that no, the money isn’t given straight back, because the vast majority of individuals will be better off.
So you ignore your previous statement and go with the “where’s the money coming from” angle.
That is bullshit. Regardless of whether what you say is true or false, you’ll simpy assume another time-consuming position to keep up the pretense that you’re contributing to the discussion.
You’re bullshitting. Why don’t you like the UBI? Why don’t you like the idea of everybody living in dignity? Would it really be that tragic if you, as an employer, had to treat employees as knowledgeable colleagues rather than lording it over the peasantry? Stop bullshitting – why don’t you like the UBI?
A lot of blustering around in circles McFlock, but you didn’t actually answer the question.
You claimed that ‘5-10%’ of earners would have to give the UBI back, but in the scenario you proposed even someone on the 1% threshold would be receiving extra money.
In your scenario 99.8% of the population are going to receive somewhere between 40 to 5% more income.
If you stand by that scenario?, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to ask where all that extra money is going to come from?
But you haven’t yet acknowledged whether your first question has been addressed: “You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back?”
The answer to that is not merely “no”, it’s “no, because the fundamental premise that the government is “going to take it straight back” would not apply to almost person in NZ.
So do you acknowledge that the question was a bullshit question?
I thought it was a legitimate response to Draco’s claim that giving the money and then taking it back through taxes was fair, because then everyone would be getting it.
But if you think it’s bullshit I’m happy to defer to your judgement.
Now can you answer my questions about your scenario please?
Well, no, it was a bullshit response, because taking an aggregate total in taxes from across the entire population does not translate into “You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back”.
As you pointed out with your math, your statement is not true at all for the vast bulk of people.
But you partially answered your own question by repeating Draco’s comment:
[…] taking it back through taxes […].
Other possible sources include bureaucratic savings from the system’s simpicity, FTT, CGT, and even some sort of social credit scheme if that floats your political boat.
Hell, one could even forget the flat tax and go progressive on the really rich fucks. Make them pay fair price for their privilege.
But you know all this. You’re just bullshitting. Because your reason for existence is to waste people’s time.
Oh. You were just fantasising then.
The structure of your comment deceived me into thinking you were making a serious contribution to the debate on a realistic UBI..
So you read this comment and assumed it was a complete policy proposal, rather than a simple illustration that your question “You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back?” was just fucking stupid?
What part of “Let’s say for simplicity’s sake” did you fail to understand?
My contribution to serious discussion on UBI was to answer one of your questions.
Perhaps you should take some time to reflect upon why you should find that a clear answer to your question is so unhelpful.
What part of “Let’s say for simplicity’s sake” did you fail to understand?
I think it was the assumption that you meant something simple?
As in, when you quoted some actual figures, you intended they had some straight forward ‘meaning’?
Now I see that your ‘meaning’ was that 99.8% of income tax payers should get a massive increase in income, and this would be paid for by an increase in tax on the remaining 0.2% of tax payers, a Financial Transactions Tax, a Capital Gains Tax, ‘some sort of social credit scheme’, and ‘going progressive on the really rich fucks’.
That’s simplistic enough for this blog I reckon. As simple as the ‘zero’ which represents the chances of a UBI being introduced once The ‘simple’ ‘Sheeple’ get the ‘simple’ idea that the UBI is ‘simply’ another ‘simplistic’ Trojan Horse for the fantasies of the tiny ‘simplistic’ minority who still believe in a Marxist vision.
‘Simply’, Lets revisit this discussion in a year, and see who was right eh?
It’s amazing how much bullshit you can string out of a perfectly straightforward answer to a perfectly simply question.
Just to clarify, you’re acknowledging that your scenario of “You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back?” was just complete bullshit for the vast majority of people?
Under whatever specific proposal, if anything, comes from Labour’s thinking project it’s safe to say that for most the amount they pay in tax will not amount to the value of the UBI they receive.
How about, rather than revisiting this in a year, you just admit that you have no interest in resolving any issue discussed here? You’re bullshit might be transparent, but it sure as shit stinks.
BTW, you don’t actually know how hu-mons use the word “simply” do you?
Under whatever specific proposal, if anything, comes from Labour’s thinking project it’s safe to say that for most the amount they pay in tax will not amount to the value of the UBI they receive.
I just can’t reconcile that with your figures showing that 98.8% of tax payers will receive more cash in hand income?
Perhaps you can explain how that would work?
You are comparing “paying the individual’s received UBI back in tax” with “overall better off compared with today’s tax rates, if you took simplified figures as written in stone rather than illustrative”.
If you want to know why your question “You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back?” is bullshit, read the above thread.
If you want a more in depth plan, look at the big kahuna or whatever Labour eventually proposes.
frankly, I don’t think you’re inteested in either.
Starting at 2:15 here’s a synopsis of what Robertson said,
1. Labour are considering the idea, there are pros and cons
2. Pros: simplify benefit system; enables people to adjust to changing work patterns; income security;
3. Cons: untested (although very interesting idea)
4. UBI is about the interaction between the income support and the tax system
5. There are a number of different models (being tested in the Netherlands, Finland)
6. In it’s purest form, it’s universal.
7. But it’s about the relationship between income and tax, it’s essentially a tax credit.
8. Espiner: it will be expensive! Robertson: we can introduce it over time (cf to Super), and it’s related to the amount of tax people pay
9. therefore higher income earners are less likely to benefit than lower
10. Espiner: what problem is trying to be solve here? Robertson: example is a beneficiary who wants to take on extra work. Current system is a disincentive because of the abatement process. If you guarantee people an income they are more likely to move around the workforce. Simply scrapping the abatement process is an option.
11. We’re facing a fundamental change in the nature of work availability.
12. Therefore we need to consider a range of options that give people income security. If work can’t do that anymore, the govt needs to consider other options.
13. We’re a long way from implementing this
alwyn,
“Well you can stop wasting your time talking about what the Labour Party are going to do weka.”
I haven’t been talking much about Labour at all other than what’s been in the report, and what we were all speculating on the other day when Little first announced.
“Listening to Morning Report today I see that Grant Robertson has been slapped down and put in his place by his leader.”
That’s not in the link you give, so citation please.
“He might have used the code UBI but that wasn’t what he was talking about.”
Yes, he was.
“He told Guyon Espiner that it wasn’t going to be Universal”
No, he didn’t. He said that how much you ended up with might depend on how much tax you paid. Based on Red Logix’s model (which is based on Keith Rankin’s work) it could look like this:
Current tax system: income of $25,000 – tax 17.5% $4375 = $20,625 cash in hand income
UBI system: income of $25,000 – tax $10,000 = $15,000 + UBI $10,000 = $25,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 0%
Current tax system: income of $100,000 – tax 33% $33,000 = $67,000 cash in hand income
UBI system: income of $100,000 – tax $40,000 = $60,000 + UBI $10,000 = $70,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 30%
Current tax system: income of $200,000 – tax 33% $66,000 = $134,000 cash in hand income
UBI system: income of $200,000 – tax = $120,000 +UBI $10,000 = $130,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 35%
“He even said that Guyon certainly wasn’t going to get it.”
Lie. He said that someone like Guyon was “unlikely to be a great deal better off”. I have no idea what Espiner earns, refer to figures above.
“He then said it would be introduced slowly, like the Old Age Pension/National Superannuation. That took roughly 80 years to develop.Grant seemd to think that UBI would have a similar gestation period so anyone over the age of 10 can forget about it.”
Another lie. He use Super as a general example of how you could introduce something over time. He didn’t say how long it would take, nor did he imply that it would take 80 years.
“He probably read a bit more of the Morgan book and learnt what it would cost and how it would have to be paid for.”
“A pity Labour felt they had to give the Finance role to someone who knows absolutely nothing about the subject.”
Two comments of no worth coming from your own prejudices and ignorance. Robertson stated up front that there are different models to look at (and that’s what the report says too).
“Anything you now post on the topic obviously has precisely nothing to do with what the Labour Party are thinking.”
Another nonsensical statement. My comments are my own thoughts unless I specifically refer to the Labour Party. All I’ve said about Labour so far is that they’re considering a UBI and they’ve released a report.
btw, re Epsiner getting it, the point is that it’s to guarantee a basic level of income. If Epsiner were to have a big drop in salary he would benefit more than with what he is on currently. That’s the income security aspect.
In my opinion a UBI will not achieve its promises overall. And it wont win Labour the election if its based on some kind of promise to fundamentally reform the tax system.
But i was just raising the tax free band to look at how that mechanism works in practice. It doesnt for example seem to be putting upward pressure on UK wages.
The UK also had ways to encourage savers to have money in the bank with ISA,s. Essentially you could save money tax free each year in cash, shares or a combo.
Since many people either have absolutely no savings or use property as savings in NZ and are a month away from not being able to pay bills, it is a way to start a saving’s culture which we do not have here.
I’m also thinking the pros of a UBI are good. There needs to be a safety net without red tape. I think universal benefits are good. When people start to ‘means test’ everything it can take so much red tape to work out the entitlements and so forth little money is saved.
In the UK with the disastrous disability. They cut people off who later died but saved little or zero money from the scheme.
Do you really mean a scheme like this?
“The account is exempt from income tax and capital gains tax on the investment returns, and no tax is payable on money withdrawn from the scheme either”.
Please provide details. I know of schemes that are exempt from tax on their earnings, or from tax on the withdrawals but not both.
The old Government Super scheme gave you the choice of one or the other, but not both.
An excellent summary Weka. Will use it as a reference.
I think the word has gone out to Alwyn and his ilk to rubbish UBI and try to stop it being discussed. UBI is part of a strategy to manage the Long term need to address employment problems. Current Governments have avoided the subject so if Opposition parties raise a possible solution, a Goverment is bound to attack it on any grounds with help of little helpers like Alwyn. A sort of spoilsport effect.
People over 65 freely choose to work or not, haven’t all suddenly turned into drug addicts or alcoholics, many have late in life turned to the arts for self-fulfillment, many work the hours they choose, may do voluntary work for charities or marae and so on.
If they earn they pay more tax.
We tested on a smaller scale for many years with family benefit. Everyone got this regardless of circumstance. We were proud of this.
“We’ve been testing it for years now with NZS.”
So we have. According to the 2013 census about 33% of the people in the 65-74 age group worked with 19% more than 30 hours/week
It drops off rapidly in older age groups. It has more than tripled since 1986. It clearly hasn’t put everyone off working has it? http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/profile-and-summary-reports/quickstats-65-plus/work-unpaid-activities.aspx
On the other hand there are only about 600,000 of them and the cost of NZS is about $12 billion, Even that amount was being questioned at the last election.
I don’t think the family benefit, even when it was at its peak in the 1950s is a relevant comparison. Most, if not all, woman stopped working when their children were young in those days if my memories are accurate. Woman, with children, who worked in the 1950s seemed to my young self to have been widows.
The cost is only being questioned because the very people who will benefit from it the most voted continuously to pay lower taxes at the very peak of their earning capacity when they should have been contributing towards it and paying for their free education they received when younger as well.
See some of us aren’t questioning the cost of NZS cause it’s the wrong question. The cost is well known and eminently predictable.
The correct question to ask is why aren’t we taxing the right people sufficiently to pay for it.
@D of SS
I was trying, without naming them, to comment on the Labour Party policy to increase the age of entitlement.
From October 2013
“Finance spokesman David Parker said today that unless there were massive tax increases, it couldn’t be sustained in its present form.
Speaking on Firstline, Parker said National was “putting their heads in the sand” by refusing to raise the age of eligibility for getting superannuation. “.
If I mention Labour wanting to do something like this some of the commentators here will get very upset and abuse me.
They were the ones questioning it. I think, like you, that we can afford it.
Mind you I am biased. I get it. I only applied for it though after interest investment returns fell through the basement floor.
Of course NZ can afford it, jesus this isnt even a worthwhile question. But there is a compromise, we probably cant afford it and have anything but govt budget deficits.
Problem is that these neo-liberal Labourites priorities are buggered and they have determined whats best for the polity and are beyond listening. Never does the question arise, what harm is the deficit actually doing to the country.
When you examine that you find its supposed to be causing higher inflation something most govts are trying to achieve. Either thats not what it does or the deficit should be expanded then. But no this doesnt cross any of these guys tiny closed minds.
Under the figures you quote, someone currently earning 100k would have 3k more in hand under the UBI scenario, but using correct current tax figures, they would actually have 6k less under the UBI.
Using current tax rates, the point at which someone would be ‘breaking even’ on the UBI model you use would be 40K. Under that and they would be better off, and over it worse off.
That sounds about ‘fair’ to me, as far as higher earners getting extra benefit, but I don’t believe 10k is anywhere near enough for a ‘basic income’!
Thanks! Good catch. I just treated each income bracket as a single tax rate, but can see from the calculator it’s taxed at different rates. I’ll see if I can figure it out later.
“but I don’t believe 10k is anywhere near enough for a ‘basic income’!”
Current tax system: income of $25,000 – tax (variable tax rates) $3,395 = $21,605 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 13.5%
UBI system: income of $25,000 – tax $10,000 = $15,000 + UBI $10,000 = $25,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 0%
Difference = +$3,395/yr or +$65/wk
Current tax system: income of $60,000 – tax $11,020 (variable tax rates) = $48,980 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 18.3%
UBI system: income of $60,000 – tax $24,000 = $36,000 + UBI $10,000 = $46,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 30%
Difference = -$2980/yr or -$57/wk
Current tax system: income of $100,000 – tax $23,920 (variable tax rates) = $76,080 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 24%
UBI system: income of $100,000 – tax $40,000 = $60,000 + UBI $10,000 = $70,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 30%
Difference = -$6,080/yr or -$117/wk
Current tax system: income of $200,000 – tax $56,920 = $143,080 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 28.5%
UBI system: income of $200,000 – tax = $120,000 +UBI $10,000 = $130,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 35%
Difference = -$13,080/yr or -$251/wk
“NZ has to become a highly controlled socialist state.”
As opposed to the highly controlled bureaucratic state we have now?
Sheesh BM, I thought you had at least had the redeeming feature of embracing freedom.
This system is worse than socialism, as it is the state and corporations working as idiotically as each other. The incentives not to work are massive, wages are low, and why try if you get nothing from it.
Plus Morgan and Co. who are pushing this are not even close to being socialist – so do we add disengious to your mantel as well BM?
The link is about this topic but TLDR version is,
* with a job guarantee the govt sets up a programme where it provides a full time at minimum wage job to anybody who applies.
* positions may be setup into the programme either to meet community goals or via applications from the non profit sector for help. Such roles dont really become redundant due to technology.
* during a recession the recently unemployed would be expected to shift from the main sector of the jobs market to the jg sector so fewer people are actually unemployed over this period.
I dont think my own limited imagination is a particularly good source and as i said positions can be created via community engagement.
*we have these guys on the trains who perform some kind of security function. Nobody wants to automate there jobs.
* regular beach litter removals. Nobody wants to automate that.
* tree planting programmes. We dont want to automate that to reduce its carbon footprint.
Without the profit motive much of the automation pressure goes away as well here.
I see the benefits and definitely think it is something that should be in the mix for consideration. I just worry that we go back to the days of seeing people leaning on shovels next to the motorway all day and the negative connotations that come along with that. It was one of the classic examples of why public works were considered inefficient waste.
I also worry about how it deals with the issue of those who carry out work like raising children or caring for family members. I suppose they could be considered one of the minimum wage jobs that people are paid for.
The same way this mornings herald claimed that the 49% of jobs that could be lost to automation over the next 10 to 20 years will be partially off set by new jobs. Ignores the fact the last new career to be created was computer programmer back in the 1960’s. There has literally not been a new classification of job since. Everything is just a repackaging of old skills and will account for automation in only very minor terms.
I suspect that the ever increasing issue of unemployment and inequality shows the current thinking has no idea of what “the way” is to deal with automation.
As funny as that is if we had a decent tax system it would. However not in the classic employee wages but in increased tax intake from a company having increased profits by not having to pay an employee.
Automation is not evil. We just need to work out how to work and economy where it becomes more abundant.
Just say on robot replaces 3 people worth 50k, the robot has a salary of 150k and pays tax on that.
Bit of a win for every one, government still gets the same amount of tax, businesses don’t have the hassle of staff and the population then can just chill out at the beach on their 50k a year universal wage.
The same system w’eve currently got could be kept and the best thing about is that it’s incremental.
If you can handle that sort of hypothetical gymnastics the concept of a universal UBI, or negative tax bracket should be pretty self explanatory as positive for society.
But being the typical National supporter, you are really trying to create the most complex system that you can, with plenty of loopholes to be exploited.
Wouldn’t it be better to have the simplest system possible that allows society and business to evolve into the future automated environment. A casual glance over the way we responded to the changes in New Zealand’s economy in the 70’s will show that proscribed and bureaucratic solutions aren’t the way to go.
It’s a credit to the Labour party that they’ve looked at this, seen that it’s going to happen and are trying to have a debate about how we transition to a society and economy that is as good, and preferably better than the one we have now. And that could involve transitioning 40% of our workforce, at all levels, to an entirely new way of living.
I reckon my idea is better.
You could even make it retrospective and introduce it now, get all the businesses that have already cut jobs due to automation.
This is is about having a UBI, but funding it via the technology that is putting people out of work.
Businesses have to pay wages as it is, so paying a robot wage won’t be an issue.
There’s still big positives for business to automate there’s no need for osh regulations, safety equipment, holidays, sick leave etc.
Of course some people will try and game it, you just have annual auditing system in place to catch the ones that do.
Sorry, just makes me think “Supplementary Minimum Payments”
The solution is deal with the transition of society, not create an impediment to the transition. Your tax will just create avoidance / evasion and other stupid choices.
Negative tax brackets seem to be a more elegant solution if you’re going to do through the tax system.
Have to say BM its a very creative and sort of weird concept you have brought up – my partner has just said the tax accountants would have a field day with it. I can see the logic of it in a “out of left field” sort of way. It certainly would help to pay for the UBI and employers would be better off without holiday pay, sickness leave etc that you mentioned. Maybe you should lodge a patent on it, it could possibly/impossibly be implemented in the future – you would make a fortune on the concept!
It’s the “current thinking” of this government, in which case the only response I can offer is: “you call that thinking?”
Also, how do you know the rise in unemployment is an entrenched phenomenon and not the predictable – and predicted* – consequence of National Party corruption and incompetence?
*the “bonfire of right wing politics”, as Helen Clark put it.
the only countries that have Job Guarantees are generally speaking socialist / communist countries.
You had a guaranteed job in East Germany, Hungary, Jugoslavia (before Milosovitch) etc etc. It might not was the job you wanted, but it was the job you did.
You also had waiting lists for cars, houses, food, etc etc etc.
But you had a job, and when you ran out of materials you stopped working. Very much like North Korea today.
So to say that a UBI is socialist, but Governmental Workprogammes are not is a bit short sighted.
Essentially, if the predictions of the worlds Kassandas come true, we will have something like an UBI as it would be easier and less costly to administer. We will also have to have social housing with rent caps and livelong tenure (unless we really want 60-80% of our population living as transients – and with an average tenanacy agreement lasting no longer than max 12 month we already have a large % of our population living as transients), and we will have to have free clinics for healthcare etc etc . If we want people to live, and participate in society.
Or we can go with the free market who will fix it all by itself, cause magic.
“British economist Paul Ormerod (quote from the Death of Economics) noted that the economies that avoided high unemployment in the 1970s maintained a:
… sector of the economy which effectively functions as an employer of last resort, which absorbs the shocks which occur from time to time, and more generally makes employment available to the less skilled, the less qualified.
He concluded that societies with a high degree of social cohesion (such as Austria, Japan and Norway) were willing to broaden their concept of costs and benefits of resource usage to ensure that everyone had access to paid employment opportunities.” Bill Mitchell
Thats an interesting quote Sabine because i wasnt aware that Austria Japan and Norway were communist countries. Thanks for the history lesson.
Ensuring access to employment is not giving a guarantee to employment.
We all have ‘access to employment’, as the drones at WINZ would assure you, but you have no guarantee that you get a job.
However, if you were to follow the premise that paying a UBI is socialist as in communism, than i suggest that you also look at providing a guaranteed job via the state as socialist. That was all I pointed out.
I am also quite sure that despite providing access to employment Austria, Japan and Norway have unemployed people.
So that access to employment is obviously not helping all people.
While a UBI would help all people. The government then could still provide access to employment as far there still is employment.
In a JG scheme (and they happen/happened in many places, including effectively if not in name in NZ in past eras) you go to WINZ and not only do they assure you access to employment, they send you on to an actual employer. Then WINZ pay your wages. That’s why its called a job guarantee, you go there and you are guaranteed getting a job (at least at the minimum wage).
Yes, some people won’t want to work for minimum wage. They might prefer searching for better paid work for example so we should still expect to see some unemployment rates in places with such a scheme.
I don’t really care how you want to label a JG scheme or a UBI scheme (socialist or capitalist or free market or whatever). That’s not an interesting question in any way. I am pretty sure I didn’t label either myself in any comments.
Every baby boomer I know is planning to live to 100.
They’ll probably make it too.
Was that really part of the conversation? I thought Winston’s lot were the generation before the baby boomers. My lot in fact. Just ahead of 1946.
“Every baby boomer I know is planning to live to 100.”
Unless of course you’re Maori or blue collar or have had a disability all your life…. In many of those cases you’d love to get even a year of NZS.
Was that really part of the conversation?
Yep. It assumes property values will stay where they are now or increase. In many places they are already decreasing as that generation starts to die off. Years of neglect in rural communities means lack of jobs, lack of hospitals, lack of all sorts of things is resulting in lower property values or an inability to sell.
Some large urban areas might get propped up by immigration and foreign buyers but it ain’t true everywhere.
When I asked “was it really part of the conversation” I was meaning the one between Key and Banks. Did they really say that Winston’s followers were dying off?
A question for all those people who think if we just avoid antagonising the Muslim world (whatever that term means) then we won’t be subjected to terror attacks.
What has Belgium been up to recently that made it a target?
“What has Belgium been up to recently that made it a target?”
I suspect you haven’t thought very carefully about these matters if you ask that question.
The most obvious response to your question would be the arrest of the suspect in the Paris bombings last November – as has already been suggested by media commentators (such as the person interviewed on Morning Report today who thought it likely that terrorist attacks had been ‘brought forward’ in response to that arrest).
But there’s another point you’re missing. In one sense perhaps ‘we’ (in the West) are all the same to ‘them’ and, more tellingly, that perception is reinforced by several observations.
First, Belgium is the headquarters of the EU (one of the bombs was close to the EU headquarters) and the EU has, within its union, several states who have less than glorious records of management, intervention and even rule in the Middle East.
Second, many of the messages from other European and Western leaders have reiterated a position emphasised in similar messages of condolence in the past – that these attacks are an attack on ‘all of us’ and an attack on ‘our’ values – not just those of Belgium.
So it seems that by targeting a ‘soft target’ like Belgium the terrorists have, indeed, hit back at those they perceive as having ‘antagonised’ them. That is, the leaders of the UK, US, France, etc. themselves seem to think that ‘they’ were as much the target as Belgium.
Having said all of that these attacks are utterly reprehensible and unforgivable – though quite explicable and not surprising.
Profile of National
.
Yesterday John Key wanted to steal money from us – to pay for his Defamation Crime. Possibly up to NZD1,5 Million. Who knows?
He will be visiting Mr Obama very soon. I hope he won’t attempt to steal money from him ! But again – who knows?
Also, do you think he will keep his creepy hands away from Obama’s daughters? Anybody’s guess I expect. He harasses girls in his own suburb, with impunity.
How gutter low the National party of NZ really is. Mismanagers; bullies; self centered; arrogant; thieves – stealing assets from the common man; secretive over incredibly stupid TPPA negotiations; flogging off NZ land and resources to foreigners (to get kick backs for national party funds); callous about jobs and workers conditions. And so on and so on …
They say Piggy Muldoon another national politician was bad. At least he was not evil like Key and and his accomplice English.
I can’t remember a National govt that improved the lives of ordinary Kiwi’s, I know in the late 60’s they had a near zero unemployment rate, but since then they haven’t managed much better than 5 or 6% at the low end and over 10% at the high end.
You probably remember the Shipley govt, took $20 off every pensioner to give the wealthiest a tax break, more older NZ’ers left for Aussie than ever before.
In five decades of observation of NZ govts, the Clark govt delivered the greatest benefits to this country that I’ve ever seen, nearly everyone had a job, and when I said everyone, that included the spouse, the redistribution of wealth to the lower incomes through tax benefits (working for families), investment in infrastructure, rebuilt the local Hospital where I live after the Nats threatened to close it and increased the capacity of all the schools by adding additional class rooms, and now all we hear is that Labour destroyed the country, most can’t remember that far back to be able to compare too today.
The media has done it’s best to undermine Labour, and the weak minded have “bought” the BS, hook line and sinker, the reality is that I’m one of the over 200k Kiwi’s that left NZ since 2011 for a “Brighter future”, and would like to return, but I just can’t stomach Key, and until I see Kiwi’s waking up to the BS being fed to them, I don’t see any improvement in NZ.
The first time I saw Key on TV, I new he couldn’t be trusted, that was in 2006, ten years ago, and guess what, he’s proven over and over again exactly that.
So, come on Labour and come on Andrew Little, honesty IS a virtue.
they generally were at the start of the co-op model, right up until trading in shares was opened up to allow ‘capital raising’, hence the NZX funds trading in shares……so now you have suppliers, who have given over the rights to the share income (but not ownership of shares per se) who are having payments cut at the same as record profits are being made and paid out as divedends…
I’d suggest they are very much in the minority. On Morning report this morning on the radio a news item suggested the vast majority of shareholders who will receive the benefit are farmers.
Possibly, although the crucial statistic is not how many of the shareholders are farmers but ‘how many of the farmers producing the milk are shareholders?’
At the extreme, it is theoretically possible that all shares are owned by one farmer; hence all shareholders would be farmers but all but one of the farmers producing the milk would not be shareholders.
I don’t know the answer to what would be the ‘correct’ question to settle this point.
The term “supplier” has also been used to describe contractors of late as well, which is muddying the water as well. Don’t know if it’s a deliberate distraction, or by whom, but very poor communication by Fontera for allowing it to happen.
For those who have an interest in the strange happenings at Rangiora High School, the Listener has a detailed post. Did the Ministry go through all this to get their hands on the millions held by the 100 year old investment Held by Rangiora High? How can they do all this to a successful school, lead by an industrious hard working Principal.
“For Peggy Burrows, that pathway has been cut abruptly short. With lawyer Richard Harrison (who represented Christchurch Girls’ High School principal Prue Taylor when she was sacked in 2012), Burrows will challenge her dismissal.” http://www.listener.co.nz/current-affairs/education/school-daze/
Well, some people commenting on this site seem to be proposing that the Government should be guaranteeing everyone a job. Those commenters would applaud your theory.
Last time i checked being a Lawyer still required a qual. Did the TPPA remove that for their disputes process? Quite happy for joe blogs kiwi to arbitrate on TPPA disputes actually for a job. Dont think Disney has that in mind however.
I really don’t understand where the Labour party is going ? Is it $200 that’s enough to live on, I am not sure pensioners agree, Is it the living wage or do they have a plan to guarantee everyone a job and pay them living wage plus a Universal income ? Can someone enlighten this pensioner with a vote, please!
“Can someone enlighten this pensioner”.
I don’t think anyone can help you at the moment. Robertson, who seems to trying to be the proud daddy, seems to give a different story every time he talks about it.
I think he is hurriedly trying to read and understand what Morgan’s book said but it seems to be a bit too hard for him. He then seems to be trying to amend the details on the fly if someone points out politically impossible bits.
If they did what Morgan advocates, and you own your own home, you are going to be bitten on the bum. Only my opinion of course
Come back in about 2018.
Do you believe Morgans book position is reasonable? It seems to be saying there need to be some one off modifications to taxation etc… which will then modify prices so some imbalances an inequities are corrected and then stuff will be sorted out from then on because all that stuff was sorted to begin with.
This kind of thinking reminds me of the prognosis for the EU where about a decade ago consensus was no country really needed to run a 3% or higher deficit (until they did). It seems a very static view of the economy to begin with.
“I don’t think anyone can help you at the moment. Robertson, who seems to trying to be the proud daddy, seems to give a different story every time he talks about it.”
Citation needed. Link or it didn’t happen. We already know you are a liar so I’m happy to add this to the list if you can’t back up your statement.
Oh for some actual coherent policies consistent with socialist principles from Labour. The last link is interesting because there was supposed to be an attempt to have the members of the Standard influence policy. We were asked for suggestions even.
Can’t see many of those suggestions anywhere near Labour’s policies.
(Also reminded me how much I miss Xtasy’s contributions).
The year of the manifesto, which turned into the year of keeping your powder dry, which turned into the year of mainly neo-liberal policy, which turned into the year of losing my vote, which turned into the year of losing the election was just bonkers.
Well there’s little evidence that Labour is pushing the needs of beneficiaries and workers. 2012 was the year of the manifesto. 2013 was supposed to be the year of the policy.
But, as our own Labour grandee Mike Smith has pointed out, 2013 is also the year Labour develops its policies
I think that’s where The Standard could be of some use in that it offers a platform for members to suggest and test policy at a national level any time they want.
Tom, a UBI is meant to ensure that everyone has a basic income and doesn’t starve etc. It’s not become replacement, it’s a system of income security that is more fair and efficient than what we have now. Don’t get too caught up on the $200 thing. For one, there are lots of different UBI models and it depends on what other ways people have of getting income. Labour are focussed on workers and the disappearance of a regular 40hr/wk jobs and a high need for flexibility. They’re not saying everyone can live on $200/wk, they’re saying its a stop gap for people that didn’t earn this week. People who don’t do paid work (retirees, I’ll and disabled people, solo parents etc) will need to be taken into account too.
Have a look at the figures in my comment up thread and you can see how it might work via tax. Yes it’s different than the living wage and job creation both of which Labour also intend to do.
You can basically ignore everything alwyn is saying as he is lying about Labour and trolling the site to derail the conversation.
What way do you think it will go? I’m a bit worried low turnout amongst the young will make it closer than people thing. I may spiral into depression if we really change our flag to that childish design.
Polls suggest on average a 60% to 40% preference for the New Zealand flag. Something remarkable would have to happen for the challenger to win on the basis of that polling.
My initial thought is the very young (non-voting age) are very supportive of the New Zealand flag as are young adults in general. I imagine if young adults took the time to participate in surveys to register their support for the flag of New Zeland then they would take the time to vote. Perhaps this sector is the one which has lifted the turnout in the second referendum?
If so then John Key’s cheap looking tea towel will not stand a chance.
It’s a shame that belatedly addressing roading infrastructure could be viewed by RWNJs as a legacy of John Key. Particularly with respect to the open tap immigration policy adopted by his government.
The first one on that list hasn’t even been started yet, ffs.
Haha, what an unbelievably shit legacy. That’s even before the next generation find they can’t afford the fuel price to use the RONS or there simply isn’t enough oil to go around anymore. Communities like Kapiti end up with a unused aqueduct type structure and they’ll be wanting to tear it down.
Contrary to what the doomer cult you belong to says, people are going to be using cars for the foreseeable future.
New Zealanders will thank Key in years to come for building this fantastic roading network and not listening to the climate change, end of the world crowd.
I expect to see many statues of Key to be commissioned in the coming decades.
that would be about my guess too DTB….which if we ignore CC (as appears to be the case) is a disruptive change in itself when you consider the proportion of GDP it involves
“That will be Keys legacy, flag’s just a minor sideline.”
Yeah and what a waste of money that lot is. Like the Hamilton bypass, 17 bridges in a 22 km section costing just under a Billion dollars at this stage. Money that could be spent on better things like a fast modern wide track commuter service to Auckland with trains travelling at 200Km an hour..
It has been claimed that with the new Waikato Freeway it will cut 25 minutes off the journey. One billion dollars divided by 25 minutes give us 40000 dollars a minute just to join the fucking big traffic jam on the southern motorway that is STILL going to take you up to ONE hour to get into central Auckland,
According to Gary Numan, the song’s lyrics were inspired by an incident of road rage: “I was in traffic in London once and had a problem with some people in front. They tried to beat me up and get me out of the car. I locked the doors and eventually drove up on the pavement and got away from them. It’s kind of to do with that. It explains how you can feel safe inside a car in the modern world… When you’re in it, your whole mentality is different… It’s like your own little personal empire with four wheels on it”.
-Gary Numan
This explains the RWNJs’ approach to transport. They believe that to take your own personal fiefdom with you wherever you go is the way of the future.
Key’s legacy will be available as The Best of Last Week Tonight with John Oliver Vols. 1 & 2. If you order online from the US you won’t have to pay GST 😉
I’ve heard there’s a bonus clip called UFO in Waitangi; soundtrack courtesy of Eminem CC PL 2.0 (Creative Commons licence Pretty Legal generic).
It will be close, but evidence so far is that the challenger is playing catch up.
There is a huge amount of support for the New Zealand flag despite what John Key says anecdotally.
After all, when he’s discussing the subject face to face with someone, that person is likely a grovelling yes-man who will say what the prime minister wants to hear.
Well, their going to the polls on June 7, Aussie Fed Election, Turnbull has just restored the “Clean Energy Finance Corp” that Abbott tried to shut down, as an election sweetener, but the experts say, too little, too late.
Their will likely be a double disillusion, as the senate has refused to pass the govts policies.
And Tony (Abbott) is being as disruptive as he possibly can be, makes for some interesting politics over the next few months.
In Question Time today the Prime Minister was naturally facing questions about Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters and his dubious party financing arrangements, which seem to violate electoral finance law. Her response was to pretend that it was nothing to do with her, and that she is not responsible for ...
A prisoner stripped of their name, imprisoned for a secret crime after a secret trial, with all details legally suppressed for secret reasons. A story by Kafka or Dumas? China? No, its just the latest stage of Australian tyranny:An Australian citizen was prosecuted, convicted, and jailed in the ACT last ...
Stuff has more details on what New Zealand First's slush-fund has been funding, with much of the spending directly benefiting the party. Which makes it look a lot like hidden donations, rather than the completely-innocent-giant-pile-of-cash Winston is trying to portray it as. The Electoral Commission is now investigating, but Simon ...
I've joked before about how hosting international summits effectively turns part of your country into a police state for the duration. Well, New Zealand is hosting APEC in 2021, with events throughout the year in Christchurch, Wellington, and Auckland. And the government has put up a bill to give itself ...
Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change.If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nzI saw an article claiming that “king tides” will increase in ...
It has been revealed that firing ranges used by the NZDF while deployed to the Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) in Bamyan Province, Afghanistan, contained unexploded ordnance that caused numerous deaths and injuries after the NZDF withdrew the PRT in April 2013. In 2014 seven children were killed when an unidentified ...
Didn't See It Coming: NZ Herald columnist Lizzie Marvelly's latest column merits serious scrutiny because such a clear example of anti-democratic thinking is encountered only rarely on the pages of the daily press. Which is not to say that the elitism which lies at the heart of such social disparagement ...
by Gearóid Ó Loingsigh Initially it was reported that in an aerial bombardment that took place on August 30th seven children were massacred; the figure then went up to eight and then on November 11th Noticias Uno reported that, according to people from the community in close proximity to the ...
A lot has happened since the UN’s report on 1.5ºC was released in October 2018. New Zealand’s Zero Carbon Bill has passed, and enshrines the 1.5ºC goal in law. The UK and France have also legally strengthened their targets to Net Zero 2050. The School Strike For Climate and Extinction ...
Next year is an election year, and Labour needs money to fund its campaign. So naturally, they're selling access:Labour is charging wealthy business figures $1500-a-head to lunch with Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern at its annual conference later this month. [...] On the weekend beginning November 29th, around 800 delegates will ...
Yesterday the government announced its changes to tenancy laws, including an end to no-cause evictions, limits on rent increases, and anonyminity for tenants who defend their rights against bad landlords (sadly necessary because landlords are scum who maintain blacklists of "uppity" tenants). They're all good moves, and have resulted in ...
In 2003 New Zealand sent a Provincial Reconstruction Team to Afghanistan to support America's doomed war there. While there, they conducted regular weapons practice on local firing ranges, littering the landscape with unexploded ammunition. These ranges weren't secure - they're on land used by locals for animal herding - so ...
Green MP Gareth Hughes has announced he will retire at the election. Its understandable - he's been there ten years, and wants to actually see his children grow up rather than miss it while drowning in the toxic parliamentary sewer. But his departure is also a huge loss for the ...
Words and images by Jacqui GibsonGone are Auckland Museum’s days of doing science using a museum-centric academic approach, after Māori land rights holders Ngāti Kuri gave the museum an ultimatum.Tom Trnski holding a fossilised whale tooth from the Far North.Aussie-born Head of Natural Sciences at Auckland Museum ...
MediaWorks announced in October 2019 that it intended to sell off its struggling television business and cancel or cut back on several popular local programmes, including New Zealand Today, Married at First SightNew Zealand and 7 Days. Its radio and outdoor advertising arms are currently performing well, but MediaWorks’ ...
Westminster voting intention:CON: 44% (+3)LAB: 28% (-1)LDEM: 14% (-1)BREX: 6% (-)via @OpiniumResearch, surveyed this weekChgs. w/ 08 Nov— Britain Elects (@britainelects) 16 November 2019 This, of course, doesn't look good. Labour have been chucking big, headline grabbing policies left, right and centre ... Well, maybe not right. Left, left ...
Some readers may remember that I mentioned last year that I was applying for NZ citizenship. I filled out the paperwork and had my original citizenship interview in February. Everything went well until they discovered that, because I had spent five months in the US in 2017, I had not ...
by Deirdre O’Neill It is becoming quite acceptable for certain sections of the left to declare that people like me – women who are ‘gender critical’ – should not be allowed in leftist or anarchist spaces. Leaving aside the arrogance and implicit authoritarianism of this claim, its lack of critical ...
There is an article in The Conversation, written by Jeremy P. Shapiro (Adjunct Assistant Professor of Psychological Sciences, Case Western Reserve University), about what he sees as the psychologically-based underpinnings of three main matters that seem to vex people all around the planet. The article is titled “The Thinking ...
. . Blogger Martyn Bradbury has won his case against unreasonable search and surveillance against the NZ Police; and subsequent Police attempts to produce evidence in secrecy, in a closed Court. His case highlights a disturbing growing trend in Aotearoa New Zealand for State power to be used against ...
The Committee of Disobedient Women has intercepted an email from Dr Emma Eejut, Senior Lecturer in Sociology, Massey University to the university’s Vice-Chancellor, Jan Thomas. Dear Jan, Thank you for your courageous move. I think 10 pages of blether** should tie any of the students game enough to try holding ...
That's the only response to the findings of the Ombudsman's investigation into LGOIMA practices at the Christchurch City Council:My investigation identified serious concerns about the Council’s leadership and culture, and its commitment to openness and transparency. In particular, Council staff raised concerns with me about various methods employed by some ...
NZ First seems to be nakedly trying to enrich itself from public office:A powerful New Zealand First figure helped establish a forestry company that then pushed for money from two key funding streams controlled by a New Zealand First Minister. An RNZ investigation has found Brian Henry, lawyer for Winston ...
Behrouz Boochani is an award winning author and journalist. He is also a refugee, who for the past six years has been detained in Australia's offshore gulag on Manus Island, and in Papua New Guinea. But last night, with the cooperation of the WORD Christchurch festival and Amnesty International, he ...
Different Strokes: If a multicultural immigration policy imposes no obligation on immigrant communities to acknowledge and ultimately embrace their host nation’s most cherished traditions and values, then how is that nation to prevent itself from being reduced to a collection of inward-looking and self-replicating ethnic and cultural enclaves?THE COALITION GOVERNMENT’S ...
Protective Zone: Reading the rules and guidelines released by Massey University, it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that its governing body considers the whole concept of free speech a disruptive threat to the orderly imparting of orthodox academic knowledge.IN TRUE ORWELLIAN fashion, Massey University has announced its commitment to ...
Farmers held a hate-march on Parliament today, complete with MAGA hats, gun-nut signs, and gendered insults. While supposedly about a grab-bag of issues - including, weirdly, mental health - it was clear that the protest was about one thing, and one thing only: climate change. And specifically, forestry "destroying" rural ...
The Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security released their annual report today, and I've been busy reading through it. In amongst the usual review of what they've been doing all year, there's a few interesting bits. For example, a discussion on "agency retention and disposal of information", which points out that ...
Recently more than 150 post-graduate students and young scientists presented an open letter to the Green Party via The Spinoff, encouraging them to reconsider their position on genetic modification. Their target is tackling climate change issues.[1] Can any party continue to be dismissive about genetic modification (GM) contributing to ...
by Deirdre O’Neill Under Thatcher and then Blair and continuing up until our contemporary moment, the working class has seen its culture slowly and progressively destroyed. The change from an industrial society to a service society produced a marked shift in focus from the working class as the backbone of ...
Since 2013, the Australian government has detained refugees without trial in Pacific gulags, where they are abused, tortured, and driven to suicide. The policy is not just an abuse of human rights and possible crime against humanity; it has also had a corrosive effect on the states Australia uses as ...
It seems fair to say that we currently live in a problematic political moment in world history. Democracies are in decline and dictatorships are on the rise. Primordial, sectarian and post-modern divisions have re-emerged, are on the rise or have been accentuated by political evolutions of the moment such as ...
Last month, Greenpeace head Russel Norman surrendered his speaking slot at an EPA conference to student climate activist Sorcha Carr, who told the EPA exactly what she thought of them. It was a bold move, which confronted both regulators and polluters (or, as the EPA calls them, "stakeholders") with the ...
The core principle supposedly underlying New Zealand's electoral finance regime is transparency: parties can accept large donations from rich people wanting to buy policy, but only if they tell the public they've been bought. Most parties abide by this, so we know that TOP was wholly-owned by Gareth Morgan, and ...
Today is a Member's Day, probably the second-to-last one of the year, and its a big one, with the Third Reading of David Seymour's End of Life Choice Bill. last Member's Day it was reported back from committee, after MPs voted narrowly to make it subject to a (rules TBA) ...
Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change.If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nzThe growth of the human population over the last 70 ...
by The Council of Disobedient Women In her excellent oral submission to the Abortion reform select committee on 31st October on behalf of Otago University’s Department of Public Health, historian and public health researcher Hera Cook stated: “We would ask that the committee not use the term ‘pregnant persons’ and ...
by Don Franks In 1957, E M Forster wrote, of his greatest work: “The India described in ‘A Passage to India’ no longer exists either politically or socially. Change had begun even at the time the book was published ( 1924) and during the following quarter of a century it ...
The Referendums Framework Bill was due back from select committee today. But there's no report on it. Instead, the bill has been bounced back to the House under Standing order 29593) because the Committee didn't bother to produce one. They probably tried. But given the membership of the committee (which ...
Two years into New Zealand’s Labour-led government, the long-delayed Zero Carbon Bill became law on 7 November. Passed essentially unanimously, the lengthy public debates and political manoeuvring faded away until the final passage was even anticlimactic: Flipping through the @nzstuff@DomPost I was starting to wonder if I’d dreamt ...
Now the Zero Carbon Bill is law, what's next? Obviously, the ETS changes currently before select committee are going to be the next battleground. But we're also going to get a good idea of where we're going, and if the progress the Zero Carbon Act promises is good enough, during ...
Grant PearceThe effects of the current Australian bushfires in New South Wales and Queensland (and also again in California) are devastating and far-reaching. To date, the fires have resulted in several lives being lost and many homes and properties destroyed. Here in New Zealand, the impacts have been only ...
A passing comment in a post the other day about the labour force participation rates of older people prompted me to pull down the fuller data and see what we could see about various participation rates over the decades since the HLFS began in 1986. As it happens, the ...
Distract And Divert: The rise of what we have come to call “Identity Politics” represents the ideological manifestation of the ruling class’s objective need to destroy class politics, and of the middle-class’s subjective need to justify their participation in the process.THE RELIEF of the ruling class can only be imagined. ...
"I saw a newspaper picture,From the political campaignA woman was kissing a child,Who was obviously in pain.She spills with compassion,As that young child'sFace in her hands she gripsCan you imagine all that greed and avariceComing down on that child's lips?" ...
Dr Matt Boyd, Prof Michael Baker, Prof Nick WilsonThe Global Health Security Index which considers pandemic threats has just been published. Unfortunately, NZ scores approximately half marks (54/100), coming in 35th in the world rankings – far behind Australia. This poor result suggests that the NZ Government needs to ...
The Zero Carbon Act is inadequate, with a weak methane target designed to give farmers a free ride. But it turns out it could have been worse: Climate Change Minister James Shaw was so desperate to get National on board, he wanted to gut that target, and leave it in ...
The Herald reprints an Australian story on a couple of tragic deaths in Bali from drinking cocktails that had methanol in them. The story argues that methanol is likely the result of home distillation. But what the young tourists were experiencing was far from a hangover. They’d consumed a toxic cocktail ...
Last month, the police announced a trial of specialist roaming armed units, which would drive round (poor, brown) areas in armoured SUVs, armed to the teeth. When they announced the trial, they told us it was about having armed police "ready to attend major incidents at any time if needed". ...
Spain went to the polls today in the second elections this year, after the Socialists (who had come to power in a confidence vote, then gone to the polls in April) rejected the offer of a coalition with the left-wing PoDemos, and instead decided to gamble n a better outcome ...
A couple of days ago I attended (and spoke at) the University of Waikato’s “LearnFest” event. There were lots of talks and sessions on very diverse aspects of teaching, mostly at tertiary level. One was by Myra Williamson from Te Piringa Faculty of Law here at Waikato, on Contract Cheating ...
There will be a transit of Mercury – the planet Mercury will pass across the face of the Sun – taking place at sunrise in New Zealand on Tuesday, 12th November. It was by observing such an event 250 years ago that James Cook and his scientist colleagues were able ...
Since becoming the world’s first openly transexual mayor and member of parliament, Georgina Beyer has been recognised as a trailblazer for trans rights. Daphna Whitmore talks with her about where she sees the current trans movement We start out talking about legislation the government put on hold that would have ...
If FFNZ really put their faith in “Top Medical Journals” they would now be amending their billboards to recognise new research results. Image from FFNZ but updated to agree with the latest research. ...
National Messiah? Chris Luxon identifies himself as an evangelical Christian. If he is genuine in this self-characterisation, then he will take every opportunity his public office provides to proselytise on behalf of his faith. He will also feel obliged to bear witness against beliefs and practices he believes to be ...
I'm going to make a Reckless Prediction™ that the Tories have 'topped out' in the 'poll of polls' / Britain Elects multipoll tracker at about 38%, and in the next week we will start to see Labour creep up on them.In fact, we might just be seeing the start of ...
by The Council of Disobedient Women Lizzie Marvelly: “I may have missed this… has @afterellen gone all terf-y? Or am I reading something incorrectly? “ https://twitter.com/LizzieMarvelly/status/1191840059105742849 After Ellen is a lesbian website that is unashamedly pro-lesbian, as you’d expect. So why is Ms Marvelly so bothered about lesbians having their ...
Did you know there once was a time when it was illegal to be a gypsy (aka Romani) in Britain?That was between 1530, when the Egyptians Act was passed, and 1856, when it was repealed.Amongst other things, the act forbade the entry of 'Egyptians' into England, ordered those already there ...
Some days I sit and think, “what will I write…?” What do you say when you get to 1000 posts? Maybe you just start where you are, diverge to where this all began, then offer a collection of reader’s favourite posts, and a few of your own? (And throw in ...
Counter-Puncher: The “activists” and “radicals” (his own words) from the Indian community who took such strong exception to Shane Jones’ remarks about Immigration NZ’s treatment of arranged marriages, may end up bitterly regretting their intervention. Jones is not the sort of person who turns the other cheek to his critics.SHANE ...
In the spirit of Remember, remember the fifth of November, let's keep this in mind FOREVER.
Oh dear. Extraordinary interview on PM with Andrew Bridgen and @EvanHD just now. Bridgen was defending Jacob Rees Mogg’s Grenfell comments. Evan asked him if JRM had meant to say he would have left ...
Collision Course? In conditions of ideological white-out, the international bankers’ “Woop-Woop! Pull Up!” warning may have come too late to save global capitalism.WHAT DOES IT MEAN when international bankers are more willing to embrace radical solutions than our politicians and their electors? At both the International Monetary Fund and the ...
Pertussis (whooping cough) is a conundrum. It is a disease that was described hundreds of years ago and the bacteria that causes it (Bordetella pertussis) isolated in 1906. We have had vaccines for about 80 years but this disease is defiant in the face of human immunity. I wanted to ...
The Zero Carbon Bill has just passed its third reading, uanimously. In the end, National supported it - but we all know they'll turn around and gut it the moment they regain power. Meanwhile, I guess ACT's David Seymour didn't even bother to show up. I am on record as ...
Dr Lindsay Robertson, Dr Jerram Bateman, Professor Janet HoekMembers of the public health community hold divergent views on how access to vaping products or electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) products should be arranged. Some believe ENDS should be as widely available as smoked tobacco and argue for liberal ...
When the Police were trying to cover up for the National Party over Dirty Politics, they went all-in with their abuses of power. They illegally search Nicky Hager's house, violating his journalistic privilege and invading his privacy. They unlawfully acquired Hager's bank records. They did the same to left-wing blogger ...
Last month, in response to a wave of protests by Extinction Rebellion, the British government purported to ban their protests from the whole of London. It was a significant interference with the freedoms of expression and assembly, and another sign of the country's decline into tyranny. But now, a court ...
Last year, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security reported on significant problems with the intelligence warrant system. While they were unwilling to declare any warrant "irregular" (meaning unlawful) due to the recent law change, they were also not willing to give the system a clean bill of health. Now, they've ...
The National Party has come out in support of encouraging greater vaccination uptake. But it sure isn’t the way I’d do it. National’s suggested docking the benefits of those on benefit whose kids aren’t keeping up with their vaccinations. Some in National have suggested extending that to payments under Working ...
Feeding The Flames: It is simply not enough to demand an end to “corruption”, or “inequality”, or the overbearing influence of the authorities in Beijing. These are just “lowest common denominator” demands: the sort of slogans that pull people onto the streets. They are not a plan.WHERE’S THE PLAN? Across ...
Clayton Mitchell, Spokesperson for Consumer Affairs The ‘wheel clamping’ Bill that will cap clamper fees to $100 passed its third readinginParliament today. New Zealand First welcomes The Land Transport (Wheel Clamping) Amendment Bill to combat predatory wheel clamping behaviour in what is currently a largely unregulated business. Cowboy clampers are: gouging ...
Jenny Marcroft, Spokesperson for Health New Zealand First welcomes the passage of the Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission Bill through its first reading in Parliament. “Today’s progress takes serious action on the mental health and addiction crisis the country is facing,” says New Zealand First Health Spokesperson Jenny Marcroft. “The re-establishment ...
Mark Patterson, Spokesperson for Primary Industries Today the Government announced the delivery of the promise to protect New Zealand interests by applying a new National Interest Test to the sales of our most sensitive and high risk assets to overseas buyers. This further strengthening of the Overseas Investment Act will ...
The Coalition Government is delivering on its promise to protect New Zealanders’ interests by applying a new national interest test to the sales of our most sensitive and high-risk assets to overseas buyers. Under current Overseas Investment Act (OIA) rules, assets such as ports and airports, telecommunications infrastructure, electricity and ...
Rt Winston Peters, Leader of New Zealand First Allegations raised this morning by Stuff Limited / Fairfax concern a party matter but I am confident that New Zealand First has operated within electoral laws, now and for the last 27 years. Declarable donations were declared to the Electoral Commission. Our ...
The chairman of the Upper North Island Supply Chain Strategy (UNISCS) working group, Wayne Brown, has hit back at critics of his group’s recommendations to relocate the Ports of Auckland cargo operations to Whangarei’s deepwater port of Northport. The working group's recommendation to close Auckland waterfront to all but cruise ...
Jenny Marcroft MP, Spokesperson for Health New Zealand First backs the public to decide on the End of Life Choice Bill via a referendum at the 2020 General Election. The Bill, with New Zealand First’s referendum provision incorporated, passed its final reading in Parliament this evening. New Zealand First Spokesperson for ...
Darroch Ball, Spokesperson for Justice New Zealand First is proud that a key Coalition Agreement commitment which will provide for a more transparent and effective criminal justice system has been realised. Legislation to establish the Criminal Cases Review Commission, an independent body focused on identifying and responding to possible miscarriages of ...
"Today we have made a choice that will leave a legacy... I hope that means that future generations will see that we, in New Zealand, were on the right side of history." - Jacinda Ardern, Third Reading of the Zero Carbon Bill ...
Darroch Ball, New Zealand First List MP A Member’s bill has been proposed that would provide income tax exemptions for all New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) personnel while on operational deployment overseas. The Income Tax (Exemption for Salary or Wages of NZDF Members on Active Deployment) Amendment Bill proposed by New Zealand First ...
Rt Hon Winston Peters, New Zealand First Leader New Zealand First is proud to have brought common sense to the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill, which passed its final reading in Parliament today. Party Leader Rt Hon Winston Peters says months of hard work went into negotiating a balanced ...
Jenny Marcroft MP, Spokesperson for Health New Zealand First has listened to calls to recognise paramedics as registered health professionals under the Health Practitioners’ Competence Assurance Act (the Act).Today, the Coalition Government announced plans for paramedics to be registered as health practitioners under the Act, and the establishment of a ...
We began the week by commemorating the New Zealand Wars and celebrating a major increase in the number of teachers. Then, we were busy supporting offenders into work and getting our rail back on track after years of underinvestment. And that's just the start! ...
In October I was sworn in as the Mayor of Lower Hutt.It’s the privilege of my life to serve Hutt people as their Mayor. There is something really special to be able to serve the community where I was raised, and where I live. ...
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters has welcomed the first reading of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation 2021 (APEC 2021) Bill in Parliament today. The temporary bill supports New Zealand’s security preparations for hosting the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Forum in 2021. “APEC is the leading economic and trade forum ...
The Government is making progress on improving the wellbeing of the one million New Zealanders under the age of 18,” Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said on World Children’s Day. The Government has today recommitted to the most widely ratified human rights treaty in history – the United Nation’s Convention on ...
Minister for Women Julie Anne Genter has released a new report celebrating the contribution of Māori women in business across Aotearoa New Zealand. “Māori women are leaders in our communities, they employ many people and support our economy and our communities,” Julie Anne Genter said. The report, Ngā wāhine kaipakihi: ...
Four parcels of land have been bought in Omokoroa, in the Western Bay of Plenty District, for an education facility that will accommodate both a primary and secondary school on a campus-like facility, Education Minister Chris Hipkins said today. Two parcels were acquired from private land owners and two were ...
1 million New Zealanders warmed by the Winter Energy Payment 36,000 families bank the Best Start Payment in first year 6,000 more families received the Family Tax Credit, 220,600 in total They receive an increase too – from an average of $117 to $157 a week for Inland Revenue clients, ...
New rules to clamp down on overzealous wheel clamping and extortionate fees charged in order to release a vehicle have passed their final stage in Parliament today. The Land Transport (Wheel Clamping) Amendment Bill has now passed its third reading. “These changes mean $100 will be the maximum wheel clamping ...
An independent Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission is a step closer after it unanimously passed its first vote in Parliament today. The Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission Bill lays the groundwork for establishing the Commission as a fully independent crown entity – delivering on a key recommendation of He Ara ...
We’ve improved border security with the NZeTA, New Zealand Electronic Travel Authority, which helps us to screen travellers for border and immigration risks off-shore before they travel to New Zealand. It was launched in August and became mandatory on 1 October 2019. More than 500,000 NZeTAs have been issued since ...
A proposed national plan of action to reduce the number of seabirds caught in fisheries is being circulated for public feedback. Fisheries Minister Stuart Nash and Conservation Minister Eugenie Sage say New Zealand is a global centre of seabird diversity with about 145 species in our waters. It has more ...
The Government is delivering on its promise to protect New Zealanders’ interests by applying a new national interest test to the sales of our most sensitive and high risk assets to overseas buyers. Associate Finance Minister David Parker said under current Overseas Investment Act rules, assets such as ports and ...
The Government is building special housing to accommodate one of Aotearoa’s greatest taonga- our kaumātua, says the Minister for Māori Development, Hon Nanaia Mahuta. Speaking at a National Kaumātua Service Providers Conference in Rotorua today, the Minister reinforced the importance kaumātua play in maintaining and passing on mātauranga Māori, knowledge, ...
Eleven men from a pilot forestry training programme for prisoners in Northland now have full time jobs or job offers upon release, Corrections Minister Kelvin Davis and Forestry Minister Shane Jones announced today. The ‘release to work’ programme was a collaboration between Te Uru Rākau and the Department of Corrections, ...
Minister of State Services Chris Hipkins today introduced into Parliament a Bill that will make it easier for the public service to tackle the biggest challenges facing Governments. The Bill represents the most significant change in the public service in 30 years. The State Sector Act 1988 will be repealed ...
The families of more than 416,000 students will be better off next year as their schools have signed up to the Government’s donations scheme, Education Minister Chris Hipkins said today. The scheme will see almost $62.5 million in additional Government funding go to schools nationwide next year. “I’m really pleased ...
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters has announced further support as the Government of Samoa responds to a serious measles outbreak. “New Zealand will deploy a further 18 vaccination nurses, bringing the total to 30 working in Samoa over the next four weeks,” Mr Peters said. “A New Zealand Medical Assistance ...
Fa’atalofa atu, malo e lelei, Kia ora koutou katoa Thank you to the Child Poverty Action Group for asking me to be here today to provide an update on some of the things that have been happening across my the social development portfolio. Can I firstly acknowledge the vast ...
***Please check against delivery*** Good morning everyone. It is a pleasure to be with you this morning to open this year’s New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing Conference and AGM. Firstly, thank you Dr Alan Jackson, NZTR Chair for your introduction. And let us acknowledge also: The NZTR Board; Dean McKenzie, Chair ...
The Government has delivered on its promise to the over one million New Zealanders who now rent to make it fairer and more secure, Associate Minister of Housing (Public Housing) Kris Faafoi has announced today. Both renters and landlords will benefit from the suite of practical changes to the Residential ...
A marine conservation milestone - the 20th anniversary of the establishment of Te Tapuwae o Rongokako Marine Reserve - is being celebrated today at a community event in Tairāwhiti/East Coast attended by the Minister of Conservation, Eugenie Sage. “The creation of this marine reserve in November 1999 was a game ...
The Government is asking the food industry to step up work to tackle obesity including reducing sugar, fat and salt in their products, better information for consumers, and tighter restrictions on advertising to children. Health Minister David Clark and Food Safety Minister Damien O’Connor have responded to a ...
ew, modern emergency department and outpatient facilities at Queenstown’s Lakes District Hospital mean better emergency care for the growing tourist mecca’s visitors and locals, says Health Minister David Clark. Today Dr Clark officially opened the hospital’s redeveloped Emergency Department and Outpatient facilities. The new facilities include: • An extended Emergency Department ...
Associate Health Minister Julie Anne Genter says today’s release of sexual and reproductive health data reinforces the significance of the Government’s commitment to providing free or very low-cost contraception. The Ministry of Health today published statistics from the Ministry of Health’s 2014/15 Health Survey. “It is important people can make ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters has announced that at the request of the Samoan Government, New Zealand will be providing further support to Samoa as it faces a worsening measles outbreak. “In response to a request from the people of Samoa, New Zealand is providing 3000 measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) ...
“The new Disability Action Plan 2019–2023 moves us towards the inclusive and accessible New Zealand that this government has committed to,” Minister for Disability Issues Carmel Sepuloni announced today. “The Action Plan was designed by disabled people, their family and supporters, the disability sector and government agencies. It will ensure ...
Third Singapore-New Zealand Defence Ministers’ Meeting 14 November 2019 Joint Statement 1. Defence Ministers Ron Mark and Dr Ng Eng Hen today conducted their third annual Singapore-New Zealand Defence Ministers’ Meeting in Singapore. 2. Building on the Enhanced Partnership signed between both countries in May this year, this annual meeting ...
A Bill to improve the court system’s response to sexual violence has passed its first reading in Parliament today. Justice Minister Andrew Little says the Sexual Violence Legislation Bill will reduce the trauma sexual violence complainants experience in court, while maintaining defendants’ fundamental rights and making sure the trial process ...
Streamlined payment practices are a step closer for Kiwi businesses with the formal launch of New Zealand’s e-Invoicing framework. Small Business Minister Stuart Nash says the government has now established the structure to enable automated and direct data exchange between the accounting systems of buyers and sellers. “The move to ...
Another 51 quarantine officers and four new biosecurity detector dog teams will help protect New Zealand from invasive pests and diseases this summer, says Biosecurity Minister Damien O’Connor. “The Government is delivering on its commitment to strengthen New Zealand’s biosecurity system and support our valuable primary sector “New Zealand’s flora, fauna ...
A new report has found New Zealand’s space sector contributed $1.69 billion to the economy in the last financial year and employs 12,000 people, Minister for Economic Development Phil Twyford announced today. The report by Deloitte was commissioned by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and shows New Zealand ...
Judge Coral Shaw has been appointed as the new Chair of the Royal Commission into Historical Abuse in State Care and in the Care of Faith-based Institutions, Internal Affairs Minister Tracey Martin announced today. "Judge Shaw, who is currently one of the inquiry commissioners, is extremely well qualified for the ...
The Government has confirmed its third major mental health facility upgrade since the Budget, this time at Palmerston North Hospital. The Prime Minister and Health Minister today visited MidCentral DHB to announce that $30 million has been allocated to upgrade its acute mental health facility. It follows earlier announcements in ...
The roll out of the National Bowel Screening Programme has reached the halfway mark, with 10 out of 20 District Health Boards now part of the programme. MidCentral DHB, which covers Palmerston North, Manawatu and surrounding districts, this week became the latest to DHB to offer free bowel screening to ...
The Government welcomes PHARMAC’s decision to fund a vaccine to protect young people from meningococcal disease from 1 December this year. “Meningococcal disease is a serious threat which people at higher risk should be protected from,” says Associate Health Minister Julie Anne Genter. “The combined pharmaceutical budget was increased by ...
Groups involved with innovative fisheries research projects are encouraged to apply for government support in the latest funding round from the Sustainable Food and Fibre Futures programme. Fisheries Minister Stuart Nash says the SFF Futures funding is designed to be flexible enough to support small or large projects across a ...
The Government has fixed an issue affecting how Immigration New Zealand has processed visa applications for culturally arranged marriages, which will now see a consistent process applied which ensures people with legitimate arranged marriages can visit New Zealand while also preventing any rorting of the system. Earlier this year Immigration ...
The Royal Commission into the Attacks on Christchurch Mosques will report back on 30 April 2020 to give it more time to hear submissions and consider information, Internal Affairs Minister Tracey Martin announced today. The Royal Commission was originally scheduled to report back to Government by 10 December 2019. “There has ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters will travel to Washington DC today to attend a ministerial meeting focused on defeating ISIS, and to continue pursuing New Zealand’s trade opportunities. Mr Peters will participate in a meeting of Foreign and Defence Ministers from key countries contributing to the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS. ...
The recently crowned Bird of the Year, the hoiho/yellow eyed penguin, is getting a much needed helping hand alongside more than 168 other community conservation projects announced Minister for Conservation Eugenie Sage today. 168 community conservation projects throughout New Zealand are benefiting from $8 million in government grants, including $500,000 ...
Controls on assault rifles and semi-automatic firearms are to be broadened to include some types of pistols, under changes to a bill currently making its way through Parliament. Police Minister Stuart Nash has tabled a Supplementary Order Paper to the Arms Legislation Bill, which is currently before a Select Committee ...
Minister of Defence Ron Mark will travel to Singapore today to conduct a counterpart visit and to co-chair the third annual Singapore-New Zealand Defence Ministers’ Meeting with his counterpart, Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen. “Singapore is one of our most important defence partners in the region, and our ...
A flash new playground has been unveiled on Parliament's grounds today, amid growing calls for the government to take more action to help lift Kiwi kids out of poverty. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne Two and a half months before the February 3 Iowa Democratic caucus, the highly regarded Selzer poll for CNN and the Des Moines Register gave Pete Buttigieg 25% in Iowa ...
A bill allowing overseas security agents to carry illegal guns while in New Zealand for the APEC summit has passed its first reading, without support from the Greens. ...
The Labour led coalition government is continuing to create homelessness. The impact of immigration, failure of Kiwibuild, and attacks on the rental market, have resulted in the opposite outcomes that New Zealanders were promised. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Danielle Every, Senior Research Fellow in social vulnerability and disasters, CQUniversity Australia If you live in a bushfire-prone area, you’ll likely have considered what you will do in the event of a bushfire. The decision, which should be made well in advance ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giovanni Di Virgilio, Research associate, UNSW Temperatures across many regions of Australia are set to exceed 40℃ this week, including heatwaves forecast throughout parts of eastern Australia, raising the spectre of more devastating bushfires. We have already heard warnings this fire season ...
Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) says that the Government’s Families Package Monitoring Report shows strong commitment to the intentions outlined in the Child Poverty Reduction Act, specifically with regard to reporting on progressing towards ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Giovanni Di Virgilio, Research associate, UNSW Temperatures across many regions of Australia are set to exceed 40℃ this week, including heatwaves forecast throughout parts of eastern Australia, raising the spectre of more devastating bushfires. We have already heard warnings this fire season ...
Today leading Māori health and public health organisations called on the Crown to meet its obligations under Te Tiriti o Waitangi as it drafts legislation for the regulation of cannabis. More than 50 Māori leaders joined the call for Māori rights ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Claudia Vickers, Director, Synthetic Biology Future Science Platform, CSIRO We need to revolutionise agriculture in the next 30 years. In 2050 we may have almost 10 billion people to feed. Farmland is already degraded by existing agriculture, and climate change is putting ...
Between now and March 2020 there is a small window where migrants who work in industries like aged care will have a realistic chance to get residency for the first time. This is due to ANZSCO skill levels being reclassified in Australia and some of those ...
Spinoff Art editor Mark Amery and photographer Ebony Lamb pay a visit to the internationally celebrated jewellery couple at their colonial cottage above Island Bay.The white horses are galloping in from the Cook Strait as photographer and singer-songwriter Ebony Lamb (Eb and Sparrow) and I roll in to Island Bay, ...
New powers to protect strategically-important assets from overseas investors are necessary due to the extremes of global capitalism, the government says. ...
Don’t get sucked in by the jovial banter and the sausage sizzle with Jacinda Ardern. Stephen Colbert is an international criminal mastermind who must be stopped. New Zealand is fizzing today with the exciting news that someone from another country has noticed that we exist. The Late Show with Stephen Colbert ...
When the 59 new constables of Wing 332 graduate on Thursday, one of them will be the 1,800th new constable to head to the frontline since October 2017. ...
Extending the amnesty period for the return of banned firearms is utterly pointless unless the compensation period is extended as well, says the Council of Licenced Firearms Owners (COLFO). ...
The Taxpayers Union denounced the role it seemed the government would require taxpayers to play in resolving the Ihumatao land dispute. But the union further claimed that taxpayers had contributed to the funding of an organisation which has been involved in the prolonged protest action at Ihumatao. This was a ...
Save the Children are extremely pleased by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s announcement today that the Government will recommit to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC). ...
David Farrier has been writing about clamping enthusiast Michael Organ for nearly three years. In this latest installment, the totally logical thing happens and the New Zealand government rolls up its sleeves.Catch up with the extraordinary saga of the clamp-happy Bashford Antiques: Parts I to V are hereWhen Michael Organ ...
In October teams of second-year Unitec Architecture students designed, modelled, then constructed interactive light installations in Devonport’s Windsor Reserve for GLOW@Artweek. The brief is strict. Their budget is zero. And the installations must be zero waste too, both in the construction and in the afterlife of the projects. These strict conditions ...
A wave of reviews and inquiries into audit around the globe are raising questions about trust, independence, and freedom from conflicts of interest in the profession, says CAANZ President Stephen Walker. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Labor frontbencher Chris Bowen, who has previously been shadow treasurer and before that treasurer, wants the study of economics made “more sexy” to attract more students, especially women, to study it. And he thinks young ...
Jenée Tibshraeny of interest.co.nz surveys the issues that have farmers worried right now, and looks at the facts behind the fears.Rumblings from the dairy farming sector are becoming increasingly loud, as both the Government and Reserve Bank (RBNZ) make policy changes that affect the sector.New Zealand has for years milked ...
He Kākano Ahau is a podcast by writer and activist Kahu Kutia (Ngāi Tūhoe) that explores stories of Māori in the city, and weaves together strands of connection. In this episode: what happens when Māori are not ‘urban Māori’ as we know them, but mana whenua.For episode four of He ...
New powers to protect strategically-important assets from overseas investors are necessary due to the extremes of global capitalism, the government says. ...
The Children’s Commissioner is calling on the government to re-prioritise its commitment to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (the Children’s Convention) on International Children’s Day. ...
National Party leaders Simon Bridges wants Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern to take stronger action over allegations that New Zealand First has breached electoral law. ...
"Prince Charles’ visit to Waitangi today, the first by a Royal in a quarter-century, highlights Moana Jackson’s view that it is kāwanatanga that is the Treaty partner," said Lewis Holden, campaign chair of New Zealand Republic. ...
Seriously, if you haven’t seen The Mandalorian, look away now. This article also contains spoilers for Return of the Jedi, The Phantom Menace, Return of the Sith, and The Last Jedi.In case you didn’t read the standfirst: this article contains spoilers about The Mandalorian, and also all of Star Wars.The ...
Editor’s Note: Here below is a list of the main issues currently under discussion in New Zealand and links to media coverage.New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.Today’s content by Dr Bryce Edwards.NZ First Matt Shand (Stuff): What NZ First slush fund was spent on: Campaign HQ, ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Cook, Lecturer, Computer and Security Science,Edith Cowan University, Edith Cowan University Fake videos and doctored photographs, often based on events such as the Moon landing and supposed UFO appearances, have been the subject of fascination for decades. Such imagery is often ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Evelyn Parr, Research Fellow in Exercise Metabolism and Nutrition, Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University As an aesthetic society, we often demonise body fat and stigmatise people with lots of it. There’s often an assumption that people carrying excess ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Renwick, Professor, Physical Geography (climate science), Victoria University of Wellington CC BY-NDClimate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change.If you have a question you’d like ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Larissa McLean Davies, Associate Professor Language and Literacy Education, University of Melbourne In recent weeks, Australian universities’ commitment to teaching Australian literature has come under scrutiny. This came amid revelations Sydney University has withdrawn funding from its Chair of Australian Literature – ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark Maund, PhD Candidate, School of Architecture and Built Environment, University of Newcastle The impacts of the bushfires that are overwhelming emergency services in New South Wales and Queensland suggest houses are being built in areas where the risks are high. We ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andreas Cebulla, Senior Research Fellow, South Australian Centre for Economic Studies, University of Adelaide In the past decade a 30-year trend to earlier retirement has been reversed. In OECD countries the average age at which people retire has risen by about one ...
Correspondence between MPI (Fisheries NZ) and NIWA (National Institute of Water and Atmosphere), obtained by Sea Shepherd under the Official Information Act, shows conclusively that MPI unreasonably influenced the research they had contracted from ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gay Hawkins, Professor, Institute for Culture and Society, Western Sydney University Most of us will never see a platypus or a lyrebird in the wild, but it’s likely we’ve encountered them on television. Our new research looks at the vital role early ...
The release of the proposed new electoral boundaries is an appropriate time to consider whether our electoral system is fit for purpose or needs a complete revamp. ...
Winston Peters says his party has always obeyed electoral law after new revelations about foundation; and RBNZ steps up BNZ supervision after capital calculation breaches. ...
The government has released statistics showing uptake of its budgeted welfare package two days after it was criticised over inaction on child poverty reduction. ...
Good morning, and welcome to The Bulletin. In today’s edition: Pressure mounts over NZ First Foundation, range of changes made to overseas investment office, and accusations of bottom trawling destroying coral.The allegations swirling around the NZ First Foundation are serious enough to warrant going back to again today. Party leader Winston ...
Are possible solutions to child maltreatment complicated? Yes. Quantum physics? No. The University of Auckland's Dr Ian Hyslop looks at how we can address child abuse as a social problem. ...
Erica Dawson didn't want to be another female who dropped out of sailing, so now she's focused on the Tokyo Olympics and being a role model instead ...
If what has been reported is both true and not a breach of the rules for political donations, then New Zealand’s reputation for for being squeaky clean looks like a joke, writes electoral law expert Andrew Geddis.Anyone paying attention to New Zealand political parties and how they run their election ...
New Zealanders like to claim moral superiority over their Australian neighbours when it comes to how asylum seekers are treated. But this belief is not based on reality, writes Tim Maurice of the Asylum Seekers Support TrustThe local news media has welcomed Iranian asylum seeker Behrouz Boochani into New Zealand ...
Sometimes it’s a great job being a news editor. Like the BBC staffer putting together the national news for radio on Tuesday morning.Lead off with the Conservative party election pledge to increase the life sentence for child murderers to … er … really life. Add factual qualification: this might ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra The government is responding to increasing concern about the faltering economy by bringing forward A$3.8 billion of infrastructure investment into the next four years, including $1.8 billion for the current and next financial years. Scott ...
Power Play - Rumours of dodgy political donations, Winston Peters full of bluster and denial, and potentially a drawn-out series of combative but ultimately meaningless exchanges with the press gallery. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra The government has overhauled its much-criticised robo-debt scheme which has seen many welfare recipients asked to repay money they do not owe. A Tuesday email to staff in the Human Services department’s customer compliance division ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra The government has overhauled its much-criticised robo-debt scheme which has seen many welfare recipients asked to repay money they do not owe. A Tuesday email to staff in the Human Services department’s customer compliance division ...
Open mike 23/03/2016 
Open mike is your post.
In Question Time today the Prime Minister was naturally facing questions about Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters and his dubious party financing arrangements, which seem to violate electoral finance law. Her response was to pretend that it was nothing to do with her, and that she is not responsible for ...5 hours ago
Climate Explained is a collaboration between The Conversation, Stuff and the New Zealand Science Media Centre to answer your questions about climate change. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, please send it to climate.change@stuff.co.nz I saw an article claiming that “king tides” will increase in ...10 hours ago
It has been revealed that firing ranges used by the NZDF while deployed to the Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) in Bamyan Province, Afghanistan, contained unexploded ordnance that caused numerous deaths and injuries after the NZDF withdrew the PRT in April 2013. In 2014 seven children were killed when an unidentified ...10 hours ago
Didn't See It Coming: NZ Herald columnist Lizzie Marvelly's latest column merits serious scrutiny because such a clear example of anti-democratic thinking is encountered only rarely on the pages of the daily press. Which is not to say that the elitism which lies at the heart of such social disparagement ...1 day ago
by Gearóid Ó Loingsigh Initially it was reported that in an aerial bombardment that took place on August 30th seven children were massacred; the figure then went up to eight and then on November 11th Noticias Uno reported that, according to people from the community in close proximity to the ...2 days ago
MediaWorks announced in October 2019 that it intended to sell off its struggling television business and cancel or cut back on several popular local programmes, including New Zealand Today, Married at First Sight New Zealand and 7 Days. Its radio and outdoor advertising arms are currently performing well, but MediaWorks’ ...3 days ago
There is an article in The Conversation, written by Jeremy P. Shapiro (Adjunct Assistant Professor of Psychological Sciences, Case Western Reserve University), about what he sees as the psychologically-based underpinnings of three main matters that seem to vex people all around the planet. The article is titled “The Thinking ...4 days ago
. . Blogger Martyn Bradbury has won his case against unreasonable search and surveillance against the NZ Police; and subsequent Police attempts to produce evidence in secrecy, in a closed Court. His case highlights a disturbing growing trend in Aotearoa New Zealand for State power to be used against ...4 days ago
by The Council of Disobedient Women In her excellent oral submission to the Abortion reform select committee on 31st October on behalf of Otago University’s Department of Public Health, historian and public health researcher Hera Cook stated: “We would ask that the committee not use the term ‘pregnant persons’ and ...1 week ago
If FFNZ really put their faith in “Top Medical Journals” they would now be amending their billboards to recognise new research results. Image from FFNZ but updated to agree with the latest research. ... 1 week ago
Clayton Mitchell, Spokesperson for Consumer Affairs The ‘wheel clamping’ Bill that will cap clamper fees to $100 passed its third reading in Parliament today. New Zealand First welcomes The Land Transport (Wheel Clamping) Amendment Bill to combat predatory wheel clamping behaviour in what is currently a largely unregulated business. Cowboy clampers are: gouging ...10 hours ago
We're setting our young people up for success, investing in education around the country. ...2 days ago
Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters has welcomed the first reading of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation 2021 (APEC 2021) Bill in Parliament today. The temporary bill supports New Zealand’s security preparations for hosting the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Forum in 2021. “APEC is the leading economic and trade forum ...2 hours ago
Chief Ombudsman Peter Boshier has proposed an "overlying structure" that would help with oversight of local government. ...59 mins ago
A flash new playground has been unveiled on Parliament's grounds today, amid growing calls for the government to take more action to help lift Kiwi kids out of poverty. ...1 hour ago
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne Two and a half months before the February 3 Iowa Democratic caucus, the highly regarded Selzer poll for CNN and the Des Moines Register gave Pete Buttigieg 25% in Iowa ...1 hour ago
The Labour led coalition government is continuing to create homelessness. The impact of immigration, failure of Kiwibuild, and attacks on the rental market, have resulted in the opposite outcomes that New Zealanders were promised. ...2 hours ago
Is Labour looking to increase the top personal tax rate again and considering reinstating long-abandoned wealth and inheritance taxes? ...3 hours ago
A mystery bidder has made a play for one of the country's biggest retirement village operators. ...4 hours ago
Spinoff Art editor Mark Amery and photographer Ebony Lamb pay a visit to the internationally celebrated jewellery couple at their colonial cottage above Island Bay.The white horses are galloping in from the Cook Strait as photographer and singer-songwriter Ebony Lamb (Eb and Sparrow) and I roll in to Island Bay, ...4 hours ago
New powers to protect strategically-important assets from overseas investors are necessary due to the extremes of global capitalism, the government says. ...4 hours ago
The Taxpayers Union denounced the role it seemed the government would require taxpayers to play in resolving the Ihumatao land dispute. But the union further claimed that taxpayers had contributed to the funding of an organisation which has been involved in the prolonged protest action at Ihumatao. This was a ...6 hours ago
Zespri is pursuing legal action in China to stop the spread of pirated kiwifruit cuttings. ...6 hours ago
A wave of reviews and inquiries into audit around the globe are raising questions about trust, independence, and freedom from conflicts of interest in the profession, says CAANZ President Stephen Walker. ...7 hours ago
Half of New Zealand's electoral boundaries are expected to change, and a new electorate is proposed for South Auckland. ...7 hours ago
The National Party leader Simon Bridges says the Prime Minister can not distance herself from allegations against her coalition partner. ...11 hours ago
Winston Peters says his party has always obeyed electoral law after new revelations about foundation; and RBNZ steps up BNZ supervision after capital calculation breaches. ...11 hours ago
Money from a NZ First-linked slush fund was reportedly spent for campaign purposes and kept secret from party officials and MPs. ...11 hours ago
Are possible solutions to child maltreatment complicated? Yes. Quantum physics? No. The University of Auckland's Dr Ian Hyslop looks at how we can address child abuse as a social problem. ...14 hours ago
Dr Simon Chapple discusses what he describes as a considerable power grab by government ministers - to the detriment of the public good. ...14 hours ago
Erica Dawson didn't want to be another female who dropped out of sailing, so now she's focused on the Tokyo Olympics and being a role model instead ...14 hours ago
Otaki writer Renée reveals the personal circumstances behind her new crime novel The Wild Card. ...14 hours ago
Fortune has been kind to Sonny Bill Williams, allowing him to stay healthy enough to bank one as the curtain slides down, ...14 hours ago
If the Mt Albert protests are about removing trees, why have the Tree Council and Forest & Bird taken the side of the axemen? ...14 hours ago
Sometimes it’s a great job being a news editor. Like the BBC staffer putting together the national news for radio on Tuesday morning. Lead off with the Conservative party election pledge to increase the life sentence for child murderers to … er … really life. Add factual qualification: this might ...17 hours ago
More politics will be added into the mix when it comes to the issue of foreign ownership. ...22 hours ago
Claims of a concerted effort to cloak donations are not yet proven, but there is enough there to concern Jacinda Ardern and the public. ...1 day ago
This is happening
http://nypost.com/2016/03/22/carbon-emissions-highest-theyve-been-since-dinosaurs-roamed-the-earth/
So why, why, why has our country not done this
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/geothermal-energy-markets-heating-up-reports-bcc-research-2016-03-22
Is it because the Muppet Tory’s can’t handle anything but one ridged ideology at at a time?
Or is it they embrace dystopia in their collective out look?
What is stopping more geothermal electricity generation in NZ?
I’m not close enough to the electricity industry to know for sure. But I suspect it’s because the companies that have huge sunk capital in fossil-fueled stations and don’t have to pay for their waste disposal and pollution are willing to sell power at a low enough price to make new geothermal uneconomic. Put a price on GHG emissions (ie require emitters to pay for the damage they cause) and we’ll probably see new geothermal plants built quite quickly.
Except many of them are sinking investment in wind power generation which suggests it isn’t fossil fuel alternatives which are stopping greater interest in geothermal generation.
A quick google turned up these pages.
http://www.nzgeothermal.org.nz/elec_geo.html
http://www.nzgeothermal.org.nz/geo_potential.html
http://www.windenergy.org.nz/operating-&-under-construction
It seems that there are both wind and geothermal projects underway. Our geothermal expertise is even an export earner.
https://www.nzte.govt.nz/en/news-and-media/media-releases/media-release-new-zealand-the-partner-of-choice-for-global-geothermal-industry/
And the point remains that putting a price on emissions will boost all of this economic activity.
That second link highlights one if the main reasons for a lack of development in this area. It states restrictions placed on use or underused government control are inhibiting development. Remove these and you are likely to get more generation via this source.
The other main reason being “its cost relative to alternatives.”
I guess wind turbines are cheaper than large-scale geothermal plants /sarc
And the RWNJ immediately demands unsustainable use of a limited resource.
What a fucken surprise.
Don’t know how that happened but if three of those comments could be deleted it would be much appreciated.
Andre @ 1.1
They’re currently working on increasing the capacity of geo-thermal power at Ngawha – quite a big undertaking, I understand.
because we have a ‘laissez faire’ governement that can’t be bothered thinking/projecting and investing in the future. And we have a business world that can’t be bothered thinking/projecting and investing in the future if they can milk the ‘present’ cow till she dies.
In short, there is no political or economical will in NZ to switch from fossil fuel to renewables, and the current ‘oil exploration permits’ granted by the current National led Government is exhibit a.
Except energy companies are investing in renewable. They just aren’t investing much in geothermal. The question is why is that?
It’s more expensive than wind and hydro and the easy generation capacity has already been developed.
No one agrees with your framing of the debate Gosman.
They know a free market model does not work, no matter how much people like yourself wish it would.
They also know your deflections are ideological.
Have you worked out yet, why no one bothers answering your questions – it is that they are ideologically loaded.
Are you so imbued with ideological smugness that you yourself don’t even know?
Lots of people have responded to my question and have answered it in the way I expected. Geothermal energy generation is not as easy to develop as other renewable clean sources.
In under-developed countries and central north island areas, new geothermal needs truly substantial local partnerships. Which are hard work and take years. Needs high profitability to make that commitment.
The big problem that occurs to me when looking at the UBI is the need for rent controls (including state housing for life)..
Just like with accommodation supplement (or the extra money paid to those in Christchurch by both the state and the insurance companies) the first people with their hands out for that money will be landlords.
If the money is only circulating up to the owners of property then nothing is gained.
Yes, and we need to view a UBI as part of a range of social solutions. Housing, rent, wages, worker rights, top ups for those not working, all need to be addressed.
Social security.
This is why a UBI will never succeed.
To make it work, NZ has to become a highly controlled socialist state.
Very few people want that, not at the moment anyway.
Nothing wrong with socialism.
Nothing wrong with a society that cares.
I love the way you speak for many people.
Alliance 59 votes
Communist League 135 votes
http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2014/e9/html/e9_part1.html
The Green Party vote is growing all through the years of neoliberalism.
A UBI isn’t dependent on a highly controlled state. It’s dependent on a govt that governs for everyone not just the people that it suits.
And it’s not like NACT aren’t an interventionist govt, they’re just intervening in teh wrong the things and in the wrong way (and incompetently a lot of the time too).
Wouldn’t everything have to be controlled though to keep expenses under control and in balance with the UBI?
Power companies, councils, rent, food, all these inputs would have to be set otherwise you’ll end up with people who can’t afford to live and no where to go for help.
what do you mean by keep expenses under control, and what do you mean by everything?
Strong economies like Germany control rent already, and other things as necessary. It is only ragged ideologues like the Gnats that allow the free market to destroy their society.
That socialist nirvana, Singapore, does as well.
Nothing wrong with socialism Paul until you run out of other peoples money !
Socialism doesn’t use other peoples money. Capitalism does (The capitalists steal it) and that’s why it falls down every single time.
Nothing wrong with capitalism stigie until they run off with other peoples money.
The UBI will simplify the system so your comment is misguided if not disingenuous. Read the discussion paper and educate yourself and possibly even do some thinking before you post your ill-considered comments.
+1 A large part of the UBI conversation in the past day or so has been driven by regulars trolling who don’t understand the concepts, haven’t done their homework and/or are just posting bullshit diversionary comments. Completely disingenuous on both counts.
Well you can stop wasting your time talking about what the Labour Party are going to do weka.
Listening to Morning Report today I see that Grant Robertson has been slapped down and put in his place by his leader. He might have used the code UBI but that wasn’t what he was talking about. He told Guyon Espiner that it wasn’t going to be Universal. He even said that Guyon certainly wasn’t going to get it. He then said it would be introduced slowly, like the Old Age Pension/National Superannuation.
That took roughly 80 years to develop. Grant seemd to think that UBI would have a similar gestation period so anyone over the age of 10 can forget about it.
He probably read a bit more of the Morgan book and learnt what it would cost and how it would have to be paid for.
A pity Labour felt they had to give the Finance role to someone who knows absolutely nothing about the subject.
http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/201794319
Anything you now post on the topic obviously has precisely nothing to do with what the Labour Party are thinking.
It is a shame you are one of those who is someone who “don’t understand the concepts, haven’t done their homework and/or are just posting bullshit diversionary comments” isn’t it?
Yesterday you lied about what Little did on RNZ. I’ll have a listen to MR later and see if you are lying again.
“Anything you now post on the topic obviously has precisely nothing to do with what the Labour Party are thinking.”
So says you, according to some trumped up nonsense you’ve mangled from listening to the radio. Labour have a discussion going on about the UBI, why not take part in it? Oh that’s right, because your purpose here is simply to destroy.
I’ve taken part in UBI conversation on the standard for years. I think I’ll let my comments be the record on that.
“It is a shame you are one of those who is someone who “don’t understand the concepts, haven’t done their homework and/or are just posting bullshit diversionary comments” isn’t it?”
Funny, that’s what I said about you yesterday. You really must be scraping the bottom of the troll barrell if you can’t even formulate your own critiques and instead try and troll me by repeating back my analysis of you.
So, please cite,
– where I don’t understand a UBI is conceptually
– something that indicates I haven’t educated myself on the UBI
– have posted bullshit diversionary comments in discussions about the UBI.
“Funny, that’s what I said about you yesterday”.
You have a very defective memory. Have you already forgotten that you said it TODAY and it is in the comment that I was replying to. That is why I put it in quotes. I thought your own words described you opinions quite nicely.
You, as usual claim that I lied about what Little said. Just how do you think that was the case, or is it merely another of your reflexive accusations when someone says something you don’t like?
By the way, you seem to be close to the Green Party. Can someone tell Meteria Turei that the Governor General is NOT our Head of State. You would think that after nearly 14 years as an MP she would have learned something about our form of Government.
I”m not close to the GP. I’m a non-active member.
If you want to talk about you lying about Little take it to the appropriate thread.
Fuck off with the gaslighting. If you can’t argue the politics what are you doing here?
Trying to sow alarm and dispondancy, and when that fails generally disrupt discussions.
pretty much.
@McFlock At least you are being truthful
“Trying to sow alarm and dispondancy, and when that fails generally disrupt discussions.”
ahahahaha I see what you did there.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Your usual dose of malicious diversionary piffle Alwyn. Labour policy is to discuss a UBI. It’s being discussed. So what’s your problem?
As for economic know nothings, Robertson is $120 billion up on your gibbering idiot Bill English. Expertise is defined by performance.
+1
Grant defines the realistic limits of a ‘UBI’ quite sensibly IMO.
“No Govt. is going to come in and just hand out $30b”.
“It is a guaranteed basic income.”
“It is a Tax credit, not a hand out”.
On those terms, I think the idea has a lot of merit, and will be reasonably salable to the voting public.
So call it a GBI?
As soon as you imply that everyone will receive it, you have framed it in a way that makes a nonsense of the idea, and have rendered the UBI unsaleable.
Clearly, we cannot afford to give it to everyone, (where does the money come from?), and so if it was ‘Universal’, at a certain level of income threshold you must have a mechanism for taking it back off those who do not need it.
Beside which, what possible point is there to giving it to people who already have perfectly adequate or very high income?
As soon as you imply that NOT everyone will get it you cannot possibly talk about a UBI. You merely have variations on all the benefits we have at the moment. You retain all the work and cost you have now in the admin work without even the benefits of careful targeting.
That is the worst of both worlds.
The great advantage of a genuine UBI is the ease of paying the money out. It is like the way that National Super is done. The only thing you have to know, once you decide that someone is eligible, is that they are still alive.
Grant seems to be having great difficulty in coming up with some way of making the scheme politically sellable. I think he may have read Morgan’s book and not understood those pesky little bits on paying for it.
You can pay for the scheme. However you really do have to decide what amount you want to pay out, and how you propose to raise that amount of money. If it is not Universal you may as well stick to what we have.
It’s sellable simply by using the word universal. Grant seems to be having the same problems as other RWNJs: Where does the money come from and why are we giving it to rich people?
Another words, he’s a fucken idiot.
He probably is having problems with conceiving how to pay for it, but I don’t think he said it wouldn’t be universal. Alwyn made that up.
Just why would he talk about a UBI, which means “Universal Basic Income”, if it isn’t going to be universal? He has to mean Universal or he is trying to con people. If isn’t universal use a different descriptor.
Wait. You don’t mean we have misunderstood and he is really talking about plans for a “Unified Business Identifier” do you?
is immediately followed by Alwyn saying:
wow
So when alwyn’s outright accused of lying, they simply continue on as if the lie had been accepted without comment.
That’s some drumpf-level bullshit right there, Alwyn.
You do realise I was talking about what “The lost sheep” said and not what Robertson was saying? I was, after all, replying to that person’s comment.
The lost sheep said
“As soon as you imply that everyone will receive it, you have framed it in a way that makes a nonsense of the idea, and have rendered the UBI unsaleable.
Clearly, we cannot afford to give it to everyone, (where does the money come from?), and so if it was ‘Universal’, at a certain level of income threshold you must have a mechanism for taking it back off those who do not need it.”
Does that make it clearer?
Yep. I can’t figure out if that’s intentional mindfuckery or if he’s just stupid. I tend to think the former. It’s the same tactic he’s using on me at the moment and I’ve seen him use it on other people. I’m not sure it is quite gaslighting, but it’s close. He just keeps repeating a lie about someone with the intention of it being accepted that the person he is talking about is deficient, often mentally. That’s why I find him creepy in ways that I don’t find other RWers. He really is nasty as an online person as well as having nasty politics.
@weka.
You did read my comment at 4.59pm?
You don’t seem to have understood it if you did.
I wasn’t talking about Grant. I was talking about “the lost sheep”
You told the lie about Robertson elsewhere.
Good synopsis lost sheep, and I agree the framing and terms need to be chosen carefully. I like the guaranteed income bit, with emphasis on income security. We have to stop looking at this as welfare benefits too.
“Beside which, what possible point is there to giving it to people who already have perfectly adequate or very high income?”
Because as soon as you start doing things like income and asset testing you have to have a whole bunch of bureaucracy which takes money and causes stress and is often unfair. If the entitlement is universal you can see how it plays out at various income levels (see my comment below, someone should check my maths). I guess you could pick a different tax rate to shift the fairness in another direction.
I don’t see how having a variable tax rate which takes back some or all of GBI is more or less complicated than having a variable threshold at which some or all of GBI is not paid out….
But I do think the idea is more saleable without the obviously empty gesture of giving it to people who you don’t actually intend to receive it and who also don’t need it.
But in general, I agree there are some very plausible arguments around potential efficiency gains in delivery.
That is, if the basic level is sufficient to meet the needs of most people receiving it? Or will it continue to be necessary to to make many adjustments to the Basic income on a case by case basis according to need above the basic level?
Which begs that much discussed question of what level you set the GBI//UBI at?
Is Labour or anyone else proposing this as a cost neutral or even cost saving measure, or does it presuppose a redistribution of wealth?
Quite aside from your individual moral stance on re-distribution, I would think that the voting Public is going to be highly sensitive to that particular detail, and it will turn out to be the devil in the discussion.
To clarify, I didn’t mean variable tax rates, I meant what the flat tax rate should be is up for debate and that playing with the figures might show a higher or lower rate is more fair. If Red is around we can ask him why he chose 40%. I assume affordability is part of it.
I agree re how it’s paid for and perceptions of that are important, although this worries me less than some because I think we should have CGTs and FTTs. I also think that once people get the idea of tax credits it gets easier. Plus frame it alongside a move back to a fairer society for *everyone, eg good solid social policy on health, education etc. Betterthat than simply here’s some more dish which feeds into the greedy selfish meme.
So, according to that logic, we can’t actually afford to have anyone living in NZ.
Where the money always comes from – it’s created. Of course, we’re talking about the government creating it and not the private banks who will be banned from creating money.
Yeah, we’d have these things called taxes. Perhaps you’ve heard of them? But instead of being used to raise funds for the government to spend they’d be used to take excessive money out of the economy after it’s used.
Fairness. Because it’s given to everyone it’s fair. Then there’s the savings of not needing a government bureaucracy that spies upon people and abuses them solely for the purpose of taking their income away.
You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back?
How do I perceive that as ‘fair’, rather than a completely meaningless farce?
It’s fair because everyone is treated exactly the same and no one is persecuted by needing it.
Because it’s not taken straight back.
Let’s say for simplicity’s sake that the UBI is 20k, and everything over 20k is flat taxed at 33%.
To give the value of the 20k “straight back”, a single individual would need to be earning three times the UBI rate plus the UBI. In this back-of-envelope illustrative example, 80k.
But if you were between contracts, or lost your job, or had to take unpaid leave, you’d still get that 20k every year, no paperwork, no humiliating judgement from social warfare caseworkers, no nothing. That’s your right. And that’s why it’s not a farce – your rent will always be paid.
“and everything over 20k is flat taxed at 33%.”
Do you mean that as a way of excluding the UBI from tax, or do you mean other income of 20K is tax free and taxed at 33% above that?
By my calculations McFlock, under the current Tax scale, someone earning 80k per annum would be netting 62.7k after tax.
Under your back of the envelope tax scenario they would be still earning 80k per annum plus the 20k UBI. After paying 33% tax on the 80k above the UBI (26.4k), they would net 73.6k.
So they’d be 10.9k better off.
To ‘give back’ the UBI, you would actually have to make the flat tax rate on everything above the UBI somewhat higher than the current rate.
Around 48% by my calculation.
As I say, I think you will find that a much tougher idea to sell to the voting public than the UBI being something you simply don’t get until your income drops to a certain level.
oh ffs,
my point is that no, the ubi is not “taken straight back” until the individual is earning a shitload. Not household income, individual income.
If the top 5 or 10% of income earners want to complain that they’re given a UBI with one hand and they pay it back in tax with the other, everyone else will ask why they have to fund an eligibility administration system simply so the very rich don’t have to pay their UBI to charity (lol, as if).
TLS’s “meaningless farce” suggestion only applies to the smallest minority of income earners. There are many reservations I still hold about a UBI, but tls’s bulshit isn’t one of them.
Bullshit
I think you’ll find my figures are accurate McFlock.
Let’s say for simplicity’s sake that the UBI is 20k, and everything over 20k is flat taxed at 33%.
Well, I’ve just had a wee play with your scenario…
If the top 5 or 10% of income earners want to complain that they’re given a UBI with one hand and they pay it back in tax with the other, everyone else will ask why they have to fund an eligibility administration system simply so the very rich don’t have to pay their UBI to charity (lol, as if).
Actually,
Under your scenario, someone currently earning….
40k – will be 13k / 27% better off.
100k – will be 17k / 22% better off
And even someone at the 1% threshold of 337k will be 21k / 9% better off!
It’s a giant lolly scramble!
And where does the money come from?
Draco going to print it for you?
Who is talking BS?
Sheep, you said “You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back?”.
Now you’re admitting that no, the money isn’t given straight back, because the vast majority of individuals will be better off.
So you ignore your previous statement and go with the “where’s the money coming from” angle.
That is bullshit. Regardless of whether what you say is true or false, you’ll simpy assume another time-consuming position to keep up the pretense that you’re contributing to the discussion.
You’re bullshitting. Why don’t you like the UBI? Why don’t you like the idea of everybody living in dignity? Would it really be that tragic if you, as an employer, had to treat employees as knowledgeable colleagues rather than lording it over the peasantry? Stop bullshitting – why don’t you like the UBI?
A lot of blustering around in circles McFlock, but you didn’t actually answer the question.
You claimed that ‘5-10%’ of earners would have to give the UBI back, but in the scenario you proposed even someone on the 1% threshold would be receiving extra money.
In your scenario 99.8% of the population are going to receive somewhere between 40 to 5% more income.
If you stand by that scenario?, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to ask where all that extra money is going to come from?
But you haven’t yet acknowledged whether your first question has been addressed: “You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back?”
The answer to that is not merely “no”, it’s “no, because the fundamental premise that the government is “going to take it straight back” would not apply to almost person in NZ.
So do you acknowledge that the question was a bullshit question?
I thought it was a legitimate response to Draco’s claim that giving the money and then taking it back through taxes was fair, because then everyone would be getting it.
But if you think it’s bullshit I’m happy to defer to your judgement.
Now can you answer my questions about your scenario please?
Well, no, it was a bullshit response, because taking an aggregate total in taxes from across the entire population does not translate into “You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back”.
As you pointed out with your math, your statement is not true at all for the vast bulk of people.
But you partially answered your own question by repeating Draco’s comment:
Other possible sources include bureaucratic savings from the system’s simpicity, FTT, CGT, and even some sort of social credit scheme if that floats your political boat.
Hell, one could even forget the flat tax and go progressive on the really rich fucks. Make them pay fair price for their privilege.
But you know all this. You’re just bullshitting. Because your reason for existence is to waste people’s time.
Oh. You were just fantasising then.
The structure of your comment deceived me into thinking you were making a serious contribution to the debate on a realistic UBI..
So you read this comment and assumed it was a complete policy proposal, rather than a simple illustration that your question “You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back?” was just fucking stupid?
What part of “Let’s say for simplicity’s sake” did you fail to understand?
My contribution to serious discussion on UBI was to answer one of your questions.
Perhaps you should take some time to reflect upon why you should find that a clear answer to your question is so unhelpful.
What part of “Let’s say for simplicity’s sake” did you fail to understand?
I think it was the assumption that you meant something simple?
As in, when you quoted some actual figures, you intended they had some straight forward ‘meaning’?
Now I see that your ‘meaning’ was that 99.8% of income tax payers should get a massive increase in income, and this would be paid for by an increase in tax on the remaining 0.2% of tax payers, a Financial Transactions Tax, a Capital Gains Tax, ‘some sort of social credit scheme’, and ‘going progressive on the really rich fucks’.
That’s simplistic enough for this blog I reckon. As simple as the ‘zero’ which represents the chances of a UBI being introduced once The ‘simple’ ‘Sheeple’ get the ‘simple’ idea that the UBI is ‘simply’ another ‘simplistic’ Trojan Horse for the fantasies of the tiny ‘simplistic’ minority who still believe in a Marxist vision.
‘Simply’, Lets revisit this discussion in a year, and see who was right eh?
It’s amazing how much bullshit you can string out of a perfectly straightforward answer to a perfectly simply question.
Just to clarify, you’re acknowledging that your scenario of “You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back?” was just complete bullshit for the vast majority of people?
Under whatever specific proposal, if anything, comes from Labour’s thinking project it’s safe to say that for most the amount they pay in tax will not amount to the value of the UBI they receive.
How about, rather than revisiting this in a year, you just admit that you have no interest in resolving any issue discussed here? You’re bullshit might be transparent, but it sure as shit stinks.
BTW, you don’t actually know how hu-mons use the word “simply” do you?
Under whatever specific proposal, if anything, comes from Labour’s thinking project it’s safe to say that for most the amount they pay in tax will not amount to the value of the UBI they receive.
I just can’t reconcile that with your figures showing that 98.8% of tax payers will receive more cash in hand income?
Perhaps you can explain how that would work?
Your problem is that you are a moron.
You are comparing “paying the individual’s received UBI back in tax” with “overall better off compared with today’s tax rates, if you took simplified figures as written in stone rather than illustrative”.
If you want to know why your question “You give me money on the basis we both clearly understand you do not intend me to have it, and are going to take it straight back?” is bullshit, read the above thread.
If you want a more in depth plan, look at the big kahuna or whatever Labour eventually proposes.
frankly, I don’t think you’re inteested in either.
https://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/201794319
Starting at 2:15 here’s a synopsis of what Robertson said,
1. Labour are considering the idea, there are pros and cons
2. Pros: simplify benefit system; enables people to adjust to changing work patterns; income security;
3. Cons: untested (although very interesting idea)
4. UBI is about the interaction between the income support and the tax system
5. There are a number of different models (being tested in the Netherlands, Finland)
6. In it’s purest form, it’s universal.
7. But it’s about the relationship between income and tax, it’s essentially a tax credit.
8. Espiner: it will be expensive! Robertson: we can introduce it over time (cf to Super), and it’s related to the amount of tax people pay
9. therefore higher income earners are less likely to benefit than lower
10. Espiner: what problem is trying to be solve here? Robertson: example is a beneficiary who wants to take on extra work. Current system is a disincentive because of the abatement process. If you guarantee people an income they are more likely to move around the workforce. Simply scrapping the abatement process is an option.
11. We’re facing a fundamental change in the nature of work availability.
12. Therefore we need to consider a range of options that give people income security. If work can’t do that anymore, the govt needs to consider other options.
13. We’re a long way from implementing this
alwyn,
“Well you can stop wasting your time talking about what the Labour Party are going to do weka.”
I haven’t been talking much about Labour at all other than what’s been in the report, and what we were all speculating on the other day when Little first announced.
“Listening to Morning Report today I see that Grant Robertson has been slapped down and put in his place by his leader.”
That’s not in the link you give, so citation please.
“He might have used the code UBI but that wasn’t what he was talking about.”
Yes, he was.
“He told Guyon Espiner that it wasn’t going to be Universal”
No, he didn’t. He said that how much you ended up with might depend on how much tax you paid. Based on Red Logix’s model (which is based on Keith Rankin’s work) it could look like this:
Current tax system: income of $25,000 – tax 17.5% $4375 = $20,625 cash in hand income
UBI system: income of $25,000 – tax $10,000 = $15,000 + UBI $10,000 = $25,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 0%
Current tax system: income of $100,000 – tax 33% $33,000 = $67,000 cash in hand income
UBI system: income of $100,000 – tax $40,000 = $60,000 + UBI $10,000 = $70,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 30%
Current tax system: income of $200,000 – tax 33% $66,000 = $134,000 cash in hand income
UBI system: income of $200,000 – tax = $120,000 +UBI $10,000 = $130,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 35%
“He even said that Guyon certainly wasn’t going to get it.”
Lie. He said that someone like Guyon was “unlikely to be a great deal better off”. I have no idea what Espiner earns, refer to figures above.
“He then said it would be introduced slowly, like the Old Age Pension/National Superannuation. That took roughly 80 years to develop.Grant seemd to think that UBI would have a similar gestation period so anyone over the age of 10 can forget about it.”
Another lie. He use Super as a general example of how you could introduce something over time. He didn’t say how long it would take, nor did he imply that it would take 80 years.
“He probably read a bit more of the Morgan book and learnt what it would cost and how it would have to be paid for.”
“A pity Labour felt they had to give the Finance role to someone who knows absolutely nothing about the subject.”
Two comments of no worth coming from your own prejudices and ignorance. Robertson stated up front that there are different models to look at (and that’s what the report says too).
“Anything you now post on the topic obviously has precisely nothing to do with what the Labour Party are thinking.”
Another nonsensical statement. My comments are my own thoughts unless I specifically refer to the Labour Party. All I’ve said about Labour so far is that they’re considering a UBI and they’ve released a report.
btw, re Epsiner getting it, the point is that it’s to guarantee a basic level of income. If Epsiner were to have a big drop in salary he would benefit more than with what he is on currently. That’s the income security aspect.
The UK has had a tax free bracket for a while. Should also be looked at I think.
Do you mean alongside of the UBI? So that in the example above of someone on $25,000, they would end up with $35,000?
No its related to what GR was saying about a tax credit in how it works there.
Instead of a UBI?
In my opinion a UBI will not achieve its promises overall. And it wont win Labour the election if its based on some kind of promise to fundamentally reform the tax system.
But i was just raising the tax free band to look at how that mechanism works in practice. It doesnt for example seem to be putting upward pressure on UK wages.
+1 Nic the NZer
There should be a tax free bracket.
The UK also had ways to encourage savers to have money in the bank with ISA,s. Essentially you could save money tax free each year in cash, shares or a combo.
Since many people either have absolutely no savings or use property as savings in NZ and are a month away from not being able to pay bills, it is a way to start a saving’s culture which we do not have here.
I’m also thinking the pros of a UBI are good. There needs to be a safety net without red tape. I think universal benefits are good. When people start to ‘means test’ everything it can take so much red tape to work out the entitlements and so forth little money is saved.
In the UK with the disastrous disability. They cut people off who later died but saved little or zero money from the scheme.
I believe NZ has an ISA type scheme already actually.
Do you really mean a scheme like this?
“The account is exempt from income tax and capital gains tax on the investment returns, and no tax is payable on money withdrawn from the scheme either”.
Please provide details. I know of schemes that are exempt from tax on their earnings, or from tax on the withdrawals but not both.
The old Government Super scheme gave you the choice of one or the other, but not both.
Was thinking of an exempt on earnings only scheme. Didnt realise ISA was both actually.
Thanks for that Weka.
An excellent summary Weka. Will use it as a reference.
I think the word has gone out to Alwyn and his ilk to rubbish UBI and try to stop it being discussed. UBI is part of a strategy to manage the Long term need to address employment problems. Current Governments have avoided the subject so if Opposition parties raise a possible solution, a Goverment is bound to attack it on any grounds with help of little helpers like Alwyn. A sort of spoilsport effect.
Thanks weka +++. The silence from Alwyn is defeaning.
“defeaning”.
What a wonderful word. Does it have a meaning?
I don’t buy that it’s untested.
We’ve been testing it for years now with NZS.
People over 65 freely choose to work or not, haven’t all suddenly turned into drug addicts or alcoholics, many have late in life turned to the arts for self-fulfillment, many work the hours they choose, may do voluntary work for charities or marae and so on.
If they earn they pay more tax.
We tested on a smaller scale for many years with family benefit. Everyone got this regardless of circumstance. We were proud of this.
We know these things are practical and possible.
“We’ve been testing it for years now with NZS.”
So we have. According to the 2013 census about 33% of the people in the 65-74 age group worked with 19% more than 30 hours/week
It drops off rapidly in older age groups. It has more than tripled since 1986. It clearly hasn’t put everyone off working has it?
http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/profile-and-summary-reports/quickstats-65-plus/work-unpaid-activities.aspx
On the other hand there are only about 600,000 of them and the cost of NZS is about $12 billion, Even that amount was being questioned at the last election.
I don’t think the family benefit, even when it was at its peak in the 1950s is a relevant comparison. Most, if not all, woman stopped working when their children were young in those days if my memories are accurate. Woman, with children, who worked in the 1950s seemed to my young self to have been widows.
The cost is only being questioned because the very people who will benefit from it the most voted continuously to pay lower taxes at the very peak of their earning capacity when they should have been contributing towards it and paying for their free education they received when younger as well.
See some of us aren’t questioning the cost of NZS cause it’s the wrong question. The cost is well known and eminently predictable.
The correct question to ask is why aren’t we taxing the right people sufficiently to pay for it.
@D of SS
I was trying, without naming them, to comment on the Labour Party policy to increase the age of entitlement.
From October 2013
“Finance spokesman David Parker said today that unless there were massive tax increases, it couldn’t be sustained in its present form.
Speaking on Firstline, Parker said National was “putting their heads in the sand” by refusing to raise the age of eligibility for getting superannuation. “.
If I mention Labour wanting to do something like this some of the commentators here will get very upset and abuse me.
They were the ones questioning it. I think, like you, that we can afford it.
Mind you I am biased. I get it. I only applied for it though after interest investment returns fell through the basement floor.
Of course NZ can afford it, jesus this isnt even a worthwhile question. But there is a compromise, we probably cant afford it and have anything but govt budget deficits.
Problem is that these neo-liberal Labourites priorities are buggered and they have determined whats best for the polity and are beyond listening. Never does the question arise, what harm is the deficit actually doing to the country.
When you examine that you find its supposed to be causing higher inflation something most govts are trying to achieve. Either thats not what it does or the deficit should be expanded then. But no this doesnt cross any of these guys tiny closed minds.
Hi Weka,
Just pointing out that the calculations on current tax rates are a bit out and that’s significantly distorting the comparison with Red Logix’s model.
http://www.ird.govt.nz/calculators/keyword/incometax/calculator-tax-rate.html
Under the figures you quote, someone currently earning 100k would have 3k more in hand under the UBI scenario, but using correct current tax figures, they would actually have 6k less under the UBI.
Using current tax rates, the point at which someone would be ‘breaking even’ on the UBI model you use would be 40K. Under that and they would be better off, and over it worse off.
That sounds about ‘fair’ to me, as far as higher earners getting extra benefit, but I don’t believe 10k is anywhere near enough for a ‘basic income’!
Thanks! Good catch. I just treated each income bracket as a single tax rate, but can see from the calculator it’s taxed at different rates. I’ll see if I can figure it out later.
“but I don’t believe 10k is anywhere near enough for a ‘basic income’!”
It’s not supposed to be a stand alone income.
Ok, does this look better?
Current tax system: income of $25,000 – tax (variable tax rates) $3,395 = $21,605 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 13.5%
UBI system: income of $25,000 – tax $10,000 = $15,000 + UBI $10,000 = $25,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 0%
Difference = +$3,395/yr or +$65/wk
Current tax system: income of $60,000 – tax $11,020 (variable tax rates) = $48,980 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 18.3%
UBI system: income of $60,000 – tax $24,000 = $36,000 + UBI $10,000 = $46,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 30%
Difference = -$2980/yr or -$57/wk
Current tax system: income of $100,000 – tax $23,920 (variable tax rates) = $76,080 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 24%
UBI system: income of $100,000 – tax $40,000 = $60,000 + UBI $10,000 = $70,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 30%
Difference = -$6,080/yr or -$117/wk
Current tax system: income of $200,000 – tax $56,920 = $143,080 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 28.5%
UBI system: income of $200,000 – tax = $120,000 +UBI $10,000 = $130,000 cash in hand income. Total nett tax rate = 35%
Difference = -$13,080/yr or -$251/wk
Red’s original calculations /universal-income-revisited/
“NZ has to become a highly controlled socialist state.”
As opposed to the highly controlled bureaucratic state we have now?
Sheesh BM, I thought you had at least had the redeeming feature of embracing freedom.
This system is worse than socialism, as it is the state and corporations working as idiotically as each other. The incentives not to work are massive, wages are low, and why try if you get nothing from it.
Plus Morgan and Co. who are pushing this are not even close to being socialist – so do we add disengious to your mantel as well BM?
National wants a highly controlled state and is putting in place lots and lots of rules to bring it about.
Rules on single parents, rules what beneficiaries can spend their money on, rules about universal testing at schools. The list goes on and on.
They just don’t want the social bit as they get all their wealth and jollies from putting others down.
A job guarantee can resolve these issues without radical changes in society going with it.
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=23719
May be a good idea to increase the minimum wage to a living wage as a complimentary policy however.
How does a job guarantee work? How does it factor in the future work issues arising from automation and recession?
The link is about this topic but TLDR version is,
* with a job guarantee the govt sets up a programme where it provides a full time at minimum wage job to anybody who applies.
* positions may be setup into the programme either to meet community goals or via applications from the non profit sector for help. Such roles dont really become redundant due to technology.
* during a recession the recently unemployed would be expected to shift from the main sector of the jobs market to the jg sector so fewer people are actually unemployed over this period.
Can you just clarify for us what sort of low skill rolls you are talking about that can’t be automated?
I dont think my own limited imagination is a particularly good source and as i said positions can be created via community engagement.
*we have these guys on the trains who perform some kind of security function. Nobody wants to automate there jobs.
* regular beach litter removals. Nobody wants to automate that.
* tree planting programmes. We dont want to automate that to reduce its carbon footprint.
Without the profit motive much of the automation pressure goes away as well here.
I see the benefits and definitely think it is something that should be in the mix for consideration. I just worry that we go back to the days of seeing people leaning on shovels next to the motorway all day and the negative connotations that come along with that. It was one of the classic examples of why public works were considered inefficient waste.
I also worry about how it deals with the issue of those who carry out work like raising children or caring for family members. I suppose they could be considered one of the minimum wage jobs that people are paid for.
I am pretty sure the public sector is tarnished with being inefficitent and wastefull even today (without the guys leaning to show off for it).
The same way this mornings herald claimed that the 49% of jobs that could be lost to automation over the next 10 to 20 years will be partially off set by new jobs. Ignores the fact the last new career to be created was computer programmer back in the 1960’s. There has literally not been a new classification of job since. Everything is just a repackaging of old skills and will account for automation in only very minor terms.
The system requires that there be people with cash in hand to buy the robotic-chef burgers. I suspect they’ll find a way.
I suspect that the ever increasing issue of unemployment and inequality shows the current thinking has no idea of what “the way” is to deal with automation.
The robot pays PAYE.
As funny as that is if we had a decent tax system it would. However not in the classic employee wages but in increased tax intake from a company having increased profits by not having to pay an employee.
Automation is not evil. We just need to work out how to work and economy where it becomes more abundant.
Just off the top of my head
You could give each robot/program a labour value.
Just say on robot replaces 3 people worth 50k, the robot has a salary of 150k and pays tax on that.
Bit of a win for every one, government still gets the same amount of tax, businesses don’t have the hassle of staff and the population then can just chill out at the beach on their 50k a year universal wage.
The same system w’eve currently got could be kept and the best thing about is that it’s incremental.
Very good BM. 🙂
Can you imagine the howls of outrage if labour floated your idea of an income tax on robots,!!
BTW I think the idea has a lot of merit.
If you can handle that sort of hypothetical gymnastics the concept of a universal UBI, or negative tax bracket should be pretty self explanatory as positive for society.
But being the typical National supporter, you are really trying to create the most complex system that you can, with plenty of loopholes to be exploited.
Wouldn’t it be better to have the simplest system possible that allows society and business to evolve into the future automated environment. A casual glance over the way we responded to the changes in New Zealand’s economy in the 70’s will show that proscribed and bureaucratic solutions aren’t the way to go.
It’s a credit to the Labour party that they’ve looked at this, seen that it’s going to happen and are trying to have a debate about how we transition to a society and economy that is as good, and preferably better than the one we have now. And that could involve transitioning 40% of our workforce, at all levels, to an entirely new way of living.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11610112
Think about that for a sec, potentially 40% going into and maybe through unemployment. What’s that going to do to your street?
Edit – fixed the link
I reckon my idea is better.
You could even make it retrospective and introduce it now, get all the businesses that have already cut jobs due to automation.
This is is about having a UBI, but funding it via the technology that is putting people out of work.
Businesses have to pay wages as it is, so paying a robot wage won’t be an issue.
There’s still big positives for business to automate there’s no need for osh regulations, safety equipment, holidays, sick leave etc.
Of course some people will try and game it, you just have annual auditing system in place to catch the ones that do.
Sorry, just makes me think “Supplementary Minimum Payments”
The solution is deal with the transition of society, not create an impediment to the transition. Your tax will just create avoidance / evasion and other stupid choices.
Negative tax brackets seem to be a more elegant solution if you’re going to do through the tax system.
Have to say BM its a very creative and sort of weird concept you have brought up – my partner has just said the tax accountants would have a field day with it. I can see the logic of it in a “out of left field” sort of way. It certainly would help to pay for the UBI and employers would be better off without holiday pay, sickness leave etc that you mentioned. Maybe you should lodge a patent on it, it could possibly/impossibly be implemented in the future – you would make a fortune on the concept!
It’s the “current thinking” of this government, in which case the only response I can offer is: “you call that thinking?”
Also, how do you know the rise in unemployment is an entrenched phenomenon and not the predictable – and predicted* – consequence of National Party corruption and incompetence?
*the “bonfire of right wing politics”, as Helen Clark put it.
+1
the only countries that have Job Guarantees are generally speaking socialist / communist countries.
You had a guaranteed job in East Germany, Hungary, Jugoslavia (before Milosovitch) etc etc. It might not was the job you wanted, but it was the job you did.
You also had waiting lists for cars, houses, food, etc etc etc.
But you had a job, and when you ran out of materials you stopped working. Very much like North Korea today.
So to say that a UBI is socialist, but Governmental Workprogammes are not is a bit short sighted.
Essentially, if the predictions of the worlds Kassandas come true, we will have something like an UBI as it would be easier and less costly to administer. We will also have to have social housing with rent caps and livelong tenure (unless we really want 60-80% of our population living as transients – and with an average tenanacy agreement lasting no longer than max 12 month we already have a large % of our population living as transients), and we will have to have free clinics for healthcare etc etc . If we want people to live, and participate in society.
Or we can go with the free market who will fix it all by itself, cause magic.
“British economist Paul Ormerod (quote from the Death of Economics) noted that the economies that avoided high unemployment in the 1970s maintained a:
… sector of the economy which effectively functions as an employer of last resort, which absorbs the shocks which occur from time to time, and more generally makes employment available to the less skilled, the less qualified.
He concluded that societies with a high degree of social cohesion (such as Austria, Japan and Norway) were willing to broaden their concept of costs and benefits of resource usage to ensure that everyone had access to paid employment opportunities.” Bill Mitchell
Thats an interesting quote Sabine because i wasnt aware that Austria Japan and Norway were communist countries. Thanks for the history lesson.
Ensuring access to employment is not giving a guarantee to employment.
We all have ‘access to employment’, as the drones at WINZ would assure you, but you have no guarantee that you get a job.
However, if you were to follow the premise that paying a UBI is socialist as in communism, than i suggest that you also look at providing a guaranteed job via the state as socialist. That was all I pointed out.
I am also quite sure that despite providing access to employment Austria, Japan and Norway have unemployed people.
So that access to employment is obviously not helping all people.
While a UBI would help all people. The government then could still provide access to employment as far there still is employment.
In a JG scheme (and they happen/happened in many places, including effectively if not in name in NZ in past eras) you go to WINZ and not only do they assure you access to employment, they send you on to an actual employer. Then WINZ pay your wages. That’s why its called a job guarantee, you go there and you are guaranteed getting a job (at least at the minimum wage).
Yes, some people won’t want to work for minimum wage. They might prefer searching for better paid work for example so we should still expect to see some unemployment rates in places with such a scheme.
I don’t really care how you want to label a JG scheme or a UBI scheme (socialist or capitalist or free market or whatever). That’s not an interesting question in any way. I am pretty sure I didn’t label either myself in any comments.
I dont think a jg is a free market mechanism at all. It explicitely says that the jobs market creates insufficient jobs and goes about creating them.
The biggest one is, I believe, that in India. It is only 100 days a year and the work isn’t always available but it is a massive scheme.
http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/abs/10.1596/1813-9450-6003
Yep. This is why we need for all housing to be state owned with a minimal rent set as a percentage of household income..
How would the govt transfer all existing private housing to state ownership? (taking into account voters, and perceptions of fairness)
They’d buy them at present market value.
And people that didn’t want to sell?
Off to the “re education camp for new comrades” – those that don’t want to sell.
“They’d buy them at present market value.”
Wow. And we think a UBI might be expensive at $30billion/year.
“At the end of 2014 the market value of New Zealand’s housing stock stood at $768 billion or 323% of GDP”. Probably add another $100 bn by now.
From
http://www.cpag.org.nz/assets/Housing%20briefing%20paper%20-%20May15%20CPAG.pdf
@weka. Surely you have seen The Godfather? We will make them an offer they can’t refuse.
Well that will certainly solve the dip in spending since the GFC in NZ. Fiji holidays all round?
Just wait a bit longer til the baby boomers die off and there’s loads of houses and Winston Peters won’t have any voters.
If it’s good enough for Banks and Key to plan on that basis it’s good enough for me.
Every baby boomer I know is planning to live to 100.
They’ll probably make it too.
Was that really part of the conversation? I thought Winston’s lot were the generation before the baby boomers. My lot in fact. Just ahead of 1946.
“Every baby boomer I know is planning to live to 100.”
Unless of course you’re Maori or blue collar or have had a disability all your life…. In many of those cases you’d love to get even a year of NZS.
Was that really part of the conversation?
Yep. It assumes property values will stay where they are now or increase. In many places they are already decreasing as that generation starts to die off. Years of neglect in rural communities means lack of jobs, lack of hospitals, lack of all sorts of things is resulting in lower property values or an inability to sell.
Some large urban areas might get propped up by immigration and foreign buyers but it ain’t true everywhere.
When I asked “was it really part of the conversation” I was meaning the one between Key and Banks. Did they really say that Winston’s followers were dying off?
Key did, no matter how much you don’t want to believe it.
It is in the transcript.
@Muttonbird
Do you have a link to this transcript, or better still a link to a recording of the conversation? A recording would be best of course.
A question for all those people who think if we just avoid antagonising the Muslim world (whatever that term means) then we won’t be subjected to terror attacks.
What has Belgium been up to recently that made it a target?
“antagonising”.
🙄
Meanwhile, at the Flemish Peace Institute (wherever that is).
Please note that neither of these acts excuse or justify more killing, and also that despite the morals of the situation, violence begets violence.
Easy and convenient target for extremists in Europe.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/22/why-was-belgium-targeted-by-bombers
Hi Gosman,
“What has Belgium been up to recently that made it a target?”
I suspect you haven’t thought very carefully about these matters if you ask that question.
The most obvious response to your question would be the arrest of the suspect in the Paris bombings last November – as has already been suggested by media commentators (such as the person interviewed on Morning Report today who thought it likely that terrorist attacks had been ‘brought forward’ in response to that arrest).
But there’s another point you’re missing. In one sense perhaps ‘we’ (in the West) are all the same to ‘them’ and, more tellingly, that perception is reinforced by several observations.
First, Belgium is the headquarters of the EU (one of the bombs was close to the EU headquarters) and the EU has, within its union, several states who have less than glorious records of management, intervention and even rule in the Middle East.
Second, many of the messages from other European and Western leaders have reiterated a position emphasised in similar messages of condolence in the past – that these attacks are an attack on ‘all of us’ and an attack on ‘our’ values – not just those of Belgium.
So it seems that by targeting a ‘soft target’ like Belgium the terrorists have, indeed, hit back at those they perceive as having ‘antagonised’ them. That is, the leaders of the UK, US, France, etc. themselves seem to think that ‘they’ were as much the target as Belgium.
Having said all of that these attacks are utterly reprehensible and unforgivable – though quite explicable and not surprising.
P.S. Brussels is also the headquarters of NATO. That makes it even more of a target than the EU headquarters.
Profile of National
.
Yesterday John Key wanted to steal money from us – to pay for his Defamation Crime. Possibly up to NZD1,5 Million. Who knows?
He will be visiting Mr Obama very soon. I hope he won’t attempt to steal money from him ! But again – who knows?
Also, do you think he will keep his creepy hands away from Obama’s daughters? Anybody’s guess I expect. He harasses girls in his own suburb, with impunity.
How gutter low the National party of NZ really is. Mismanagers; bullies; self centered; arrogant; thieves – stealing assets from the common man; secretive over incredibly stupid TPPA negotiations; flogging off NZ land and resources to foreigners (to get kick backs for national party funds); callous about jobs and workers conditions. And so on and so on …
They say Piggy Muldoon another national politician was bad. At least he was not evil like Key and and his accomplice English.
Observer (Tokoroa)
I can’t remember a National govt that improved the lives of ordinary Kiwi’s, I know in the late 60’s they had a near zero unemployment rate, but since then they haven’t managed much better than 5 or 6% at the low end and over 10% at the high end.
You probably remember the Shipley govt, took $20 off every pensioner to give the wealthiest a tax break, more older NZ’ers left for Aussie than ever before.
In five decades of observation of NZ govts, the Clark govt delivered the greatest benefits to this country that I’ve ever seen, nearly everyone had a job, and when I said everyone, that included the spouse, the redistribution of wealth to the lower incomes through tax benefits (working for families), investment in infrastructure, rebuilt the local Hospital where I live after the Nats threatened to close it and increased the capacity of all the schools by adding additional class rooms, and now all we hear is that Labour destroyed the country, most can’t remember that far back to be able to compare too today.
The media has done it’s best to undermine Labour, and the weak minded have “bought” the BS, hook line and sinker, the reality is that I’m one of the over 200k Kiwi’s that left NZ since 2011 for a “Brighter future”, and would like to return, but I just can’t stomach Key, and until I see Kiwi’s waking up to the BS being fed to them, I don’t see any improvement in NZ.
The first time I saw Key on TV, I new he couldn’t be trusted, that was in 2006, ten years ago, and guess what, he’s proven over and over again exactly that.
So, come on Labour and come on Andrew Little, honesty IS a virtue.
Fonterra is broken….in a supposed co-operative model the shareholders are making big profits, but the suppliers aren’t.
Which doesn’t make any sense, unless there are shareholders who aren’t suppliers, then it’s a big win….ohh hang on
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/78179286/fonterra-halfyear-profit-soars-muchneeded-good-news-for-farmers.html
https://www.nzx.com/markets/NZZX
Ummm…. the suppliers generally are the shareholders.
they generally were at the start of the co-op model, right up until trading in shares was opened up to allow ‘capital raising’, hence the NZX funds trading in shares……so now you have suppliers, who have given over the rights to the share income (but not ownership of shares per se) who are having payments cut at the same as record profits are being made and paid out as divedends…
Market capitalisation of farmers shares = 9.476 billion
Market capitalisation of non farmer units = 556 million
So only 5.5% of Fonterra is owned by non-farmers. Conversely 95% of the profit will therefore be paid to the farmers.
The reference to the NZX trading for Fonterra shares is a red herring. It’s a closed market managed by NZX. Only farmers have access to it.
I’d suggest they are very much in the minority. On Morning report this morning on the radio a news item suggested the vast majority of shareholders who will receive the benefit are farmers.
Possibly, although the crucial statistic is not how many of the shareholders are farmers but ‘how many of the farmers producing the milk are shareholders?’
At the extreme, it is theoretically possible that all shares are owned by one farmer; hence all shareholders would be farmers but all but one of the farmers producing the milk would not be shareholders.
I don’t know the answer to what would be the ‘correct’ question to settle this point.
Do you?
Most lower order sharmilkers won’t own shares so they will suffer the most.
The term “supplier” has also been used to describe contractors of late as well, which is muddying the water as well. Don’t know if it’s a deliberate distraction, or by whom, but very poor communication by Fontera for allowing it to happen.
For those who have an interest in the strange happenings at Rangiora High School, the Listener has a detailed post. Did the Ministry go through all this to get their hands on the millions held by the 100 year old investment Held by Rangiora High? How can they do all this to a successful school, lead by an industrious hard working Principal.
“For Peggy Burrows, that pathway has been cut abruptly short. With lawyer Richard Harrison (who represented Christchurch Girls’ High School principal Prue Taylor when she was sacked in 2012), Burrows will challenge her dismissal.”
http://www.listener.co.nz/current-affairs/education/school-daze/
Now I have discovered what is wrong with New Zealand.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/78156665/lawyer-numbers-soars-as-the-law-become-more-complex-and-numerous
No wonder we have become ever more litigious.
Does anyone else remember the Tom Paxton album “One Million Lawyers and Other Disasters”? On a per capita basis that is about where New Zealand has got to.
And imagine the legion of lawyers needed to thrash out TPPA disputes! Ker-ching!
Well, some people commenting on this site seem to be proposing that the Government should be guaranteeing everyone a job. Those commenters would applaud your theory.
Last time i checked being a Lawyer still required a qual. Did the TPPA remove that for their disputes process? Quite happy for joe blogs kiwi to arbitrate on TPPA disputes actually for a job. Dont think Disney has that in mind however.
I really don’t understand where the Labour party is going ? Is it $200 that’s enough to live on, I am not sure pensioners agree, Is it the living wage or do they have a plan to guarantee everyone a job and pay them living wage plus a Universal income ? Can someone enlighten this pensioner with a vote, please!
“Can someone enlighten this pensioner”.
I don’t think anyone can help you at the moment. Robertson, who seems to trying to be the proud daddy, seems to give a different story every time he talks about it.
I think he is hurriedly trying to read and understand what Morgan’s book said but it seems to be a bit too hard for him. He then seems to be trying to amend the details on the fly if someone points out politically impossible bits.
If they did what Morgan advocates, and you own your own home, you are going to be bitten on the bum. Only my opinion of course
Come back in about 2018.
Do you believe Morgans book position is reasonable? It seems to be saying there need to be some one off modifications to taxation etc… which will then modify prices so some imbalances an inequities are corrected and then stuff will be sorted out from then on because all that stuff was sorted to begin with.
This kind of thinking reminds me of the prognosis for the EU where about a decade ago consensus was no country really needed to run a 3% or higher deficit (until they did). It seems a very static view of the economy to begin with.
“I don’t think anyone can help you at the moment. Robertson, who seems to trying to be the proud daddy, seems to give a different story every time he talks about it.”
Citation needed. Link or it didn’t happen. We already know you are a liar so I’m happy to add this to the list if you can’t back up your statement.
Labour is still collecting and collating data and feedback, so no policies have been agreed yet.
Oh god not another year of the manifesto.
Oh for some actual coherent policies consistent with socialist principles from Labour. The last link is interesting because there was supposed to be an attempt to have the members of the Standard influence policy. We were asked for suggestions even.
Can’t see many of those suggestions anywhere near Labour’s policies.
(Also reminded me how much I miss Xtasy’s contributions).
The year of the manifesto, which turned into the year of keeping your powder dry, which turned into the year of mainly neo-liberal policy, which turned into the year of losing my vote, which turned into the year of losing the election was just bonkers.
Well there’s little evidence that Labour is pushing the needs of beneficiaries and workers. 2012 was the year of the manifesto. 2013 was supposed to be the year of the policy.
But, as our own Labour grandee Mike Smith has pointed out, 2013 is also the year Labour develops its policies
I think that’s where The Standard could be of some use in that it offers a platform for members to suggest and test policy at a national level any time they want.
Tom, a UBI is meant to ensure that everyone has a basic income and doesn’t starve etc. It’s not become replacement, it’s a system of income security that is more fair and efficient than what we have now. Don’t get too caught up on the $200 thing. For one, there are lots of different UBI models and it depends on what other ways people have of getting income. Labour are focussed on workers and the disappearance of a regular 40hr/wk jobs and a high need for flexibility. They’re not saying everyone can live on $200/wk, they’re saying its a stop gap for people that didn’t earn this week. People who don’t do paid work (retirees, I’ll and disabled people, solo parents etc) will need to be taken into account too.
Have a look at the figures in my comment up thread and you can see how it might work via tax. Yes it’s different than the living wage and job creation both of which Labour also intend to do.
You can basically ignore everything alwyn is saying as he is lying about Labour and trolling the site to derail the conversation.
Bazaar politics, exposed.
Labour’s discussion document (pdf) outlining 10 big ideas from the Future of Work Commission.
How odd. The prime minister wades in to criticise a private company’s operating affairs.
When Andrew Little says as much the RWNJs have a cow about it.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/78179286/fonterra-halfyear-profit-soars-muchneeded-good-news-for-farmers
Flag day tomorrow. Drum roll please…
What way do you think it will go? I’m a bit worried low turnout amongst the young will make it closer than people thing. I may spiral into depression if we really change our flag to that childish design.
Returns are already higher than the first referendum with today and tomorrows still to come in.
http://www.elections.org.nz/events/referendums-new-zealand-flag-0/voting-second-referendum/voting-statistics
Some big variations by day, which is odd. I wonder if that’s to do with NZPost or processing rather than when people voted.
Polls suggest on average a 60% to 40% preference for the New Zealand flag. Something remarkable would have to happen for the challenger to win on the basis of that polling.
My initial thought is the very young (non-voting age) are very supportive of the New Zealand flag as are young adults in general. I imagine if young adults took the time to participate in surveys to register their support for the flag of New Zeland then they would take the time to vote. Perhaps this sector is the one which has lifted the turnout in the second referendum?
If so then John Key’s cheap looking tea towel will not stand a chance.
Interestingly Key doesn’t think hi legacy will be damaged if he looses.
My immediate thought was what legacy?
Farrar’s phone monkeys will be asking the question as we speak.
RONS
https://www.nzta.govt.nz/roads-and-rail/state-highway-projects/roads-of-national-significance-rons/
That will be Keys legacy, flag’s just a minor sideline.
It’s a shame that belatedly addressing roading infrastructure could be viewed by RWNJs as a legacy of John Key. Particularly with respect to the open tap immigration policy adopted by his government.
The first one on that list hasn’t even been started yet, ffs.
Haha, what an unbelievably shit legacy. That’s even before the next generation find they can’t afford the fuel price to use the RONS or there simply isn’t enough oil to go around anymore. Communities like Kapiti end up with a unused aqueduct type structure and they’ll be wanting to tear it down.
Better than selling the country down the river with bull shit election bribes like WFF and interest free loans.
Self serving Fuckwits.
RONS in the age of climate change and post-carbon. Yep, fitting legacy for the short-sighted greedy one.
Contrary to what the doomer cult you belong to says, people are going to be using cars for the foreseeable future.
New Zealanders will thank Key in years to come for building this fantastic roading network and not listening to the climate change, end of the world crowd.
I expect to see many statues of Key to be commissioned in the coming decades.
Of course we will be using cars in the future, just not as much, and people already curse the lack of public transport.
Roads of Numpty Significance.
Those are your beliefs and time after time they ignore realities.
You sir are a laughable idiot troll and should be banned as such under the policy.
define foreseeable future?
heh, nice one Pat.
About 5 to 10 years.
that would be about my guess too DTB….which if we ignore CC (as appears to be the case) is a disruptive change in itself when you consider the proportion of GDP it involves
Self serving? It’s the middle class right which has made hay from WFF and their kids from interest free loans.
RONS
https://www.nzta.govt.nz/roads-and-rail/state-highway-projects/roads-of-national-significance-rons/
“That will be Keys legacy, flag’s just a minor sideline.”
Yeah and what a waste of money that lot is. Like the Hamilton bypass, 17 bridges in a 22 km section costing just under a Billion dollars at this stage. Money that could be spent on better things like a fast modern wide track commuter service to Auckland with trains travelling at 200Km an hour..
It has been claimed that with the new Waikato Freeway it will cut 25 minutes off the journey. One billion dollars divided by 25 minutes give us 40000 dollars a minute just to join the fucking big traffic jam on the southern motorway that is STILL going to take you up to ONE hour to get into central Auckland,
-Gary Numan
This explains the RWNJs’ approach to transport. They believe that to take your own personal fiefdom with you wherever you go is the way of the future.
Key’s legacy will be available as The Best of Last Week Tonight with John Oliver Vols. 1 & 2. If you order online from the US you won’t have to pay GST 😉
I’ve heard there’s a bonus clip called UFO in Waitangi; soundtrack courtesy of Eminem CC PL 2.0 (Creative Commons licence Pretty Legal generic).
UFO in Waitangi?
Steven Joyce took it on the chin in Waitangi.
ah, the IFO 😉
Yes, but polling by Curia found that “UFO” will sell better in the US market, which is much more important to John than the backwaters of NZ.
lol.
I think the flag result could be very close. I dont trust these right wing pollsters.
It will be close, but evidence so far is that the challenger is playing catch up.
There is a huge amount of support for the New Zealand flag despite what John Key says anecdotally.
After all, when he’s discussing the subject face to face with someone, that person is likely a grovelling yes-man who will say what the prime minister wants to hear.
Interesting how the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment has had a silver fern in its logo since 2012.
Key really really digs that fern he was just biding his time feeding the chickens.
Well, their going to the polls on June 7, Aussie Fed Election, Turnbull has just restored the “Clean Energy Finance Corp” that Abbott tried to shut down, as an election sweetener, but the experts say, too little, too late.
Their will likely be a double disillusion, as the senate has refused to pass the govts policies.
And Tony (Abbott) is being as disruptive as he possibly can be, makes for some interesting politics over the next few months.