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.
This open-for-business, under-new-management cliché-pockmarked government of Christopher Luxon is not the thing of beauty he imagines it to be. It is not the powerful expression of the will of the people that he asserts it to be. It is not a soaring eagle, it is a malodorous vulture. This newest poll should make ...
The latest labour market statistics, showing a rise in unemployment. There are now 134,000 unemployed - 14,000 more than when the National government took office. Which is I guess what happens when the Reserve Bank causes a recession in an effort to Keep Wages Low. The previous government saw a ...
Three opinion polls have been released in the last two days, all showing that the new government is failing to hold their popular support. The usual honeymoon experienced during the first year of a first term government is entirely absent. The political mood is still gloomy and discontented, mainly due ...
National's Finance Minister once met a poor person.A scornful interview with National's finance guru who knows next to nothing about economics or people.There might have been something a bit familiar if that was the headline I’d gone with today. It would of course have been in tribute to the article ...
Rob MacCulloch writes – Throughout the pandemic, the new Vice-Chancellor-of-Otago-University-on-$629,000 per annum-Can-you-believe-it-and-Former-Finance-Minister Grant Robertson repeated the mantra over and over that he saved “lives and livelihoods”.As we update how this claim is faring over the course of time, the facts are increasingly speaking differently. NZ ...
Chris Trotter writes – IT’S A COMMONPLACE of political speeches, especially those delivered in acknowledgement of electoral victory: “We’ll govern for all New Zealanders.” On the face of it, the pledge is a strange one. Why would any political leader govern in ways that advantaged the huge ...
Bryce Edwards writes – The list of former National Party Ministers being given plum and important roles got longer this week with the appointment of former Deputy Prime Minister Paula Bennett as the chair of Pharmac. The Christopher Luxon-led Government has now made key appointments to Bill ...
TL;DR: These are the six things that stood out to me in news and commentary on Aotearoa-NZ’s political economy at 10:06am on Wednesday, May 1:The Lead: Business confidence fell across the board in April, falling in some areas to levels last seen during the lockdowns because of a collapse in ...
Over the past 36 hours, Christopher Luxon has been dong his best to portray the centre-right’s plummeting poll numbers as a mark of virtue. Allegedly, the negative verdicts are the result of hard economic times, and of a government bravely set out on a perilous rescue mission from which not ...
Auckland Transport have started rolling out new HOP card readers around the network and over the next three months, all of them on buses, at train stations and ferry wharves will be replaced. The change itself is not that remarkable, with the new readers looking similar to what is already ...
Completed reads for April: The Difference Engine, by William Gibson and Bruce Sterling Carnival of Saints, by George Herman The Snow Spider, by Jenny Nimmo Emlyn’s Moon, by Jenny Nimmo The Chestnut Soldier, by Jenny Nimmo Death Comes As the End, by Agatha Christie Lord of the Flies, by ...
On February 14, 2023 we announced our Rebuttal Update Project. This included an ask for feedback about the added "At a glance" section in the updated basic rebuttal versions. This weekly blog post series highlights this new section of one of the updated basic rebuttal versions and serves as a ...
Have a story to share about St Paul’s, but today just picturesPopular novels written at this desk by a young man who managed to bootstrap himself out of father’s imprisonment and his own young life in a workhouse Read more ...
The list of former National Party Ministers being given plum and important roles got longer this week with the appointment of former Deputy Prime Minister Paula Bennett as the chair of Pharmac. The Christopher Luxon-led Government has now made key appointments to Bill English, Simon Bridges, Steven Joyce, Roger Sowry, ...
Newsroom has a story today about National's (fortunately failed) effort to disestablish the newly-created Inspector-General of Defence. The creation of this agency was the key recommendation of the Inquiry into Operation Burnham, and a vital means of restoring credibility and social licence to an agency which had been caught lying ...
Holding On To The Present:The moment a political movement arises that attacks the whole idea of social progress, and announces its intention to wind back the hands of History’s clock, then democracy, along with its unwritten rules, is in mortal danger.IT’S A COMMONPLACE of political speeches, especially those delivered in ...
Stuck In The Middle With You:As Christopher Luxon feels the hot breath of Act’s and NZ First’s extremists on the back of his neck and, as he reckons with the damage their policies are already inflicting upon a country he’s described as “fragile”, is there not some merit in reaching out ...
The unpopular coalition government is currently rushing to repeal section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act. The clause is Oranga Tamariki's Treaty clause, and was inserted after its systematic stealing of Māori children became a public scandal and resulted in physical resistance to further abductions. The clause created clear obligations ...
Buzz from the Beehive The government’s official website – which Point of Order monitors daily – not for the first time has nothing much to say today about political happenings that are grabbing media headlines. It makes no mention of the latest 1News-Verian poll, for example. This shows National down ...
It Takes A Train To Cry:Surely, there is nothing lonelier in all this world than the long wail of a distant steam locomotive on a cold Winter’s night.AS A CHILD, I would lie awake in my grandfather’s house and listen to the traffic. The big wooden house was only a ...
Packing A Punch: The election of the present government, including in its ranks politicians dedicated to reasserting the rights of the legislature in shaping and determining the future of Māori and Pakeha in New Zealand, should have alerted the judiciary – including its anomalous appendage, the Waitangi Tribunal – that its ...
Dead Woman Walking: New Zealand’s media industry had been moving steadily towards disaster for all the years Melissa Lee had been National’s media and communications policy spokesperson, and yet, when the crisis finally broke, on her watch, she had nothing intelligent to offer. Christopher Luxon is a patient man - but he’s not ...
Chris Trotter writes – New Zealand politics is remarkably easy-going: dangerously so, one might even say. With the notable exception of John Key’s flat ruling-out of the NZ First Party in 2008, all parties capable of clearing MMP’s five-percent threshold, or winning one or more electorate seats, tend ...
Bryce Edwards writes – Polling shows that Wellington Mayor Tory Whanau has the lowest approval rating of any mayor in the country. Siting at -12 per cent, the proportion of constituents who disapprove of her performance outweighs those who give her the thumbs up. This negative rating is ...
Luxon will no doubt put a brave face on it, but there is no escaping the pressure this latest poll will put on him and the government. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāTL;DR: These are the six things that stood out to me in news and commentary on Aotearoa-NZ’s political ...
This is a re-post from The Climate Brink by Andrew Dessler In the wake of any unusual weather event, someone inevitably asks, “Did climate change cause this?” In the most literal sense, that answer is almost always no. Climate change is never the sole cause of hurricanes, heat waves, droughts, or ...
Something odd happened yesterday, and I’d love to know if there’s more to it. If there was something which preempted what happened, or if it was simply a throwaway line in response to a journalist.Yesterday David Seymour was asked at a press conference what the process would be if the ...
Hi,From time to time, I want to bring Webworm into the real world. We did it last year with the Jurassic Park event in New Zealand — which was a lot of fun!And so on Saturday May 11th, in Los Angeles, I am hosting a lil’ Webworm pop-up! I’ve been ...
Education Minister Erica Standford yesterday unveiled a fundamental reform of the way our school pupils are taught. She would not exactly say so, but she is all but dismantling the so-called “inquiry” “feel good” method of teaching, which has ruled in our classrooms since a major review of the New ...
Exactly where are we seriously going with this government and its policies? That is, apart from following what may as well be a Truss-Lite approach on the purported economic “plan“, and Victorian-era regression when it comes to social policy.Oh it’ll work this time of course, we’re basically assured, “the ...
Hey Uncle Dave, When the Poms joined the EEC, I wasn't one of those defeatists who said, Well, that’s it for the dairy job. And I was right, eh? The Chinese can’t get enough of our milk powder and eventually, the Poms came to their senses and backed up the ute ...
Polling shows that Wellington Mayor Tory Whanau has the lowest approval rating of any mayor in the country. Siting at -12 per cent, the proportion of constituents who disapprove of her performance outweighs those who give her the thumbs up. This negative rating is higher than for any other mayor ...
Buzz from the Beehive Pharmac has been given a financial transfusion and a new chair to oversee its spending in the pharmaceutical business. Associate Health Minister David Seymour described the funding for Pharmac as “its largest ever budget of $6.294 billion over four years, fixing a $1.774 billion fiscal cliff”. ...
Bryce Edwards writes – Many criticisms are being made of the Government’s Fast Track Approvals Bill, including by this writer. But as with everything in politics, every story has two sides, and both deserve attention. It’s important to understand what the Government is trying to achieve and its ...
TL;DR: Here’s my top 10 ‘pick ‘n’ mix of links to news, analysis and opinion articles as of 10:10am on Monday, April 29:Scoop: The children's ward at Rotorua Hospital will be missing a third of its beds as winter hits because Te Whatu Ora halted an upgrade partway through to ...
span class=”dropcap”>As hideous as David Seymour can be, it is worth keeping in mind occasionally that there are even worse political figures (and regimes) out there. Iran for instance, is about to execute the country’s leading hip hop musician Toomaj Salehi, for writing and performing raps that “corrupt” the nation’s ...
Yesterday marked 10 years since the first electric train carried passengers in Auckland so it’s a good time to look back at it and the impact it has had. A brief history The first proposals for rail electrification in Auckland came in the 1920’s alongside the plans for earlier ...
Right now, in Aotearoa-NZ, our ‘animal spirits’ are darkening towards a winter of discontent, thanks at least partly to a chorus of negative comments and actions from the Government Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāTL;DR: These are the six things that stood out to me in news and commentary on ...
You make people evil to punish the paststuck inside a sequel with a rotating castThe following photos haven’t been generated with AI, or modified in any way. They are flesh and blood, human beings. On the left is Galatea Young, a young mum, and her daughter Fiadh who has Angelman ...
April has been a quiet month at A Phuulish Fellow. I have had an exceptionally good reading month, and a decently productive writing month – for original fiction, anyway – but not much has caught my eye that suggested a blog article. It has been vaguely frustrating, to be honest. ...
A listing of 31 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, April 21, 2024 thru Sat, April 27, 2024. Story of the week Anthropogenic climate change may be the ultimate shaggy dog story— but with a twist, because here ...
Hi,I spent about a year on Webworm reporting on an abusive megachurch called Arise, and it made me want to stab my eyes out with a fork.I don’t regret that reporting in 2022 and 2023 — I am proud of it — but it made me angry.Over three main stories ...
The new Victoria University Vice-Chancellor decided to have a forum at the university about free speech and academic freedom as it is obviously a topical issue, and the Government is looking at legislating some carrots or sticks for universities to uphold their obligations under the Education and Training Act. They ...
Do you remember when Melania Trump got caught out using a speech that sounded awfully like one Michelle Obama had given? Uncannily so.Well it turns out that Abraham Lincoln is to Winston Peters as Michelle was to Melania. With the ANZAC speech Uncle Winston gave at Gallipoli having much in ...
She was born 25 years ago today in North Shore hospital. Her eyes were closed tightly shut, her mouth was silently moving. The whole theatre was all quiet intensity as they marked her a 2 on the APGAR test. A one-minute eternity later, she was an 8. The universe was ...
Skeptical Science is partnering with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. This fact brief was written by Sue Bin Park in collaboration with members from our Skeptical Science team. You can submit claims you think need checking via the tipline. Is Antarctica gaining land ice? ...
Images of US students (and others) protesting and setting up tent cities on US university campuses have been broadcast world wide and clearly demonstrate the growing rifts in US society caused by US policy toward Israel and Israel’s prosecution of … Continue reading → ...
Barrie Saunders writes – Dear Paul As the new Minister of Media and Communications, you will be inundated with heaps of free advice and special pleading, all in the national interest of course. For what it’s worth here is my assessment: Traditional broadcasting free to air content through ...
Many criticisms are being made of the Government’s Fast Track Approvals Bill, including by this writer. But as with everything in politics, every story has two sides, and both deserve attention. It’s important to understand what the Government is trying to achieve and its arguments for such a bold reform. ...
Peter Dunne writes – The great nineteenth British Prime Minister, William Gladstone, once observed that “the first essential for a Prime Minister is to be a good butcher.” When a later British Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan, sacked a third of his Cabinet in July 1962, in what became ...
Ele Ludemann writes – New Zealanders had the OECD’s second highest tax increase last year: New Zealanders faced the second-biggest tax raises in the developed world last year, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) says. The intergovernmental agency said the average change in personal income tax ...
We all know something’s not right with our elections. The spread of misinformation, people being targeted with soundbites and emotional triggers that ignore the facts, even the truth, and influence their votes.The use of technology to produce deep fakes. How can you tell if something is real or not? Can ...
This video includes conclusions of the creator climate scientist Dr. Simon Clark. It is presented to our readers as an informed perspective. Please see video description for references (if any). This year you will be lied to! Simon Clark helps prebunk some misleading statements you'll hear about climate. The video includes ...
It is all very well cutting the backrooms of public agencies but it may compromise the frontlines. One of the frustrations of the Productivity Commission’s 2017 review of universities is that while it observed that their non-academic staff were increasing faster than their academic staff, it did not bother to ...
Buzz from the Beehive Two speeches delivered by Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters at Anzac Day ceremonies in Turkey are the only new posts on the government’s official website since the PM announced his Cabinet shake-up. In one of the speeches, Peters stated the obvious: we live in a troubled ...
1. Which of these would you not expect to read in The Waikato Invader?a. Luxon is here to do business, don’t you worry about thatb. Mr KPI expects results, and you better believe itc. This decisive man of action is getting me all hot and excitedd. Melissa Lee is how ...
…it has a restricted jurisdiction which must not be abused: it is not an inquisitionNOTE – this article was published before the High Court ruled that Karen Chhour does not have to appear before the Waitangi Tribunal Gary Judd writes – The High Court ...
Lindsay Mitchell writes – One of reasons Oranga Tamariki exists is to prevent child neglect. But could the organisation itself be guilty of the same?Oranga Tamariki’s statistics show a decrease in the number and age of children in care. “There are less children ...
David Farrar writes: Graeme Edgeler wrote in 2017: In the first five years after three strikes came into effect 5248 offenders received a ‘first strike’ (that is, a “stage-1 conviction” under the three strikes sentencing regime), and 68 offenders received a ‘second strike’. In the five years prior to ...
Bryce Edwards writes – Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has surprised everyone with his ruthlessness in sacking two of his ministers from their crucial portfolios. Removing ministers for poor performance after only five months in the job just doesn’t normally happen in politics. That’s refreshing and will be extremely ...
TL;DR: These are the six things that stood out to me in news and commentary on Aotearoa-NZ’s political economy in the two days to 6:06am on Thursday, April 25:Politics: PM Christopher Luxon has set up a dual standard for ministerial competence by demoting two National Cabinet ministers while leaving also-struggling ...
Hi,Today I mainly want to share some of your thoughts about the recent piece I wrote about success and failure, and the forces that seemingly guide our lives. But first, a quick bit of housekeeping: I am doing a Webworm popup in Los Angeles on Saturday May 11 at 2pm. ...
It is hard to see what Melissa Lee might have done to “save” the media. National went into the election with no public media policy and appears not to have developed one subsequently. Lee claimed that she had prepared a policy paper before the election but it had been decided ...
Open access notablesIce acceleration and rotation in the Greenland Ice Sheet interior in recent decades, Løkkegaard et al., Communications Earth & Environment:In the past two decades, mass loss from the Greenland ice sheet has accelerated, partly due to the speedup of glaciers. However, uncertainty in speed derived from satellite products ...
Buzz from the Beehive A statement from Children’s Minister Karen Chhour – yet to be posted on the Government’s official website – arrived in Point of Order’s email in-tray last night. It welcomes the High Court ruling on whether the Waitangi Tribunal can demand she appear before it. It does ...
Mr Bombastic:Ironically, the media the academic experts wanted is, in many ways, the media they got. In place of the tyrannical editors of yesteryear, advancing without fear or favour the interests of the ruling class; the New Zealand news media of today boasts a troop of enlightened journalists dedicated to ...
It's hard times try to make a livingYou wake up every morning in the unforgivingOut there somewhere in the cityThere's people living lives without mercy or pityI feel good, yeah I'm feeling fineI feel better then I have for the longest timeI think these pills have been good for meI ...
In 1974, the US Supreme Court issued its decision in United States v. Nixon, finding that the President was not a King, but was subject to the law and was required to turn over the evidence of his wrongdoing to the courts. It was a landmark decision for the rule ...
Every day now just seems to bring in more fresh meat for the grinder.In their relentlessly ideological drive to cut back on the “excessive bloat” (as they see it) of the previous Labour-led government, on the mountains of evidence accumulated in such a short period of time do not ...
This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Megan Valére SosouMarket gardening site of the Itchèléré de Itagui agricultural cooperative in Dassa-Zoumè (Image credit: Megan Valère Sossou) For the residents of Dassa-Zoumè, a city in the West African country of Benin, choosing between drinking water and having enough ...
Buzz from the Beehive Melissa Lee – as may be discerned from the screenshot above – has not been demoted for doing something seriously wrong as Minister of ...
Morning in London Mother hugs beloved daughter outside the converted shoe factory in which she is living.Afternoon in London Travelling writer takes himself and his wrist down to A&E, just to be sure. Read more ...
Labour is calling for the Government to urgently rethink its coalition commitment to restart live animal exports, Labour animal welfare spokesperson Rachel Boyack said. ...
Today’s Financial Stability Report has once again highlighted that poverty and deep inequality are political choices - and this Government is choosing to make them worse. ...
The Green Party is calling on the Government to do more for our households in most need as unemployment rises and the cost of living crisis endures. ...
Unemployment is on the rise and it’s only going to get worse under this Government, Labour finance spokesperson Barbara Edmonds said. Stats NZ figures show the unemployment rate grew to 4.3 percent in the March quarter from 4 percent in the December quarter. “This is the second rise in unemployment ...
The New Zealand Labour Party welcomes the entering into force of the European Union and New Zealand free trade agreement. This agreement opens the door for a huge increase in trade opportunities with a market of 450 million people who are high value discerning consumers of New Zealand goods and ...
The National-led Government continues its fiscal jiggery pokery with its Pharmac announcement today, Labour Health spokesperson Ayesha Verrall says. “The government has increased Pharmac funding but conceded it will only make minimal increases in access to medicine”, said Ayesha Verrall “This is far from the bold promises made to fund ...
This afternoon’s interim Waitangi Tribunal report must be taken seriously as it affects our most vulnerable children, Labour children’s spokesperson Willow-Jean Prime. ...
Te Pāti Māori are demanding the New Zealand Government support an international independent investigation into mass graves that have been uncovered at two hospitals on the Gaza strip, following weeks of assault by Israeli troops. Among the 392 bodies that have been recovered, are children and elderly civilians. Many of ...
Our two-tiered system for veterans’ support is out of step with our closest partners, and all parties in Parliament should work together to fix it, Labour veterans’ affairs spokesperson Greg O’Connor said. ...
Stripping two Ministers of their portfolios just six months into the job shows Christopher Luxon’s management style is lacking, Labour Leader Chris Hipkins said. ...
Tonight’s court decision to overturn the summons of the Children’s Minister has enabled the Crown to continue making decisions about Māori without evidence, says Te Pāti Māori spokesperson for Children, Mariameno Kapa-Kingi. “The judicial system has this evening told the nation that this government can do whatever they want when ...
It appears Nicola Willis is about to pull the rug out from under the feet of local communities still dealing with the aftermath of last year’s severe weather, and local councils relying on funding to build back from these disasters. ...
The Government is making short-sighted changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA) that will take away environmental protection in favour of short-term profits, Labour’s environment spokesperson Rachel Brooking said today. ...
Labour welcomes the release of the report into the North Island weather events and looks forward to working with the Government to ensure that New Zealand is as prepared as it can be for the next natural disaster. ...
The Labour Party has called for the New Zealand Government to recognise Palestine, as a material step towards progressing the two-State solution needed to achieve a lasting peace in the region. ...
Some of our country’s most important work, stopping the sexual exploitation of children and violent extremism could go along with staff on the frontline at ports and airports. ...
The Government’s Fast Track Approvals Bill will give projects such as new coal mines a ‘get out of jail free’ card to wreak havoc on the environment, Labour Leader Chris Hipkins said today. ...
The government's decision to reintroduce Three Strikes is a destructive and ineffective piece of law-making that will only exacerbate an inherently biased and racist criminal justice system, said Te Pāti Māori Justice Spokesperson, Tākuta Ferris, today. During the time Three Strikes was in place in Aotearoa, Māori and Pasifika received ...
Cuts to frontline hospital staff are not only a broken election promise, it shows the reckless tax cuts have well and truly hit the frontline of the health system, says Labour Health spokesperson Ayesha Verrall. ...
The Green Party has joined the call for public submissions on the fast-track legislation to be extended after the Ombudsman forced the Government to release the list of organisations invited to apply just hours before submissions close. ...
New Zealand’s good work at reducing climate emissions for three years in a row will be undone by the National government’s lack of ambition and scrapping programmes that were making a difference, Labour Party climate spokesperson Megan Woods said today. ...
More essential jobs could be on the chopping block, this time Ministry of Education staff on the school lunches team are set to find out whether they're in line to lose their jobs. ...
Te Pāti Māori is disgusted at the confirmation that hundreds are set to lose their jobs at Oranga Tamariki, and the disestablishment of the Treaty Response Unit. “This act of absolute carelessness and out of touch decision making is committing tamariki to state abuse.” Said Te Pāti Māori Oranga Tamariki ...
The Government is trying to bring in a law that will allow Ministers to cut corners and kill off native species, Labour environment spokesperson Rachel Brooking said. ...
Cancelling urgently needed new Cook Strait ferries and hiking the cost of public transport for many Kiwis so that National can announce the prospect of another tunnel for Wellington is not making good choices, Labour Transport Spokesperson Tangi Utikere said. ...
A laundry list of additional costs for Tāmaki Makarau Auckland shows the Minister for the city is not delivering for the people who live there, says Labour Auckland Issues spokesperson Shanan Halbert. ...
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi, and Mema Paremata mō Tāmaki-Makaurau, Takutai Tarsh Kemp, will travel to the Gold Coast to strengthen ties with Māori in Australia next week (15-21 April). The visit, in the lead-up to the 9th Australian National Kapa haka Festival, will be an opportunity for both ...
The Green Party has today launched a step-by-step guide to help New Zealanders make their voice heard on the Government’s democracy dodging and anti-environment fast track legislation. ...
From today, passengers travelling internationally from Auckland Airport will be able to keep laptops and liquids in their carry-on bags for security screening thanks to new technology, Transport Minister Simeon Brown says. “Creating a more efficient and seamless travel experience is important for holidaymakers and businesses, enabling faster movement through ...
People with an interest in the health of Northland’s marine ecosystems are invited to a public meeting to discuss how to deal with kina barrens, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones says. Mr Jones will lead the discussion, which will take place on Friday, 10 May, at Awanui Hotel in ...
Kiwi exporters are $100 million better off today with the NZ EU FTA entering into force says Trade Minister Todd McClay. “This is all part of our plan to grow the economy. New Zealand's prosperity depends on international trade, making up 60 per cent of the country’s total economic activity. ...
There are heartening signs that the extractive sector is once again becoming an attractive prospect for investors and a source of economic prosperity for New Zealand, Resources Minister Shane Jones says. “The beginnings of a resurgence in extractive industries are apparent in media reports of the sector in the past ...
The return of the historic Ō-Rākau battle site to the descendants of those who fought there moved one step closer today with the first reading of Te Pire mō Ō-Rākau, Te Pae o Maumahara / The Ō-Rākau Remembrance Bill. The Bill will entrust the 9.7-hectare battle site, five kilometres west ...
Energy Minister Simeon Brown has announced 25 new high-speed EV charging hubs along key routes between major urban centres and outlined the Government’s plan to supercharge New Zealand’s EV infrastructure. The hubs will each have several chargers and be capable of charging at least four – and up to 10 ...
The coalition Government will not proceed with the previous Government’s plans to regulate residential property managers, Housing Minister Chris Bishop says. “I have written to the Chairperson of the Social Services and Community Committee to inform him that the Government does not intend to support the Residential Property Managers Bill ...
The Government has announced an independent review into the disability support system funded by the Ministry of Disabled People – Whaikaha. Disability Issues Minister Louise Upston says the review will look at what can be done to strengthen the long-term sustainability of Disability Support Services to provide disabled people and ...
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has attended the Universal Periodic Review in Geneva and outlined the Government’s plan to restore law and order. “Speaking to the United Nations Human Rights Council provided us with an opportunity to present New Zealand’s human rights progress, priorities, and challenges, while responding to issues and ...
The Government and Rotorua Lakes Council are committed to working closely together to end the use of contracted emergency housing motels in Rotorua. Associate Minister of Housing (Social Housing) Tama Potaka says the Government remains committed to ending the long-term use of contracted emergency housing motels in Rotorua by the ...
Trade Minister Todd McClay heads overseas today for high-level trade talks in the Gulf region, and a key OECD meeting in Paris. Mr McClay will travel to Riyadh to meet with counterparts from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). “New Zealand’s goods and services exports to the Gulf region ...
Education Minister Erica Stanford has outlined six education priorities to deliver a world-leading education system that sets Kiwi kids up for future success. “I’m putting ambition, achievement and outcomes at the heart of our education system. I want every child to be inspired and engaged in their learning so they ...
The new NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) App is a secure ‘one stop shop’ to provide the services drivers need, Transport Minister Simeon Brown and Digitising Government Minister Judith Collins say. “The NZTA App will enable an easier way for Kiwis to pay for Vehicle Registration and Road User Charges (RUC). ...
Whānau with tamariki growing up in emergency housing motels will be prioritised for social housing starting this week, says Associate Housing Minister Tama Potaka. “Giving these whānau a better opportunity to build healthy stable lives for themselves and future generations is an essential part of the Government’s goal of reducing ...
Racing Minister Winston Peters has paid tribute to an icon of the industry with the recent passing of Dave O’Sullivan (OBE). “Our sympathies are with the O’Sullivan family with the sad news of Dave O’Sullivan’s recent passing,” Mr Peters says. “His contribution to racing, initially as a jockey and then ...
Assalaamu alaikum, greetings to you all. Eid Mubarak, everyone! I want to extend my warmest wishes to you and everyone celebrating this joyous occasion. It is a pleasure to be here. I have enjoyed Eid celebrations at Parliament before, but this is my first time joining you as the Minister ...
Associate Health Minister David Seymour has announced Pharmac’s largest ever budget of $6.294 billion over four years, fixing a $1.774 billion fiscal cliff. “Access to medicines is a crucial part of many Kiwis’ lives. We’ve committed to a budget allocation of $1.774 billion over four years so Kiwis are ...
Hon Paula Bennett has been appointed as member and chair of the Pharmac board, Associate Health Minister David Seymour announced today. "Pharmac is a critical part of New Zealand's health system and plays a significant role in ensuring that Kiwis have the best possible access to medicines,” says Mr Seymour. ...
Hundreds of New Zealand families affected by Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) will benefit from a new Government focus on prevention and treatment, says Health Minister Dr Shane Reti. “We know FASD is a leading cause of preventable intellectual and neurodevelopmental disability in New Zealand,” Dr Reti says. “Every day, ...
Regional Development Minister Shane Jones today attended the official opening of Kaikohe’s new $14.7 million sports complex. “The completion of the Kaikohe Multi Sports Complex is a fantastic achievement for the Far North,” Mr Jones says. “This facility not only fulfils a long-held dream for local athletes, but also creates ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters’ engagements in Türkiye this week underlined the importance of diplomacy to meet growing global challenges. “Returning to the Gallipoli Peninsula to represent New Zealand at Anzac commemorations was a sombre reminder of the critical importance of diplomacy for de-escalating conflicts and easing tensions,” Mr Peters ...
Ambassador Millar, Burgemeester, Vandepitte, Excellencies, military representatives, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen – good morning and welcome to this sacred Anzac Day dawn service. It is an honour to be here on behalf of the Government and people of New Zealand at Buttes New British Cemetery, Polygon Wood – a deeply ...
Distinguished guests - It is an honour to return once again to this site which, as the resting place for so many of our war-dead, has become a sacred place for generations of New Zealanders. Our presence here and at the other special spaces of Gallipoli is made ...
Mai ia tawhiti pamamao, te moana nui a Kiwa, kua tae whakaiti mai matou, ki to koutou papa whenua. No koutou te tapuwae, no matou te tapuwae, kua honoa pumautia. Ko nga toa kua hinga nei, o te Waipounamu, o te Ika a Maui, he okioki tahi me o ...
Paul Goldsmith will take on responsibility for the Media and Communications portfolio, while Louise Upston will pick up the Disability Issues portfolio, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced today. “Our Government is relentlessly focused on getting New Zealand back on track. As issues change in prominence, I plan to adjust Ministerial ...
Recreational catch limits will be reduced in areas of Fiordland and the Chatham Islands to help keep those fisheries healthy and sustainable, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones says. The lower recreational daily catch limits for a range of finfish and shellfish species caught in the Fiordland Marine Area and ...
Energy Minister Simeon Brown has welcomed an important milestone in New Zealand’s hydrogen future, with the opening of the country’s first network of hydrogen refuelling stations in Wiri. “I want to congratulate the team at Hiringa Energy and its partners K one W one (K1W1), Mitsui & Co New Zealand ...
The coalition Government is delivering on its commitment to improve resource management laws and give greater certainty to consent applicants, with a Bill to amend the Resource Management Act (RMA) expected to be introduced to Parliament next month. RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop has today outlined the first RMA Amendment ...
Overseas models for regulating the oil and gas sector, including their decommissioning regimes, are being carefully scrutinised as a potential template for New Zealand’s own sector, Resources Minister Shane Jones says. The Coalition Government is focused on rebuilding investor confidence in New Zealand’s energy sector as it looks to strengthen ...
Emergency Management and Recovery Minister Mark Mitchell has today released the Report of the Government Inquiry into the response to the North Island Severe Weather Events. “The report shows that New Zealand’s emergency management system is not fit-for-purpose and there are some significant gaps we need to address,” Mr Mitchell ...
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith is today travelling to Europe where he’ll update the United Nations Human Rights Council on the Government’s work to restore law and order. “Attending the Universal Periodic Review in Geneva provides us with an opportunity to present New Zealand’s human rights progress, priorities, and challenges, while ...
Associate Agriculture Minister, Mark Patterson, formally reopened the world’s largest wool processing facility today in Awatoto, Napier, following a $50 million rebuild and refurbishment project. “The reopening of this facility will significantly lift the economic opportunities available to New Zealand’s wool sector, which already accounts for 20 per cent of ...
Hon Andrew Bayly, Minister for Small Business and Manufacturing At the Southland Otago Regional Engineering Collective (SOREC) Summit, 18 April, Dunedin Ngā mihi nui, Ko Andrew Bayly aho, Ko Whanganui aho Good Afternoon and thank you for inviting me to open your summit today. I am delighted ...
The Government is delivering on its commitment to bring back the Three Strikes legislation, Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee announced today. “Our Government is committed to restoring law and order and enforcing appropriate consequences on criminals. We are making it clear that repeat serious violent or sexual offending is not ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters has today announced four new diplomatic appointments for New Zealand’s overseas missions. “Our diplomats have a vital role in maintaining and protecting New Zealand’s interests around the world,” Mr Peters says. “I am pleased to announce the appointment of these senior diplomats from the ...
New Zealand is contributing NZ$7 million to support communities affected by severe food insecurity and other urgent humanitarian needs in Ethiopia and Somalia, Foreign Minister Rt Hon Winston Peters announced today. “Over 21 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance across Ethiopia, with a further 6.9 million people ...
Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage Paul Goldsmith is congratulating Mataaho Collective for winning the Golden Lion for best participant in the main exhibition at the Venice Biennale. "Congratulations to the Mataaho Collective for winning one of the world's most prestigious art prizes at the Venice Biennale. “It is good ...
The Government is reforming financial services to improve access to home loans and other lending, and strengthen customer protections, Commerce and Consumer Affairs Minister Andrew Bayly and Housing Minister Chris Bishop announced today. “Our coalition Government is committed to rebuilding the economy and making life simpler by cutting red tape. We are ...
“China remains a strong commercial opportunity for Kiwi exporters as Chinese businesses and consumers continue to value our high-quality safe produce,” Trade and Agriculture Minister Todd McClay says. Mr McClay has returned to New Zealand following visits to Beijing, Harbin and Shanghai where he met ministers, governors and mayors and engaged in trade and agricultural events with the New ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has completed a successful trip to Singapore, Thailand and the Philippines, deepening relationships and capitalising on opportunities. Mr Luxon was accompanied by a business delegation and says the choice of countries represents the priority the New Zealand Government places on South East Asia, and our relationships in ...
Responding to the long-awaited release of judges’ special allowances, including free air travel and hotels for spouses, generous sabbaticals, and access to limousines, Taxpayers’ Union spokesman Alex Murphy said: “In what world does your employer ...
Analysis - The United States has unveiled plans to boost the weapons trade with Australia and the UK, on the same day that Winston Peters is expected to sketch NZ's position on AUKUS. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrea Carson, Professor of Political Communication, Department of Politics, Media and Philosophy, La Trobe University Since Australia’s First Nations Voice to Parliament referendum in October 2023, diverse commentaries have sought to explain why it failed. But what does an analysis of media ...
Lawyers representing two iwi as well as the Māori Women’s Welfare League on Wednesday asked the Court of Appeal to overturn last week’s High Court decision on the Waitangi Tribunal’s decision to summons Children’s Minister Karen Chhour. The Tribunal is currently investigating the Government’s decision to repeal section 7AA of ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra The Albanese government will introduce legislation to ban deepfake pornography and provide more funding for the eSafety Commission to pilot age-assurance technologies. The contribution of internet sites to gender-based violence was one major issue ...
Average ordinary time hourly earnings, as measured by the Quarterly Employment Survey (QES), increased 5.2 percent in the year to the March 2024 quarter, according to figures released by Stats NZ today. Annual wage cost inflation, as measured by the ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dimitrios Salampasis, FinTech Capability Lead | Senior Lecturer, Emerging Technologies and FinTech, Swinburne University of Technology Clem Onojeghuo/Unsplash In the digital era, the job market is increasingly becoming a minefield – demanding and difficult to navigate. According to the Australian Bureau ...
As of the March 2024 quarter, we can now look back on 20 years of data related to youth not in employment, education, or training (NEET), as collected by the Household Labour Force Survey (HLFS), according to figures released by Stats NZ today. "The ...
Thousands of workers attended public events in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch today to celebrate International Workers’ Day (May Day), but union representatives are urging caution and vigilance over the Government’s blatantly "anti-worker" ...
The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate was 4.3 percent in the March 2024 quarter, compared with 4.0 percent in the previous quarter, according to figures released by Stats NZ today. ...
The PSA is warning the Government that the sensitive information of New Zealanders held by various agencies will fall into the wrong hands if the latest round of proposed cuts goes ahead. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Talitha Best, Professor of Psychology, CQUniversity Australia Victoria Rodriguez/Unsplash How do sugar rushes work? – W.H, age nine, from Canberra What a terrific question W.H! Let’s explore this, starting with some of the basics. What is sugar? ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karinna Saxby, Research Fellow, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne MART PRODUCTION/Pexels Increasing income support could help keep women and children safe according to new work demonstrating strong links between financial insecurity and domestic violence. ...
ANALYSIS:By Olli Hellmann, University of Waikato When New Zealanders commemorate Anzac Day today on April 25, it’s not only to honour the soldiers who lost their lives in World War I and subsequent conflicts, but also to mark a defining event for national identity. The battle of Gallipoli against ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mark A Gregory, Associate Professor, School of Engineering, RMIT University The telecommunications industry faces a major shakeup following the release of the post-incident report on last November’s 12-hour Optus outage. Telecommunications companies will have to share more information with customers during future ...
Welcome to The Spinoff Bookseller Confessional, in which we get to know Aotearoa’s booksellers. This week: Eden Denyer, bookseller at Unity Books Auckland.Weirdest question/request you’ve had on the shop floorA mother came in looking for anything we might have on Alaskan bison as that was her little boy’s ...
NZCTU Economist Craig Renney said new data released by Statistics New Zealand shows the need for Government to act now, with unemployment rising from 3.4% to 4.3%. ...
The outpouring of anger over Maiki Sherman’s hyperbolic presentation of this week’s ‘nightmare’ poll is itself an overreaction, argues Stewart Sowman-Lund. Politicians love nothing more than to pretend they don’t care about polls. This week, deputy prime minister Winston Peters said he didn’t give a “rat’s derriere” about a TVNZ ...
Asia Pacific Report Ngāti Kahungunu in Aotearoa New Zealand’s Hawkes Bay region has become the first indigenous Māori iwi (tribe) to sign a resolution calling for a “ceasefire in Palestine”, reports Te Ao Māori News. Reporter Te Aniwaniwa Paterson talked to Te Otāne Huata, who has been organising peace rallies ...
By Dale Luma in Port Moresby “We want grants and not concessional loans,” is the crisp message from Papua New Guinea businesses directly affected by the Black Wednesday looting four months ago. The businesses, which lost millions after the January 10 rioting and looting, say they need grants as part ...
Happy May Day. Join a union. Q: What’s worse than a staff break room where the only place to sit and have a cup of tea is on a teetering stack of old pornography magazines? A: Your boss replacing the magazine stacks with chairs that are “heartily encrusted with ...
By Koroi Hawkins, RNZ Pacific editor Former opposition leader Matthew Wale has been announced as the second prime ministerial candidate ahead of the election in Solomon Islands tomorrow. He will face off against former foreign affairs minister Jeremiah Manele, who was announced by the Coalition for National Unity and Transformation ...
We get but one birthday a year – why not make it last as long as possible by scheduling as many meals with friends and family as you can? This is an excerpt from our weekly food newsletter, The Boil Up. How do you celebrate your birthday? Do you celebrate at ...
A Koi Tū discussion paper released today proposes sweeping changes to New Zealand’s media industry. The principal’s key author, Gavin Ellis, explains how journalists have a key role to play in making others value their role in society. This is an abridged version of a piece first published on knightlyviews.com ...
The Government’s spending cuts are again targeting support for Māori with proposed reform of the agency charged with advising on Māori wellbeing and development. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Douglas, Honorary Senior Lecturer, UNSW Aviation., UNSW Sydney The history of budget jet airlines in Australia is a long road littered with broken dreams. New entrants have consistently struggled to get a foothold. Low-cost carrier Bonza has just become the industry’s ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rosalind Dixon, Director, Gilbert + Tobin Centre of Public Law, UNSW Sydney Australia is finally having a sustained conversation about violence against women and what we can do about it. It is more than time. Australian women and girls continue to experience ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Duckett, Honorary Enterprise Professor, School of Population and Global Health, and Department of General Practice and Primary Care, The University of Melbourne stockfour/Shutterstock Preliminary bulk billing data released this week shows a 2.1% rise in bulk billing up to March. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samantha Schulz, Senior Lecturer, University of Adelaide Australia is once again grappling with how we can stop gendered violence in our country. Protests over the weekend show there is enormous community anger over the number of women who are dying and National ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University AnastasiaDudka/Shutterstock What if the government was doing everything it could to stop thieves making off with our money, except the one thing that could really work? That’s how it ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Harrington, Senior Lecturer in English and Cultural Studies, University of Canterbury The Conversation It seems to be a time of old favourites. This month our experts have recommended two new seasons – the second season of Alone Australia (although ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jonti Horner, Professor (Astrophysics), University of Southern Queensland A bright Eta Aquariid meteor photobombed this photo of comet C/2020 F8 (SWAN) in May 2020.Jonti Horner Meteors – commonly known as shooting stars – can be seen on any night of the ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Flannery, Honorary fellow, The University of Melbourne Shutterstock Current concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO₂) in Earth’s atmosphere are unprecedented in human history. But CO₂ levels today, and those that might occur in coming decades, did occur millions of years ago. ...
Winston Peters has been keen to dismiss speculation on our involvement in Aukus but will give a speech tonight on the direction of our foreign policy, writes Anna Rawhiti-Connell in this excerpt from The Bulletin, The Spinoff’s morning news round-up. To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Patrick Usmar, Lecturer in Critical Media Literacies, Auckland University of Technology Getty Images With the coalition government’s ban of student mobile phones in New Zealand schools coming into effect this week, reaction has ranged from the sceptical (kids will just get ...
Hospitals around the country are not allowed to make a single hiring decision without the approval of Te Whatu Ora's head office, including for cleaners and administration staff. ...
A new report on protecting journalism and democracy in New Zealand recommends a levy be charged on global platforms like Facebook and Google to fund media firms undertaking public interest reporting. It also calls for the reinstatement of a powerful Broadcasting Commission to distribute public funding for journalism and other ...
On International Workers' Day, also known as May Day, the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions Te Kauae Kaimahi and the wider union movement are celebrating the proud history of the labour movement during a tough time for working people. ...
From bills to beards, a walk through the former Green co-leader’s time in politics. After close to a decade in politics, James Shaw is preparing to bid farewell to parliament. Tonight will see the former minister deliver his valedictory address, certain to be a speech filled with Shaw’s trademark wit ...
Two months ago, MPs unanimously voted to give themselves a week off in Efeso Collins’ honour. On Tuesday, most were too busy to give even an hour of their time. The day Fa’anānā Efeso Collins died, parliament felt different. In a building that operates at a breakneck pace, everyone stopped ...
India’s election involves hundreds of millions of people and is a months-long affair. Here’s how voting works and what’s at stake.The biggest-ever election in world history started on April 19, with more than 10% of the world’s population eligible to vote. Elections in India, the world’s most populous country ...
Comment: Journalists are very good at telling other people’s stories, but they fall well short when writing about their own profession. Perhaps that is why it is so undervalued. Every successive poll on the public’s attitude toward journalism is more alarming than the last. In the last month we have ...
Opinion: A young Māori woman and her Pacific partner arrive at their local hospital by ambulance. She has gone into labour at just under 24 weeks, but the couple haven’t recognised the symptoms – and don’t know the risks of premature birth for their baby. By the time they arrive, ...
Behind closed doors, NZ First will be arguing fiercely against any watering down of the ministerial decision-making powers in the Bill The post Bishop backtracks after fast-track backlash appeared first on Newsroom. ...
Emotional scenes played out in the Invercargill courthouse on the first two days of the coronial inquest into the death of Gore toddler Lachlan Jones, in which the boy’s mother was accused of disposing of her son’s body. The second season of Newsroom’s award-nominated podcast The Boy in the Water ...
Opinion: The impression from the carpark is very inviting. The area is well fenced but barred so there is easy visibility of loved ones. Inside, the spaces are welcoming and clean and staff are friendly and clearly comfortable. I am greeted by ‘Kim’. She has worked here for three years, ...
After the Christchurch earthquake, the then-national civil defence boss compared his experience to “putting a team on the rugby field who have never ever played together before”. Now, eight years later – and following a damning inquiry into the emergency response of cyclones Gabrielle, Hale and the Auckland anniversary weekend floods – ...
“I had just come off the end of a major robbery case which I had been working on for six months when I got a call on the afternoon of September 1, 1992, that some remains had been found at a building site in Devonport, so I drove over with ...
Loading…(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){var ql=document.querySelectorAll('A,DIV,A[data-quiz],DIV[data-quiz]'); if(ql){if(ql.length){for(var k=0;k<ql.length;k++){ql[k].id='quiz-embed-'+k;ql[k].href="javascript:var i=document.getElementById('quiz-embed-"+k+"');try{qz.startQuiz(i)}catch(e){i.start=1;i.style.cursor='wait';i.style.opacity='0.5'};void(0);"}}};i['QP']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)})(window,document,'script','https://take.quiz-maker.com/3012/CDN/quiz-embed-v1.js','qp'); Got a good quiz question?Send Newsroom your questions. The post Newsroom daily quiz, Wednesday 1 May appeared first on Newsroom. ...
Asia Pacific Report A Pacific civil society alliance has condemned French neocolonial policies in Kanaky New Caledonia, saying Paris is set on “maintaining the status quo” and denying the indigenous Kanak people their inalienable right to self-determination. The Pacific Regional Non-Governmental Organisations (PRNGOs) Alliance, representing some 15 groups, said in ...
Koi Tū New Zealand cannot sit back and see the collapse of its Fourth Estate, the director of Koi Tū: The Centre for Informed Futures, Sir Peter Gluckman, says in the foreword of a paper published today. The paper, “If not journalists, then who?” paints a picture of an industry ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Foreign investment proposals with implications for Australia’s strategic or economic security will face tougher scrutiny, under a policy overhaul to be announced by Treasurer Jim Chalmers on Wednesday. At the same time, the government ...
A Waitangi Tribunal inquiry report has warned government that a repeal of Section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act could cause harm to children in care. ...
The Treasury has published today three new papers covering government consumption multipliers, automatic stabilisers and the impacts of global shocks on New Zealand’s economy. ...
Asia Pacific Report The Pacific state of Hawai’i’s House of Representatives has joined the state’s Senate in calling for a ceasefire in Israel’s war on Gaza, becoming the first state to pass such a resolution, reports Hawaii News Now. In March, the Senate passed a ceasefire resolution with a 24–1 ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Christopher Ferrie, A/Prof, UTS Chancellor’s Postdoctoral Research and ARC DECRA Fellow, University of Technology Sydney PsiQuantum The Australian government has announced a pledge of approximately A$940 million (US$617 million) to PsiQuantum, a quantum computing start-up company based in Silicon Valley. Half ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hunter Bennett, Lecturer in Exercise Science, University of South Australia Cameron Prins/Shutterstock If you spend a lot of time exploring fitness content online, you might have come across the concept of heart rate zones. Heart rate zone training has become more ...
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 http://thestandard.org.nz/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).
http://thestandard.org.nz/robertson-labour-on-the-future-of-work/#comment-1120444
http://thestandard.org.nz/does-the-left-win-by-tacking-to-the-centre-or-by-being-principled/#comment-1070069
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.
http://thestandard.org.nz/labour-horse-water/#comment-1028816
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.
http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-01012014/#comment-752261
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.
http://thestandard.org.nz/2013-the-policy-year/
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.