They cut, we pay

Written By: - Date published: 7:44 am, May 11th, 2011 - 49 comments
Categories: budget 2011, kiwisaver, tax - Tags:

The Nats have run this country into the ground and say there’s no option but to slash Kiwisaver. The actual cuts they announce will be less than foreshadowed, and we will then be expected to be grateful. It’s the Nats’ old trick. But the reality is there’s no need for Kiwisaver cuts at all. Not while the rich keep the tax cuts National gave them.

I reckon they’ll announce they will cut the government contribution by half from$20 per week to $10 – so much for this budget being all about savings. That will reduce the cost of Kiwisaver by something like $400 million a year…. Just about exactly as much as last year’s ‘broadly fiscally neutral’ tax package that gave Key his $1,000 a week tax cut is costing.

49 comments on “They cut, we pay ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Anthony 1
    11 May 2011 at 8:48 am

    “We can’t afford Kiwisaver”

    But we can afford tax cuts for the rich.

    • Colonial Viper 1.1
      11 May 2011 at 9:12 am

      And tens of millions for private schools. And about the same figure to bail out rich foreign investors. See a pattern?

  2. marsman 2
    11 May 2011 at 8:58 am

    We can’t afford Kiwisaver but we can give Warner Bros $40 million, and Mediaworks $40 million etc etc.

    • prism 2.1
      11 May 2011 at 9:08 am

      marsman
      Just remember that at the end of the day Warner Bros millions will produce jobs and income right here in NZ. The Mediaworks dolla-rolla is a dog of a different colour – more a prop to cover government costs, sort of like giving tax cuts to the rich so they don’t have to work so hard!

      • bbfloyd 2.1.1
        11 May 2011 at 12:07 pm

        “warner bros millions will produce jobs and income”…… only if you buy the ruse that the hobbit was ever in danger of being moved from here. if you check the figures, and look into the logistics, that was never a possibility. so the money was a gift. noting more nothing less.

  3. Blue 3
    11 May 2011 at 9:02 am

    We can’t afford Kiwisaver, but we can afford to bail out South Canterbury Finance investors.

    Perhaps that can be the next Kiwi superannuation scheme?

  4. prism 4
    11 May 2011 at 9:03 am

    Talking about the IMF comments this morning radionz interviewed Don Brash to give a third comment. He was introduced as the leader of the ACT party. This miniscule party is being given uncountable election advantage because of having as a leader a widely known personality – first Roger Douglas and now Donald Brash. There are other informed people to round out discussions on the economy if we want understanding. Seems radionz goes for the known fluent right wing arguers with their knee-jerk beliefs and spurious facts expressed in dulcet tones. Perhaps they are dazzled by the self-promotion of past office-bearers from Treasury and failed politicians who are committed to destroying our democracy as we know it.

    • Colonial Viper 4.1
      11 May 2011 at 9:11 am

      You’ve probably realised it by now, but there is a list of “approved” economics experts that the media talks to. If you’re not on that list you’ve literally got no show.

      Brash provides media with a two in one hit – he’s on the approved list and he’s now also the leader of a Government coalition party.

      Radio NZ is funny for having a board which is quite happy to support the NACT Government even as the NACT Government proceedes to disadvantage public broadcasting in this country.

    • Lyall 4.2
      11 May 2011 at 12:45 pm

      “miniscule” ? like the Greens? Like Mana ? Like any other LWNJ party ?

      • Craig Glen Eden 4.2.1
        11 May 2011 at 5:09 pm

        While not a Green supporter they are the third largest political Party in NZ I believe so dont think you can really call them minuscule.

  5. prism 5
    11 May 2011 at 9:33 am

    Thanks CV I didn’t know that there was a tick list for economics experts but did notice that I don’t hear as much from guy from Berl who seems to make good sense – Dr Ganesh Nana. More often its nzier. All you write seems right on the nail.

  6. tc 6
    11 May 2011 at 9:46 am

    Control the media and the message (via the approved list of speakers) and you go a long way to controlling the outcome……it’s worked time and again in the past and concentration of media onwership make this a doddle now.

    What the creditable journo’s would call ‘rent a quote’ easy and lazy ‘journalism’ at it’s finest.

  7. Tiger Mountain 7
    11 May 2011 at 10:23 am

    Sometimes I wonder why do these turkeys (Bract and Natz) even make a pretense of bothering to run a nation state.
    • they oversee a transfer of wealth to the top 10% in NZ and a transfer of profit off shore to their parasitic mates wherever possible
    • they slash and burn driving incomes down and reducing social services
    • they then reduce the ability to fight back by weakening unions with the 90 day fire at will and freedom of association limiting legislation
    • they build more private prisons and institute a surveillance culture to keep tabs on those that dare to speak up while increasing police ability to inflict lethal force and obtain ‘compliance’
    • they make a travesty of parliament with abuse of urgency
    • they have a pathological hatred of public ownership and democratic forms

    And on top of all that the tories rely on a balls deep msm to keep as many as possible under informed, miss-informed or diverted. The Super City showed where they would really like to go-corporatism with sinking lids on all expenditure and not many if any windows of accountability.

    Now maybe they will annoy middle income people enough with these Kiwisaver and WFF cuts to open up a bit of space for the left to rearrange the numbers prior to the election, that would be good because if these pricks sneak in for a second term this country really will be run into the ground for many years to come.

    • infused 7.1
      11 May 2011 at 11:08 am

      yawn.

      Half baked imo. Labour never had a problem with the media when it was in power. They were doing all the work for them. How the times have changed.

      Labour bought this whole slash and burn on themselves. Labour = spend spend spend. There is nothing to spend.

      • marsman 7.1.1
        11 May 2011 at 11:55 am

        ‘Labour never had a problem with the media when it was in power’ ???? Seriously?? The repeated bullshit about Helen Clark in a speeding limo ? Not so for John Key ,they did a whitewash job for him. The hounding of Chris Carter ? Not so for Pansy Wong. Bill English rorting half a million bucks? Quickly forgotten. And on and on.

        • Armchair Critic 7.1.1.1
          11 May 2011 at 11:58 am

          Paula Bennett and the breach of privacy? Richard Worth and something that is not in the public interest for us to know?

      • bbfloyd 7.1.2
        11 May 2011 at 12:13 pm

        not forgetting the year long campaign run relentlessly against the electoral finance act..”attack on democracy”!!!!

        not forgetting the “fact”, as agreed by the national minister of finance, that the nz economy was in excellent shape to deal with the global recession.

        spend spend spend………yeah right……. dickhead.

      • fraser 7.1.3
        11 May 2011 at 12:21 pm

        considering that neo-con politics all round the world follows pretty much the same playbook over and over again it shouldnt be long till thats the labour party’s fault too. Who knew they had so much influence.

      • lprent 7.1.4
        11 May 2011 at 12:36 pm

        Labour never had a problem with the media when it was in power.

        Bullshit. The same issues keep arising and have been getting more and more of problem ever since I first started getting involved in politics in the 70’s.

        It has never mattered what the state of the economy is, the media report only the minimum of Labour policy. Over the years even that has moved from straight reporting to what we get now, where the detractions of the policy are often put before the policy is enunciated. 

        Quite simply you’d have to be blind and deaf to not know all that. But I guess being a RWNJ is much the same

      • Campbell Larsen 7.1.5
        11 May 2011 at 2:00 pm

        Infused – or more accuratly, confused – you must be half baked if you think that people actually buy that tired old line ‘it’s Labours fault’ especially after the Rats have almost had a full term…

        Yep, your yawn gives you away – get off the smack mate – that shit is almost as bad for you as reading the Herald or watching TV3

        • Colonial Viper 7.1.5.1
          11 May 2011 at 2:06 pm

          Now who is going to stump up the $15M-$20M needed to start up a Lefty MSM channel?

          • Campbell Larsen 7.1.5.1.1
            11 May 2011 at 2:24 pm

            The content (news anyway) could be produced a lot cheaper than that, there are plently of writers here and elsewhere – the frequencies are a bit more tricky – maybe it would be possible to utalise some of those allocated to Iwi…

            But essentially the frequencies belong to everyone, and are not the governments to sell to the highest bidder anyway. Once upon a time people dreamed of the great things that could be achived through mass communication – this hope gave birth to public service broadcasting.

            We should not have to buy a place in the MSM – we should already be represented there, the people are in fact owed this.

            The duopoly in the MSM must be deconstructed.

    • Draco T Bastard 8.1
      11 May 2011 at 1:48 pm

      Exactly.

      • Colonial Viper 8.1.1
        11 May 2011 at 1:52 pm

        Bankers are the cornerstone of the NZ economy. Banks provide tens of thousands of financial industry jobs in this country and make available crucial financial capital to let this economy grow. Anything the banks do in this country they do to help aspiring businesses and individuals reach success.

        You seething ungrateful masses, what’s your problem now?

        😀

        (This is fun, I might have to do a full day of role reversal just for practice)

        [lprent: You’re still sounding too intelligent. I wouldn’t even give that one a glance. You need to get closer to dumb it down further if you want to get a troll alert. ]

  9. Carol 9
    11 May 2011 at 11:06 am

    Huh! Stuff toook their Kiwisaver poll off the front page pretty quickly. The percentage voting to say Nats are not keeping their election promises has been gradually growing:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/budget-2011/4986635/Nats-bet-on-support-for-KiwiSaver-cuts

    • lprent 9.1
      11 May 2011 at 12:40 pm

      Stupid poll even for online. It appears you can press Vote as many times as you like and each click counts as a vote.

      • Lanthanide 9.1.1
        11 May 2011 at 1:27 pm

        Nope, it doesn’t. They do track IP addresses. If the numbers go up between subsequent viewing of the results, it’s because other people have voted in that time period.

        • lprent 9.1.1.1
          11 May 2011 at 1:48 pm

          Obviously I couldn’t check from this side. But I ran a test of about 20 clicks and had number turnover almost exactly in accordance with my clicks (twice there was an extra one). It could be the local javascript just ticking over the local count, but since it was popping the results up in a separate window I presumed that they were ajaxing it.

          • Lanthanide 9.1.1.1.1
            11 May 2011 at 5:16 pm

            Admittedly I haven’t checked this out recently, but last year I did several tests with multiple votes from the same computer during quiet times, and it didn’t count them.

      • Pascal's bookie 9.1.2
        11 May 2011 at 1:30 pm

        That’s the least of its problems

        Will cuts to KiwiSaver and sales of stakes in state assets see you change your vote?

        That’s just laughably bad.

  10. Armchair Critic 10
    11 May 2011 at 11:57 am

    How do cuts to Kiwisaver help achieve the National Party’s stated aim of catching up with Australia? It seems to me that to match Australia, cuts are the polar opposite of what is required.

  11. Carol 11
    11 May 2011 at 11:59 am

    Cunliffe on the possible cuts to Kiwi saver:

    http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/cunliffe-cutting-kiwisaver-dumb-4165096

    He said Labour believes KiwiSaver is very important to keep New Zealand’s economy going and to lift the country’s savings rate, but he said Labour would also review the scheme.

    “We would review KiwiSaver to build on it. We think it’s a great platform. We want to see more New Zealanders involved and saving more, not less.”

    But Cunliffe would not be more specific about what Labour would do with the scheme.

    “Let’s see what the government does. It’s not our intention to reduce the benefits in KiwiSaver. It’s our intention to make the scheme better and broader and to have more New Zealanders involved.”

    Cunliffe said the problem is that New Zealanders went on a binge and borrowed to buy property.

    “We’ve got all our wealth tied up in that and not enough in savings and our country is short of capital. We have to have every Kiwi able to save. KiwiSaver is the best scheme around for doing that. It’s been very successful, the best scheme since (former prime minister Sir Robert) Muldoon canned the last one.”

    …. just for those bloggers and MSM journos that say Labour and/or The Left only comment in a critical way on trivialities.

  12. RedLogix 12
    11 May 2011 at 12:51 pm

    I choose tax cuts for the rich, they’re better people than you’s ordinary scum and I’m really a ‘millionaire in waiting’.

  13. Herodotus 13
    11 May 2011 at 1:47 pm

    Nice to see that Nat is actually looking after the poor and average person, and not taking money off the poor and giving to those well off. Anyone who pays taxes is contributing to the subsidy of this scheme. There are many out there that their budget does not allow to be able to benefit from Labs giveaway and join up to the scheme or are able to have a “holiday” contribution wise. Those on good incomes are able to benfit the most, how can beneficaries, those over 65, min wage etc be able to max the govt assistance? They cannot. Even those on what many consider good incomes are unable to contribute to this scheme, as tough times do not allow.
    Unless ALL are able to be included in the scheme, IMO then the generous govt subsidies should not apply.
    I just love $1.6b p.a. being paid out to 1/3 of NZers that we all pay for.!!!

  14. randal 14
    11 May 2011 at 1:54 pm

    in answer to the question you ring up HQ of ‘democracy international corp” and ask for a copy of the branch managers manual then get the actuaries to work out how much you can actually screw out of the peasants before they rebel!
    DIC!

  15. Kaplan 15
    11 May 2011 at 4:02 pm

    Register your opposition to Kiwisaver cuts here:
    Leave Kiwisaver Alone

    • Herodotus 15.1
      11 May 2011 at 4:18 pm

      And support the subsidy for the rich by the poor. Pity many here FAIL to see this. It will continue untril Kiwisaver is compo and we all get the same $$ entitlement. $1.6b p.a. for 1.6m people what about the other 3m people. And I bet that of the 1.6m that there are many who do not contribute or are not financially able to, and thus fail to get the $1,024 p.a. additional benefit.
      Pity we have so many financially illiterate out there that are unable to see 😉

      • TightyRighty 15.1.1
        11 May 2011 at 4:59 pm

        Isn’t kiwisaver taken out of wages and compulsory unless you opt out within three months?

        So why don’t you ask the three million others yourself numbnuts.

        • Herodotus 15.1.1.1
          11 May 2011 at 5:19 pm

          TR what about the $1.6b that the govt contributes each year and the fees that they also cover. opting out is still not compo, yet anyone who receives an income payes taxes. All this kiwisaver was was a sweetner from Cullen to the middle classes and by taking some money out of the money system allowing for an indirect tightening. It was a more pallitable means of “savings” than Peters idea of compo contributions until your personnel account maxed out at around $75k. It was still a very shallow means of preparing for retirement yet for what it delivers very expensive for the country, especially as Cullen and co knew that we were entering a prolonged period of deficits.
          As someone who purports a political philosophy even you should be able to see the many short commings of this, or do I over estimate you?

      • Lanthanide 15.1.2
        11 May 2011 at 5:18 pm

        Children under the age of 18 are not eligible for the tax credits, regardless of what they contribute. As a result, many parents set up accounts for their children, get the $1,000 kickstart and don’t contribute anything further.

        • Herodotus 15.1.2.1
          11 May 2011 at 5:25 pm

          They still get the benfit of having some charges paid for.
          So that makes the $1.6b annual charge to benefit even fewer people. So those who actually benefit is inxs of the $400 p.p. average.
          It also discriminates those over 65, as they are not able to upgrade their income package to compensate for the fact that they do not receive the 2% (was 4%) company subsidy. Thus their package is now less than any other worker for performing the same job.

  16. Fat Uncle 16
    11 May 2011 at 6:15 pm

    My taxes don’t pay for early childhood education, women’s refuge, adult education, ‘back office staff’ in places like bio-security, investment in the super fund or in Kiwisaver to the same degree but they do pay for interest free loans to media companies, bailouts of finance and insurance companies, new beemers, doing up Key’s house, flights around the country, the DPS and the promotion of New Zealand which is probably less effective than having a competent Prime Minister front hardtalk.

    So really why do I have to keep paying them?

    This isn’t what I or my parents or their parents signed up for.

    Investing in Key’s house over our future.

    It’s ‘affordable’ for a guy who will never have to worry about money or his future security in his life.

  17. Fat Uncle 17
    11 May 2011 at 6:17 pm

    Knowing it is a political football undermines the scheme as something long term and reliable.

    In fact that is everything in our country while the Nats are in power.