Will Labour reveal their tax increases policy before the election?
October 22nd, 2008 at 10:00 am by David FarrarSmart readers will have noted Labour have been very careful not to rule out tax increases after the election. They have said they will not reverse their current tax cuts, but they have left open introducing new taxes, or a new “rich rich prick” tax rate of 45c for those who earn over $100,000.
The Herald reports that Labour have basically already spent their contingency spending money for the next three years. This means that if Labour is re-elected they will either have to go through three years of making no spending promises or they will put up taxes.
Yesterday Dr Cullen said strong leadership was needed to ensure the overseas crisis did not lead to a “depression” in New Zealand.
“Labour is simply not prepared to let that happen,” Dr Cullen said.
“We will bring forward spending on infrastructure to create real jobs and build the potential for future growth … now is not the time to slash spending as our opponents are proposing.”
The hypocrisy of these statements are massive. Up until a few weeks ago Dr Cullen was attacking National’s plans for increased infrastructure spending. Cullen and Clark said it was madness and lunacy. They have done the mother of all u-turns.
But he also gets it wrong about “slashing spending”. Yes National will look to eleiminate some low quality spending – but the major change it is making is reducing the amount of money going into KiwiSaver in the short term. Now Dr Cullen is saying that in a recession you need increased activity to help you out of it – well that is exactly what National are doign by temporarily diverting some money from savings into spending and tax cuts – both of which help minimise a recession.
So by Dr Cullen’s own logic, National’s policies will provide a greater short-term stimulus to the economy. You save more in the good times and you save less and spend more in the tight times – exactly what National is doing. Cullen just can not admit that his 4%/4% KiwiSaver policy is nno longer suitable for today’s economic climate – it was a policy for when we had massive surpluses.
Related posts:
- Who to blame, and what to do with the economy
- Cullen’s scorched earth policy has succeeded
- Gap increases to 33%
- Cullen talks depression not recession
October 22nd, 2008 at 10:18 am
DPF: You save more in the good times and you save less and spend more in the tight times
I hope readers don’t follow this advice. This Keynesian economics will now meet the mother of all demises.
People, if spending creates wealth, Zimbabwe would be rich. It’s just a crazy economic theory, and if you don’t believe me, just look at the DOW index in 1931 and compare it to 1939. Also compare the unemployment statistics at the beginning and end of that decade.
That’s why it doesn’t really matter if we elect National or Labour, both will be disastrous.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 10:20 am
Keynes, it seems, is back.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 10:26 am
Clark has to be asked this question “will you rule out any increase in income tax should you form the next govt?”
another on capital gains tax should follow given its high on the greens wish list
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 10:33 am
A capital gains tax is a certainty should Labour form the next govt with the Greens and as DPF suggests we will also see the implementation of an envy tax (45c)
Unlike DPF I do not think it will come in at 100K, it is more likely to come in at around the 80K mark.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 10:34 am
There could be a good fun advert about two Cullens or two Clarks on borrowing, infrastructure etc.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 10:34 am
Don’t forget a re-introduction of the Death Tax! That one is itching to be let out of its coffin for another run at “inherited wealth” – something that the tall poppy cutters would dearly love to extinguish.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 10:38 am
Labour to announce a ‘nasty’ policy and seek a electoral mandate prior to implementing it… you got to be joking.
EFA – no
Vote:ETS – no
Anti-Smacking – no
etc etc etc
October 22nd, 2008 at 10:42 am
so berend … are you saying that ACT will have no effect whatsoever on a John Key led National Government? Gueez, clearly you don’t have too much faith in Rodney and co.
Why bother vote for them then?
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 10:47 am
If there is one thing i trust Labour on , it is to renege on its promises.Labour is all about taxes.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 10:52 am
Taxes, and LICE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AnxPuidq1qQ
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 10:55 am
Don’t for get the ultimate ‘rich pricks’ tax, a 5% annual tax on the capital value of all homes with a QV of of over $1.0 mil. No wait, make that $800k. We won’t tax investment properties though, because Helen has six of those. But we will apply this tax to dairy farms – their owners are the nouveau riche priques.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 11:01 am
So why isn’t key laying into the deceiving thieves?
If they increase taxes, I’m gone. I already pay sooo much – I wouldn’t mind if there were some return, but overall I am worse off than 10 years ago.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 11:04 am
Here is Victor Davis Hanson in the day before yesterday’s Washington Times: THIS ADVICE APPLIES EQUALLY TO NZ:
“…….Americans cannot charge all we desire on unlimited credit. Surely one of our presidential candidates can warn the American people to save a little more, use our credit cards a little less and pay off what we already owe.
The government can only hand out more entitlements by borrowing even more to pay for them. Raising taxes on anyone in a recession is insane. But even crazier is cutting them further at a time of skyrocketing national debt without commensurate reductions in spending.
So who will tell the people that we can’t raise – or reduce – taxes and can’t borrow for any more new programs until we first cut expenses……..”
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 11:04 am
Death duties eh? Mmm Thats been on the labor wish list for some time. Wouldn’t surprise me that they would bring it back if they return to power. Still in adversity there is opportunity, trust lawyers will get a massive spike in activity!
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 11:07 am
Here is Paul Rubin, in “Get Ready For The New New Deal”, in todays’s Wall Street Journal:
“In 1932, Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt was elected president as the nation was heading into a severe recession. The stock market had crashed in 1929, the world’s economy was slowing down, and all economic indicators in the U.S. showed signs of trouble.
The new president’s response was to restructure the economy with the New Deal — an expansion of the role of government once unimaginable in America. We now know that FDR’s policies likely prolonged the Great Depression because the economy never fully recovered in the 1930s, and actually got worse in the latter half of the decade. And we know that FDR got away with it (winning election four times) by blaming his predecessor, Herbert Hoover, for crashing the economy in the first place.
Today, the U.S. is in better shape than in 1932. But it faces similar circumstances. The stock market has been in a tail spin, credit markets have locked up, and a surging Democratic presidential candidate is running on expanding the role of government, laying the blame for the economic turmoil on the current occupant of the White House and his party’s economic policies.
Barack Obama is one of the most liberal members of the Senate. His reaction to the financial crisis is to blame deregulation. He even leverages fear of deregulation onto other issues. For example, Sen. John McCain wants to allow consumers to buy health insurance across state lines. Mr. Obama likens this to the financial deregulation that he alleges got us into the current mess…….
“But if the coming wave of new regulation from an Obama administration is harmful to the economy, Mr. Obama will take a page from FDR’s playbook. He’ll blame Republicans for having caused the market crash in the first place, and so escape blame for the consequences of his policies. It worked for FDR and, so far in this campaign, blaming Republicans and George W. Bush has worked for Mr. Obama.
Democrats draw their political power from trial lawyers, unions, government bureaucrats, environmentalists, and, perhaps, my liberal colleagues in academia. All of these voting blocs seem to favor a larger, more intrusive government. If things proceed as they now appear likely to, we can expect major changes in policies that benefit these groups.
If those of us who favor free markets for the freedom and prosperity they bring are right, the political system may soon put our economy on track for a catastrophe.”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455099434052597.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 11:09 am
Forget about death duties – any increase in any taxes will be the kiss of death for this country. The tidal wave of emigration after a Labour victory will be immense without any extra incentive like this.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 11:26 am
So will any of the left wing MSM ask the obvious question as to why the socialists wont release their MiniBudget before the election
Ask them whether disclosure and transperancey is part of their governance policy
Ask them why they wont Are they too scared to tell the voters what they plan
Come on Guyon Fran M John C Mark S Duncan etc etc Have you got any balls or are you just a bunch of socialists poodles
Call yourselves journalists What a joke you all are
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 11:33 am
Why aren’t the media going ape-shit and yelling Secret Agenda at every opportunity?!?
Edit: um, what gd said too!
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 11:42 am
“Why aren’t the media going ape-shit and yelling Secret Agenda at every opportunity?!?”
I think that’s National’s job, isn’t it?!
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 11:46 am
Don’t forget the ETS
Vote:Remember the tax increase from that is twice as much as the Labour’s tax cuts
October 22nd, 2008 at 11:47 am
what gd & getstaffed said!
why dont ACT! run some attack ads???
national want to go with their soft sell approach – which i think is the right way…
Get ACT! to go nuts! they would get a swing in votes!
Labour “attack” ads would pale in comparison to the footage we have on them!
maybe one ad that just shows the various labour ministers going to court?
hell, just an ad of mallard slobbering all over the place would do
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 12:00 pm
Wasn’t Cullen a history teacher? If so, he should know better that increasing tax during tight time never works. He should check out the results of what Hoover and Roosevelt did increasing tax just before and during the Great Depression…
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 12:25 pm
NoCash – he has a phd in economic and social history…
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 12:26 pm
NoCash, NEVER underestimate the capacity of a socialist to draw the WRONG LESSONS from historical observation. These people actually believe that FDR “solved” the depression. In fact, I remember being TAUGHT THAT at (State) High School. I have since learned better on my own, but I would wager that a majority of the ignorant masses who actually have any opinion one way or the other on FDR and the depression, would opt for the notion that “tax and spend” was the RIGHT thing to do.
Depressing, I know.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 12:30 pm
From today’s “Australian”:
“Government heeds Reserve’s warnings with fee for $1 million deposits”
Jennifer Hewett and David Uren | October 22, 2008
“THE Government has backflipped on its free unlimited bank deposit guarantee after it emerged Reserve Bank governor Glenn Stevens gave advice to impose a fee for large sums to avoid distortions to the financial markets…….”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24531324-601,00.html
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 12:35 pm
That’s not the point. If he wasn’t bothered by the size of the current account deficit, the decline in productivity or the widening wage gap with Australia, he’s not going to be bothered by a little thing like a recession.
If an increase in taxation keeps the number of public sector employees stable or growing, and they don’t have to face the wage restraint of lesser workers in the private sector, he will have achieved his primary aim. That is to maintain a constituency that will vote for Labour and hinder any conservative Government that replaces him. We’ve had in the last 9 years a simple exercise in realpolitik. taxes are increased to punish Labour’s enemies- and he’s not crying over the loss of talent overseas. Benefits are used to slowly transform an independent citizenry into clients dependent on the state rather than their own resources. It’s the 21st C version of bread and circuses. You don’t want free people, you want clients that depend on you. They’re not in power to serve the people, they’re in power because they believe they are better than the people.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 12:36 pm
So you acknowledge that the MSM do Labour’s job when National is so accused?
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 12:46 pm
philbest – i was basically taught he solved the depression.. although it didnt go into depth.. we were too busy studying 16th century england..
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 1:08 pm
“So by Dr Cullen’s own logic….” you expect economic logic from Labour???
Vote:The only logic is political expediency, he is just playing to the target market…
October 22nd, 2008 at 1:09 pm
“we were too busy studying 16th century england..”
I hear it was quite similar to 20th century New Zealand in terms of public services and infrastructure.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Managing this strikes me as being reasonably simple. National need to start saying at every opportunity….”when Labour increases taxes in their mini-budget later this year”. Cullen then has to confirm , deny or obfuscate. Confirm and they are dead meat. Deny or obfuscate (most likely) and the trust issue is neatly reversed. This issue can potentially nail Labour, and every journalist with half a brain or conscience should be pursuing it.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 1:47 pm
I’m of the view that the MSM will get on something once the a political party starts making noises about it – i could be wrong, but isn’t this what happened earlier in the year with Labour saying ‘National not releasing any policy = secret agenda’, so the media start pointing out the fact that National isn’t releasing policy ‘x’ months out from the election. Chicken or the egg maybe…
To compound the point, National have not done a good job of of running a razor sharp political campaign with all the gaffs etc. Labour knows how to do it (although they seem a bit unhinged lately).
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Will Labour reveal their tax increases policy before the election?
Are you mad? If you were a hunter, stalking up on some prey, would you stand up, while still out of range, and shout “Look at me! Ive got a rifle and I’m coming for you”
The lame stream media need to get off their arses on this one.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 2:10 pm
This latest conspiracy theory of yours simple fails the credibility test i’m afraid DPF. People who earn over $100,000 make up perhaps 5% of the electorate, and the vast majority of them will be voting for Act and National anyhow. Labour has no reason to not just introduce this wealth tax notice john key has behaved like a prick, but not all wealthy people harass women about not having children (the context which the “rich prick comment was made). They aren’t all pricks.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 2:15 pm
roger – why throw in the “rich” part then?
generally youd through call someone a “&%^$ prick” if you saw the first part of what you said as a negative.
say you were fat and i was going to call you a prick.. id probably call you a “fat prick”.. cause i see it as adding a more negative effect..
i wouldnt say “you good bastard prick”
“you thoughtful prick” (not if i were abusing you.)
to sum up… cullen sees being “rich” as something bad.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Dime
nah – don’t think cullen sees being rich as a bad thing (i.e. nz’s top tax rate is significantly lower than Australia’s). John key is wealthy, therefore has a lot of social power, status, power and knowledge, yet he’s still makes a comment which is sexist/bigoted.
Bigoted people are often that way because they come from a position of social insecurity and ignorance. John Key has neither excuse – that’s the point i think cullen was trying to make.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 2:35 pm
“Bigoted people”
You mean like Helen Clark, Sue Bradford and Russell Norman, who claimed that the more than eighty percent of the population opposing the anti-smacking legislation were “right wing fundamentalists”?
Sounds like bigotry to me.
How about the fact that the most viscous anti-Israeli bigots are all members of the Labour/Green axis?
How about the fact that the most viscous anti-American bigots are all members of the Labour/Green axis?
The Left loves bigotry and hatred when it suits them.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 2:39 pm
# roger nome (3888) 0 3 Says:
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:10 pm
“This latest conspiracy theory of yours simple fails the credibility test i’m afraid DPF. People who earn over $100,000 make up perhaps 5% of the electorate, and the vast majority of them will be voting for Act and National anyhow. Labour has no reason to not just introduce this wealth tax notice john key has behaved like a prick, but not all wealthy people harass women about not having children (the context which the “rich prick comment was made). They aren’t all pricks.”
AHA. Soooo, Roger Nome, you are privy to 9th floor of the Beehive decisions, eh? You’re arguing that Labour DOESN’T need to release details of their policy because YOU can assure us it only involves increased taxes on people who earn more than 100 Grand?
Kindly tell us your rank in the Labour Government Hierarchy, and kindly put the detail out properly in a Press Release like we are asking and like you insist the Nats do.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 2:42 pm
# Lee (195) 1 0 Says:
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:35 pm
“Bigoted people”
You mean like Helen Clark, Sue Bradford and Russell Norman, who claimed that the more than eighty percent of the population opposing the anti-smacking legislation were “right wing fundamentalists”?
Sounds like bigotry to me.
How about the fact that the most viscous anti-Israeli bigots are all members of the Labour/Green axis?
How about the fact that the most viscous anti-American bigots are all members of the Labour/Green axis?
The Left loves bigotry and hatred when it suits them.”
Especially where “Christian Fundamentalism” is concerned. In fact, that is what is mostly at the root of anti-Americanism. If only Americans could be nice trustworthy apostates like the “enlightened” Europeans, we’d love them too, eh.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 2:50 pm
AH. As usual, Rodney Hide is the only politician actually speaking the unpalatable truth:
Clark And Key Playing Politics With The Economy
Rodney Hide MP
Wednesday, October 22 2008
“ACT Leader Rodney Hide today accused both Prime Minister Helen Clark and National Leader John Key of being ‘head-in-the-sand’ over New Zealand’s economic crisis, and of playing politics to get through the election at a time when economic leadership and direction is needed.
“Mr Key is playing ‘me too’ with Labour’s wild spending policies and promises. He must know they’re unaffordable – which makes him irresponsible in the extreme,” Mr Hide said.
“He has today again ruled out Roger Douglas from Cabinet, blithely parroting Helen Clark’s line that Roger Douglas and ACT’s policies are extreme.
“In the weeks and months ahead, John Key’s government will need all the help and experience the country can muster. That’s why people who know how vulnerable New Zealand is to the world economic meltdown should give a Party vote to ACT.
“ACT has made no bottom lines or demands for its support, as we consider New Zealand’s situation too dire to be playing politics.
“We also know that what Clark and Key say now will change dramatically after the election – and they know it too,” Mr Hide said….”
ENDS
Vote:Authorised by Nick Kearney, 137 Beach Haven Road, Auckland
October 22nd, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Cullens ultimate plan is to have all income paid directly to the govt, which owns and pays for everything and we all just get pocket money.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 3:00 pm
What about a “Gay Tax”?
They have less overheads as most couples are professionals, reasonable incomes and no dependents.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Viscous bigots?
Are you saying that they are a bit thick?
roger nome, you are a such a stinking apologist ponce. If you truly believe some of the total shit you write then you have real problems.
Cullen is a fucking buffoon and if his fat, feathered arse is still on the treasury benches come November 9th then we are in deeper shit than we could ever begin to imagine.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 3:02 pm
The productive sector needs to fight back.
How about all the “rich pricks” don’t pay their staff for 3 months and see how long Clark and co last.
Labour will attack the banks, but love credit cards and easy loans as it makes their voters feel rich without having to work hard for anything. Would be interesting to know how many students have iPhones or the average size TV for a beneficiary.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Rodney needs to become like a pit bull on heat and savage Labour at every turn. Make up some McCain style ads about Labour and plast them on TV.
National needs to play it safe to pick up the centre vote, but ACT should be let loose.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Southern Raider (647) Vote: Add rating1 Subtract rating 0 Says:
October 22nd, 2008 at 3:02 pm
“The productive sector needs to fight back.
How about all the “rich pricks” don’t pay their staff for 3 months and see how long Clark and co last……”
Southern Raider, have you ever read “Atlas Shrugged”?……. I think you’d love it……..
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Southern Raider (647) Vote: 1 0 Says:
October 22nd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Far better pay the staff but not the Gst/Paye – no cash – no govt
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 3:56 pm
or – no cash, go straight to jail, get replaced by someone who wants the job…
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 6:16 pm
I’ve got one. How about all we ‘rich pricks’ go and register as organ donors.
First, we go through the testing regime, at a cost of about $12k to the tax payer.
And then, the day the tax increases take effect, we withdraw our names en masse.
Vote:October 22nd, 2008 at 6:18 pm
By the way, I’m already doing it.
Vote:October 23rd, 2008 at 4:04 am
What’s Cullen going to do with the rest of his life once he’s booted out of office on 8 November?
Retire and move back to the UK?
Vote:October 23rd, 2008 at 5:49 am
I went to an Ohariu candidates meeting in Wellington last night. I asked Charles Chauvel if Labour would raise taxes in December if re-elected. He said “definitely not”. I think I will write to him and get him to confirm what he said on Labour party letterhead – could be quite a souvenir if he is wrong or being “Winston” with the truth!
Vote:October 23rd, 2008 at 6:48 am
LOL.
Nome speaking on behalf of Kullen.
Fuck me – the retarded speaking on behalf of those chronically out of their depth.
Vote:October 23rd, 2008 at 7:42 am
Clark has to be asked this question “will you rule out any increase in income tax should you form the next govt?”
Already asked and answered, chillingly!
Vote:The very first question – and she fudges the answer. It is completely behoven on every commentator, blogger and person who wants to rid themselves of this repugnant regime to keep hammering this point – Labour is going to cancel their tax-cuts and increase taxes if re-elected. It is their secret agenda.
October 23rd, 2008 at 9:10 am
Her answers are a disgrace, fobbing off people and crowing on about Welfare For Families. The fiscal drag one is a pearler, as is the one about the billboard photo. If she had really wanted to look her best she could have at least worn a paper bag on her ugly mug.
What a cancerous disgusting piece of work she really is.
Vote: