Tax Cuts in nineteen hours instead of nine years
Under Labour, we had to wait nine years for tax cuts.
After around nineteen hours of Parliament under National, they have legislated for tax cuts in 2009, 2010 and 2011. They will give a worker on the average wage a whopping $47 a week more.
The third reading passed 68-52 a short time ago.
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: National, tax cuts
December 11th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
Whats this 2009 and then 2010 and then 2011..
Since when did they say they would be strung out over 3 years, or was that in the clever wording of the tax cut promise too
[DPF: If you can't read their policy, then NCEA has a lot to answer for]
December 11th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Don’t be thick Jacob. That’s what they promised. Perhaps you might need to be a little more educated.
December 11th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Sushi
JVH isn’t intelligent enough yet to enrol in play school
December 11th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Well, give ‘m this one. With legislation they’re off to a good start. The maiden speeches were promising as well. So surprise me more guys.
December 11th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Anyone earning $45,000 or less and receiving WFF will gain nothing from this bill. 75% of taxpayers earn less than $45,000 and a very large number of them have children.
Those earning $14-24,000 will actually be worse off – a fair number of part time workers, and those earning the minimum wage.
This is a tax bill that cuts significantly at the top end, but delivers less than a dollar a week after three years for the average worker, and actually takes away for a significant number of people on low incomes. It is typical National policy, in other words.
[DPF: It is not true a large number have children. Only 20% of families get WFF]
December 11th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Brings back memories of a certain billboard in 2005
http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2008/12/taxcuts.html
December 11th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
georgedarroch FFS Those earning under $45K DONT PAY TAX and get a handout from ME to boot if they have produced enouigh kids Ive paid for WWF you smuck and I dont mind doing that either
But I bloody well object when morons like you start bleating at me getting some of my stolen money back
Join the real world the old Communist regime of 1999 to 2008 is gone.
Time to put head down and bum up and starting doing some productive work and join the dwindling numbers of us who have carried the lazy for the past 9 years
December 11th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
And if you’re earning $45k and you’re not on WFF (ie. not supported by the Communist Regime) you get a whole $10. Woo hoo! 20c per week!
If you save up, you could by a packet of chewing gum every three weeks! Or a block of cheese every year!
[DPF: Wrong on every count. On $45,000 the tax cuts in total are $47 a week, and 1 April alone is an extra $19 a week.]
December 11th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Go George! And then, if you’re earning $45,000 and enjoying a 20 cents per week tax break you can go and get a new job, which given your earning power is likely to be in a small workplace in the largely non-union private sector services… and then get sacked for trying to organise for a union. National’s idea of paradise!
[DPF: It is $47 a week not 20c a week on $45,000.]
December 11th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
FFS!! If you lefties want to get into “fairness” – how about the fact that over the last 9 years I have had to pay a shit load more tax than some one earning $45k, so why shouldn’t I get more (of MY money) back proportionally?
December 11th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
george & jafa: how about encouraging people to aspire to more, work hard and expect less by way of handouts from their fellow NZers, ie take increasing levels of responsibility for their own lives.
and whatever you think National’s idea of paradise is, mine is edged closer by the absence of neo-communist flakes that have messed with NZ for the last decade.
December 11th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
jafapete, he’d be sacked for not having enough brains to wait 90 days before staring to organise for a union.
December 11th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Whoops, for all earners up $40k not receiving you get the $10.
The median income in New Zealand is $27,924. You need to be earning $12k more than the median income to see more than a block of cheese. And not getting a cent of assistance from the Communist Regime.
December 11th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Bandycoot – the leftie idea of fairness is when you and your wealth are parted for the primary purpose of keeping the left in cash, and the secondary purpose of keeping the left’s voters just subservient enough to be assured of their continued ballot-box loyalty, but not so desperate so at to revolt. It’s a delicate balancing act.. but the Chardonnay helps
December 11th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
How about raising wages, by increasing the minimum wage, and by allowing people to bargain collectively against their employers. You increase the minimum wage $1.25 per hour, and that worker gets more in one day than they would get in tax cuts in an entire year.
And don’t tell me it can’t be done. NZ and Australia had the same wages in the early 1980s, but the Government in Australia continued to increase minimum wage levels through the 1980s and 1990s, so that a minimum youth wage now works out to $15AUD per hour. Adult minimum wages are considerably higher again. And don’t talk to me about productivity. Australian wages followed growth in productivity, while NZ wages were deliberately divorced from it – productivity increased while wages stayed flat
December 11th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
the lefties cream their pants thinking of the glorious time when we rick prciks will have our total income confiscated so theyr can redistribute it ‘fairly” and ‘equitably” given us the balance ZERO
Well FOXTROT OSCAR lefties go get a liofe and a real job and start producing something other than sprogs that we have to feed.
December 11th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Good theory george now explain why despite our low wage economy we are bleeding our jobs to China,India etc. and how increasing the wages will halt that?
December 11th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Gosh George, Are you saying that in Australia they kept the award system in place for years after NZ swept all that labour market regulation away with the ECA, AND increased the minimum wage, and their wages increased by much more than ours year after year?
And now we’re told we have to deregulate again on order to catch up. This sort of twisted evidence-free logic reminds me of the late 1980s/early 1990s. If we want to be like the Australians, why can’t we do what the Australians do?
December 11th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
ah yes… those evil, evil employers must be opposed. we must struggle against them. they are the root of all social evil. duh!
also, I think you might need to use some selective and/or twisted stats to convince me that NZ productivity has increased.
December 11th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
Well done Mr Key and well done to those who voted for this bill.
I do not mind saying that after nine years of being over taxed and at least three years of paying for other people’s kids it is fucking great to see that I will be getting some of MY money back.
Nine years of socialism has altered my mindset, I no longer give a toss if those on low incomes pay a bit more tax, I simply do not care.
I used to be concerned about those at the bottom of the ladder, I was one who was prepared to help and happy to pay my taxes if it meant the GENUINE few who are in need received that help but I have to say that after being financially raped by the corrupt Labour government I have hardened my attitude, I was sick of seeing MY money wasted by those corrupt wankers and sick of seeing losers and lazy bastards moved from the dole onto the sickness and invalids benefit simply to make the figures look good.
Most of all I take great joy at the prospect of complete wankers such as PhilU getting less of my money every week
December 11th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
jafa
Care to comment about the way your beloved unions have almost caused the downfall of the American Auto makers?
December 11th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Oh, that’s simple. The costs sinking the automakers relate to healthcare and pensions, both of which are being funded by the companies at great cost rather than socialised.
December 11th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Oh how about labour productivity statistics from those well known commies, Statistics NZ.
December 11th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
No getstaffed, not evil, just profit maximising and often very short-term in their focus (due to the stock market, accountants’ lack of understanding of people management, etc). This means that many employers see their employees as a cost, and anything paid to them as reducing the profits available for the shareholders. And as for job security, look at the way the stock market reacts to mass sackings (job cuts).
So, as practised in this country, as in other Anglo-American countries, capitalism tends to be something of a zero-sum game. That’s not the unions’ fault either, although they’re not altogether blameless for this state of affairs. Some unions tried very hard to forge cooperative relationships with employers, and got their hands burnt.
Do the proposed measures do anything at all to improve productivity? Improve management practice? Improve union-management cooperation? Nope, not a thing. If anything, you’re likely to see worse management practice given that there will be less incentive for managers to get hiring decisions right.
December 11th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
I think this about covers it.
December 11th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
“Care to comment about the way your beloved unions have almost caused the downfall of the American Auto makers?”
Oh, Big Bruv, it couldn’t have been those clever managers who flew three executive jets to Washington to plead hardship before Congress, could it?
I couldn’t believe it when one of them promised to do away with the Saturn brand if they got the money. Saturn, in case you don’t know, was a partnership between GM and the UAW to introduce cooperatively Japanese style management techniques — half of the management positions were held by union members, etc. The first-time quality performance was “remarkable” and the productivity performance rivalled car plants in Japan. But GM head office management, and the UAW leadership it has to be said, didn’t like the shared control, and stymied the success story.
So, you see, it’s not just a matter of unions bad, management good. This comment also illustrates the points made about management practice in the Anglo-American world in my last post. See this book for more information on Saturn http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/ilrpress/titles/3545.html
December 11th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
DPF: They will give a worker on the average wage a whopping $47 a week more
Ummmm … is that
(a) “a whopping $47 a week more” than they would have received if Labour had won the ‘lekshun? Or
(b) just $45 a week more than now?
If (b), then what would have been the situation with Labour?
December 11th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
This empty faux horror rhetoric from our resident lefties passes me by. National campaigned on it; National delivered on it and that’s good enough for me.
BTW loosers …. tell me just when Labour campaigned on the EFA???????
December 11th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
I don’t begrudge the money that has gone into WFF. My children don’t live with me – and as of next year, both will have flown the coop. But I have dutifully paid Child Support for fifteen years, and provided a whole lot of other support for them, both financial and in other ways. So I haven’t really experienced the largesse of the government up until now, but I do commend National for trying to address the imbalance that has been dealt to those of us who pay tax, but don’t have the pitter-patter of little (or not-so-little) feet in our homes.
December 11th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Keep abusing democratic processes righties, and you’ll soon be losers yourselves. [Maybe even "loosers". What was that you said about basic literacy DPF?]
December 11th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
They will give a worker on the average wage a whopping $47 a week more
Sorry Harpoon, the $47 includes the Labour party cut you’ve been getting for a few months.
December 11th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
georgedarroch, yes, let’s increase the minimum wage so we can increase youth unemployment. Exactly what we need in South Auckland. We need an abolishment of the minimum wage if you want to see wage rises. Now too many wages are pegged to the minimum wage instead of what a job is worth (i.e. more, not less).
December 11th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
jafapete, my point was – and remains – that george felt it natural to suggest that thing would be better if workers would more actively “bargain against employers”. That statement alone tells me that he (and quite possibly many other lefties) is stuck in an 18th century industrial mentality where today’s employers are to be fought against, rather than collaborated with.
The majority of NZers work for small businesses where owners have invested personal time, effort, expertise and risk plenty to be in business. They are completely entitled to a good return on their investment, their staff are perfectly entitled to a fair wage and, of course and, if they have the inclination and guts, to establish their own business at some point in the future.
What p*sses me off is the sneering ungratefulness and tall poppy syndrome espoused by many lefties who, rather than get off their arses and work to better their lot in life, find the time and energy to moan about the success/wealth of others.
December 11th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
“Ummmm … is that
(a) “a whopping $47 a week more” than they would have received if Labour had won the ‘lekshun? Or
(b) just $45 a week more than now?
If (b), then what would have been the situation with Labour?”
Who cares? We all know that there would have been no tax cuts from Labour if National had not indicated for several years that this would be a priority. Therefore, the full $47 per week is attributable to the new Government, and zero to Labour.
Cullen was ideologically opposed to tax cuts. His simple, entrenched, socialist view of middle income earners was to relieve them of a disproportionate share their money in order to redistribute it to others. Recipients extended far beyond the truly needy to include those averse to work and those who felt entitled to breed children whom they knew they could not afford to support.
We are still too highly taxed as a nation, but there is a new feeling around that responsible citizens who take responsibility for themselves and their actions might just get to keep the majority of their own income. After 9 years of Cullen’s unbalanced, socially-divisive economic mismanagement, it’s a welcome start.
December 11th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Work presented to the Select Committee showed that removing youth rates would actually decrease youth unemployment (by increasing the value of their time in work).
Never let the facts get in the way of a good argument.
December 11th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Oh, $10 a week is a lot better than $10 per year. My mistake should have been obvious to me.
December 11th, 2008 at 3:18 pm
getstaffed, Yes, George’s use of the word “against” was regrettable, given the normative tone of the point he was making.
However, it is an accurate description of how the vast majority of such bargaining is conducted (win-lose, zero-sum game, distributive, whatever). But we should aspire to something more constructive, when possible. My point is that if that does not happen, that is not simply the fault of the unionists, let alone any old lefties like myself. NZ’s managers have held the power in the workplace over the past twenty years or so, and it’s time to start holding them to account for the poor state of employment relations in many workplaces.
Also, don’t forget that workers often invest a great deal in the small workplaces too. The longer a worker spends in a workplace, often the narrower and more firm-specific the skill-set. And, given that success in many markets, especially export , depends on securing more than just the contracted labour from the workforce, ideas about proprietorial rights aren’t very helpful in practice these days.
I don’t know of any lefties that fit your description, apart from the probably fictitious accounts of philu’s circumstances that are retailed on this blog.
December 11th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
yes Jafapete … you are quite right in highlighting my spelling mistake. Kinda pales into insignificance though when measured against the corruption and arrogance that was the hallmark of your mob over the past nine years.
And to cap it all off you and yours ‘cooked the books’ over the PREFU … about par for your course.
See you didn’t bother to answer my question. Too hard or just embarrassment?
December 11th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
The longer a worker spends in a workplace, often the narrower and more firm-specific the skill-set.
Well, doh, yeah? Your point is, Mr Lefty Apologist? Oh, that’s right – throw some big words, and bit of business bingo around and troll. No wonder no-one reads your witterings.
December 11th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
Blame it all on the Full Moon.
Sorry the Full Moon is tomorrow night.
Just listen to those lefty trolls screaming.
One day you will realise that you have to work to earn a living, and not rely on tax cuts.
Greedy little Socialists.
The real taxpayers told you to Fuck Off on November 8th.
All of those on benifits are moaning, but their tax is just variable arithmetic.
Go figure.
December 11th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
Jafa
For a pinko I quiet like you so please let me give you some natured advice, do not talk about the Auto industry as you clearly know little about it, you are embarrassing yourself.
December 11th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
Aren’t TAX CUTS great?
After such a long wait New Zealand final gets what it deserves.
PS Labour lost, National won, deal with it Lefties.
December 12th, 2008 at 10:52 am
“JOHN” [11 Dec]: You accused “just listen to those lefty trolls screaming”. Pot-kettle-black.
I’m not sure how one screams in blog comments, but perhaps one way is to use incendiary language and behave like a troll. Language and behavior like this:
Wouldn’t you agree?
December 12th, 2008 at 10:59 am
Tax cuts are brilliant OECD. Imagine that, getting money for working hard.