This entry was posted
on Sunday, October 25th, 2009 at 8:53 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
The Labour leadership is embroiled in a murky polling operation run by a senior MP who has instructed volunteers to deliberately deceive people about their identities and the reason for their calls.
msn today…
oh dear oh dear…more pooze on the NZ liarbour party…
The polls were being run from Parliamentary offices by former Cabinet minister Rick Barker, who has admitted instructing staff to use false names and claim they were calling from a company that no longer exists.
tsk tsk tsk…skeletons..closet…er ” nothing to see here..move on move on”…
Bryce Edwards, a politics lecturer at the University of Otago, said that the episode appeared to show a misuse of Parliamentary resources: “I would say that any phone polling at Parliament would fall foul of the rules.”
“This is very clearly partisan political activity, and pretty hard to sell as a legitimate use of Parliamentary resources.”
Privacy Commissioner Marie Shroff said the details of Barker’s polling operation raised serious questions and could breach the Privacy Act.
Spotlight to fall on tax-dodgers
Finance minister Bill English has signalled the government will next year get tough with tax-dodgers by closing loopholes that allow wage earners to avoid paying their share of tax.
:
The IRD says that when the top income tax rate of 39 cents (now 38 cents) was applied to earnings of $60,000+ in 2000, a flood of taxpayers rearranged their finances to avoid the new regime. English said large-scale “legitimate avoidance behaviour” by higher-income earners undermined the goodwill of lower-income earners.
I note that they’re going after people who are operating withing the law here, working to minimise the amount of tax the government takes off them. So if the intent is to test to enure the spirit of the law is being upheld (ie that there’s fairness in contribution to the tax take) then how about they also focus on tipping the welfare leeches (cue whoar) out, and having them earn their living.
I are perfectly happy to pay tax. But I detest it being used to create welfare dependency and buy votes with that dependence. Time for a flat tax which is zero rated up to $20k.
“The volunteer, who is a Green Party member, said it was run by Barker and, when the volunteer participated, took place in Barker’s office at Parliament on October 14.”
“But Hughes defended the use of false names and for callers to not identify that they were representing the Labour Party.”
We all know Anderton represents the labour party but has this now spread to the melons?
It’s high time for an INDEPENDENT corruption investigation unit with wide powers of interrogation.
I propose this should work close together with bloggers and use a system of total and complete openness to all of its investigations with web-based data repositories so that any and all taxpayers can share and participate in bringing to light and cleansing the system of the copious amounts of corruption, rort and abuse of power that is going on.
I volunteer to set up and participate in such an organization.
Further to my 9:06 comment. Does Bill ‘getting tough’ mean that he’ll be dissolving his own family trust? Leading the way so to speak? I presume his was set up to maximise tax advantage – just like most family trusts.
getstaffed, well actually no. Most trusts are set up to remove assets from personal ownership, thus preventing them being seized by creditors upon insolvency or by the gummint upon a person’s elevation to rest home status.
I are perfectly happy to pay tax. But I detest it being used to create welfare dependency and buy votes with that dependence. Time for a flat tax which is zero rated up to $20k. – getstaffed
I agree with most of this, but am bemused by the last point. Zero-rating up to $20k would surely be very progressive and put even more of the tax burden on the higher earning people who generate New Zealand’s wealth. Already many low-income earners do not even pay the current low rate because of family support etc.
I have no problem with higher earners paying tax at a somewhat higher rate, but I think everyone should pay something. It is not right that such a huge number get a completely free ride.
Yes that’s right Phil the Nats will only see one term, who do you and bob think will be the next government? (jeeez). Surely not the idiot Melons, there are to busy helping the noddys in Liarbore stack the polls, not that that will do them much good.
If the stupid little man who poses as an economic genius aka know as Finance Minister does what I think he is threatening to do then watch that graph from yesterday do a complete and rapid about face.
There are dozens of reasons why people arrange their affairs not the least the appalling rate of taxation imposed upon the producers in our society and abused by the leaches, beneficiaries who could help themselves, rent seekers like those that want money from Govt. (i.e. taxpayers) to further their own interests and feather their own nests (scientists, Universities, students etc), et al.
If arranging my business affairs, that includes multiple housing, on which I borrow to fund my other business affairs is to become non viable due to restrictions involving the interest rate deductability and so on then I will be among those who either leave of restructure my operations such that NZ loses both exports, jobs, residents, brain power, idea’s, and everything else that’s good for NZ that goes with these sorts of enterprises. We have right now two world first products almost ready to go the market. English and co need to decide if they want to continue to have these businesses in NZ or if he would rather we emigrate with them.
I don’t want to live somewhere else, I’m happy here (if it was a bit warmer), but money talks to business.
At a guess I would estimate that NZ will lose nearly 100 times any extra tax he might think he would collect.
The essence of this issue is and has always been the tax rate. If tax rates are lower then there is simply no major benefit to anyone to avoid those taxes and the simple fact is that humans respond to stimuli. High taxes is always going to cause people to respond in a way that reduces that cost to themselves or their company. Rising wages and fixed tax rates have distorted the tax system. Tax rates need to be indexed.
There is a fairness level that most people will accept and I’d suggest thats somewhere around the 20% level.
Even the most ardent anti tax people will accept that if they consider it fair. There are always some of course who deal in large numbers and who never want to pay tax and they should be nailed. e.g. the current 15 companies who are either going or been to court.
Undoubtely the fairest is to have a tax free amount that covers those that live of benefits that are necessary.(not those that are entitled) say $20k. next 20k at 10%. The banks use a figure of $40k as their starting base for household and general living expenses for the average household. So the first 40k needs to allow households to survive. House holds being 2 contributors. There may well be a good argument for allowing aggregation of incomes from those two. e.g. one full time = one part time.
Personal rates say 20% that 20 % rate should apply to say $100,000 (which will catch most taxpayers.
Company rates 25% and earnings over 100,000 25%.
Raise GST to 20%. Those on lower incomes will have been compensated, those that spend will get to pay thier share nad wasteful spending will be expensive leading to elimination of wasteful imports and therefore assist our balance pf payments crises.
If we went this route then we have compensated those that are unable to earn more, we have provided incentive for those that can and can’t be bothered and we have given everyone a reason to aspire to earn more either by working harder, longer, smarter or however. And our tax take would zoom up, tax avoidance would go way down, IRD wouldn’t have to bother itself with much more than large tax payers and th incentive to minimize would be way down.
Personally I don’t want to spend the last 30 or so years of my life in bondage to the woolly thinking of people like English and Bollard and like getting rid of Clark we need to do the same with these neanderthal’s along with their dinosaurs at Treasury.
No doubt the lefties and losers and all those other various take merchants will attack this but they should take a good hard look at Firestone. Firestone have finally left NZ because of the cost of doing business is too great. Firestone and others have been consistent with their efforts, have invested in NZ but it just doesn’t work anymore.
Now look around and see how many other businesses are doing or have done he same thing in the last 6 or 7 years. Hundreds of them.
We have one of chance to stem the tide of mediocrity that has infested politics and we need to push this message home.
Ordinary working people have and do understand the message. Politics unfortunately is not about better outcomes but about getting voted back. Right now the Nats have a 30% lead in the opinion polls but instead of being at least brave they are simply negotiating more status quo, pandering to special interest groups like the Maori Party and the Greens. All they need is to grow some guts and go with ACT and they can’t be beaten.
Unfortunately though the Catholics and the Jews have always rolled over, compromised and never stood up for individual freedom. Worlds history and if we don’t learn from history we are destined to repeat that history.
I expect that will bring the wrath of many of those with religious affiliations but like the Muslims behavior towards women and non believers its all true and you should look at yourselves first.
“..[DPF: Bob Jones also predicted in 2000 that the Clark Govt would last only one term]..”
ok..
but do you discount his rationale behind the prediction..?
1)..the recession having bit much worse by then..(he’s not buying the ‘the recession is over’ bullshit either..eh..?..)
2) lots of people suffering..and an unthinking/uncaring govt having done s.f.a. for them..
..will have people looking to the left..
and 3)..the return of a populist-policy-laden peters..being a key component in the return of labour..
..and the overthrow of key..
your responses to those..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
[DPF: Actually his major argument was Key mangling his English.
I think there is a reasonable chance there could be another global recession, triggered by the fiscal deficit of the US Government. And if there is, yes I expect it will damage incumbent Govts, including the NZ one.
An external event like that can throw out of office even the most popular Govt. However if Labour are pinning all their hopes on another global recession, that is a risky strategy.
I don't think Peters will make it back. In fact he could well decide in early 2011 not to stand- a possibility he has left open]
“..No doubt the lefties and losers and all those other various take merchants will attack this but they should take a good hard look at Firestone. Firestone have finally left NZ because of the cost of doing business is too great. Firestone and others have been consistent with their efforts, have invested in NZ but it just doesn’t work anymore..”
utter bullshit..
nz rates as one of the best countries in the world to do business in..(least red-tape.)
and firestone left here..(and oz..remember..!)..’cos they can make more paying third world wages..
yet you righties just trot out this made-up/lying- crap..
..all the fucken time..
..it’s a never-ending river of misinformation/outright lies..
I can’t even be bothered answering that. I like to talk with intelligent well informed people. Phillu you are not one of those.
Reading the news doesn’t qualify you as well informed.
Never and not running a business that employs many and makes and sells and all the things businesses do doesn’t assist with your image and alter ego that likes to tell your self that you are intelligent and informed is misinformed.
When you have done the hard yards rather than what it seems is your life to date comeback better informed and then just maybe, we might listen. Until then go away. I have never resorted to personally attacking you like others do but I can see exactly why they do. Most of the time I don’t even bother to read the space you fill. But I will concede that now and again that what you do say (as DPF acknowledged a couple of days back), you can be right.
This is not one of those occasions.
Taxpayers were placing income in a trust account, paying 33 cents for every dollar earned, rather than the top rate of 38c. Another common ploy was for individual taxpayers to “shelter” their money by creating a company so that they paid 30 cents of every dollar earned in tax rather than the top rate.
We wouldn’t have that problem if the company, highest income and trust rates were all the same.
Simple answer is to reduce the top rate to 30% initially for everyone and the revenue lost can be recovered by making all the bludgers (like phool) get a job instead of collecting a benefit. QED. Get on with it Bill stop waffling.
Does Bob Jones *really* believe that ACT will increase its support such as to be the majority party? Even with the country recognising the need to slash public expenditure, I don’t think that it will happen philu.
Is it too hard for Q+ A to get someone other than Metiria Turai to front on MMP? I’m sick of seeing her mug as she has nothing to say. All show and no substance. The demise of the Greens must be on the horizon. Whos’ producing this show anyway – must be some lazy bastard.
What pisses me off is they way most politicians (ACT possibly excluded) think about tax.
There have been numerous studies done which demonstrate raising taxes actually reduces tax revenue over time (something philu in his economic wisdom will splutter about and deny).
There was one done by an economist around 1990, can’t remember which. But it was studying the lowering of the top tax rate, and showed tax revenues flow in at a much faster pace than the previous higher rate.
People like the Greens and Labour that think whacking a top rate of 50% on will make the revenue from the fat cats pour in are deluded, they will merely find ways to hide their income (indeed tax avoidance from that high a tax rate can hardly be called immoral) and will be less productive.
Lower, flatter taxes will not lead to lower revenues over the medium term, which is why I get fucked off when people call tax cuts “unaffordable”. What is unaffordable is the obscene level of public spending Labour carried out over the last few years, and which National are tinkering around the edges without managing to reduce it much (Families Commission $8million a year, anyone?)
You are dead right nickb – successive governments seem to be taking ever bigger slices of the pie, not realising (or caring) that their actions are actually making the pie smaller.
GW Bush only lowered tax rates for those earning over $400k or so. He didn’t lower them for normal workers and small to medium businesses, which is really what everyone wants.
He also started two wars, the biggest conflicts that the US has seen since at least Veitnam. IMHO fiscal responsibility is a great reason not to start a war.
One has to accept that there will be in organic collections in Auckland, I have to say the people roaming the streets looking for prizes etc is par for the course, but it leaves a little to be desired when one gets woken up all night with cars with trailers and small trucks sifting through these belongings…
In our recent article on the second GOP debate, we called out Gov. Mike Huckabee as well as Reps. Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter for their support of the FairTax. We wrote that the bipartisan Advisory Panel on Tax Reform had “calculated that a sales tax would have to be set at 34 percent of retail sales prices to bring in the same revenue as the taxes it would replace, meaning that an automobile with a retail price of $10,000 would cost $13,400 including the new sales tax.” A number of readers pointed out that H.R. 25, the specific bill mentioned by Gov. Huckabee, calls for a 23 percent retail sales tax and not the 34 percent used by the Advisory Panel on Tax Reform. That 23 percent number, however, is misleading and based on some extremely optimistic assumptions. We found that while there are several good economic arguments for the FairTax, unless you earn more than $200,000 per year, fairness is not one of them.
Family Trusts are set up as a “living will” for many reasons, such as assets protection, control over beneficiaries, etc etc etc.
If they weere set up as a tax vehicle then the IRD would identify it as a sham.
The fact that it can be used as vehicle for spreading income (trustee shareholders) is um just um just coincidence. The Minor Beneficiary rule sort of mitigates shams.
Finkenstein, the fact that assets have been transferred to a trust doesnt necessarily protect it from Creditors, esp where there is still a substantial settlors loan balance.
If the assets had been transferred within the last few years then the liquidator/official assignee/reciever will have grounds to go and get them
Well lowering taxes in NZ and Australia has worked very well in the past but raising, as Clark did because she thought that because she (a single woman without a family and who lived in the $ lucrative trough of politics) could afford to, everyone else should.
Clearly it was an unmitigated disaster, from Kiwi’s leaving to the next 30 years of poverty that has now descended upon NZ, because of the money being wasted by Communist Clark and her Nasty henchman.
Dirty Rat;
The loophole for wages earners is actually the buying and selling of houses at a profit. For some reason it is assumed that some other bugger does that but from my experience it is the wage and salary earners. I’ve just done some work for a couple, one who literally works in a salt mine and his wife a partime wage slave who are about to make 100,000k just buying and selling a house. A house that they were lucky enough to be able to buy, last year from a distressed seller, that they have slept in meantime and now they are selling. And good on them. Not if Blenglish gets his way. He will disembowel them for making some money. Always about envy. Never about risks and rewards.
Go have a read. Nice picture but what captured my attention was this little paragraph;
“Teachers are role models and having a teacher linked with Penthouse is taking things too far,”
No shit Shirley, teachers as role models. Thank the Lord I didn’t go to school for too long then. Apart from being knucledragging lefties most of them never grow up beyond the age of the kids they teach. Most of them don’t even want to place their skills into an open market where they get paid what they are worth, by the payers.
Ask any sales person who their worst nightmare is and the answer is always the same. Bloody school teachers.
Those are available to all people, wage earners or not.
It isnt a loophole, if you go into a property transaction with a view of hocking it off, then you will be deemed to have purchased it with a view to a profit. That is a mistake that people do with banks with finance applications. If the IRD have a wiff of “intention” then you pay tax on that profit. There are mitigating factors such as financial difficulties etc etc, but generally Intention is the tax rule
Its not a loophole, and again, not limited to wage earners, which was what Blinglish referred to.
Know all that and the point I was trying to get across is that wage earners are just as much into tax avoidance as the millionaires that Blenglish was on about. If I earned 1Mill there is no way I would allow the IRD to take 38% or something like $350,000 of my money and nor will John Key, Bill English and anyone else. English only needs to look at his own use of trusts etc to minimize his income to realize the motivation.
Way back before GST was introduced and tax rates were way up there, the cash economy was used and enjoyed by everyone. When GST came along the cash economy dried up and pretty much stayed that way until the tax rates caught up with the growing incomes (wage creep). As the tax amount taken rose so did the cash economy. Along came the ignorant and added further to that change by demanding without consultation more tax from higher income earners. Plenty supported the move as the polls showed at the time but what they all forgot was that income creep would again get them and that is what happened so the average wage earner went from well of to poor and then the stupid twosome added WFF to quell the rebellion.
From my experience there is much more cash economy operating now than there was 9 years ago. I have heard of very large sums being passed around and I don’t blame the taxpayer for looking after their own cash. If it wasn’t being stolen by legalized theft in the first place it would stop happening.
Something that i would add to my first post is that the GST threshold should be raised from the current 60k to 200k.
Reason is that it simplifies the running of small businesses and takes away the temptation to avoid the GST as earlier this post. And at 200k that’s still only 4k per week. When GST was introduced the threshold was 50k so 25 years that threshold has risen 10k. Not even moving with inflation.
If our tax rates were protected from inflation then we would all be a way lot richer and Govt. would have wasted way less money because they would have had to raise other taxes to have the money to spend. Now that in itself raises debate and makes the populace unhappy. Govts. normally (and Clark and Co aren’t normal), do not usually like unhappy electorates.
If you earned $1mill as a ‘wage earner’, then you pay tax on that $1 mill through PAYE. And no, “wage earners’ are not into tax avoidance by virtue of the available deductions.
I would doubt very very much that Bill English would be using his trust as a vehicle for tax minimisation on a salary.
Farm yes, salary , no.
Another point, when GST came in, the cash economy increased (as did the false invoicing industry which in the Bay of Plenty was @$50 million in the horticultural industry).
Not so. Any paye earner can offset that against another business expenses that arise from owning houses or any other form
business. e.g own a truck in a business but don’t earn to much and its depreciation is available to the taxpayer, same as a house. Business do this all the time.
A taxpayers total income is included int he tax return calculations including the trusts , farms etc so yes he can and most likely does.
As I have lived here in the middle of all that for a long time I am happy to say that the cash economy declined on the introduction of GST.
What you are talking about is quite different. Those guys set out to never declare any earnings at all and the GST was a part of that. It was about a complete fraud not just the GST. From memory the money was never accounted for and wages were distributed in cash no records although again if my memory is correct they deducted the paye but never paid it to ird as that would have exposed the scam.. Its was a straight out cash economy effort which happened to also avoid paying tax of any kind.
In my opinion, those who voted for National/Act in the expectation of those two parties forming a coalition have been diddled.
It’s all very well complaining on here about so little change to the tax system/rates, but you really should be asking Hide, Key and English just why they are there. For years they bleated on about tax cuts being some kind of economic Viagra, yet here they are in a position to to enact the policies they have been preaching and their dithering is probably even worse than Obama’s dithering on Afghanistan.
Rodney Hide may well be kicking local government where it hurts the most, but I am sure that is not what the majority of ACT voters thought they were getting. There should be a huge chant directed at ACT:
RODNEY, WHERE ARE MY TAX CUTS!
However, guys, what you need to consider is this. YOUR government is not delivering on tax cuts, and why not? What could be their reasons for dallying when evidence produced even here clearly demonstrates advantages of lower taxes?
It’s suggested that Key et al are playing safe to win the next election. Does this mean they fear LOSING votes with such a vote-catching act (pardon the pun) of lowering our taxes? And did you guys vote for them to watch them do nothing for three years? Hell, I ain’t got that much longer in work force. I want, I need, my economic miracle NOW!
As I keep pointing out on here, the master of glumness, he of Double Dipton fame, said a little while ago that he can’t cut taxes in the current environment, yet right now is when we need a major fillip. I think Bill just got confronted with a double dose of reality when he finally assumed command of the economy.
To be honest, I was looking forward to tax cuts and whatever other extreme policies in the name of laissez faire (a failure previously, but that never stops governments) this government instituted, just so the new generations could see for themselves what works and what doesn’t.
But I didn’t expect them to first return education to the 19th century. And because I have a vested interest in the quality of our education system, I am forced to abandon my previously benign attitude to this government.
“I am forced to abandon my previously benign attitude to this government”
We’re all very frightened Luc.
Tax cuts make sense when you’re running record surpluses but you have to be unselfish enough to avoid spending almost all of it on your own support base. Unfortunately NZ didn’t have such a govt throughout the time they were possible. I wonder why Liarbore’s supporters aren’t calling their own party to account for that behaviour? Do you think they’re just plain stupid, or are they evil?
When the Liarbore govt left the Nats with a decade of deficits and various timebombs like Railways and ACC ticking away in the cupboard JUST LIKE THEY DID IN THE 90′s, then you don’t really have much of a choice.
To be honest, the GFC was totally predictable and was predicted many years before the election and so I was surprised when Key and English didn’t revise their tax cut promises and I think that was a mistake. But the reality is that Liarbore left them very little room to manoeuvre which again is in COMPLETE CONTRAST TO THE POSITION THE NAT’S LEFT THEM WITH WHEN THEY TOOK OVER IN 1999.
Why anyone with a 3-digit supports Liarbore, I have no idea. Time and again, they prove to be not only incompetent but also dishonest. You guys are bloody lucky the average reef-fish is so childishly politically naive otherwise you’d never get any votes at all.
Why pigeonhole me as a Labour supporter? I think poor old Labour has a way to go yet before it recovers form the last nine years and becomes electable again. But it doesn’t mean I won’t egg them on to take on the government over stuff like the education debacle.
When I talk tax cuts. I do so from the right wing point of view: that tax cuts stimulate the economy, so I refute your suggestion that tax cuts are only affordable in a surplus situation. If the theory of the right is correct, cutting taxes in a deficit situation is exactly what should be done to get us out of deficit.
Isn’t that what the guys above, getstaffed, nickb, viking are saying?
If tax cuts can’t stimulate the economy in a deficit situation, then perhaps something is amiss with the theory?
Dirty Rat, I take your point. minor distinction but none the less right. Separate entities and you are correct. How can a paye payer avoid tax? Only by being paid cash under the table. Now I know a Chinese restaurant that operates that way with the Chinese servants. (and not in Hong Kong either.)
LUC. That’s exactly what history shows happens in NZ. Tax cuts equal better economy. 80′s 90′s but sadly not the 000′s yet.
“If tax cuts can’t stimulate the economy in a deficit situation, then perhaps something is amiss with the theory?”
Luc, tax cuts don’t work if you have to go into debt to pay for them because the stimulus effect in terms of increased spending in the economy is swallowed up by the interest you have to pay.
That’s the difference between when Liarbore was in power and now.
Going to be even worse next time around Reid, all hail to the ratchet effect one can hope we have more than pots and pans to bang together unlike the citizens of Iceland.
Reid, the other part of tax cuts is cuts in Govt. spending. Some will occur naturally as the tax cuts take effect and others have to be man made by someone with gumption guts etc. I mean how many millions are we pouring into useless qaungos. and television companies etc/ Need i suggest more. Those of us in business have all had to do it so why the hell shouldn’t the state? Tell me that
“Reid, the other part of tax cuts is cuts in Govt. spending.”
Yes I know that very well Viking and that’s why ACT needs to be there but they can only do so much.
Key’s stances on various issues like e.g. ruling out SOE sales in the first term showed his political naivity. Anyone with any nouse could have told him that he had enough gas in the tank to get over the line without making those concessions. It’s most unfortunate as I believe that at most the Nats are going to be at most a two term govt. As Banana says, we’re going to have a W not a U shaped recession and the second hit is going to be severe. World-changing. Either the USD disappears as the reserve or the US introduces a gold-backed dollar. Given the hyperinflation dangers in the US if the former happens, I’m picking the latter as a strategy but whichever way they go, the shit’s going to hit the fan in 2011, IMO.
Unfortunately given his performance to date I don’t think Key has it in him to deal with this and bring us out of the coming mess in the best possible state although there is in fact no better alternative leader given his background. What he needs is a very strong executive and he doesn’t have it. They have the experience but they don’t have the ability.
Sometimes, a picture really is worth a thousand words.
Especially when those pictures are drawn by Robert Crumb.
And especially when those words come from the Bible.
For those who haven’t heard yet: Legendary comics artist Robert Crumb has just come out with his new book: The Book of Genesis, Illustrated by R. Crumb ..
.. a magnum opus, five years in the making, telling the complete, unedited book of Genesis in graphic novel form.
And I’m finding it fascinating.
It’s masterfully illustrated, of course, Crumb being among the very best creators in this burgeoning literary form.
And it’s getting Genesis across to me, deep into my brain and my imagination, in a way that it had never quite gotten there before.
Of course I’ve read Genesis.
More than once.
It’s been a little while since I’ve read the whole thing all the way through, but it’s not like it’s unfamiliar.
But there’s something about seeing the story fleshed out in images to make some of its more striking narrative turns leap out and grab your brain by the root.
There’s nothing quite like seeing the two different creation stories enacted on the page to make you go ..
.. “Hey! That’s right!
Two completely different creation stories!”
There’s nothing quite like seeing Lot offer his daughters to be gang-raped .. to make you recoil in shock and moral horror.
There’s nothing quite like seeing the crazed dread and burning determination in Abraham’s eyes as he prepares the sacrifice of his own son to make you feel the enormity of this act.
Reading these stories in words conveys the ideas; seeing them in images conveys the visceral impact.
It makes it all seem vividly, immediately, humanly real.
Now, that is something of a mixed blessing.
Spending a few days with the characters in Genesis isn’t the most relaxing literary vacation you’ll ever take.
Richard Dawkins wasn’t kidding when he said, “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction.”
The God character in Genesis is cruel, violent, callous, insecure, power-hungry, paranoid, hot-tempered, morally fickle…
.. I could go on and on.
And God’s followers aren’t much better.
They lie, they scheme, they cheat one another, they conquer other villages with bloodthirsty imperialist glee, they kill at the drop of a hat.
This isn’t Beatrix Potter here.
It’s more like Dangerous Liaisons by way of Quentin Tarantino.
Yes phil, interesting you pick up on that. For if Lot was truly righteous, how could he do that? And then his daughters slept with him and bore him two sons.
An extremely relevant passage is Genesis 19:37 – the first-born child’s name is the name of people who are still around today that never would have been, had Abraham not challenged G-d on His decision to destroy Sodom.
Actually, Lot offered his daughters because Lot had two (male) strangers to staying the night, and the men of the town surrounded his house and wanted to (homosexually) have sex with them. Lot begged them not to and offered his two daughters instead of allowing this horrible abomination (sodomy – Lot lived in Sodom) to happen. God later destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for these sins, and Lot was one of the few to survive.
ps, I’m sure Crumb’s retelling is interesting, in a completely fictional Hollywood kind of way.
Public Address Radio on Radio Live just had an interview with a playwright who is doing a dramatisation on Darwin and he made this interesting statement:
Ultimately, in the greater scheme of things, life is meaningless.
Good interview worth listening to this Labour Weekend. Roger Kerr gives some good material, especially from his history in Treasury in Muldoon times etc.
The problem with National is that they gave probably the most important job in the country to the world least most competent person.
Bill English is a walking disaster zone, and I am reaaaly shit scared about what he will do ( BTW way I have commented on Cactus Kates blog, its an accountants in-joke, we are to be wed and cactus katie baby will bear my children).
But I do not believe his advisors will risk exposing that little piece of shit to avoidance, and what he did was to th eletter of the law.
Now you have made suggestions that he did. I don’t go for that.
He is a little shit, but a law abiding little shit nontheless
Philu; Here you go.
High cost of NZ manufacture’ hurt tyre company
By JAMES WEIR – BusinessDay
Last updated 05:00 26/10/2009
Bridgestone has lost money in the past two years, despite revenues rising to $217 million last year.
Bridgestone said on Friday that it would close its Christchurch tyre factory by Christmas, sacking 275 people in a move that has devastated workers, their union says.
Companies Office files show Bridgestone, a tyre maker, retailer and wholesaler, lost $7.1 million in the 2008 calendar year in New Zealand.
The Bridgestone NZ loss in the previous year was $3.8m. The firm made a $1.2m profit in 2006.
In announcing the closure of the Christchurch plant and one in Adelaide, Australia, Bridgestone’s owners in Japan blamed intensifying cost competition globally. In Adelaide, 600 jobs will go.
Bridgestone is Japan’s biggest maker of tyres and in the half year to June made a loss of 38.3 billion, hit by the economic downturn in Japan, the United States and Europe.
“Despite continued efforts to improve cost competitiveness at both plants, international competitive forces have been making tyre manufacturing in Australia and New Zealand increasingly difficult to the point where the operations in both countries are no longer viable,” the company said.
Bridgestone’s distribution, customer service and retail networks in New Zealand, which employ more than 1500 people, are unaffected.
The head office is in Auckland and it also owns Tony’s Tyre Service.
Bridgestone New Zealand direct owner is in Australia, but the ultimate parent is Bridgestone Corporation of Japan. While its New Zealand annual revenues rose more than $20m to $217m in the latest year, the annual report shows the cost of goods sold rose about $25m, to $148m.
In the latest year, employee benefits were $33.3m, $3m higher than the previous year.
Aside from normal costs, such as rent, freight and power, Bridgestone reported an unexplained $22.4m in “other expenses”, up from $17.7m the previous year.
The “other expenses” knocked the company from what would otherwise have been a profit into a $10 million pre-tax loss, before a $3m tax benefit.
The value of the shareholders’ equity in the company at the end of last year was about $110m, with assets of about $173m and liabilities of $62m.
Bridgestone Rubberworkers union secretary Kerry Pearce said the company had said it would pay full redundancy and holiday entitlements to the workers.
They had a redundancy agreement of seven weeks’ pay for the first year of employment and two weeks for each following year, uncapped.
“There’s a lot of history on this site, with some members having worked here 45 years and some being the second and third generation of their families to have worked here, so it is a very sad day for all of us,” he said.
Ad Feedback
Bridgestone was the last tyre manufacturer in Australia and New Zealand.
The firm said tyre production in both countries had been running at a loss for several years and had been under review for some time.
Bridgestone’s tyres would be imported from Japan, southeast Asia, Europe and the US.
“Unfortunately though the Catholics and the Jews have always rolled over, compromised and never stood up for individual freedom. Worlds history and if we don’t learn from history we are destined to repeat that history.
I expect that will bring the wrath of many of those with religious affiliations but like the Muslims behavior towards women and non believers its all true and you should look at yourselves first.”
I think you will find Catholics gave as good or even better as they got. Catholic persecutions have a long and savage history, not least against Jews, so to lump those two religions together as suffering similarly is just a little obscene. If I were Jew, I wouldn’t have a bar of the Catholic Church. The for you to want to carry on centuries of savagery into a modern day persecution of Islam is simply perpetuating exactly what you complain of.
Who was who said that the oppressed are merely oppressors in waiting? Bertrand Russell?
We need to break the cycle. A good start would be for the US stop attacking Muslim nations and using its power and influence working for peace, not perpetual war. Sadly, the ruling elite of that country currently believe perpetual war is in its best interest.
October 25th, 2009 at 8:55 am
The Labour leadership is embroiled in a murky polling operation run by a senior MP who has instructed volunteers to deliberately deceive people about their identities and the reason for their calls.
msn today…
oh dear oh dear…more pooze on the NZ liarbour party…
October 25th, 2009 at 8:59 am
The polls were being run from Parliamentary offices by former Cabinet minister Rick Barker, who has admitted instructing staff to use false names and claim they were calling from a company that no longer exists.
tsk tsk tsk…skeletons..closet…er ” nothing to see here..move on move on”…
October 25th, 2009 at 9:03 am
Bryce Edwards, a politics lecturer at the University of Otago, said that the episode appeared to show a misuse of Parliamentary resources: “I would say that any phone polling at Parliament would fall foul of the rules.”
“This is very clearly partisan political activity, and pretty hard to sell as a legitimate use of Parliamentary resources.”
Privacy Commissioner Marie Shroff said the details of Barker’s polling operation raised serious questions and could breach the Privacy Act.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:06 am
From Stuff:
I note that they’re going after people who are operating withing the law here, working to minimise the amount of tax the government takes off them. So if the intent is to test to enure the spirit of the law is being upheld (ie that there’s fairness in contribution to the tax take) then how about they also focus on tipping the welfare leeches (cue whoar) out, and having them earn their living.
I are perfectly happy to pay tax. But I detest it being used to create welfare dependency and buy votes with that dependence. Time for a flat tax which is zero rated up to $20k.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:10 am
“The volunteer, who is a Green Party member, said it was run by Barker and, when the volunteer participated, took place in Barker’s office at Parliament on October 14.”
“But Hughes defended the use of false names and for callers to not identify that they were representing the Labour Party.”
We all know Anderton represents the labour party but has this now spread to the melons?
October 25th, 2009 at 9:16 am
good to close all those loopholes. I looked into them a while back but it was a pain in the arse for a few extra dollars.
Even better to have flat tax. But, that will never happen, too forward thinking for our mob.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:18 am
It’s high time for an INDEPENDENT corruption investigation unit with wide powers of interrogation.
I propose this should work close together with bloggers and use a system of total and complete openness to all of its investigations with web-based data repositories so that any and all taxpayers can share and participate in bringing to light and cleansing the system of the copious amounts of corruption, rort and abuse of power that is going on.
I volunteer to set up and participate in such an organization.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:18 am
Further to my 9:06 comment. Does Bill ‘getting tough’ mean that he’ll be dissolving his own family trust? Leading the way so to speak? I presume his was set up to maximise tax advantage – just like most family trusts.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:20 am
Doug – how long do you think your comment will last with `intolerent Trev’ on Red Alert?
October 25th, 2009 at 9:24 am
getstaffed, well actually no. Most trusts are set up to remove assets from personal ownership, thus preventing them being seized by creditors upon insolvency or by the gummint upon a person’s elevation to rest home status.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:28 am
Adolf, fair enough. The ‘rest home’ reason accounts for ours.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:39 am
whoar..!
didyasee bob jones is predicting this govt will only last one term..?
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/bob-jones-says-the-honeymoon-of-this-national-govt-will-not-lastand-key-will-beis-a-one-term-pony/
“..(this comes in a long hagiography from deborah coddington..
and i have to say..i agree with his (political) conclusions/predictions..
esp. his observations on the return of winston peters..
and his (crucial) role in any return to govt. of goff/labour..)
“..But that doesn’t mean he ignores others’ opinions.
Just don’t mumble when you offer them.
He abhors sloppy speech and bad grammar ..
.. one reason he predicts John Key’s honeymoon polling will not last ..
..and the National Government will be a “one-term pony”.
He doesn’t dislike Key.
“He’s an affable chap and a natural smiler, just like Nelson Mandela and that fraud from Tibet.
But he mangles the English language.
Look, it’s not hard to speak properly.
I’m a state-house boy from Naenae .. and I can do it.
Give Key to me for two days and I’ll teach him to stress the consonants.
If he doesn’t improve .. it will become a source of ridicule.”
Jones says Phil Goff is a clone of Key .. and if Labour keeps him as leader they’ll be back on the Treasury benches ..
.. but with one other proviso – Winston Peters makes it back.
And Jones says he will because Peters’ timing is perfect.
“Despite the scathing editorials and cartoons, it’s television that matters .. and Winston loves television.
“By 2010 the recession will be really biting..
.. National will be suffering, perhaps unfairly ..
.. from the backlash of their traditionally tight-fisted policies ..
.. and voters will look to the left.”
(i see jones is also not buying that ‘the recession is over’ canard..)..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
[DPF: Bob Jones also predicted in 2000 that the Clark Govt would last only one term]
October 25th, 2009 at 9:49 am
I agree with most of this, but am bemused by the last point. Zero-rating up to $20k would surely be very progressive and put even more of the tax burden on the higher earning people who generate New Zealand’s wealth. Already many low-income earners do not even pay the current low rate because of family support etc.
I have no problem with higher earners paying tax at a somewhat higher rate, but I think everyone should pay something. It is not right that such a huge number get a completely free ride.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Yes that’s right Phil the Nats will only see one term, who do you and bob think will be the next government? (jeeez). Surely not the idiot Melons, there are to busy helping the noddys in Liarbore stack the polls, not that that will do them much good.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:40 am
If the stupid little man who poses as an economic genius aka know as Finance Minister does what I think he is threatening to do then watch that graph from yesterday do a complete and rapid about face.
There are dozens of reasons why people arrange their affairs not the least the appalling rate of taxation imposed upon the producers in our society and abused by the leaches, beneficiaries who could help themselves, rent seekers like those that want money from Govt. (i.e. taxpayers) to further their own interests and feather their own nests (scientists, Universities, students etc), et al.
If arranging my business affairs, that includes multiple housing, on which I borrow to fund my other business affairs is to become non viable due to restrictions involving the interest rate deductability and so on then I will be among those who either leave of restructure my operations such that NZ loses both exports, jobs, residents, brain power, idea’s, and everything else that’s good for NZ that goes with these sorts of enterprises. We have right now two world first products almost ready to go the market. English and co need to decide if they want to continue to have these businesses in NZ or if he would rather we emigrate with them.
I don’t want to live somewhere else, I’m happy here (if it was a bit warmer), but money talks to business.
At a guess I would estimate that NZ will lose nearly 100 times any extra tax he might think he would collect.
The essence of this issue is and has always been the tax rate. If tax rates are lower then there is simply no major benefit to anyone to avoid those taxes and the simple fact is that humans respond to stimuli. High taxes is always going to cause people to respond in a way that reduces that cost to themselves or their company. Rising wages and fixed tax rates have distorted the tax system. Tax rates need to be indexed.
There is a fairness level that most people will accept and I’d suggest thats somewhere around the 20% level.
Even the most ardent anti tax people will accept that if they consider it fair. There are always some of course who deal in large numbers and who never want to pay tax and they should be nailed. e.g. the current 15 companies who are either going or been to court.
Undoubtely the fairest is to have a tax free amount that covers those that live of benefits that are necessary.(not those that are entitled) say $20k. next 20k at 10%. The banks use a figure of $40k as their starting base for household and general living expenses for the average household. So the first 40k needs to allow households to survive. House holds being 2 contributors. There may well be a good argument for allowing aggregation of incomes from those two. e.g. one full time = one part time.
Personal rates say 20% that 20 % rate should apply to say $100,000 (which will catch most taxpayers.
Company rates 25% and earnings over 100,000 25%.
Raise GST to 20%. Those on lower incomes will have been compensated, those that spend will get to pay thier share nad wasteful spending will be expensive leading to elimination of wasteful imports and therefore assist our balance pf payments crises.
If we went this route then we have compensated those that are unable to earn more, we have provided incentive for those that can and can’t be bothered and we have given everyone a reason to aspire to earn more either by working harder, longer, smarter or however. And our tax take would zoom up, tax avoidance would go way down, IRD wouldn’t have to bother itself with much more than large tax payers and th incentive to minimize would be way down.
Personally I don’t want to spend the last 30 or so years of my life in bondage to the woolly thinking of people like English and Bollard and like getting rid of Clark we need to do the same with these neanderthal’s along with their dinosaurs at Treasury.
No doubt the lefties and losers and all those other various take merchants will attack this but they should take a good hard look at Firestone. Firestone have finally left NZ because of the cost of doing business is too great. Firestone and others have been consistent with their efforts, have invested in NZ but it just doesn’t work anymore.
Now look around and see how many other businesses are doing or have done he same thing in the last 6 or 7 years. Hundreds of them.
We have one of chance to stem the tide of mediocrity that has infested politics and we need to push this message home.
Ordinary working people have and do understand the message. Politics unfortunately is not about better outcomes but about getting voted back. Right now the Nats have a 30% lead in the opinion polls but instead of being at least brave they are simply negotiating more status quo, pandering to special interest groups like the Maori Party and the Greens. All they need is to grow some guts and go with ACT and they can’t be beaten.
Unfortunately though the Catholics and the Jews have always rolled over, compromised and never stood up for individual freedom. Worlds history and if we don’t learn from history we are destined to repeat that history.
I expect that will bring the wrath of many of those with religious affiliations but like the Muslims behavior towards women and non believers its all true and you should look at yourselves first.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:43 am
..I see H2 has returned to Wellington to marry her partner Sue Veart. They were joined in a ” civil union “.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Jones also said the sub-prime problem wasn’t serious enough to cause wider economic problems.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:46 am
“..[DPF: Bob Jones also predicted in 2000 that the Clark Govt would last only one term]..”
ok..
but do you discount his rationale behind the prediction..?
1)..the recession having bit much worse by then..(he’s not buying the ‘the recession is over’ bullshit either..eh..?..)
2) lots of people suffering..and an unthinking/uncaring govt having done s.f.a. for them..
..will have people looking to the left..
and 3)..the return of a populist-policy-laden peters..being a key component in the return of labour..
..and the overthrow of key..
your responses to those..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
[DPF: Actually his major argument was Key mangling his English.
I think there is a reasonable chance there could be another global recession, triggered by the fiscal deficit of the US Government. And if there is, yes I expect it will damage incumbent Govts, including the NZ one.
An external event like that can throw out of office even the most popular Govt. However if Labour are pinning all their hopes on another global recession, that is a risky strategy.
I don't think Peters will make it back. In fact he could well decide in early 2011 not to stand- a possibility he has left open]
October 25th, 2009 at 10:51 am
and 3)..the return of a populist-policy-laden peters..being a key component in the return of labour..
Snigger.. I thought he was meant to make it in 2008 philu, what happened there?
October 25th, 2009 at 10:53 am
“..No doubt the lefties and losers and all those other various take merchants will attack this but they should take a good hard look at Firestone. Firestone have finally left NZ because of the cost of doing business is too great. Firestone and others have been consistent with their efforts, have invested in NZ but it just doesn’t work anymore..”
utter bullshit..
nz rates as one of the best countries in the world to do business in..(least red-tape.)
and firestone left here..(and oz..remember..!)..’cos they can make more paying third world wages..
yet you righties just trot out this made-up/lying- crap..
..all the fucken time..
..it’s a never-ending river of misinformation/outright lies..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 25th, 2009 at 10:53 am
“..[DPF: Bob Jones also predicted in 2000 that the Clark Govt would last only one term]..”
ok..
but do you discount his rationale behind the prediction..?
Yeah yeah yeah phool. Bob also predicted that “RJI shares would be over $20 by christmas”.
That was xmas 1987 if you recall!!!!
Sucked the dickheads in then and it is still workin going by your wafflings this morning.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:58 am
“..Snigger.. I thought he was meant to make it in 2008 philu, what happened there?.”
he missed by 0.8%…
(not a huge amount..and a lot of those ‘battlers’ persuaded to switch to national/ that ‘nice mr key’….
..and who are now hurting..won’t get fooled again..eh..?..)
and peters got a shitload more votes nationally than did hide/act..
eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 25th, 2009 at 10:58 am
’tis every mans duty to pay as little tax as possible.
English should be looking for ways to reduce the tax we pay, not increase it.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:01 am
I can’t even be bothered answering that. I like to talk with intelligent well informed people. Phillu you are not one of those.
Reading the news doesn’t qualify you as well informed.
Never and not running a business that employs many and makes and sells and all the things businesses do doesn’t assist with your image and alter ego that likes to tell your self that you are intelligent and informed is misinformed.
When you have done the hard yards rather than what it seems is your life to date comeback better informed and then just maybe, we might listen. Until then go away. I have never resorted to personally attacking you like others do but I can see exactly why they do. Most of the time I don’t even bother to read the space you fill. But I will concede that now and again that what you do say (as DPF acknowledged a couple of days back), you can be right.
This is not one of those occasions.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:13 am
“..This is not one of those occasions…”
really..?
so..firestone didn’t close factories here and in australia…
‘cos they would rather pay third world wages..?
what do you base this on..?
the other point i made is that nz is internationally ranked as one of the easiest countries to do business in..
these are irrefutable facts…
that prove yr arguments as the made-up crap they are..
you come back with some weird rave about the superior wisdoms of widget-makers..(??..)
and a string of ad hominems..
meh..!
eh..?
(and all in yr own words..eh..?
what’s known as a ‘rigorous self-dicking’..eh..?..)
heh..!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 25th, 2009 at 11:20 am
Viking2 said:
I suspect that if the government undertook your tax reforms then they would be voted back in with the highest majority ever.
The Stuff article also says:
We wouldn’t have that problem if the company, highest income and trust rates were all the same.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:23 am
And why is Mr English releasing this policy on a Sunday?
October 25th, 2009 at 11:43 am
“..And why is Mr English releasing this policy on a Sunday?.”
it’s all part of the p.r. blitz/offensive..
an attempt to dull/blunt the sharp edge of the (unfortunate) ‘double-dip-from-dipton’ sword…`
(see also his ‘we are out of the recession’ homilies/bullshit ads..on the telly..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 25th, 2009 at 11:47 am
Simple answer is to reduce the top rate to 30% initially for everyone and the revenue lost can be recovered by making all the bludgers (like phool) get a job instead of collecting a benefit. QED. Get on with it Bill stop waffling.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:48 am
Sorry phil, won’t be seeing anything on NZ telly as I am in QLD. Working. Like you should be.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:51 am
Oh good, not only are we not selling SOEs, we are risking more tax dollars through them:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/2997982/QV-takeover-makes-govt-top-dog
October 25th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Maybe QV could be sold…
October 25th, 2009 at 11:56 am
Does Bob Jones *really* believe that ACT will increase its support such as to be the majority party? Even with the country recognising the need to slash public expenditure, I don’t think that it will happen philu.
October 25th, 2009 at 11:59 am
so..firestone didn’t close factories here and in australia…
Not for your reasons philu, have you thought about the impacts your mate Obummer’s tariffs are having on the tyre manufacturing business?
Thought not, communism doesnt hurt the redundnat workers, only the greedy fat cats… eh?
October 25th, 2009 at 11:59 am
gee..!..i thought kiwiblog was kinda unique..
the knuckledraggers one of a kind..
but no..
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/paranoia-for-breakfastnowis-this-person-talking-about-a-kiwiblog-cloneor-what/
“..A few years ago I fell in with this circle of people – a high proportion of which are certifiably insane –
- who correspond by email with each other over politics.
I would call it a seriously mixed blessing .. except that I’d never go far enough as to use the ‘b’ word to describe the experience.
I can honestly say that when I was originally baited into participating in the group I came with an open mind ..
.. and I still have not met a single person on the list.
About half the correspondents are regressives ..
.. most of them from right out of central casting on the set of the movie “America Neanderthal”.
They rarely cease to astonish me.
The level of thuggishness, hypocrisy, ignorance, proud ignorance and ad hominem insult from those quarters is staggering.
More on that some other day perhaps .. but there’s one additional aspect of that behavior set that floors me.
It’s the capacity to simply make things up out of whole cloth ..
.. and then just have it become ‘truth’.
Period..”
(spooky..!..eh..?..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 25th, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Is it too hard for Q+ A to get someone other than Metiria Turai to front on MMP? I’m sick of seeing her mug as she has nothing to say. All show and no substance. The demise of the Greens must be on the horizon. Whos’ producing this show anyway – must be some lazy bastard.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
i thought turei monstered shirtcliffe..
(she could/should have been holding a sign above his head..
..’yesterdays’ man’..
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 25th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
What pisses me off is they way most politicians (ACT possibly excluded) think about tax.
There have been numerous studies done which demonstrate raising taxes actually reduces tax revenue over time (something philu in his economic wisdom will splutter about and deny).
There was one done by an economist around 1990, can’t remember which. But it was studying the lowering of the top tax rate, and showed tax revenues flow in at a much faster pace than the previous higher rate.
People like the Greens and Labour that think whacking a top rate of 50% on will make the revenue from the fat cats pour in are deluded, they will merely find ways to hide their income (indeed tax avoidance from that high a tax rate can hardly be called immoral) and will be less productive.
Lower, flatter taxes will not lead to lower revenues over the medium term, which is why I get fucked off when people call tax cuts “unaffordable”. What is unaffordable is the obscene level of public spending Labour carried out over the last few years, and which National are tinkering around the edges without managing to reduce it much (Families Commission $8million a year, anyone?)
October 25th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
You are dead right nickb – successive governments seem to be taking ever bigger slices of the pie, not realising (or caring) that their actions are actually making the pie smaller.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Lowering tax rates didn’t work very well for GW in the US. Record deficits (for then) followed by a recession.
October 25th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
GW Bush only lowered tax rates for those earning over $400k or so. He didn’t lower them for normal workers and small to medium businesses, which is really what everyone wants.
He also started two wars, the biggest conflicts that the US has seen since at least Veitnam. IMHO fiscal responsibility is a great reason not to start a war.
October 25th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
One has to accept that there will be in organic collections in Auckland, I have to say the people roaming the streets looking for prizes etc is par for the course, but it leaves a little to be desired when one gets woken up all night with cars with trailers and small trucks sifting through these belongings…
October 25th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Unspinning the FairTax
Summary
In our recent article on the second GOP debate, we called out Gov. Mike Huckabee as well as Reps. Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter for their support of the FairTax. We wrote that the bipartisan Advisory Panel on Tax Reform had “calculated that a sales tax would have to be set at 34 percent of retail sales prices to bring in the same revenue as the taxes it would replace, meaning that an automobile with a retail price of $10,000 would cost $13,400 including the new sales tax.” A number of readers pointed out that H.R. 25, the specific bill mentioned by Gov. Huckabee, calls for a 23 percent retail sales tax and not the 34 percent used by the Advisory Panel on Tax Reform. That 23 percent number, however, is misleading and based on some extremely optimistic assumptions. We found that while there are several good economic arguments for the FairTax, unless you earn more than $200,000 per year, fairness is not one of them.
October 25th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Um……..
So what is the ‘loophole’ that allows “wage earners” to avoid paying their share of tax ?
October 25th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
Lowering tax rates didn’t work very well for GW in the US. Record deficits (for then) followed by a recession.
Again Pete, you’re looking at it like a lefty politician would.
It was G.W’s massive spending that led to deficits, 2 wars aren’t usually conducive to surpluses.
October 25th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Getstaffed
Family Trusts are set up as a “living will” for many reasons, such as assets protection, control over beneficiaries, etc etc etc.
If they weere set up as a tax vehicle then the IRD would identify it as a sham.
The fact that it can be used as vehicle for spreading income (trustee shareholders) is um just um just coincidence. The Minor Beneficiary rule sort of mitigates shams.
Finkenstein, the fact that assets have been transferred to a trust doesnt necessarily protect it from Creditors, esp where there is still a substantial settlors loan balance.
If the assets had been transferred within the last few years then the liquidator/official assignee/reciever will have grounds to go and get them
October 25th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Well lowering taxes in NZ and Australia has worked very well in the past but raising, as Clark did because she thought that because she (a single woman without a family and who lived in the $ lucrative trough of politics) could afford to, everyone else should.
Clearly it was an unmitigated disaster, from Kiwi’s leaving to the next 30 years of poverty that has now descended upon NZ, because of the money being wasted by Communist Clark and her Nasty henchman.
October 25th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Dirty Rat;
The loophole for wages earners is actually the buying and selling of houses at a profit. For some reason it is assumed that some other bugger does that but from my experience it is the wage and salary earners. I’ve just done some work for a couple, one who literally works in a salt mine and his wife a partime wage slave who are about to make 100,000k just buying and selling a house. A house that they were lucky enough to be able to buy, last year from a distressed seller, that they have slept in meantime and now they are selling. And good on them. Not if Blenglish gets his way. He will disembowel them for making some money. Always about envy. Never about risks and rewards.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
Topless teacher on Penthouse website
By JONATHAN MARSHALL – Sunday News
Last updated 05:00 25/10/2009
BARING ALL: Rachel Whitwell in a website pose.
A primary school teacher who appeared naked on Australian Penthouse’s website is being investigated by the New Zealand Teachers Council.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/2998568/Topless-teacher-on-Penthouse-website
Go have a read. Nice picture but what captured my attention was this little paragraph;
“Teachers are role models and having a teacher linked with Penthouse is taking things too far,”
No shit Shirley, teachers as role models. Thank the Lord I didn’t go to school for too long then. Apart from being knucledragging lefties most of them never grow up beyond the age of the kids they teach. Most of them don’t even want to place their skills into an open market where they get paid what they are worth, by the payers.
Ask any sales person who their worst nightmare is and the answer is always the same. Bloody school teachers.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Viking2
Those are available to all people, wage earners or not.
It isnt a loophole, if you go into a property transaction with a view of hocking it off, then you will be deemed to have purchased it with a view to a profit. That is a mistake that people do with banks with finance applications. If the IRD have a wiff of “intention” then you pay tax on that profit. There are mitigating factors such as financial difficulties etc etc, but generally Intention is the tax rule
Its not a loophole, and again, not limited to wage earners, which was what Blinglish referred to.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Know all that and the point I was trying to get across is that wage earners are just as much into tax avoidance as the millionaires that Blenglish was on about. If I earned 1Mill there is no way I would allow the IRD to take 38% or something like $350,000 of my money and nor will John Key, Bill English and anyone else. English only needs to look at his own use of trusts etc to minimize his income to realize the motivation.
Way back before GST was introduced and tax rates were way up there, the cash economy was used and enjoyed by everyone. When GST came along the cash economy dried up and pretty much stayed that way until the tax rates caught up with the growing incomes (wage creep). As the tax amount taken rose so did the cash economy. Along came the ignorant and added further to that change by demanding without consultation more tax from higher income earners. Plenty supported the move as the polls showed at the time but what they all forgot was that income creep would again get them and that is what happened so the average wage earner went from well of to poor and then the stupid twosome added WFF to quell the rebellion.
From my experience there is much more cash economy operating now than there was 9 years ago. I have heard of very large sums being passed around and I don’t blame the taxpayer for looking after their own cash. If it wasn’t being stolen by legalized theft in the first place it would stop happening.
Something that i would add to my first post is that the GST threshold should be raised from the current 60k to 200k.
Reason is that it simplifies the running of small businesses and takes away the temptation to avoid the GST as earlier this post. And at 200k that’s still only 4k per week. When GST was introduced the threshold was 50k so 25 years that threshold has risen 10k. Not even moving with inflation.
If our tax rates were protected from inflation then we would all be a way lot richer and Govt. would have wasted way less money because they would have had to raise other taxes to have the money to spend. Now that in itself raises debate and makes the populace unhappy. Govts. normally (and Clark and Co aren’t normal), do not usually like unhappy electorates.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
If you earned $1mill as a ‘wage earner’, then you pay tax on that $1 mill through PAYE. And no, “wage earners’ are not into tax avoidance by virtue of the available deductions.
I would doubt very very much that Bill English would be using his trust as a vehicle for tax minimisation on a salary.
Farm yes, salary , no.
Another point, when GST came in, the cash economy increased (as did the false invoicing industry which in the Bay of Plenty was @$50 million in the horticultural industry).
October 25th, 2009 at 2:45 pm
It doesn’t help that Bush lowered taxes then increased spending as part of this “compassionate” conservatism bullshit.
October 25th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
yep..!..so that’swhere bush went wrong..eh..?
too much ‘compassionate conservatism’..?
who knew/noticed..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 25th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Not so. Any paye earner can offset that against another business expenses that arise from owning houses or any other form
business. e.g own a truck in a business but don’t earn to much and its depreciation is available to the taxpayer, same as a house. Business do this all the time.
A taxpayers total income is included int he tax return calculations including the trusts , farms etc so yes he can and most likely does.
As I have lived here in the middle of all that for a long time I am happy to say that the cash economy declined on the introduction of GST.
What you are talking about is quite different. Those guys set out to never declare any earnings at all and the GST was a part of that. It was about a complete fraud not just the GST. From memory the money was never accounted for and wages were distributed in cash no records although again if my memory is correct they deducted the paye but never paid it to ird as that would have exposed the scam.. Its was a straight out cash economy effort which happened to also avoid paying tax of any kind.
October 25th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Three new navy ships.
October 25th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
good laugh
October 25th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
In my opinion, those who voted for National/Act in the expectation of those two parties forming a coalition have been diddled.
It’s all very well complaining on here about so little change to the tax system/rates, but you really should be asking Hide, Key and English just why they are there. For years they bleated on about tax cuts being some kind of economic Viagra, yet here they are in a position to to enact the policies they have been preaching and their dithering is probably even worse than Obama’s dithering on Afghanistan.
Rodney Hide may well be kicking local government where it hurts the most, but I am sure that is not what the majority of ACT voters thought they were getting. There should be a huge chant directed at ACT:
RODNEY, WHERE ARE MY TAX CUTS!
However, guys, what you need to consider is this. YOUR government is not delivering on tax cuts, and why not? What could be their reasons for dallying when evidence produced even here clearly demonstrates advantages of lower taxes?
It’s suggested that Key et al are playing safe to win the next election. Does this mean they fear LOSING votes with such a vote-catching act (pardon the pun) of lowering our taxes? And did you guys vote for them to watch them do nothing for three years? Hell, I ain’t got that much longer in work force. I want, I need, my economic miracle NOW!
As I keep pointing out on here, the master of glumness, he of Double Dipton fame, said a little while ago that he can’t cut taxes in the current environment, yet right now is when we need a major fillip. I think Bill just got confronted with a double dose of reality when he finally assumed command of the economy.
To be honest, I was looking forward to tax cuts and whatever other extreme policies in the name of laissez faire (a failure previously, but that never stops governments) this government instituted, just so the new generations could see for themselves what works and what doesn’t.
But I didn’t expect them to first return education to the 19th century. And because I have a vested interest in the quality of our education system, I am forced to abandon my previously benign attitude to this government.
October 25th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Viking
Those offsets are as a result of being self-employed, rental property eg.
Not as a result of being a wage earner.
BTW if Bill is receiving salary then he cannot pass it on to a trust
October 25th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
“I am forced to abandon my previously benign attitude to this government”
We’re all very frightened Luc.
Tax cuts make sense when you’re running record surpluses but you have to be unselfish enough to avoid spending almost all of it on your own support base. Unfortunately NZ didn’t have such a govt throughout the time they were possible. I wonder why Liarbore’s supporters aren’t calling their own party to account for that behaviour? Do you think they’re just plain stupid, or are they evil?
When the Liarbore govt left the Nats with a decade of deficits and various timebombs like Railways and ACC ticking away in the cupboard JUST LIKE THEY DID IN THE 90′s, then you don’t really have much of a choice.
To be honest, the GFC was totally predictable and was predicted many years before the election and so I was surprised when Key and English didn’t revise their tax cut promises and I think that was a mistake. But the reality is that Liarbore left them very little room to manoeuvre which again is in COMPLETE CONTRAST TO THE POSITION THE NAT’S LEFT THEM WITH WHEN THEY TOOK OVER IN 1999.
Why anyone with a 3-digit supports Liarbore, I have no idea. Time and again, they prove to be not only incompetent but also dishonest. You guys are bloody lucky the average reef-fish is so childishly politically naive otherwise you’d never get any votes at all.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Why pigeonhole me as a Labour supporter? I think poor old Labour has a way to go yet before it recovers form the last nine years and becomes electable again. But it doesn’t mean I won’t egg them on to take on the government over stuff like the education debacle.
When I talk tax cuts. I do so from the right wing point of view: that tax cuts stimulate the economy, so I refute your suggestion that tax cuts are only affordable in a surplus situation. If the theory of the right is correct, cutting taxes in a deficit situation is exactly what should be done to get us out of deficit.
Isn’t that what the guys above, getstaffed, nickb, viking are saying?
If tax cuts can’t stimulate the economy in a deficit situation, then perhaps something is amiss with the theory?
Surely not!
October 25th, 2009 at 5:15 pm
From ACT website:
# Taxation
Action: Cut and flatten rates.
Benefit: More incentive for people with initiative to create wealth and jobs.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:16 pm
Dirty Rat, I take your point. minor distinction but none the less right. Separate entities and you are correct. How can a paye payer avoid tax? Only by being paid cash under the table. Now I know a Chinese restaurant that operates that way with the Chinese servants. (and not in Hong Kong either.)
LUC. That’s exactly what history shows happens in NZ. Tax cuts equal better economy. 80′s 90′s but sadly not the 000′s yet.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
Dirty Rat this for you and all those other English believers.
http://asianinvasion2006.blogspot.com/
October 25th, 2009 at 5:27 pm
“If tax cuts can’t stimulate the economy in a deficit situation, then perhaps something is amiss with the theory?”
Luc, tax cuts don’t work if you have to go into debt to pay for them because the stimulus effect in terms of increased spending in the economy is swallowed up by the interest you have to pay.
That’s the difference between when Liarbore was in power and now.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
http://nominister.blogspot.com/2009/10/labour-finance-minister-speaks-from.html
October 25th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Going to be even worse next time around Reid, all hail to the ratchet effect one can hope we have more than pots and pans to bang together unlike the citizens of Iceland.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:34 pm
Reid, the other part of tax cuts is cuts in Govt. spending. Some will occur naturally as the tax cuts take effect and others have to be man made by someone with gumption guts etc. I mean how many millions are we pouring into useless qaungos. and television companies etc/ Need i suggest more. Those of us in business have all had to do it so why the hell shouldn’t the state? Tell me that
October 25th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
We all know how successful George Bush’s economic stimulus tax cuts policy was?
October 25th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
http://www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html
Have a go at this and if you don’t get 80 to 100% join the red flag.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Thank you Viking, timely support as I go back out to finish the lawns on a lovely Sunday afternoon.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
“Reid, the other part of tax cuts is cuts in Govt. spending.”
Yes I know that very well Viking and that’s why ACT needs to be there but they can only do so much.
Key’s stances on various issues like e.g. ruling out SOE sales in the first term showed his political naivity. Anyone with any nouse could have told him that he had enough gas in the tank to get over the line without making those concessions. It’s most unfortunate as I believe that at most the Nats are going to be at most a two term govt. As Banana says, we’re going to have a W not a U shaped recession and the second hit is going to be severe. World-changing. Either the USD disappears as the reserve or the US introduces a gold-backed dollar. Given the hyperinflation dangers in the US if the former happens, I’m picking the latter as a strategy but whichever way they go, the shit’s going to hit the fan in 2011, IMO.
Unfortunately given his performance to date I don’t think Key has it in him to deal with this and bring us out of the coming mess in the best possible state although there is in fact no better alternative leader given his background. What he needs is a very strong executive and he doesn’t have it. They have the experience but they don’t have the ability.
October 25th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
here is something for the ‘i’ve got a special friend in the sky’ crew..
http://whoar.co.nz/2009/robert-crumb-has-done-an-atheists-graphic-novel-of-genesis/
“..It’s true what they say.
Sometimes, a picture really is worth a thousand words.
Especially when those pictures are drawn by Robert Crumb.
And especially when those words come from the Bible.
For those who haven’t heard yet: Legendary comics artist Robert Crumb has just come out with his new book: The Book of Genesis, Illustrated by R. Crumb ..
.. a magnum opus, five years in the making, telling the complete, unedited book of Genesis in graphic novel form.
And I’m finding it fascinating.
It’s masterfully illustrated, of course, Crumb being among the very best creators in this burgeoning literary form.
And it’s getting Genesis across to me, deep into my brain and my imagination, in a way that it had never quite gotten there before.
Of course I’ve read Genesis.
More than once.
It’s been a little while since I’ve read the whole thing all the way through, but it’s not like it’s unfamiliar.
But there’s something about seeing the story fleshed out in images to make some of its more striking narrative turns leap out and grab your brain by the root.
There’s nothing quite like seeing the two different creation stories enacted on the page to make you go ..
.. “Hey! That’s right!
Two completely different creation stories!”
There’s nothing quite like seeing Lot offer his daughters to be gang-raped .. to make you recoil in shock and moral horror.
There’s nothing quite like seeing the crazed dread and burning determination in Abraham’s eyes as he prepares the sacrifice of his own son to make you feel the enormity of this act.
Reading these stories in words conveys the ideas; seeing them in images conveys the visceral impact.
It makes it all seem vividly, immediately, humanly real.
Now, that is something of a mixed blessing.
Spending a few days with the characters in Genesis isn’t the most relaxing literary vacation you’ll ever take.
Richard Dawkins wasn’t kidding when he said, “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction.”
The God character in Genesis is cruel, violent, callous, insecure, power-hungry, paranoid, hot-tempered, morally fickle…
.. I could go on and on.
And God’s followers aren’t much better.
They lie, they scheme, they cheat one another, they conquer other villages with bloodthirsty imperialist glee, they kill at the drop of a hat.
This isn’t Beatrix Potter here.
It’s more like Dangerous Liaisons by way of Quentin Tarantino.
With tents, sand, and sheep..”
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 25th, 2009 at 7:31 pm
“Lot offer his daughters to be gang-raped”
Yes phil, interesting you pick up on that. For if Lot was truly righteous, how could he do that? And then his daughters slept with him and bore him two sons.
An extremely relevant passage is Genesis 19:37 – the first-born child’s name is the name of people who are still around today that never would have been, had Abraham not challenged G-d on His decision to destroy Sodom.
Most unfortunate it has proven to be.
October 25th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Actually, Lot offered his daughters because Lot had two (male) strangers to staying the night, and the men of the town surrounded his house and wanted to (homosexually) have sex with them. Lot begged them not to and offered his two daughters instead of allowing this horrible abomination (sodomy – Lot lived in Sodom) to happen. God later destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for these sins, and Lot was one of the few to survive.
ps, I’m sure Crumb’s retelling is interesting, in a completely fictional Hollywood kind of way.
October 25th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
ps, I’m sure Crumb’s retelling is interesting, in a completely fictional Hollywood kind of way.
Are you saying the Bible is not fictional?
October 25th, 2009 at 7:52 pm
and they are off..and running..!
schism-alert..!
schism-alert…!
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 25th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
“.. “Hey! That’s right!
Two completely different creation stories!”..”
and what’s up with that..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 25th, 2009 at 8:03 pm
Public Address Radio on Radio Live just had an interview with a playwright who is doing a dramatisation on Darwin and he made this interesting statement:
Ultimately, in the greater scheme of things, life is meaningless.
Depressing but true?
October 25th, 2009 at 8:22 pm
fletch..why didn’t lot just move..from sodom..?
(maybe down the road to gommorrah..?..
(a real party-town..rumour has it..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
October 25th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
New topic for a minute ….
Good interview worth listening to this Labour Weekend. Roger Kerr gives some good material, especially from his history in Treasury in Muldoon times etc.
http://static.radionz.net.nz/assets/audio_item/0017/2107403/ideas-20091025-1105-Ideas_for_25_October_2009-m048.asx
October 25th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Viking2
Please don’t get me wrong.
The problem with National is that they gave probably the most important job in the country to the world least most competent person.
Bill English is a walking disaster zone, and I am reaaaly shit scared about what he will do ( BTW way I have commented on Cactus Kates blog, its an accountants in-joke, we are to be wed and cactus katie baby will bear my children).
But I do not believe his advisors will risk exposing that little piece of shit to avoidance, and what he did was to th eletter of the law.
Now you have made suggestions that he did. I don’t go for that.
He is a little shit, but a law abiding little shit nontheless
October 25th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
BTW just in case I fall aslep drunk.
HAPPY LABOUR DAY ALL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
October 26th, 2009 at 7:44 am
Philu; Here you go.
High cost of NZ manufacture’ hurt tyre company
By JAMES WEIR – BusinessDay
Last updated 05:00 26/10/2009
Bridgestone has lost money in the past two years, despite revenues rising to $217 million last year.
Bridgestone said on Friday that it would close its Christchurch tyre factory by Christmas, sacking 275 people in a move that has devastated workers, their union says.
Companies Office files show Bridgestone, a tyre maker, retailer and wholesaler, lost $7.1 million in the 2008 calendar year in New Zealand.
The Bridgestone NZ loss in the previous year was $3.8m. The firm made a $1.2m profit in 2006.
In announcing the closure of the Christchurch plant and one in Adelaide, Australia, Bridgestone’s owners in Japan blamed intensifying cost competition globally. In Adelaide, 600 jobs will go.
Bridgestone is Japan’s biggest maker of tyres and in the half year to June made a loss of 38.3 billion, hit by the economic downturn in Japan, the United States and Europe.
“Despite continued efforts to improve cost competitiveness at both plants, international competitive forces have been making tyre manufacturing in Australia and New Zealand increasingly difficult to the point where the operations in both countries are no longer viable,” the company said.
Bridgestone’s distribution, customer service and retail networks in New Zealand, which employ more than 1500 people, are unaffected.
The head office is in Auckland and it also owns Tony’s Tyre Service.
Bridgestone New Zealand direct owner is in Australia, but the ultimate parent is Bridgestone Corporation of Japan. While its New Zealand annual revenues rose more than $20m to $217m in the latest year, the annual report shows the cost of goods sold rose about $25m, to $148m.
In the latest year, employee benefits were $33.3m, $3m higher than the previous year.
Aside from normal costs, such as rent, freight and power, Bridgestone reported an unexplained $22.4m in “other expenses”, up from $17.7m the previous year.
The “other expenses” knocked the company from what would otherwise have been a profit into a $10 million pre-tax loss, before a $3m tax benefit.
The value of the shareholders’ equity in the company at the end of last year was about $110m, with assets of about $173m and liabilities of $62m.
Bridgestone Rubberworkers union secretary Kerry Pearce said the company had said it would pay full redundancy and holiday entitlements to the workers.
They had a redundancy agreement of seven weeks’ pay for the first year of employment and two weeks for each following year, uncapped.
“There’s a lot of history on this site, with some members having worked here 45 years and some being the second and third generation of their families to have worked here, so it is a very sad day for all of us,” he said.
Ad Feedback
Bridgestone was the last tyre manufacturer in Australia and New Zealand.
The firm said tyre production in both countries had been running at a loss for several years and had been under review for some time.
Bridgestone’s tyres would be imported from Japan, southeast Asia, Europe and the US.
October 26th, 2009 at 9:42 am
Viking2 @ 10.40am
“Unfortunately though the Catholics and the Jews have always rolled over, compromised and never stood up for individual freedom. Worlds history and if we don’t learn from history we are destined to repeat that history.
I expect that will bring the wrath of many of those with religious affiliations but like the Muslims behavior towards women and non believers its all true and you should look at yourselves first.”
I think you will find Catholics gave as good or even better as they got. Catholic persecutions have a long and savage history, not least against Jews, so to lump those two religions together as suffering similarly is just a little obscene. If I were Jew, I wouldn’t have a bar of the Catholic Church. The for you to want to carry on centuries of savagery into a modern day persecution of Islam is simply perpetuating exactly what you complain of.
Who was who said that the oppressed are merely oppressors in waiting? Bertrand Russell?
We need to break the cycle. A good start would be for the US stop attacking Muslim nations and using its power and influence working for peace, not perpetual war. Sadly, the ruling elite of that country currently believe perpetual war is in its best interest.