About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

November 26, 2014 4:22pm by David Farrar

Gareth Morgan on why a flat tax is fairer

The video is from Gareth Morgan, but a colleague of his presents it.

A lot I disagree with him on, but not this issue.

Share this:

Facebook
X
LinkedIn
Reddit
WhatsApp
More

Pinterest
Print
Tumblr

Like this:

Like Loading…

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment122

NZ Politics
flat tax
Gareth Morgan

Related Stories

Saint Gareth to the rescue again
Two good Gareth Morgan columns
Blunt on Gareth Morgan

Comments (122)

Login to comment or vote

The Bangles

Weihana, everybody would still get a good education, a good head start, the ability to start up a fresh new business, if they have a sound business plan. At the same time, everybody groans about tax. Poor people who are getting benefits moan about how its unfair. The middle class moan they’re paying more than their fair bit. And the rich are also groaning about tax. Nobody would be able to say its unfair. And everybody would have every opportunity to succeed.

If this were in place, 11 years ago I would have bought up a small business accounting franchise, and would have paid that back easily within two years. Ironically, some libertarians would have a huge problem with this. They would say parents should pay for the child’s schooling, or they should simply become an apprentice. Some libertarians say my idea of opportunities is socialism. With the person I’m thinking of who also didn’t believe in welfare for those with no arms or legs. after a lot of tugging and pulling, he now sees things my way. What is going to get people started, is now the issue for him.

Finally, the reason this country is going nowhere, is tourism and farming are our main export. This employs 10% of the people, the other 90% are saying I can offer a service, and the 10% are saying we don’t need so many people. So with gamemaker and ebooks, this is a great opportunity for creative people to create new products and new industries. This way of doing things would make that possible. At one time we were creating a lot of products, everybody was well off, and until this happens, we will continue to moan and groan, about not getting our fair share.

Finally the rich don’t pay their fair bit of tax. They use trusts and other legal manouvers to avoid their fair share. Warren buffett offered $100,000 to any CEO who was paying more income tax proportionately to the secretary. Not one could say they were.
3 1
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 11:48am
mikenmild

Redbaiter
Would the imposition of a gold standard for the New Zealand dollar be an action point for your first hundred days in power?
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 11:58am
The Bangles

Redbaiter, if we had a gold standard, exports would equal imports over time. If our imports are greater than our exports, we have to pay out gold. Paying out gold, means we have less money, making prices and wages lower. This means the cost of our exports goes back down, meaning we export more, we receive more gold, prices and wages go back up. So if we do, do that, exports will equal imports, meaning more industries, as we are importing more than we export, 47 of the last 50 years we have imported more than we exported.
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 12:13pm
georgebolwing

The Bangles

I’m pretty sure Washington could not have been sent an early drat of the Communist Manifesto. He died in 1799, decades before it was written. Washington was an elitist, as were many of the founding fathers. When they said “all men are created equal” they really meant “all freeborn white property-owning men are created equal”. Washington opposed plans for industrialisation because it would have reduced the power of the planters, who he though where the ideal rulers.
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 12:33pm
Redbaiter

When they said “all men are created equal” they really meant “all freeborn white property-owning men are created equal”. Washington opposed plans for industrialisation because it would have reduced the power of the planters, who he though where the ideal rulers.

Don’t mistake our Mr. Bolwing for anything other than the left wing msm fed stooge he really is. He has no reference point outside todays corrupted progressive political strata within which he survives.
4 2
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 12:39pm
The Bangles

Georgebolwing, if you look up on you tube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myzE1X_GLw8

11:47
Jordan Maxwell – The Dawn of a New Day (Teaser Trailer)
by mymomentummedia3 years ago1,114 views
Jordan Maxwell – The Dawn of a New Day (Teaser Trailer)
HD

You’ll see what I meant and what I was referring to. I did say according to Jordan Maxwell. What Jordan is saying, is the people who came up with the idea of the communist manifesto came up with it years and years and years before Karl Marx existed. They wanted to implement it years ahead of Karl Marx. But because it got rejected by certain people they just had to wait and wait until the time was right, and that happened to be when people were miserably treated in Karl Marx’s era.

Anyhow as I said this is according to Jordan Maxwell. And this is why I didn’t want to go into all those other things. I try to keep my comments to what I can easily prove.
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 12:49pm
Weihana

The Bangles (85 comments) says:
November 27th, 2014 at 11:48 am

Weihana, everybody would still get a good education, a good head start,

No, they get that now, more or less. What you propose is to saddle people with debt for the privilege of being born to a poor household. Somehow this equates to “fairness”.

At the same time, everybody groans about tax. Poor people who are getting benefits moan about how its unfair.

If they do I fail to see how your proposal offers them any advantage. They’ll be servicing the “debt” from their parents benefits and their own education, health care and the rest, and somehow they have a “good head start” and an opportunity to take on more debt to finance some amazing business proposal.

Nobody would be able to say its unfair.

Throw in jail anyone who questions the fairness of your proposal? 🙂

If this were in place, 11 years ago I would have bought up a small business accounting franchise, and would have paid that back easily within two years.

Yeah, maybe.

Ironically, some libertarians would have a huge problem with this.

About as ironic as Protestants fighting Catholics or Sunni fighting Shia.

Finally the rich don’t pay their fair bit of tax.

What is fair? Even if they pay a lower proportion, they would generally still pay a greater absolute amount. The problem is ideologues who view taxation as some sort of personal investment or account.

Tax is collected for public goods and it should be designed to balance competing forces such as incentives to work vs entrenched privilege for the wealthy, greater tax revenue to funds services vs competing foreign tax markets etc. Achieving the right balance should be an empirical question, not an ideological question about whether or not it conforms to some libertarian’s interpretation of the “scriptures”.
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 1:33pm
georgebolwing

Sorry Bangles. I tried to watch it, but when after 1:26 he said “America is a world communist state” I just had to stop.

Red is, I am sure, going to say that this is because I have been indoctrinated by the progressives and my capacity for reason sapped by a diet of main-stream media and that I am a cultural Marxist.

But it is really because Jordan Maxwell is an idiot.
3 2
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 1:37pm
The Bangles

George, America is not what it used to be. Their are people in America wondering how it went from a free country to have so much more government control. So maybe a communist state is a bit too rough, but it really isn’t the free country it used to be. And besides, Marxist-Communism is Communism by stealth. By implementing Marx’s ten planks, you eventually get communism.

Anyhow, if you watched other Jordan Maxwell videos you could see that he is a very very intelligent man.
3 2
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 1:44pm
The Bangles

Weihana, I’ll try to say this again. Warren Buffett wrote to every CEO, and said I’ll give you $100,000 if you can prove you pay more income tax than your secretary, proportionately speaking. If she makes $40,000, and you make $400,000, then the CEO would pay 10 times as much income tax. Not one CEO was able to say yes.

For instance, my brother runs a company in England. If he takes out only a small amount from his company per year, he only pays tax on the amount he takes out. So if for arguements sake the first 20,000 pounds per year is at 0%, he would only take out exactly 20,000, no matter how much he earnt.

The difference between my idea and the status quo, is that currently some people are paying plenty, and getting little, and others are getting plenty and receiving little. This means we’d still have services for people who need it. But ultimately you pay for it. The problem is too many people wanting a free ride and other people being disincentived to earn more. It means things will be available but you will pay for it.

The other issue, is that banks like to lend on property, and to the government. Try getting a loan for a business with no or a small amount of security. What this idea is saying, is some people are stuck, how bout they take that risk.
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 1:52pm
deadrightkev

“He is also right about the Universal Basic Income.”

I believe that is were he is wrong. Everyone has a right to work but not a right to a guaranteed income for doing nothing. In effect it is just a tax free income threshold.
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 2:08pm
Weihana

The Bangles (87 comments) says:
November 27th, 2014 at 1:52 pm

Weihana, I’ll try to say this again. Warren Buffett wrote to every CEO, and said I’ll give you $100,000 if you can prove you pay more income tax than your secretary, proportionately speaking. If she makes $40,000, and you make $400,000, then the CEO would pay 10 times as much income tax. Not one CEO was able to say yes.

Not sure how this is relevant to people having to shoulder a debt because they received a state education, or because their parents received state assistance.

The difference between my idea and the status quo, is that currently some people are paying plenty, and getting little, and others are getting plenty and receiving little.

Redistributing wealth to oppose excessive inequality and to provide opportunity to those without means is not an unintended consequence.

This means we’d still have services for people who need it. But ultimately you pay for it. The problem is too many people wanting a free ride and other people being disincentived to earn more. It means things will be available but you will pay for it.

Under your plan poor people pay for everything they ever received. Those lucky enough to be born to wealthy parents get a free ride. Such is the fairness of life eh. Birth is part of the divine plan, but tax is the devil’s work!

The other issue, is that banks like to lend on property, and to the government. Try getting a loan for a business with no or a small amount of security. What this idea is saying, is some people are stuck, how bout they take that risk.

So you propose loans for people that would not otherwise receive them from a bank? People who are already servicing debts to the government for their education and their parents benefits? These loans are to be given regardless of their ability to service more debt?

But you say they’ll be given a loan if they have a “sound” business plan? So who decides whether it’s a good business plan? Is this how business works? Businesses succeed and fail on the strength of their business plan as determined by a government bureaucrat?
1 3
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 2:31pm
The Bangles

Weihana, I’m not quite sure that you understand the fundamentals, of what I mean by debt. Their was a great depression, and it was caused by a sharemarket crash. People had no money at all. Their was a plan, we the government are going to borrow money from the very rich, and we will get this country running again. People were jumping out of windows, not able to pay for their food or their rent. So it sounded it pretty good. One condition, you receive those things, but you pay the debt back with income tax.

Keynesianism says when the country is going through rough times, the govt should borrow and spend, and then when people have more money, when people are buying more from the supermarket, buying more homes, those businesses can rehire. And once unemployment is just a little less, than you cut spending, or raise taxes, and you start to collect more money than you spend.

People understood that as a citizen I get privileges, but any debt the government has, the guaranee that it will be paid back is by income tax. So a public education, working for families is paid by the government borrowing. And they can borrow, because when these people graduate they will pay the government income tax. And so now the government can repay the people they borrowed from.

So really, the only difference between this system and my system, is everybody is supposed to be paying back the public debt, which was created for public education and working for families etc. What my idea does is say, once you’ve done your bit, your free. If you want to continue to pay, more money in your pension, or whenever you get into trouble.

So the public debt is guaranteed by people’s future earnings. If you look at the world/global debt clock, it has every country’s debt in proportion to the expected earnings. Now in regards to the business side, I’m not sure you understand what Capital adequacy requirements means.

When you put $1,000 into the bank, the bank is expected to keep 8% of that $1,000 in reserve, at all times. Not quite, its 8% of that $1,000 x the risk weighting. The risk weighting of personal and business loans is 100%, the risk weighting on mortgages is 50%. So if that $1,000 gets used for business, 8% x $1,000 x 100% needs to be kept on hand. With a mortgage its 8% x 50% x $1,000 needs to be kept on hand. This is why mortgages are half the cost of credit card loans approximately. Now what about government loans. For most governments its about 20% risk weighting. So if you go to the NZ debt market site, http://www.nzdmo.govt.nz/, you will find kiwibonds of below a year pay no more than 3%. A bank doesn’t need to keep so much money on hand, 8% x by the risk weighting.

So, the reason why banks lend to the government and on property is because of that. What I’m saying is if someone is having difficulty getting work, why should they stay on the dole for 10 years, wouldn’t it be better to give them just enough to start up a business, provided its sound. Sound doesn’t mean starting up a dairy next door to the dairy round the corner. Someone who has studied business will know what sound means. But most importantly, we aren’t developing that many products. Developing new products is what this country desperately needs. 10% are producing, 90% are offering a service.
3 2
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 2:57pm
mikenmild

I’m really not sure that it is the people on the dole that we should be relying on to establish a new wave of businesses.
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 3:29pm
Weihana

The Bangles (88 comments) says:
November 27th, 2014 at 2:57 pm

Keynesianism says when the country is going through rough times, the govt should borrow and spend…

…So a public education, working for families is paid by the government borrowing. And they can borrow, because when these people graduate they will pay the government income tax. And so now the government can repay the people they borrowed from.

Public expenditure is generally paid by tax revenue collected at the same time. Keynesianism says that the government should spend to ensure adequate demand when the economy is weak. This has nothing to do with whether or not a particular area of spending is sustainable long term. Borrowing is to facilitate a deficit which is not the same thing as saying we borrow to pay for public education.
1 3
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 4:09pm
The Bangles

Well, let’s put it this way then. If gamemaker was a part of the curriculum. That at an early age in college, people who wanted to study computer programming studied gamemaker (gamemaker is the easiest game programming language available). This means before they finished school, their would be people who would say to themselves I’ve got some good games that I can develop, and they’d go off and do it. They’d live in their folks house, give it a go, and if successful fantastic. If it doesn’t work out, well then I guess they would be looking for a job.

Or suppose people were given a book writing competition while in school, and it took up half of year of english as a subject. At the end of it, the students are told that if the book is good, they don’t need a publisher to make it happen, and the school would pay the copyright fee, and they would make money out of it. Then after the people graduate, their would be people who would go out and do it, all that’s needed is time and the copyright fee, and its all done. If this was the way school was taught, those who have the creativity to make new products would just go out and do it.

2ndly, technology destroys and creates. Office technology means you need less office workers. If these people who lose their job, go for another office job, well other companies will be letting their staff go. Now, if those people get together, and find someone who is creating new products, those office people just might have a future. Technology destroys jobs, but with creativity new products can be developed.

So, the business development side, I would give preference to those who are still studying, give them the motive to make it happen, if they have something they can develop that will be in demand. I would also give preference to those between jobs. Yes I would be concerned with those still on the dole. That’s why they require people to do a course. That’s why business consultants have a look at the plan. Not everybody qualifies. I would still recommend those safeguards, to minimise the amount of businesses falling over.
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 4:12pm
The Bangles

Weihana, the reason they are paying for people’s public education, and working for families, is yes one of the things it does, is supports aggregate demand. But at the same time, every government official will call it an investment. If that wasn’t the case, they wouldn’t be concerned about how students are doing, their wouldn’t be assessments.

In the great depression, their was no money available for anybody, except the rich. The government borrowed the money, with the understanding people will pay it back with income tax. I’ve seen business income tax returns. On the form it says who will get that information. Every government department and everybody we have a treaty with. Those who lend us money, have a right to know how much people are earning. And this information is available on the world/global debt clock.

Now that statement is only on a business income tax return. So what’s actually happening, is those who are fresh out of college, are paying income tax, and that tax is going to the government, which sends it off to those they owe money too. Or if you ever went into WINZ, when your payments are approved, it says SWIFT will pay out, this amount of money.

What does SWIFT stand for. You google SWIFT, society for world inter financial transactions. In other words the money for a benefit is paid out by people lending to the government. But at the same time, their are plenty of people working, and paying income tax. And according to Niall Furguson who is an economist he says that when a country borrows, they must declare an income tax on the people. This is a Harvard economist. Repeat Niall is a harvard economist.
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 4:24pm
Weihana

The Bangles (89 comments) says:
November 27th, 2014 at 4:12 pm

Well, let’s put it this way then. If gamemaker was a part of the curriculum…

Or suppose people were given a book writing competition while in school,…

This is very fanciful. Trying to earn a living by doing something creative is arguably among the most unlikely to pay off. For every silly game that becomes a fad, thousands go nowhere. For every person that is a successful author, there are countless people no one has ever heard of.

Technology destroys jobs, but with creativity new products can be developed.

That doesn’t necessarily compensate for the job losses. There is a growing concern that employment has become uncoupled from productivity since the late 90s. Look at the major tech companies that exist today. Google. Facebook. Amazon. They don’t employ as many people given their size.

So, the business development side, I would give preference to those who are still studying, give them the motive to make it happen, if they have something they can develop that will be in demand.

So how is someone who studied business supposed to determine whether a game will be in demand? Or a book? I suppose if he fills out the business plan template correctly he is deemed to have a “sound” business plan?
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 4:29pm
Weihana

The Bangles (90 comments) says:
November 27th, 2014 at 4:24 pm

Weihana, the reason they are paying for people’s public education, and working for families, is yes one of the things it does, is supports aggregate demand.

Nonsense. These things are required even if there is a surplus.

In the great depression…

Public education is funded whether or not there is a depression, or a recession or a “rock star economy”.
1 3
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 4:32pm
Weihana

The Bangles (90 comments) says:
November 27th, 2014 at 4:24 pm

And according to Niall Furguson who is an economist he says that when a country borrows, they must declare an income tax on the people. This is a Harvard economist. Repeat Niall is a harvard economist.

ahhh copy Niall is a Harvard economist. lol 🙂
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 4:35pm
The Bangles

Weihana, the simple fact of the matter is that the only competitive industries in New Zealand are dairy and tourism. That’s 10%, and the other 90% provide a service. Of course tech exists, but it is a service industry. How many businesses in New Zealand are producing keyboards at a competitive price?

Now about your comments about games and books. Yeah, their are things that have fallen over, but I did say to develop while still in school. This way those that are fit to do it, will know they are. And your comment about filling out the template, shows something about this generation’s idea about technology. That somethings just can’t be simplified that easily. Their are somethings that fit outside of the box. Those who get the grant are required to go to business seminars, and are required to have a plan, approved by a business consultant. No, it isn’t as simple as filling out a template. Its with experienced business people who know what they are doing.

This is where you need judgement and understanding, by a trained business backgrounded consultant. These people know what will sell. If your in the music industry, those who’ve got the experience, know what is going to sell and what isn’t, and will tell you what to do differently.

Finally, books and games are just two examples of what’s happening. 20 years ago, if you wanted to write a book, you needed a publisher, now you don’t. You wanted to make a game, you were expected to study programming for four years. Now all of that is gone. And technology is going to continue to speed things up, and its going to continue to make more and more office jobs obsolete.

And about you copying my statement about aggregate demand. The next sentence I stated, what else it does. You’ve completely ignored that, and then you go and make fun of it. When I said the great depression, I talked about how this system started again your doing the same thing.

So Weihana, seeing that’s what you’ve done, this is the last post I’m sending to you in this string. And for everybody else, look at the rest of what I’ve said, and compare what he says I’ve said to what I’ve really said.
3 2
Log in to Reply
Report
November 27, 2014 4:52pm
Matthew Flannagan

freedom101 s
“Great ideas usually start out with one person challenging the status quo, usually to their great personal cost. In the middle ages ideas could kill – Galileo was forced to recant. We are fortunate to have our own incubators.

Galileo was tried during the counter reformation several hundred years after the middle ages. He was forced to recant his claim ( which was false) that his system was proven to be true as opposed to merely a good hypothesis. He was not threatened with execution or death. It also was the *only* case where a person was tried for their scientific ideas by the catholic church. Something which never happened during the middle ages and he was not introducing new ideas against the status quo. The idea he presented had already been proposed by numerous theologians several hundred years before him, such as Jean Buridan and Nicholas Oresme.

Try justifying Morgan’s ideas with something other than discredited 19th century propaganda about history.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
November 28, 2014 12:55pm

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Are Robertson’s leadership ambitions over?

General Debate 27 November 2014 »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 13K other subscribers

Highlights

Target achieved II
Good progress on attendance
Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments

Top Stories

General Debate 03 June 2026
Another British policing scandal
General Debate 04 June 2026
A win for democracy
Abolishing HR
Meet the Greens - ACC
Democrat says lock up the Jews
$600k on a website for a building!
Words that are now meaningless
General Debate 02 June 2026

Recent Posts

Words that are now meaningless 4 June 2026
Abolishing HR 4 June 2026
General Debate 04 June 2026 4 June 2026
Meet the Greens – ACC 4 June 2026
Democrat says lock up the Jews 3 June 2026
Another British policing scandal 3 June 2026
General Debate 03 June 2026 3 June 2026
A win for democracy 3 June 2026
$600k on a website for a building! 2 June 2026
Set housing outcomes not outputs 2 June 2026
General Debate 02 June 2026 2 June 2026
Of course GP wait times will skyrocket under Labour 2 June 2026

Recent Comments

Words that are now meaningless
CJames
General Debate 04 June 2026
Ghost
Words that are now meaningless
David Garrett
Words that are now meaningless
David Garrett
Words that are now meaningless
Maggy Wassilieff
Words that are now meaningless
Charlotte Wells
Words that are now meaningless
CJames
General Debate 04 June 2026
David George
General Debate 04 June 2026
virtualmark
Abolishing HR
imalwaysright
Words that are now meaningless
mandk
Words that are now meaningless
Melbury
Words that are now meaningless
David Garrett
Words that are now meaningless
tf78
General Debate 04 June 2026
Jethrod

Links

Parliament fails to defend transparency
No Right Turn
"The principal view of human laws is, or ought always to be, to explain, protect, and enforce such rights as are absolute, which in themselves are few and simple."
Not PC
Word of the day
Hompaddock
The response to Budget 2026 has been unusually muted
Point of Order
You know what “does not pass the sniff test”? Labour’s incremental response to blatant corruption – this is why they plunged 7.5%
The Daily Blog
When is a Free Speech Union not a Free Speech Union?
The Standard
We Are a Country That Decided Housing Was The Economy
No Minister
My Opening Statement for the UATX Caplan-Jones Immigration Rematch
Utopia
Playing with numbers.
Kiwipolitico
Another non-tariff barrier
Offsetting Behaviour
Rugby Premiership Predictions for Round 18
Stats Chat
Budget 2026
NZCPR
UK Conversion Therapy Ban, Digital ID, Rallies, Elections
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
A central banker’s fiction
Croaking Cassandra
THE WORKING FROM HOME RACKET BY PUBLIC SERVANTS
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Get Vaccinated Tomorrow Or Shut Your Pie Hole
Cactus Kate
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker

[email protected]

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

© 2003-2026 David Farrar

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d

%d