- cross-posted to:
- newzealand@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- newzealand@lemmit.online
Great write-up.
In fact, the line “Labour and National had broadly similar fiscal approaches…” is worth repeating.
So the default position we should be applying to the current government is – where is all the evidence for the claims that Luxon is making?
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s FUD.
We can’t find tax cuts for the ultra wealthy unless we penny pinch welfare.
Their tax cuts, or more accurately bracket adjustments, will mean more money for almost everyone in NZ. Where did this “ultra wealthy” thing come from?
Their tax cuts, or more accurately bracket adjustments, will mean more money for almost everyone in NZ
It absolutely will not. People on low incomes get nothing, people on low to middle get $2 a week, only around 3000 families meet the highly specific targeted criteria for the $250 per fortnight that was misleadingly flashed around during the election. The rest goes to upper incomes and that’s before the landlord handouts.
Then a whole bunch of these people will be directly financially worse off from removal of public transport and prescription support, big rates increases from abandoning 3 waters with no replacement and so on and so on.
The amount of extra money the average earner will get is negligible, while the amount of public services that are getting cut to lay for it will leave most people worse off in the long run.
Not really what I was asking, but OK.
Don’t hold your breath on the bracket adjustments actually happening; the only ones that are certain to go through are the back dated landlord subsidies.
Yeah, the fuckers are already trying to squirm out of that one.
The inflationary adjustment is something I support the principle of more than anything else, but it’s a disappointing start for sure.
On a slightly related topic, it was incredible watching Labour’s support collapse last election, wasn’t it?
The principle sounds good & common sense like. But I believe NZ is vastly under taxed - compared to the public services we clearly want & need. So anything that reduces the tax take is for me a big negative. The only way i’d support the inflation adjustment to the brackets is by countering it with CGT and wealth taxes; and i’d also couple that with reducing GST as well.
Labour really should have gotten a CGT in while they had the chance, and an absolute majority. In my view, their failure to make the most of that is why they did so poorly in the last election.
In terms of a wealth tax, I don’t like the idea one bit, mostly because I believe that once you have bought something, especially a property, it should be yours to keep. If your primary dwelling was exempt from the tax, then I would look at the proposal a bit more seriously.
Otherwise, you make life hard for retirees etc.
I don’t think that way about property. I think it would be better to think about property as a right to use; and once you’re not using it, or not able to use it to its fullest that right should revert back to the community. Life’s only hard for retirees because we choose to leave people to the luck of what they accumulated during their life time. We could choose to take care of everyone if we wanted to.
Otherwise, you make life hard for retirees etc.
The wealth tax the Greens propose is specifically designed to mitigate this, as it wouldnt apply to the first $2 million net for individuals and $4 million net for couples.
They did think of that, but what are the chances that figure will be adjusted for inflation?
Gordon Campbell has been putting out brilliant articles for years now (decades probably!). He’s got a bias that appeals to me, but is very fact based in his analysis so its hard to dispute what he’s describing, perhaps some could argue against what his suggested actions are.
Do you expect honesty, empathy or goodwill from them?
I think we can still be critical of things without being surprised by them.
