-
29-10-2020, 05:08 PM
#6881
Originally Posted by fungus pudding
Precisely why some cgt systems have a repatriation clause allowing an assett to be sold cgt free provided the assett is replaced within a certain time frame
That's more like the US system of handling CGT on the principal residence house. Since mortgage interest can be deducted of the individuals taxable income, it's expected sooner or later the capital gain on the home will be recognised. But on most part, MOST Americans pay no CGT on their home as 'death / estate taxes' don't normally apply to the common individual - you have to be in excess of $12 MILLION in assets before those taxes apply.
Watch out NZ, the Labour + Greens will form some way to tax more from the haves.
-
29-10-2020, 11:15 PM
#6882
Originally Posted by jonu
Badly flawed premise moka. Can you show me where neo-liberalism was present in the Kirk/Rowling/Muldoon governments of the 70's?
Your long treatise bears no relation to NZ history. Check your dates for when LABOUR's neo-liberal policies came into play in the late 80's, as a kneejerk reaction to the interventionist policies of the 70s which combined with the oil shocks and formation of the EEC had been a disaster.
Originally Posted by jonu
Born and bred here actually westerly. And perhaps you could point me to where neo-liberal economic policies were prevalent in NZ in the 1970s?
You and moka aren't shy of misrepresenting things to back your point of view are you? Pretty low level of integrity on display.
Ignoring me doesn't make the truth go away.
I said why has New Zealand gone backwards in living standards from the mid 1970s = neoliberalism.
The 1970s was a period of economic stagnation in much of the Western world putting an end to the overall Post–World War II economic expansion. In New Zealand the 1970s was an era plagued by an economic pattern of stagnation, high inflation, rising prices and rising unemployment and high external debts and borrowing. In 1973 OPEC stopped selling oil to the United States. The embargo sent gas prices through the roof. Between 1973-1974, prices more than quadrupled. The embargo contributed to stagflation.
The answer to the stagflation was neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is not a new idea, the ideas of laissez faire or free markets have been the dominant economic philosophy for centuries. The 1920s were a period of a laissez faire philosophy. Laissez faire means being relatively free of government control or regulation.
Neoliberalism was part of a paradigm shift that followed the failure of the Keynesian consensus in economics to address the stagflation of the 1970s. Keynes' style of economics encouraged a more active role of the government in order to "manage overall demand so that there was a balance between demand and output". These ideas dominated mainstream economics in the post-war period and formed the mainstream of macroeconomic thought in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s.
-
30-10-2020, 07:39 AM
#6883
Originally Posted by moka
I said why has New Zealand gone backwards in living standards from the mid 1970s = neoliberalism.
...
Muldoon PM from 1975-84 was an old-fashioned state interventionist.
The UK, which had been NZ's most important trade partner, joined the EEC (now the EU) in 1973. That had an important income generating impact for NZ. There was an urgent need to find new markets for our exports which then faced EEC tariffs and quotas.
-
30-10-2020, 07:48 AM
#6884
Originally Posted by moka
I said why has New Zealand gone backwards in living standards from the mid 1970s = neoliberalism.
The 1970s was a period of economic stagnation in much of the Western world putting an end to the overall Post–World War II economic expansion. In New Zealand the 1970s was an era plagued by an economic pattern of stagnation, high inflation, rising prices and rising unemployment and high external debts and borrowing. In 1973 OPEC stopped selling oil to the United States. The embargo sent gas prices through the roof. Between 1973-1974, prices more than quadrupled. The embargo contributed to stagflation.
The answer to the stagflation was neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is not a new idea, the ideas of laissez faire or free markets have been the dominant economic philosophy for centuries. The 1920s were a period of a laissez faire philosophy. Laissez faire means being relatively free of government control or regulation.
Neoliberalism was part of a paradigm shift that followed the failure of the Keynesian consensus in economics to address the stagflation of the 1970s. Keynes' style of economics encouraged a more active role of the government in order to "manage overall demand so that there was a balance between demand and output". These ideas dominated mainstream economics in the post-war period and formed the mainstream of macroeconomic thought in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s.
You continue to dig your hole deeper moka. I'm not sure if those are your words, or if you have lifted them from somewhere (probably should acknowledge them if you have), but it is clear neoliberal policies were a response to a situation that had turned to custard and that living standards were already in decline.
There is certainly a case to be made that neo-liberal policies exacerbated the problem by increasing the wealth gap/ power imbalance, but the cause of the economic woes of the '70s point far more to interventionism and protectionism alongside the shenanigans of the OPEC cartel.
The numbers lifted out of extreme poverty worldwide in the last 30 years suggest less interventionism has got some things right (I don't think Capitalism should be completely unfettered) but a side effect is a bigger wealth gap....have a look at the "Mathew Principle"....it would appear to be part of the nature of things.
-
30-10-2020, 12:54 PM
#6885
Originally Posted by jonu
You continue to dig your hole deeper moka. I'm not sure if those are your words, or if you have lifted them from somewhere (probably should acknowledge them if you have), but it is clear neoliberal policies were a response to a situation that had turned to custard and that living standards were already in decline.
There is certainly a case to be made that neo-liberal policies exacerbated the problem by increasing the wealth gap/ power imbalance, but the cause of the economic woes of the '70s point far more to interventionism and protectionism alongside the shenanigans of the OPEC cartel.
The numbers lifted out of extreme poverty worldwide in the last 30 years suggest less interventionism has got some things right (I don't think Capitalism should be completely unfettered) but a side effect is a bigger wealth gap....have a look at the "Mathew Principle"....it would appear to be part of the nature of things.
China alone would of been responsible of lifting their population out of poverty from 1980 to 2020 (an impressive feat within 40 years). And you know what? ALL THAT came from western trade. Yep the high purchasing power of the US consumers (US consumption) has basically lifted China out of poverty for most of the population to the point that they now produce the most millionaires around the world.
-
31-10-2020, 09:33 AM
#6886
Originally Posted by dobby41
You can't go on and off work - there are stand downs.
Only if you work more than 26 weeks plus holiday pay is assessed however most seasonal employers include the 8% holiday pay in to the hourly rate.
-
31-10-2020, 03:46 PM
#6887
Originally Posted by Bjauck
Muldoon PM from 1975-84 was an old-fashioned state interventionist.
The UK, which had been NZ's most important trade partner, joined the EEC (now the EU) in 1973. That had an important income generating impact for NZ. There was an urgent need to find new markets for our exports which then faced EEC tariffs and quotas.
Now they are banging down our door for a trade deal. Strange decision they made to leave the best trading arrangement in the world.
What can britain offer us these days. Maybe some more real estate agents and TV shows on sky..
Last edited by Panda-NZ-; 31-10-2020 at 03:47 PM.
-
01-11-2020, 08:38 AM
#6888
https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/h...00000-above-cv
Not a whisper from Cindy about skyrocketing house prices.
Enjoy, Labourites and watch the wealth gap opens ever wider under the team of incompetents. What you voted for - thanks as those who can reap huge capital gains benefits!
Last edited by Balance; 01-11-2020 at 08:39 AM.
-
01-11-2020, 08:49 AM
#6889
Originally Posted by Balance
https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/h...00000-above-cv
Not a whisper from Cindy about skyrocketing house prices.
Enjoy, Labourites and watch the wealth gap opens ever wider under the team of incompetents. What you voted for - thanks as those who can reap huge capital gains benefits!
Labour already set aside $400,000,000 for 'progressive home ownership'. The intention seems to be that the homeowners get money up front, one way or another, and pay it back over time.
So really taxpayers, it's like celery - zero calories. Except it will be more like taxpayer input to Kiwibuild, lots of calories.
-
01-11-2020, 09:10 AM
#6890
Originally Posted by artemis
Labour already set aside $400,000,000 for 'progressive home ownership'. The intention seems to be that the homeowners get money up front, one way or another, and pay it back over time.
So really taxpayers, it's like celery - zero calories. Except it will be more like taxpayer input to Kiwibuild, lots of calories.
$400m builds less than 1,000 houses in NZ or less than 500 in Auckland these days - waiting list for homes run into the thousands.
So taxpayers will be tapped into for the tens of billions of dollars required to build state homes.
Plenty of money to be made, folks!
Just make sure you get your share - in fact, more than your share because future generations are going to have to pay for the shopaholic-debt-piling habits of Cindy's team of incompetents.
Last edited by Balance; 01-11-2020 at 09:17 AM.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks