Labour / NZ First Government

[minimoke]

Pity tomorrow is celebrated by just a minority — for the rest of us it’s just a day off

Is it "celebrated" or just "recognised"

[fungus pudding]

Pity tomorrow is celebrated by just a minority — for the rest of us it’s just a day off

Why is that a pity?

[elZorro]

Interesting comparison between the difference in governance standards between business and Government https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/opinio...nment-p-212183

You have to pay for that link, Iceman. The gist of it was?

[elZorro]

Pity tomorrow is celebrated by just a minority — for the rest of us it’s just a day off

As long as Jacinda having a good time up North it’ll we OK

Looks like Labour had a good day again, best feeling there in 40 years. Maybe it was well planned in advance, they're not making the normal mistakes. A bit of humility.

[elZorro]

[QUOTE=minimoke;702092]

That will suit the wealthy very well. They will have a vehicle to store capital that can survive downturns in the property market. (These downturns are likely to be less than the same cost associated with a tax). Then they are sitting pretty for whenth property market improves - which it always does after a downturn.

If you are going to have a CGT (and I'm not advocating one), then to be fair it has to apply to the family home.

Easily sorted with a policy that looks at the capital value relative to other properties in the area. If it's exceeded by a big percentage and the costs to get there weren't large, then maybe there would be a cutoff on the family home. Maybe. But in most cases, the expenses to keep a family home tidy or to improve it, plus pay the interest, exceed or make up a large proportion the capital return. Why do rentiers buy basic low-maintenance homes or block flats? Low overheads, and then they claim back the interest costs. So it's not the same situation at all.

So to be fair, a CGT must exclude the family home in almost all cases.

[minimoke]

Looks like Labour had a good day again, best feeling there in 40 years. Maybe it was well planned in advance, they're not making the normal mistakes. A bit of humility.

Whose going to abuse a pregnant woman?

[minimoke]

Easily sorted with a policy that looks at the capital value relative to other properties in the area.

Well thats not going to work. Even Rating Valuations are a made up number

[elZorro]

Whose going to abuse a pregnant woman?

Exactly. Fortuitous timing.

[artemis]

Well thats not going to work. Even Rating Valuations are a made up number

True but they are broadly relative and there is an objection process. The family home has been excluded from the Tax Working Group, as we know, but what other assets will be excluded from the WG's recommendations.

The Labour Party fell foul of this at the 2011 and 2014 elections, as they scrambled to add exceptions in response to public feedback. Rules around how the family home was to be defined. The bach. The family business under some circumstances. Not sure we ever found out how assets in trusts were to be dealt with.

And many other assets that are usually the province of the well off were excluded - art, jewellery, boats, classic cars ....

Labour canned it as policy - an election loser. Good chance it will be back in in 2020. Learning from history?

[BlackPeter]

My head's on the block too. I'd rather politicians tackle their duties with life experience, facts and logic rather than blind faith and mythology.

Absolutely - you get my vote!