Labour / NZ First Government

[Bjauck]

Ignores the facts - he didn't apply for the money.
When interviewed he didn't know exactly what was originally applied for (25% gift, 25% govt equity and 50% loan).

Fair enough, it would have been the CEO I imagine who would have been chiefly involved. Although I don’t see how the Principal could avoid being involved in presenting and compiling information, presentations and prospectus on the school for interested parties.

Taking on the job of The Principal (administrator? teacher?) of a new school must have slightly different challenges as opposed to stepping into the job at a well-established school.

[Zaphod]

Fran likes it
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12363644

Good on Fran for asserting her position, but perhaps she has forgotten that Roberston actually stated up to $550m. Tax payers will naturally arrange their affairs so as to minimise the amount of tax paid at this level.
Tax-expert and Labour party loyalist Geoff Nightingale has also criticised the move stating “Labour income gets taxed harder and we still have the gap of untaxed capital gains which will be fuelled by quantitative easing, this exacerbates the current distortion in the system.”

[Zaphod]

Ignores the facts - he didn't apply for the money.
When interviewed he didn't know exactly what was originally applied for (25% gift, 25% govt equity and 50% loan).

Given he has no knowledge about one of the fundimental requirements for the position, then perhaps it was a good time to leave.

The MoE would not look favourably on this lack of knowledge during their regular audit cycle. That lack of knowledge for a senior position, that would oversee enrolment and day to day operation of the expansion, looks very unusual.

[dobby41]

Tax-expert and Labour party loyalist Geoff Nightingale has also criticised the move stating “Labour income gets taxed harder and we still have the gap of untaxed capital gains which will be fuelled by quantitative easing, this exacerbates the current distortion in the system.”

I'd agree with that.

[Bjauck]

Good on Fran for asserting her position, but perhaps she has forgotten that Roberston actually stated up to $550m. Tax payers will naturally arrange their affairs so as to minimise the amount of tax paid at this level.
Tax-expert and Labour party loyalist Geoff Nightingale has also criticised the move stating “Labour income gets taxed harder and we still have the gap of untaxed capital gains which will be fuelled by quantitative easing, this exacerbates the current distortion in the system.”

Actually capital gains - and even unrealised capital gains can be taxed as income in certain situations - and of course those exceptions also distort decisions. He must have been referring to NZ's not having a general CGT or stamp duty/financial transaction tax.

[jonu]

Oh dearie me....Cindy displaying a distinct lack of transparency over the Rugby Championship move to Oz. She blamed it on Sanzar politics. She knows the truth to be otherwise.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/new...ectid=12364330

Mr Impey actually thanked Grant Robertson for his work....but it was rigidity around quarantine that stopped it. Cindy would have known that.

How do you know Ardern is telling whoppers? You can see her teeth!

Cindy, the promiser of the most honest and transparent government.

The Minister responsible for Child Poverdy that the UN says has got worse under her watch. What a success story she is!

[iceman]

Oh dearie me....Cindy displaying a distinct lack of transparency over the Rugby Championship move to Oz. She blamed it on Sanzar politics. She knows the truth to be otherwise.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/new...ectid=12364330

Mr Impey actually thanked Grant Robertson for his work....but it was rigidity around quarantine that stopped it. Cindy would have known that.

How do you know Ardern is telling whoppers? You can see her teeth!

Cindy, the promiser of the most honest and transparent government.

The Minister responsible for Child Poverdy that the UN says has got worse under her watch. What a success story she is!

Another broken promise that voters don't seem to care about. Bill English had a great focus on this with direct approach to families in trouble and achieved great results. Labour scrapped his well thought out program as soon as they came into power and child poverty under the PMs watch has continued to rise. Yet another failure.

[Bjauck]

Another broken promise that voters don't seem to care about. Bill English had a great focus on this with direct approach to families in trouble and achieved great results. Labour scrapped his well thought out program as soon as they came into power and child poverty under the PMs watch has continued to rise. Yet another failure.

Labour is trying to retain the Treasury benches at the cost of fundamental and meaningful reform of the tax system, housing and social welfare. By trying to be a middle-way party is it actually losing its way?

I am tossing up between Top and ACT for my vote.

[artemis]

Labour is trying to retain the Treasury benches at the cost of fundamental and meaningful reform of the tax system, housing and social welfare. By trying to be a middle-way party is it actually losing its way?

I am tossing up between Top and ACT for my vote.

Labour is trying not to scare the horses. They know they will have an excuse for the next 3 years to look like a steady hand on the tiller because unprecedented, no playbook, pivot as the world changes. Cliches and slogans. Then bow out for a few years having successfully set in place a hosepipe of handouts next to impossible to reverse and that can only be paid by more borrowing. Voters will love it.

TOP will be a wasted vote this election. Policies based on facts are all very well but we don't do facts any more.

[fungus pudding]

Labour is trying to retain the Treasury benches at the cost of fundamental and meaningful reform of the tax system, housing and social welfare. By trying to be a middle-way party is it actually losing its way?

I am tossing up between Top and ACT for my vote.

Good on you. They both have worthwhile ideas. However, mention them to the average punter and you are likely to get shot down in no time - regardless of the fact that the particular punter is unlikely to have any knowledge of their policies. Certainly true of Top's property tax. I'm not sure where UBI has been a roaring success as Top claims, but it makes for a good economics debate.