I wonder if the length of time in power has made him realise that some things will be difficult to achieve - and he has to prioritise those issues important to his support base.
I think that if he concentrates on housing supply issues as opposed to demand pressures, he does not have to risk alienating as many supporters.
Angela D'Audney was a good presenter. I thought Peter Williams has been impressive delivering some of the long and technical questions. The new University Challenge presenter was quite difficult to follow when he spoke quickly.
D'Audney - harsh voice. I'd go for John Hawkesby as best news presenter, but I think we've waddled way off topic here.
As for the free market, television and private radio in NZ seem to prove that myth completely wrong. The more competition, the more rubbish they offer, and the more their audience declines.
maybe so......... but at least the "free viewers and listeners" have a choice at what to view and listen to....... or we could have state controlled media....... luckily living in this land there is choice.... some lands have state controlled media pumping out state controlled "propaganda".
having said that i might have misunderstood your point of view...... but i dont think so.
freedom of choice and freedom of expression and freedom to vote is the cornerstone of democracy
in my opinion anyway.
The point was the free market supposedly gives choice and competition. One butcher -monopoly, two butchers - competition. Three butchers none of them make a living and who knows where the meat comes from?
I wonder if the length of time in power has made him realise that some things will be difficult to achieve - and he has to prioritise those issues important to his support base.
I think that if he concentrates on housing supply issues as opposed to demand pressures, he does not have to risk alienating as many supporters.
I quite agree, Bjauck. The question is, if some wealthier people were required to pay more taxes, would the deficit be as high, and would there be a bit less inequality now? More tax cuts are the last thing NZ needs right now. We have to pay back the govt borrowing a bit at least, to create a buffer. We need to do this while interest rates are low. The govt gets money at 2.2%, but that's not always going to be the case. Brian Fallow has a comment on the budget.
Personally I think the McGillicuddies Party might have the answer, and not because they thought it was an amusing idea at the time. A great leap backwards where we hold onto our old stuff, stop buying the latest gear just for the sake of it, stop expanding roads, get the rail and buses and cycle lanes working properly instead. Climate change will stop us all in our tracks soon enough, we should start getting ready.
Foxy, are you casting doubt on the trickle-down effect? The tax cuts for the rich were supposed to motivate them to create more wealth which would benefit everyone. I am a bit sceptical of that, as a lot of those tax cuts for the wealthy may well have ended up being invested in comparatively appealing NZ real estate investments for many reasons, and resulting in boosting land prices. The result is that the less well-off have been increasingly priced out of home ownership.
I must admit I like to have some of the latest gadgets. One person's productivity boost can look like someone else's pointless upgrade. I agree with boosting public transport - especially for a country like NZ that has to import its cars. Tax cuts would be short-sighted pork barrel politics imho.
Foxy, are you casting doubt on the trickle-down effect? The tax cuts for the rich were supposed to motivate them to create more wealth which would benefit everyone. I am a bit sceptical of that, as a lot of those tax cuts for the wealthy may well have ended up being invested in comparatively appealing NZ real estate investments for many reasons, and resulting in boosting land prices. The result is that the less well-off have been increasingly priced out of home ownership.
I must admit I like to have some of the latest gadgets. One person's productivity boost can look like someone else's pointless upgrade. I agree with boosting public transport - especially for a country like NZ that has to import its cars. Tax cuts would be short-sighted pork barrel politics imho.
Exactly. There are numerous articles pointing out the fallacies of trickle-down economics, or supply side policies.
Have a look at the graphs off to the side. It doesn't work here, it hasn't worked anywhere in the world. In fact, it tends to slow growth, as the lower paid end up getting poorer education and fewer opportunities, so labour productivity is lower than it should be. Everyone loses, except the already wealthy.
Couldn't a government, for example, establish free trades training in the building and housing areas, and employ and then mobilise large teams to work their way through all of the govt owned housing estate, from one end of the country to another, to make the most of these taxpayer owned assets? Rather than letting them get run down and eventually put up for a fire sale, basically the land value? Sure, some would not be well suited to current needs, but they could be modified/resited/developed, and I know there are entire suburbs of state houses that are fully tenanted and yet run down, right now. The state own the land under them, in established, reticulated areas. Hold onto that. Perhaps state houses should also be subject to regular drug residue inspections, a regime that tracks tenants to some extent. Homes with stable tenants and clear histories would be checked far less often. This is all just common-sense stuff, but National wouldn't do that, they're going to bleed all the cash out of these properties that they can, and it's a big juicy target for immediate but one-off revenue. Guess what, it's hurting poorer people, they could get easier and repeatable income by taxing the wealthy a bit more.
Of course, another solution to more borrowing is to revert to the tax settings Labour had - they seemed to work fine, and yielded record surpluses. Note we still haven't seen any sign of a crackdown on major tax dodgers by this government. A helping hand for them, sure. But no crackdown.
Of course, another solution to more borrowing is to revert to the tax settings Labour had - they seemed to work fine, and yielded record surpluses. Note we still haven't seen any sign of a crackdown on major tax dodgers by this government. A helping hand for them, sure. But no crackdown.
Interesting points from Bernard Hickey.
A lack of planning for some years by all hues of governments, despite opening the immigration gates, is taking its toll on infrastructure. Is it time to reduce immigration at least until Auckland housing supply and infratructure improves? In addition is time to reduce the appeal of residential housing to both local and foreign investors? If only Investors were to buy infrastructure bonds instead of housing, then perhaps that would alleviate house price pressures whilst providing funds for much needed infrastructure. However that would require a major shift in thinking, tax structure etc.
.... Hold onto that. Perhaps state houses should also be subject to regular drug residue inspections, a regime that tracks tenants to some extent. Homes with stable tenants and clear histories would be checked far less often. This is all just common-sense stuff, but National wouldn't do that, they're going to bleed all the cash out of these properties that they can, and it's a big juicy target for immediate but one-off revenue. Guess what, it's hurting poorer people, they could get easier and repeatable income by taxing the wealthy a bit more.
There are some sensitive smake alarms around. I wonder if they could develop a Drug detector that could be installed into a house and detect various drugs such as P before the house becomes properly contaminated?
Originally Posted by elZorro
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks