If National wins ...

[fungus pudding]

Just like JK saying he would not increase GST as I well recall. And what happened??

When did he say that? I thought he said he wouldn't increase tax but I could be wrong. I was one other time, years ago about something.

[Sgt Pepper]

When did he say that? I thought he said he wouldn't increase tax but I could be wrong. I was one other time, years ago about something.

Yes FP

enjoy the video which Belg has kindly provided. John Key at his duplicitous best.
Well Im off to work now

[fungus pudding]

Yes FP

enjoy the video which Belg has kindly provided. John Key at his duplicitous best.
Well Im off to work now

Not sure about any video, but I think you are right. I do recall Key saying something about most being better off when he reduced income tax rates. It was a good deal.

[Cuzzie]

16 Billion and counting. Show us the money David - remember. Out of control man!!!
You & I and every NZer, VOTERS OR NOT will pay dearly for his bribes. Our unborn grandchildren will pay dearly for his bribes.

BTW, EZ for the fourth time, "Kim.com - how say you? After all the blogging you & belg did for the fatman, what are your thoughts on D.C doing the dirty on the joke party?

[elZorro]

16 Billion and counting. Show us the money David - remember. Out of control man!!!
You & I and every NZer, VOTERS OR NOT will pay dearly for his bribes. Our unborn grandchildren will pay dearly for his bribes.

BTW, EZ for the fourth time, "Kim.com - how say you? After all the blogging you & belg did for the fatman, what are your thoughts on D.C doing the dirty on the joke party?

Cuzzie, maybe you're better at maths than David Parker, but he says that the policies are all funded, paid for, and the surpluses will start in year one of their term. If you'll remember, history is on his side. Labour posted 9 budget surpluses in a row, National has posted five deficits. Big ones. Who do I believe: paid Crosby-Textor-like wannabes - or the Labour Party? They didn't lie last time they were in, they did a great job.

I'm very happy Labour has sidelined Internet Mana from the serious vote. But I've just heard that Lailla Harre (and Gareth Hughes) were well received by uni students at Auckland, and at least those votes won't go to National. Anne Tolley was heckled.

[Banksie]

I was chatting to a National candidate - and I am disappointed to say - he has the same mantra for labour and green policies, "where will they get the money from". He had obviously not read the policies that explain the funding.

One item that does bother me in the various budgets is the value that is being put on unpaid/avoided taxes. While it is easy to do a study coming up with a hypothetical value, how easy will it be to actually collect that tax.

[elZorro]

I was chatting to a National candidate - and I am disappointed to say - he has the same mantra for labour and green policies, "where will they get the money from". He had obviously not read the policies that explain the funding.

One item that does bother me in the various budgets is the value that is being put on unpaid/avoided taxes. While it is easy to do a study coming up with a hypothetical value, how easy will it be to actually collect that tax.

Hi Banksie, I agree, you see how powerful it is to put the false word out there, even if it's a lie about funding shortfalls, it's effective for National. How long can they keep getting away with it I wonder?

Regarding collecting taxes, I've seen company office records behind some of the wealthy people who invest in the same shares we do here on the NZX. Quite often they are running layered companies which end up in tax havens. It's unscrupulous.

Here's the National govt picking winners: just 23 companies getting $41million of grants to part-fund their research. Even Xero gets some. Wait a minute, didn't they get a lot of funds from ordinary punters? Isn't that enough?

http://tvnz.co.nz/business-news/new-...panies-6052615

[Banksie]

Regarding collecting taxes, I've seen company office records behind some of the wealthy people who invest in the same shares we do here on the NZX. Quite often they are running layered companies which end up in tax havens. It's unscrupulous.

Here's the National govt picking winners: just 23 companies getting $41million of grants to part-fund their research. Even Xero gets some. Wait a minute, didn't they get a lot of funds from ordinary punters? Isn't that enough?

I went back and had a look at the fiscal policy regarding tax avoidance, this is what it has to say:

"Tax avoidance reduces government revenue by up to $5-7 billion a year. When a small percentage of people don’t pay their fair share, everyone else has to pick up the cost through higher taxes, reduced services, or higher public debt. Labour will set a target of reducing tax avoidance by $20 million a year in 2015/16, rising to $200 million a year in 2018/19."

Which seems achievable.

And yeah, the grant money is so little in comparison to what Xero raised from the shareholders, it seems a little unfair that they got that as well. Although (I'll give this disclaimer) I work for a company (not one on the list) that gets government grant money, which I believe we use for research programs undertaken by students. So yes we get the benefit of the research, but the students get the benefit of on-the-job training and work experience, so maybe targeted funding is not a bad idea.

[fungus pudding]

I was chatting to a National candidate - and I am disappointed to say - he has the same mantra for labour and green policies, "where will they get the money from". He had obviously not read the policies that explain the funding.

One item that does bother me in the various budgets is the value that is being put on unpaid/avoided taxes. While it is easy to do a study coming up with a hypothetical value, how easy will it be to actually collect that tax.

The IRD have been trying for years to beat tax evasion - a change of govt. with a new bunch of clichés won't do it.

[elZorro]

I went back and had a look at the fiscal policy regarding tax avoidance, this is what it has to say:

"Tax avoidance reduces government revenue by up to $5-7 billion a year. When a small percentage of people don’t pay their fair share, everyone else has to pick up the cost through higher taxes, reduced services, or higher public debt. Labour will set a target of reducing tax avoidance by $20 million a year in 2015/16, rising to $200 million a year in 2018/19."

Which seems achievable.

And yeah, the grant money is so little in comparison to what Xero raised from the shareholders, it seems a little unfair that they got that as well. Although (I'll give this disclaimer) I work for a company (not one on the list) that gets government grant money, which I believe we use for research programs undertaken by students. So yes we get the benefit of the research, but the students get the benefit of on-the-job training and work experience, so maybe targeted funding is not a bad idea.

Good posts Banksie and Belgarion. We'd make a great campaign team!

Regarding R&D funding: I've had some come into my business too, never over $100k worth, and it also ends up with students and suppliers. I also fund some students myself out of cashflow, took on three last summer. It takes quite a while to organise, so when I see an average of $2mill heading into big firms, but only a few of them, I'm thinking that they are strong enough not to need the money, and that it'll fund R&D work they were having to do anyway. More importantly, it's not spread out. National could be helping ten times the number of firms, with an average $200k grant. Wouldn't that increase the likelihood of a game-changer? Chumps.