sharetrader
Page 8 of 1608 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218581085081008 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 16077
  1. #71
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Waitakere New Zealand.
    Posts
    1,083

    Default

    Major von Tempsky When has the OECD ever given any good advice. The Australian power company sales so far have been a disaster for the ordinary Australian
    Possum The Cat

  2. #72
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sth Island. New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,428

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by POSSUM THE CAT View Post
    Major von Tempsky When has the OECD ever given any good advice. The Australian power company sales so far have been a disaster for the ordinary Australian
    Really? Do tell us more.

  3. #73
    Senior Member Halebop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,172

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Major von Tempsky View Post
    And for the anti-assets sales flock of parrots (hint No 1, you never succeed with a negative message, you need a positive message) , you will of course have noted that (a) the OECD recently advised the NZ Govt that it needed to make some asset sales to improve the economy and (b) that Julia Gillard's Labour Government is now moving towards power company sales in Australia.
    The best argument National has presented is that we have to sell something to make the books balance. That is not a positive message.

    If we want to back centre-right stewardship of the economy and the contention that National are better masters of growth, then retaining assets is the smart thing to do. Asset sales is a 'no' vote for the local economy (and therefore a no vote for national?).

    I also prefer my thinking to be a little more independant. Asia can still recall the advice received from the OECD (advice that came with teeth via the IMF) about debt management. Think we know now what a bunch of cr@p the OECD has proved to be.

    On asset sales I want to see interest saved and the benefits vs income earned and the benefits over a time series. Until I see something to the contrary, methinks inflation and compounding is a vote for assets retained. How about less dogma and more math?

  4. #74
    Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    CNI area NZ
    Posts
    5,958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Halebop View Post
    The best argument National has presented is that we have to sell something to make the books balance. That is not a positive message.

    If we want to back centre-right stewardship of the economy and the contention that National are better masters of growth, then retaining assets is the smart thing to do. Asset sales is a 'no' vote for the local economy (and therefore a no vote for national?).

    I also prefer my thinking to be a little more independant. Asia can still recall the advice received from the OECD (advice that came with teeth via the IMF) about debt management. Think we know now what a bunch of cr@p the OECD has proved to be.

    On asset sales I want to see interest saved and the benefits vs income earned and the benefits over a time series. Until I see something to the contrary, methinks inflation and compounding is a vote for assets retained. How about less dogma and more math?
    I agree Halebop: On Tuesday a power fault at Huntly threatened the National Grid. 200,000 customers were dropped as part of load shedding. Genesis have threatened that Huntly is not profitable enough and they'd like to retire all of the old four steam generators. Oh sure, when on Tuesday lunchtime, two out of four were running flat out, generating 500MW. Split the power companies up even more, add market forces more directly, and we'll get heaps of this sort of rubbish going on. It's a bit like Pike River, in retrospect the best and safest use of that site would be to have Solid Energy operate it. With no market forces, just have a tidy, careful planning stage, but do it right. These are important national assets, not playthings.

  5. #75
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Christchurch, , France.
    Posts
    1,247

    Default

    It's not "the best argument National has presented" (doubt you've even read half of them anyway) but the arguments presented by OECD, IMF, Treasury, Reserve Bank, in the Australian Labour Government and expert worldwide economic advice!

    Here's something to put in your pipe from Shane Jones

    "Labour MP Shane Jones says his party has to realise that National has the numbers to push through state asset sales, and he will not criticise iwi which wish to invest in them.

    Yesterday Mr Jones said that although Labour opposed state asset sales they were now inevitable and iwi wanting to invest in them for commercial reasons should not be pilloried.

    He indicated a more pragmatic stance on the issue was ahead as Labour sought to re-build its links with business and enterprises.

    "We can continue to criticise that programme, because we are in Opposition. But ... the Labour Party needs to learn to count in terms of the election outcome.

    "The Government has the numbers to pursue its programme. I certainly won't get too precious if various iwi step up to the plate and say 'we want to be part of this action'. That's a decision they're entitled to take. They've got sovereignty over their own commercial decisions."

    The position is similar to that of the Maori Party - which is opposed to state asset sales but has said it will support any iwi which wants to buy shares."

  6. #76
    Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    CNI area NZ
    Posts
    5,958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Major von Tempsky View Post
    It's not "the best argument National has presented" (doubt you've even read half of them anyway) but the arguments presented by OECD, IMF, Treasury, Reserve Bank, in the Australian Labour Government and expert worldwide economic advice!

    Here's something to put in your pipe from Shane Jones

    "Labour MP Shane Jones says his party has to realise that National has the numbers to push through state asset sales, and he will not criticise iwi which wish to invest in them.

    Yesterday Mr Jones said that although Labour opposed state asset sales they were now inevitable and iwi wanting to invest in them for commercial reasons should not be pilloried.

    He indicated a more pragmatic stance on the issue was ahead as Labour sought to re-build its links with business and enterprises.

    "We can continue to criticise that programme, because we are in Opposition. But ... the Labour Party needs to learn to count in terms of the election outcome.

    "The Government has the numbers to pursue its programme. I certainly won't get too precious if various iwi step up to the plate and say 'we want to be part of this action'. That's a decision they're entitled to take. They've got sovereignty over their own commercial decisions."

    The position is similar to that of the Maori Party - which is opposed to state asset sales but has said it will support any iwi which wants to buy shares."
    Unfortunately the truth of the matter might be that some tribes like Tainui are due for top-up payments from the state under their agreement, once any other major Waitangi settlements are made in 2012. Instead of cold hard cash (which we are a bit short of, not enough National and Act supporters paying their fair share of tax), National has come up with "asset sales" as a way of keeping this a bit below the radar. Iwi will be gifted some of these shares in that case, as a contra.

    Did you see Russell Norman from the Greens on TV this morning. It's to be hoped the govt will front up with 51% of any capital raising for the partially-sold companies in perpetuity. If not, they'll end up with less than 51% share, as a result of dilution...I hadn't thought of that. They are onto it, the Greens.

  7. #77
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sth Island. New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,428

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elZorro View Post
    Unfortunately the truth of the matter might be that some tribes like Tainui are due for top-up payments from the state under their agreement, once any other major Waitangi settlements are made in 2012. Instead of cold hard cash (which we are a bit short of, not enough National and Act supporters paying their fair share of tax), National has come up with "asset sales" as a way of keeping this a bit below the radar. Iwi will be gifted some of these shares in that case, as a contra.

    Did you see Russell Norman from the Greens on TV this morning. It's to be hoped the govt will front up with 51% of any capital raising for the partially-sold companies in perpetuity. If not, they'll end up with less than 51% share, as a result of dilution...I hadn't thought of that. They are onto it, the Greens.
    Well every other bugger's thought of it. It has been well covered. (Greens are really on to it alright ! ) I have no idea why you think voters for any particular party do not pay their fair share of tax. I'll bet my bottom dollar that I pay a higher percentage of my total income than you do. This time I voted National - even though the tax changes last year increased my tax bill by about 60k with no change in income.

  8. #78
    Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    CNI area NZ
    Posts
    5,958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fungus pudding View Post
    Well every other bugger's thought of it. It has been well covered. (Greens are really on to it alright ! ) I have no idea why you think voters for any particular party do not pay their fair share of tax. I'll bet my bottom dollar that I pay a higher percentage of my total income than you do. This time I voted National - even though the tax changes last year increased my tax bill by about 60k with no change in income.
    Hi FP, I just stuck that bit in about tax to keep the thread going.. seemed to work . Your case is a bit different, but it is certainly true that most high income earners are paying less tax under National. This shows up in the tax take dropping back, I did a chart of that somewhere. It's down by about 5 billion a year I think.

    So has National said that they will not allow dilution to occur? That would be good to know.

    It is amazing that on just about any topic, two opposing sides to the argument can be shown. It's just a case of which facts you leave out, is it not?

  9. #79
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sth Island. New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,428

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by elZorro View Post
    Hi FP, I just stuck that bit in about tax to keep the thread going.. seemed to work . Your case is a bit different, but it is certainly true that most high income earners are paying less tax under National. This shows up in the tax take dropping back, I did a chart of that somewhere. It's down by about 5 billion a year I think.

    So has National said that they will not allow dilution to occur? That would be good to know.

    It is amazing that on just about any topic, two opposing sides to the argument can be shown. It's just a case of which facts you leave out, is it not?
    It's a case of fairness. The one relavent fact is that about 10% of taxpayers still pay about 85% of the tax. 75% pay less than $2500.

  10. #80
    Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    CNI area NZ
    Posts
    5,958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fungus pudding View Post
    It's a case of fairness. The one relavent fact is that about 10% of taxpayers still pay about 85% of the tax. 75% pay less than $2500.
    Where did these figures come from FP? Here is the situation regarding PAYE, which implies it's not as rude as you suggest.

    http://www.interest.co.nz/news/53585...ndividual-paye

    When you say tax, do you mean just the govt levied taxes on income, or do you mean to include Rates, GST, levies on fuel, cigs, alcohol, etc, which are all part of the picture? Lower income people must be paying a big portion of their weekly wage on levies/taxes in one form or another. Once you get above a certain point and overheads are covered, the tax rates we are left with now, are fairly affordable.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •