New centrist green party?

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › New centrist green party?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 11

2853 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2172429 3-Feb-2019 20:50

wsnz:

Technically we're not guaranteed to get the KS investment back, but I think it's unlikely the all would be lost.

I think his statement about funding people over 65, relates to NZ Super being funded from general taxation, at the same time as KiwiSaver is also being deducted. It's likely (IMHO) that NZ Super will be supplanted by KiwiSaver or at least means tested against KS balances, at some point in the future. Under that scenario today's taxpayers are paying twice, for only one benefit.

There are few guarantees in life, but KS funds are invested by independent financial entities so it's unlikely - short of a major crash - that the money would be lost. It's not (as you know) a scheme like UK NI where it's effectively an extra tax that just gets swallowed up in the general govt finances.

I'm less sure about KS replacing super, or super being means tested. I'd like to think that such a proposal would be so unpopular as to remove any chance of a govt proposing it from gaining power, but the politics of envy can be a strong force. If you start testing means against KS balances you're on a slippery slope - do you count real estate value of the family home, family trusts, etc etc?

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2172597 4-Feb-2019 08:53

Journeyman:

Do you have any evidence that a bluegreen party is being created or "cohooted" (whatever that means) by a larger party? Or is this just something you've imagined?

Well how on earth would National ever get themselves over the line again? They won't because they have no firends. They are a party for self centered rich people. Most New Zealanders don't buy into their facist/capatilist/self-centered viewpoints anymore. Dumb parties, with self centered rich people should not be in government. At lest now we have a goverment that knows what its doing and at least has the interests of most kiwis. Democracy wins at the end of the day.

cohoot : https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cahoot

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2172607 4-Feb-2019 08:59

wsnz:

I think his statement about funding people over 65, relates to NZ Super being funded from general taxation, at the same time as KiwiSaver is also being deducted. It's likely (IMHO) that NZ Super will be supplanted by KiwiSaver or at least means tested against KS balances, at some point in the future. Under that scenario today's taxpayers are paying twice, for only one benefit.

If you over 65, you have greatly benefited as a baby boomer. You have money, and probably quiet a large chunk of it in kiwi saver too. Your retirement from goverment should therefore take into account your kiwi saver funds. Everybody over 65 should be getting an equal retirement. If you have kiwisaver it should offset the amount you get from NZ super. Its not fair that some people in this country are allowed to retire wilth lots more money than others.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2172645 4-Feb-2019 10:19

It gets bizarrer and bizarrer

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2172662 4-Feb-2019 10:38

tdgeek:

It gets bizarrer and bizarrer

I agree this is a very sensitive topic, but one that should at least be discussed. Are you incapable of having a discussion?

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2172664 4-Feb-2019 10:48

Darude34:

tdgeek:

It gets bizarrer and bizarrer

I agree this is a very sensitive topic, but one that should at least be discussed. Are you incapable of having a discussion?

How can you "agree" this is a sensitive topic when I said bizarre. Bizarre does not mean sensitive.

However, now that you mention "Are you incapable of having a discussion?" Yes I can, can you? Given the adjectives used by you to describe the National party and its supporters, and of your very extreme left leaning, you cannot. When you call National and/or its supporters as fascists, etc, etc, yes, something is not right, hence bizarre. I'd look at hopping off your bandwagon and making an attempt to discuss your opinions, and note, many points are opinions, not facts.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18659 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2172708 4-Feb-2019 13:06

Maybe time to get back to the topic?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

GV27

5896 posts

Uber Geek

#2172711 4-Feb-2019 13:08

shk292:

GV27:

Kiwisaver is a tax for being under 65 while you continue to fund people who are over 65 getting free money whether they need it or not. In a low wage economy, that's kind of rubbish.

How is kiwisaver a tax? You invest money, after a defined period, you get the investment back. How does this fund people over 65?

It's taken from your pay in the same manner of a tax, with no actual guarantee you'll get it back. Meanwhile, you're also paying income tax that goes towards people who, regardless of means, are getting a bonus for turning a certain age.

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2172720 4-Feb-2019 13:27

Last time I checked kiwisaver was not compulsory. Taxes are compulsory. There is a bit of a difference.

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2172723 4-Feb-2019 13:34

GV27:

Meanwhile, you're also paying income tax that goes towards people who, regardless of means, are getting a bonus for turning a certain age.

Which is exactly how it should be. How do you expect these people to survive when they stop work? Would you be happier if they were on work and income instead? Also from your income tax! I sense you thinking this is unfair?

GV27

5896 posts

Uber Geek

#2172821 4-Feb-2019 15:44

Darude34:

GV27:

Meanwhile, you're also paying income tax that goes towards people who, regardless of means, are getting a bonus for turning a certain age.

Which is exactly how it should be. How do you expect these people to survive when they stop work? Would you be happier if they were on work and income instead? Also from your income tax! I sense you thinking this is unfair?

I don't qualify for state assistance or WFFTC because there are criteria for those things to make sure people who need it most actually get it. But there is no criteria for receiving Super other than just "be over 65". Why don't I get a bonus for turning 21? Or 33? Why am I underwriting people who lived through a time of significantly cheaper costs of living than I face for the same things regardless of their means?

Darude34

52 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#2172848 4-Feb-2019 16:14

GV27:

Darude34:

GV27:

Meanwhile, you're also paying income tax that goes towards people who, regardless of means, are getting a bonus for turning a certain age.

Which is exactly how it should be. How do you expect these people to survive when they stop work? Would you be happier if they were on work and income instead? Also from your income tax! I sense you thinking this is unfair?

I don't qualify for state assistance or WFFTC because there are criteria for those things to make sure people who need it most actually get it. But there is no criteria for receiving Super other than just "be over 65". Why don't I get a bonus for turning 21? Or 33? Why am I underwriting people who lived through a time of significantly cheaper costs of living than I face for the same things regardless of their means?

I'm not disagreeing with you. I just think everybody should get the same when they turn 65. It does not matter if you have been a slave to some corporate company and paid taxes, or if you have been on work and income your whole life. We all have the right to retire equal. I fully support means testing, if somebody has their house paid for and $$$$ in kiwisaver why should they receive super too? The less money the babyboomers get the better, they don't need it. Personally I would like to see means testing taken as far as evaluating all your assets and property etc too.

shk292

2853 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2172893 4-Feb-2019 17:15

Darude34:

I'm not disagreeing with you. I just think everybody should get the same when they turn 65. It does not matter if you have been a slave to some corporate company and paid taxes, or if you have been on work and income your whole life. We all have the right to retire equal. I fully support means testing, if somebody has their house paid for and $$$$ in kiwisaver why should they receive super too? The less money the babyboomers get the better, they don't need it. Personally I would like to see means testing taken as far as evaluating all your assets and property etc too.

So, you've directly contradicted yourself. Either you want everyone treated the same - as it is now with national super - or you want a socialist utopia of equal outcome which would require massive means testing and asset stripping of those who have done better than the lowest common denominators. As someone noted above, even Karl Marx, for all his discredited theories, didn't advocate equality of outcome.

I'd love to hear more about how you think your proposal above could be achieved, what its benefits would be and whether you have any idea of the unintended consequences.

For example "we all have the right to retire equal". So, if through hard work, good education and prudence, I find myself in a mortgage-free $1M house, does that mean you're going to build similar for everyone? And the same type of car? And you're going to replicate my overseas pension (which I earned) for everyone in NZ?

I hear Venezuela is nice this time of year if you're looking for somewhere closer to your ideals

dwilson

162 posts

Master Geek

#2172895 4-Feb-2019 17:17

Darude34:

I just think everybody should get the same when they turn 65. It does not matter if you have been a slave to some corporate company and paid taxes, or if you have been on work and income your whole life. We all have the right to retire equal. I fully support means testing, if somebody has their house paid for and $$$$ in kiwisaver why should they receive super too? The less money the babyboomers get the better, they don't need it. Personally I would like to see means testing taken as far as evaluating all your assets and property etc too.

I knew this would happen, we no longer have balance in the force :(

You destroy a bunch of trolls on one team and then ... well, look what turned up.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18659 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2172926 4-Feb-2019 18:11

One last time, this thread is about the implications/desirability/likelihood/consequences of a new centrist green party being established, along with possible others. Please take the socialism vs capitalism discussion elsewhere.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | ... | 11