Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

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

Forums › Politics › Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

1 | ... | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | ... | 268

meow
13581 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10914

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1906847 23-Nov-2017 23:37

So we tend to overlook many things in the Politics forums - as stated, they're less moderated but it doesn't mean that we're not watching.

Stop it with making things personal. We're not Children. If you feel you need to make things personal then disconnect your router and get off the internet for a bit. The Politics forum doesn't exempt you from the FUG and appropriate punishments for schoolyard type behaviour will still be given.

Michael Murphy | https://murfy.nz
Referral Links: Quic Broadband (use R122101E7CV7Q for free setup)

Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? Please consider supporting us by subscribing.
Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

PhantomNVD

2619 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 759
Inactive user

#1906855 24-Nov-2017 00:16

tdgeek:
MikeB4:

tdgeek:

new news, women will get tax breaks on womens essentials. Why? Im sure many things are essential to many different people. maybe us guys will get tax breaks on hedge trimmers???

Hedge trimmers are optional

Yes, I was being facetious. My point is why would we give a tax beard for that purpose? I am in full agreement helping any girls or women who struggle with that cost. But we, as in taxpayers are also foregoing GST revenue from the many who can afford that cost. Its help 2 people out of 10, and flag the revenue from the other 8.

Agree... we have no problem supplying these for our own needs, so at least they should target this idea toward WINZ (free pickup for WINZ clients?) or in high schools and Uni’s health/first aid centres.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1906907 24-Nov-2017 09:16

Pumpedd:

My statement was based on a television article where 2 Uni's Vice Chancellors stated that enrollments so far were 10% up on this time last year, and they were wondering if they too were going to get an increase in funding to cover this expansion.

They do get an increase, as their funding model is based on TEC funding based on number of EFT (equivalent full time) students enrolled. What may be a problem is that they'll get a cap on the number of EFTs they can use per programme and total, that being determined by central govt - probably based on how much they want to fund and dividing it up on a nominally rational basis, which includes forecast workplace demand for skills, but also the history of completion rates, short and long-term employment outcomes etc etc. They also get flayed by TEC if they don't meet EFT targets - their allocation - hence funding - for subsequent years gets cut.

I suspect that it would be in the interests of the university to overstate the number of applications for enrolment at this time of year, because there's a considerable difference between numbers of initial applications and final enrolments - part of the reason for that being that potential students apply for the same or similar courses at different institutions to hedge their bets in case they aren't accepted at their first choice. This creates planning chaos. Nice to have enrolments confirmed and locked-in ASAP rather than scrambling at the last minute to figure out how programmes are going to be delivered. Creating the impression that you're "lucky to be accepted" because demand is high hurries student applicants up in their decision making.

I don't think anybody really knows the impact of the free fee policy on student numbers. IMO it (course cost) is only one of many barriers to addressing the ridiculous situation that mainly family wealth determines who does and doesn't make it in the present system.

wsnz

654 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 204

#1906957 24-Nov-2017 09:37

Fred99:

They do get an increase, as their funding model is based on TEC funding based on number of EFT (equivalent full time) students enrolled. What may be a problem is that they'll get a cap on the number of EFTs they can use per programme and total, that being determined by central govt - probably based on how much they want to fund and dividing it up on a nominally rational basis, which includes forecast workplace demand for skills, but also the history of completion rates, short and long-term employment outcomes etc etc. They also get flayed by TEC if they don't meet EFT targets - their allocation - hence funding - for subsequent years gets cut.

Labour have not made any statements regarding increasing EFTS related funding, so in the absence of any further information and giving the start of the new tertiary year is almost upon us, we'll have to assume that their intention is to keep enrolments at the same level but to waive the student payable fee component.

Tertiary institutions will need to be very careful in who they allow to enrol as TEC course completion measurements still apply, and if they allow students who are not committed to the course to enrol both parties will suffer.

Fred99:

I don't think anybody really knows the impact of the free fee policy on student numbers. IMO it (course cost) is only one of many barriers to addressing the ridiculous situation that mainly family wealth determines who does and doesn't make it in the present system.

I agree.

IMO a fee free first year (moving to three free years of post-secondary education) is not the right method to increase participation rates and lift educational achievements. Student loan write-offs for successful completion of strategically important courses (perhaps with bonding), combined with some tweaks to the EFTS funding system is the better way to lift outcomes.

I think the policies we've seen publicised thus far are politically expedient sound-bytes but lack any real strategic thinking behind them.

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15472

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1906966 24-Nov-2017 09:56

Oh God! Michael Cullen will be leading the Labour Tax Group.

/me facepalm.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12768

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1907004 24-Nov-2017 10:24

networkn:

Oh God! Michael Cullen will be leading the Labour Tax Group.

/me facepalm.

That news does not fill my Friday with joy and happiness.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16319

Lifetime subscriber

#1907029 24-Nov-2017 10:59

michaelmurfy:

So we tend to overlook many things in the Politics forums - as stated, they're less moderated but it doesn't mean that we're not watching.

It must be hard for you to have to read every single post to see who's transgressing.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Geektastic

18010 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8468

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1908716 27-Nov-2017 22:10

MikeB4:

networkn:

Oh God! Michael Cullen will be leading the Labour Tax Group.

/me facepalm.

That news does not fill my Friday with joy and happiness.

He's a bit past his prime. Perhaps the whiskey helps keep him focussed.

wsnz

654 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 204

#1908800 28-Nov-2017 08:12

Geektastic:

He's a bit past his prime. Perhaps the whiskey helps keep him focussed.

He is however still very ideologically driven, and consequently the likely policy outcomes from this process are readily guessable.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1908818 28-Nov-2017 09:41

wsnz:

Geektastic:

He's a bit past his prime. Perhaps the whiskey helps keep him focussed.

He is however still very ideologically driven, and consequently the likely policy outcomes from this process are readily guessable.

Hard to think of more ideologically driven than Douglas, Richardson etc.

Oh - okay - there's Morgan.

I don't think "ideologically driven" should be a valid criticism of politicians (including ex). They all are - every single one of them. Even anarchists.

sen8or

1897 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1402

#1908819 28-Nov-2017 09:50

Michael "Can we Tax it, Yes we Can" Cullen

Lenovo

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

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1908820 28-Nov-2017 09:53

sen8or:

Michael "Can we Tax it, Yes we Can" Cullen

The "tax on (almost) everything" (GST) wasn't his idea.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1908826 28-Nov-2017 10:06

The purpose of the TWG is to make the existing tax take, fairer. Its not to increase the tax take. Some taxes will increase, some will decrease, some will be added some will be removed

Thats been very clearly stated.

Or, thats not much good as we cannot whinge about that so we will pretend that its add tax add tax add tax working group so we can diss the Govt?

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1908828 28-Nov-2017 10:07

Fred99:

sen8or:

Michael "Can we Tax it, Yes we Can" Cullen

The "tax on (almost) everything" (GST) wasn't his idea.

Kiwisaver, Super, Working For Families, were, they seem like sound ideas

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1908835 28-Nov-2017 10:18

tdgeek:

Fred99:

sen8or:

Michael "Can we Tax it, Yes we Can" Cullen

The "tax on (almost) everything" (GST) wasn't his idea.

Kiwisaver, Super, Working For Families, were, they seem like sound ideas

I don't think WFF was a good idea at all:

it was an admission of defeat, that ordinary working people with children in the post-reform low-wage high-cost economy were struggling to get by.

It effectively penalised young people without children who were on low wages but not eligible for any WFF payment, and made it harder for them to get ahead as it cemented the low-wage economy - combined with a double-whammy for that generation with tertiary fees and repaying student loans, at a time in life when you should be trying to put money aside for your future life, a deposit on a house etc.

Instead of giving away money, I'd have rather seen an all-out attack on low wages, "real" job creation, and a high tax-free threshold.

1 | ... | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | ... | 268