Christopher Luxon, New Zealand Prime Minister 2023

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

Forums › Politics › Christopher Luxon, New Zealand Prime Minister 2023

1 | ... | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | ... | 188

BDFL - Memuneh
79291 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3192425 8-Feb-2024 13:06

In this case I agree with the government. A tax that was being collected and not used for the projects its was created for: Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Transport Minister Simeon Brown announce Auckland fuel tax ending - NZ Herald

As of September 2023, about $780 million in Regional Fuel Tax (RFT) revenue had been raised, with approximately $341 million remaining unspent.

“The RFT was supposed to help fund important projects like Mill Road and Penlink. While Mill Road was cancelled, and Penlink received full Crown funding, Auckland Transport has used RFT revenue to fund many non-roading projects including more cycle lanes, redlight cameras, speed humps, and lowering speed limits across the city,” Brown said.

The remaining funds should be spent on projects that were of “mutual priority” to Government and Auckland Council, including the Eastern Busway, City Rail Link electric trains and stabling, road corridor improvements and some growth-related infrastructure.

So, I'm not sure where the "$2 billion gap" quoted in the other article comes from - the projects don't exist, and there's a surplus on that bucket.

On the other hand, a congestion tax will impact people who can't work from home - the same people who probably would benefit from a light rail project.

Oh right. That doesn't exist anymore.

Wanting to reduce congestion without good public transport doesn't work too well. It's just dumb, costly in the long run and negatively impacts the environment.

SaltyNZ

8231 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#3192426 8-Feb-2024 13:13

I'm not exactly sure how the $2B comes about either but I do know all the alternatives Wayne Brown mentioned to cover it are reaaaaaally going to piss off the NACT voters who wanted the fuel tax gone. Congestion charges? I can hear the utebros heads exploding from here.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

Paul1977

5047 posts

Uber Geek

#3192464 8-Feb-2024 15:03

tdgeek:

If we taxed everyone at say 22% that would be fair? While everyone in that scenario is treated equally, the are not in fact equal. Person A on a low income has little left over after tax, Person B on a high income has plenty left over after tax. That doesn't mean you screw the higher earners down, but as they have a massively higher PDI, (and in fact have a PDI) they can afford to pay more, and still enjoy plenty of benefits that they have created for themselves, income wise.

"Fair" could have different meanings in this context:

Putting into the tax system the same amount as you take out could be considered fair.
Everyone paying an identical dollar amount in tax could be considered fair.
Everyone paying the same percentage of earnings could be considered fair.

My personal view is that anything other than option 1 is to some degree unfair. But I never suggested the tax system should be fair and/or equal. A truly fair or equal system would result in many being plunged into abject poverty, which isn't a result many want.

So in answer to your question, I personally wouldn't consider a flat tax rate of 22% (or any other arbitrary percent) truly fair. But I would consider it the closest we could conceivably get that wasn't doomed to failure and widespread misery. That's still not an endorsement, as there is a lot more to be considered than "fairness".

SaltyNZ

8231 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#3192465 8-Feb-2024 15:12

Simply changing @ockel's poor penalty tax to a 22% flat rate still doesn't address the fact the richest arrange their affairs so as to be exposed to poor penalty tax as little as possible. It does likely reduce how much poor penalty tax they have to pay on what they can't avoid though, so I'm sure they're quite happy with the idea.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek

#3192469 8-Feb-2024 15:41

SaltyNZ:

Simply changing @ockel's poor penalty tax to a 22% flat rate still doesn't address the fact the richest arrange their affairs so as to be exposed to poor penalty tax as little as possible. It does likely reduce how much poor penalty tax they have to pay on what they can't avoid though, so I'm sure they're quite happy with the idea.

If you take a look at table 4.1 in the IRD's HWI report you'll see that the poor are not penalised in our tax regime, quite the opposite in fact. And the rich pay proportionately more. Perversely the regime has got flatter since that table's data - as people drift into higher tax brackets with no bracket adjustment it gets flatter and flatter and flatter. Ironically the party calling for a more progressive tax system wasnt the previous Government.

The flat tax proposal harks back to Roger Douglas flat tax proposal which, as voters showed, didnt fly. Neither does ACTs tiered system nor TOP's, nor the Greens or The Maori Partys. We all had our say on how we wanted the tax system to change during October last year. Picking a single arbitrary number (why not 20% or 25%?) seems pointless in or progressive tax environment.

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

quickymart

13963 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#3192583 8-Feb-2024 19:24

I guess getting rid of the fuel tax is a tax cut, right? I mean it is a tax that they're cutting, isn't it?

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#3192613 8-Feb-2024 20:45

The fuel tax was garbage, it should have applied to every city in the country (instead of just one) and it didn't stop the government totally screwing Auckland when it came to upholding the ATAP agreements by letting projects either lapse or dooming them to the Wellington paperwork machine, nor did the government dip into it when a bunch of walking and cycling projects got slashed post-Covid.

Frankly I'm glad it's dead. It was verging on an unconscionable bargain.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

quickymart

13963 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#3192637 8-Feb-2024 22:12

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/auckland-mayor-wayne-brown-tips-clash-with-transport-minister-simeon-brown-after-regional-fuel-tax-axeing/VB2Y2QQKSRFPTBBQDDFQY7HATA/

Maybe the fuel tax being chopped will turn into Brown vs Brown.

Handle9

11391 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3192729 9-Feb-2024 01:48

quickymart:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/auckland-mayor-wayne-brown-tips-clash-with-transport-minister-simeon-brown-after-regional-fuel-tax-axeing/VB2Y2QQKSRFPTBBQDDFQY7HATA/

Maybe the fuel tax being chopped will turn into Brown vs Brown.

More like dumb and dumber.

sen8or

1789 posts

Uber Geek

#3192787 9-Feb-2024 09:19

So a new change in policy of "fees free" tertiary education, from first year to last

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/education/the-government-is-scrapping-first-year-fees-free-what-you-need-to-know/4RA65TPAXJEMHFOHXUDJVR46OI/

I like the idea of the last year being free, you've already proven stickability at education having completed 1-2 years study (depending on the qualification) so the final year being free is somewhat of a reward, but if it prevents people from starting tertiary study to begin with, may not be such a good move.

I'd prefer a reward system that rebates fees based on contribution to the workforce in NZ, where say 1 -2 years fees is rebated / refunded after x years of working. I have no issue with expecting people to invest in themselves with the long term view that there will be a lifetime return on their education so don't think 100% of fees should be refunded.

michaelmurfy

meow
13255 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3192793 9-Feb-2024 09:38

sen8or:

So a new change in policy of "fees free" tertiary education, from first year to last

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/education/the-government-is-scrapping-first-year-fees-free-what-you-need-to-know/4RA65TPAXJEMHFOHXUDJVR46OI/

See this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/1almrod/the_new_government_is_scrapping_firstyear_fees/

I like the idea of the last year being free, you've already proven stickability at education having completed 1-2 years study (depending on the qualification) so the final year being free is somewhat of a reward, but if it prevents people from starting tertiary study to begin with, may not be such a good move.

This is what the government wants you to think but the reality is far worse.

How do you decide it is your final year of study? What if you want to continue studying after this to better yourself? Often final year means the final year of a 3 year study period. What if you don't want to continue that study and instead want to focus on something else? It essentially means:

I doubt that it would reduce administrative costs for tertiary education providers for any new scheme, but now focused on the final year.

Tertiary education providers struggled with the first year fee free scheme to have it work. Most providers (if not all) do not have active development teams to update and add new features (if they do it might be very limited for budget/scope that they can implement changes) to their student system stuff.

Someone might think that it is easy to tell if Student A, B, C, D, etc, are eligible or not for First Year Free Scheme, but it is not. I think that a Final Year free scheme would be more complex and even more onerous on the tertiary education provider, the student, and even the government to sort it out

e.g. do you refund the tuition fee payment, or loan component? If so, how does it get reported and verified? How do refund it? What are the processes in place in case an error is made with the refund? How do you even define a "final year"?

Yeah, for real. You basically have two options:

1) have to have a student declare this is their final year and they definitely won't upgrade their degree. Good luck on the administration if they change their mind, or getting that money back if they fail out. We are talking about a conditional loan, where if they fail to complete, they owe the government thousands. Can't wait to see the suicide rate shoot up when struggling students put two and two together on that.

OR, 2. you backpay them, either through loan refund or cash in hand (some people won't have had a loan anyway). At which point, they won't be students anymore. Thus defeating the point of trying to make education accessible and uni cost of living less horrendous for students.

Needing more time to complete or a break from uni is NORMAL, especially in your final years as you get older and life catches up. I don't know anybody outside of the top students who actually completed in 3 years square. It's basically going to be at best a graduation gift for students of rich families, and at worse a death sentence for the most vulnerable students who find themselves without means to deal with it. Realistically, it will simply stop anybody who isn't well-off from getting an education. Which, cynically, may actually be the point in the long-term

The comments are a pretty good insight on that thread. But essentially, fee free final year is a hard thing for students to get. I fully agree with the majority of what I assume to be students in the comments of that Reddit thread, it's a monumental step to exit school and study at University and the first fee free year helped achieve that for many people and push them to study. Now, we're just going to likely see the amount of people going to study decline which means less skilled people etc.

It's just one more thing this Government has done to prove it doesn't give a shit about people and it is yet another step back for New Zealand.

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.

SaltyNZ

8231 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#3192794 9-Feb-2024 09:44

I personally do not mind the relatively small amount of my tax dollars "wasted" on a kid who took the risky first step to higher education and more productive member of society but found it wasn't for them, because it means that there are some who take that risky step and find that it is for them, who would not have otherwise.

When the government is so blinkered about education attendance that the PM decided to preach about it at Waitangi, making policy changes that actively discourage kids from attempting to step up seems at best not well thought out.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79291 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3192803 9-Feb-2024 09:51

Handle9:

quickymart:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/auckland-mayor-wayne-brown-tips-clash-with-transport-minister-simeon-brown-after-regional-fuel-tax-axeing/VB2Y2QQKSRFPTBBQDDFQY7HATA/

Maybe the fuel tax being chopped will turn into Brown vs Brown.

More like dumb and dumber.

Like Auckland mayor saying "I had all that money coming, the projects were canned and now I can't keep collecting it for my own political means."

"Dumb and dumber" is a nice way of putting it. It is more like a weasel lambasting another weasel.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79291 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#3194182 12-Feb-2024 08:28

Lobbyists are back at Parliament - with a new privacy measure hiding their identities | RNZ News

The identities of people allowed to freely come and go from Parliament have been made secret by the new Speaker.

Gerry Brownlee told RNZ he did not agree with the blanket ban on lobbyists having swipe card access and some discretion was needed.

He had approved swipe card access for about four new people, who he said could be described as having lobbying roles. But they were not employed by professional lobbying firms and largely had jobs assisting parties in Parliament.

He would not be "facilitating commercial activities" for lobbying firms. But in a departure from previous Speakers, Brownlee said he wouldn't publish the 'approved visitor list' of people with swipe card access to Parliament, in order to protect their privacy.

...

After RNZ's investigation into the lobbying industry last year then-Prime Minister Chris Hipkins asked Brownlee's predecessor, Adrian Rurawhe, to remove the swipe cards that gave about 80 lobbyists easy access to Parliament.

At the time, National's deputy leader Nicola Willis backed the swipe card ban and said there should be a "transparent, publicly accountable register of who's doing the lobbying and who they're lobbying for". She also called for a 12 month stand-down period for ministers going into lobbying after leaving Parliament.

Transparent and accountable, except if the Speaker decides not to.

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#3194458 13-Feb-2024 06:40

Kiwirail tells Auckland Transport that they can't provide services due to 'heat' on an overcast day that reached 25 degrees. Not even close to Auckland's hottest day. This is after months of closures and deferred services for urgent track maintenance.

And people wonder why there's so little goodwill towards the idea of using public transport in Auckland.

1 | ... | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | ... | 188