Our next national election - policies, promises and people

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

Forums › Politics › Our next national election - policies, promises and people

1 | ... | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | ... | 33

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2422286 17-Feb-2020 11:38

This isn't going well for Jacinda. It's looking like people expect her to actually hold Winston Peters to some sort of account. It's almost like taking photos of journalists who are running stories about your political party's donations issues meeting with sources might have crossed some sort of line?

https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/17-02-2020/damage-control-jacinda-ardern-faces-torrent-of-winston-related-questions/

Last week she had refused to comment on the matters in question – in particular the strange admission and subsequent denial of Winston Peters of having any involvement in how photos of journalists meeting former NZ First president Lester Grey ended up on a Whaleoil-linked blog.

But every Monday morning, the questions need to be faced head on. The week for the prime minister begins with interviews with the biggest morning TV and radio news shows in the country: RNZ’s Morning Report, TVNZ 1’s Breakfast, the Mike Hosking Breakfast on Newstalk ZB, and the AM Show on Three.

Two clear patterns emerged. The first is that Ardern is trying to limit her exposure to the scandal by arguing that it is a matter for the leader of NZ First (the political party) rather than a matter for her as the boss of the government. The second theme is a repeated point about finding such blogs distasteful, and that she would not want the Labour Party to have any involvement with them.

Tradepub

Free professional, reference and technical white papers (affiliate link).

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2422290 17-Feb-2020 11:42

National outlines a guide on the upcoming campaign

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/119561745/simon-bridges-wants-to-cut-taxes-and-boost-growth-to-keep-kiwis-at-home

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2422351 17-Feb-2020 12:24

tdgeek:

National outlines a guide on the upcoming campaign

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/119561745/simon-bridges-wants-to-cut-taxes-and-boost-growth-to-keep-kiwis-at-home

"National announces future announcement, to be announced at a later date"

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2422354 17-Feb-2020 12:30

GV27:

tdgeek:

National outlines a guide on the upcoming campaign

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/119561745/simon-bridges-wants-to-cut-taxes-and-boost-growth-to-keep-kiwis-at-home

"National announces future announcement, to be announced at a later date"

This why its a guide, that they have put on the table for us to see. "Later date" is covered by " upcoming campaign"

Or do we close this thread till official campaign start day. All parties are sowing a few seeds, I cant see the issue in placing them on here

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2422385 17-Feb-2020 13:17

tdgeek:

This why its a guide, that they have put on the table for us to see. "Later date" is covered by " upcoming campaign"

Or do we close this thread till official campaign start day. All parties are sowing a few seeds, I cant see the issue in placing them on here

To be fair it's the same as Labour's infrastructure package - they had it approved in November, then announced it existed but the details would come later, and then they announced it this year.

I'm just trying to be even in my criticism. I'm sick of announcements about announcements :P Show me some policy, damnit!

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2422417 17-Feb-2020 13:31

GV27:

tdgeek:

This why its a guide, that they have put on the table for us to see. "Later date" is covered by " upcoming campaign"

Or do we close this thread till official campaign start day. All parties are sowing a few seeds, I cant see the issue in placing them on here

To be fair it's the same as Labour's infrastructure package - they had it approved in November, then announced it existed but the details would come later, and then they announced it this year.

I'm just trying to be even in my criticism. I'm sick of announcements about announcements :P Show me some policy, damnit!

I posted what I posted as an FYI to all subbers here, it wasnt to brickbat or bouquet anything. To me, its just a few tidbits, a bit more detail, and what I posted does give a nice rounded guide as to Nationals plans.

May be better to wait till campaign day, I can delete if needed

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2422421 17-Feb-2020 13:41

tdgeek:

I posted what I posted as an FYI to all subbers here, it wasnt to brickbat or bouquet anything. To me, its just a few tidbits, a bit more detail, and what I posted does give a nice rounded guide as to Nationals plans.

May be better to wait till campaign day, I can delete if needed

There's goingto be plenty to talk about - plus at this rate we may have an election a lot sooner than we planned.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
78934 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2422451 17-Feb-2020 14:41

"Good news for Simon Bridges: his big tax idea is already happening":

So what is the average wage then? Stats NZ figures from last year put the median weekly income at $1016, which added up per annum comes to a shade under $53,000.

So what is the effective tax rate for someone on the median wage? Calculated out, someone on the median wage ends up paying about 17% of their income in income tax.

So when Simon Bridges says “people on the average wage shouldn’t be paying almost 33 per cent in the dollar,” many will think he’s absolutely right. And fortunately for them, it’s also already totally true. It’s possible he’s doing something cute with averages and bucking the orthodoxy in how he crunches the number. It’s possible he’s plugging a bunch of other taxes into his calculator to formulate a cents-in-the-dollar tax rate. Or maybe he’s just proclaiming that something that isn’t happening won’t happen.

My technology disclosure

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2422472 17-Feb-2020 14:56

freitasm:

"Good news for Simon Bridges: his big tax idea is already happening":

So what is the average wage then? Stats NZ figures from last year put the median weekly income at $1016, which added up per annum comes to a shade under $53,000.

So what is the effective tax rate for someone on the median wage? Calculated out, someone on the median wage ends up paying about 17% of their income in income tax.

So when Simon Bridges says “people on the average wage shouldn’t be paying almost 33 per cent in the dollar,” many will think he’s absolutely right. And fortunately for them, it’s also already totally true. It’s possible he’s doing something cute with averages and bucking the orthodoxy in how he crunches the number. It’s possible he’s plugging a bunch of other taxes into his calculator to formulate a cents-in-the-dollar tax rate. Or maybe he’s just proclaiming that something that isn’t happening won’t happen.

Thats the marginal rate almost (he says almost too), a small part of the 17% average. Technically he is correct, someone on that salary is paying the marginal tax rate but only on some of it. Its misleading. Many people who dont know that will of course believe it, as he is a senior member of Parliament

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2422523 17-Feb-2020 15:32

I suspect he misspoke, which he can't really afford to do lest people jump on him. The point he was probably trying to make is quite valid - that a relatively low income (relative to living costs like housing and transport) sees you fall into the top tax bracket.

The point he actually ended up making was borderline inarguable and makes him look like an idiot.

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2422532 17-Feb-2020 15:46

GV27:

I suspect he misspoke, which he can't really afford to do lest people jump on him. The point he was probably trying to make is quite valid - that a relatively low income (relative to living costs like housing and transport) sees you fall into the top tax bracket.

The point he actually ended up making was borderline inarguable and makes him look like an idiot.

He did this only recently, I forget what the topic was. But he picked out a distant year or two to show Nats were better than Labour, and ignored the recent period for both parties. I am all for hard campaigning, puffery (a marketing and legal term) exaggeration, minimising, but I draw the line at blatent misleading statements.

Yes as regards facts yes thats right. If the average wage was say 46k I think the first 10k or 14k was at 9.5%? Whatever it was doesnt matter, when you are now on 53k, same median salary, no better off, you have more dollars taxed at the 31% marginal rate. We should align the tax tables every year, but we dont. It ends up as a cash cow for the Govt, then they reap in those rewards then give a generous tax cut, (aka fixing the tax tables but not backdating them) and gets elected or re expected off that lie

Its bit like underfunding then having a catchup, you still "earned" the years you underfunded.

Crazy stuff

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
78934 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2422537 17-Feb-2020 15:52

@tdgeek:

Yes as regards facts yes thats right. If the average wage was say 46k I think the first 10k or 14k was at 9.5%? Whatever it was doesnt matter, when you are now on 53k, same median salary, no better off, you have more dollars taxed at the 31% marginal rate. We should align the tax tables every year, but we dont. It ends up as a cash cow for the Govt, then they reap in those rewards then give a generous tax cut, (aka fixing the tax tables but not backdating them) and gets elected or re expected off that lie

From the article I linked:

For the first $14,000 of income, the tax rate is 10.5% – or ten and a half cents on the dollar.

The next bracket is income between $14,000 and $48,000 – and this is the crucial point. You only pay the tax rate of 17.5% on income earned between those two figures. So for the first $14,000, you’re still only paying 10.5%.

For income between $48,000 and $70,000, you pay a tax rate of 30%. Again, that’s only for the income between those two figures – for income up to the lower thresholds, you have a lower rate of tax to pay.

And then, there’s one more bracket on top again. For everything earned above $70,000 a year, the tax rate is 33%.

My technology disclosure

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2422539 17-Feb-2020 15:55

Cheers fir that I wasn’t aware of that middle 17.5 rate

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2422617 17-Feb-2020 16:48

It's quite mind-boggling that our top tax rate kicks in at an income level that wouldn't get your a mortgage in Auckland.

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2422841 18-Feb-2020 07:38

Furthermore, those in charge of our tax system need to explain why you can be a top rate earner for income tax purposes at $70K but still eligible for WFFTC all the way up to $120K.

Of course, the person in charge of our last serious tax reform exercise famously said (in a response to a question in Parliament) that people earning over $60K and having to pay 39 cents in the dollar past that should move to Australia if they didn't like it.

1 | ... | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | ... | 33