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 | ... | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2482945 13-May-2020 17:51

Fred99:

If you look at a demographic pyramid for NZ, there is no "baby boom bulge". So you're arguing a myth. Get over it.

But you're just continually avoiding the obvious point: boomers and the gray generation tend to be singularly focused on preserving their self-interest (and their progeny's ability to continue their unearned advantage through winning the birth lottery) and have exerted an outsized political influence through aligning their interests with the political expedience of the likes of NZF, in the context of NZ. This is easily observable to anyone.... whose eyes are basically open. Boomers and the grey generation have also had the advantage of almost unheard of and highly sustained (but by no means uninterrupted) economic conditions where even frankly the historically "lower" classes like your average shopkeeper or bus driver (and the like) have managed to buy a house, have lifestyles that similarly situated young people today have no hope of repeating, and even in some cases accumulate capital that has grown and provided exponential advantages that young people today have no hope of ever getting near. How's that okay? And why is it unacceptable to call such obvious matters out?

From a pure selfishness POV, my wife and I will benefit from the ongoing favouritism towards holders of capital since we both have well-to-do parents. It's just not a morally acceptable state of affairs in my eyes. Typically the people most keen on blocking any kind of reforms are the boomers and the gray generation.

And if that offends anyone, if we are serious about a genuine debate, the answer should be: tough ****.

Tradepub

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

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482949 13-May-2020 17:54

Fred99:

DaveDog:

The next election won't be so much based on policy, but there will be a lot of promises and it'll ultimately boil down to people - which people/party can you trust.

Well that would truly suck. An effective media would of course probe politicians for commitment to policy goals.

The worst job in the world right now is Grant Robertson's. Pretty horrific presenting a budget that's inevitably going to haunt him forever, with a very slim chance of getting it right.

I will probably get castigated, but I rate him highly. He knows his stuff. His goal is NZ. You won't get any scripted, generic, simple answers if you question him, he knows his stuff. Its about time we had politicians like him that are NZ focused. Not media focused, or vote focussed. If he told me we are screwed we need to suck it up, I'd buy that. Thats rare in politics.

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482951 13-May-2020 17:58

Handle9: NZ has one of the highest tax takes from GST (relative to GDP) per capita .

Maybe it does. Where does health and education fit into that? You need to square off what taxes cover before you can decide who is lowest taxed.

I.e. purchasing power.

Handle9

11118 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482953 13-May-2020 18:00

tdgeek:

Handle9: NZ has one of the highest tax takes from GST (relative to GDP) per capita .

Maybe it does. Where does health and education fit into that? You need to square off what taxes cover before you can decide who is lowest taxed.

I.e. purchasing power.

What on earth does health and education have to do with the mix of taxation? There is no suggestion that New Zealand is over taxed, just that far too much comes from consumption tax.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2482956 13-May-2020 18:01

DaveDog:

It's not about the population age, but rather the levels of enrolment and voting as the demographic age increases...

So why does this happen? I was born at the tail end of the baby boom. I've never failed to vote in a GE when living in NZ. I seriously doubt that any of my similar aged friends have either. I wouldn't accept an assumption that older people tend to vote because they're old. Young people don't vote for other reasons. That's frightening.

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482958 13-May-2020 18:03

MikeAqua:

Firstly I didn't say democracy sucks, or even that it's bad that boomers tend to have a strong influence on party policies. Just suggesting that such a phenomena is a real problem for politicians, because it limits what their policy position can be. I was hypothesising, but I think it's fair observation than Labour and National would be concerned about what boomers think.

Farmers are another group, who have sufficient common interest to give politicians in the major parties pause when it comes to climate change. If Labour and National had a common climate change policy that would neutralise that position.

I do realise that parties like to differ on things - otherwise we will all figure out it's coke vs pepsi.

Really???

Boomers are one part of the population. I know quite a few, most aren't sitting on 23 rentals. Some are, and they would anyway as they are smart. Smart people are smart, that's not age dependent. Its no more than a convenient argument.

National and Labour dont have a remotely common climate change policy. National doesn't have one.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2482970 13-May-2020 18:10

tdgeek:

Maybe it does. Where does health and education fit into that? You need to square off what taxes cover before you can decide who is lowest taxed.

I.e. purchasing power.

Congratulations: you've just won a Supreme Non-Sequitur Award.

His point is undoubtedly that compared to similarly situated countries, your average person pays a greater proportion of tax from GST payments. GST is a regressive tax for reasons that can be discerned by most intelligent adults. Now you can agree or disagree (although it's difficult to see how a rational person can take the latter position) over whether favouritism towards capital is morally acceptable or not. But whether an average person pays more tax in the form of GST compared to broadly comparable countries is pretty easy to determine, since most Kiwis broadly agree that the likes of Aus, UK, US, Canada and other OECD countries etc are broadly situated as us.

The answers to that question have nothing whatsoever to do with how much relative benefit such an average taxpayer obtains in return for each $1 of tax paid. For the love of whatever that is good and holy, people: please engage brain before typing, have some respect for your fellow interlocutor and actually address the arguments that are made, and don't post for the sake of adding to your post count.

GV27

5859 posts

Uber Geek

#2482973 13-May-2020 18:13

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300011411/government-puts-light-rail-on-hold

Transport Minister Phil Twyford said decisions on Auckland's light rail project "are on hold while the Government’s full focus is on fighting Covid-19”.

The decision on actually building Light Rail has been stalling for years now. To drop it suddenly because of 'Covid19'... well...I have strong thoughts about that.

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482974 13-May-2020 18:16

Handle9:

What on earth does health and education have to do with the mix of taxation? There is no suggestion that New Zealand is over taxed, just that far too much comes from consumption tax.

OK, my bad, you focussed just on GST, my post was on taxation generally. Tax is tax. Income is income. The net benefit is net salary. Where health in the form of Govt provided or buy medical insurance is pertinent. Free education is pertinent. NZ is highly taxed. Thats includes free education and health. So are we highly taxed if we consider heath and education as a right that everybody should be able to receive?

Please forego the LOL and what on earth's. Its a discussion. I am well aware of your many posts. I dont get why you have become so angry and negative. Its a discussion. Ive noticed that here from others. Maybe its the virus, maybe its cabin fever, but I've seem many posts from many people that I respect going overboard. Just my opinion

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2482977 13-May-2020 18:19

tdgeek:

Fred99:

Well that would truly suck. An effective media would of course probe politicians for commitment to policy goals.

The worst job in the world right now is Grant Robertson's. Pretty horrific presenting a budget that's inevitably going to haunt him forever, with a very slim chance of getting it right.

I will probably get castigated, but I rate him highly. He knows his stuff. His goal is NZ. You won't get any scripted, generic, simple answers if you question him, he knows his stuff. Its about time we had politicians like him that are NZ focused. Not media focused, or vote focussed. If he told me we are screwed we need to suck it up, I'd buy that. Thats rare in politics.

I'm not rating him poorly. He's got an impossible job to do - in an unprecedented turbulent environment. Whatever he gets wrong (and chances are a lot - because you'd need to be the genuine Nostradamus to score a few hits on the nail head) - the opposition will be merciless.

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482989 13-May-2020 18:31

dejadeadnz:

Congratulations: you've just won a Supreme Non-Sequitur Award.

His point is undoubtedly that compared to similarly situated countries, your average person pays a greater proportion of tax from GST payments. GST is a regressive tax for reasons that can be discerned by most intelligent adults. Now you can agree or disagree (although it's difficult to see how a rational person can take the latter position) over whether favouritism towards capital is morally acceptable or not. But whether an average person pays more tax in the form of GST compared to broadly comparable countries is pretty easy to determine, since most Kiwis broadly agree that the likes of Aus, UK, US, Canada and other OECD countries etc are broadly situated as us.

The answers to that question have nothing whatsoever to do with how much relative benefit such an average taxpayer obtains in return for each $1 of tax paid. For the love of whatever that is good and holy, people: please engage brain before typing, have some respect for your fellow interlocutor and actually address the arguments that are made, and don't post for the sake of adding to your post count.

Thank you for that award. I have no issues with my post count, nor do I have any issues with expressing how angry I am, do you?. Daily? Hourly? I am quite happy with expressing my opinion, and I am quite happy for that to be questioned. After all its a discussion. Google that if you need too. That appears to go over some people's head doesnt it?

You can feel free to reply with the usual anger.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2482990 13-May-2020 18:32

dejadeadnz:

But you're just continually avoiding the obvious point: boomers and the gray generation tend to be singularly focused on preserving their self-interest

That's what "everybody" singularly focuses on - with the exception of a very few philanthropists and genuine "good Samaritans". It probably reaches peak force in parents with young children - because "human nature" and survival instinct / "the selfish gene".
As a generalisation, we treat old people in a pretty crappy way in our Anglo american influenced society. Many other cultures don't. In competitive economics that disadvantages those societies. That sucks.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2482991 13-May-2020 18:34

tdgeek:

OK, my bad, you focussed just on GST, my post was on taxation generally. Tax is tax. Income is income.

No matter how many times you post a cute punchline, it doesn't make it worthwhile or relevant. $10 in GST collected from a low income beneficiary is highly damaging to her well-being and regressive; $10 in CGT on a high income person is highly affordable and makes no material difference to the person's life. The categorisation of the income received by the government might stay the same but the social outcomes, issues of distributive justice, and the like involved are complex and materially different.

And the only angry person here is the one caught out making a non-sequitur and who then proceeds to violate the FUG by calling another poster names.

Edit: Fixed some typos. Got distracted.

tdgeek

29554 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482992 13-May-2020 18:34

GV27:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300011411/government-puts-light-rail-on-hold

Transport Minister Phil Twyford said decisions on Auckland's light rail project "are on hold while the Government’s full focus is on fighting Covid-19”.

The decision on actually building Light Rail has been stalling for years now. To drop it suddenly because of 'Covid19'... well...I have strong thoughts about that.

I agree. There is no reason to shelve issues that are not Covid-19 related. There is life beyond the virus. And it needs to be dealt with. Does it need to be delayed? Possibly. You can keep an issue current, and delay it, there is a difference.

DaveDog

336 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2482993 13-May-2020 18:38

dejadeadnz:

But you're just continually avoiding the obvious point: boomers and the gray generation tend to be singularly focused on preserving their self-interest (and their progeny's ability to continue their unearned advantage through winning the birth lottery) and have exerted an outsized political influence through aligning their interests with the political expedience of the likes of NZF, in the context of NZ. This is easily observable to anyone.... whose eyes are basically open. Boomers and the grey generation have also had the advantage of almost unheard of and highly sustained (but by no means uninterrupted) economic conditions where even frankly the historically "lower" classes like your average shopkeeper or bus driver (and the like) have managed to buy a house, have lifestyles that similarly situated young people today have no hope of repeating, and even in some cases accumulate capital that has grown and provided exponential advantages that young people today have no hope of ever getting near. How's that okay? And why is it unacceptable to call such obvious matters out?

From a pure selfishness POV, my wife and I will benefit from the ongoing favouritism towards holders of capital since we both have well-to-do parents. It's just not a morally acceptable state of affairs in my eyes. Typically the people most keen on blocking any kind of reforms are the boomers and the gray generation.

And if that offends anyone, if we are serious about a genuine debate, the answer should be: tough ****.

I would be reluctant to put all boomers into this category, but from a policy point of view this certainly seems to have been the case. It's easy to list the benefits that our seniors have enjoyed (and then subsequent governments have closed the door) - instantly springing to mind... Education (loans and accessibility), Welfare tends to be punitive to "non-superannuation" recipients and looking forward - current younger Kiwi's are expected to save for their retirements without any guarantee they'll get super (for example).

I'd be reluctant to lay this at the feet of the boomers though. The Boomers have been reasonably motivated to have a coordinated voting and lobby block, they've successfully made a fuss when things don't go their way and have in some cases been effective at lobbying. In comparison, youth are disorganised, unmotivated and generally apathetic.

1 | ... | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33