NZ 2023 Election Thread

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

Forums › Politics › NZ 2023 Election Thread

1 | ... | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | ... | 102

28567 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3121876 30-Aug-2023 13:17

ockel:

Simon Bridges introduced a members bill in 2021 (defeated by Labour) that would have seen indexation every 3 years. Bill English proposed lifting the bottom two thresholds in the 2017 Budget and IIRC intended to index if returned to power in the 2017 election. Its not a new concept just one that doesnt suit the party that represents the worker (sic)

Good on Simon. BE was votebuying. What about as per Newshub article today "National has disappointingly significantly watered down its previous pledges to adjust tax brackets to account for inflation since Labour took office in 2017"

Yes, its not a new concept, and we do embrace it, every other blue moon

It doesnt suit any party as its free revenue, so they all hold off, then when pressured, its an election promise

Backblaze

Backblaze Unlimited Backup. World’s easiest cloud backup. Get peace of mind knowing your files are backed up securely in the cloud (affiliate link).

tdgeek

28567 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3121878 30-Aug-2023 13:18

GV27:

Never was a problem for GR when it came to writing cheques.

Perhaps QE should have not occured, as what I assume you are meaning

ockel

1947 posts

Uber Geek

#3121929 30-Aug-2023 15:30

tdgeek:

Good on Simon. BE was votebuying. What about as per Newshub article today "National has disappointingly significantly watered down its previous pledges to adjust tax brackets to account for inflation since Labour took office in 2017"

Yes, its not a new concept, and we do embrace it, every other blue moon

It doesnt suit any party as its free revenue, so they all hold off, then when pressured, its an election promise

You cant make the statement "Yeah, I get that. All past Govts should have had them indexed." and then accuse those that tried to do it as vote buying. Both English and Bridges wanted it be be enshrined in legislation, thats not vote buying.

Either you genuinely think tax brackets should be indexed (like NZSuper and benefits are indexed on 1 April every year as enshrined in legislation) and accept that the only team that doesnt want to do it is Labour or you think the population should be increasingly taxed every year as part of a progressive tax regime.

Which do you support?

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

ockel

1947 posts

Uber Geek

#3121930 30-Aug-2023 15:35

tdgeek:

GV27:

Never was a problem for GR when it came to writing cheques.

Perhaps QE should have not occured, as what I assume you are meaning

QE was driven by the RBNZ (as is their remit) not GR. QE is this case being OCR cutting and then LSAP plus FLP. His was oberabundent fiscal stimulus, which is cheque writing.

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

tdgeek

28567 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3121947 30-Aug-2023 16:06

ockel:

You cant make the statement "Yeah, I get that. All past Govts should have had them indexed." and then accuse those that tried to do it as vote buying. Both English and Bridges wanted it be be enshrined in legislation, thats not vote buying.

Either you genuinely think tax brackets should be indexed (like NZSuper and benefits are indexed on 1 April every year as enshrined in legislation) and accept that the only team that doesnt want to do it is Labour or you think the population should be increasingly taxed every year as part of a progressive tax regime.

Which do you support?

How often does the threshold get adjusted historically?

If National want to enshrine it, well English and Bridges werent in power. When Chris Luxon is, but the past promise to set it from 2017 isnt going to happen, why is that?

I feel that it should be an annual adjustment to the tax thresholds. Does Labour hate that idea? Well, National isnt a fan either, if its part of the 2017 campaign, and now part of the 2023 campaign, and even then its every 3 years, with an out clause. Its voting time, hold your hands out.

All govts love the thresholds for obvious reasons, and like most big ticket items, the public needs to wait and wait until a government caves in.

tdgeek

28567 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3121948 30-Aug-2023 16:07

ockel:

His was oberabundent fiscal stimulus, which is cheque writing.

Such as wage subsidy? Covid leave?

SirHumphreyAppleby

2506 posts

Uber Geek

#3121950 30-Aug-2023 16:13

tdgeek:

I feel that it should be an annual adjustment to the tax thresholds. Does Labour hate that idea? Well, National isnt a fan either, if its part of the 2017 campaign, and now part of the 2023 campaign, and even then its every 3 years, with an out clause. Its voting time, hold your hands out.

I tend to agree, but why stop at tax thresholds? Surely, if there is going to be an annual adjustment in tax, the tax take could instead reflect the actual dollars the government requires to operate.

If you cut out all the waste, you could get away with simply charging everyone a flat fee to cover the true expense and be done with all this rate nonsense.

tdgeek

28567 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3121954 30-Aug-2023 16:22

SirHumphreyAppleby:

I tend to agree, but why stop at tax thresholds? Surely, if there is going to be an annual adjustment in tax, the tax take could instead reflect the actual dollars the government requires to operate.

If you cut out all the waste, you could get away with simply charging everyone a flat fee to cover the true expense and be done with all this rate nonsense.

They operate to a surplus, then spend that on stuff we need. A liberal govt, liberally, a conservative govt, conservatively. But its never enough.

Given that the wealthy pay more $, I doubt a flat fee could work.

gzt

15184 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3122033 30-Aug-2023 23:30

ockel: Simon Bridges introduced a members bill in 2021 (defeated by Labour) that would have seen indexation every 3 years. Bill English proposed lifting the bottom two thresholds in the 2017 Budget and IIRC intended to index if returned to power in the 2017 election.

In other words, always just over the horizon for the National Party.

gzt

15184 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#3122045 31-Aug-2023 01:14

SirHumphreyAppleby: I think David Seymour needs a bit of a break from campaigning. He's made a few (minor) slip ups lately, neither of which will cost him my vote. His latest gaffe, saying in a speech... "I daresay if Nelson Mandela was alive today he would be campaigning for Act."

Unfortunately, this is not a gaffe. Even worse - It's the kind of thing some ACT partiers say to portray themselves as victims of terrible racism. It also exemplifies the kind of things some ACT partiers say to convince themselves that they are not actually being racist at all, while actually tolerating some pretty nasty stuff.

GV27

5407 posts

Uber Geek

#3122083 31-Aug-2023 08:40

gzt:
In other words, always just over the horizon for the National Party.

Not quite.

Labour repealed tax cuts that Bill English had already legislated when they came into power. There were there and ready to go.

Funny how that doesn't get labeled a 'tax increase' even though it definitely was.

On2or3wheels

184 posts

Master Geek

#3122220 31-Aug-2023 13:43

Taxes aren’t necessarily bad, it depends what benefit you’re getting from them.

For some people the benefits are far larger than the extra money they would get from tax cuts, like free school lunches, cheap bus trips, free training fees program etc.
For a family with multiple children these alone would add up.

The proposed tax cut from National is a bit sneaky in that even the ultra rich are getting it, at the expense of say subsidized bus travel for children.
The unusual thing is, right wing thinking in the past said you were better to provide free services to low income earners or beneficiaries, rather than cash, to guarantee it got spent on priorities.

sir1963

2215 posts

Uber Geek

#3122229 31-Aug-2023 14:18

On2or3wheels:

Taxes aren’t necessarily bad, it depends what benefit you’re getting from them.

For some people the benefits are far larger than the extra money they would get from tax cuts, like free school lunches, cheap bus trips, free training fees program etc.
For a family with multiple children these alone would add up.

The proposed tax cut from National is a bit sneaky in that even the ultra rich are getting it, at the expense of say subsidized bus travel for children.
The unusual thing is, right wing thinking in the past said you were better to provide free services to low income earners or beneficiaries, rather than cash, to guarantee it got spent on priorities.

I have always opposed the "block of cheese" tax cuts, they do nothing for me, but combined they can do a lot of good.

When I do perk work for people I do not accept payment (except for consumables), I ask them to donate that money to KidsCan.

GV27

5407 posts

Uber Geek

#3122303 31-Aug-2023 15:17

On2or3wheels:

Taxes aren’t necessarily bad, it depends what benefit you’re getting from them.

For some people the benefits are far larger than the extra money they would get from tax cuts, like free school lunches, cheap bus trips, free training fees program etc.
For a family with multiple children these alone would add up.

The proposed tax cut from National is a bit sneaky in that even the ultra rich are getting it, at the expense of say subsidized bus travel for children.
The unusual thing is, right wing thinking in the past said you were better to provide free services to low income earners or beneficiaries, rather than cash, to guarantee it got spent on priorities.

That's the nature of a progressive tax system. If you give relief to the people at the low end, the people paying more get it too.

On2or3wheels

184 posts

Master Geek

#3122305 31-Aug-2023 15:29

GV27:

That's the nature of a progressive tax system. If you give relief to the people at the low end, the people paying more get it too.

Oh I realise that but you can counteract it by adjusting the top rate.

1 | ... | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | ... | 102