[Discuss] Things that were meant to bring prices down but have not. (?)

Forums › Off topic › [Discuss] Things that were meant to bring prices down but have not. (?)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

3423 posts

Uber Geek

#3227740 8-May-2024 10:44

I don't understand the 'economic growth at all costs' mentality. Both sides of the political spectrum have been driving high migration numbers.

If you look in the stats, it's not all brain surgeons either. Dairy workers and truck drivers feature too.

When you look at geography, the only substantial flat land in NZ is in Canterbury, Waikato and BOP. We could expect these to be the places to boom over the next wee while.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

deepred

494 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#3227741 8-May-2024 10:46

PS. Who wrote the following? Hint: it's probably not who you'd think.

"Landlord's right has its origin in robbery. As soon as the land of any country has all become private property, the landlords, like all other men, love to reap where they never sowed, and demand a rent even for its natural produce. The wood of the forest, the grass of the field, and all the natural fruits of the earth, which, when land was in common, cost the labourer only the trouble of gathering them, come, even to him, to have an additional price fixed upon them. He must then pay for the licence to gather them, and must give up to the landlord a portion of what his labour either collects or produces. This portion, or, what comes to the same thing, the price of this portion, constitutes the rent of land, and in the price of the greater part of commodities, makes a third."

"I regret to say that we of the F.B.I. are powerless to act in cases of oral-genital intimacy, unless it has in some way obstructed interstate commerce." — J. Edgar Hoover

"Create a society that values material things above all else. Strip it of industry. Raise taxes for the poor and reduce them for the rich and for corporations. Prop up failed financial institutions with public money. Ask for more tax, while vastly reducing public services. Put adverts everywhere, regardless of people's ability to afford the things they advertise. Allow the cost of food and housing to eclipse people's ability to pay for them. Light blue touch paper." — Andrew Maxwell

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3227800 8-May-2024 11:22

How are veges compared to the usual in season prices?

Tomatoes used to be around $12 off season and 95c in season per kilo. This year they are $4+ in season, with no weather disasters. I'm assuming growers are topping up prices to recover past disaster losses

wellygary

8323 posts

Uber Geek

#3227817 8-May-2024 12:05

tdgeek:

How are veges compared to the usual in season prices?

Tomatoes used to be around $12 off season and 95c in season per kilo. This year they are $4+ in season, with no weather disasters. I'm assuming growers are topping up prices to recover past disaster losses

Basic Fruit and Vege items are basically the sum of their inputs,

Pretty sure that Wages, Insurance, council rates, fuel, fertiliser etc have not fallen in price.... Expect food prices to remain elevated,

Inflation is nasty and wishing for prices to return to "the good old days" is a forlorn hope....

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3227826 8-May-2024 12:29

wellygary:

Basic Fruit and Vege items are basically the sum of their inputs,

Pretty sure that Wages, Insurance, council rates, fuel, fertiliser etc have not fallen in price.... Expect food prices to remain elevated,

Inflation is nasty and wishing for prices to return to "the good old days" is a forlorn hope....

I agree but 95c to $4 to $5 is more then any inflation. I imagine many businesses would do loss recovery with pricing if they can swing that, I would too

kingdragonfly

11196 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#3227879 8-May-2024 12:51

elpenguino:
I don't understand the 'economic growth at all costs' mentality. Both sides of the political spectrum have been driving high migration numbers.

I'm not sure I follow. Just to support the aging population, and keep the tax base relatively flat, we need migrants.

Just look at Japan. More than 1 in 10 people in the country are now aged 80 or older, so speaking of pure economics are no longer productive, and using more tax money than contributing.

Japan has always been anti-immigrant, and it's devastating for the young as their tax-base collapses.

China and Russia are in much worse than Japan, as there "population pyramid" is wildly distorted.

cddt

1556 posts

Uber Geek

#3227893 8-May-2024 14:10

kingdragonfly:

I'm not sure I follow. Just to support the aging population, and keep the tax base relatively flat, we need migrants.

People of child-bearing age are having fewer and fewer children, mainly because housing costs means it is impossible to get suitable or secure housing at a price they can afford.

Meanwhile schools are absolutely packed to the gunnels and teachers have to deal with more and more children who don't speak much English. Student enrollments in schools in Auckland alone were 8,000 higher in 2023 than in the previous year. That's an additional 267 classrooms worth in one year - how many new classrooms were built in that year?

The solution you propose (and that the government seems to have been following for decades) is now the driving cause of the problem.

Edit for addition: It's a viscous cycle, which the country needs to get out of. Otherwise our standard of living will continue to decline, and we will rob our children of the opportunities we took for granted.

My referral links: BigPipe | Mercury

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

elpenguino

3423 posts

Uber Geek

#3227894 8-May-2024 14:18

kingdragonfly:
elpenguino:

I don't understand the 'economic growth at all costs' mentality. Both sides of the political spectrum have been driving high migration numbers.

I'm not sure I follow. Just to support the aging population, and keep the tax base relatively flat, we need migrants.

Seems to be a couple of assumptions there. When we get migrants, they get old and need supporting too, so by using migrants to pay today's tax bills, we're just perpetuating the scenario to repeat itself, albeit by kicking the can down the road for a while.

Second, do we need to keep the tax base flat? That's a neo-liberal line the moneyed class spread so that the middle pay the bulk of the tax. We could move to a higher tax regime to pay for all the services we don't have we're always complaining about.

For example, why is there no higher taxes on luxury cars in NZ? You pay just GST for a Swift or a 911.

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

deepred

494 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#3227902 8-May-2024 14:47

kingdragonfly:
elpenguino:

I don't understand the 'economic growth at all costs' mentality. Both sides of the political spectrum have been driving high migration numbers.

I'm not sure I follow. Just to support the aging population, and keep the tax base relatively flat, we need migrants.

Just look at Japan. More than 1 in 10 people in the country are now aged 80 or older, so speaking of pure economics are no longer productive, and using more tax money than contributing.

Japan has always been anti-immigrant, and it's devastating for the young as their tax-base collapses.

China and Russia are in much worse than Japan, as there "population pyramid" is wildly distorted.

Russia stands out especially for its above-average death rate, and not just because of the losses from the invasion of Ukraine.

Handle9

11391 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3227908 8-May-2024 15:05

elpenguino: That's a neo-liberal line the moneyed class spread so that the middle pay the bulk of the tax.

This is not actually true. The tax working group found that 50% of income tax was paid by the top 12% of income earners. The top 3% of income earners were paying 25% of income tax.

It also found that around 50% of house holds were net takers - they got more in transfers than they paid in tax.

tweake

2391 posts

Uber Geek

#3227915 8-May-2024 15:37

wellygary:

tdgeek:

How are veges compared to the usual in season prices?

Tomatoes used to be around $12 off season and 95c in season per kilo. This year they are $4+ in season, with no weather disasters. I'm assuming growers are topping up prices to recover past disaster losses

Basic Fruit and Vege items are basically the sum of their inputs,

Pretty sure that Wages, Insurance, council rates, fuel, fertiliser etc have not fallen in price.... Expect food prices to remain elevated,

Inflation is nasty and wishing for prices to return to "the good old days" is a forlorn hope....

there is a recent article on this, can't remember where.

farmers are doing it hard. costs have risen a lot. as per usual primary producers get screwed down in price. the ones making the money are the middle men. i know of companies who are getting rid of their primary producing side but keeping the processing and retail side, easy to guess which one makes the money.

SaltyNZ

8230 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#3227917 8-May-2024 15:39

Handle9:
elpenguino: That's a neo-liberal line the moneyed class spread so that the middle pay the bulk of the tax.

This is not actually true. The tax working group found that 50% of income tax was paid by the top 12% of income earners. The top 3% of income earners were paying 25% of income tax.

The situation probably looks different depending on whether you consider the absolute amount of tax paid or the relative amount of tax paid. Someone worth $500M who pays $1M in tax a year is paying a lot more than me in absolute terms, but a lot less in relative terms. It's that second way of looking at it that is the concern. People with less money pay a much larger proportion of what they have in tax.

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

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

wellygary

8323 posts

Uber Geek

#3227933 8-May-2024 15:48

SaltyNZ:

The situation probably looks different depending on whether you consider the absolute amount of tax paid or the relative amount of tax paid. Someone worth $500M who pays $1M in tax a year is paying a lot more than me in absolute terms, but a lot less in relative terms. It's that second way of looking at it that is the concern. People with less money pay a much larger proportion of what they have in tax.

Nope works on both % and absolute,

When you consider Government direct transfers (Basically, Working for families) you don't actually start paying the government until you are in Decile 5,

(The table below is from the Tax Working Group, but likely still holds as there haven't been any significant tax changes since)

You can only justify the "Rich pay less % in tax" if you include unaccounted Capital Gains from real estate and other non financial assets

tweake

2391 posts

Uber Geek

#3227934 8-May-2024 15:50

deepred:

Courtesy of a gift link via Bernard Hickey:

Bloomberg 6/5/2024: Global Housing Shortages Are Crushing Immigration-Fueled Growth

that really only focus on whats been happening in more recent times. however note the uk house price ratio graph. the problem has been around a whole lot longer and thats not immigration driven.

frankly i think the immigration etc simply sped up what has already been happening. we would still have the exact same problem regardless of immigration, tho it would take longer. people will always continue to milk other people for money via the housing market. even today i see an article trying to coax FHBers into fomo, the RE is doing what it does best.

the housing market will top out, people simply run out of money. then it shifts to rent to squeeze them more. as people get paid more the market will come up to take that away. even if govt builds housing, that cost gets put onto the same people, so you have the same result. the only way to stop it is to get rid of the ability to make money out of 2nd hand housing.

kingdragonfly

11196 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#3227937 8-May-2024 15:58

When I see "keep the tax rate flat" I mean not running a long term deficit.

I realize that we are pretty fiscally responsible compared to the eye-watering deficit run by the US, at NZD $444,103 each US taxpayer.

I'm all for taxing the rich.

The MAGA crowd have a hard-on for 1950's USA.

Well the "gold days" top marginal income tax rate reached 92%, as opposed to 39% today in the US.

Of course a marginal income tax rate is useless if the rich can use loopholes to avoid taxes.

Even though I'm a house owner, I'm also for getting rid of the re-introduced deduction: landlords will be able to claim 80 percent of their interest expenses against tax.

It has nothing to do with immigrants.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7