PDA

View Full Version : Govt to back off Levy increases!?


Hiflyer
18th November 2009, 14:35
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10609935

Don't know what to make of this, it seems kinda two faced
James Deuce
18th November 2009, 14:58
It is.

Don't fall for it.
modboy
18th November 2009, 15:13
I liked this bit...

" Goatee beards were a popular fashion accessory, and nicknames like "Stoney", "Hawkeye" and "Wolfman" plentiful. "

You're immortalised Brent ! I'm pissed they didn't include Modboy ! haha.
Bend-it
18th November 2009, 15:24
As I've said before, and Stoney expressed so well, the amount is immaterial. For many people, the cost of taking time off work, travel expenses etc coming for the Bikeoi exceeds the ACC levy for a few years!

If it was justified and warranted, I would pay even more... It is the principle that we are arguing.

Currently, ACC is a no faults system, and if they want to change that, then fine, apply it across the board, assess people's individual risk and charge people their ACC levy like an insurance company, open it up to competition.

If not, it has to remain no faults for everyone.

If we pay even 1 cent more than car owners (which we currently do), then it's saying, "ACC is a 'no faults' system, except for those damn bikers!! We'll screw them!" then tag on other groups which are next in line.
modboy
18th November 2009, 15:45
If it was justified and warranted, I would pay even more... It is the principle that we are arguing.

Currently, ACC is a no faults system, and if they want to change that, then fine, apply it across the board, assess people's individual risk and charge people their ACC levy like an insurance company, open it up to competition.

If not, it has to remain no faults for everyone.


Exactly right Bend-it !!

I liked Goff's argument that old people fall over and need hip replacements - so should we hit them with a $500 annual levy. And we can include skateboarders, rugby players, runners, trampers, climbers, morris dancers, people that use vending machines, etc etc, then split it up by gender and race ... everyone's risk factors need to be assessed so that no single group is subsidising any other group.

I believe we call this reductio ad absurdum