2011 Budget

[superman]

Government annouces net deficit of around 39.4 billion dollars. And the year to the budget accounts for 16-17 billion of this (gross 67 billion net 39.4 after supposed financial assets....)

May 19 budget... what do you reckon the good old government are going to do to counter this?

I reckon this budgets going to be reminiscent of the black budget. I'd actually be all for cutting interest free student loans, if they did the same with cutting down large welfare numbers, cutting down working for families crap etc all in one go. But I guess I'm definitely more on the capitalist side rather than socialist.

GST to 17.5%? :shit: Let's hope not.

[Oblivion]

what do you reckon the good old government are going to do to counter this?

Most likely borrow more money. Actually :facepalm:

[Brett]

Massive overhaul of the social welfare system needed.

[Maha]

'what do you reckon the good old government are going to do to counter this'?

Keep blaming the previous Government/s....:corn:

[mashman]

they'll probably lower corporation tax a percent or two..... as well as what Maha said

[Ender EnZed]

'what do you reckon the good old government are going to do to counter this'?

Keep blaming the previous Government/s....:corn:

This.:facepalm:

[Bald Eagle]

Increase ACC levies :facepalm: oops they already did that to get a few extra mill - not sure who else they gunna rape.

[Murray]

Dear John Key and Bill English,

Please find below our suggestion for fixing New Zealand's economy…..

Instead of giving billions of dollars to the Banks, Iwi's and others to be squandered on unearned bonuses and extravagant oveseas trips, use the following plan.

You can call it the Patriotic Retirement Plan:

There are about 1 million people over 50 in the work force.
Pay them $1 million each severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

1) They MUST retire. One million job openings = unemployment fixed ....
2) They MUST buy a new car. One million cars ordered = motor industry fixed.
3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage and the banks must use the money for cheap new loans for new home buyers = housing supply and affordability fixed.
4) They MUST buy at least $100 of alcohol a week = your money back in duty/tax etc.
5) The MUST buy some shares in the strategic NZ companies you propose flogging off, and hold them for at least 10 years = US owning OUR remaining assets and more money kept in NZ instead of sent overseas. Note that of our biggest 20 companies in 1988 ALL are now owned overseas or controlled or owned by Graeme Hart, except for Fisher & Paykel; and from just Telecom and the BNZ alone (and not even including the other 17 companies) $16 billion of dividends has gone to their overseas owners.
6) They MUST pay for their grandchildren to go to University = no further need for student loans and more doctors and nurses.
7) Instead of stuffing around with the carbon emissions trading scheme that makes us pay for the major polluters, tell the greedy bastards to reduce their pollution emissions by 75% within 5 years or they'll be shut down = more jobs for inventive NZ manufacturers providing polution solutions and more tourists to a really cleaner, greener NZ.
8) If you need more money, have all MP's pay back their falsely claimed expenses and second home allowances.

And while we are at it, lets address the needs of the Elderly and Criminals

Let's put the pensioners in jail and the criminals in a nursing home.

This way the pensioners would have access to showers, hobbies and walks.
They'd receive unlimited free prescriptions, dental and medical treatment, wheel chairs etc and they'd receive money instead of paying it out.
They would have constant video monitoring, so they could be helped instantly, if they fell, or needed assistance.
Bedding would be washed twice a week, and all clothing would be ironed and returned to them.
They would be checked every 20 minutes and be provided with all meals and snacks.
They would have family visits in a suite built for that purpose.
They would have access to a library, weight room, spiritual counselling, pool and education courses.
Simple clothing, shoes, slippers, PJ's and legal aid would be free, on request.
Private, secure rooms for all, with an exercise outdoor yard, with gardens.
Each pensioner could have a computer, tv, radio and daily phone calls.
There would be a board of directors to hear complaints, and the caregivers would have a code of conduct that would be strictly adhered to.

The criminals would get cold food, be left all alone and unsupervised, with lights off at 8pm and showers once a week.

While living in a tiny room and paying $800.00 per week with no hope of ever getting out.

[Bikemad]

i vote Murray for president!!!!!

[Maha]

i vote Murray for president!!!!!

Muzz the Prez is kind of catchy....:rockon:

[AllanB]

I blame the earthquake.

But I blame that for everything.

Handy really.

Sleep in - earthquake
Forget stuff - earthquake
Shitty corner entry/exit - earthquake
Horny - earthquake
Broke - earthquake

[sil3nt]

Those in charge will still get a pay rise soon and will still take joy rides in tax payer funded cars / helicopters. We wouldn't need to pay people to protect John Key if he stopped wasting all our money.

But its still Labours fault and they are still the good guys fixing it :rolleyes:

[Oblivion]

I vote anarchy.

[Mully]

Never mind. Just realised I can't actually be fucked.

[James Deuce]

The MOST disappointing thing about this budget is Motorcyclists haven't taken their shotgun out of the cupboard and set up barricades of burning tyres around Parliament.

The Government is claiming the the deficit has been offset by gains made by - come on you can do it - ACC.

It was broke 2 years ago.

They raised motorcycle rego levies because ACC was broke.

As I said at the time, it isn't broke, its fund managers are geniuses who turn their surplus into industry sustaining investment for many NZ companies.

In a country with balls, MAG and BRONZ would be howling for Nick Smith's resignation because he lied. Hell, individual bikers would be openly harassing him. He stood up in front of 9500 bikers and lied. In a lot of countries that's a political death sentence. He stood in front of a variety of media organisations and formats and lied. We knew that. No one else did. No one else cared. The Unions didn't care, the media dismissed us as a bunch of greasy blue-collar herberts, and the Government went on a divide and conquer mission that succeeded beautifully the moment our "representatives" accepted Government coin to come up with a "solution" for the motorcycling "problem".

The only "problem" is the inability of any organisation to gain any traction against a Government intent on turning NZ into a bi-cultural nightmare country with two administrations running people's lives based on race and an intense, burning need to divest itself of any public property or investment opportunities that will benefit voters directly in return for license payments from a foreign owned corporations that are a fraction of the potential earnings a NZ owned Corporation could make.

Taranaki has some of the best light, sweet crude oil in the world. Diesel is going to become increasingly important as a fuel source, as is the lower refining costs associated with this quality of oil. We don't own those oil fields. We sold them. We get a license fee from a company who fills a giant tanker that doesn't berth anywhere in NZ and sods off with an energy source that made country's like Norway incredibly rich and gave its citizens a standard of living that is unmatched. In a country perched on the edge of cliffs, mountains, The North Sea and the Arctic Circle.

Kiwis are mad.

[oneofsix]

Muzz for Prez, James for Finacne minister :rockon:

[White trash]

Dear John Key and Bill English,

Please find below our suggestion for fixing New Zealand's economy…..

Instead of giving billions of dollars to the Banks, Iwi's and others to be squandered on unearned bonuses and extravagant oveseas trips, use the following plan.

You can call it the Patriotic Retirement Plan:

There are about 1 million people over 50 in the work force.
Pay them $1 million each severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

1) They MUST retire. One million job openings = unemployment fixed ....
2) They MUST buy a new car. One million cars ordered = motor industry fixed.
3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage and the banks must use the money for cheap new loans for new home buyers = housing supply and affordability fixed.
4) They MUST buy at least $100 of alcohol a week = your money back in duty/tax etc.
5) The MUST buy some shares in the strategic NZ companies you propose flogging off, and hold them for at least 10 years = US owning OUR remaining assets and more money kept in NZ instead of sent overseas. Note that of our biggest 20 companies in 1988 ALL are now owned overseas or controlled or owned by Graeme Hart, except for Fisher & Paykel; and from just Telecom and the BNZ alone (and not even including the other 17 companies) $16 billion of dividends has gone to their overseas owners.
6) They MUST pay for their grandchildren to go to University = no further need for student loans and more doctors and nurses.
7) Instead of stuffing around with the carbon emissions trading scheme that makes us pay for the major polluters, tell the greedy bastards to reduce their pollution emissions by 75% within 5 years or they'll be shut down = more jobs for inventive NZ manufacturers providing polution solutions and more tourists to a really cleaner, greener NZ.
8) If you need more money, have all MP's pay back their falsely claimed expenses and second home allowances.

And while we are at it, lets address the needs of the Elderly and Criminals

Let's put the pensioners in jail and the criminals in a nursing home.

This way the pensioners would have access to showers, hobbies and walks.
They'd receive unlimited free prescriptions, dental and medical treatment, wheel chairs etc and they'd receive money instead of paying it out.
They would have constant video monitoring, so they could be helped instantly, if they fell, or needed assistance.
Bedding would be washed twice a week, and all clothing would be ironed and returned to them.
They would be checked every 20 minutes and be provided with all meals and snacks.
They would have family visits in a suite built for that purpose.
They would have access to a library, weight room, spiritual counselling, pool and education courses.
Simple clothing, shoes, slippers, PJ's and legal aid would be free, on request.
Private, secure rooms for all, with an exercise outdoor yard, with gardens.
Each pensioner could have a computer, tv, radio and daily phone calls.
There would be a board of directors to hear complaints, and the caregivers would have a code of conduct that would be strictly adhered to.

The criminals would get cold food, be left all alone and unsupervised, with lights off at 8pm and showers once a week.

While living in a tiny room and paying $800.00 per week with no hope of ever getting out.

Quite obviously a cut and paste from some other website as there's nowhere near 1 million people over 50 in the workforce in New Zealand.

And did you do the math? The deficit is almost 40 million. You're suggesting spending 1 trillion dollars (count the zeros einstein 1,000,000,000,000) That's a million, MILLION dollars.

Bro.............

[Oakie]

I vote anarchy.

Isn't that an oxymoron?

[Oakie]

Quite obviously a cut and paste from some other website as there's nowhere near 1 million people over 50 in the workforce in New Zealand.

And did you do the math? The deficit is almost 40 million. You're suggesting spending 1 trillion dollars (count the zeros einstein 1,000,000,000,000) That's a million, MILLION dollars.

Bro.............

Someone seriously suggested some of the first half of that be done in the USA when the recession started. Then someone checked the maths...

[mashman]

Dear John Key and Bill English,
money money, moving money, giving some away, obviously borrowing it, selling stuff to get it, paying people off (redundancy :shifty:), etc...


1) Get rid of money in NZ
2) Gets around the need to tweak taxation/financial policies etc...
3) Buy everyones mortgages/land that aren't NZ owned. (100% ownership)
4) Mark up a smart rosta for "careeer progression" in NZ.
5) Invite businesses from around the world to have their base of operations in NZ for a flat rate 1% of their turnover (our workforce is free... think about it. (using people from 4) on work experience :)).
6) Ignore those who don't want to work (financial system or not, accept that some won't work... let's not be naive or petty about it, "he's not working so i won't" :rofl:)
7) Pay off existing loans owed by NZ owned businesses and govt.

You can see where I'm going with that...

100% locally owned NZ, with cash to burn for fuel, medicine, bulk buy the latest and greatest TV's etc... after all, our workforce is "free" (1% of turnover) (do you think companies would set up in NZ?) :)... Our factories are to be converted to run using alternative power sources as the primary fuel source. 100% (ish) Clean and Green.

All of the best bits of everything. A cutting edge society (no money, drastically less crime rate), producing cutting edge technology (high end becomes competitive, "free" workforce remember), no need for businesses to hunt for finance to pay for escalating wage costs (because there won't be any)...

blah blah blah blah... A Financial and a Social policy with 1 single idea and a few tweaks... Or someone elses version of similar.

Education, Health, etc... second to none on the globe.

[Brian d marge]

The MOST disappointing thing about this budget is Motorcyclists haven't taken their shotgun out of the cupboard and set up barricades of burning tyres around Parliament.

The Government is claiming the the deficit has been offset by gains made by - come on you can do it - ACC.

It was broke 2 years ago.

They raised motorcycle rego levies because ACC was broke.

As I said at the time, it isn't broke, its fund managers are geniuses who turn their surplus into industry sustaining investment for many NZ companies.

In a country with balls, MAG and BRONZ would be howling for Nick Smith's resignation because he lied. Hell, individual bikers would be openly harassing him. He stood up in front of 9500 bikers and lied. In a lot of countries that's a political death sentence. He stood in front of a variety of media organisations and formats and lied. We knew that. No one else did. No one else cared. The Unions didn't care, the media dismissed us as a bunch of greasy blue-collar herberts, and the Government went on a divide and conquer mission that succeeded beautifully the moment our "representatives" accepted Government coin to come up with a "solution" for the motorcycling "problem".

The only "problem" is the inability of any organisation to gain any traction against a Government intent on turning NZ into a bi-cultural nightmare country with two administrations running people's lives based on race and an intense, burning need to divest itself of any public property or investment opportunities that will benefit voters directly in return for license payments from a foreign owned corporations that are a fraction of the potential earnings a NZ owned Corporation could make.

Taranaki has some of the best light, sweet crude oil in the world. Diesel is going to become increasingly important as a fuel source, as is the lower refining costs associated with this quality of oil. We don't own those oil fields. We sold them. We get a license fee from a company who fills a giant tanker that doesn't berth anywhere in NZ and sods off with an energy source that made country's like Norway incredibly rich and gave its citizens a standard of living that is unmatched. In a country perched on the edge of cliffs, mountains, The North Sea and the Arctic Circle.

Kiwis are mad.


I'm standing, bedraggled , holding my placard ( votes for wimmin ) or was it the right to wear a short dress one one I cant remember now

Ive bought my spinning machine , have some jesus boots and ready to do .....................

Nothing ( as a good keen bloke should)

oh I may grumble a bit , or vent my frustrations to that nice man on the radio , but nothing shall I do and nothing shall be done


Stephen

Actually , nothing IS what I am going to do ,,, For 10 years NZ government has received , not one drop of my money ..... ( all transactions were to owner operators and were in cash , except one which was paid in cash but to a largish company , who I think may be owner operated but,,,,, )


Oh and here in the United States of New Zealand, organization is spelt with a "z" ( your spell check should have picked that up.....

[trustme]

1/ We get rid of money , cool
3/ Buy everyones mortgages/ land with the money we have not got.
5/ We want 1% of turn over but we don't use money. Oh I get it, we want MUNG BEANS
7/ we pay off business & govt loans with mung beans as well because we don't have money . You do remember # 1 don't you.

you have been smoking Brians hemp skirt again haven't you. Stop it he will get cold.:yes::yes:

[mashman]

1/ We get rid of money , cool
3/ Buy everyones mortgages/ land with the money we have not got.
5/ We want 1% of turn over but we don't use money. Oh I get it, we want MUNG BEANS
7/ we pay off business & govt loans with mung beans as well because we don't have money . You do remember # 1 don't you.

you have been smoking Brians hemp skirt again haven't you. Stop it he will get cold.:yes::yes:

Try using that muscle inside your head, instead of letting it dictate terms :shifty:... that's the problem with "you people", you believe there is a box to be thought outside of :).

3/ We pool ALL of our money into a single pot. There May not be enough, so we may have to borrow.
5/ Fucksake, we, as in NZ, will still need to earn a living in the global financial marketplace... duh!
7/ Similar to 3, but some businesses just won't be needed, so no need to pay the loans etc...

Is that the best you've got? Half arsed criticisms, ZERO imagination and no solutions :killingme, I'd love to say I was surprised, but "you people" are everywhere. As I said before, try USING yer brain for a change instead of relying on auto-pilot.

[Brian d marge]

Dont unsettle the natives ... once they realize they have been sold a pup

they are having enough trouble will Acc , student loans , food prices , oh and the latest one ..the enormous debt , that we apparently cant pay back

mean while , my hemp is growing without a care in the world .....

Stephen

[trustme]

You are talking in riddles
1/ Get rid of money in NZ That is pretty unambiguous
5/ We still need to earn a living in the global financial market . The last time I looked that meant in simple terms dealing in money for commodities

To try a split the foreign trade from the internal economy would be nigh on impossible

If you attempted to promote your argument a little more coherently rather than resorting to abuse of the sceptics you might get somewhere, but of course that is what I have come to expect from ' you people '

Humour me for a second, you appear to be promoting a form of collectivism. People are all different , they all have different wants , needs & aspirations. We as the human race are not communal animals, there are always leaders & followers, some want to be rich , some want to sit in their vegie garden & chill, some want to travel the world & some never want to leave the west coast. How does this system of yours make room for the diversity of wants & needs.???

PS, I have a vegie garden too so take that in a nice way.

[mashman]

To try a split the foreign trade from the internal economy would be nigh on impossible

If you attempted to promote your argument a little more coherently rather than resorting to abuse of the sceptics you might get somewhere, but of course that is what I have come to expect from ' you people '

Again, use your own brain, don't trust mine (i don't, i see no reason why you should :)).

The problem with "you people" (if you take that as me being abusive, that's your problem... not mine :yes:), is that you refuse to work things out for yourself.

For instance:


To try a split the foreign trade from the internal economy would be nigh on impossible

Is that the way you see it? My brain tells me that there will be no need for such a thing as an internal "financial" economy. Split accomplished.

[Brett]

The mind boggles. Still $380M borrowed each week increasing our deficit. That is $19B. If someone was spending a large amount more than they earned every week people would tell them to pull their head in and be financially responsible. (And many would blame them for the financial crisis in a way). YET...we carry on the charge of the light brigade like a bunch of fuckin' chumps. It is not like we are even investing that $380M in something that will ultimately provide us with a productive outcome such as tech R&D, new infrastructure etc. A large portion of it goes into the bloody big black hole that is social welfare, rediculous treaty settlements etc. (and by elections...Hone you cock.)

Even rats bail from a sinking ship eventually.

[trustme]

Is that the way you see it? My brain tells me that there will be no need for such a thing as an internal "financial" economy. Split accomplished.

Sorry ' me people ' again. You seem to be promoting a type of internal barter system. We work at something & in return the gummint or 'them' gives us something in return. Is the something we get, something of our choice, or 'theirs' ? Who decides how much of something we get? Do we get more of something the harder we work ?. Can we save up our somethings & trade them for something else or must somethings be used when supplied.? After all someone else might have something that I want more than my something.

I like this getting rid of money for something, soooo much simpler.:shutup::shutup::shutup::shutup:

[mashman]

Sorry ' me people ' again. You seem to be promoting a type of internal barter system. We work at something & in return the gummint or 'them' gives us something in return. Is the something we get, something of our choice, or 'theirs' ? Who decides how much of something we get? Do we get more of something the harder we work ?. Can we save up our somethings & trade them for something else or must somethings be used when supplied.? After all someone else might have something that I want more than my something.

I like this getting rid of money for something, soooo much simpler.

back again eh :rofl:... I just want to set 1 thing straight, for the record :). This is my perspective, not the perspective of any "collective" or "organisation" that currently promotes similar "ideals"... my "wanting" brain in action (what's your excuse "you people")... to that end...

There may be no need for a govt, not as we currently view it anyway. Although some "governing" body will be required to look after the interests of the country, both globally and internally.

No barter system. If something needs doing, someone just does it (think logistics department for recource management)... things WILL be planned and built/repaired/made to last, to exceptionally high standards and quality (no point in doing it otherwise).

Work. We work or the whole thing doesn't work (same as we do already, but without financial rewards :shit). It may well be that those who don't want to go on and study would be obliged (stolen from a recent govt getting the "sick" back into work) to choose some "community" based work i.e. do a bin run, maintain the drains etc... the incentive being more personal time than everyone else, maybe just working 2 - 3 hours per day, as opposed to "skilled" trades that may need to work 5 hours per day, I'm sure the logistics department would have a clearer idea of what is required.

As for greed, need, excess, want desire etc... that whole kettle of fish revolves around an education policy and how we "breed" the next generation. Educated in terms of "social responsibility" (as wanky as it sounds, it's what we currently do, just really really badly). Included in that education will be things like, sharing. Wanna go fishing for the weekend, go talk to the logistics department, see what boats are going out and if there's any room on them. Wanna go hunting, talk to logistics, see what's available. Want that smart wanky boat/yacht/lodge/bach etc... for the weekend, go talk to logistics. Everyone gets a shit at everything, as long as it's available. You don't need to own your own boat, especially when it sits there for 26 weeks of the year and someone else already has one... I'm sure you see where I'm going with that.

Gawd this is much easier to discuss than it is to type... at least you get "instant" clarification where things get all me shitty explanatory ambiguous... "Your people" would probably have different/better/smarter ways of running things within that sort of economy.

The idea really is, if someone needs something done, talk to logistics, then it gets done. No need for skill trade etc... by all means provide a few beers with a mate if you're taking some of his personal time (do you really give your mates beer in trade :blink:, or as a gesture)... courtesy and appreciation does not have to stop.

It'd make budget decisions a little easier.

[Mully]

1) Get rid of money in NZ

Honestly, you ignore one very salient point with this every time:

How am I supposed to know I'm better than my neighbours if I don't have more money/stuff??

[mashman]

Honestly, you ignore one very salient point with this every time:

How am I supposed to know I'm better than my neighbours if I don't have more money/stuff??

I just know I am :), I don't need to prove it and that "prove it" part in itself makes me better than "you people"... everything else is just cream and reaffirmation

[trustme]

back again eh :rofl:... I just want to set 1 thing straight, for the record :). This is my perspective, not the perspective of any "collective" or "organisation" that currently promotes similar "ideals"... my "wanting" brain in action (what's your excuse "you people")... to that end...

There may be no need for a govt, not as we currently view it anyway. Although some "governing" body will be required to look after the interests of the country, both globally and internally.

No barter system. If something needs doing, someone just does it (think logistics department for recource management)... things WILL be planned and built/repaired/made to last, to exceptionally high standards and quality (no point in doing it otherwise).

Work. We work or the whole thing doesn't work (same as we do already, but without financial rewards :shit). It may well be that those who don't want to go on and study would be obliged (stolen from a recent govt getting the "sick" back into work) to choose some "community" based work i.e. do a bin run, maintain the drains etc... the incentive being more personal time than everyone else, maybe just working 2 - 3 hours per day, as opposed to "skilled" trades that may need to work 5 hours per day, I'm sure the logistics department would have a clearer idea of what is required.

As for greed, need, excess, want desire etc... that whole kettle of fish revolves around an education policy and how we "breed" the next generation. Educated in terms of "social responsibility" (as wanky as it sounds, it's what we currently do, just really really badly). Included in that education will be things like, sharing. Wanna go fishing for the weekend, go talk to the logistics department, see what boats are going out and if there's any room on them. Wanna go hunting, talk to logistics, see what's available. Want that smart wanky boat/yacht/lodge/bach etc... for the weekend, go talk to logistics. Everyone gets a shit at everything, as long as it's available. You don't need to own your own boat, especially when it sits there for 26 weeks of the year and someone else already has one... I'm sure you see where I'm going with that.

Gawd this is much easier to discuss than it is to type... at least you get "instant" clarification where things get all me shitty explanatory ambiguous... "Your people" would probably have different/better/smarter ways of running things within that sort of economy.

The idea really is, if someone needs something done, talk to logistics, then it gets done. No need for skill trade etc... by all means provide a few beers with a mate if you're taking some of his personal time (do you really give your mates beer in trade :blink:, or as a gesture)... courtesy and appreciation does not have to stop.

It'd make budget decisions a little easier.

I get it but I don't buy it. Human nature will not change with education.No matter how much you tell kids to share they still fight. If education was the key we could educate everyone to be rocket scientists, truth is some will never be rocket scientists as long as their arse points down, others will be rocket scientists or whatever they chose to succeed at , with or without education .Breeding won't change the nature of the beast. The idea is noble but doomed by human nature, wish it was otherwise.:drinknsin:drinknsin

[mashman]

I get it but I don't buy it. Human nature will not change with education.No matter how much you tell kids to share they still fight. If education was the key we could educate everyone to be rocket scientists, truth is some will never be rocket scientists as long as their arse points down, others will be rocket scientists or whatever they chose to succeed at , with or without education .Breeding won't change the nature of the beast. The idea is noble but doomed by human nature, wish it was otherwise.


I did had a largish spiel written out that disagreed with your assessment of what human nature is. But thought, fuck it, you've got a brain, it just works within the confines of todays society... I decided not to post it. Your post is utter tripe (apart from the fact that you get it)...

"You people" have no concept of what any given individual is capable of, you lump individuals into manageable categories without even considering why a particular individual has chosen that way of life... be it bludger, politician, engineer, doctor etc... But that's fine with me. I understand why. You read it in a book or heard it from your lecturers or see it in your politicians and see it on TV etc...

Education is everything. You will need an new education system to cater for the new way of life. When do kids become money aware? and why do they become money aware? What does money do to a society? Do you really think everyone wants to live like this? You underestimate people... and just because they don't want to be rocket scientists, or indeed have the mental faculty to achieve it,,, they must be useless... I dunno, "you people".

Until you change your view on human nature, none of what I post will make sense. But you are wrong :rofl:

[Brian d marge]

Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains

famous dead guy said that....

Famous dead guy also said "The heart of the idea of the social contract may be stated simply: Each of us places his person and authority under the supreme direction of the general will, and the group receives each individual as an indivisible part of the whole..."

another dead guy had a thought that went like .......Ostendo primo conditionem hominum extra societatem civilem (quam conditionem appellare liceat statum naturae) aliam non esse quam bellum omnium contra omnes; atque in eo bello jus esse omnibus in omnia.

Translated , goes like this .......It was war on the terraces.. war on the terraces.....In such condition, there is no place for industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving, and removing, such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.


Never played for West Ham either of em ..... Smart buggers them ...

Stephen

[oneofsix]

At least someones super is safe from the budget cuts, no prizes for guessing who's though

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4997964/KiwiSaver-cuts-ignore-MPs-super

Good thinking these National Politicians, we should invest and cut spending so lets cut the amount we invest through Kiwisaver and call it a cut in spending. :facepalm:

[mashman]

At least someones super is safe from the budget cuts, no prizes for guessing who's though

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4997964/KiwiSaver-cuts-ignore-MPs-super

Good thinking these National Politicians, we should invest and cut spending so lets cut the amount we invest through Kiwisaver and call it a cut in spending. :facepalm:

:killingme why am I not surprised... so "they" represent "us", but the country (the flag not the people :blink:) treats "them" as more valuable members of society than "us", even though "they" will have a shorter career than most of "us". Sounds fair :blink:

[superman]

Well Mr. Key says that growth in NZ wages will out do inflation unlike under the previous 9 years of Labour government. Sceptical? Very. :yes:

[jaffaonajappa]

:killingme why am I not surprised... so "they" represent "us", but the country (the flag not the people :blink:) treats "them" as more valuable members of society than "us", even though "they" will have a shorter career than most of "us". Sounds fair :blink:

The changes dont affect those on the older style Super schemes. Seems kinda fair to me. Im on an older style super scheme - put up with years of crap sompared to the newer generation just so I can see this super. New fellas are on the new scheme. Older ones can stay on their old scheme (which they started before the new laws were made.).

Anyways - why does everyone always blame a governement for their financial predicament. Kiwis have been a social welfare state for generations now - its starting to cripple us. Perhaps if we stopped asking what the government can do to make us rich, and spend more time figuring out how to (legally) improve our own situations - we might get somewhere?

Dont believe this works? Have a look at the Asian countries over the last 50 year period. I still remember visiting Singapore - the kiwi dollar was heeeeps compared to their rice paper. We were the rich whities. Now....the roles are reversed - so we have this anti-asian attitude in our country.

Less Moaning, more working.
someone pass me that whip.

[puddytat]

Well there is a bit of a diferance between public & private debt & no doubt about it our private debt is way up there with the worst of them.
Personally I see it that National has no real intention of reducing public debt...why fuck with kiwisaver when it is only going to cut a bit over a weeks debt from our continued 350 mill a week borrowing....:blink:
The Nats are only paying lip service to the debt problem, because the longer it continues the easier it will be to justify selling our national assets, or allowing more big overseas business an easier ride in mining our sensitive areas for 4/5ths of fuck all.
The IMF & World Bank must be wringing their hands with glee & so are the Capitalist pigs as they watch the worlds resources fall inevitably into their hands.
Dont believe me? Portugal will be bailed out to the tune of 170billion on the proviso that they sell PUBLIC ASSETS:angry:
Mark my words,we're being set up to fail & I prophesize that if the Nats get in, the silverware will be sold off in the next Parliamentary term

Watched a great vid called Collapse the other day.....Michael Rupperts monologue explains how the lies & political propaganda fed to Americans by big business will eventually lead to human extinction:shutup:Due to the inexorable connection between energy depletion & the collapse of the economic system that supports the entire industrial world.
I watched shortly there after, David Attenborough who ,mild mannered & hugely respected as he is.....said the same thing.:gob:
Money is not going to solve the real problems facing our species.

[racefactory]

Well there is a bit of a diferance between public & private debt & no doubt about it our private debt is way up there with the worst of them.
Personally I see it that National has no real intention of reducing public debt...why fuck with kiwisaver when it is only going to cut a bit over a weeks debt from our continued 350 mill a week borrowing....:blink:
The Nats are only paying lip service to the debt problem, because the longer it continues the easier it will be to justify selling our national assets, or allowing more big overseas business an easier ride in mining our sensitive areas for 4/5ths of fuck all.
The IMF & World Bank must be wringing their hands with glee & so are the Capitalist pigs as they watch the worlds resources fall inevitably into their hands.
Dont believe me? Portugal will be bailed out to the tune of 170billion on the proviso that they sell PUBLIC ASSETS:angry:
Mark my words,we're being set up to fail & I prophesize that if the Nats get in, the silverware will be sold off in the next Parliamentary term

Watched a great vid called Collapse the other day.....Michael Rupperts monologue explains how the lies & political propaganda fed to Americans by big business will eventually lead to human extinction:shutup:Due to the inexorable connection between energy depletion & the collapse of the economic system that supports the entire industrial world.
I watched shortly there after, David Attenborough who ,mild mannered & hugely respected as he is.....said the same thing.:gob:
Money is not going to solve the real problems facing our species.

Thanks for that I'm just watching it now. Fucking mind blowing.

Michael Rupperts, David Attenborough, Colin Campbell and Max Keiser- these people need to be the ones running this planet. Weren't a significant population of the Greek people actually urging Max Keiser for president after his translated appearance on AlJazeera? I hope these people can educate the masses as much as possible. True prophets. I agree, it is not money that will solve the real problems.

[short-circuit]

Watched a great vid called Collapse the other day.....Michael Rupperts monologue explains how the lies & political propaganda fed to Americans by big business will eventually lead to human extinction:shutup:Due to the inexorable connection between energy depletion & the collapse of the economic system that supports the entire industrial world.
I watched shortly there after, David Attenborough who ,mild mannered & hugely respected as he is.....said the same thing.:gob:
Money is not going to solve the real problems facing our species.

You might be interested to read a book called The Selfish Capitalist by Oliver James - highly recommend it. I had this forum in mind as I read about the predominant political views and values (and the implications) in highly materialistic societies. NZ is pretty extreme by international standards - there's no two ways about it.

James' research indicates that NZ rates second highest in the world in terms of levels of emotional distress (after the U.S). The direct links he makes between this and the political and economic ideology that's been followed here since 1984 seem pretty compelling.

[mashman]

The changes dont affect those on the older style Super schemes. Seems kinda fair to me. Im on an older style super scheme - put up with years of crap sompared to the newer generation just so I can see this super. New fellas are on the new scheme. Older ones can stay on their old scheme (which they started before the new laws were made.).

Anyways - why does everyone always blame a governement for their financial predicament. Kiwis have been a social welfare state for generations now - its starting to cripple us. Perhaps if we stopped asking what the government can do to make us rich, and spend more time figuring out how to (legally) improve our own situations - we might get somewhere?

Dont believe this works? Have a look at the Asian countries over the last 50 year period. I still remember visiting Singapore - the kiwi dollar was heeeeps compared to their rice paper. We were the rich whities. Now....the roles are reversed - so we have this anti-asian attitude in our country.

Less Moaning, more working.
someone pass me that whip.

I dunno... "you people" believe that money is the answer to everything... which it blatantly isn't. I roar with laughter when they talk about extending the pensionable age... oh, but you have to because no "scheme" we have ever tried has kept up with the aging population :facepalm:. Does that not tell you something?

[jaffaonajappa]

I dunno... "you people" believe that money is the answer to everything... which it blatantly isn't. I roar with laughter when they talk about extending the pensionable age... oh, but you have to because no "scheme" we have ever tried has kept up with the aging population :facepalm:. Does that not tell you something?

Hmmm, I certainly agree with some of that. Money is not the answer to everything.
The countries spend-spend-spending habits is hurting tho.

The populations getting older? Ha - the last 20 or so governments have been told this problem was coming up - no one started anything early enough. Kudos to Kiwisaver tho - perhaps in 50 years time we may have our shyte sorted.

[mashman]

Hmmm, I certainly agree with some of that. Money is not the answer to everything.
The countries spend-spend-spending habits is hurting tho.

The populations getting older? Ha - the last 20 or so governments have been told this problem was coming up - no one started anything early enough. Kudos to Kiwisaver tho - perhaps in 50 years time we may have our shyte sorted.

tis why we give the govt our money, to spend spend spend... I remember hearing the same thing back in the mid 80's from the UK economists that were most likely laughed at... pensions to fail... so they had a property boom instead... sounds like vaguely familiar story :)...

Gawd I hope it ain't 50 years. If living is this hard at the moment, for a vast majority of the population I'd venture, then it's gonna be a nightmare in 50 years... probably much earlier than that.

What we need is a Resolution :shifty:

[racefactory]

What we need is insurrection.

[puddytat]

What we need is a Resolution :shifty:


What we need is insurrection.

And a Inquisition....

[mashman]

And a Inquisition....

I'd settle for an amnesty :)

[reggie1198]

Dear John Key and Bill English,

Please find below our suggestion for fixing New Zealand's economy…..

Instead of giving billions of dollars to the Banks, Iwi's and others to be squandered on unearned bonuses and extravagant oveseas trips, use the following plan.

You can call it the Patriotic Retirement Plan:

There are about 1 million people over 50 in the work force.
Pay them $1 million each severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

1) They MUST retire. One million job openings = unemployment fixed ....
2) They MUST buy a new car. One million cars ordered = motor industry fixed.
3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage and the banks must use the money for cheap new loans for new home buyers = housing supply and affordability fixed.
4) They MUST buy at least $100 of alcohol a week = your money back in duty/tax etc.
5) The MUST buy some shares in the strategic NZ companies you propose flogging off, and hold them for at least 10 years = US owning OUR remaining assets and more money kept in NZ instead of sent overseas. Note that of our biggest 20 companies in 1988 ALL are now owned overseas or controlled or owned by Graeme Hart, except for Fisher & Paykel; and from just Telecom and the BNZ alone (and not even including the other 17 companies) $16 billion of dividends has gone to their overseas owners.
6) They MUST pay for their grandchildren to go to University = no further need for student loans and more doctors and nurses.
7) Instead of stuffing around with the carbon emissions trading scheme that makes us pay for the major polluters, tell the greedy bastards to reduce their pollution emissions by 75% within 5 years or they'll be shut down = more jobs for inventive NZ manufacturers providing polution solutions and more tourists to a really cleaner, greener NZ.
8) If you need more money, have all MP's pay back their falsely claimed expenses and second home allowances.

And while we are at it, lets address the needs of the Elderly and Criminals

Let's put the pensioners in jail and the criminals in a nursing home.

This way the pensioners would have access to showers, hobbies and walks.
They'd receive unlimited free prescriptions, dental and medical treatment, wheel chairs etc and they'd receive money instead of paying it out.
They would have constant video monitoring, so they could be helped instantly, if they fell, or needed assistance.
Bedding would be washed twice a week, and all clothing would be ironed and returned to them.
They would be checked every 20 minutes and be provided with all meals and snacks.
They would have family visits in a suite built for that purpose.
They would have access to a library, weight room, spiritual counselling, pool and education courses.
Simple clothing, shoes, slippers, PJ's and legal aid would be free, on request.
Private, secure rooms for all, with an exercise outdoor yard, with gardens.
Each pensioner could have a computer, tv, radio and daily phone calls.
There would be a board of directors to hear complaints, and the caregivers would have a code of conduct that would be strictly adhered to.

The criminals would get cold food, be left all alone and unsupervised, with lights off at 8pm and showers once a week.

While living in a tiny room and paying $800.00 per week with no hope of ever getting out.

Sounds great on paper, but only one problem I can see, where will N.Z get the one trillion dollars needed for this scheme to begin with......

[reggie1198]

Dear John Key and Bill English,

Please find below our suggestion for fixing New Zealand's economy…..

Instead of giving billions of dollars to the Banks, Iwi's and others to be squandered on unearned bonuses and extravagant oveseas trips, use the following plan.

You can call it the Patriotic Retirement Plan:

There are about 1 million people over 50 in the work force.
Pay them $1 million each severance for early retirement with the following stipulations:

1) They MUST retire. One million job openings = unemployment fixed ....
2) They MUST buy a new car. One million cars ordered = motor industry fixed.
3) They MUST either buy a house or pay off their mortgage and the banks must use the money for cheap new loans for new home buyers = housing supply and affordability fixed.
4) They MUST buy at least $100 of alcohol a week = your money back in duty/tax etc.
5) The MUST buy some shares in the strategic NZ companies you propose flogging off, and hold them for at least 10 years = US owning OUR remaining assets and more money kept in NZ instead of sent overseas. Note that of our biggest 20 companies in 1988 ALL are now owned overseas or controlled or owned by Graeme Hart, except for Fisher & Paykel; and from just Telecom and the BNZ alone (and not even including the other 17 companies) $16 billion of dividends has gone to their overseas owners.
6) They MUST pay for their grandchildren to go to University = no further need for student loans and more doctors and nurses.
7) Instead of stuffing around with the carbon emissions trading scheme that makes us pay for the major polluters, tell the greedy bastards to reduce their pollution emissions by 75% within 5 years or they'll be shut down = more jobs for inventive NZ manufacturers providing polution solutions and more tourists to a really cleaner, greener NZ.
8) If you need more money, have all MP's pay back their falsely claimed expenses and second home allowances.

Sounds great on paper, but only one problem I can see, where will N.Z get the one trillion dollars needed for this scheme to begin with......

[jaffaonajappa]

Sounds great on paper, but only one problem I can see, where will N.Z get the one trillion dollars needed for this scheme to begin with......

Tax the hell out of Petrol.

[Mully]

And a Inquisition....

I wasn't expecting that.

[superman]

I'm glad to hear rumours of them finally sorting the student allowance.

All these students who have parents with less that $60,000 TAXABLE income per year get an allowance with their student loan. Anywhere from $60 to $200 per week that doesn't have to be paid back. But the catch is you can't earn over a certain amount per week to get it, so they get to be lazy and I get to work 20 hours a week to try and get the same amount they get from the government.

Of course anyone who owns a business doesn't earn over $60,000 taxed due to lovely write-offs so all sorts get it when it should just be there for those who come from poor backgrounds that wish to study.

Hopefully they make some good changes to that.

[sil3nt]

I was never able to get a student allowance when i first studied. I lived at home so it wasn't a big issue. Went back to study when i was 24 as i was eligible for the allowance as what your parents earn is not taken into account.

I get $230 and can earn $200 on top of that (before tax) before they start taking money off my allowance.

I end up with about the same amount as i did working fulltime minimum wage.

[shrub]

As expected Our Masters will sell stakes in Genesis Energy, Meridian, Mighty River Power and olid Energy.

Really, really, REALLY stupid and shortsighted to sell of shares in profitable and strategically important businesses that will increase in value significantly over the next few years. I never had a lot of confidence in English as a finance minister, but WTF? Does the guy have no understanding of commerce and business? How about reversing the tax cuts that it turns out we couldn't afford? Personally I would lose a bit if that happened, but I'm more interested in the future financial viability of NZ than whether I have an extra few bucks today.

[superman]

What I've seen so far seems quite sensible, I will have a more thorough look through the proposals later this evening.

[shrub]

What I've seen so far seems quite sensible, I will have a more thorough look through the proposals later this evening.

I agree with the changes to the student loan and working for families, but what is sensible about selling profitable and strategically valuable assets? My problem is I look at things from a business angle, and it just does not make good business sense to do that. As for the changes to Kiwisaver - when will they stop tinkering? Drop the contribution rates, then increase them and cut the Govt contribution. Kiwisaver was one of the best things Cullen did and it's probably the only strategy I have seen from either government that has the slightest chance of helping us catch the Aussies.

What people forget is that one of the reasons Australia is so rich compared to us is because they save money in the Australian Superannuation scheme - in fact $1.28 trillion. Australians now have more money invested in managed funds per capita than any other economy. A big chunk of that $1.28 trillion is invested in NZ which is why whenever we buy groceries, do our banking etc a chunk of our hard earned buggers off to Aussie. And another big chunk of that money is invested in Australia which means an Aussie business has access to capital to grow, develop and make more money etc.

If the idiots in Wellington do anything to Kiwisaver it should be to increase contribution rates by all three parties. They can then issue bonds that can be purchased by mum and dad investors via the Kiwisaver fund managers which means they're borrowing money from us and we keep our assets.

[Indiana_Jones]

"Budget gives $1.6b to infrastructure over four years"

Cha-ching lol

-Indy

[aprilia_RS250]

If the idiots in Wellington do anything to Kiwisaver it should be to increase contribution rates by all three parties. They can then issue bonds that can be purchased by mum and dad investors via the Kiwisaver fund managers which means they're borrowing money from us and we keep our assets.

I don't think you did your math there...

Current scheme everyone pretty much contributes 2% as that's the maximum matching rate by employers, so say you're earning 60k you get $1047 MTC, 2% * 60k =1.2k as employer contributions and also another 1.2k from your wages. Total you have put in for that year = 3447.

Under new scheme everyone will contribute 3% as the employer will match that. So for 60k you get 521 MTC, and 2*0.03*60k= 3600. Total 4121.


Therefore total contributions will be going up.

[Mully]

As expected Our Masters will sell stakes in Genesis Energy, Meridian, Mighty River Power and olid Energy.

And I hope private investors get first whack - I'm all over that.

For my own gain - I'm not a fan of selling profitable companies for short-term gain. Unless I can buy a share.... Fucking, hello!!!


I don't think you did your math there...

Therefore total contributions will be going up.

You shut up - how dare you interupt a KB rant. What's the world coming to, etc [/sarcasm]

[Ocean1]

Of course anyone who owns a business doesn't earn over $60,000 taxed due to lovely write-offs

I own a business, but I'm obviously doing it wrong. Care to explain how that write-off shit works?

[Toaster]

What really fingers my prostate is the fact these MP's keep accepting payrises year on year and yet tell the rest of us to tighten our belts and suck it up.

[jazfender]

So I was watching 3 news on all this budget malarky tonight and they were trying to paint a picture of people in hardship getting hit harder by this budget.

I'm trying to get my head around this but from what I saw, the cuts that affect most people amount to JACK SHIT.

They had this giant stamp of [-$2.55] per week across the story of some fat bitch on $60k (that'd be nice) and tried to seriously say that she was being hard done by.

Minus two dollars and fifty five cents a week. Oh fucking call the mayor! The only people that would affect are well below the poverty line, not chewing $60k.

Shit, what is she going to do without that extra snickers bar a week?

[Mully]

What really fingers my prostate

Wait, so is that a good thing or a bad thing??

[Winston001]

i wasn't expecting that.

nobody expects the spanish inquisition!!!!

[rainman]

Kiwis are mad.

Nah. Just stupid.


...continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

First noble truth, innit?


I still remember visiting Singapore - the kiwi dollar was heeeeps compared to their rice paper. We were the rich whities. Now....the roles are reversed - so we have this anti-asian attitude in our country.

Seriously, you want to emulate Singapore?


As expected Our Masters will sell stakes in Genesis Energy, Meridian, Mighty River Power and olid Energy.

Really, really, REALLY stupid and shortsighted to sell of shares in profitable and strategically important businesses that will increase in value significantly over the next few years. I never had a lot of confidence in English as a finance minister, but WTF? Does the guy have no understanding of commerce and business?

Um, that would be a NO. He's a ferkin eejit.

[Ender EnZed]

I'm glad to hear rumours of them finally sorting the student allowance.

Nothing has changed in this budget though has it? And, out of curiousity, what do you propose happen to it? Not what's wrong with it at the moment, but what you would like it to be.

[Winston001]

As expected Our Masters will sell stakes in Genesis Energy, Meridian, Mighty River Power and olid Energy.

Really, really, REALLY stupid and shortsighted to sell of shares in profitable and strategically important businesses that will increase in value significantly over the next few years.

I never had a lot of confidence in English as a finance minister, but WTF? Does the guy have no understanding of commerce and business?

I'm not keen on selling 49% of these companies but recently I needed to do the same thing. Reality can be hard.

As for Bill English, he's an astute guy from a farming background which makes him grounded and practical. I should add that Michael Cullen was also a good Minister of Finance particularly considering he was a history professor before entering parliament. I suspect both men share similar economic views even if they can never say that.




If the idiots in Wellington do anything to Kiwisaver it should be to increase contribution rates by all three parties. They can then issue bonds that can be purchased by mum and dad investors via the Kiwisaver fund managers which means they're borrowing money from us and we keep our assets.

Agreed. A national compulsory superannuation scheme is a no-brainer. Thats the problem with Kiwisaver - its optional.

But I don't see why the taxpayer should subsidise it. No govt contributions are necessary.

[Fatt Max]

Muzz the Prez is kind of catchy....:rockon:

+1 to that bruvvas

[rainman]

I'm not keen on selling 49% of these companies but recently I needed to do the same thing. Reality can be hard.

We don't NEED to sell the power companies. There are plenty of alternatives.

[Brian d marge]

nobody expects the spanish inquisition!!!!

sorry couldnt resist .......

<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/uprjmoSMJ-o" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Stephen

[rainman]

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth is forecast to reach 4% next year and the economy is forecast to create 170,000 new jobs over the next four years.
...
The economic forecasts envisage an acceleration in growth to levels last seen in the first half of past decade.


I think we should cut the dope subsidy for Treasury...

[superman]

I own a business, but I'm obviously doing it wrong. Care to explain how that write-off shit works?

Lol I'm sure you know exactly how it works :yes:, it's the same way farmers pay $1500 tax per year. Clever accounting. I'm not against claiming off for businesses, I'm against these rich little shits that get money for free they don't have to pay back even though their parents are well off. It takes no account for wealth just straight taxable income which is definitely a flawed system.

[superman]

Nothing has changed in this budget though has it? And, out of curiousity, what do you propose happen to it? Not what's wrong with it at the moment, but what you would like it to be.

I don't know... some how fix it that the people I went to school with that were paying 12k a year in school fees don't get $150 of free money every week!

[Winston001]

I don't know... some how fix it that the people I went to school with that were paying 12k a year in school fees don't get $150 of free money every week!

To be honest this sort of clever structuring of family incomes annoys me too - and I've probably helped a few as a side-effect of succession planning. Tax avoidance though is a stupid reason to make life complicated.

But overall not many people can do this out of the 47,000 students in NZ. Yes it happens but not much.

[Maha]

John Key is a man of two faces...
Get him into a one on one interview and hes all calm an d collect...
Yesterday, he couldn't even look Goff in the eye went he was his rant.
Calling the labour party 'Hobbit haters/muppets and a Ring Binder Party. (National being a iPOD Party):facepalm:
Came across as twat really...he was very close to being a Downs kid im sure.

[superman]

To be honest this sort of clever structuring of family incomes annoys me too - and I've probably helped a few as a side-effect of succession planning. Tax avoidance though is a stupid reason to make life complicated.

But overall not many people can do this out of the 47,000 students in NZ. Yes it happens but not much.

Then there are the students who are "estranged" and not in contact with their father. Therefore only get assistance living with their mother and then they get an allowance.

Because my parents earn over the threshold study link expects my parents to directly give me the $4500 a year they give to people on the allowance. I WISH! I have to loan on top of my course costs $4500 a year instead, so I end up with twice the loan coming out of uni, because I got to grow up in a house where my parents refused to have kids until they got to an age where they could afford to have us. Fuck me for having a dad who's just a few years away from retirement age, would have obviously been better to been born to younger parents not as far through their career as then the government just loves to hand out money.

Pisses me off just as much that the 1/16th Maori kids from my school got free laptops going to university because they are 1/16th Maori, not how well off they are.

[shrub]

I'm not keen on selling 49% of these companies but recently I needed to do the same thing. Reality can be hard.

As for Bill English, he's an astute guy from a farming background which makes him grounded and practical. I should add that Michael Cullen was also a good Minister of Finance particularly considering he was a history professor before entering parliament. I suspect both men share similar economic views even if they can never say that.

Agreed. A national compulsory superannuation scheme is a no-brainer. Thats the problem with Kiwisaver - its optional.

But I don't see why the taxpayer should subsidise it. No govt contributions are necessary.

I'm not sure that coming from a Southland farming background makes one especially grounded and practical. My biggest complaint about this budget, the last one, the one before that and damn near every budget I can remember is that the focus is entirely on cutting expenditure here to spend money there and on treasury forecasts of growth. Treasury have got it wrong far too often to base anything on their projections, and this idea we'll be back in the black by 2014 is as about as likely as Samoa winning the RWC.

And 170,000 jobs? Where the hell are they coming from? Rebuilding ChCh is one place, but how does that work for the rest of NZ, and even though I live here I can't see myself getting any more work through the rebuilding process.

I wish for once we had a government that looked for ways for NZ to earn more as a solution to our economic woes rather than cutting taxes with one hand and services with the other - and cutting bureaucracy will do just that. Why can't the government look at opportunities to support innovation and technology? We have businesses that are growing like crazy in the country, and they're almost entirely high-tech businesses, so why not support R&D more? Why not look at adding value to our exports instead of exporting raw materials for others to add value to?\

When I want to improve my financial situation I don't cut my spending, I find ways to make myself more valuable to an employer, and it works.

[oneofsix]

I find ways to make myself more valuable to an employer, and it works.

yep John has got that sorted for you - lower wagers. As long as he can keep the NZ employee's wages less than Aussie then, according to his stated logic, the NZ employee is more valuable to the Aussie employer. :facepalm:

[SPman]

Treasury forecasting 4% growth? :facepalm:
What are they imbibing - I want some. I think John boy is snorting the same stuff!

In May 2008,Treasury forecast growth rates for the next three years of 1.5 per cent, 2.3 per cent and 3.2 per cent. Instead, we got -1.1 per cent, -0.4 per cent and -0.1 per cent. :blink:

Privatise some more public assets to reduce the deficit...oh...how convenient? Never mind, you'll have a chance to buy them back as shares....yeah, right...buy back what you've already paid for!

Let's all join this current government, and go back to sleep! :drinkup:

[Oscar]

Treasury forecasting 4% growth? :facepalm:
What are they imbibing - I want some. I think John boy is snorting the same stuff!

In May 2008,Treasury forecast growth rates for the next three years of 1.5 per cent, 2.3 per cent and 3.2 per cent. Instead, we got -1.1 per cent, -0.4 per cent and -0.1 per cent. :blink:

Privatise some more public assets to reduce the deficit...oh...how convenient? Never mind, you'll have a chance to buy them back as shares....yeah, right...buy back what you've already paid for!

Let's all join this current government, and go back to sleep! :drinkup:

Hindsight is easy, isn't it?

Using a forecast issued three months before a worldwide ecomonic melt down is a cheap shot.

As for this crap about buying back what you've already paid for - the country is a net debtor. We only own the bit we've paid for.

There is a tension between hanging on to valuable assets while we're paying $300m a week in interest. If we continued this way, our debt would be downgraded on the international market and we'll be paying more - not just the Govt., but you and me. How would you feel about the Govt. hanging onto these assets as your mortgage rate passed double digits?

[mashman]

Current scheme everyone pretty much contributes 2% as that's the maximum matching rate by employers, so say you're earning 60k you get $1047 MTC, 2% * 60k =1.2k as employer contributions and also another 1.2k from your wages. Total you have put in for that year = 3447.

Is the employer 3% before or after tax? Coz that kind of voids what the employer puts in. On that 60k it'd be $60, whilst the employees pays an extra $600... yippee, new tax.



Nothing has changed in this budget though has it? And, out of curiousity, what do you propose happen to it? Not what's wrong with it at the moment, but what you would like it to be.

I reckon a great leap forwards would have been to put the higher tax band back up again. I'd like to see the "regulations" surrounding tax write-offs tightened :yes: ("you people" take because you can... BUT, once tightened I'd look at personal tax cuts :yes:). I'd also, oh ok, "decriminalise" cannabis to get the tax and tourist $$$ (lots of money))... Then I'd pay off the country's debt. But as you mentioned, nothing has really changed. imho... The govt will waste it on that which doesn't need it. I'd do any manner of with things with that kind of cash and a government department of resources at my fingertips... TPTB lack imagination, not revenue sources. I'll say nothing on the social reprocussions.

But that's just me being unrealistic :blink:

[Clockwork]

Hey!!!!


Why dont they sell our assests off to The Cullen Fund, Government Super, Kiwi Saver Investors and ACC...... that way the Government gets the money the claim they need and the country gets to keep these assets for our future.


Then they could offer massive tax breaks on any corperate incomethat they can demonstrate was earned offshore!

[Oscar]

Hey!!!!


Why dont they sell our assests off to The Cullen Fund, Government Super, Kiwi Saver Investors and ACC...... that way the Government gets the money the claim they need and the country gets to keep these assets for our future.


Then they could offer massive tax breaks on any corperate incomethat they can demonstrate was earned offshore!

Err.. that's pretty much what English said in the budget (apart from the overseas tax break thingo).

[Clockwork]

That so? I didn't watch the budget myself, but I'll be amazed/impressed if these shares aren't offerd to "Ma & Pa" investers then and end up owned by foreign investment funds within 5 years.

[Oakie]

I'm still voting National this year.

[jazfender]

I didn't watch the budget myself, but...

if I had a penny...

[Oscar]

That so? I didn't watch the budget myself, but I'll be amazed/impressed if these shares aren't offerd to "Ma & Pa" investers then and end up owned by foreign investment funds within 5 years.

Um...that's called the free market...are you a communist or summat:devil2:

[Oblivion]

I still reckon that those useless pricks in Parliament deserve alot less money than they can get.

Thats why I think the following;

Prime Minister earns 500k a year. Cut this back to 250k a year.
All other members of Parliament earn 150k a year.

Even with this wage cut, they can still live the life they lead. It just means less binging of properties, and overseas homes.

Destroy all taxpayer credit cards. No more are to be made.

All members of Parliament will have to buy their own cars. No cars supplied as part of their job.

The government will have 5 cars for VIP transport. No more no less.

Members of Parliament will have performance reviews on a 3 month basis. This is where the taxpayer will vote on the performance of this particular member. This will be followed up by a professional performance review assess them as well, to filter out bad ministers.

I think its about time we teach them that they need to be in it for the job instead of the money.

All this I think should save the Government at least 10-20$ million a year.

Anyone agree?

[scracha]

I own a business, but I'm obviously doing it wrong. Care to explain how that write-off shit works?

I wish some employers would wake up and smell the roses. Like many other businesses, I worked like a bastard all year, made a whopping big loss (largely down to sdead beats not paying me) and had to sell MY OWN SHIT to cover wages this year. Still having to pay the tax on the profit I made the year before though....they won't give me a refund against this years loss. Fuck..I must have went overboard on all this free cash "tax writeoffs" thing he keeps talking about. Hopefully the IRD won't pop round and find the depreciated Ferrari and Learjet in the garage.

I'm sick of moaning cunts with 4 or 5 kids whining about their benefit cuts. If they can't grasp the 3 R's, then teach the boys how to put on a condom and the girls how to swallow*.

*the pill

[scracha]

I still reckon that those useless pricks in Parliament deserve alot less money than they can get.

Thats why I think the following;

Prime Minister earns 500k a year. Cut this back to 250k a year.
All other members of Parliament earn 150k a year.


Prime minister gets 50 million a year Can employ who he/she likes. Gets control of everything except the armed forces and the media. Does a fucking good job otherwise we can vote to put a bullet in his/her head after 5 years.

Would save even more money, current flip flop government short sightedness would be fixed and shit would actually happen.

[Oscar]

I still reckon that those useless pricks in Parliament deserve alot less money than they can get.

Thats why I think the following;

Prime Minister earns 500k a year. Cut this back to 250k a year.
All other members of Parliament earn 150k a year.

Even with this wage cut, they can still live the life they lead. It just means less binging of properties, and overseas homes.

Destroy all taxpayer credit cards. No more are to be made.

All members of Parliament will have to buy their own cars. No cars supplied as part of their job.

The government will have 5 cars for VIP transport. No more no less.

Members of Parliament will have performance reviews on a 3 month basis. This is where the taxpayer will vote on the performance of this particular member. This will be followed up by a professional performance review assess them as well, to filter out bad ministers.

I think its about time we teach them that they need to be in it for the job instead of the money.

All this I think should save the Government at least 10-20$ million a year.

Anyone agree?

Nope.

If you think MP's are in it for the money, I suggest that you hang out with one for a ‎couple of days. I don't care what they get paid, it just ain't worth it for the shit they ‎have to put up, see and listen to on a daily basis.‎ National, Labour, ACT Maori or Green, I doubt any of them are earning substanially more than they got in private life.

The PM definitely isn’t in it for the money. He had to put his investments into a blind ‎trust on becoming an MP, so the job is almost certainly costing him money. ‎Notwithstanding this, you may be interested to know that "a substantial part" of Key's ‎salary goes to charity.‎

[Ender EnZed]

Prime Minister earns 500k a year. Cut this back to 250k a year.
All other members of Parliament earn 150k a year.


That's a raise for the back benchers.


The PM definitely isn’t in it for the money. He had to put his investments into a blind ‎trust on becoming an MP, so the job is almost certainly costing him money. ‎Notwithstanding this, you may be interested to know that "a substantial part" of Key's ‎salary goes to charity.‎

Somehow I doubt he'll run short anytime soon though.

[Ocean1]

Lol I'm sure you know exactly how it works :yes:, it's the same way farmers pay $1500 tax per year. Clever accounting.

Short of actually lying I haven't got a clue how it works.

Tell me the basics eh?

[rainman]

I reckon a great leap forwards would have been to put the higher tax band back up again.

The Nats can't reverse the tax cuts, even if they were to sit down and figure out this is the best rational course of action, because they would be voted out in a heartbeat. I don't think they are sufficiently ideology-free to actually conclude this is the best course of action, of course, but either way, they can't do it. So, one must conclude, either they are too stupid to see the obviousness of this, or too protective of their own self-interested arses not to lie to us.


I'm still voting National this year.

Slow learner, huh?


The PM definitely isn’t in it for the money. He had to put his investments into a blind ‎trust on becoming an MP, so the job is almost certainly costing him money. ‎Notwithstanding this, you may be interested to know that "a substantial part" of Key's ‎salary goes to charity.‎

Got any evidence of this, or just trotting out spin lines?

[oneofsix]

The PM definitely isn’t in it for the money. He had to put his investments into a blind ‎trust on becoming an MP, so the job is almost certainly costing him money. ‎Notwithstanding this, you may be interested to know that "a substantial part" of Key's ‎salary goes to charity.‎

Money no not money - power. He has got the money but not enough to give him the power he now craves. not smart enough to get the power via the money, well not enough money. It also gives him a nice pension. Hey if he is a good boy and does what the IMF wants he may even be allowed a hotel maid or two. :sick:

[mashman]

The Nats can't reverse the tax cuts, even if they were to sit down and figure out this is the best rational course of action, because they would be voted out in a heartbeat. I don't think they are sufficiently ideology-free to actually conclude this is the best course of action, of course, but either way, they can't do it. So, one must conclude, either they are too stupid to see the obviousness of this, or too protective of their own self-interested arses not to lie to us.

or being told what to do by a third party :rofl:... most likely

[Winston001]

I wish for once we had a government that looked for ways for NZ to earn more as a solution to our economic woes...

Why can't the government look at opportunities to support innovation and technology? We have businesses that are growing like crazy in the country, and they're almost entirely high-tech businesses, so why not support R&D more?

Why not look at adding value to our exports instead of exporting raw materials for others to add value to?



Snap. I wish for the same. I'm coming to the view that politicians can't do this because voters don't understand or support it. National and ACT have tried in the past, Labour under Lange tried, Muldoon before that, and they all lost voter support. Actually even Norm Kirk tried and got stymied by the Labour caucus.

The problem in essence is that NZ does not exist as a single cultural entity. We have too many divisions in our society and no broad appreciation of our vulnerability as a tiny nation. So we cannot agree on a common purpose - instead we argue in nasty destructive ways while the economic pie goes mouldy.

[Flip]

Just two points; 1, why would you sell a asset that was paying you 17% to pay off a debt that was costing you 6%, sounds like an asset fire sale to your BRT mates to me? and 2, I have still got all my tax cuts, so to all those hard working middle class people who voted National because they thought they would be better off! SUCKERS!:yes:

[Brian d marge]

Just two points; 1, why would you sell a asset that was paying you 17% to pay off a debt that was costing you 6%, sounds like an asset fire sale to your BRT mates to me? and 2, I have still got all my tax cuts, so to all those hard working middle class people who voted National because they thought they would be better off! SUCKERS!:yes:

Because this is how the IMF works,,, opens the country up for investment ( wall street and big business)
See what it did with water ...and rice I think

It will be digging up the forests soon ( AND VERY LITTLE will return to NZ )

been done before and is happening now

Stephen

[Mully]

The Nats can't reverse the tax cuts, even if they were to sit down and figure out this is the best rational course of action, because they would be voted out in a heartbeat.

Funnily enough, I was discussing this with a mate of mine (both of us, apparently, are rich pricks, but that's by the by)..

We both thought that the Gummint should reverse the tax cuts. The problem is, of course, that Phil Goff and his mates (despite screaming for the Nats to reverse them) would them be bitching that there was a broken promise.

It's like the superannuation age - common sense says it needs to be raised - albeit gradually (I'd say 55 or over, it stays 65. People 35-54, moves to 66. People under 35, goes to 67) - but because the Nats have said they wont move it, to alter it would have Phil (I've got nothing, put me out of my misery) Goff screaming.

It's also interesting (almost exactly like the ACC Levy debacle) that Labour refuses to rule out reversing what National have done. I idly wonder if they're all in on a massive game against the populace.

[superman]

Short of actually lying I haven't got a clue how it works.

Tell me the basics eh?

You don't lie. Ok lets say someone is a music teacher/singer performer as their business. Anything at all related to this business can be bought through the business, therefore an outgoing in the business and GST is also written off when buying for a business to my understanding. And as incoming-outgoing = profit/loss you reduce profit and therefore reduce the amount of taxed income.

This is my very crude understanding of the system. But there are certain set percentages by the government on how much you claim back on certain costs, but most importantly asset aquisition is non-taxed and an outgoing. IE buy a nice shiny vehicle for your business, stationary, computers, for a music teacher anything music education or music related at all you can buy GST free and write off on business, such as CDs, speakers, concert tickets. Anything.

In the end you end up with a nice car, nice computer, nice sound system. And your business hasn't made as much money for the year because of the things you bought for your business. So to my understanding the business grows nicely with the profit from the year, and that is not taxed because of course the profit isn't liquid anymore.

[Ender EnZed]

It's like the superannuation age - common sense says it needs to be raised - albeit gradually (I'd say 55 or over, it stays 65. People 35-54, moves to 66. People under 35, goes to 67) - but because the Nats have said they wont move it, to alter it would have Phil (I've got nothing, put me out of my misery) Goff screaming.

It's hardly revoltionary to suggest that by 2016 it'll be 66 and that by 2027 it'll be 67. I'd be amazed if it wasn't.

[Clockwork]

Um...that's called the free market...are you a communist or summat:devil2:



Somethin like that yeah... maybe a nationalist might be a better label though.

We're a little fish in a big pond, we can't compete in the free market and we need to do whatever we can to hold on to what few assets we have. We simply shouldn't be paying prifts to other countries for services that we provide only to ourselves such as power, telecommunications.. banking etc...

Seriously, once its all sold where will that leave us econmically?

[Clockwork]

You don't lie. Ok lets say someone is a music teacher/singer performer as their business. Anything at all related to this business can be bought through the business, therefore an outgoing in the business and GST is also written off when buying for a business to my understanding. And as incoming-outgoing = profit/loss you reduce profit and therefore reduce the amount of taxed income.

This is my very crude understanding of the system. But there are certain set percentages by the government on how much you claim back on certain costs, but most importantly asset aquisition is non-taxed and an outgoing. IE buy a nice shiny vehicle for your business, stationary, computers, for a music teacher anything music education or music related at all you can buy GST free and write off on business, such as CDs, speakers, concert tickets. Anything.

In the end you end up with a nice car, nice computer, nice sound system. And your business hasn't made as much money for the year because of the things you bought for your business. So to my understanding the business grows nicely with the profit from the year, and that is not taxed because of course the profit isn't liquid anymore.

THB I'm not sure how this works but I was up in Reatihi a couple of months ago and got chatting to an elderly farmer in the local Cossie club. He was saying that it had bee a good year for him this year and was probably going to post his first profit (in something like 30 years IIRC). Later he was chatting about the history of the place, how he'd started with a small block of land which he'd slowly increased over the years by buying up adjoining blocks (while not making any profits presumably) and diversifying to the point where he now appears to be a significant land owner in the area. My guess is that the reason he's finally making a profit is that he's run out of write-offs and land buying opportunities.

I suspect that that's the sort of thing Superman is referring to. this guy has increased his personal wealth substanially while never actually making a profit.

Farmers are probably able to call a lot of their living expenses "business expenses" not sure it would be so easy for other type of small businesses though.

[marty]

Can't see if this has been posted - the deloittes summary. check out the social welfare spend.

[Mully]

It's hardly revoltionary to suggest that by 2016 it'll be 66 and that by 2027 it'll be 67. I'd be amazed if it wasn't.

Except that it seems to be a sacred cow for most parties - one of the things National did that I don't like (and there's a few), was say "we wont touch the superannuation age"

Labour (to my knowledge) have never said anything about raising the Super age either.

So it's a case of one of them biting the bullet and whacking it up straight away, or greasing the populace up and easing it up a bit at a time (yes, double entendre intended)

From memory, Super costs more than the DPB - yet no-one has said "Sorry, guys it can't continue this way"

It doesn't help, of course, that Muldoon and his mates dismantles the last Super Scheme we had.

[geoffm]

Nope.

If you think MP's are in it for the money, I suggest that you hang out with one for a ‎couple of days. I don't care what they get paid, it just ain't worth it for the shit they ‎have to put up, see and listen to on a daily basis.‎ National, Labour, ACT Maori or Green, I doubt any of them are earning substanially more than they got in private life.



I never realised that failed teachers, academics, lawyers and graduates who went straight into politics were so well paid in the private sector.
Sorry, for most of them, this is 3-5x as much money as they would be earning in a real job. John Key, and a couple of the Act/ Nat pollies are an exception.
There are plenty of areas to cut expenses, in fact entire departments, and anything with "commission" in the name should be an endangered species
Geoff

[rainman]

We both thought that the Gummint should reverse the tax cuts. The problem is, of course, that Phil Goff and his mates (despite screaming for the Nats to reverse them) would them be bitching that there was a broken promise.

...

I idly wonder if they're all in on a massive game against the populace.

It's a consequence of how we structure government. You can do nothing useful in opposition, so all your effort goes in to winning the election. That gets to be the whole game - not delivering the value afterwards. And like the successive CVs of a person who's been out of work for a while, the promises and claims get bolder and less connected with reality, until they "get hired" and then have to deliver. The whole thing made worse by being openly competitive, of course - like applying for the only job in town, when all CVs are public, and the job gets renewed every three years so you can have another crack. Strong incentive for the losers to keep attacking the winners, irrespective of what they are actually doing, or which "side" they're on.

Like employees, the better ones stick more closely to their innate values and nature, so can more easily recover after winning and deliver something not too far from what was promised. But the losers continue to attack them. The worse ones (partisanship aside, this defo applies to the current lot) win, then don't, or can't deliver. What they presented pre-election, and what they actually are, are just too far apart.

Incidentally, this is why FPP is such a stupid idea - at least with MPP we're hiring some different buggers to try and hold the winners to account.

We don't employ pollies to run the country in our best interests anymore, we have set them up like competing sports teams. Over time this just magnifies and entrenches the differences between the two, and leads to the polarised setup we currently have. Voters just become one-eyed football hooligans, not people trying to do the best for the whole country.


Farmers are probably able to call a lot of their living expenses "business expenses" not sure it would be so easy for other type of small businesses though.

Some farm expenditure is shared (electricity, etc), but it's usual for an allocation of this to be applied to the personal account rather than the business. That said proper personal drawings are usually lower for farmers as they have lower living expenses (need less, and don't forget barter). The typical small farmer isn't actually making a shitload of money unless they are really large scale. Smaller growers and mixed farms don't make a ton of cash, and inputs aren't getting cheaper either. Fertiliser is expensive, and with PSA, psyllids etc other more pesticides etc are needed. Potato farmers are now spraying a helluva lot more than they did before, for example. And the supermarkets continue to fuck over the farmers. Sure diary is till making money, but it's usually high debt too.

[Oscar]

Got any evidence of this, or just trotting out spin lines?

Which rock are you living under?
He's been doing it since he was leader of the opposition.
Labour having been giving Key shit about everything from being a rogue trader to having too many minders. Do you think they'd let him spin charity donations?

[Oscar]

I never realised that failed teachers, academics, lawyers and graduates who went straight into politics were so well paid in the private sector.
Sorry, for most of them, this is 3-5x as much money as they would be earning in a real job. John Key, and a couple of the Act/ Nat pollies are an exception.
There are plenty of areas to cut expenses, in fact entire departments, and anything with "commission" in the name should be an endangered species
Geoff

Jeez, lay off the bong will ya?
Name one MP that is getting paid 5 times what he/she did before entering Parliament.
That POS Nandor maybe, but he's gone.

[marty]

Actually Nandor was one of the more intelligent guys there. I don't give him any credence as an MP, but he is a smart guy. Maybe that's why he's not there any more.

[marty]

Jeez, lay off the bong will ya?
Name one MP that is getting paid 5 times what he/she did before entering Parliament.
.

Gareth Hughes

Parekura Horomia

Paula Bennett

[Mully]

Gareth Hughes

Parekura Horomia

Paula Bennett

He said one, not three.

Sheesh, pay attention.

[Maha]

Actually Nandor was one of the more intelligent guys there. I don't give him any credence as an MP, but he is a smart guy. Maybe that's why he's not there any more.

''Actually Nandor was one of the more intelligent guys''

If that were so, you would think he would have had the smarts to hold on to his position within the Greens?

Hes not there anymore because he looks like a retired Morris Dancer.

[Oscar]

Gareth Hughes

Parekura Horomia

Paula Bennett

So you know what they were earning before becoming MP's?

How much?

[marty]

Bennett was a 'recruitment consultant' for McCully prior to her being a list MP. I doubt whether that paid $20k, if anything

Could be wrong about Horomia - some research suggests he had multiple income streams (from primarily Maori consultancy work) prior to beating Derek Fox in 1999. You don't get that big by eating pot noodles on a poverty wage.

Hughes worked for Greenpeace prior to being a list MP - again I doubt the pay was more than subsidence at that employment.

[Oscar]

Bennett was a 'recruitment consultant' for McCully prior to her being a list MP. I doubt whether that paid $20k, if anything

Could be wrong about Horomia - some research suggests he had multiple income streams (from primarily Maori consultancy work) prior to beating Derek Fox in 1999. You don't get that big by eating pot noodles on a poverty wage.

Hughes worked for Greenpeace prior to being a list MP - again I doubt the pay was more than subsidence at that employment.


He said:


Sorry, for most of them, this is 3-5x as much money as they would be earning in a real job. (my emphasis)

I still don't see any proof of even one earning 5x.

[marty]

I've lost you now. Bennet is earning a minimum of $134000, plus various allowances - possibly up to $40k worth. Even at $150k surely she is earning close to 5x what she was earning before she was an MP?

[Oscar]

I've lost you now. Bennet is earning a minimum of $134000, plus various allowances - possibly up to $40k worth. Even at $150k surely she is earning close to 5x what she was earning before she was an MP?

Are you saying she was only paid 30k in her previous job?
What was it?

[marty]

dunno. I'll play your silly game - what was it?

[Oscar]

dunno. I'll play your silly game - what was it?

It's not my game.
You gave the names of 3 MP's who get paid 5 times what they earned in private life.
I just wondered how you knew.

[rainman]

Which rock are you living under?
He's been doing it since he was leader of the opposition.
Labour having been giving Key shit about everything from being a rogue trader to having too many minders. Do you think they'd let him spin charity donations?

So, that's a no, then?

[Ocean1]

This is my very crude understanding of the system.

If it's that easy you'd be a fool not to jump on the bandwagon wouldn't you?

Say you need a machine, y'know; to make shit. And you've been a good thriftie wee pixie and saved what should have been your wages all year so you've got most of the funds to hand.

You buy the machine, and as you said the profits take a hit that year. So that's a shitload of tax yo don't have to pay at the end of the year eh? Wrong. You might not have the cash any more but you'll still be paying tax on about 88% of it. Don't have it? Tough.

Oh, and if you've just ticked over a couple of years in business, (and you really think you can start to see some actual cash in your future at last) expect a letter from Inland Revenue advising you that you'll need to stump up with last years tax, this years tax and next years tax. Now please.

When you've managed all that and you're somehow still solvent, (I can tell you how, but you won't like it) then I guess you'd be well tooled up to let us know how to do it better eh?

I'll be waiting by the phone.

[superman]

If it's that easy you'd be a fool not to jump on the bandwagon wouldn't you?

Say you need a machine, y'know; to make shit. And you've been a good thriftie wee pixie and saved what should have been your wages all year so you've got most of the funds to hand.

You buy the machine, and as you said the profits take a hit that year. So that's a shitload of tax yo don't have to pay at the end of the year eh? Wrong. You might not have the cash any more but you'll still be paying tax on about 88% of it. Don't have it? Tough.

Oh, and if you've just ticked over a couple of years in business, (and you really think you can start to see some actual cash in your future at last) expect a letter from Inland Revenue advising you that you'll need to stump up with last years tax, this years tax and next years tax. Now please.

When you've managed all that and you're somehow still solvent, (I can tell you how, but you won't like it) then I guess you'd be well tooled up to let us know how to do it better eh?

I'll be waiting by the phone.

IRD website says you can directly claim these:-



business-related legal fees up to $10,000 a year

rent paid on business premises

repairs and maintenance on business items

stationery and supplies for the business

purchases of raw materials or trading stock

electricity and telephone costs

business vehicle and transport costs

interest on money borrowed for the business

interest on underpayments of tax

gross wages paid to employees

insurance of business assets or premises

premiums paid for accident insurance

ACC levies

50% of business entertainment costs

any fringe benefit tax you’ve paid
depreciation

[Winston001]

IRD website says you can directly claim these:-



business-related legal fees up to $10,000 a year

rent paid on business premises etc etc...




This argument is a no-winner. Until you are self-employed you can't really grasp the complexities involved. Such as fringe benefit tax on personal vehicle use. And vehicle log books to prove business use.

I was in your camp once upon a time - glaring darkly at "business" people while earning a low wage myself.

Then I became a business owner. To then find that our employees sometimes earned more than me. And IRD wanted plenty of tax paid ahead just in case things got better.

Ultimately my business assets comprise a 10yr old vehicle, heaps of books worth zilch, computers nobody would buy, and old desks etc. I'm not unhappy about that because that is always what I expected. The value of being my own boss (in a partnership) was worth it.

Nevertheless wage earners think the self-employed are creaming it and the self-employed just keep trying and hoping that one day they will. Its not a bad thing for any of us.

[superman]

This argument is a no-winner. Until you are self-employed you can't really grasp the complexities involved. Such as fringe benefit tax on personal vehicle use. And vehicle log books to prove business use.

I was in your camp once upon a time - glaring darkly at "business" people while earning a low wage myself.

Then I became a business owner. To then find that our employees sometimes earned more than me. And IRD wanted plenty of tax paid ahead just in case things got better.

Ultimately my business assets comprise a 10yr old vehicle, heaps of books worth zilch, computers nobody would buy, and old desks etc. I'm not unhappy about that because that is always what I expected. The value of being my own boss (in a partnership) was worth it.

Nevertheless wage earners think the self-employed are creaming it and the self-employed just keep trying and hoping that one day they will. Its not a bad thing for any of us.

Lol yeah I'm trying to learn about it more. I own a vending machine, but because it only profits around 5k a year, and sole traders don't have to pay any tax if profit is less than 6k per year I don't really have to worry. :yes:

I don't have an issue with people doing it. It's rich people getting allowance money from the government due to low "taxable income" with no direct relation to wealth that pisses me off.

[Ocean1]

IRD website says you can directly claim these:-


And why shouldn't you? You do understand what "costs" are don't you?

And in fact you'd be surprised what category IRD considers some of those things fall under.

New engine to replace the lunched one in the truck? is an asset improvement, not maintenance.

Like I said, when you've walked a mile...

[Brian d marge]

Im self employed

Love it , moneys good , Holidays are fantastic , drink beer anytime I want ...and what I did to the secretary last weekend you could print in a public forum ( it should be IN forum!)
Next week I am jetting out to Bahrain to have a beer with a good friend (JT LeRoy) before returning back to Japan

I have No Idea why you fellas make such hard yards of it .......

Stephen

[Oscar]

So, that's a no, then?

Google is your friend.

[rainman]

Google is your friend.

Clearly not as much as it is yours - I could only find spin lines repeated by fanbois like you, and a woolly worded comment from the man himself dating from before the election.

Now I don't doubt that he does give a chunk of change to charities - who, with tens of mil in the bank and a salary of $375000 pa, wouldn't? - but the mental weakness you are displaying is to assume either that he donates most of his money, deriving minimal benefit from his pay, or that this makes him exceptional.

There is simply no evidence of the former (and no, I don't trust his word on this). And lots of us (including many MPs) give to charities, and would gladly give more if we had more to give. If I had 50 mil - although I'd guess he doesn't either, anymore - earning interest, and a nearly $400k paypacket, once I had paid the mortgage and provided a modest sum for my retirement and the kids education, I'd happily give all of the rest away and be entirely happy. I wouldn't even need to live in an $8m house with other properties around the world.

I might buy a better bike, of course.

You can live bloody comfortably here on a helluva lot less than $400k - all of the rest is just cream. Frankly, I think there should be performance pay for MPs. JK wouldn't be coming near to earning his base pay - if you did an objective job sizing, excluding the whole "responsible for the entire country" schtick, which just ain't true, he's grossly overpaid based on his competence and performance. And don't get me started on English - if I were his boss he'd have been performance managed out some time ago. Actually, I'd restructure the whole damn lot.

Anyway, this has little to do with the budget, so perhaps it's best left for another thread.

[Oscar]

Clearly not as much as it is yours - I could only find spin lines repeated by fanbois like you, and a woolly worded comment from the man himself dating from before the election.



Bullshit.
It was reported in the mainstream media.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/573560/Key-pledges-PMs-salary-to-charity

Are you saying that the Opposition, after having a go at Key for various pathetic reasons over the last few years would have missed an opportunity like this.

What we have here is the Kiwi Tall Poppy Machine in overdrive. You can't stand success.

[rainman]

Bullshit.
It was reported in the mainstream media.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/573560/Key-pledges-PMs-salary-to-charity

Are you saying that the Opposition, after having a go at Key for various pathetic reasons over the last few years would have missed an opportunity like this.

What we have here is the Kiwi Tall Poppy Machine in overdrive. You can't stand success.

Bullshit right back at ya. Read that article, and re-read my response, and work on your comprehension skills.

The reason the opposition doesn't have a go at him on this is because the level of Key's donation to charity is unknowable to all but a few people. Which set does not include you, I'm pretty sure, thus your initial parroting of party lines is still intellectually weak, and unsubstantiated by any facts. Which is why I picked you up on it - I don't like mindless spin. But feel free to let your ideological bias let you believe Key is exceptional, if that's what floats your <s>insecurity</s> boat.

And bullshit x2: I don't come from a culture that suffers from Tall Poppy Syndrome, and I'm quite keen on success, work and achievement, actually. The difference is that I don't define making a bit of money being a financial trader, and surrounding yourself with material goods, to be success. Au contraire.

Successful people are those that are self-reliant, can take care of themselves and their families, take reasonable steps to protect against future risk, and then apply themselves to helping the rest of society rather than exploiting it. I don't give a fuck about how many zeroes there are in your bank balance, how big your telly is, or what car you drive - it's what's in your heart, your brain, and your actions, that defines value in a human being.

Key seems to be someone who's in it for himself, for the glory - he's borderline narcissistic. If he's NZ's idol/ideal, then $deity help us all.

[Oscar]

Bullshit right back at ya. Read that article, and re-read my response, and work on your comprehension skills.

The reason the opposition doesn't have a go at him on this is because the level of Key's donation to charity is unknowable to all but a few people. Which set does not include you, I'm pretty sure, thus your initial parroting of party lines is still intellectually weak, and unsubstantiated by any facts. Which is why I picked you up on it - I don't like mindless spin. But feel free to let your ideological bias let you believe Key is exceptional, if that's what floats your <s>insecurity</s> boat.

And bullshit x2: I don't come from a culture that suffers from Tall Poppy Syndrome, and I'm quite keen on success, work and achievement, actually. The difference is that I don't define making a bit of money being a financial trader, and surrounding yourself with material goods, to be success. Au contraire.

Successful people are those that are self-reliant, can take care of themselves and their families, take reasonable steps to protect against future risk, and then apply themselves to helping the rest of society rather than exploiting it. I don't give a fuck about how many zeroes there are in your bank balance, how big your telly is, or what car you drive - it's what's in your heart, your brain, and your actions, that defines value in a human being.

Key seems to be someone who's in it for himself, for the glory - he's borderline narcissistic. If he's NZ's idol/ideal, then $deity help us all.

If intellectual rigor is your thing, how come you scoff at someone accepting that some of Keys' salary is going to charity, yet admit yourself that he does it? I did not say how much he donated, just that he did. He therefore could fit your description of the succesful person who has applied themselves to helping the rest of society. Yet you somehow know that:


Key seems to be someone who's in it for himself, for the glory - he's borderline narcissistic

If he was in it for himself, he'd still be a currency trader.

This seems to be a classic example of a bullshit party line and a tall poppy practitioner.
Your brand of pompous pseudo intellectualism is what's gonna keep the left out of power for the next generation.

[Ocean1]

Your brand of pompous pseudo intellectualism is what's gonna keep the left out of power for the next generation.

... praise the lord.

[rainman]

If intellectual rigor is your thing, how come you scoff at someone accepting that some of Keys' salary is going to charity, yet admit yourself that he does it? I did not say how much he donated, just that he did.

Because, as you say, rigor is my thing. It may be prudent for you to revisit your original post at this point, just saying.


If he was in it for himself, he'd still be a currency trader.

Dunno, there's a couple of other explanations that spring to mind, none of which involve altruism.

Anyway, back to the budget. Wotcha think of Labour's response then?

[Edbear]

Im self employed

Love it , moneys good , Holidays are fantastic , drink beer anytime I want ...and what I did to the secretary last weekend you could print in a public forum ( it should be IN forum!)
Next week I am jetting out to Bahrain to have a beer with a good friend (JT LeRoy) before returning back to Japan

I have No Idea why you fellas make such hard yards of it .......

Stephen

Some of us a bit wary of Earthquakes and Tsunamis that make NZ seem like small fry...

[Winston001]

Successful people are those that are self-reliant, can take care of themselves and their families, take reasonable steps to protect against future risk, and then apply themselves to helping the rest of society rather than exploiting it...

...it's what's in your heart, your brain, and your actions, that defines value in a human being.

Agreed and well expressed.


Key seems to be someone who's in it for himself, for the glory - he's borderline narcissistic. If he's NZ's idol/ideal, then $deity help us all.

Mmm...oddly enough I don't have that impression of the guy at all. In fact he appears to be very ordinary, no obvious ego, no obvious flaws. In fact I'm surprised he's risen to PM but possibly he's an anti-dote to Helen Clark's firm leadership style. Laidback has its attractions at times - but not for long.

Anyway I don't think we can advance each others opinions by denigrating MPs unless there are obvious faults. Its a no-win argument. Instead we should focus on the bigger issues like how the heck the most remote first-world nation on Earth can continue to provide a safe high-tech home for our children.

[puddytat]

Successful people are those that are self-reliant, can take care of themselves and their families, take reasonable steps to protect against future risk, and then apply themselves to helping the rest of society rather than exploiting it. I don't give a fuck about how many zeroes there are in your bank balance, how big your telly is, or what car you drive - it's what's in your heart, your brain, and your actions, that defines value in a human being.

.

Pretty simple really.....for some.

[Winston001]

...got chatting to an elderly farmer in the local Cossie club. He was saying that it had bee a good year for him this year and was probably going to post his first profit (in something like 30 years IIRC)...

My guess is that the reason he's finally making a profit is that he's run out of write-offs and land buying opportunities.

I suspect that that's the sort of thing Superman is referring to. this guy has increased his personal wealth substanially while never actually making a profit.

Farmers are probably able to call a lot of their living expenses "business expenses" not sure it would be so easy for other type of small businesses though.

Just a quick note: if you aren't making a profit, you aren't making money. The problem is many people think what you express above - I used to as well.

Here's how it actually works: you buy a block of land or building. You borrow the money. In the first year you make mortgage payments of $20,000. You think you can deduct all of that from your gross business turnover right? Wrong. Lets say $10,000 is interest - that is deductible. But the other $10,000 is reduction of debt - and that comes out of your income = taxable.

Its exactly the same for your business vehicle - loan repayments apart from interest are taxable income. Capital sums.

There is a lot more which can be said on the topic but this isn't the best thread for it. I see Labour are attacking farmers now so we can discuss that elsewhere.

[Ocean1]

Instead we should focus on the bigger issues like how the heck the most remote first-world nation on Earth can continue to provide a safe high-tech home for our children.

Send the wee darlings out to work.

I'm tired of supporting the fuckers, time they did a turn.

[steve_t]

Anyway, back to the budget. Wotcha think of Labour's response then?

Did anyone else think Phil Goff's speech was a bunch of generic bollocks and that it sounded like the speech was prewritten ages ago? It didn't really seem to address any parts of the budget itself but more just harp on about the state of the nation and just basically try to rubbish National. Phil Goff just doesn't seem to have anything interesting or with substance to say

[Pussy]

Did anyone else think Phil Goff's speech was a bunch of generic bollocks and that it sounded like the speech was prewritten ages ago? It didn't really seem to address any parts of the budget itself but more just harp on about the state of the nation and just basically try to rubbish National. Phil Goff just doesn't seem to have anything interesting or with substance to say

Yep! Shit talk, as per normal. He's an idiot.

[mashman]

blah blah blah charitable donations


do you think he claimed for his charitable tax incetive?



Did anyone else think Phil Goff's speech was a bunch of generic bollocks and that it sounded like the speech was prewritten ages ago? It didn't really seem to address any parts of the budget itself but more just harp on about the state of the nation and just basically try to rubbish National. Phil Goff just doesn't seem to have anything interesting or with substance to say


by the looks of things he knows how to play the game too. If you can't beat 'em etc... shame though.



pretty much everything you've said


I can't bling you again... fancy being PM :)

[rainman]

Your brand of pompous pseudo intellectualism is what's gonna keep the left out of power for the next generation.


... praise the lord.

Never understood the right's discomfort with intellectualism... I mean, what's the alternative? Being a philistine? Or is it you think intellectual=academic and you have unresolved teacher issues? Probably got me on the pompous, though. :)


Here's how it actually works: ...
...loan repayments apart from interest are (paid from) taxable income.

Bear in mind though most of us can't easily offset mortgage or vehicle loan interest against income, at least for the family home/car. With farmers it's somewhat easier to merge business and personal spending, because the home is part of the productive workplace.

It will be interesting to see the reaction to Labour's ETS plans. Although I have a lot of interest in seeing a proper mechanism implemented to address GG emissions, it's an area to move carefully in. There are some very wealthy farmers who can afford it, but will resist any attempts to pay their share/change their practices to address climate change. Theres are also lots of smaller guys who aren't making enough money to get by as it is. Probably politically smart though, most of them won't vote Labour either way.


fancy being PM :)

No fear, I'd be terrible at it. Really crap at smile, wave and tell the people what they want to hear.

Also I'd tell the (genuine) bludgers to get off their arses, tell the (genuinely) rich to stop being greedy fucks, and tell the rest of the world to go to hell, so I'd be hated by everyone. :yes:

[oneofsix]

No fear, I'd be terrible at it. Really crap at smile, wave and tell the people what they want to hear.

Also I'd tell the (genuine) bludgers to get off their arses, tell the (genuinely) rich to stop being greedy fucks, and tell the rest of the world to go to hell, so I'd be hated by everyone. :yes:

you sound just like the person we need for PM :yes: someone who doesn't want the job. :shutup:

[Clockwork]

Just a quick note: if you aren't making a profit, you aren't making money. The problem is many people think what you express above - I used to as well.

Here's how it actually works: you buy a block of land or building. You borrow the money. In the first year you make mortgage payments of $20,000. You think you can deduct all of that from your gross business turnover right? Wrong. Lets say $10,000 is interest - that is deductible. But the other $10,000 is reduction of debt - and that comes out of your income = taxable.

Its exactly the same for your business vehicle - loan repayments apart from interest are taxable income. Capital sums.

There is a lot more which can be said on the topic but this isn't the best thread for it. I see Labour are attacking farmers now so we can discuss that elsewhere.


I'm no accountant, Winston but I think you're looking at this as a private individual. If a business buys an asset, the cost of that purchase is deducted before any profits are declared are they not? The farmer pays himself minimum wage 'cos he's just barely getting by but the company he owns has just become worth more. Of course as there is no Capital Gains Tax, so eventually it all ends up in his bank account tax free, yes?

[Ocean1]

Never understood the right's discomfort with intellectualism... I mean, what's the alternative? Being a philistine? Or is it you think intellectual=academic and you have unresolved teacher issues? Probably got me on the pompous, though. :)

And the pseudo. Don't forget the pseudo.

[Oscar]

Because, as you say, rigor is my thing. It may be prudent for you to revisit your original post at this point, just saying.



Dunno, there's a couple of other explanations that spring to mind, none of which involve altruism.

Anyway, back to the budget. Wotcha think of Labour's response then?

My original point was that MP's (of whatever stripe) can't be in it for the money, and following along - John Key is definitely not in for the money.

Yes, back to the budget.
‎Labour's response is probably as weak as the budget itself.
It was interesting to so the way it was reported - State TV made a fuss of Labour's child protection agenda, whereas TV3 simply reporting that Labour intended to close of a Govt agency to save money.

Both parties responses are not surprisingly targeting the others constituents - National having a go at beneficaries and students, Labour the farmers.

Neither of them seem to have grasped the nettle, but it's hardly surprising in an election year, is it? I'd give the Govt. the edge at the moment firstly as they are showing where the moeny is coming from, and seondly because they're making the most controversial part of their programme an election issue.

[Oscar]

Never understood the right's discomfort with intellectualism... I mean, what's the alternative? Being a philistine? Or is it you think intellectual=academic and you have unresolved teacher issues? Probably got me on the pompous, though. :)





I have no problems with intellectualism or teachers (I am married to one, my mother ‎was one). I was speaking of “pseudo intellectualism”‎

For example, you say:‎

‎“..thus your initial parroting of party lines is still intellectually weak, and ‎unsubstantiated by any facts.”‎

This was not “a party line” and I don’t see how it was intellectually weak. My ‎conclusion was - it was all over the media for several years, and if it wasn’t true, the ‎truth is easy to find, and there are an awful lot of people who would have found it by ‎now. Notwithstanding that, you have no evidence to contradict the claim.‎

You then crack into your work with this beauty:‎

‎“Key seems to be someone who's in it for himself, for the glory - he's borderline ‎narcissistic..”‎

This is your personal observation and normally I would leave it at that, but for one ‎accusing others of lacking intellectual rigor, making pronouncements like that, giving ‎no evidence for one’s opinion – just silly really, isn’t it? ‎

[mashman]

No fear, I'd be terrible at it. Really crap at smile, wave and tell the people what they [b]"need"[b] to hear.

Also I'd tell the (genuine) bludgers to get off their arses, tell the (genuinely) rich to stop being greedy fucks, and tell the rest of the world to go to hell, so I'd be hated by everyone.


fixed for ya... Sounds like you fit the bill to me :yes:... job's yours.

I'm comfortable with a PM that has that attitude towards the Country too... +1 on the rest of the world... and I can live with you being hated by everyone :shifty:

[Ocean1]

If a business buys an asset, the cost of that purchase is deducted before any profits are declared are they not?

Not.

Capital expenditure items are depreciated depending on what schedule they fall under. From memory most "equipment" is depreciated at 12%, vehicles at 18%.

You get to pay tax on the outlay for those items at year's end, even though you don't in fact have the profit to show for it. If the capital asset cost you $100,000.00 then next tax year you get to knock about $3000.00 off your tax bill.

Welcome to the real world.

[Winston001]

I'm no accountant, Winston but I think you're looking at this as a private individual. If a business buys an asset, the cost of that purchase is deducted before any profits are declared are they not? The farmer pays himself minimum wage 'cos he's just barely getting by but the company he owns has just become worth more. Of course as there is no Capital Gains Tax, so eventually it all ends up in his bank account tax free, yes?

Ocean's already answered so I'll just agree with him.

A vehicle (or land) is a capital asset. Repayments of principal are taxable profit no matter the structure.

I do understand what you mean but you need to account for fringe benefit tax as well. A vehicle used for private use attracts fringe benefit tax (49.25%) - city councils for example pay that on staff cars. No competent accountant will accept you don't use a vehicle privately unless its a tractor.

Contrary to what most people believe, accountants are an enforcement arm of IRD. An accountants reputation and ability to do his/her best for every client is based upon IRD trusting that accountant to obey the tax laws. If the accountant ignores the rules, they get blacklisted and their clients audited which ultimately can put the accountant out of business.

[rainman]

And the pseudo. Don't forget the pseudo.

Nuthin' pseudo about me buddy, ah'm the real deal.

http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20110523.gif


I don’t see how it was intellectually weak....
... just silly really, isn’t it? ‎

One day I'll buy you a beer and explain it to you, but I think if we carry on here we'll bore everyone to death.


Capital expenditure items are depreciated depending on what schedule they fall under. From memory most "equipment" is depreciated at 12%, vehicles at 18%.

You get to pay tax on the outlay for those items at year's end, even though you don't in fact have the profit to show for it. If the capital asset cost you $100,000.00 then next tax year you get to knock about $3000.00 off your tax bill.


Your and Winston's comments are of course broadly correct, even if the best answer when it comes to tax and depreciation is "it depends".

Nonetheless, it's quite possible to structure your affairs as a farmer to pay relatively little tax (other than by the usual approach taken of making very little money). The trick is to take as little as possible out, and leave as much as possible as deductible expenses. Kinda like Clockwork's comment indicated.

Case in point: I have before me a set of audited accounts for a successful sheep (&wool), beef and deer partnership, from a few years ago but not that much has changed:
(Figures rounded to protect the innocent, and 'cos I'm lazy and don't feel like adding in my head)
- Sales of about 260k
- Trading profit/gross farm income about 195k (sales - purchases - change in stock value *)
- Less total farm expenses about 140k (**)
- Less debt servicing, another $30k
- Less depreciation of nearly another 20k (a small adjustment is made for personal use)
- Leaves a surplus from operations of 5.5k (great return on sales, huh?)
That gets adjusted for personal electricity and R&M, and some non-deductible entertainment, less a salary allowance of all of $5k for one of the partners (yes, per year***), depreciation clawback on sold assets etc, leaving a small amount to be distributed to the partnership trust accounts. Cash drawings are taken from these: 13k from one, 55k from the other.

This isn't a huge operation, but not small either: net assets nearly $3m, the trusts have balances of about $1.3m each, sales of a few thousand sheep, about two hundred cattle, and a hundred deer. It doesn't say in the accounts but I'm guessing a 300-500 hectares.

Provisional tax paid? Less than $6k from one trust, $2.5k from the other; around 12% tax if my rough mental maths serves. You can argue this is reasonable based on drawings taken etc. but my guess is these guys aren't struggling, and have a pretty comfortable life, with a very comfortable retirement ahead.

* Yes, this is income too, not an asset. Change in value of stock at standard value is added to sales less purchases and counted as gross income.
** Includes electricity and R&M for owners dwelling and for farm, plus telephone/computer, entertainment, general admin, insurance, rates. Oh, and motorcycle expenses... :)
*** but there are drawings

[Winston001]

Hang about Rainy me ol mate, you are talking about the farming entity's tax. What about GST paid on expenses during the year? Even ignoring that, the employees income is taxable which needs to be added to this farms tax responsibility for the year. It all goes to support our social democracy. As it should.

[rainman]

Hang about Rainy me ol mate, you are talking about the farming entity's tax. What about GST paid on expenses during the year? Even ignoring that, the employees income is taxable which needs to be added to this farms tax responsibility for the year. It all goes to support our social democracy. As it should.

Not so much: it's a partnership, so not taxed as an entity. For a partnership you have to file an IR7 showing the distribution of income among the partners, or in this case their trusts. These are where the drawings come from, and where the tax is done. This is also a handy way of distributing income between family members, which of the rest of us can't do. Farmers can also use Income Equalisation Schemes, those seem to be a neat trick too although I don't understand them completely.

Salary paid to a working partner under contract is deductible at the partnership level, but does attract PAYE. In this case it's so low as to not matter though. The drawings and provisional tax I've shown is at the trust level. Maybe this doesn't include the trust beneficiary's tax assessment but why show prov tax at all then? I didn't draw up the accounts so am only going off the 20 or so page summary stuff.

GST, sure - but both in and out, so you're only exposed to the difference - and once again it's at the partnership level, pre-distribution. No-one cares much about GST in farming (or for that matter other businesses), it has a cash impact but the accounts are mostly ex GST.

I've had another look at the accounts, and a few other cases, and can't see why the tax paid is so low (10ish% instead of 33%, trust rate), but then not all the details are laid out in the auditors report (funny that). I thought it might be showing prior year's provisional tax, and they'd had a bad year, but then they'd be nailed by UOMI, surely...

Dunno, tax is a mystery sometimes. But being a farmer (some other business owners, too) certainly provides some opportunities to, um, remove some of the mystery.