How sad is this Labour Government

[scumdog]

Let's see. We'll take the average NZ income, figure out how much tax gets paid on it, and set that against the standard unemployment benefit to answer your question.

From the Statistics NZ website, 'average weekly income for people in paid employment' last quarter was $762, or an annual pre-tax income of $39,624. The ird.govt.nz calculator gives weekly PAYE on this as $161.95.

A single adult on the unemployment benefit gets $164.16 a week.

If we make a hand-waving guess that, say, 20% of the tax take is spent on welfare, then you could arguably say that after all other public service costs are covered from income tax, it takes, on average, 5 people working to pay for one adult on the dole.

Naked arse!! so what you are saying is that the WHOLE p.a.y.e. from one average wage earner does not even cover the 'pay-out to ONE person on the unemployment benefit!!!!
Huh, "benefit" - whose effing "benefit"??

[jrandom]

Naked arse!! so what you are saying is that the WHOLE p.a.y.e. from one average wage earner does not even cover the 'pay-out to ONE person on the unemployment benefit!!!!

Precisely.

Good stuff, eh? Warm fuzzies.

[riffer]

I had a conversation with a mate this morning on this subject.

He is unemployed, and his wife is unemployed.

He is supposed to be paying child support on 2 children, as well as supporting 2 children living with him.

His wife suffers from depression, and is on the sickness benefit because of this. As he "stays at home to look after her" he also collects the sickness benefit.

He has worked out that if he goes back to work, he will pay child support and his wife will lose her sickness benefit.

The upshot is he will have to earn $58,000 per annum to get the same amount they currently get.

Where is the incentive?

[James Deuce]

Well spotted!

Actually it's not entirely a troll, although the reaction was certainly predictable.
Although i'm sure there are inequities, rip-offs and inefficiencies in our current system, I'm a bit sceptical about claims that we would all be happier and better-off if only we paid a lot less tax. The ones that complain the loudest about taxation being theft tend to be the ones who have accountants to minimize their tax obligations...
I agree that there are lazy people bludging off the taxpayer. I just suspect that the extra taxation burden placed on the rest of us may be exaggerated. Have you any idea what reduction in tax you would receive if unemployment and sickness benefit fraud was eliminated? It would be interesting to find out...

My desire to pay more tax was predictable?

I must have missed the point then.

[jrandom]

The upshot is he will have to earn $58,000 per annum to get the same amount they currently get.

Jeepers.

I mean, obviously the guy's not an evil slacker or anything, and no doubt his wife's illness makes things very difficult for them, but, I mean, hell's bells.

The equivalent of a $58,000 salary in his pocket, just to stay home with the wife and kids?

For his situation to arise, it seems obvious that the System is suboptimal. But then, I think every single-income working parent out there understands the lack of holistic strategy in our current welfare vis à vis tax structures.

[riffer]

Jeepers.

I mean, obviously the guy's not an evil slacker or anything, and no doubt his wife's illness makes things very difficult for them, but, I mean, hell's bells.

The equivalent of a $58,000 salary in his pocket, just to stay home with the wife and kids?

For his situation to arise, it seems obvious that the System is suboptimal. But then, I think every single-income working parent out there understands the lack of holistic strategy in our current welfare vis à vis tax structures.

It's very easy to get a sickness benefit for depression. The government has manipulated the unemployment figures for many years. Add the sickness beneficiaries to the unemployed and you will find that the amount of unemployed has remained the same for many years, unlike what they tell you. People transfer from UB to SB for more money.

This is not a totally indicative case. My friend has a $50,000 child support bill. This will cost him a bundle in back payments obviously.

Even so, When you add up sickness benefits, and accomodation supplements it adds up.

For the record, I currently take home less than he does after my child support is taken out. And I have to work. My wife stays at home to ensure our kids have a good start in life. Unfortunately that doesn't count for much nowadays.

[ManDownUnder]

For the record, I currently take home less than he does after my child support is taken out. And I have to work. My wife stays at home to ensure our kids have a good start in life. Unfortunately that doesn't count for much nowadays.

For the record - I'd rather your kids got a good start in life and I paid a little extra in tax - that's investing in our future.

It's pouring money into the present I object to (i.e. setting people into positions where they're better off staying on their arse, on the dole, with no excuse and no hope of ever getting motivated to put down the playstation console long enough to find a job.

...rant over...
MDU

[riffer]

For the record - I'd rather your kids got a good start in life and I paid a little extra in tax - that's investing in our future.

It's pouring money into the present I object to (i.e. setting people into positions where they're better off staying on their arse, on the dole, with no excuse and no hope of ever getting motivated to put down the playstation console long enough to find a job.

Thanks for that MDU. It was a tough decision to make having Gini give up work as she was earning a fair bit - but we haven't regretted it. You learn to live on less money. It's tough though, especially when some buggers have lots of money to spend on their toys and some weekends I can't even get out for a ride as we can't afford the gas.

As for my mate, he has an endless supply of playstation 2 games from the video store...

[ManDownUnder]

As for my mate, he has an endless supply of playstation 2 games from the video store...

**** GROSS GENERALISATION ALERT ****

... don't they all...

**** ALERT OVER ****

[Blakamin]

You learn to live on less money. It's tough though, especially when some buggers have lots of money to spend on their toys and some weekends I can't even get out for a ride as we can't afford the gas.

I know that feeling well...

[Warren]

The government is 42% of the economy. It does not matter if taxes are taxed again just as long as as the system is fair and the govt ends up with enough money to govern (Police, Roads, Social welfare, Pensions, etc). If you remove taxes the government will have less money to spend on those teachers and nurses salaries.

Overall the economy gets what it produces. If NZ wants 14,000 spa pools, 50,000 new houses....etc...etc...... then the economy has to produce that amount of stuff (Including making things to trade for other stuff overseas). You don't ever get anything for free.

One way to increace the economy is to get as much people producing as much thinks as possible. That means there are a vary few super ritch people and the rest have to work 60 hour weeks just to make ends meet. "The trikle down effect"

The other option is that everyone works 40 hour weeks and gets similar wages. Overall less will be produced so the economy will be smaller, but on avearge everyone will be happier.

There have been prostitutes and gay people for all of history. The labour Govt are not social engineering just giving them the basic rights they deserve.

[jrandom]

The government is 42% of the economy.

The government *eats* 42% of the economy. Economy is production, consumption and trade. If a large whack of consumption is poured into infrastructure and artificial 'value distribution' smoothing, then there's an economic concept of 'government' for you.

If you remove taxes the government will have less money to spend on those teachers and nurses salaries.

Have you read the Treasury reports? Do you know how much money the government gets as tax, and how much of that money it spends on various and different things? I have to admit I haven't, but I have the feeling that if I did, I'd become quite annoyed with parts of it.

One way to increace the economy is to get as much people producing as much thinks as possible... The other option is that everyone works 40 hour weeks and gets similar wages... on avearge everyone will be happier

Adam Smith idealised it. Without measuring the human condition and psyche, you can't truly begin to analyse an economy. In fact, the rigid classical models tend to fail badly in interesting and nonlinear ways. I think your point about everyone being happier under certain circumstances is more important than you made it seem, there.

The labour Govt are not social engineering

Well... yes, they are. Nobody said that was inherently evil. Making laws to control the actions of a populace is the only effective definition of social engineering, so... shrug. That's what they're doing. Specifically, they're arranging things so that people in relationships that don't fall under the definition of 'marriage' have access to similar property rights, which would, indubitably, have a measurable effect.

[Warren]

Well... yes, they are. Nobody said that was inherently evil. Making laws to control the actions of a populace is the only effective definition of social engineering, so... shrug. That's what they're doing. Specifically, they're arranging things so that people in relationships that don't fall under the definition of 'marriage' have access to similar property rights, which would, indubitably, have a measurable effect.

I believe that the previous laws were social engineering, trying to make everyone to fit into a christion view of society. Let people do what they want to do.

[jrandom]

I believe that the previous laws were social engineering, trying to make everyone to fit into a christion view of society. Let people do what they want to do.

Any governmental system other than anarchy can be defined as an attempt at social engineering.

*We* might agree that rape and murder are wrong, but that doesn't mean that we're not engaging in social engineering when we set up a republic that punishes such behaviour.

[TwoSeven]

I dont agree with the government tax policy - it doesnt work and is certainly not fair.

I dont see why I should work 50% of the year for someone else, and not be entitled to any of those benefits should I find myself not being able to work (like the company downsizes).

When my last contract ended I was debt free, but had little savings (after paying the debts I had 2k left). I had to pay myself $200/wk income for 5 months before I became a student and was able to claim student allowance.

Lucky I havnt purchased a house yet or I would have lost everything - the buggers at winz even checked my bank balance to ensure I didnt have any savings stashed away somewhere.

The simple rule - if you want to get ahead in life - dont live in new zealand. You'd have the same quality of life living on a pacific island somwhere. Great for retired people but rubbish for us professionals.