Rich families rort the system -FFS!

[Mully]

Ya know what's good? The ignore list.

*sigh* bliss.

[Hitcher]

Demeaning bling sent your way fuckwit

Thank you for drawing that to my attention. I may never have looked at my rep status and noticed otherwise. I hope you feel better now.

I'm still waiting for the straight question.

[HenryDorsetCase]

No I wouldn't.
This is NOT a victimless "crime" it's pure self centered greed.

dude, it isn't a "crime" of any sort.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Start a new thread on it. But with a policy like that you'd be right of the Nazi party. Maybe ACT would take you?

Perhaps you would enjoy living in a third world country with widespread poverty/crime, and a lack of any kind of public health, education or any sort of social services - who knows?

ad hominem.

and thank you for your description of NZ which I pay for already. I'd like to pay less tax so that I could afford to send you to "Logic for beginners 101".

and at least the trains would run on time.

[short-circuit]

Thank you for drawing that to my attention. I may never have looked at my rep status and noticed otherwise. I hope you feel better now.

I'm still waiting for the straight question.

I don't think I really need to ask it do I?

It's quite clear that you (like the majority of arsehole users of this forum) admire the kind of weasel [your words - enterprising] accounting practices that enable other arseholes to collect benefits that they really should have no entitlements to.

[short-circuit]

ad hominem.

and thank you for your description of NZ which I pay for already. I'd like to pay less tax so that I could afford to send you to "Logic for beginners 101".

and at least the trains would run on time.

Flat tax society = flat earth society

[MotoGirl]

No I wouldn't.
This is NOT a victimless "crime" it's pure self centered greed.

It's not a crime. Period.

Can you clarify how it is "greed" when they are legally entitled to it? And are NZ's beneficiaries also greedy?

[Pedrostt500]

Start a new thread on it. But with a policy like that you'd be right of the Nazi party. Maybe ACT would take you?

Perhaps you would enjoy living in a third world country with widespread poverty/crime, and a lack of any kind of public health, education or any sort of social services - who knows?

20% was a number out of the air, and is far less than the actual tax you pay at the moment, for instance you earn $100 as an employee, you pay PAYE, you go out and by lunch for $10, you pay another 12.5 % GST on that $10 that you have already paid PAYE on, if you spend $20 on petrol for your bike, 12.5 % GST plus a Road users Tax as well that is inclusive of the price of petrol, if you buy a beer, then you also pay excise taxes with the Gst charged on top.
The government Knows that a major chunk of what you earn as a wage earner will be paid in various TAXES after PAYE has been taken out of your wages for you by your employer. So I'm right wing?, think again.

[Robert Taylor]

I pay 39% tax- my Wife pays 33%
We have no rental properties and do not claim any public funds assistance AT ALL (although have in the past back when on 20% tax levels)

Not all of us "jealous" tax bracketers go hunting for the bludge ya know, just the ones with fucking trust accounts and multiple investment properties etc

Have more than one house, and rent one out- get the fuck outta my godamn tax money- these cunts are as bad as dole bludgers and 1k a week dpb mums

Greedy pricks plan to make a property loss to justify ripping US off

Another sad fact- I got a payrise- it pushed my tax bracket up to the point I actually get LESS in the hand by about 5%- and I just carry on- what else can I do?
Roger has a good point on flat tax rates

Yep, its those at the top and those at the bottom who are screwing those in the middle. The tax system should be simplified, maybe we should just have a flat consumption tax.
Im all for hard work, people doing productive things that benefit the country and employ people. One thing I particularly hate is brazen speculation.

[short-circuit]

It's not a crime. Period.

Can you clarify how it is "greed" when they are legally entitled to it? And are NZ's beneficiaries also greedy?

Confused about the differences and connections between morality and legality:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlber...al_development

Read the thread from the start - it's about who should qualify as a beneficiary (surely this should be based on NEED)

[short-circuit]

The tax system should be simplified, maybe we should just have a flat consumption tax.

Who will be most affected by that?

[Ixion]

It's not a crime. Period.

Can you clarify how it is "greed" when they are legally entitled to it? And are NZ's beneficiaries also greedy?

If I go out with others to a shared meal, and shove my way forward and shovel 90% of the food onto my own plate, that is not illegal. But I am sure the others would say that I was greedy.

Yes, many beneficiaries are also greedy.

I have little time for either trustifarians or able bodied benefit bludgers. Both are shirkers and betwixt the two they have brought this country to its knees.

Every year the proportion of people actually putting in a honest day's work for a fair day's pay steadily reduces.

Vote Communist. The only party that will abolish both taxes and benefits.

[MotoGirl]

Confused about the differences and connections between morality and legality:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohlber...al_development

Read the thread from the start - it's about who should qualify as a beneficiary (surely this should be based on NEED)

You could continue to debate this for hours and never convince me that your morals are right. I have my own, thanks.

Benefits have criteria to determine eligibility; if you meet those criteria then the system deems you to "need" that benefit.

[short-circuit]

Benefits have criteria to determine eligibility; if you meet those criteria then the system deems you to "need" that benefit.

An attempt to exonerate the indefensible.

Fail.

[Pedrostt500]

You could continue to debate this for hours and never convince me that your morals are right. I have my own, thanks.

Benefits have criteria to determine eligibility; if you meet those criteria then the system deems you to "need" that benefit.

But if the Income is manipulated to be able to get an eligibility to a benifit, that other wise would not be eligible for, does this not moraly bankrupt the system, and should it be these loop holes that should be tightened or closed.