Rich families rort the system -FFS!

[The Stranger:Me]

How is protecting your assets using a Trust an evil or shameful act?
I don’t see why people who act prudently should be penalised when irresponsible jackarses get given handouts. If you think this doesn’t happen, read on...

There is nothing wrong with a trust, they serve many a legitimate purpose.
Though as a vehicle with which to extract more money from the govt (i.e. your friends, family and fellow man) for no return (work, goods or services etc) I find somewhat shameful at the least.
Were this an intended consequence I would put it in the evil category personally.

[short-circuit]

How is protecting your assets using a Trust an evil or shameful act?
I don’t see why people who act prudently should be penalised when irresponsible jackarses get given handouts. If you think this doesn’t happen, read on...

My grandfather lived in a retirement home for four years while he slowly disintegrated from Parkinson’s and Diabetes. Not only had my grandparents owned their own business but they had paid shitloads of tax and saved for their retirement. They never even had a mortgage for God’s sake – it was all cash in the bank.

Because they were sittin’ pretty, they had to fork out for grandad’s care –somewhere to the tune of $120,000. Meanwhile, my great-uncle– a raging alcoholic who had pissed everything away – was also in the retirement home and receiving the same standard of care, although his was paid for by the government.

Why should my great-uncle have been given a handout? He wasn’t “needy”, he was just a fuckwit who blew his money on things that weren’t necessities.

Like Stranger said, the use of a trusts is not the issue - it is the use of trusts and other invisible investments to extract extra benefits (not "entitlements") for which you have no real NEED for.

Shameful.

[Hitcher]

Wherever there is a welfare state or state-funded charity, there will be rorts.

People seem to forget that taxpayer funded welfare should be a safety net, not a hammock. It certainly isn't an entitlement.

Trusts aren't the only vehicles available for people to "protect" their assets or minimise their liabilities. Limited liability companies, shell companies, offshore bank accounts, credit cards and insurance also provide mechanisms to protect/conceal assets from the prying eyes and sticky fingers of the New Zealand Inland Revenue Department and agencies with a vested interest in one's financial position.

The Government is promising a review of the current benefit and personal taxation schemes, and has already started to fly a few kites in this regard. It will be interesting to see what their serious contenders for change are.

[RantyDave]

Refusing a "handout" is exactly the same thing as refusing a tax cut. Do you see anyone refusing a tax cut? Volunteering to pay more?

Dave

[short-circuit]

the prying eyes and sticky fingers of the New Zealand Inland Revenue Department and agencies with a vested interest in one's financial position.

Again the weasel words implying that taxation is somehow theft.

Ask the Edwardians or the Victorians what their societies were like without taxation. Ask them how well "charity" alone served them

[short-circuit]

Refusing a "handout" is exactly the same thing as refusing a tax cut. Do you see anyone refusing a tax cut? Volunteering to pay more?

Dave

I dunno about that Dave. I'd like fairer taxation - far more progressively structured. It would involve the majority paying more.

I'm quite prepared to pay for the benefits of living in a civilised and socially responsible society.

[MotoGirl]

There is nothing wrong with a trust, they serve many a legitimate purpose.
Though as a vehicle with which to extract more money from the govt (i.e. your friends, family and fellow man) for no return (work, goods or services etc) I find somewhat shameful at the least.
Were this an intended consequence I would put it in the evil category personally.

Cheers for that. Although, personally I consider it more of an "added bonus" provided it [the Trust] wasn't setup solely for the purpose of gaining these additional benefits.

[short-circuit]

Cheers for that. Although, personally I consider it more of an "added bonus" provided it [the Trust] wasn't setup solely for the purpose of gaining these additional benefits.

....but you'll take them any way - just because you can.



Are you the kind of person that would go looting after a natural disaster?

[The Stranger:Me]

Refusing a "handout" is exactly the same thing as refusing a tax cut.

Exactly??
Tax is taking what you earned from you. A tax cut is taking less of what you earned from you.
A hand out is something you didn't earn, but someone else did, so you are taking from your friends and family.
If everyone recieves a tax cut then everyone benefits, if you take a handout not intended for you, you benefit at the expense of others.

I don't see it as exactly the same thing by any stretch.

[boomer]

Exactly??
Tax is taking what you earned from you. A tax cut is taking less of what you earned from you.
A hand out is something you didn't earn, but someone else did, so you are taking from your friends and family.
If everyone recieves a tax cut then everyone benefits, if you take a handout not intended for you, you benefit at the expense of others.

I don't see it as exactly the same thing by any stretch.

one could argue that a tax cut is only a reduction in the left hand, the right hand then needs to increase $$ or reduce output to cover the left hands tax cut..

[Hitcher]

Again the weasel words implying that taxation is somehow theft.

Any inference drawn is yours.

Are you saying that taxation isn't theft?

[Hitcher]

Are you the kind of person that would go looting after a natural disaster?

Define "looting". Does that include sourcing food to feed one's family or medical supplies for the sick and injured?

[boomer]

Define "looting". Does that include sourcing food to feed one's family or medical supplies for the sick and injured?

no.. its getting a 60" LCD TV

can i have one on blick plse?!

[short-circuit]

Are you saying that taxation isn't theft?

I'm saying it's a responsiblity - part of a social contract that entitles one to contribute in order to receive the benefits of a civilised society.

[short-circuit]

Define "looting". Does that include sourcing food to feed one's family or medical supplies for the sick and injured?

That example would relate to NEED and SURVIVAL obviously.

I don't think these are issues in MotoGirl's case. She's just helping herself because she can and the people she's ripping off are faceless