"Bold steps" by the g'ment - changes announced at 2pm today

[Tank]

Probably the most sensible thing that's ever happened in parliament, I thought it was well deserved, and I was gutted he did'nt get away with it......(although not surprised, living in little old left-wing Zealand)

you forget that they were doing the same thing only a couple of weeks prior to a National member. If you cant take it - dont give it in the first place.

[firefighter]

Um, that would be me. You got a problem with that?

Redefining slow since 2006...says it all really.

[Tank]

The green party pissed me off so much - Im going home tonight and cutting down a fucken tree. Then Im going for a thrash on the bike to burn some fossell fuels - just out of spite.

[rainman]

Reapplication requirements for those on the dole for an extended period

Yeah, 'cos it's really easy to get on the dole, and shuffling some more forms will make "dole bludgers" get jobs. Oh wait...

Work and training requirements for those on the DPB

I'd like to see training support for all unemployed. That's what Paula Bennett set up, isn't it? Oh wait...

they are going review the whole "sickness benefit" scam - fucken brilliant.

What makes sickness benefits a scam? I've only ever been on a benefit once, and that was sickness, for a short while. Wasn't easy, wasn't much, and I certainly didn't feel I was benefitting from a scam.

Well - it looks like GST is going to be confirmed at 15% in May.

Yay for National, that's what they campaigned on - more tax!!! Oh, wait...

He mentioned across the board personal tax reductions - not just the top bracket.

I will wait to see the details of that before believing a word of it. They have lied about this before.

[Brian d marge]

Grow dope !!! yeee haaaa
no tax , raise the price to cover the GST all good

I voted ten years ago , Life is good , 25 hr work week, can afford a house ( building a new one) have nice car and a few bikes ... no stress ( except from the wife )

OK its a bit of a drive to see anything green , but you cant eat scenery !

I can really see the IMF pushing their ideas here , privatization of ,,,almost everything , ACC being next as will the prisons

all of this will benefit overseas corporations and NOT New ZEALAND ( why you would put up with such sh!t is beyond me ,,,)

buy you produce locally , for cash , avoid the GST !

Stephen

[Mully]

Bush lawyer.
Buying a house or shares for a long term hold is not liable to tax and consequently the ird don't go after it.

What?

Why would you buy anything for a long term hold unless you were intending to sell it and make money?

http://www.ird.govt.nz/toii/property...k-pay-tax.html

Income earned from property sales is like any other income. You may have to pay income tax on it.

If you buy a property with the firm intention of selling it when prices rise, to make a gain from the increase in its value, the profit is likely to be taxable.

It is, of course, up to IRD to prove your intent - but then if you're claiming a tax "loss" on the investment, it's pretty hard to argue (with a straight face) that your intent wasn't to make money from a rise in the value. If it's your family home, you can't claim a tax loss.

EDIT: Unless you're talking about not selling it ever. In which case, you're quite correct - IRD wont go after an increase in the value in that instance. Sorry, crossed wires I think.

But then the income from that investment (shares or property) is taxable of course.

[rainman]

The green party pissed me off so much - Im going home tonight and cutting down a fucken tree. Then Im going for a thrash on the bike to burn some fossell fuels - just out of spite.

Yeah, that's real grown up.

Redefining slow since 2006...says it all really.

Buddy, if you want to get into a IQ dick-measuring contest, all I will say is "bring it on"

all of this will benefit overseas corporations and NOT New ZEALAND ( why you would put up with such sh!t is beyond me ,,,)

Me too. Suppose this is where the word "sheeple" comes from.

Good to see Rodney on the telly now demonstrating his knowledge of science. Oh wait...

[Tank]

Yeah, 'cos it's really easy to get on the dole, and shuffling some more forms will make "dole bludgers" get jobs. Oh wait...

Im sure the labour model of just leaving them on it forever isnt helping anyone.

I'd like to see training support for all unemployed. That's what Paula Bennett set up, isn't it? Oh wait...

They dont need training - most of them just need a rocket up their arse to get a fucken job.

What makes sickness benefits a scam? I've only ever been on a benefit once, and that was sickness, for a short while. Wasn't easy, wasn't much, and I certainly didn't feel I was benefitting from a scam.

Because it has been shown that many are on it for life - they simply have moved the long term unemployed. Lets have SB for people who actually need it (not saying you didnt). But fucks that are on SB for 10 years because they smoke pot and are addicted and cannot work .

Yay for National, that's what they campaigned on - more tax!!! Oh, wait...

You missed where it is offset across the entire tax brackets - nett income for all will be up. You greenies miss a lot huh?

I will wait to see the details of that before believing a word of it. They have lied about this before.

Like the great global warming con. Parties in glass houses etc

[Tank]

Yeah, that's real grown up...

Nagh - its not. But hey I enjoy it and the tree was impacting my sea view. So - without it - Ill be adding value to my home. A fucken double win !!!!

[rainman]

Im sure the labour model of just leaving them on it forever isnt helping anyone.
...
fucks that are on SB for 10 years because they smoke pot and are addicted and cannot work .

Oh, you mean the Harris family? I'm sure Paula claimed they were on a benefit since 1984. No National governments since then?

They dont need training - most of them just need a rocket up their arse to get a fucken job.

Ah yes, because the economy always provides heaps of jobs. Sorry, I forgot. Funny how when I've been looking, options have been a bit scarce. I must need a rocket up my arse.

You missed where it is offset across the entire tax brackets - nett income for all will be up. You greenies miss a lot huh?

I will reserve judgement until I see the actual details. But my prediction is that the uber-rich will benefit (with a sop to the poor) at the cost of the middle class. And you dumb bastards think they're looking after you!

Like the great global warming con. Parties in glass houses etc

Not getting into a climate change debate here but if you think it's a con good luck to you. I'll stick with the science, thanks.

ps. Just seen this - from http://www.nzherald.co.nz/martin-joh...0538381&pnum=1

National leader John Key said told a press conference this morning that if National is elected and does a "half decent job" at growing the economy, then increasing GST and the top tax rate will not be necessary.

Snicker.

[mashman]

Like the great global warming con. Parties in glass houses etc

"Funding for a network of open access food development and commercialisation facilities, investment in the domestic centre for Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research and in the Global Research Alliance, and in Primary Growth Partnership."

seriously, WTF is Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research? Cow farts?

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-sto...stments-stung/

[Miscreant]

What?

Why would you buy anything for a long term hold unless you were intending to sell it and make money?

http://www.ird.govt.nz/toii/property...k-pay-tax.html



It is, of course, up to IRD to prove your intent - but then if you're claiming a tax "loss" on the investment, it's pretty hard to argue (with a straight face) that your intent wasn't to make money from a rise in the value. If it's your family home, you can't claim a tax loss.

EDIT: Unless you're talking about not selling it ever. In which case, you're quite correct - IRD wont go after an increase in the value in that instance. Sorry, crossed wires I think.

But then the income from that investment (shares or property) is taxable of course.

Seriously, don't give up your day, which appears to be talking shit from the looks of it I may add. It's not up to the ird to prove anything. They need only level a charge and it is up to you to prove otherwise. Under tax law you are guilty until proven innocent.
However you are still wrong on your original point anyway.
Sure you "may" be liable for tax on the sale of a house, in certain specific circumstances as I outlined.

Boody bush lawyers.

[Tank]

Oh, you mean the Harris family? I'm sure Paula claimed they were on a benefit since 1984. No National governments since then?

Them and many others - truth tho is that there are many who have lived on benefit for the labour years - at least National is standing up and saying 'enough'!

Ah yes, because the economy always provides heaps of jobs. Sorry, I forgot. Funny how when I've been looking, options have been a bit scarce. I must need a rocket up my arse.

Not you specifically - but if you dont think there are many '000's of people that do need a rocket you are living in a dream world. A sad insulated dream world.

I will reserve judgement until I see the actual details. But my prediction is that the uber-rich will benefit (with a sop to the poor) at the cost of the middle class. And you dumb bastards think they're looking after you!

meh - im in the rich category - so im all good. Guess Im not such a dumb bastard after all.

Not getting into a climate change debate here but if you think it's a con good luck to you. I'll stick with the science, thanks.

ahh - the faked science that didnt stand up.

ps. Just seen this - from http://www.nzherald.co.nz/martin-joh...0538381&pnum=1



Snicker.

in red baby 10 chars

[rainman]

Fookin hell, colour me surprised. Peter Dunne just made a small amount of sense!

[Swoop]

WHAT!!?? The "safety net" of the unemployment benefit ISN'T a hammock to laze around in??
Fucking great!!

Leave GST alone and hammer the abusers of the public purse!

On social service, Mr Key confirmed that legislation would be introduced to reform the benefit system as promised before the last election.

"For most people, a benefit should only provide temporary support until they can return to work."

Fookin hell, colour me surprised. Peter Dunne just made a small amount of sense!

What? He said that he was going to take a crap?