2011 Budget

[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.

[SPman]

Treasury forecasting 4% growth?
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.

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!

[Oscar]

Treasury forecasting 4% growth?
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.

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!

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 ("you people" take because you can... BUT, once tightened I'd look at personal tax cuts ). 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

[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

[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.