The welfare state

[rainman]

NO! I clearly cover that in my post.

Perhaps I am just being dim here, so please, humour me and connect the dots.
- You want to cut business tax, completely if possible,
- You propose to raise GST to compensate, but only partly.
- You don't expect business to cut prices because they're greedy.
- You haven't said how you'd reduce govt spend to make up the shortfall.
- You haven't admitted this means increasing individual tax.
What kind of maths do you use? I'm genuinely open-minded to wacky suggestions, but only those that actually add up. Unless you have a source of magic beans somewhere, I can't see this working for the voters who will have to foot the bill, so it will never happen and is what we might call irrelevant.

I don’t see it happening either.

Eh? I'm confused, you were just talking about "knocking a third off the purchase price of everything" and now you say you don't see it happening?

I don’t give a fuck how messy “people” attempt to behave, they need to live within their means.

Agree. How to do it? This is mainly not a government problem, so should be able to be solved without them. It does involve getting business and the media to do the right thing, though. And the "consumers", too. Oops.

I suspect we agree quite strongly here, actually. People have lost their sense of financial responsibility, and want the latest gadgets and lifestyle despite not being able to afford them. Why? Debt's way too easy (partly to compensate for the free-market-fuckeration of the middle and lower classes, who would otherwise not be able to afford these products) and partly because many people sense there's little point in working like their parents' generation because their chance of "making it" is steadily diminishing as the elites hoover up more and more of the pie.

OK, maybe in your world they're just innately lazy gangsta bitches on the DPB, but at least we agree on the problem?

As opposed to hiding under the skirts of an employer? Absofuckinglutely.

Really. It's an unqualified good (always better) to work for yourself? OK, but then I ask "Do you seriously think the entire society could be self-sufficient self-employed, live-and-die-by-the-sword small biz owners?" And you answer:

Of course not.

So it's always better, except when it's impossible? So, not better for everyone? Maybe some people should be under the skirts of an employer? Or even have to be? Does this still make them inferior to you? And can they in turn still feel good about themselves by dissing the unemployed?

Let's get out of kindergarten, guys, it's 2011.

But the vast majority need to be producing real live goods

Agree 100%. Why are we not? Nothing to do with 1984 and the economic philosophy you're so keen on?

Kiwirail desperately need heavy engineering support that actually produces effective results

I believe ya, but why don't we have that, again? (See above)

What’s fucked the economy is the loss of primary and secondary industry.

Indeed, it's a major cause. Why don't we have that? (You're getting the idea by now, I'm sure).

Think about it. You understand cause and effect. Engineering is evidence-based. So why hold loyalty for an economic model which the evidence pretty clearly shows is a failure?

If you do like unorthodox thinking, two solutions for your contemplation:
1. Anything that would have Mr Friedman spinning in his grave. Re-nationalise key industries and banks, protect local industries, do-it-ourselves not globalise, set trade tariffs, block most foreign ownership, restart training and apprenticeships for productive industries... Good god I'm sounding like Winston Peters.
2. Socialist (a real one, not the Helen Clark version) revolution. Think Cuba, Venezuela, that sort of thing. Ya, I don't see this happening either.

In short, cut the dole by reducing the demand for it - by building a strong economy that makes jobs. The current global free trade horse puckey just doesn't do this, the evidence on that is clear.

We don't have the right people to sell this, though, so it stands as much chance of being voted in as Mr Stranger's weird ideas. Thus it is also, sadly, irrelevant. Also, some of it is illegal, and the WTO would bitchslap up every way till Tuesday. And they probably have bigger guns.

Which is why we is fucked.

Congratulations, you got to use neolib in a sentence. The rest is drivel.

I was happier abut the useful idiots bit, actually. (And it's not drivel - we agree on a whole lot of things). Seriously though, you're being sold a pup. Follow the evidence, not your indoctrination.

[rainman]

Anyway, theres too much reading and not enough videos on this thread.

I can rise to that challenge...

[Howie]

Kiwirail desperately need heavy engineering support that actually produces effective results, trust me, Hillside Workshop losses are mostely due to their inability to provide that.

Interesting view of Hillside workshops.

What would you say are the reasons that they couldn't Get the support they needed??

I have a few ideas why they can't, but I'm interested in yours!!

[Ocean1]

Eh? I'm confused, you were just talking about "knocking a third off the purchase price of everything" and now you say you don't see it happening?

Correct on both counts. I can’t disprove the idea in terms of likely economic success, but it’s extremely unlikely to get past the general preconception that companies should pay tax. It might bend in that direction if companies had the vote their tax contributions arguably entitle them to.

Agree. How to do it? This is mainly not a government problem, so should be able to be solved without them. It does involve getting business and the media to do the right thing, though. And the "consumers", too. Oops.

Government shouldn’t govern? C’mon, it’s easy, encourage saving, discourage borrowing. It’s just not likely to attract votes.

I suspect we agree quite strongly here, actually. People have lost their sense of financial responsibility, and want the latest gadgets and lifestyle despite not being able to afford them. Why? Debt's way too easy (partly to compensate for the free-market-fuckeration of the middle and lower classes, who would otherwise not be able to afford these products) and partly because many people sense there's little point in working like their parents' generation because their chance of "making it" is steadily diminishing as the elites hoover up more and more of the pie.

OK, maybe in your world they're just innately lazy gangsta bitches on the DPB, but at least we agree on the problem?

Probably not the cause though. You are aware, are you not, that wealth is more evenly distributed now than at pretty much any time in history?

So the mechanism causing the problems you site are more likely to be the disconnect between the gnenration of that wealth and the spending of it, no?

Really. It's an unqualified good (always better) to work for yourself?

OK, but then I ask "Do you seriously think the entire society could be self-sufficient self-employed, live-and-die-by-the-sword small biz owners?" And you answer:

Insomuch as it usually results in a more accurate link between worth and income, yes pretty much.

So it's always better, except when it's impossible? So, not better for everyone? Maybe some people should be under the skirts of an employer? Or even have to be?
Does this still make them inferior to you? And can they in turn still feel good about themselves by dissing the unemployed?

Let's get out of kindergarten, guys, it's 2011.

From what complex does the “inferior” comment arise? Does a propensity to prefer that people rely on their own efforts for their own income indicate juvenile thinking to you?

I’m ambivalent about how inferior or otherwise you or anyone else feels about your work habits. Unless, of course you’re attempting to justify an income that you simply FEEL you deserve, then I’d FEEL inclined to tell you to fuck off. That’s how the majority of adults react to undeserved handouts in 2011.

Agree 100%. Why are we not? Nothing to do with 1984 and the economic philosophy you're so keen on?

Keen history buff, eh? No, nothing to do with 1984, much, much simpler than that. We’ve got far too many alternatives to productive membership of our society. We can’t afford them.

I believe ya, but why don't we have that, again? (See above)

Largely because it's mired in the work ethics of the 1960’s, (see above).

Indeed, it's a major cause. Why don't we have that? (You're getting the idea by now, I'm sure).

Because in much the same way that we allow too many people ways to live long term without producing anything of value, we also allow too many multi-national corporations to thrive while providing nothing of substance.

Think about it. You understand cause and effect. Engineering is evidence-based. So why hold loyalty for an economic model which the evidence pretty clearly shows is a failure?

If you do like unorthodox thinking, two solutions for your contemplation:
1. Anything that would have Mr Friedman spinning in his grave. Re-nationalise key industries and banks, protect local industries, do-it-ourselves not globalise, set trade tariffs, block most foreign ownership, restart training and apprenticeships for productive industries... Good god I'm sounding like Winston Peters.
2. Socialist (a real one, not the Helen Clark version) revolution. Think Cuba, Venezuela, that sort of thing. Ya, I don't see this happening either.

In short, cut the dole by reducing the demand for it - by building a strong economy that makes jobs. The current global free trade horse puckey just doesn't do this, the evidence on that is clear.

We don't have the right people to sell this, though, so it stands as much chance of being voted in as Mr Stranger's weird ideas. Thus it is also, sadly, irrelevant. Also, some of it is illegal, and the WTO would bitchslap up every way till Tuesday. And they probably have bigger guns.

Which is why we is fucked.

Unfortunately the minor successes in selling those concepts to simpletons is what has put us in the shit to start with, I’m hardly surprised you’re finding it difficult to get much traction for a second round of parasitic policy. You’ve got all the right words up there, you just need to arrange them in the correct order. Reducing demand for the doll will work when it becomes easier to work, which will happen when businesses are more productive, which will happen when less non-productive output is demanded of them.

The free market thing does work, dude. It’s just that we haven’t had one for a couple of hundred years, (if then). The largest growth industries since then have been those who demand an income without producing anything anyone wants.

However it's spun, the consequences of the failure to produce a living in the long term... is death. That applies as much to a nation or a business as it does to an individual.

[Ocean1]

Interesting view of Hillside workshops.

What would you say are the reasons that they couldn't Get the support they needed??

I have a few ideas why they can't, but I'm interested in yours!!

I'll PM you later, dude.

[Howie]

I'll PM you later, dude.

ok, look forward to hearing from you.

[BoristheBiter]

This might be a very simplistic idea but why don't we just keep what we earn? Pay for the things we use, yes they might be higher but if we don't use them we are not being charged, and its up to your family to look after you if you fall on hard times.

Getting something for nothing has been the downfall of west, constantly propping up the flotsam and jetsam of society.
How can someone that has been on the dole all there life get the same as someone that has worked?

No matter how you spin the argument the non contributes are, and will continue to, bring the rest of us down.

As said earlier the constant use of free handouts by successive governments has now made the welfare state untenable and it will soon drag us down if a major shake up is not carried out.
Unfortunately I don't see this happening any time soon.

[Pussy]

This might be a very simplistic idea but why don't we just keep what we earn? Pay for the things we use, yes they might be higher but if we don't use them we are not being charged, and its up to your family to look after you if you fall on hard times.

Getting something for nothing has been the downfall of west, constantly propping up the flotsam and jetsam of society.
How can someone that has been on the dole all there life get the same as someone that has worked?

No matter how you spin the argument the non contributes are, and will continue to, bring the rest of us down.

As said earlier the constant use of free handouts by successive governments has now made the welfare state untenable and it will soon drag us down if a major shake up is not carried out.
Unfortunately I don't see this happening any time soon.

Love your work!
The lefties should have shown dedication to their ideals by emigrating to Romania in the early 80s....

[rainman]

This is an interesting conversation, unfortunately I have to work today so won't be able to give it my full attention. But some quick questions:

I can’t disprove the idea in terms of likely economic success, but it’s extremely unlikely to get past the general preconception that companies should pay tax. It might bend in that direction if companies had the vote their tax contributions arguably entitle them to.

Sounds a bit like you're trying to navigate to a predetermined conclusion, tbh. If there is no evidence of past success of a scheme, why on earth would we do it if not for purely ideological reasons?

Government shouldn’t govern?

No, I'm saying it's no gummint debt that's the problem here, but consumer debt, so the consumers should take some responsibility for fixing that.

You are aware, are you not, that wealth is more evenly distributed now than at pretty much any time in history?

No, in fact my view would be close to the opposite of that. Do you have any evidence to cite to support this opinion of yours?

From what complex does the “inferior” comment arise? Does a propensity to prefer that people rely on their own efforts for their own income indicate juvenile thinking to you?

I wasn't the one looking down on people for being "under the skirts of an employer", or bene-bashing...

Unless, of course you’re attempting to justify an income that you simply FEEL you deserve, then I’d FEEL inclined to tell you to fuck off. That’s how the majority of adults react to undeserved handouts in 2011.

I have had only a very short period of my life when I have received any form of handout at all. And given the amount I pay in tax and the relative modesty of my demands on the social fabric, I don't have any moral issues with this - in fact I would comfortably say I was entitled to it at the time.

Reducing demand for the doll will work when it becomes easier to work, which will happen when businesses are more productive, which will happen when less non-productive output is demanded of them.

Productivity isn't the main problem. Look at the evidence.

The free market thing does work, dude. It’s just that we haven’t had one for a couple of hundred years, (if then).

OK, I'll bite. Name one successful country that has a free market that meets your standards, and where is "does work".

[allycatz]

Speaking from experience on receiving a benefit a few years back when my twins were little, I decided after trying to manage on a benefit I'd go back to work. At that stage I received, DPB, Accomodation supplement and Special Benefit. So, when you go back to work, the Special benefit goes, the accom supp drops by over half and the DPB adjusts accordingly downwards. That meant that any job I did, the first 18 - 20 hours went on just making up the money I lost. On top of that there was childcare for my twins (then$180 per week). I lost money (around$150 per week overall) in going back to work and for a while struggled even more than when I was at home. For me it was still worthwhile to get away from the stigma of it all, but I can understand how for some people it ends up in the too hard basket.

[Howie]

This might be a very simplistic idea but why don't we just keep what we earn? Pay for the things we use, yes they might be higher but if we don't use them we are not being charged, and its up to your family to look after you if you fall on hard times.

Getting something for nothing has been the downfall of west, constantly propping up the flotsam and jetsam of society.
How can someone that has been on the dole all there life get the same as someone that has worked?

No matter how you spin the argument the non contributes are, and will continue to, bring the rest of us down.

As said earlier the constant use of free handouts by successive governments has now made the welfare state untenable and it will soon drag us down if a major shake up is not carried out.
Unfortunately I don't see this happening any time soon.

Fortunately I don't see this happening any time soon. As I for one would not want to live in a society where the those in need aren't looked after. What would happen do you think if all Benefits were stopped?

Would you want to live with Bars on your windows? In Compounds with 24 hour security? Carry a gun to protect yourself at all Times? Mind you it would create a few more jobs in security, and the police. Hang on a minute aren't the police paid out of the tax revenue?

[Ocean1]

Sounds a bit like you're trying to navigate to a predetermined conclusion, tbh. If there is no evidence of past success of a scheme, why on earth would we do it if not for purely ideological reasons?

It wasn’t my idea, I just said I can’t see any reason it wouldn’t produce better results. What’s the point of invoking the lack of past success if the concepts haven’t previously been tried? Sound to me a bit like you’re attempting to attribute a pre-conceived characteristic.

No, I'm saying it's no gummint debt that's the problem here, but consumer debt, so the consumers should take some responsibility for fixing that.

But that debt, that poor behaviour affects the whole economy, isn’t it a socialist concept that the government should control that? In fact if lending regulation didn’t favour poor lending policy so much there’d be a bloody sight less loans to teenagers for things they genuinely can’t afford.

No, in fact my view would be close to the opposite of that. Do you have any evidence to cite to support this opinion of yours?

Your view is nonsense, do your own research.

I wasn't the one looking down on people for being "under the skirts of an employer", or bene-bashing...

Neither was I, there’s no disrespect in the statement, your interpretations are as usual slanted in favour of your prejudices.

I have had only a very short period of my life when I have received any form of handout at all. And given the amount I pay in tax and the relative modesty of my demands on the social fabric, I don't have any moral issues with this - in fact I would comfortably say I was entitled to it at the time.

Onya. Obviously a good bloke ™

The same can’t be said for far, far too many.

Productivity isn't the main problem. Look at the evidence.

Not? Well on a National level there’s only two variables there, dude. Which is it, low income or high expenditure?

OK, I'll bite. Name one successful country that has a free market that meets your standards, and where is "does work".

Did not you read the last bit there, dude? We haven’t seen a genuine free market since governments were decided by votes from those who rely on markets being regulated in their favour. The closest you’ll see is the one in the local car park of a Sunday afternoon.

[Ender EnZed]

This might be a very simplistic idea but why don't we just keep what we earn? Pay for the things we use, yes they might be higher but if we don't use them we are not being charged, and its up to your family to look after you if you fall on hard times.

Survival of the fittest. Your children would be in a deep fryer by (former) Dole-day afternoon.

[mashman]

Getting something for nothing has been the downfall of west, constantly propping up the flotsam and jetsam of society.
How can someone that has been on the dole all there life get the same as someone that has worked?

No matter how you spin the argument the non contributes are, and will continue to, bring the rest of us down.

You mean work or die?

[mashman]

No matter how you spin the argument the non contributes are, and will continue to, bring the rest of us down.

I disagree.

Instead of heading towards New Zealandopolis at break neck speed... suffering the associated growing pains of population explosion driven by rampant "consumerism" and the general confusion that goes with it. Why don't we try something slightly different. You may find that that perceived laziness disappears.

We pool our assets. Everyone in the country.

You will suddenly have a shitload of cash and a workforce that works for free. An unemployment rate that has never been heard of (in the millions (lazy bastards won't even be noticed) ), but by default, this is not a bad thing at all? Not in a society that's still makin food, producing water, exporting overseas etc... (potentially for free... wonder what countries could benefit from free lamb ).

To fund this venture, we invite large corporations to set up head office in NZ and to make use of our free (highly educated) workforce for a small fee. That fee should be enough to cover our imports and lifestyle. We can keep the lovely technology and all move in a slightly different direction for a change. What education programme would you like with your KFC sir? That opens up opportunities to have a crack at tackling social issues, whilst not screwing the country over financially. Isn't that the goal? happy healthy workforce? Low crime rates? Infant mortality rate? educational standards/subjects/topics/institutions? Water quality? Air quality? Manage population growth (removing "career mums" and associated babies)No pressure to become one of the workers? Parents able to spend time with their kids and not leave them at the hands of a "society" that really doesn't deserve that term. Kids able to play in the streets again . I'll stop.

I'd rather not see people die because someone has deemed them lazy.