The welfare state

[Howie]

Yup.
Especially with China upping troops on the border to get the smugglers under control and sending a message to the NK hardliners about their actions...

Yep and China does so well for it's own people.

[The Stranger:Me]

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.

Man, are you fucking with me?
Surely you jest.
From my post #249
"Get rid of company tax and increase income tax across the board and GST to 20% to recover the lost income tax take."
There's your missing link for fuck sake!
Learn to read.

And no of course it wont happen. Too many people are too rigid in their ideologies to even entertain the idea of thinking for themselves and apparently reading comprehension in this country is at an all time low right now - sound like anyone you know?

For the umpteenth time - YOU PAY ALL THE TAX ANYWAY! My company hasn't paid a cent in tax ever! I have collected a heap from you (the public at large) and passed it on to the government though. So the way it is now, you pay my tax anyway, what's the difference if you pay me to pay the govt or pay them direct?

Now, to be sure - I'm NOT saying a sudden drop to zero and as previously pointed out zero would almost certainly never happen. I used zero as an example to provoke thought on principals.

[The Stranger:Me]

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.

Irrelevant it may be. But you did ask what I would do?
Not what will or will not happen.
Were you to ask what I believe will happen I would have said we will continue to do the same as we have always done all the while expecting a different outcome.

Sounds suspiciously like a familiar definition for something. Think about that definition when you find yourself unable to change wont you.

[Winston001]

"Get rid of company tax and increase income tax across the board and GST to 20% to recover the lost income tax take."

That's an idea I've wondered about myself. If anyone is interested, its discussed on Straight Dope http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=608778

Theoretically all money eventually flows to the individual where it can be taxed.

The objection is that companies can retain earnings (untaxed) while still indirectly benefiting the shareholders. It shouldn't happen but can be damned hard to pick up.

[FJRider]

Theoretically all money eventually flows to the individual where it can be taxed.

In practice ... it flows from the individual ... and IS taxed ...

[rainman]

From my post #249
"Get rid of company tax and increase income tax across the board and GST to 20% to recover the lost income tax take."

Apologies, I had forgotten that's what you has said by the time we got to this part of the discussion. And in my defense, my brain is scrambled from too little sleep and too much study.

Also, had you said "my idea is to increase effective individual tax to over 60%", we could probably all have saved a bit of time here.

And before you trot out your logic that prices will drop and it won't matter, so would salaries and wages...

And no of course it wont happen.

Yes, but that's less because it' hard to get people to do sensible things, and more because it's a fucking stupid idea.

For the umpteenth time - YOU PAY ALL THE TAX ANYWAY! My company hasn't paid a cent in tax ever! I have collected a heap from you (the public at large) and passed it on to the government though. So the way it is now, you pay my tax anyway, what's the difference if you pay me to pay the govt or pay them direct?

I also pay all of your electricity bill, by the same token. Do you want that free too?

Irrelevant it may be. But you did ask what I would do?
... Think about that definition when you find yourself unable to change wont you.

Indeed i did ask that, fair enough. But now that you've told me I'm left a little disappointed.

And I'm eminently flexible and always willing to change my views - but only as long as the opposing views are better.than those I already hold.

[The Stranger:Me]

Apologies, I had forgotten that's what you has said by the time we got to this part of the discussion. And in my defense, my brain is scrambled from too little sleep and too much study.

Also, had you said "my idea is to increase effective individual tax to over 60%", we could probably all have saved a bit of time here.

And before you trot out your logic that prices will drop and it won't matter, so would salaries and wages...



Yes, but that's less because it' hard to get people to do sensible things, and more because it's a fucking stupid idea.

Without bothering to check your 60% figure (which incidentally is still below the top marginal rate we have had in NZ in years past) you are obviously missing a critical element (now there's a surprise). That is as noted on at least 2 previous occasions that it would be phased in and in reality wouldn't reach 0.

Providing an environment for companies to grow and become strong is clearly fucking stupid. Better off we all just hope like hell that commodity prices stay high, because that sounds like a plan we can all bank on for the future. And what's more, we don't actually need companies anyway because the likes of yourself are perfectly able to find jobs on your own, and hell, if you can't, you can always go on the dole right.

[scissorhands]

Who's winning the facts and figures pooh fight?

Keep it up, you will either finally get it right, or end up with a job in the herdhive

[Winston001]

Globally, company taxes average 25%. Few countries have no company tax.

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;316529

Much as I like your idea Stranger, the evidence is against it. Consider economic powerhouses such as China (25%), Japan (40%), Germany (29%), and the United States (0-35%).

If we reduced company tax to Zero, people would rearrange their affairs to keep as much money in their companies as possible. We know that, from existing efforts to move income to the lowest taxed enitity eg. spreading it among your children - tax law was amended to stop that.

The fairest tax system is one flat tax across everybody. Rodger Douglas tried - and he was correct.

[mashman]

Bit of confusion here chaps.

The govt intends selling 49% of the power companies and using that money to repay loans the govt owes to overseas lenders. So govt debt is reduced. That is good.

NZ doesn't owe private debt or public debt arising out of foreign investment in NZ assets. I'm not sure where you got that from, or I'm misunderstanding.

I didn't say it wasn't good (the post just above yours agrees... to a degree )

It doesn't? Did NZ not "take on" the debt of Kiwirail when it was re-bought from Oz? Is that the same thing?

This is confusing, even by your standards.
Why do we have to invest money overseas to grow our economy?
How does that and overseas debt (I assume that's what yer on about) relate to the price of electricity?

Surely there's a shit load of money being invested locally on energy generation?

Noooo, surely not.
Dunno, educate me... (but 1 reason will be to keep personal tax bills down)
If we're using the money from the asset sales to pay off overseas debt, there will be less $$$ available for investment/maintenance of the actual assets. Having nearly cut the "steady" cashflow in half, investment/maintenance will suffer and any shortfalls will need to be covered (up) and probably by the govt at our expense as the major shareholder... who will then have to borrow from overseas again for investment/maintenance etc... One consequence will be higher elecrticity prices... Pick away big boy.

There probably is... these things ain't cheap.

[Oscar]

Noooo, surely not.
Dunno, educate me... (but 1 reason will be to keep personal tax bills down)
If we're using the money from the asset sales to pay off overseas debt, there will be less $$$ available for investment/maintenance of the actual assets. Having nearly cut the "steady" cashflow in half, investment/maintenance will suffer and any shortfalls will need to be covered (up) and probably by the govt at our expense as the major shareholder... who will then have to borrow from overseas again for investment/maintenance etc... One consequence will be higher elecrticity prices... Pick away big boy.

There probably is... these things ain't cheap.

The money from the share sales has little or nothing to do with investment or maintenance in the infrastructure. That money would have to be found from somewhere even if the shares weren't sold.


I have no idea what your comment about the cashflow being cut in half refers to. Tell the voices in your head to slow down, so you can type everytng they say...

[Winston001]

Did NZ not "take on" the debt of Kiwirail when it was re-bought from Oz? Is that the same thing?

NO. NZ did not take on Toll Holdings debt when we purchased the rolling stock and ferries.

If we're using the money from the asset sales to pay off overseas debt, there will be less $$$ available for investment/maintenance of the actual assets. Having nearly cut the "steady" cashflow in half, investment/maintenance will suffer and any shortfalls will need to be covered (up) and probably by the govt at our expense as the major shareholder... who will then have to borrow from overseas again for investment/maintenance etc... One consequence will be higher elecrticity prices... Pick away big boy.

Oh dear. Mash - debt requires servicing ie. interest payments. If you have no debt = no interest to pay. That means more money for you to spend elsewhere.

SOEs like any other business set money aside each year to replace/build new plant. These are strong businesses with near monopolies so I don't think you have to worry too much.

Yes, the price of electricity will rise. We are one of the cheaper places in the world but don't have enough of the stuff and new generation is expensive. No nation can get away from that.

[mashman]

I know i shouldn't... but BONSAAAAAAAAAAAAAI

The money from the share sales has little or nothing to do with investment or maintenance in the infrastructure. That money would have to be found from somewhere even if the shares weren't sold.

I have no idea what your comment about the cashflow being cut in half refers to. Tell the voices in your head to slow down, so you can type everytng they say...

With more outgoings there WILL be less money around for that incestment/maintenance, which in turn will encourage a price rise (it may take a year or 3, but it'll happen?).

Hyperbole... the voices told me to say it... (i'm glad someone else hears them too)

NO. NZ did not take on Toll Holdings debt when we purchased the rolling stock and ferries.

I must have misread? "Hon Bill English:

Can the Minister tell the House and the public whether that figure includes the Government taking on somewhere around $100 million to $200 million of debt, Toll NZ having access to rent-free depot space in prime locations for 6 years, and, as rumoured, a special discount for Toll NZ’s own freight?

Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN: On the first point, clearly, the company carries some debt. It also has a finance lease over the Arahura. The price being paid is slightly above the per share price with which Toll NZ bought out the minority shareholders, so a premium was paid to obtain control. That share price, of course, reflected also the existence of debt and the Arahura finance lease. On the other matters, the member is free to invent what he likes for the next few weeks; the full details will be released when the final deal is completed, and I think members will discover that a lot of what has been said in the public area is greatly exaggerated."

Isn't that Ironbridge radio nonsense situation kinda similar? Foreign debt I mean? After all that $49,000,000 (quoted somewhere) was probably earmarked for the PM's house to be renovated or somefink... so "we" have to fund the shortfall by borrowing more or cutting services?

Oh dear. Mash - debt requires servicing ie. interest payments. If you have no debt = no interest to pay. That means more money for you to spend elsewhere.

SOEs like any other business set money aside each year to replace/build new plant. These are strong businesses with near monopolies so I don't think you have to worry too much.

Yes, the price of electricity will rise. We are one of the cheaper places in the world but don't have enough of the stuff and new generation is expensive. No nation can get away from that.

... I understand that debt requires servicing and didn't realise that I had said the opposite? I understand that the govt could pay off a chunk of public debt, which would hopefully lower the borrowing and leave a little left over to give more tax breaks and pave the streets with gold etc... call me a cynic like... but, I have my reservations in regards to what the money will be spent on... they've already said they're looking at new assets, so I'm not counting my chickens that public debt will be healthier after the SOE "sales". Which, to me, is what the message is?

I'm not worrying, I'm laughing... I've other things to worry about.

A nation can get away with it... they just need to do what's necessary to prove that new generation = expensive theory incorrect. Your lecky (amongst other things) is farkin expensive here... I use MUCH less than here than when living in Scotland, yet I pay more... I know, I know new generation = expensive.

[Oscar]

I know i shouldn't... but BONSAAAAAAAAAAAAAI



With more outgoings there WILL be less money around for that incestment/maintenance, which in turn will encourage a price rise (it may take a year or 3, but it'll happen?).

What the fuck is incestment, you sick bastid?

Where are these extra outgoings coming from?
And don't say dividends, because the SOE's already pay the Govt. the market equivalent.

[mashman]

What the fuck is incestment, you sick bastid?

Where are these extra outgoings coming from?
And don't say dividends, because the SOE's already pay the Govt. the market equivalent.

... double entendre for my own giggles...

Do the govt take a fixed rate? or all of it because they own the SOE anyway? Anything not going to the govt coffers, that currently does, is an extra outgoing in my eyes. So DIVIDENDS