Gareth Morgan in the Herald on ACC levies for bikers

[Flip]

.... and lets not get me started on performance cars!!!

The problem is there is no way to collect tax on recreational activities. Whats the matter with performance cars anyway?

[mashman]

The problem is there is no way to collect tax on recreational activities. Whats the matter with performance cars anyway?

Yes there is:

The person has the injury.
The person may do 1 or more "dangerous" actvities.
The person is covered by ACC.
ACC is supposed to be a 1 size fits all approach to keeping us "looked after".
The person pays multiple ACC levies OUT OF 1 SALARY.

Find the total bill for the year. Using the ACC calculator that I assume they have on the IRD database, play with the % ACC per $ of income feature until you get the total bill for the year. Voila, job done, time for tea, biccies and hot tead biccie blowjobs.. we may even save some cash on ACC Admin .

Simple yes? It catches everyone for everything, no more oh he should pay this because if his shoe lace comes undone he'll nearly maybe possibly potentially probably almost die according to this reporting I have in front of me . Is it profitable to keep such a simple thing complicated?

[mashman]

ACC says low rates drive up cost of future claims...

Would the above have anything to do with the new estimate in regards to our risk and liability?

[Swoop]

As I understand it Mr Morgan is by profession an economist ( nobody has yet succesfully explained what they do )

An economist is the same as a weather forecaster.
They "guess" for a living, much like a gambler.

The results are normally the same, some times they guess correctly and other times they get it astronomically wrong. The culpability of these people is zero. Nada. You never hear of economists' being made redundant.
All you will hear is "there is no way in hell we could have seen ""that"" coming!", and they walk away scott free.

They should all bugger off and become full-time professional moustache growers and join the circus. A real one. One that isn't in an office.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Leaving aside the ad hominem attacks on Gareth Morgan (some of which are particularly stupid, hurtful and above all ignorant) and dealing with the point:

One way to ensure that "recreational" activities which cause injury and are petrol powered is to levy ACC on fuel. That takes away that whole onroad/ofroad argument and the need to suffer this death by a thousand cuts which is what this, and all the other proposals do in my view.

Of course the non petrol powered sporting injuries then come under the microscope, but better to lump mountain biking and base jumping in with thugby and netball because there is zero political will to change entitlements there.

But what evs. You guys whinging on the internet, that'll fix it, right?

Now, where's my lamington. And I drink coffee. Norwegian Blackened Blood coffee.

[avgas]

I am done with ACC and I am done with Gareth Morgan.
I no longer people preaching to me they are my friends, then stabbing me in the back.

Bring back the scumbags who tell you to your face they are going to rip you off. Privatize the fucker.
Lets make it honest robbery - not the delusional good cop bad cop routine we have now. Its a fucking joke.

[Tigadee]

http://www.motorweb.co.nz/pub/infograph/road-fatalities

According to this, we (i.e. bikers) share the same fatality rate as pedestrians...

[Crasherfromwayback]

The problem is there is no way to collect tax on recreational activities. Whats the matter with performance cars anyway?

Yes there is. Petrol should be $4.00 a litre. Sorted. Farmers fucking themselves on quads, jet skiers, moto-xers...we all pay. Mum driving the car in reverse over someone...you name it.

[oneofsix]

yeah but are pedestrians hunted like this?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/7...rider-off-road


They have to put up with the careless and thoughtless like bikers but not actively hunted down like this lass was.
Wonder if she was checked out by a medic and is now another ACC stat. The article doesn't really say.

[pete376403]

While on ACC in general - interesting analysis of the "financial crisis" Smith was pushing;
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opin...tentions-clear

[sleemanj]

One way to ensure that "recreational" activities which cause injury and are petrol powered is to levy ACC on fuel.

But why? Why do we have to levy ACC on anything other than income as part of taxation?

Why do we have to say "you had a motor vehicle accident, so your costs will be paid by motor vehiclists", or indeed "you are a dairy worker, so you will pay more ACC than an office worker", why can it not just be "you had an accident, so your costs will be paid by all of society".



One flat percentage of income levy added to personal and company taxes, adjusted annually. Set at whatever level it needs to be to cover the expected costs.

[pete376403]

But why? Why do we have to levy ACC on anything other than income as part of taxation?

Why do we have to say "you had a motor vehicle accident, so your costs will be paid by motor vehiclists", or indeed "you are a dairy worker, so you will pay more ACC than an office worker", why can it not just be "you had an accident, so your costs will be paid by all of society".



One flat percentage of income levy added to personal and company taxes, adjusted annually. Set at whatever level it needs to be to cover the expected costs.

Isn't that the original Woodhouse formula? But various Governments just can't resist tinkering

[tigertim20]

Doesn't that statement support high ACC levies then? That since the risk is higher, then motorbikes should be paying higher ACC than other vehicles?

thats not the fucking point.
ACC is a NO FAULT SYSTEM.

how about we charge black people more tax because they are a higher risk of heart disease and a number of other medical issues that ultimately chew up dollars?

[MrKiwi]

And that's the heart of the matter, which has apparently been decided to move to the later while we were watching something else.

Though considering it's Sir Owen, and Mr Gareth, I know which one I'd rather listen to


The risk figure is bollocks and irrelevant anyway, nobody pays either insurance or ACC on a per km basis. If you ever needed proof that MOTOTNZ are just an ACC propaganda machine, them running those figures instead of per bike risk provides it.

Although to be fair to the Council the views in that article are those of Gareth Morgan and are not necessarily shared by others on the Council, hence why it was not released under the Council's name. I think the discussion should be had, however, I for one agree with some of what he argues and not on others. Whether I agree with Gareth or not does not mean I should run him down, or those on the Council. Agree to disagree, play the ball not the man.

[bogan]

Although to be fair to the Council the views in that article are those of Gareth Morgan and are not necessarily shared by others on the Council, hence why it was not released under the Council's name. I think the discussion should be had, however, I for one agree with some of what he argues and not on others.

A good rule of thumb, if you are part of a group dealing with a particular issue, don't make an individual statement on a similar issue. It's not fucking rocket science.

I hope you do have the discussion, tbh I find it hard to believe it hasn't yet come up; I also hope you allow the motorcyclists you claim to represent to influence the outcome.