Wednesday, May 24, 2017

Smart politics, terrible economics

John Key once described interest free student loans as smart politics but terrible economics.  It seems this week's budget will be the same:
POLITIK understands that the movements will be for the two lowest thresholds.

Currently tax on income up to $14,000 is 10.5% and for income from $14000 - $48000 tax is 17.5%.

Those thresholds will both rise.

There will also be changes to Working for Families and an increase in the Accommodation Supplement.

POLITIK has been told that added together the tax threshold and Working for Families moves could mean families where one parent is in work with two children see their income rise by what is being described as a “significant” weekly figure.
Key also described Working for Families as communism by stealth.
The money in the Government’s accounts has been earned by hard working taxpayers, and we want to ensure that in an election year when there is a temptation for bidding wars, that we make the biggest difference we can with those surpluses," he told his weekly press conference yesterday.   
Will Steven Muldoon Joyce reward all taxpayers, including people like me who employ 15 workers and work 6 days a week to earn their wages, and allow their PAYE to be given to Muldoon Joyce?
But there is also a political recognition that they would be unwise to be seen to be delivering more money to already wealthy higher income earners.
Absolute traitors to their purported cause.  They're simply poll driven sheep.  It's why I will never vote for them and why I have continually dismissed many offerings to join the party.


paul scott said...

Previous leader of the 5th Nat Government, Slackjaw John, said at his retirement that he had 'pragmatics' as his cause. This was a surprise of course because it seemed they had no cause at all, and people had previously forgiven them because they kept Labour away.
I think now there is a sea change in public opinion now.
Hooton suggested that Winston Peters could be PM inside a Labour N First coalition.
The tax incrase falls right into Winston's policy of increaaed social spending [Police, Health, Regional ]. I think he will still go with Nat.
We will need an entirely new Nat party, one that can find principles and policy lost with Slackjaw who traded us out of our democracy.

The Veteran said...

Guezz Paul ... the only 'slackjaw' around here is your man dribbling in his dotage.

For Nick ... clearly ACT has yet to figure out the dynamics of MMP although they remain the beneficiary of it. ACT has the luxury of standing unbending on it's principles ignoring the reality that in order to govern in NZL you have to do so from the centre which requires compromise. Have to say you appear just a tad silly in trying to equate Joyce with Muldoon. If you want a Muldoonist command economy where free trade is a dirty word then all you have to do is vote Winston First.

I can only assume you are against moving the tax thresholds in favor of tax reductions. To the average punter they are one and the same.

Nick K said...

It is David Seymour who has been pushing this for a couple of years, but for all thresholds, including mine.