Wednesday, July 12, 2017


I just don't understand the incompetence of Labour.   In trying to shore up their own shrinking demographic support as well trying to poach some of Winston's golden oldie support they have said to every other taxpayer 'up yours' ... we know best how to spend your money, not you.   They have taken the effective tax cuts due to take effect on 1 April off the table.  

Mark my words ... there will be a price to pay for this bit of Socialist arrogance.

But it's their proposed $450 (single person) and $700 (for a couple) electricity subsidy payment proposed for those in receipt of NZ Superannuation that I want to focus on.    It's a universal payment for c*********s to be made regardless of the recipients assets or income.   Means the superannuitant with no other source of income other than NZ Superannuation gets the same as a certain OAP Party leader earning in excess of $200,000.    If you're going down that track why not structure the payment linked to where the recipient has an entitlement to a Community Services Card with an abatement regime for those earning over the prescribed amount.     It's called targeting and it's hardly a new concept.

But it gets worse.   The payment is to be made in cash and not direct to the electricity provider.   Reminds me how it was a couple of years back when Top Energy used to distribute their annual $200 'rebate' to their customers by way of cheque.   That week the amount going through the pokies over doubled.   Thankfully wiser heads prevailed and nowadays those eligible for the payment receive a $200 credit on their electricity account.   Seems Labour can't even learn from past mistakes.

Labour couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery although you might be forgiven for thinking that's where their latest policy was dreamed up.   I guess it helps having a whisky loving apostate Morman holding the little man's hand.


Anonymous said...

At last, common sense by a political party that realises by offering tax cuts as a bribe is the equivalent of the Old Soviet 5 year plan. Short termism at it's worst.

Money for a third world road system and a failing education system first.

Re the electricity rebate it is merely a copy of the UK's winter fuel allowance of £200 for every household where the occupants are over 65. There are other schemes to help those in fuel poverty as well. The Queen is eligible as is the lowest in the land but presumably like us and thousands of well off people she donates hers to charity.

Trying to establish an eligibility means test would have added almost as much again to the bill so it is paid out in cash as people have choice as to pay for gas, electricity or buy a truck load of wood.

If NZ follows the UK the most of the money will be spent on fuel with charities and bookmakers coming in with a few bonuses. All in all a welcome and and proven scheme.

Lord Egbut

Lindsay Mitchell said...

Blogged similarly Veteran. Bugger all reaction. Is this Labour stuff just so blatant people don't want to 'dignify it with a response'?

The Veteran said...

Egbut ... tax cuts = short term terrorism. I never thought you were stupid, just misguided. Are you trying to prove me wrong?

The mechanism for a means test is already in place. Called the Community Services Card or hadn't you caught up with that?

Monitoring the airwaves and outright derision is perhaps the kindest reaction. Other commentators are less charitable.

Anonymous said...

Veteran......time for Specsavers I think......Short TERMISM. The administrative burden on using the Com card and peoples changing circumstances would be outweigh any financial advantage.

Lord Egbut the misunderstood.

The Veteran said...

Egbut ... Ooooops yes and apologies but my reaction is the same. What's so terrible about allowing people to spend their own money?

There is no administrative burden in relation to the CSC. You either qualify for it or you don't. The low income rates rebate scheme works well. Why shouldn't this?

Andrei said...

Explain to me Veteran why Labour's proposal is a bribe when National's attempt to buy Christchurch Central with a $25 million handout top rebuild an ugly old church (whose leadership has fallen into heresy) isn't a bribe?

Johno said...

They are both egregious bribes.

The Veteran said...

Andrei ... I have already posted my opposition to any government contribution to the rebuild. It matters not that Labour and NZ First also think its a good idea. For me the 80/20 rule is in play and I am left sucking a lemon.

Labour's proposal is a bribe and a not a very well thought out bribe. Trying to outdo Winston with a 'my dick' is longer than 'your dick' type handout is hardly good policy.

The Veteran said...

Andrei ... I see you are a contributor to Lucia Maria's New Zealand Conservative blog ... guess that explains the Anglican 'heresy' jibe.

David said...

Vet, Andrei is an eastern Orthodox, also thinks Lucia maria is a heretic.

Anyway, heretic is a religious term and does not apply to anyone outside that particular religion.

My objection to the cathedral rebuild being funded by taxes is that the Church ran a very successful tax free business there. They refuse to pay tax, yet expect to receive the benefits from others taxation. Until all churches pay tax on their earnings and their land holdings, not a cent of taxpayer money should flow to them.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Our religion correspondent has struck again. The atheist who knows more about churches than churchmen do.

Churches don't refuse to pay tax. Unlike Maoris, they pay rates on ALL their properties, they pay GST on ALL their expenditure and they make very little, if any, operating profit. In fact, if all the voluntary social work done by members was charged to their churches as labour at the minimum wage, churches would be bigger loss makers than Clive Palmer.

David said...

The atheist who knows more about churches than churchmen do.

Yes, Adolf, as you seem to count yourself among the "churchmen" I ,do know more than you.

they pay rates on ALL their properties is a lie, even if it is a lie for Jesus. In NZ churches are exempt from council rates. Councils can levy targeted rates for water, sewerage and refuse collection but not any other type of rate.

In Australia they are exempt and the Melbourne City Council estimates that the lost revenue from church properties results in ratepayers paying 10% more than would be necessary if the churches pulled their weight.

...they make very little, if any, operating profit.

That may be true for some, but my comment on this thread was directed at the Christ Church Cathedral, in Christchurch. In addition to worship, they also ran a very successful coffee shop and gift shop, commercial ventures, exempt from tax. Luke 20:25, I believe, is the instruction from Jesus that they choose to ignore.

In fact, if all the voluntary social work done by members was charged to their churches as labour at the minimum wage, churches would be bigger loss makers than Clive Palmer.

I haven't seen any comparable NZ or Aus figures, but in the US, it is estimated that 80% of church goers volunteer labour is utilised in their home church - repairs, maintenance, cleaning, etc. Very little of it was in outreach to the community.

Churches will not make losses as they sit on so much wealth that could be sold and used for the benefit of the community, but rather than building up store with their father in Heaven, they presume to accumulate worldly goods.

Adolf, you may not be aware of this, but up until about 15 years ago the Anglican Church owned every property on Leigh St in the Adelaide CBD. Rate free. No taxes on rental income.

Social work is not the sole preserve of the christian church, there is a vast number of secular groups that provide social services, minus the dogma and pedophilia.

Anonymous said...

Just a further comment on the "Bribes" cunningly disguised as altruism by the Labour party. The UK treasury is very disappointed if the largesse handed out in the form of winter fuel payments (£200) is actually used for that purpose...if it spent in the pub or other hedonistic activities the Govt claws back forty pounds in tax so it is win win for everyone. Boost the economy, feel good factor and increase revenue.

Lord Egbut

The Veteran said...

Egbut ... so that's your defense. OK because Govt gets a chunk of it back albeit perhaps not from the purpose it was given for. Methinks even you must feel a tad embarrassed from arguing that line of reasoning.

David said...

Half the price of a Pint of Guinness is tax,

Half the tax is spent on the dole.

Half the dole is spent on pints of Guinness.

So drink up and do your bit for Ireland.

A slight paraphrase of a sign in an Irish pub; I think I'd had too many Pints to remember it clearly.

Anonymous said...

veteran...not half as embarrassed as I would be if I advocated tax cuts when the country now needs to look at it's crumbling infrastructure and failing education system which leads to building more jails.

Lord Egbut

The Veteran said...

Egbut ... do you actually believe what you write? Central and local government own over $200b of infrastructure assets and the 2015 National Infrastructure Plan spend forecast through to 2025 was for another $110b to be added to the inventory. There is more being spent now on infrastructure development than at any other time in our history.

Your education jib doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Government spending on education as a proportion of GDP has NZL leading at 7.26% compared with say the UK at 6.3%, France at 5.8% the US at 5.62% and Canada at 5.5%. And wots Labour's response to all of this ... scrap Charter Schools catering for those who fall thru the cracks and a return to the hopelessly discredited 'one glove fits all' approach.

Fact is that good economic management provides scope for tax cuts and increased infrastructural and educational spending.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

"Egbut ... do you actually believe what you write? "

What a silly question!!

Anonymous said...

Veteran.....that's a politicians answer, drag out a few GDP statistics. The truth is not the amount spent but how it is spent, where it is spent and the achievement levels.

Countries with aprox the same GDP and population are way ahead of us. For example Ireland with a literacy level of 99%, something that was last seen in in NZ during the 1960's. In the first WW2 intake to Burnham camp they found 2 men that were illiterate and yet today illiteracy abounds.

As for the amount spent on infrastructure you will find that it is playing catchup. Instead of spending year on year in the past the the infrastructure has been neglected
Transport, power and education being the worst. and it's not a jib (jibe) just history repeating itself.

There's no free lunch tax cuts have to be paid for.

Lord Egbut

The Veteran said...

Egbut ... your stats, my stats, we're not going to get into a pissing contest are we?

I like the stats from 'your' Guardian newspaper report which detailed the OECD world educational rankings from the latest PISA study.

In reading NZL was rated 4th highest among 65 countries behind South Korea, Finland and Canada (UK was 20th, Ireland 17th).

In maths NZL was rated 7th highest among 65 countries (UK was 22nd, Ireland 26th)

In science NZL was rated 4th highest among 65 countries behind Finland, Japan and South Korea (UK was 11th and Ireland 14th).

As you say its a failing system????

But we can agree we're playing infrastucture catch-up. Ain't it great that the National government is doing just that and remind me just how many countries in the OECD are running budget surpluses.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

"...they found 2 men that were illiterate...."

One of them continues to this day, commenting ad nauseam, at No Minister.