Maybe Hipkins-the-aspirational should talk to the 200 people leaving New Zealand everyday in search of a better life. This is New Zealand do-nothing 101 and in my view offers a glimpse of a future embedded in gradual decline. The rich will get richer, the poor will get poorer, and politicians will swing the pendulum from left to right promising to fix New Zealand’s endemic problems. My god, it’s boring to watch and hard to live. My decision about the future is getting easier with every announcement.
"Malpass praises the strategy of earmarking the tax to free doctor visits.."
Probably is politically smart, but that fact itself points to a lot of what's wrong with this country. With people valuing inward looking, immediate gratification kinds of things, spending on eating a fish rather than on the capability to catch fishes.
In any case, ironically perhaps, the less tax such a CBT raises, the more likely it is to have shifted investment away from non-productive housing into sectors that could actually generate export income. It is this rather than doctors visits, and even lower house prices (although with less incentive to build that may not be the case), that are the real potential worth of such a policy.
Nicely put, Bryce. I agree with some critics that Labour has not been forceful enough, but considering the nastiness of comments raised by the likes of Luxon, Willis, Bishop, Brown, and Seymour, it is not surprising that Hipkins wants to tread softly. It is an old truism that you can't change people's minds by changing the law. First, you have to change their minds, then you can change the law. Let them get used to the idea! Of course, despite the brickbats, the lies, the misinformation, the misdirections, and the denials, National would love a CGT. It is just not prepared to say it out loud. Despite protestations to the contrary it would likely apply it to the primary homes of lower-income New Zealanders because that would enable them to give even larger tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy. As much as 8.6%? Surely they would be able to get that down to 5% with a hefty CGT on the lower classes?
"... Labour has chosen safety over transformation". Perhaps transformation must happen slowly. Look at how many years it has taken to get to this. And judging by the number of people on social media, probably residential property investors, who are upset that this policy is an incursion on their hard-earned savings, such transformation must happen slowly. Otherwise the electorate won't support it and there'll be no change at all.
I don’t know what planet these commentators are on but it’s not where I live. This is a neither fish nor fowl policy which will raise very little money, kill the bach market and damage business. Tying it to GP visits just makes it even sillier.
Maybe Hipkins-the-aspirational should talk to the 200 people leaving New Zealand everyday in search of a better life. This is New Zealand do-nothing 101 and in my view offers a glimpse of a future embedded in gradual decline. The rich will get richer, the poor will get poorer, and politicians will swing the pendulum from left to right promising to fix New Zealand’s endemic problems. My god, it’s boring to watch and hard to live. My decision about the future is getting easier with every announcement.
"Malpass praises the strategy of earmarking the tax to free doctor visits.."
Probably is politically smart, but that fact itself points to a lot of what's wrong with this country. With people valuing inward looking, immediate gratification kinds of things, spending on eating a fish rather than on the capability to catch fishes.
In any case, ironically perhaps, the less tax such a CBT raises, the more likely it is to have shifted investment away from non-productive housing into sectors that could actually generate export income. It is this rather than doctors visits, and even lower house prices (although with less incentive to build that may not be the case), that are the real potential worth of such a policy.
A depressingly familiar story.
Nicely put, Bryce. I agree with some critics that Labour has not been forceful enough, but considering the nastiness of comments raised by the likes of Luxon, Willis, Bishop, Brown, and Seymour, it is not surprising that Hipkins wants to tread softly. It is an old truism that you can't change people's minds by changing the law. First, you have to change their minds, then you can change the law. Let them get used to the idea! Of course, despite the brickbats, the lies, the misinformation, the misdirections, and the denials, National would love a CGT. It is just not prepared to say it out loud. Despite protestations to the contrary it would likely apply it to the primary homes of lower-income New Zealanders because that would enable them to give even larger tax breaks to the ultra-wealthy. As much as 8.6%? Surely they would be able to get that down to 5% with a hefty CGT on the lower classes?
"... Labour has chosen safety over transformation". Perhaps transformation must happen slowly. Look at how many years it has taken to get to this. And judging by the number of people on social media, probably residential property investors, who are upset that this policy is an incursion on their hard-earned savings, such transformation must happen slowly. Otherwise the electorate won't support it and there'll be no change at all.
I don’t know what planet these commentators are on but it’s not where I live. This is a neither fish nor fowl policy which will raise very little money, kill the bach market and damage business. Tying it to GP visits just makes it even sillier.