Posts by Rob Stowell

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First

  • Polity: Eleventy billion dollars!,

    Lovely Joe. Made my afternoon :)

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 1843 posts Report Reply

  • Polity: Eleventy billion dollars!,

    The auto correct on this phone is savage though sometimes handy. It can make a mess of a perfectly formed sentence. Names it usually mangles. Apologies to Mr Hooten.

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 1843 posts Report Reply

  • Polity: Eleventy billion dollars!,

    How we pay for this is important to get right. But all the moaning that we can't, it's impossible, madness!? We have a population and more or less we already (imperfectly) feed and house it. Once we acknowledge the current system is both unfair an inefficient - and a UBI improves both - it a bit daft to insist it's impossible.
    There's great wailing at even the mention of 56% marginal tax rate. It will destroy enterprise! The saintly wealth creators will abandon the country to its wretched poverty-stricken fate!
    Get a grip! Under Muldoon the top tax rate was 65%. There was estate tax. People still worked and started businesses and there were even rich people.
    A UBI should probably start with the assumption no-one above a certain level is better off. So the cost if the UBI is recovered completely in extra tax. The top tax rate and company tax would need to go up - but they should anyway. And we need a CGT anyway because it's just too easy to avoid paying tax at the moment through property investment.
    Now we have Mr Hooter on board we just have to convince Bill English it's his idea and we're off.

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 1843 posts Report Reply

  • Polity: The Taxpayers' Union rides again!, in reply to Raymond A Francis,

    Even in my head I can guestimate $300 per week plus $85 per child would come to about $60b. If govt currently take more than $72b that's a great wack, but not "all their revenue". And it replaces most current spending (approx $25b) on social welfare.
    Nor is that anything like the whole story. Wealthy people (like you and I :)) would be in a very good position to pay more tax. In our family we could afford another $770 a week - a vast increase in what we currently pay - and not be one dollar worse off.
    Discussing the UBI by waving around big scary numbers without pointing these things out is not really doing the job either :)

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 1843 posts Report Reply

  • Polity: Home-spun non-truths,

    Gareth Morgan, who's been advocating for a UBI for years, adds his 2 cents.

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 1843 posts Report Reply

  • Polity: Home-spun non-truths,

    I love the idea of a UBI. I love the way, for example, it could change society and the way we thing about work. If no-one wants to clean toilets, no-one HAS to. So toilet-cleaning might get you a good wage. Other jobs might decline in value – because they offer personal satisfaction at a rate that amply compensates. Art might be everywhere. Music might be free (haha, mutter the musicians sardonically. But really – sure, we can come round Tuesday night and play at your party. But you better get some beer in for the bass-player.)
    Tax policy would have to shift markedly, though. Already wealthy folks know there are many ways to minimise your tax. If we put up income and corporate rates, the ridiculousness of having no CGT will jump out. Because it’s such a simple way to avoid tax altogether, with higher income tax no-one will declare money they can shove into a capital asset. It’s already glaringly obvious this is happening.

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 1843 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Friday Music: The hottest rap…,

    Eta: the dating seems to be questionable. Still: so much we don't know about how we got here.

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 1843 posts Report Reply

  • Hard News: Friday Music: The hottest rap…,

    Legendary cities of the Indus - fascinating! Thnx Mr D :)

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 1843 posts Report Reply

  • Polity: Global behemoths and tax,

    In the case of apple, there's "added value" and then there's markup (or pure profit.) It's pretty clear the majority of that comes from sales here.
    And how much of apple's "added value" really comes from Ireland?
    In the case of Google, nz eyeballs ARE the added value. Nz advertisers are the local revenue stream. Google get both for close to nothing tax wise.

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 1843 posts Report Reply

  • Speaker: The real problem with the ‘Kiwimeter’, in reply to Euan Mason,

    The wording was “Māori should not receive any special treatment.” I can’t simply disagree with that statement because I take issue with the way it’s phrased.

    Yeah. It's a reasonable assumption Māori are discriminated against - we have all manner of evidence for this. Discrimination is 'special treatment'.
    This is a very poorly thought-out question. It may well bring out the 'shitty attitudes' - but how would you have any idea what people meant when they agreed or disagreed?
    Without even starting to think about whether 'having a tiny proportion of what was unjustly seized from your iwi returned a century or so later' is 'special treatment'?
    Meh.

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 1843 posts Report Reply

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 185 Older→ First