Posts by Rob Stowell
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Dirty Politics, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
former chair of accountancy firm PwC)
PWC specialise in tax 'minimisation'. They're expensive, but that's what they do: make sure you pay a lot less tax. (It has to be a lot, because they charge a lot, and if you're not saving money, you're losing out.)
I'm hearing a lot on the news that we have to sort out these foreign trusts for the sake of our 'international reputation'. Or because they might be hiding 'corruption' or money laundering.
Again I think: they're just not getting it. I'm not pissed off that our reputation is being tarnished, though that's not good.
I'm angry the wealthiest on the planet are not paying their fair share. They get wealthier. Government struggles for money and cuts services and borrows and we get told 'we can't afford it'!
And everyone else pays their tax.
Reputation be damned. It's not our tax system that's missing out, but that's not the point. -
Listening to Andrew Little this afternoon was interesting. He said almost all the right things. And he seems decent and smart. But there was an audience who, given a little sauce, would have lapped it up; given a little fire, would have exploded. Little was wry and thoughtful but also a bit apologetic and diffident.
I don’t think I’m a mob-frenzy sort of person, but I found myself yearning wistfully for a bit of rabble-rousing. -
Polity: A wilting rose, in reply to Moz,
It doesn’t matter how you dress it up, ever-increasing pollution, increasing poverty and falling living standards outside the 1% are not “wins for the left”, but they are core business for the right.
Yeah. This 'we're winning, really!' just seems daft. "They're flogging off everything they can get away with and moving the money offshore" feels more like it.
-
Sad to miss Keuper in Chch. Saw some great gigs in Sydney in the late 80s – both stripped back, and with horns. Should be good shows.
Wilderpeople is a great romp. Looking forward to Tickled too – there was some talk of backers getting access to a stream? -
Bold, eh. that would be nice. Because Labour too often come across as - "We don't know what we believe in but if you tell us what you want maybe we'll send out a researcher to write a prelimimnary report ..."
(Also - lumping Sanders with Trump and Le Pen? I hope you felt a bit queasy doing that. He's strident and radical about universal healthcare, higher taxes on the wealthy, free college, controlling money in politics - the status quo in NZ and/or Labour policy.) -
Super delegates are unlikely to change the popular vote. But if it's close, it's more likely to be rancourous. It's nothing like the GOP trainwreck. But there's a mirror dynamic going on.
The 'establishment' - and from everything I've heard from her, that definitely includes Hilary - just don't get it. 'Business as usual' is not working for most people and destroying the planet. Young people get it. Sanders gets it. Win or lose, that's what he's injected into the race.
Winning the presidency and presiding over slowly unfolding economic, social and environmental disaster isn't such a great prize. -
Lovely Joe. Made my afternoon :)
-
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.
-
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. -
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 :)