the suspension of payments to the super fund
note these have now been extended another two years to 2018
Nice of them to choose to not save for our retirement.
Well at least it also makes comparing our tax burden by suggesting we have super covered is a joke! http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10644470
Close-Up are just taking the piss. Four wealthy men selling the Budget to the rest of us.
I think John Key is the token leftie in the discussion.
3 bald 50 year+ white men. All in the top income bracket you would think. Key does love the numbers though. Closest I've seen him to being genuine and passionate about something.
No credible analysis from the point of view of a country at all, though NZ corp might be ok. I wonder what Gareth Morgan thinks this will do to our health service- oh that's right they didn't ask him.
Julie - what Craig is saying is you are part of the stupid half of the top tax bracket who didn't illegally hide their income in trusts.
Remember if you defraud the country and you are well paid it is unfairness that means you need a tax cut!
If you don't, and genuinely believe in paying as part of your citizenship you are really just deluding yourself. Nobody really believes they should or have to pay taxes! After all it is just being stolen from you and you don't get anything from it.
Do you think it works both ways?
Can the SAS look forward to gruelling campaigns on the beaches of Hawaii, the bars of Ireland and in the board rooms of merchant banks?
I thought it was an indictment of our media that both TV1's and 3's story were so similar, shot for shot, quote for quote, and made no attempt to investigate or provide any alternative analysis or views.
Last year Campbell reported that the PRT was potentially to be scaled back:
"Along the way, he seems intent on shutting down the Provincial Reconstruction Team effort in Bamiyan – just when that province is being widely cited as almost the only success story that the corrupt and discredited Karzai government has had in its struggle with the Taliban."
Did this happen? Was the focus changed from reconstruction to commandos?
If so this would explain why there is some dissatifaction with the reconstruction.
Caveat emptor- only a school scientist.
The other thing here is presumably most of our science is focused on biology to assist our primary industries.
Our scientists are hardly going to be working on designs or innovations for mass production.
Interesting overview from Colin James here about Korea, which I believe started it's current manufacturing direction by government order under a military regime in the '70s.
There can't be much point researching technology that would be a part of this kind of economy.
In other words, I guess I'm saying industries and economic direction may have to have a top down approach in such an isolated economy. All they seem to be suggesting is mining gold. No value added there.
Bart my reading of the Sprout's post (which is more of a link to Gordon's work) is that because of his standing in the scientific community what he says needs scrutiny. I did admittedly read Gordon's post prior to reading the standard link(!), but I think the point is still valid.
It isn't that he has the ear of the Prime Minister, but that what he says carries so much more weight because of his esteemed position.
As I said I'm not in any way familiar with the industry processes, but at a time when there are so many cutbacks for so many useful and necessary public services it would be nice to know any R & D money we were giving to the private sector was being put to productive use.
I share your hope about R & D, but feel that with the results of a lack of financial regulation and our history of private investment in the housing market ahead of production, well, I used to be an optimist.
Unless there is something I'm not seeing here? In any case Craig has got some main-splaining to do.
And didn't we have this with the Knowledge wave? What was the result of all those increased science busaries and etc?
Russell you are attacking the Sprout for being partisan, but his blog is mostly a link to Gordon Campbell's analysis here
According to Gordon, Gluckman is presenting two public faces about this- one that is positive about government's science program with its lack of oversight, and another which suggests that there is woeful underfunding for science in critical areas, by both public and private sectors. The two are stuggling to present a coherent public whole, he says.
It would be nice to see someone directly addressing both the arguments of Gordon and Sean Plunket that The Sprout was highlighting- well to take the quote in regards to R & D directly:
Plunket : So why should the government subsidise a private sector that isn’t pulling its own weight?
Gluckman : Lets call it market failure….
Plunket : Is subsidizing the market …and giving them the easy option the answer to that?
Gluckman : It’s helping our business to realise that they need to use knowledge better, if they aim to export products to the world, to make New Zealand richer.
Plunket : But they don’t need to spend money on it, because they can apply to the government for a grant, and the government will give it to them…
I realise most of the posters in this thread seem to be involved closely in this industry. I'm not, but I still think these are fair enough questions, despite the rhetoric that brought them to your attention.
Why don't you run a major daily?
Is angry Russel back ready to smite the evil f@# who somehow seem to be running our country once more?
Mining national parks, cutting back national radio, privatising prisons, probably welfare, cutting work rights, raising GST to cut top tax rates, asailing ACC and biggest crime of all giving TVNZ 6 and 7 to Sky free of charge.
Oh and pay equity, appeasement on whaling...I lost count...
Just as well they went easy on us first term huh?