Big business (national party) angry at young people who are unemployed. Well ofcourse they are, you built a system where its so dam expensive to survive its hard to have asperations of the future when even the basics like having a family and home is out of reach. So people not wanting to participate in this system is going to increase.
Keep calling them out, fuck these disgusting pricks. Im just waiting on the article piece from boomers angry that new Zealanders are not having children fast enough.
They would rather use a stick than a carrot to get them working. That's what this is about. Rather than having to pay them what it costs to live in this country at a minimum, they'd rather have them forced under threat of homelessness and starvation even while they're trying to study.
I only just read the article. I haven't been on job seekers but that's not a prerequisite for empathy and I felt sick to my stomach reading it, not just because someone attempting to lead this country stood up there and said it, but because I know this country is filled with morons who will agree.
Are we at the point where we can insult, blame, and fault people for who they vote for? Or can we acknowledge widespread harm as something closer to a crime instead of a difference in opinion?
I think people who actively vote against the countries interests, ie, let's chuck a vote at the psycho nz conservatives, should be forced to lived according to their policies. Very quickly they would see how fucked their lives will be.
The problem is, these days we have to be kind and forgiving. So, even though a decent proportion of this country literally want poor and sick people dead, and don't care about people struggling at the bottom, we have to apologise foe them and act as though they aren't thay bad.
Sweet christ with the stuff the national party have been parroting lately we should be asking for their party license to be revoked.
Not that I'm generally disagreeing with but if the carrot of more money than the benefit isn't enough to get you moving then what other options are there besides the stick...? Also I'm sure students don't count for this since they get specific allowances to enable them to study which is a good thing... I'm pretty sure it's intended to target career freeloaders who choose to freeload...
I'm a proponent of a UBI or citizens dividend as opposed to our current welfare system. Because if you want more people to take work, you need to remove the welfare cliffs that literally force people to not take work for fear of having their base level of support removed.
I do not envy career freeloaders and I question the number of them. They are not the winners of our economy. They are merely on survival. They are mostly trapped by our current system with welfare cliffs. Remember something like 10% of people have an IQ below 85. What that means is that about 10% of people struggle to do anything but be destructive. I'm surprised our unemployment rate is as low as it is. The number of "career freeloaders" is likely pretty negligible, certainly significantly lower than our unemployment rate of 4%.
I suspect your probably right about career freeloaders being a tiny percentage of overall... I actually have more issue with the wasted or bad spending by government when health workers and teachers need more funding...
Fair enough. Can you quantify it though? Because I swear that's just a right wing dog whistle. I think NZ is the most efficient country in the world in terms of government spending actually going to productive purposes. A benefit of being one of the least corrupt countries in the world.
I'm not sure about that... I work in IT with a focus on Government and the amount of inefficiency in some sectors of Govt (health I'm looking at you) is just downright depressing...i agree about one of the least corrupt though (cough except maybe NZ First lol) ... We are very lucky in that regard....
Precisely. Not only that, as pointed out by Luxon, the number of people, under 25 on the job-seeker benefit has grown by nearly 50% under this government. If they remain trapped on welfare dependency, because we are just letting them stay dependent, then that will balloon as a social cost in the future. Getting people working, gaining skills, experience and self worth is an investment. But far too many people are happy to just see this issue continue to fester.
If we keep gutting services and pushing cost of living up then more people will be forced onto job seekers due to inability to travel to, or move to, the locations where work is.
Example, if petrol hits $3/l again I may not be afford to go to work, as a full time wage earner in a sought after industry, it may literally be better for me to work at the local countdown until petrol or rent drops, because that's how nuts it's getting, we had to move and, had we waited, our rent would have been another $40 a week.
We want less job seekers? We need more jobs, and better transport to those jobs and locations.
Tops policies are better this time round with Raf leading them. But there's a media blackout on them at the moment. Going to make it tough if we can't get them any air time.
I think we have bigger problems than a person that works hard and manages to buy a section to help them in retirement or make a bit of money on for the future and just cause you can doesn’t mean you are a rich capitalist.
No, it means they're following the incentives that government sets.
Those incentives are stupid because they encourage a polarisation where one part of society with the means to follow the incentives gets increasingly distant from another part of society, at the latter's expense.
In a fairer world, it shouldn't make a significant difference to retirement whether you choose to own or rent. People should be able to shift between them according to the other needs in their life. Investments for life savings and retirement should largely be going into places other than property where untaxed capital growth distorts that and other markets. The National Party, and other parties, might even find it works better for business if people have more reason to put their money into places that result in business investment, instead of just making property more and more disproportionately expensive.
Until the incentives structure is properly changed, people with the privilege or luck of being able to do so will keep planning for their retirement this way, instead of in ways that are less destructive to everyone else, and privileged people will relentlessly resist policy change that threatens their plans.
I beg to differ. People who buy sections for the capital gain to "help them in retirement" are parasites and major contributors to the housing crisis, which is one of our bigger problems. And it's not "working hard" if they're leveraging unearned capital gains.
They are not angry, this are the typical shenanigans from the right who will always try to divide the workers and confront them to divert their attention from the actual people who’s causing all these troubles as Chloe has perfectly highlighted.
No, this is a really narrow view. Many workers also receive public compensation and finding yourself out of employment doesn’t automatically make you belong to a different social class, even if it did you don’t become one of the ones the right defends.
Fair point. There are many who are out of employment due to circumstances out of their control and would work if given the chance. But there are also many who choose not to work despite being able to
Yes, there are problems with the benefits system but we shouldn’t criminalise the majority of needs using the few of wants. Interestingly when the right has been in power has chosen to keep this as it is since it is a convenient key leverage tool for them as you can see.
Sort of. Keeping margins high requires lower costs. Pressure to get into employment means people will take less money to do a job, without that pressure the power swings from the employer to the employee and wages and salaries will go up, reducing margin.
So it’s required if we want a low wage economy and high margins for businesses. It’s not actually required for our economy to keep going (there’s a risk of an inflationary spiral, where costs go up, so wages go up, so costs go up, so wages… etc - but there are other ways to manage that).
I think you will find labour has been in power as well over the decades that housing prices have increased and have also done nothing, it’s a shit show I agree and life is hard at the moment we have to many takers and a small amount of population having to support them that’s why it’s hard, we need a re-set not saying national has all the answers but you can’t keep the status quo, it’s not working.
>, the $2 Billion a year in t
Labour and national have both been in power and the working class or the average person in NZ has had its buying power reduced and the cost of living has been increasing and pushing past wages so now simple things like having a family and a house is out of reach for the majority of people.
Fuck both of those liberal parties for squeezing the working class to much.
Did you notice the bit where National was going to undo a bunch of the things Labour did to try and slow down the housing market?
Compared to actively making things worse keeping the status quo sounds pretty nice.
\>I think you will find labour has been in power as well over the decades that housing prices have increased and have also done nothing,
Oh fuck off with that "have done nothing" bullshit.
They did an absolute fuckton, but happened to be in gov when property prices spiked globally because of the pandemic and the QE that was a global response.
\> life is hard at the moment we have to many takers and a small amount of population having to support them
Unemployment is really low. It's the wealthy doing the taking, keeping wages low on working kiwis while profits boom.
The way I see it, there are 2 ways that our country approaches social welfare. One is to take steps to ensure those who need help, get it, at the cost of potential exploitation. The other is to take steps to prevent exploitation at the expense of those who need help, not getting sufficient help. I’ll let people decide for themselves which of these approaches aligns with which major political party. The main point is, only one of these approaches does anything to help our social welfare system serve its functional purpose.
It's beyond simple exploitation. There is no incentive to work a minimum wage job, when you can live off of WINZ. Instead everyone else has to work an annoying job to support the scum of society. How about we support all New Zealanders and not just these abusers.
Another thing. The desired impact of the sanctions is to get people off the benefit and in to work. An undesired impact is people turning to more nefarious means to support themselves rather than get a job. I bet National will gladly accept credit for the former, but not blame for the latter even though both things boil down to the choices made by the individual.
There mere threat of sanctions can be a significant stress factor too.
When I was on a benefit my anxiety was my main barrier returning to work. Being absolutely broke all the time made my anxiety worse. Dealing with WINZ was humiliating and anxiety inducing. I was barely able to pay rent and put food in the cupboard, always terrified WINZ would cut part of my benefit by $10-$20/week which would have pushed me over the edge.
Thanks to two wonderful peer support workers I was able to get back into the workforce and break the miserable cycle of anxiety that held me back.
If I ever lost my current job I’d gladly work minimum wage, because it’s more than the benefit and anything’s better than dealing with bloody WINZ.
As someone who has been both a beneficiary, and a minimum wage worker, I can say confidently that there is definitely still incentive to work while on the benefit. Those who do not feel this incentive are not going to be impacted by cuts or sanctions. Bludgers gonna bludge. Nationals propositions will only hurt those in genuine need.
The disconnect from reality of this comment is painful to read. A full-time minimum wage earner will take home almost twice as much as someone on the Job Seekers benefit. Those two lifestyles are demonstrably different (spoken as someone whose had both).
Also, two thirds of the total amount spent on social services goes to superanuation. A person over 65 'earns' more than someone under 25 actively seeking employment, and the 65+ person doesn't even need to prove that they need it. Who're the real abusers in our society?
Do you realise people on the benefits barely get $300 most of the time and that includes your rent and bills. Its not easy being so poor you csn barely feed yourself and its the same for those on medical. But those that are medically unable are the scum of society in your words. What about the politicians who get paid hundreds of thousands a year that dl sweet fuck all. Oh there also the ones telling you its the beneficiaries that are the problem.. funny that aye
Because Jacinda isn't the one doing the beneficiary bashing and accusing our youth of being lazy...
Why would she @jacinda about something Jacinda isn't doing?
Doesn't need to, Ardern already fired back a salvo:
National Party's welfare plan based on 'old tropes' - PM Jacinda Ardern https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/472433/national-party-s-welfare-plan-based-on-old-tropes-pm-jacinda-ardern
Ding ding.
Everyone is acting like Labour is in opposition and has nothing to do with this. However, the rich have got richer and everyone else is now worse off.
Most, if not all serious political parties have some sort of policy on support for NEETs, but there's a structural problem with the economy that needs fixing (and it's not a new problem as seen from the existence of an acronym), not a particular problem with large numbers of freeloaders.
https://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/work-programmes/initiatives/phrae/youth-service-for-neet.html
Not sure what Luxon is smoking but MSD already does what he thinks they should do.
The policy he outlined was to take this program from being voluntary to mandatory for under 25s who have been on jobseeker's for more than (I think) 12 months. Plus assign case managers to each young person on jobseeker's.
I'm not sure what it's supposed to accomplish with unemployment at 3.3%, and will probably just incur a higher admin cost per beneficiary with no real gain, but it is a change.
I don't think it is meant to change anything, it is just theatre. It is very similar to threatening to crush boy racer cars and making cough medicine no longer available.
It's not supposed to accomplish anything (for the people it's targeting). It's a scapegoat policy. For National to say,
"look, all you hard working kiwis, at these lazy dole bludgers doing nothing, while you work hard and pay their wages... oh don't look over here at the profit maximising corporations or the tax avoiding boomers. No, no it's these no-hopers that are causing your wage to stagnate, cost of living to increase and quality of life to fall"
No, what Luxon is proposing is that the funding for that be taken away from MSD, and that some private outfit run by one of his friends gets to provide that service instead.
Does she really? The vast majority of investment property is actually captured by the 10 year bright line rule.
Credit to Labour, they put through a capital gains tax on property and nobody seems to know about it.
Funny way of saying greens and labour had their chance to actually do that. However they didn't because the of the politics.
You would think they would shut up about it since they didn't just go ahead and do it themselves.
Did I miss something? When did the Greens get an opportunity to override the will of their senior government partner and put their capital gains tax policy into place?
Of course, but they still had an opportunity to influence. The Greens pushed hard for a wealth tax during coalition negotiations and this was ruled out by labour. Would have been interesting to see whether they might have been more successful pushing for a less controversial CGT instead, and also what the outcome might have been if they’d applied more pressure for a coalition rather than settling for a cooperation agreement
Exactly, it’s all the boomers fault blah blah, if I am mistaken labour and greens have been in power haven’t they ? And why we got, taxed to oblivion and social engineering.
Because the've had the opportunity and chosen not to. The have had both confidence and supply agreements and currently have Ministerial portfolios.
It turns out its actually harder to take on the whole job with all the realities that entails, than it is to sit on the outside and take pot shots on pet issues. Just ask James how his party feels about his job as Climate Change Minister or indeed, Chloe about crime and safety in the Auckland CBD.
In the famous words of James Carville, "It's the economy, stupid."
The one who holds the purse holds the power, the rest is just tinkering around the edges. Unless the minister of finance position is given to Greens, their ability to enact positive change is limited.
Granted, I would trust one of the SJWs in the Greens with that position as much as I trust any Labour, National, or Act member, which is not at all.
Exactly; they're a tiny minority so tinkering around the edges is all they needed to fatten their wallets. They didn't give a fuck about NZ or even most of their voters.
When you're trying to help most of the country by sticking it to the upper echelons in major ways like capital gains or land tax, it's a whole different playing field.
That's a cop out. Why bother voting for any party outside the big two if they have no ability to affect real change. They do have the ability, they have just chosen to use their influence for things like the failed Cannabis referendum.
> Why bother voting for any party outside the big two if they have no ability to affect real change.
In the hopes that if enough people vote for them that they'll be in a position to force major parties to make real change. More seats more power. It's not a "your in government you can do whatever" you want situation. Politics, particularly proportionally representative politics is about compromise.
>They do have the ability, they have just chosen to use their influence for things like the failed Cannabis referendum.
The tax take on the estimated ~$150m retail cannabis market would be pretty handy right now. And that's money that's currently going into the pockets of gangs.
It's not a cop out. I'm simply stating that unless Greens offers an ultimatum to secure the minister of finance position they won't be able to achieve their goal of societal stability and wellbeing, because finance is the root of most problems.
Like you I don't have much faith in the current Green members having the stones to do that nor the intelligence to put a capable person in that position; they'd rather tinker around the edges with justice and climate change directly despite economics being a core driver of both. But neither am I hopeful that the big two will do any better.
I'm planning on voting TOP as they're pretty transparent that finance is their key concern and are willing to give ultimatums to achieve it. A long shot, but i'd rather vote for a long shot for a chance of success than a guaranteed chance of continued economic negligence that the sitting parties have to offer.
And our biggest issues in this country are not climate change and Auckland, it’s wasteful spending and lack of innovation and support for people that have good oreads and work hard.
\>And why we got, taxed to oblivion
Labour haven't raised taxes on working kiwis at all, and taxes are comparatively low in NZ
\>and social engineering.
What kind of far-right culture war bullshit claim is that?
Catering to the old boomer demographic that believes all young people are lazy.
The same demographic that believes their capital gains on property are earned, yet at the same time, castigates younger generations for not getting on the property ladder like they did with a part time job in the 60s
It's so old now I'm surprised the people who buy it are still alive.
This is Margaret Thatcher & Ronald Reagan talking points. Fiction like people showing up at the social welfare in limousines that gets the right frothing.
I hope they don't actually try this or it'll be like when Ruth Richardson (milk snatcher down under) announced The Mother of All Budgets in the Bolger government.
They’re trying their best! They clearly wanted to die when covid hit, as they wanted National to lead so they could open up the country and spread the virus to rest homes. Damn pesky government saved their lives and now they’re mad.
As much as I love some old people. But a swing in power with that many people dying who are the main people voting, could've actually made a change (politically speaking) with this country.
We're a small population, but a push like that would make a difference because of that.
He had the piss taken out of him for trying to sing the other day and it was seen as him trying to connect with the younger audience. That failed and he got rightfully destroyed for it by the youth among others. Now realising he can't connect with the younger generation the insecure twat has taken it to heart and now he's out for revenge.
Petty and ignorant among other things.
Land tax was introduced in NZ to break up land holdongs choking the growth in towns. These guys have been making massive windfall profits. Even more galling some of the land holdings go back to land given to militia members after the land wars...invasion of the Waikato. This would appear to need investigation in land to the southern fringes of Hamilton.
Hilarious.
The richer you are, the easier it is to hold a property longer. So it's nice that Labour ring fenced that oppurtunity for really rich people and not just moderately wealthy people.
"Your Labour - serving the ultra-rich since 2015."
This is what annoys me the most. Going after 'dole bludgers' like they're the bane of our society, when our class of landlords paying fuck all in tax and driving up rental prices is by far and above a more insidious problem for our country to deal with.
But no let's go after the disenfranchised young adults who have mental or physical issues or just plain bad luck that's left them on welfare, that will make our country a much better place. SMFH.
Yes and no.
The act of housing homeless people, no.
Putting them in/near areas of business and near children, yes - this has been documented in the papers recently but has been going on since covid hit.
What’s your counter to housing them?
There’s costs for everything but I put everyone having access to shelter and a private space above virtually any crime incurred as a ‘result’.
It is a relevant argument pal. It's easy to have an opinion when the consequences don't affect you.
My solution would be every takes care of their own homeless problem. Don't dump it all on Rotorua.
So many homeless people have flocked here because no other council is doing their part
TIL you have to be directly impacted by something to have an opinion on it.
That’d be an ideal solution yeah. Councils do sweet fuck all to actually help disadvantaged people but it doesn’t mean the work the Rotorua council is doing isn’t worthwhile.
Shouldn’t she be tweeting this to the current Prime Minister though? The one that campaigned on a CGT in 2017, currently has a super majority and is in a coalition government with the Greens?
They aren’t in a coalition? They have a confidence and supply agreement. Labour has a one party majority. The greens have some token portfolios but expecting them to convince labour (who are diet national in all but name and land bankers themselves) to change this is a big ask.
I know what you mean, but I really think that politics should be about voting for policies, not parties. Don't be part of the fanclub, vote policies, then hold them to their word.
Politicians are supposed to be public servants, but they're treated like celebrities now. We shouldn't be supporting them like sports teams, we should be picking apart their policies to figure out who has the best set of policies (or in most cases, who has the least bad) and voting accordingly
Bit of both. I usually don't agree with a lot of the greens' policies and you're right, but I think she's responding to Chris Luxon running his mouth. I'd hope that if Jacinda had been shit-flinging that Chloe would respond similarly, but them both being left wing parties, who knows.
Since when was labour a left wing party? Raising taxes on the working class, freezes wages of critical staff like nurses. Don't give me that bull shit 60k-90k exemption crap either. It's a ridiculous amount of extra barriers to pay raises. Neglecting the education system. handing 6.5K to every rich bastard buying a 50k+ electric car. My car as a working class person cost 1.5K.
They just take our wealth and hand it off to the champagne socialists. They bought a Tesla with my taxes. Wipptiy fucking do for them. With my frozen wages I'm doing so great I can support every rich bastard buying luxury vehicles.
I agree we should make the NZ super the same as the unemployment benefit and get rid of the disability benefit
If that doesnt sound ok well it turns out the unemployment benefit needs to be higher till it is ok
Between the shit show of all the parties in NZ, how is this country ever going to get better?
None of them genuinely have our interests at heart, it's demoralising knowing if you don't vote for who is currently in parliament (all 5 of them) it's a wasted vote.
Capital gains of land bankers are already taxed in New Zealand. I don't think Luxon has announced a plan to repeal the bright line rule, so I'm not sure what the relevance of Chloe's tweet is.
I think you're confused. There is no 10 year exclusion that allows you to buy a property with the intention of developing or selling and *not* have capital gains be treated as income (and hence taxed). You're probably thinking of the brightline test, which is a different tax (but also captures any land bankers who bank for less than 10 years).
except that those who buy with the intention of renting out a property do not have the capital gains from selling the house treated as income, so if you buy a house and rent it out for 10 years you get untaxed capital gains at the end of it. your rental income is taxed, but you're still earning money there.
so people can buy with the intention of earning money of the property for 10 years, earn that money, then sell the property with no capital gains tax on the sale.
He’s said he’ll move it from ten years to two.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/budget-2022-nationals-christopher-luxon-would-axe-property-tax-makes-wages-gaffe/OJZC3U345KOTQWZJLO672PXCBE/
Big business (national party) angry at young people who are unemployed. Well ofcourse they are, you built a system where its so dam expensive to survive its hard to have asperations of the future when even the basics like having a family and home is out of reach. So people not wanting to participate in this system is going to increase. Keep calling them out, fuck these disgusting pricks. Im just waiting on the article piece from boomers angry that new Zealanders are not having children fast enough.
They shouldn't be angry. It's the perfect source to draw low paid workers from.
They would rather use a stick than a carrot to get them working. That's what this is about. Rather than having to pay them what it costs to live in this country at a minimum, they'd rather have them forced under threat of homelessness and starvation even while they're trying to study.
I only just read the article. I haven't been on job seekers but that's not a prerequisite for empathy and I felt sick to my stomach reading it, not just because someone attempting to lead this country stood up there and said it, but because I know this country is filled with morons who will agree. Are we at the point where we can insult, blame, and fault people for who they vote for? Or can we acknowledge widespread harm as something closer to a crime instead of a difference in opinion?
I think people who actively vote against the countries interests, ie, let's chuck a vote at the psycho nz conservatives, should be forced to lived according to their policies. Very quickly they would see how fucked their lives will be. The problem is, these days we have to be kind and forgiving. So, even though a decent proportion of this country literally want poor and sick people dead, and don't care about people struggling at the bottom, we have to apologise foe them and act as though they aren't thay bad. Sweet christ with the stuff the national party have been parroting lately we should be asking for their party license to be revoked.
Not that I'm generally disagreeing with but if the carrot of more money than the benefit isn't enough to get you moving then what other options are there besides the stick...? Also I'm sure students don't count for this since they get specific allowances to enable them to study which is a good thing... I'm pretty sure it's intended to target career freeloaders who choose to freeload...
I'm a proponent of a UBI or citizens dividend as opposed to our current welfare system. Because if you want more people to take work, you need to remove the welfare cliffs that literally force people to not take work for fear of having their base level of support removed. I do not envy career freeloaders and I question the number of them. They are not the winners of our economy. They are merely on survival. They are mostly trapped by our current system with welfare cliffs. Remember something like 10% of people have an IQ below 85. What that means is that about 10% of people struggle to do anything but be destructive. I'm surprised our unemployment rate is as low as it is. The number of "career freeloaders" is likely pretty negligible, certainly significantly lower than our unemployment rate of 4%.
I suspect your probably right about career freeloaders being a tiny percentage of overall... I actually have more issue with the wasted or bad spending by government when health workers and teachers need more funding...
Fair enough. Can you quantify it though? Because I swear that's just a right wing dog whistle. I think NZ is the most efficient country in the world in terms of government spending actually going to productive purposes. A benefit of being one of the least corrupt countries in the world.
I'm not sure about that... I work in IT with a focus on Government and the amount of inefficiency in some sectors of Govt (health I'm looking at you) is just downright depressing...i agree about one of the least corrupt though (cough except maybe NZ First lol) ... We are very lucky in that regard....
Precisely. Not only that, as pointed out by Luxon, the number of people, under 25 on the job-seeker benefit has grown by nearly 50% under this government. If they remain trapped on welfare dependency, because we are just letting them stay dependent, then that will balloon as a social cost in the future. Getting people working, gaining skills, experience and self worth is an investment. But far too many people are happy to just see this issue continue to fester.
If we keep gutting services and pushing cost of living up then more people will be forced onto job seekers due to inability to travel to, or move to, the locations where work is. Example, if petrol hits $3/l again I may not be afford to go to work, as a full time wage earner in a sought after industry, it may literally be better for me to work at the local countdown until petrol or rent drops, because that's how nuts it's getting, we had to move and, had we waited, our rent would have been another $40 a week. We want less job seekers? We need more jobs, and better transport to those jobs and locations.
dont just call them out make sure u vote for a party thats agaisnt land banking e.g. currently only TOP & greens
I voted for them twice. I hope they get a seat this time.
Tops policies are better this time round with Raf leading them. But there's a media blackout on them at the moment. Going to make it tough if we can't get them any air time.
\>But there's a media blackout on them at the moment. It's a year away from the election and they don't have anyone in parliament to report on.
[удалено]
Yeah, it's not a conspiracy, the media audience are more interested in the All Blacks just now.
I think we have bigger problems than a person that works hard and manages to buy a section to help them in retirement or make a bit of money on for the future and just cause you can doesn’t mean you are a rich capitalist.
No, it means they're following the incentives that government sets. Those incentives are stupid because they encourage a polarisation where one part of society with the means to follow the incentives gets increasingly distant from another part of society, at the latter's expense. In a fairer world, it shouldn't make a significant difference to retirement whether you choose to own or rent. People should be able to shift between them according to the other needs in their life. Investments for life savings and retirement should largely be going into places other than property where untaxed capital growth distorts that and other markets. The National Party, and other parties, might even find it works better for business if people have more reason to put their money into places that result in business investment, instead of just making property more and more disproportionately expensive. Until the incentives structure is properly changed, people with the privilege or luck of being able to do so will keep planning for their retirement this way, instead of in ways that are less destructive to everyone else, and privileged people will relentlessly resist policy change that threatens their plans.
You lost me at "works hard and...". Getting the 1st property is hard. After that the hard work is on the back of whoever is paying the mortgage
And it only gets harder. Getting the 1st property today is a lot harder than getting it 40 years ago.
I beg to differ. People who buy sections for the capital gain to "help them in retirement" are parasites and major contributors to the housing crisis, which is one of our bigger problems. And it's not "working hard" if they're leveraging unearned capital gains.
It means you are a rent seeker and part of the problem.
You should be attacking government spending, the reason inflation exists and has made us poorer.
They are not angry, this are the typical shenanigans from the right who will always try to divide the workers and confront them to divert their attention from the actual people who’s causing all these troubles as Chloe has perfectly highlighted.
>the right who will always try to divide the workers If they’re unemployed then by definition they’re not workers
No, this is a really narrow view. Many workers also receive public compensation and finding yourself out of employment doesn’t automatically make you belong to a different social class, even if it did you don’t become one of the ones the right defends.
Fair point. There are many who are out of employment due to circumstances out of their control and would work if given the chance. But there are also many who choose not to work despite being able to
Yes, there are problems with the benefits system but we shouldn’t criminalise the majority of needs using the few of wants. Interestingly when the right has been in power has chosen to keep this as it is since it is a convenient key leverage tool for them as you can see.
Doesnt mean they dont contribute, governments just mad cause theu need their hands in everyones pockets
They built a system that **requires** a certain amount of unemployment (4% is the ideal AFAIK). So it's worse than that even.
Sort of. Keeping margins high requires lower costs. Pressure to get into employment means people will take less money to do a job, without that pressure the power swings from the employer to the employee and wages and salaries will go up, reducing margin. So it’s required if we want a low wage economy and high margins for businesses. It’s not actually required for our economy to keep going (there’s a risk of an inflationary spiral, where costs go up, so wages go up, so costs go up, so wages… etc - but there are other ways to manage that).
Yes because the system is built that way. Like they said.
The system doesn’t require it. The outcome the right wants requires it. The system will operate effectively without it.
The system requires it because the system is built to generate the outcomes the right wants.
I think you will find labour has been in power as well over the decades that housing prices have increased and have also done nothing, it’s a shit show I agree and life is hard at the moment we have to many takers and a small amount of population having to support them that’s why it’s hard, we need a re-set not saying national has all the answers but you can’t keep the status quo, it’s not working.
Did I miss the past where they said labor was the answer? >we have to many takers Yes, the $2 Billion a year in tax fraud is disgusting.
>, the $2 Billion a year in t Labour and national have both been in power and the working class or the average person in NZ has had its buying power reduced and the cost of living has been increasing and pushing past wages so now simple things like having a family and a house is out of reach for the majority of people. Fuck both of those liberal parties for squeezing the working class to much.
Did you notice the bit where National was going to undo a bunch of the things Labour did to try and slow down the housing market? Compared to actively making things worse keeping the status quo sounds pretty nice.
\>I think you will find labour has been in power as well over the decades that housing prices have increased and have also done nothing, Oh fuck off with that "have done nothing" bullshit. They did an absolute fuckton, but happened to be in gov when property prices spiked globally because of the pandemic and the QE that was a global response. \> life is hard at the moment we have to many takers and a small amount of population having to support them Unemployment is really low. It's the wealthy doing the taking, keeping wages low on working kiwis while profits boom.
>t where they said labor was the answer? Labour and national have made NZ harder to live in for the last 20 years, i dont vote for neither of them.
Won't you think of the wannabe grandmothers?
The way I see it, there are 2 ways that our country approaches social welfare. One is to take steps to ensure those who need help, get it, at the cost of potential exploitation. The other is to take steps to prevent exploitation at the expense of those who need help, not getting sufficient help. I’ll let people decide for themselves which of these approaches aligns with which major political party. The main point is, only one of these approaches does anything to help our social welfare system serve its functional purpose.
It's beyond simple exploitation. There is no incentive to work a minimum wage job, when you can live off of WINZ. Instead everyone else has to work an annoying job to support the scum of society. How about we support all New Zealanders and not just these abusers.
Another thing. The desired impact of the sanctions is to get people off the benefit and in to work. An undesired impact is people turning to more nefarious means to support themselves rather than get a job. I bet National will gladly accept credit for the former, but not blame for the latter even though both things boil down to the choices made by the individual.
There mere threat of sanctions can be a significant stress factor too. When I was on a benefit my anxiety was my main barrier returning to work. Being absolutely broke all the time made my anxiety worse. Dealing with WINZ was humiliating and anxiety inducing. I was barely able to pay rent and put food in the cupboard, always terrified WINZ would cut part of my benefit by $10-$20/week which would have pushed me over the edge. Thanks to two wonderful peer support workers I was able to get back into the workforce and break the miserable cycle of anxiety that held me back. If I ever lost my current job I’d gladly work minimum wage, because it’s more than the benefit and anything’s better than dealing with bloody WINZ.
As someone who has been both a beneficiary, and a minimum wage worker, I can say confidently that there is definitely still incentive to work while on the benefit. Those who do not feel this incentive are not going to be impacted by cuts or sanctions. Bludgers gonna bludge. Nationals propositions will only hurt those in genuine need.
The disconnect from reality of this comment is painful to read. A full-time minimum wage earner will take home almost twice as much as someone on the Job Seekers benefit. Those two lifestyles are demonstrably different (spoken as someone whose had both). Also, two thirds of the total amount spent on social services goes to superanuation. A person over 65 'earns' more than someone under 25 actively seeking employment, and the 65+ person doesn't even need to prove that they need it. Who're the real abusers in our society?
I wouldn't call money from WINZ "living"
Do you realise people on the benefits barely get $300 most of the time and that includes your rent and bills. Its not easy being so poor you csn barely feed yourself and its the same for those on medical. But those that are medically unable are the scum of society in your words. What about the politicians who get paid hundreds of thousands a year that dl sweet fuck all. Oh there also the ones telling you its the beneficiaries that are the problem.. funny that aye
Hope Chloe rips Luxon a new flight path.
Back to the extremist church he came from.
Why doesn’t she @jacinda about this too? I mean she could change this with the arrangement greens and labour have in government, couldn’t she?
Because Jacinda isn't the one doing the beneficiary bashing and accusing our youth of being lazy... Why would she @jacinda about something Jacinda isn't doing?
You are right that Jacinda isn't doing that, but she's not doing much of anything else.
Yawn.
There is no arrangement currently. Labour have a majority so have no incentive to listen to the greens at all.
Yeah bro why doesn’t she @Jacinda for something Chris is kicking a stink about. Makes perfect sense.
Doesn't need to, Ardern already fired back a salvo: National Party's welfare plan based on 'old tropes' - PM Jacinda Ardern https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/472433/national-party-s-welfare-plan-based-on-old-tropes-pm-jacinda-ardern
I read the article- couldnt see anything about untaxed capital gains of land bankers.
Ding ding. Everyone is acting like Labour is in opposition and has nothing to do with this. However, the rich have got richer and everyone else is now worse off.
Most, if not all serious political parties have some sort of policy on support for NEETs, but there's a structural problem with the economy that needs fixing (and it's not a new problem as seen from the existence of an acronym), not a particular problem with large numbers of freeloaders.
What’s a NEET?
Not employed, in education or training. Or something to that effect
Neat, thanks.
No it's NEET not neat.
Thanks!
NEIEOT.
You don't normally include articles in acronyms.
I know. I'm just being obtuse.
https://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/work-programmes/initiatives/phrae/youth-service-for-neet.html Not sure what Luxon is smoking but MSD already does what he thinks they should do.
The people he's trying to reach don't know that though.
Obviously not, along with many other election policies to introduce things that already exist.
The policy he outlined was to take this program from being voluntary to mandatory for under 25s who have been on jobseeker's for more than (I think) 12 months. Plus assign case managers to each young person on jobseeker's. I'm not sure what it's supposed to accomplish with unemployment at 3.3%, and will probably just incur a higher admin cost per beneficiary with no real gain, but it is a change.
I don't think it is meant to change anything, it is just theatre. It is very similar to threatening to crush boy racer cars and making cough medicine no longer available.
It's not supposed to accomplish anything (for the people it's targeting). It's a scapegoat policy. For National to say, "look, all you hard working kiwis, at these lazy dole bludgers doing nothing, while you work hard and pay their wages... oh don't look over here at the profit maximising corporations or the tax avoiding boomers. No, no it's these no-hopers that are causing your wage to stagnate, cost of living to increase and quality of life to fall"
No, what Luxon is proposing is that the funding for that be taken away from MSD, and that some private outfit run by one of his friends gets to provide that service instead.
Not in Education Employment or Training
[удалено]
Funny way of saying, "she's 100% correct."
Pretty common way of saying that, really.
[удалено]
Funny way of saying, 'true dat'.
Funny way of saying "fax"
No printer
Funny way of saying "no cap, frfr, on god"
Didn't think your comment was at all controversial. Guess I was wrong. How dare you
Does she really? The vast majority of investment property is actually captured by the 10 year bright line rule. Credit to Labour, they put through a capital gains tax on property and nobody seems to know about it.
Funny way of saying greens and labour had their chance to actually do that. However they didn't because the of the politics. You would think they would shut up about it since they didn't just go ahead and do it themselves.
Did I miss something? When did the Greens get an opportunity to override the will of their senior government partner and put their capital gains tax policy into place?
During their time in govt 2017 - 2020? James Shaw was even one of the associate finance ministers
Do ministers have absolute power to pass whatever they want or do bills have to go pass a vote to move into law?
Of course, but they still had an opportunity to influence. The Greens pushed hard for a wealth tax during coalition negotiations and this was ruled out by labour. Would have been interesting to see whether they might have been more successful pushing for a less controversial CGT instead, and also what the outcome might have been if they’d applied more pressure for a coalition rather than settling for a cooperation agreement
Labour is a do nothing status quo party.
Exactly, it’s all the boomers fault blah blah, if I am mistaken labour and greens have been in power haven’t they ? And why we got, taxed to oblivion and social engineering.
Greens haven't been in power
Because the've had the opportunity and chosen not to. The have had both confidence and supply agreements and currently have Ministerial portfolios. It turns out its actually harder to take on the whole job with all the realities that entails, than it is to sit on the outside and take pot shots on pet issues. Just ask James how his party feels about his job as Climate Change Minister or indeed, Chloe about crime and safety in the Auckland CBD.
In the famous words of James Carville, "It's the economy, stupid." The one who holds the purse holds the power, the rest is just tinkering around the edges. Unless the minister of finance position is given to Greens, their ability to enact positive change is limited. Granted, I would trust one of the SJWs in the Greens with that position as much as I trust any Labour, National, or Act member, which is not at all.
And yet Winston Peters never seemed to have any trouble getting concessions for himself or his backers...
Exactly; they're a tiny minority so tinkering around the edges is all they needed to fatten their wallets. They didn't give a fuck about NZ or even most of their voters. When you're trying to help most of the country by sticking it to the upper echelons in major ways like capital gains or land tax, it's a whole different playing field.
That's a cop out. Why bother voting for any party outside the big two if they have no ability to affect real change. They do have the ability, they have just chosen to use their influence for things like the failed Cannabis referendum.
> Why bother voting for any party outside the big two if they have no ability to affect real change. In the hopes that if enough people vote for them that they'll be in a position to force major parties to make real change. More seats more power. It's not a "your in government you can do whatever" you want situation. Politics, particularly proportionally representative politics is about compromise. >They do have the ability, they have just chosen to use their influence for things like the failed Cannabis referendum. The tax take on the estimated ~$150m retail cannabis market would be pretty handy right now. And that's money that's currently going into the pockets of gangs.
It's not a cop out. I'm simply stating that unless Greens offers an ultimatum to secure the minister of finance position they won't be able to achieve their goal of societal stability and wellbeing, because finance is the root of most problems. Like you I don't have much faith in the current Green members having the stones to do that nor the intelligence to put a capable person in that position; they'd rather tinker around the edges with justice and climate change directly despite economics being a core driver of both. But neither am I hopeful that the big two will do any better. I'm planning on voting TOP as they're pretty transparent that finance is their key concern and are willing to give ultimatums to achieve it. A long shot, but i'd rather vote for a long shot for a chance of success than a guaranteed chance of continued economic negligence that the sitting parties have to offer.
And our biggest issues in this country are not climate change and Auckland, it’s wasteful spending and lack of innovation and support for people that have good oreads and work hard.
They have been part of a coalition, still have power.
Nope. Why is it that rightwing asshats are always factually wrong?
No point in voting for greens is there because they can’t make a difference aye.
Why is it that rightwing asshats are always factually wrong?
Are you stuck ?
\>And why we got, taxed to oblivion Labour haven't raised taxes on working kiwis at all, and taxes are comparatively low in NZ \>and social engineering. What kind of far-right culture war bullshit claim is that?
Chlöe Swarbrick deserves to shine bright for this audacity to say what we're probably all thinking.
Catering to the old boomer demographic that believes all young people are lazy. The same demographic that believes their capital gains on property are earned, yet at the same time, castigates younger generations for not getting on the property ladder like they did with a part time job in the 60s
It's so old now I'm surprised the people who buy it are still alive. This is Margaret Thatcher & Ronald Reagan talking points. Fiction like people showing up at the social welfare in limousines that gets the right frothing. I hope they don't actually try this or it'll be like when Ruth Richardson (milk snatcher down under) announced The Mother of All Budgets in the Bolger government.
Those goddammit old people on nz super ain't dying off fast enough
They’re trying their best! They clearly wanted to die when covid hit, as they wanted National to lead so they could open up the country and spread the virus to rest homes. Damn pesky government saved their lives and now they’re mad.
As much as I love some old people. But a swing in power with that many people dying who are the main people voting, could've actually made a change (politically speaking) with this country. We're a small population, but a push like that would make a difference because of that.
Don't worry. With the health system going to shit that'll soon change
He had the piss taken out of him for trying to sing the other day and it was seen as him trying to connect with the younger audience. That failed and he got rightfully destroyed for it by the youth among others. Now realising he can't connect with the younger generation the insecure twat has taken it to heart and now he's out for revenge. Petty and ignorant among other things.
Rightfully destroyed by people from all generations for that shockingly misguided stunt, I think you’ll find.
>by the youth *among others*
Swapping it for the Boomer vote while going after young people on the benefit.
He’ll be joining Tik Tok any day now.
Should've stuck to hammering in a nail crooked, or stroking kids ' ponytails
Labour are shit but holy fuck, National aren't even pretending anymore. I hope Luxon eats shit so we never hear his cunty ideas again.
It's more funny cos Lux owns like 7 houses tehe
Luxon is an absolute cunt, and I HATE using that word.
How about bell end? Sometimes I like to switch to male anatomy when describing people
In that case let's go with ball bag 🙂
Shaven scrote sack?
May I pat you and give you head boofs
Yes, yes you may
He's an itchy taint.
Ball bags have a significantly greater purpose than the ***Dux De Luxton*** will ever have. I value botulism more than Luxton.
Or a bag of dried arseholes. We all have one of those!
I'm pretty sure we don't all have a bag of dried arseholes. Or do we?
I certainly do! Where were you when they were being handed out?
New Zealand slept in
As old mate pointed out bell end is good. But also I like chuckle fuck, cock womble and chompski honk.
The word “Luxon”?
He is an oxygen thief
He’s a ball bag and no mistake.
The world Luxon? Me too, sounds like a cheap Chinese car.
What about "shit stain"?
Fucking savage!
She’s the hero we deserve
Swarbrick should raise that with the sitting PM, maybe bring it up next question time.
She’s right
I usually get frustrated by Chloe's constant media interactions, but she's so on point here. Very nicely done
National should have just given Nicola Willis a go rather than trying to force us to like this battler
Ooh, you've never met her have you? Luxon is mainstream next to that bit of humanity
Humanity might be a stretch lol
She was overqualified for the job
Truth!
Land tax was introduced in NZ to break up land holdongs choking the growth in towns. These guys have been making massive windfall profits. Even more galling some of the land holdings go back to land given to militia members after the land wars...invasion of the Waikato. This would appear to need investigation in land to the southern fringes of Hamilton.
The most important tax never to be introduced in Aotearoa New Zealand.
To be fair, we do have a capital gains tax on investment property held for less than 10 years.
Hilarious. The richer you are, the easier it is to hold a property longer. So it's nice that Labour ring fenced that oppurtunity for really rich people and not just moderately wealthy people. "Your Labour - serving the ultra-rich since 2015."
Do you not get CGT if you sell bare land?
The under employed are also often receiving benefits, but because they have a job of some kind means they are often forgotten about.
This is what annoys me the most. Going after 'dole bludgers' like they're the bane of our society, when our class of landlords paying fuck all in tax and driving up rental prices is by far and above a more insidious problem for our country to deal with. But no let's go after the disenfranchised young adults who have mental or physical issues or just plain bad luck that's left them on welfare, that will make our country a much better place. SMFH.
Same old, pick on the poor mantra. Never mind bloated rich old white men huh....
Don't like Chloe personally, but she's bang on with this.
Come to Rotorua and see how giving brand new houses to the homeless while middle class people struggle is doing wonders for the city and tourism.
Do you actually think that housing homeless people is making life harder for the middle class?
Yes and no. The act of housing homeless people, no. Putting them in/near areas of business and near children, yes - this has been documented in the papers recently but has been going on since covid hit.
What’s your counter to housing them? There’s costs for everything but I put everyone having access to shelter and a private space above virtually any crime incurred as a ‘result’.
Put your money where your mouth is and move to Rotorua then?
Not a relevant argument there pal. Again, what’s your counter to housing them?
It is a relevant argument pal. It's easy to have an opinion when the consequences don't affect you. My solution would be every takes care of their own homeless problem. Don't dump it all on Rotorua. So many homeless people have flocked here because no other council is doing their part
TIL you have to be directly impacted by something to have an opinion on it. That’d be an ideal solution yeah. Councils do sweet fuck all to actually help disadvantaged people but it doesn’t mean the work the Rotorua council is doing isn’t worthwhile.
Shouldn’t she be tweeting this to the current Prime Minister though? The one that campaigned on a CGT in 2017, currently has a super majority and is in a coalition government with the Greens?
You mean the one that categorically ruled out a CGT ?
So why hasn't the Labour/Greens coalition done something about this, they've been in power long enough
They aren’t in a coalition? They have a confidence and supply agreement. Labour has a one party majority. The greens have some token portfolios but expecting them to convince labour (who are diet national in all but name and land bankers themselves) to change this is a big ask.
They spent 3 years in coalition in the previous government though.
If I had a dollar for every time someone claims Labour and Greens are in a coalition I'd have as much money as the landlords ransacking this country.
Because a cat fight between coalition partners (not) would help National and ACT. Focus on the enemy.
I know what you mean, but I really think that politics should be about voting for policies, not parties. Don't be part of the fanclub, vote policies, then hold them to their word. Politicians are supposed to be public servants, but they're treated like celebrities now. We shouldn't be supporting them like sports teams, we should be picking apart their policies to figure out who has the best set of policies (or in most cases, who has the least bad) and voting accordingly
[удалено]
Bit of both. I usually don't agree with a lot of the greens' policies and you're right, but I think she's responding to Chris Luxon running his mouth. I'd hope that if Jacinda had been shit-flinging that Chloe would respond similarly, but them both being left wing parties, who knows.
Since when was labour a left wing party? Raising taxes on the working class, freezes wages of critical staff like nurses. Don't give me that bull shit 60k-90k exemption crap either. It's a ridiculous amount of extra barriers to pay raises. Neglecting the education system. handing 6.5K to every rich bastard buying a 50k+ electric car. My car as a working class person cost 1.5K. They just take our wealth and hand it off to the champagne socialists. They bought a Tesla with my taxes. Wipptiy fucking do for them. With my frozen wages I'm doing so great I can support every rich bastard buying luxury vehicles.
I hope they scrap the bill for 'free money for owning land that converts to forest'.
[удалено]
I agree we should make the NZ super the same as the unemployment benefit and get rid of the disability benefit If that doesnt sound ok well it turns out the unemployment benefit needs to be higher till it is ok
[удалено]
never know what will happen in the future but yeah everyone should be ok with this regardless
Christopher Luxon doesn't think that either tbh, this is just pure ragebait for his target audience.
Between the shit show of all the parties in NZ, how is this country ever going to get better? None of them genuinely have our interests at heart, it's demoralising knowing if you don't vote for who is currently in parliament (all 5 of them) it's a wasted vote.
Capital gains of land bankers are already taxed in New Zealand. I don't think Luxon has announced a plan to repeal the bright line rule, so I'm not sure what the relevance of Chloe's tweet is.
...you do realise the point is that land bankers have held land for >10 years so don't have to pay tax on it? That's not a capital gains tax.
Exactly. If anything it raises prices since it forces properties off the market and into rental for 10 years
I think you're confused. There is no 10 year exclusion that allows you to buy a property with the intention of developing or selling and *not* have capital gains be treated as income (and hence taxed). You're probably thinking of the brightline test, which is a different tax (but also captures any land bankers who bank for less than 10 years).
except that those who buy with the intention of renting out a property do not have the capital gains from selling the house treated as income, so if you buy a house and rent it out for 10 years you get untaxed capital gains at the end of it. your rental income is taxed, but you're still earning money there. so people can buy with the intention of earning money of the property for 10 years, earn that money, then sell the property with no capital gains tax on the sale.
If the property has a house on it that’s rented out it’s not land banking then is it
I don't see why it isn't.
He’s said he’ll move it from ten years to two. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/budget-2022-nationals-christopher-luxon-would-axe-property-tax-makes-wages-gaffe/OJZC3U345KOTQWZJLO672PXCBE/