Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

25 Comments

  1. A CGT would promote fairness in NZ at least but the traitor denied it.

      1. What about a FTT Tax?
        A financial transaction tax (FTT) is a tax on the purchase, sale, or transfer of financial instruments. An FTT is usually levied as a small percentage of the nominal value of the transaction, but could in theory also be imposed as a flat fee per trade.
        Financial Transaction Taxes
        https://taxworkinggroup.govt.nz › default › files › t…PDF

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_transaction_tax

        The Impact of a Financial Transactions Tax – Tax Foundation
        https://taxfoundation.org › financial-transaction-tax
        How Financial Transaction Taxes Work — Under an FTT, when a financial asset is traded, a small percentage of the asset’s value is paid in taxes. For example …

        https://www.ashurst.com/en/news-and-insights/legal-updates/financial-transaction-taxes-in-the-eu—an-overview/financial-transaction-tax-in-spain—an-overview/

    1. As a kiwi, I support having both economic and military “capabilities” so robust that they force the rest of the world to flinch every time we turn Left. I trust New Zealand in that role more than I do America, China, Russia or even the EU, which is why I’m fine using wealth taxez as leverage for our own domestic policies.

      And even besides that, the counter argument is basically “we should not piss of the rich because if we do they will use their power over society to take over and ruin everything.”

      A couple of mid-way points where regulation and wealth taxes seems wise. Like, not making it possible for people to have that kind of power in the first place. Just an idea.

  2. It’s not like I don’t hear what she’s saying, I do!

    Short of a Cuban style revolution, NZ has as much chance of fixing pure greed as we do making a stitch of difference with world climate change. None!

  3. Wealth inequality numbers are silly. If you have 5000 people who save nothing at all, then the guy who saves $10k has more than 5000 people. It’s emotive nonsense.

    Income inequality, on the other hand, is real and concerning.

    1. I agree that the wealth inequality numbers don’t really tell you much how society is organised. A change from 388 people to 20 people in just 10 years is all about stock markets and how they reward innovation.

      Apple has very quickly become the most valuable company (by stock market valuation) in the world. Tesla is by far the most valuable car company in the world, even though it produces only one tenth the number of cars as Toyota. But it was the first major electric car company and is rapidly growing. Tesla’s outsize valuation has made Elon Musk the wealthiest man in the world.

      What could be done about this? A wealth tax could only be paid by actually selling part of the portfolio given that the valuations are not backed by realisable income. Maybe that is the intent. Spread the ownership of the portfolio by downsizing the very large shareholdings that some people have. That was done to land estates in NZ in the nineteenth century, to the general benefit of hugely expanding family owned and operated farms.

      I suspect there may be a fair bit of support for wealth taxes on seriously wealthy people.

      What is the level of serious wealth?

      Obviously we will all have our own views. I suspect for most people it is a level of wealth that takes someone completely beyond typical middle class aspirations. In New Zealand that is probably $50 million and beyond, well over what a very large Lotto win can produce, which might be seen as a token of New Zealand wealth aspirations.

      1. Trying to tax innovation or assets is not the objective of these discussions, professor. Fairness is what kicked off the wealth tax debates.

        Ultimately the left want more rights and freedoms rather than aesthetic pleasures and comfort.

  4. Martyn I hope you warned Mark ( a commenter on your Lim piece) that you were going to use such a risqué photo of Chloe with this article. Though maybe not quiet as brazen I can still see the skin on her chest below the shoulder line. This is not the way.

  5. Chloe Swarbrick: “In a flood, you could have 10 people working together to build a boat big enough for all of them. Or you could have one person hoarding the materials necessary, scolding the others that they simply didn’t work hard enough to survive. The boat wouldn’t be built. “

    Thing is, I doubt the Greens would get the boat built either. They’d be too worried if the ten boat builders were truly representative of society and if one of the co-captains of the ship should be non-binary instead of male.

  6. Being an entrepreneur in NZ means that you have figured out the best way to exploit poor immigrant workers.

  7. Chloe is 100% right but I have 0% confidence in the Greens ability to do anything about it. Not just because of their lack of electoral support but because of their hyper focus on identitarian navel gazing.

Comments are closed.