'Dear home-owning opponents of taxing capital gains & public investment via borrowing: what's the point of 'winning' and keeping the gains if your kids migrate and raise your grandkids elsewhere?'
This is the argument Labour *must* take into the next election. Polls clearly show that the tide has turned on things like a CGT and I don’t think people are buying this idea we can cut our way to prosperity.
Labour lost in 2023 because they couldn’t clearly articulate what they wanted to achieve beyond a marginal reduction in the cost of fruits and vegetables after squandering an MMP majority.
Bold action is what’s needed. We need a Prime Minister not a Prime Manager.
Personally, I think Labour lost because the electorate wanted change following Covid and high inflation. A better policy slate would probably have got more votes, but I doubt it would have made that much difference to the election result.
Chris Hipkins just said he's thinking of working with Winston. So he can't say (credibly) he might tax capital gains. He would be in exactly the same position as Jacinda in 2017. Promising a working group and then bailing out.
Labour working with NZ First is a terrible idea. I'll be voting Green Party (or TMP) for sure if Labour signals it will do that. I'm happy Nats did though! Anything to tamp down ACT. But both Labour and Nats need to really think hard about what NZF brings to the table.
I wonder if NZF is the conservative with a small "c" party and should not be discounted by Labour. It's way too soon to dismiss potential coalition partners. NZF could water down some of the PC actions by the last government which caused me to not vote Labour for the first time in my life. My experience in politics is a range of values at the political table reflects societies differences better than the "this is what we think" approach to decisions.
I hear you Bernard. However lets not rule out a NZF without Winston and who knows what lightening rod topics they grab in that scenario. He's no spring chicken after all. Do I remember hearing John Key said he wasn't worried about NZF because they're voter base was dying out? I would hope there is enough of the disenfranchised of my generation to turn out the vote if there was a concrete pledge to go the distance with the Greens.
I wonder if Hipkins could trade support for CGT from NZF for an undertaking from Labour to NZF not to reassert their old ways of 'progressivism' through social liberalism.
How about the possibility that NZF will withdraw from the coalition / cross the floor in May when Seymore replaces Winnie as DPM? Would that trigger an election? I think 'drunk with power' Shane Jones would try and stay with Nat/Act though. Would that trigger the 'waka jumping rule?
the horse has bolted as far as capital gains taxes go as I suspect those days are over for at least a while. Far better to simply tax property and have an offsetting reduction in income tax to rebalance the transfer of value from income to property. Taxing property (and maybe a simple wealth tax to cover off everything) is a far simpler approach especially if it is fiscally neutral (though we do need to increase tax revenue over all to fund so much of what is presently underfunded.. Also need to reintroduce inheritance tax.
Interesting idea and probably more likely to get through. I always liked the idea of rates acting as taxes, as they’ve been around a long time and accepted part of life so an easier to sell to the public. Maybe an add on to rates called National infrastructure tax, with discounts given for continually inhabited homes
yes - a straight forward tax on capital value is easy to calculate as you note the system of valuation already exists and it is easily arguable that much of our taxation already goes on property related functions - plus it doesn't have the drawbacks of only taxing property/assets at time of sale and it provides a predictable annual revenue stream for government - it could also be set so that there is some minimum value (maybe median value) beneath which there is no tax. Also if it resulted in a drop in income tax then a lot of tax payers would be pretty comfortable with the concept.
Agree with despairing hope. It is wonder of life to hear running footsteps and a call- "Grandma" or a granddaughter waking and joyfully saying "there's Granddad".
Beautiful letter Bernard. I just hope the brain rot hasn't set in too much and people can truely comprehend what you're asking them to consider.
On another note, warming is accelerating. The graphs shared at the bottom of the Kaka should have everyone terrified. Every day in January was over 1.7 degrees of pre-industrial warming. We've hit and are pushing through and towards (the known) tipping points at an accelerated pace. But it's radio silence from the media, from elected officials. It's tragic in more ways than one, but people really are not prepared for the much harder life that's ahead of them (sooner than expected).
Chippy agreeing to work with Winston and effectively ruling out CGT again, this is really sad. Last time he gambled on promising the least he could get away with to win and lost.
With the coalition in its current state he’s set to do the same.
I live in hope of someone who would deliver something meaningful embracing modern monetary theory.
I sincerely hope so. I would rather someone else lead Labour to the next election. Just too much happened with the Ardern government, but it’s slim pickings
Not sure that given the depths of misogyny, threats and vitriol Jacinda Ardern, Gholriz Gharaman, Siouxsie Wiles and Kiritapu Allan were subjected to many women would be keen right now. We, no matter our political persuasion, should be ashamed and horrified by recent reports on this.
I don’t understand why they can’t just pull a Labour UK move and swiftly bring one in anyway without discussing it? As the coalition have done with smoking reforms. Understandably people will be pissed, but they are the same people who will be pissed regardless. Why give them the leeway again to shout it down.
They probably could, or just come in after an election and say it was required to form a coalition - beats a Treaty Principles Bill as a price to pay...
Totally agree with you Bernard. Except I would like to point out that the last Labour Govt had the Brightline test at 10 years (now changed back to an ineffectual 2 years by the current lot) which was in effect a capital gains tax.
Exactly! As per my comment above, made absolutely no difference to the house price trend line. A CGT on housing is the perfect "Third Way" tax: An appealingly-populist policy that is inconsequential for extremely-wealthy donors (with their tax-optimisation and equity-derived lifestyles), while further supressing and dividing the working class.
Yep, absolutely! And I know that's what you usually advocate for... I'm just concerned that's not the 'recommendation' the average punter will take from a letter which references "capital gains" three times, and doesn't mention a land tax at all? (I do appreciate that explicit 'policy' wasn't the point of the letter, but still...)
The Brightline test at 10 years had not been in place long enough to make a difference. Landlords were holding on hoping for a change in government. One of the first things things the incoming govt did was change B/line test to 2 years and give landlords back their tax break.
You might be right, and it might have eventually helped. But, it has also existed for a decade now (at various limits), and house price growth only accelerated during that entire period. More pertinently, house prices globally (including where CGT already applies) have also increased at roughly the same rate. My hypothesis is that the availability of easy equity-derived debt now means the 'sale' price (that is, the CG-taxable price) is no longer the number we should focus on if we want to address growing inequality.
I think I agree, however how is this structured. Is it like rates? How is it paid & to Central or local government? Can you direct me to simple explanation
Great letter Bernard. It drives me crazy that nearly no one in the media is discussing this sort of stuff. It's always about the bottom dollar, with no consideration given to the humanity of these decisions.
You're right on the money. What is the point? I'm young-ish (early 30s) own a house and make decent money, yet every day is a struggle and that's even without kids. Time is starting to tick for me and my partner to have children and I just don't know how it's going to work. Even with a decent full-time job here, Australia is looking more and more inviting every day. The promise of actually living and not just surviving is really tempting.
I really wish these politicians would grow some balls and enact some real change. Might even get the younger generation to get out and vote, if they saw a party was actually serious about looking out for them in a meaningful way rather than just tinkering around the edges of an already broken system.
The Greens are that party, and their voters are disproportionately the educated, females and young. Labour completely let down the voting block that wanted/needed/demanded a progressive Labour Green TPM coalition. Nearly all of the policies that Bernard advocates for are Green Party policy and have been for years.
Bernard. We expect everything to be provided but “heaven forbid” will not help to pay for it. Successive governments have failed to bite the bullet because the rich prick house or two owning boomers have prevented them. They are now getting their just rewards but it is ok because they can fly to Aus or elsewhere to see their mokopuna and pollute the hell out of what remains of the planet on the way. A couple of feet of sea level rise may be necessary. At least it might get rid of Mar a Lago!
How do those of us still capable of thinking and reading stay sane? You are a rock Bernard.
That point about travelling to Australia a couple of times a year to see grandkids for a holiday is a good one. It's fine, unless you can't fly to Australia any more. That's why covid was so devastating to that particular lifestyle. Suddenly there wasn't even those regular holiday/visits.
Ironically.. in my family the boomers are more than happy to leave their wanaka life style block over the winter months for a holiday apartment on the sunshine coast to see there grand kids walk to school
Great article Bernard, although I believe it is optimistic to think that parents who have spent their entire lives endeavoring to collect capital gains as a method of securing their retirement years are going to change their views overnight.
lmproving the slope of the playing field by changing the tax laws in a direction that makes all of the country's residents pay tax at a similar rate is however likely to gain support. As Gary from Garys Economics says "increasing inequality drives civil unrest" which we can see in New Zealand. The COC are driving inequality and there are many areas that Labour could be using to shoot them down. Trying to cover all issues won't work while offering to get into bed with the anti vax nutters via a partnership that you ruled out last election looks like a weak sellout. Hope that isn't the case. Time to stand up and lead with a clear vision to unify NZ and move us forward.
We had an obscure vision resulting in the hijacking of NZ by the current clowns. Should have known when the first word of their slogan was "back" that things wouldn't go forward.
"as a method of securing their retirement years". Not sure it's even that rational. I think it's often more emotive- the belief that taxation is "theft by the bloody government". That the income is impossible to hide (unlike doing cash jobs, for example) probably irks them even more!
People I know with multiple rental properties have done it for their retirement and for their kids (ages ranging from 30s to 70s). Biggest intergenerational transfer of wealth which will firmly entrenched the inequality is on our doorstep.....
Of course I know this is often the case, but that doesn't explain the aversion to CGT. It often ends up with elderly parents renting to their kids, probably for a bit less than market rent, but also the kids can't get repairs done when needed. My next door neighbour is in this situation and it looks like intergenerational controlling behaviour to me.
I agree with the sentiment of the letter. Yes, I am older and very comfortable, with one investment property rented to a member of extended family. The extra income we will get from less tax on rental property will make zero difference to our lifestyle. I have a more radical view to just taxation on wealth and spending it on infrastructure. Our economy works to increase the wealth of the already wealthy and keep the poor really poor. We lack the charity to accept that we need to help those that struggle to help themselves. Our political system serves only a minority. Banks, Insurance are no longer there to facilitate a just society and to spread risk. Individualism has failed. The health of our whole society should be our goal. Our health system is failing not only because of poor government policy but also because of poor life decisions by many. Our fixation on the motor car has something to do with that. Each new government has an agenda for education. Some new method, or just bringing back an old one should fix things! Education is about the relationship between the teacher and the class. A good teacher who understands that relationship can find the appropriate teaching strategy. Yes, we need to spend a lot more on infrastructure but we need to improve our decision making processes so that we are doing more than just producing policy statements and business plans. Please bring construction of infrastructure back into the public domain. It’s likely to be cheaper and may provide more rewarding work environments. In short, there is no simple fix.
A thousand yeses!!!!! Applaud every thing you wrote! You are spot on when pointing out the decision making part...not just decisions on policy but also decisions as voters!!!!!
"The extra income we will get from less tax on rental property will make zero difference to our lifestyle."
maybe zero difference to your lifestyle but it will make you richer/wealthier a hell of a lot quicker than those buying/purchasing a dwelling for themself (and family) !!!
you are being allowed to deduct your mortgage interest and council rates from your income before your income tax payable is calculated. if the extended family was buying/purchasing the investment property for themselves they would NOT be allowed to do that.
therefore you are one of the residential rental property owners who have a COLOSSAL financial advantage over people who are buying/purchasing a dwelling for themself (and family).
Also a serious question for Gen Xers. If the junior doctors, engineers, etc, migrate now. Who will be the senior doctors, specialists, etc in 10-20 years time when we retire and are looking for care, etc?
As a capital gains tax seems to be politically unacceptable, maybe it should exclude the family home and just tax gains on holiday and investment properties. I live modestly in a rural district that includes two communities of upmarket holiday homes, most of which are only occupied for a few weeks a year. Many are let out on AirB&B over the Christmas holidays which covers the costs of owning the property - rates, etc.
The town that serves these rural communities currently has 46 people living on the street and the foodbank and other helping groups are doing a roaring trade.
The contrast between the haves and havenots is very marked.
Bernard, addressing the open letter to every "home owning older voter" is flat-out demographic profiling. The more targeted version in the heading above the link and comments, specifying opponents of particular policies, is fairer, though it's not, as the quote marks imply, quoted accurately from the letter above, at least as printed - perhaps the audio differs?
There have always been baby boomers who have been consistently appalled by the erosion of humane public public policy in our lifetime, and have voted for whatever alternative, electable or otherwise, was on offer - more and more difficult as much of the notional left jumped the fence into the neoliberal orthodoxy. There's a fair chance they read the Kaka...
I support the Kaka because I think it's important and provides a vastly better source of NZ political economy than other sources. However I am often angry at the demographic profiling and resulting blame. I wonder if the people who do fit the profile are reading the Kaka or more likely lying on some beach somewhere else
This is the argument Labour *must* take into the next election. Polls clearly show that the tide has turned on things like a CGT and I don’t think people are buying this idea we can cut our way to prosperity.
Labour lost in 2023 because they couldn’t clearly articulate what they wanted to achieve beyond a marginal reduction in the cost of fruits and vegetables after squandering an MMP majority.
Bold action is what’s needed. We need a Prime Minister not a Prime Manager.
Personally, I think Labour lost because the electorate wanted change following Covid and high inflation. A better policy slate would probably have got more votes, but I doubt it would have made that much difference to the election result.
yes, with Hipkins in front and centre, it might still be too much of a reminder for the electorate next year as well.
Chris Hipkins just said he's thinking of working with Winston. So he can't say (credibly) he might tax capital gains. He would be in exactly the same position as Jacinda in 2017. Promising a working group and then bailing out.
Labour working with NZ First is a terrible idea. I'll be voting Green Party (or TMP) for sure if Labour signals it will do that. I'm happy Nats did though! Anything to tamp down ACT. But both Labour and Nats need to really think hard about what NZF brings to the table.
I wonder if NZF is the conservative with a small "c" party and should not be discounted by Labour. It's way too soon to dismiss potential coalition partners. NZF could water down some of the PC actions by the last government which caused me to not vote Labour for the first time in my life. My experience in politics is a range of values at the political table reflects societies differences better than the "this is what we think" approach to decisions.
I hear you Bernard. However lets not rule out a NZF without Winston and who knows what lightening rod topics they grab in that scenario. He's no spring chicken after all. Do I remember hearing John Key said he wasn't worried about NZF because they're voter base was dying out? I would hope there is enough of the disenfranchised of my generation to turn out the vote if there was a concrete pledge to go the distance with the Greens.
I wonder if Hipkins could trade support for CGT from NZF for an undertaking from Labour to NZF not to reassert their old ways of 'progressivism' through social liberalism.
How about the possibility that NZF will withdraw from the coalition / cross the floor in May when Seymore replaces Winnie as DPM? Would that trigger an election? I think 'drunk with power' Shane Jones would try and stay with Nat/Act though. Would that trigger the 'waka jumping rule?
I do not believe Winston willl let Seymour take deputy PM position.
It's not Winston's call, It's Luxon's- and the deal has already been made at the time the coalition was formed.
Agree Luxon is PM however my comment was about actions if Winston is required to step aside how will that transpire.
the horse has bolted as far as capital gains taxes go as I suspect those days are over for at least a while. Far better to simply tax property and have an offsetting reduction in income tax to rebalance the transfer of value from income to property. Taxing property (and maybe a simple wealth tax to cover off everything) is a far simpler approach especially if it is fiscally neutral (though we do need to increase tax revenue over all to fund so much of what is presently underfunded.. Also need to reintroduce inheritance tax.
Interesting idea and probably more likely to get through. I always liked the idea of rates acting as taxes, as they’ve been around a long time and accepted part of life so an easier to sell to the public. Maybe an add on to rates called National infrastructure tax, with discounts given for continually inhabited homes
yes - a straight forward tax on capital value is easy to calculate as you note the system of valuation already exists and it is easily arguable that much of our taxation already goes on property related functions - plus it doesn't have the drawbacks of only taxing property/assets at time of sale and it provides a predictable annual revenue stream for government - it could also be set so that there is some minimum value (maybe median value) beneath which there is no tax. Also if it resulted in a drop in income tax then a lot of tax payers would be pretty comfortable with the concept.
Agree with despairing hope. It is wonder of life to hear running footsteps and a call- "Grandma" or a granddaughter waking and joyfully saying "there's Granddad".
Beautiful letter Bernard. I just hope the brain rot hasn't set in too much and people can truely comprehend what you're asking them to consider.
On another note, warming is accelerating. The graphs shared at the bottom of the Kaka should have everyone terrified. Every day in January was over 1.7 degrees of pre-industrial warming. We've hit and are pushing through and towards (the known) tipping points at an accelerated pace. But it's radio silence from the media, from elected officials. It's tragic in more ways than one, but people really are not prepared for the much harder life that's ahead of them (sooner than expected).
Yep. Terrified is one word for it.
Chippy agreeing to work with Winston and effectively ruling out CGT again, this is really sad. Last time he gambled on promising the least he could get away with to win and lost.
With the coalition in its current state he’s set to do the same.
I live in hope of someone who would deliver something meaningful embracing modern monetary theory.
It seems not to be
Thomas Manch may be ‘undermining’ Labour with this story, hope he is very wrong indeed
I sincerely hope so. I would rather someone else lead Labour to the next election. Just too much happened with the Ardern government, but it’s slim pickings
It's not "slim pickings" at all - Kieran MxAnulty first and foremost, Barb Edmonds is highly credible, Carmel Sepuloni
Not sure that given the depths of misogyny, threats and vitriol Jacinda Ardern, Gholriz Gharaman, Siouxsie Wiles and Kiritapu Allan were subjected to many women would be keen right now. We, no matter our political persuasion, should be ashamed and horrified by recent reports on this.
When it comes to questioning lack of CGT or that captains call. I’d like something more from the next leader but my opinion
Agree Kieren McAnulty has vision & can talk complex financial issues that make sense to all not just economists.
Kieran is a no! He is newly married and is adamant that he does not want the role. He is campaign manager and will do a highly competent job of that.
Barbara has 8 children and gas her hands full to do an excellent job of finance, one of the most important jobs of all.
Chippy is intelligent, sharp, caring, a great speaker, and well grounded.
There is no prefect politician or Party. Look at National! They choose Luxon, and look at that is turning out!. Slim pickings over that side for sure
I don’t understand why they can’t just pull a Labour UK move and swiftly bring one in anyway without discussing it? As the coalition have done with smoking reforms. Understandably people will be pissed, but they are the same people who will be pissed regardless. Why give them the leeway again to shout it down.
They probably could, or just come in after an election and say it was required to form a coalition - beats a Treaty Principles Bill as a price to pay...
Agree - why the need for endless debate and polling? Just do it and move on.
Exactly!
Ben: I have emailed Hipkins; it’s not ok to work with Peters. If we do our work, I do not believe we need him.
I hope so
Reply to my email.
Chris has asked me to tell you that Labour ruled out working with Winstone Peters in the last election; and that position is unlikely to change.
Thank you for updating me
I’d really like him to make a commitment to exploring CGT though, or Bernard’s land tax.
Great open letter. Here's hoping it will penetrate the appropriate grey matter.
Magnificent letter Bernard, we should all share this with smug median voters we know…
Your grandkids will have Aussie accents and will cheer for Australia. Enjoy watching them grow up on zoom
Totally agree with you Bernard. Except I would like to point out that the last Labour Govt had the Brightline test at 10 years (now changed back to an ineffectual 2 years by the current lot) which was in effect a capital gains tax.
Exactly! As per my comment above, made absolutely no difference to the house price trend line. A CGT on housing is the perfect "Third Way" tax: An appealingly-populist policy that is inconsequential for extremely-wealthy donors (with their tax-optimisation and equity-derived lifestyles), while further supressing and dividing the working class.
So how about a proper tax on unearned and leveraged land wealth?
Yep, absolutely! And I know that's what you usually advocate for... I'm just concerned that's not the 'recommendation' the average punter will take from a letter which references "capital gains" three times, and doesn't mention a land tax at all? (I do appreciate that explicit 'policy' wasn't the point of the letter, but still...)
Fair point Tim
The Brightline test at 10 years had not been in place long enough to make a difference. Landlords were holding on hoping for a change in government. One of the first things things the incoming govt did was change B/line test to 2 years and give landlords back their tax break.
You might be right, and it might have eventually helped. But, it has also existed for a decade now (at various limits), and house price growth only accelerated during that entire period. More pertinently, house prices globally (including where CGT already applies) have also increased at roughly the same rate. My hypothesis is that the availability of easy equity-derived debt now means the 'sale' price (that is, the CG-taxable price) is no longer the number we should focus on if we want to address growing inequality.
Yep. But it was ineffective. It's why I favour an annual tax on residential land values for all. Not just landlords.
I think I agree, however how is this structured. Is it like rates? How is it paid & to Central or local government? Can you direct me to simple explanation
Great letter Bernard. It drives me crazy that nearly no one in the media is discussing this sort of stuff. It's always about the bottom dollar, with no consideration given to the humanity of these decisions.
You're right on the money. What is the point? I'm young-ish (early 30s) own a house and make decent money, yet every day is a struggle and that's even without kids. Time is starting to tick for me and my partner to have children and I just don't know how it's going to work. Even with a decent full-time job here, Australia is looking more and more inviting every day. The promise of actually living and not just surviving is really tempting.
I really wish these politicians would grow some balls and enact some real change. Might even get the younger generation to get out and vote, if they saw a party was actually serious about looking out for them in a meaningful way rather than just tinkering around the edges of an already broken system.
The Greens are that party, and their voters are disproportionately the educated, females and young. Labour completely let down the voting block that wanted/needed/demanded a progressive Labour Green TPM coalition. Nearly all of the policies that Bernard advocates for are Green Party policy and have been for years.
Wonderfully depressing and true
Bernard. We expect everything to be provided but “heaven forbid” will not help to pay for it. Successive governments have failed to bite the bullet because the rich prick house or two owning boomers have prevented them. They are now getting their just rewards but it is ok because they can fly to Aus or elsewhere to see their mokopuna and pollute the hell out of what remains of the planet on the way. A couple of feet of sea level rise may be necessary. At least it might get rid of Mar a Lago!
How do those of us still capable of thinking and reading stay sane? You are a rock Bernard.
Patrick Medlicott
That point about travelling to Australia a couple of times a year to see grandkids for a holiday is a good one. It's fine, unless you can't fly to Australia any more. That's why covid was so devastating to that particular lifestyle. Suddenly there wasn't even those regular holiday/visits.
Ironically.. in my family the boomers are more than happy to leave their wanaka life style block over the winter months for a holiday apartment on the sunshine coast to see there grand kids walk to school
This seems to be a not uncommon choice among those who can.
i don't think they subscribe to the Kaka
Great article Bernard, although I believe it is optimistic to think that parents who have spent their entire lives endeavoring to collect capital gains as a method of securing their retirement years are going to change their views overnight.
lmproving the slope of the playing field by changing the tax laws in a direction that makes all of the country's residents pay tax at a similar rate is however likely to gain support. As Gary from Garys Economics says "increasing inequality drives civil unrest" which we can see in New Zealand. The COC are driving inequality and there are many areas that Labour could be using to shoot them down. Trying to cover all issues won't work while offering to get into bed with the anti vax nutters via a partnership that you ruled out last election looks like a weak sellout. Hope that isn't the case. Time to stand up and lead with a clear vision to unify NZ and move us forward.
We had an obscure vision resulting in the hijacking of NZ by the current clowns. Should have known when the first word of their slogan was "back" that things wouldn't go forward.
"as a method of securing their retirement years". Not sure it's even that rational. I think it's often more emotive- the belief that taxation is "theft by the bloody government". That the income is impossible to hide (unlike doing cash jobs, for example) probably irks them even more!
People I know with multiple rental properties have done it for their retirement and for their kids (ages ranging from 30s to 70s). Biggest intergenerational transfer of wealth which will firmly entrenched the inequality is on our doorstep.....
The kids aren't 70!!!
Of course I know this is often the case, but that doesn't explain the aversion to CGT. It often ends up with elderly parents renting to their kids, probably for a bit less than market rent, but also the kids can't get repairs done when needed. My next door neighbour is in this situation and it looks like intergenerational controlling behaviour to me.
I agree with the sentiment of the letter. Yes, I am older and very comfortable, with one investment property rented to a member of extended family. The extra income we will get from less tax on rental property will make zero difference to our lifestyle. I have a more radical view to just taxation on wealth and spending it on infrastructure. Our economy works to increase the wealth of the already wealthy and keep the poor really poor. We lack the charity to accept that we need to help those that struggle to help themselves. Our political system serves only a minority. Banks, Insurance are no longer there to facilitate a just society and to spread risk. Individualism has failed. The health of our whole society should be our goal. Our health system is failing not only because of poor government policy but also because of poor life decisions by many. Our fixation on the motor car has something to do with that. Each new government has an agenda for education. Some new method, or just bringing back an old one should fix things! Education is about the relationship between the teacher and the class. A good teacher who understands that relationship can find the appropriate teaching strategy. Yes, we need to spend a lot more on infrastructure but we need to improve our decision making processes so that we are doing more than just producing policy statements and business plans. Please bring construction of infrastructure back into the public domain. It’s likely to be cheaper and may provide more rewarding work environments. In short, there is no simple fix.
I attempt to stay sane by keeping informed about stuff that I hope I have some influence over; the National political scenery. Ye for Kaka a Day !
Thanks Bernard for your open letter. Let’s all do what we can to get it out there and talk about it.
And what an outstandingly eloquent letter from the departed nurse!
A thousand yeses!!!!! Applaud every thing you wrote! You are spot on when pointing out the decision making part...not just decisions on policy but also decisions as voters!!!!!
🙌🙌🙌🥹
"The extra income we will get from less tax on rental property will make zero difference to our lifestyle."
maybe zero difference to your lifestyle but it will make you richer/wealthier a hell of a lot quicker than those buying/purchasing a dwelling for themself (and family) !!!
you are being allowed to deduct your mortgage interest and council rates from your income before your income tax payable is calculated. if the extended family was buying/purchasing the investment property for themselves they would NOT be allowed to do that.
therefore you are one of the residential rental property owners who have a COLOSSAL financial advantage over people who are buying/purchasing a dwelling for themself (and family).
Also a serious question for Gen Xers. If the junior doctors, engineers, etc, migrate now. Who will be the senior doctors, specialists, etc in 10-20 years time when we retire and are looking for care, etc?
Maybe by then it will be plane loads of retirees leaving.
Well the genXers are also leaving so it's last one standing in A ane E please turn out the lights
As a capital gains tax seems to be politically unacceptable, maybe it should exclude the family home and just tax gains on holiday and investment properties. I live modestly in a rural district that includes two communities of upmarket holiday homes, most of which are only occupied for a few weeks a year. Many are let out on AirB&B over the Christmas holidays which covers the costs of owning the property - rates, etc.
The town that serves these rural communities currently has 46 people living on the street and the foodbank and other helping groups are doing a roaring trade.
The contrast between the haves and havenots is very marked.
Any CGT policy would almost certainly exclude the family home - all the previous election policies did. Didn't help Labour win anything though.
Thanks for the open letter, Bernard. I will put it up on the Tuesday Club notes next week. These go to 1500 people.
Bernard, addressing the open letter to every "home owning older voter" is flat-out demographic profiling. The more targeted version in the heading above the link and comments, specifying opponents of particular policies, is fairer, though it's not, as the quote marks imply, quoted accurately from the letter above, at least as printed - perhaps the audio differs?
There have always been baby boomers who have been consistently appalled by the erosion of humane public public policy in our lifetime, and have voted for whatever alternative, electable or otherwise, was on offer - more and more difficult as much of the notional left jumped the fence into the neoliberal orthodoxy. There's a fair chance they read the Kaka...
I support the Kaka because I think it's important and provides a vastly better source of NZ political economy than other sources. However I am often angry at the demographic profiling and resulting blame. I wonder if the people who do fit the profile are reading the Kaka or more likely lying on some beach somewhere else