And then you need to ask yourself a further question. If Kindergartens are struggling with insufficient funding - is it all that wise to pump NZ$300,000,000 per year (actually more, but we’ll go with the fools figures) into paying interest on student loans?

Maybe what is needed is a bit of perspective.

Cut taxes………….Cut public good services. There is a direct relationship here. We already have a situation right now where Kindergartens need to fund raise to buy toilet paper. Cut taxes any further and we will have to fund raise to keep the door open at all.

The main problem with tax is tax avoidance by corporates. Cut their tax rates back further and all that happens is that more profits flow off shore and that doesn’t do anything at all for any balance of payments deficit.

The tired old arguments about Eire. It was all fine and dandy whilst they were net beneficiaries of EU money. Now they are not. Multi-nationals come in when attracted by low tax rates and other incentive and then promptly vanish when someone else gives them a better deal.

I had to pinch myself to make sure I wasn’t back in NZ whilst in Eire to read regular newspaper announcements of another factory closure, not of existing and long standing Irish industry but of corporates of a very short standing in Eire.

Having lived in Europe for much of the 90’s, I know all about the Celtic tiger Ireland. It’s another sign of your confusion that you trot an example of wealth transfer from the EU tax payers to the companies domiciled in Ireland to prop up your arguments for reduced tax rates. Without EU infusions the Irish miracle would not have been, regardless of the tax rates. As you well know, corp tax rates are a complete red herring due to imputation credits.

Re the garbage arriving from China*Mart, I too avoid it where-ever possible. Unfortunately this gets harder as more production is outsourced and moved offshore. Some of these local firms (e.g Macpac) had no choice but to move or else shut down. Corporate capital has no allegiance to local communities - indeed it has a legal obligation to make the max return on capital. When more money can be made by moving offshore, regardless of social, environmental and labour issues, what do you expect ? At least I am aware that local communities require more than cash and wishful thinking to thrive.

And I agree with your comments on the FTA. Unfortunately, Labour, Nats and ACT would all rush in to do a trade deal with China.

Personal and collective responsibility is required for change. We do not stand alone, rather we will fall together.

I know we have ding donged in the past…but I 100% support your thoughts about buying cheap crap. The Chinese govt is a deeply and dangerously totalitarian regime that I try not to support with any of my consumer choices whenever possible.

It is a convenient myth to push the rich mans club angle. They want to set a rate of 15% from 0 to 38,000. That boosts everyone, even those on low and mid range salaries.

Many countries are adopting a flatter tax structure, and finding it helps with growth, reducing compliance costs and removing incentives for the very rich to minimise tax.

You make out that ACTS tax rates are too low and that they are some-how immoral and uncaring. Why is 33% set by labour suddenly proof they are the beacon of economic genius?

I’m also surprised that you are so dismissive of individuals initiatives to buy locally, to recycle, to mentor etc. You said: “Goods sold by China*Mart made by slave labourers undermine locally made goods and small businesses. Full stop.” Yes they do, and there is nothing the consumer can do about it. It is up to the government to fix isn’t it? That sounds very fatalistic and pathetic to me. Maybe you are confused. You could *choose* not to buy those cheaper goods. More people could. Perhaps the nasty government overtaxes and *forces* you to buy cheap crap made in China?

It starts with people taking personal responsibility for their actions, and working that way. Leaving it up to the government is a cop out. Especially this Govt. - rushing to form a FTA with China, irrespective of human rights issues and with the hopes that we get to sell more than we buy. It wont be free.

And I don’t do PTA. I was referring to setting up their web site, helping with their IT installation and support and helping with transport for regular class outings. I don’t think the community will be destroyed if the government takes a little less from each persons pay packet.

Maybe on a tighter budget, they wont waste as much?

When the equal footing requires taking the middle class down a few pegs to “equalise” I diverge on the “solutions” that are on offer.

The real rich and the mega rich seem to be in a position where they can minimise much of the meddlings of the government and the so called free market. (The market is not free, it remains handicapped by the current system, for which I do not put the entire blame on the government)

From where I stand, the system is skewed and needs fixing. My belief is fixing it through a more right leaning philosophy will avoid the likelihood of strong left wing elements trying to replace it rather than fix it. We’ve seen where that road leads.

We may likely find several problems we agree upon, but the method of repair and the relative importance in the scheme of things is where we begin to diverge. That doesn’t necessarily make the right winger any less a humanitarian.

In New Zealand, economically speaking, the poorest may have a further road to travel to achieve success, but it isn’t that much further. The vast majority of Kiwis have their own challenges to overcome financially, but they are not insurmountable by any means.

The bigger issue is on the social side, and things can be very unequal there. We do have a responsibility to help others on that score, and again it seems we may agree on the problem but not the method of resolution.

The smacking debate for example. Some want to characterise this as the right-wingers desire to thrash their children. I want to see REAL coal face solutions to disadvantaged children, and my belief is centring the issue around this aspect is a huge diversion from those things that make a big difference, whilst simultaneously helping to erode the confidence and respect we need to give the vast majority of parents that would give their very lives for their children, who face undue suspicion and intolerance from a few people that believe their way is the right way for all.

That good, caring parents are voicing their concern over this bill should be a signal to the Greenies that maybe you are throwing the baby out with the bath water. Instead, it is reduced to the assumption we love to beat defenceless people to death, and think the current provision in the Crimes Act allows us to get off scot free when it happens.

The only reason for NOT redefining the section tighter is that the Greens seek to ban smacking and criminalise the parents they say they will never apply the law too.

Oops, have I strayed off topic, or does this count as an example?