duh..!..it’s ok bj..

the penny has dropped…

..i can be a bit slow on the uptake sometimes..

..phil@whoar.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I think property speculators may exit the market, but not investors. It should be noted that property speculators are already subject to capital gains tax.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Oh, and MC, if you don’t even faintly suspect the Government is intent on ‘streamlining’ the RMA in a manner that would allow such things to happen, you are perhaps a little behind the play.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

bj..must be a cultural/culinary-thing..

..i don’t get it..

..is it a defiant/up yours!-one-liner..?

phil@whoar.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

The hydropower station On Lake Manapouri runs from water diverted from the lake and away from its natural egress to the sea, the Waiau River. Pressure to increase the generation capacity by increasing the flow through the generators would result in significant loss of productivity for the farmers along the Waiau. It has already happened. Foreign investors, intent on increasing their returns, could lever the company into doing just that. It’s clear that any efforts by locals to contain the productivity of the company can be challenged by investors who seek increasing returns. That what ya want, Misanthropic Curmudgeon?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

mc..like the dirty-dairy-farmers..

..they have had use of the resource for nothing..

phil@whoar.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

@Elsie 3:33 PM

Okay, that’s your personal choice to accept a lower return in exchange for less risk, but I suspect if the playing field were leveled re tax, many more property investors would take the risk of selling some of their properties and/or increasing their mortgages on them to obtain the capital to invest in business.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Having been on & off benefits for a while now (since being made redundant from a long term job) I have seen the following : no real increase in the number of job vacancies, waiting areas at WINZ still as busy as ever, decrease in the number of staff in the local WINZ office.

I dont see any real evidence that this Key-led Govt. is doing anything to improve the plight of those on benefits. All I do see is juggling of figures to make it appear as though they are !
I believe that many people who drop off the unemployed stats. are not going back to work, they just give up…

Kia-ora

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Toad,

I have multiple properties and I would never pay capital gains tax on any of them, as I have no intention of selling them. I buy, never sell.

Think of it as an accommodation provision company, if you like. People need a place to live.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Gregor,

Because an area is risky is no reason for government to waste taxpayers money speculating on it.

Even if New Zealand did do so, there is no reason to suggest that we would have any comparative advantage in what is essentially a large scale manufacturing endevour. We won’t make alt energy products for the same reason we don’t make cars. We may well design alt energy, but again, I’m not sure we have some natural advantage on scientific inquiry, either. If we did, the private sector would gladly fund it.

NZers would still be obsessed with property, as in the case of many countries, because property is a low risk, easily understood business model. Someone needs a house to live in, someone else provides it. Given I am one such person, I can tell you that I am very supportive of the environmental lobby support of smart growth planning, as there is nothing quite like creating artificial scarcity on a product in high demand.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

@Elsie 3:03 PM

Of course a capital gains tax is not going to persuade many people whose sole significant asset is their family home to take the risk of raising a big mortgage against it to start up a business or invest in an existing one.

But those who have 2 or 5 or 10 investment properties are incentivised by the absence of a capital gains tax to take the safe option of continuing to invest in more and more property, rather than the somewhat more risky option of trying to get higher returns on their capital by investing in productive enterprise.

So capital gets ties up in property rather than doing stuff which will create jobs.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Elsie

Given that the green tech market is still fairly immature and thus risky, the funding is far more likely to come from governments than private investors via R+D and large scale civil contracts – governments create sovereign energy policies, regulations and guidelines; corporations generally tend to seek government funding and guarantees to execute that vision when that market is immature to defer their risk.

Furthermore, to suggest that successive NZ governments would take anything other than the most simplistic view of macro-economic management (“Grow more trees! Make more milk!”) flies in the face of reality.

This is borne out with NZ investors obsession of property; a perfectly rational response given the regulatory, commercial and taxation framework that has existed in NZ since the 80s.

So the notion that all that is standing in the way is that politicians aren’t directing it, or the taxpayer isn’t funding it, is almost completely accurate.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

a capital gains tax which would unleash capital to be invested in innovative productive Kiwi businesses?

How about you put *your* house/savings on the line to fund speculative energy start-ups? Might I suggest that the reasons many Kiwis don’t already do this is because they don’t like the risk profile of such investments. They suit those who wish to speculate in high risk activity, or politicians who are effectively gambling with other people’s money in areas where returns are highly unlikely.

Also, if you impose capital gains, you’ll introduce a cost that will do nothing to make housing more affordable. On the contrary.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Joyce et al. are trying to. Simple people like Gareth complain every step of the way, because Joyce et al. wont subscribe to their blinkered, statist, interpretations.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Robert’s breathless regurgitation of the tired old strawman about selling water rights along with generators fails on so many grounds is laughbale.

Firstly, it completely fails to graps the role the RMA plays in using resources: a compay (irerecpectove of ownership) must apply for and be granted resource consent to ‘use’ the water. The onwnership of the company has no bearing on the merits of their claim/case.

Secondly, should the above first point be ignored, it beggars belief how the existing privately ownered hydro stations have been operating for years!

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Gareth,

What reason have you to believe we can secure 1% of the global renewable energy market?

That’s like saying if we could secure 1% of (insert desired market) then we could create many jobs and much wealth. I suggest if it were as easy to do as it is to say, we would have done it already. The notion that all that is standing in the way is that politicians aren’t directing it, or the taxpayer isn’t funding it, is laughable.

If you really think it can be done, go out and do it. If the numbers add up, then private investors will fall over themselves to fund it.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Catherine hypothetical fantasy of a “class where 10% have English as a second language, four have learning impairments such as dyslexia, three have been diagnosed as ADHD” completly ignores the swathes of teacher aides that would be available for those people, as well as the additional funding for the ESL students.

But as usual, Catherine does ignore fact and promotes fantasy. The above hypothetical fantasy should therefore come as no surprise.

Like or Dislike: 0  1 (-1)

Good point why won’t he?

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

We call ‘em “fondleslabs” phil

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

The Hattie research claiming that it’s about better teachers not class size is contested. What about a larger class where 10% have English as a second language, four have learning impairments such as dyslexia, three have been diagnosed as ADHD, one has cerebral palsy and 15 didn’t get breakfast – as in many primary schools across Aotearoa. How do larger classes help any brilliant teacher deal with that? What about the research that says we learn from quality relationships and from participatory activities? How can these be improved in bigger groups? Why do wealthy parents choose smaller private schools? This is just about Treasury wanting to save money, not about the realities.

Like or Dislike: 1  1 (0)