http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/300974/govt-announces-unexpected-budget-surplus
A bit of good news; much more relevant than the "tax haven" non-issue.
I am sure the pseudo opposition will be pleased to see New Zealand having a bit
of nice news!
Tony
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/300974/govt-announces-unexpected-budget-surplus
A bit of good news; much more relevant than the "tax haven" non-issue.
I am sure the pseudo opposition will be pleased to see New Zealand having a bit
of nice news!
Tony
On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 22:13:31 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/300974/govt-announces-unexpected-budget-surplus
A bit of good news; much more relevant than the "tax haven" non-issue.
I am sure the pseudo opposition will be pleased to see New Zealand having a bit
of nice news!
Tony
Even the real opposition must be pleased - it would be interesting to
compare 8 month results to ful year results for other years as well.
I doubt htat New Zealands reputation as a tax haven has anything to do
with this result - what were your trying to distract from, Tony?
Surely a good result doesn't need embellishment or a side-tracking
comment!
On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 22:13:31 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNo it doesn't which is why I didn't side track - I was merely commenting on the relativity of two recent topics. You really cannot resist sarcasm can you?
dot nz> wrote:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/300974/govt-announces-unexpected-budget-surplus
A bit of good news; much more relevant than the "tax haven" non-issue.
I am sure the pseudo opposition will be pleased to see New Zealand having a >>bit
of nice news!
Tony
Even the real opposition must be pleased - it would be interesting to
compare 8 month results to ful year results for other years as well.
I doubt htat New Zealands reputation as a tax haven has anything to do
with this result - what were your trying to distract from, Tony?
Surely a good result doesn't need embellishment or a side-tracking
comment!
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:the
On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 22:13:31 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNo it doesn't which is why I didn't side track - I was merely commenting on
dot nz> wrote:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/300974/govt-announces-unexpected-budget-surplus
A bit of good news; much more relevant than the "tax haven" non-issue.
I am sure the pseudo opposition will be pleased to see New Zealand having a >>> bit
of nice news!
Tony
Even the real opposition must be pleased - it would be interesting to
compare 8 month results to ful year results for other years as well.
I doubt htat New Zealands reputation as a tax haven has anything to do
with this result - what were your trying to distract from, Tony?
Surely a good result doesn't need embellishment or a side-tracking
comment!
relativity of two recent topics. You really cannot resist sarcasm can you? Tony
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 22:13:31 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNo it doesn't which is why I didn't side track - I was merely commenting
dot nz> wrote:
A bit of good news; much more relevant than the "tax haven" non-issue.http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/300974/govt-announces-unexpected-budget-surplus
I am sure the pseudo opposition will be pleased to see New Zealand having >>>a
bit
of nice news!
Tony
Even the real opposition must be pleased - it would be interesting to >>compare 8 month results to ful year results for other years as well.
I doubt htat New Zealands reputation as a tax haven has anything to do
with this result - what were your trying to distract from, Tony?
Surely a good result doesn't need embellishment or a side-tracking
comment!
on the
relativity of two recent topics. You really cannot resist sarcasm can you? Tony
On 9/04/2016 8:56 a.m., Tony wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:That's the problem with paranoia. Rich doesn't deal in good news. Doesn't understand it, but spends every waking moment seeking out bad news, doom
On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 22:13:31 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNo it doesn't which is why I didn't side track - I was merely commenting
dot nz> wrote:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/300974/govt-announces-unexpected-budget-surplus
A bit of good news; much more relevant than the "tax haven" non-issue. >>>> I am sure the pseudo opposition will be pleased to see New Zealand
having a
bit
of nice news!
Tony
Even the real opposition must be pleased - it would be interesting to
compare 8 month results to ful year results for other years as well.
I doubt htat New Zealands reputation as a tax haven has anything to do
with this result - what were your trying to distract from, Tony?
Surely a good result doesn't need embellishment or a side-tracking
comment!
on the
relativity of two recent topics. You really cannot resist sarcasm can
you?
Tony
and gloom - real or imagined, particularly if he can spin it towards
National or Key..
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 22:13:31 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNo it doesn't which is why I didn't side track - I was merely commenting on the
dot nz> wrote:
A bit of good news; much more relevant than the "tax haven" non-issue.http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/300974/govt-announces-unexpected-budget-surplus
I am sure the pseudo opposition will be pleased to see New Zealand having a >>>bit
of nice news!
Tony
Even the real opposition must be pleased - it would be interesting to >>compare 8 month results to ful year results for other years as well.
I doubt that New Zealands reputation as a tax haven has anything to do
with this result - what were your trying to distract from, Tony?
Surely a good result doesn't need embellishment or a side-tracking
comment!
relativity of two recent topics. You really cannot resist sarcasm can you? >Tony
On Fri, 08 Apr 2016 15:56:09 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netCarry on regardless Rich.
dot nz> wrote:
Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 22:13:31 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netNo it doesn't which is why I didn't side track - I was merely commenting on >>the
dot nz> wrote:
A bit of good news; much more relevant than the "tax haven" non-issue. >>>>I am sure the pseudo opposition will be pleased to see New Zealand having a >>>>bithttp://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/300974/govt-announces-unexpected-budget-surplus
of nice news!
Tony
Even the real opposition must be pleased - it would be interesting to >>>compare 8 month results to ful year results for other years as well.
I doubt that New Zealands reputation as a tax haven has anything to do >>>with this result - what were your trying to distract from, Tony?
Surely a good result doesn't need embellishment or a side-tracking >>>comment!
relativity of two recent topics. You really cannot resist sarcasm can you? >>Tony
I'm happy to extend the thread to a different topic on the basis of an >assessment of relativity. Starting first with the good news, I note
there has been no comment on the unusual timing - it is not I think
common to report 8 month results, but perhaps a positive number for
Obegal is sufficiently unusual that it was worth reporting, but from >http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/78695837/nz-tax-boost-pushes-government-budget-into-surplus-by-400m
we have:
"However net losses were $5.3b higher than forecast driven by
actuarial losses on the ACC claims liability and higher than expected
losses on financial instruments due to weaker markets.
When these gains and losses were combined with the Obegal, the
operating balance was in deficit by $5.1b - $4.6b worse than
expected."
And from the government: >http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1604/S00131/398-million-surplus-in-year-to-february.htm
"The operating balance – which includes gains and losses – was $4.6
billion worse than expected. This was driven by the Super Fund
recording a $1.8 billion loss due to unfavourable market conditions,
and falling interest rates and an increase in claim volumes have
contributed to a $3.1 billion increase in ACC’s outstanding claims >liability."
So we have undoubtledly good news, even though the wider picture shows
that New Zealands overall progress remains perhaps less than desirable
. . . Not so much good news?
Comparing that with the issue of a tax haven, the Prime Minister has
of course been very clear - there has not been a problem and there is >currently no problem - in fact the sort of business being talked about
could be good for New Zealand >http://www.nzherald.co.nz/panama-papers/news/article.cfm?c_id=1504026&objectid=11618024
So is this really a problem at all? It certainly is getting a lot of
press time - see: >http://www.nzherald.co.nz/panama-papers/news/headlines.cfm?c_id=1504026
and
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/world/panama-papers
with each of these giving a lage number of comments from people that
think it is very important for New Zealand and for the world, as well
as some other takes on teh subject: >https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cfi7OB4UYAA58wj.jpg
So Tony, which issue is more "relevant," to use your term?
I suggest that the need for New Zealand to be seen to be trustworthy
and reliable and interested in making both the NZ and global tax
systems fair must trump a brief single period subsidiary result that
can only be regarded as marginally 'good news'.
On Thu, 07 Apr 2016 22:13:31 -0500, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
dot nz> wrote:
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/300974/govt-announces-unexpected-budget-surplus
A bit of good news; much more relevant than the "tax haven" non-issue.
I am sure the pseudo opposition will be pleased to see New Zealand having
a bit of nice news!
Tony
No mileage here for the opposition Tony - unless something can be
found to support the fact that the surplus was less than it should
have been.
The purpose of the opposition is to expose the failings of the
government parties. Success is ignored. That's the nature of our
system of government. The current opposition find this a difficult
task.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/94343562/government-puts-up-starter-5-million-to-americas-cup-defence
Excellent use of our money!
Tony
On Monday, 3 July 2017 16:27:52 UTC+12, nor...@googlegroups.com wrote:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/94343562/government-puts-up-starter-5-million-to-americas-cup-defence
Excellent use of our money!
Tony
Hmmm, as a massive sailing fan I'm personally very happy to see this.
But if I had no interest in sailing I'd probably be grumpy about it.
On Monday, 3 July 2017 16:27:52 UTC+12, nor...@googlegroups.com wrote:I don't see it as support for sailing necessarily although I do love sailing at many levels. I see it as an investment opportunity. The last time we defended the cup here it returned a fifty fold bonus to the country, and that is conservative. At least 8,000 jobs and at least 500 million dollars directly into the Auckland economy. I believe that the government is doing this for exactly that reason and I think they are right to do so.
Excellent use of our money!https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/94343562/government-puts-up-starter-5-million-to-americas-cup-defence
Tony
Hmmm, as a massive sailing fan I'm personally very happy to see this.
But if I had no interest in sailing I'd probably be grumpy about it.
JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> wrote:at
On Monday, 3 July 2017 16:27:52 UTC+12, nor...@googlegroups.com wrote:I don't see it as support for sailing necessarily although I do love sailing
https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other-sports/94343562/government-puts-up-starter-5-million-to-americas-cup-defence
Excellent use of our money!
Tony
Hmmm, as a massive sailing fan I'm personally very happy to see this.
But if I had no interest in sailing I'd probably be grumpy about it.
many levels. I see it as an investment opportunity. The last time we defended the cup here it returned a fifty fold bonus to the country, and that is conservative. At least 8,000 jobs and at least 500 million dollars directly into the Auckland economy. I believe that the government is doing this for exactly that reason and I think they are right to do so.contrary
In addition, and in no way as a response to your post, I am concerned about those who call it a rich man's sport. This last win is evidence to the
and that sort of criticism ignores the reality of soccer, NBA, baseball and many other sports that rely on individual wealth for their continuedexistence.
Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99579040/why-we-shouldnt-celebrate-child-poverty-falling-for-first-time-in-years-just-yet"policies"
Rich will want to spin this as a result of the current government's
I suspect but he would need to lie to do so.
Tony
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99579040/why-we-shouldnt-celebrate-child-poverty-falling-for-first-time-in-years-just-yet
Rich will want to spin this as a result of the current government's "policies"
I suspect but he would need to lie to do so.Its not clear what you suspect Tony, but in opening a thread with a
Tony
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 13:22:30 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net"policies"
dot nz> wrote:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99579040/why-we-shouldnt-celebrate-child-poverty-falling-for-first-time-in-years-just-yet
Rich will want to spin this as a result of the current government's
You are typing without thinking again Tony - why on earth would I
think that current government policies had anything to do with
government decisions over 2 years ago? I can only conclude that you
did not read the article - it's headline is "Why we shouldn't
celebrate child poverty falling for first time in years just yet" -
but of course that is exactly what you were trying to imply. A small improvement to an appalling statistic is however not unwelcome, albiet
that the measuure is 18 months old - National just hated measurements relating to poverty; these statistics were from a university. It is
pointed out in the article that the statistic is before the effect of
the limited benefit increases provided by the National government from earlier this year.
In general, it remains true that a National-led government increases
child poverty; a Labour-led governmetn reduces it - but the most
recent National led government had possibly by the end of their 9
years nearly offsett he sharp increase in poverty from their policies
shortly after being first elected - but even Dr Becroft was not able
to explain why the recently reported statistic had improved.
For related reading see:
http://www.nzchildren.co.nz/ http://www.childpoverty.co.nz/flow-infographics/child-poverty-trends-2016
I suspect but he would need to lie to do so.Its not clear what you suspect Tony, but in opening a thread with a
lie yourself does not say much for your rationality.
Tony
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 13:22:30 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot netBecause that is exactly the way that you psot, time and time again!
dot nz> wrote:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99579040/why-we-shouldnt-celebrate-child-poverty-falling-for-first-time-in-years-just-yet
Rich will want to spin this as a result of the current government's >>"policies"
You are typing without thinking again Tony - why on earth would I
think that current government policies had anything to do with
government decisions over 2 years ago?
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 55:02:29 |
| Calls: | 2,096 |
| Files: | 11,143 |
| Messages: | 950,131 |
