Freedom Matters - Dirty Politics Threatens That
The most concerning thing for me about the publication of Nicky Hager's book Dirty Politics is not the claims made within i,t but the implications for privacy and freedom in New Zealand.
I'll deal with the book's main claims later, but firstly the fact that the emails which most of the book is based on were, admitted by the author, as being hacked and obtained illegally. It seems that for half the population, because it is said to be "in the public interest" and supports their political view, that this snooping has been given tacit approval.
Given recent years of protest about how much government organisations may be listening in to our private conversations and reading our emails this is a remarkable change in attitude. It seems that snooping and breach of privacy is now regarded as okay if it is perceived by the individual doing it as for the good of the country. The concerning thing of course is that it is not our legal system deciding this but politically motivated (no matter how much they deny this) members of the public.
The danger now is that it is open slather. Individuals from all of the political spectrum can now claim delving into New Zealanders' private emails is , in their opinion, "in the public interest" if it seems to reveal something scandalous. The trouble with emails, and texts, is they can often be, and have in this book, been misinterpreted. So we will have members of the public setting themselves up as judge, jury and executioner without first even seeking the other side of the story.
Is this what New Zealanders want? I have no doubt Whaleoil has just as many emails, if not more in his files which are likely to be very damaging to the left and right of New Zealand politics, should he decide to release them in the name of "public interest". There will be many public figures laying very low at the moment I would think. I for one do not want a New Zealand where anyone can access my private communications for their own ends.
Moving on now to the assertions made in the book itself. And I admit I have only read the more salacious pieces floating around. I don't want to pay money for a book with illegally obtained information.
Where to start? There are just so many falsely drawn conclusions and assumptions. I don't think anyone is denying emails exist. What is disputed is the interpretation of those emails and texts. Lets take them one by one.
Rodney Hyde: Assertion he was blackmailed. Completely denied by Rodney as without a shred of truth. This was banter between other parties which never came to anything
Peter Dunne: Links with and payments from the tobacco industry. Last contact was 20 years ago. So false.
David Farrar: Again all main assumptions denied.
Judith Collins: Has done nothing outside the cabinet manual or illegal. The name she gave to whaleoil was already in the public domain.
John Key and OIA request: The SIS director has confirmed Key had no influence on this. So wrong again
John Key: Description of West Coast woman who's son was killed in a car crash. Just didn't even happen and I think most people would be surprised if he used those words. Turns out the contact made on that day with whaleoil was on a completely different matter.
Jason Ede: Trawling around in Labour's website and sharing information. Has he done anything illegal? Probably not. Labour's website pages were open to the public. If he downloaded anything as long as he did nothing with the information he's unlikely to have done anything wrong in a legal sense. Unethical? Possibly. Talking to media and bloggers is one thing. Talking about how to get the opposition with outsiders is quite another. The PM should reign his staff in on this. I don't think anyone in any political party would be naive enough to think this doesn't go on in all parties, but leave it to the journalists and bloggers.
So yes there is some dirty politics in New Zealand, from all sides. So let's not get cute and think it's only National. If Nicky Hager wanted to really do a job on NZ politicians he would have covered the political spectrum and done some checking of his stories to weed out the ones without foundation.
The National Party handling of this has been poor. The PM was, understandably, taken by surprise. In those circumstances what he should have done is say "look I haven't read the book, I'll go away and see what's in it and see if there is anything I need to investigate" . He could then have gone away, compiled a list of the main accusations as above, with researched denials as above and knocked it on the head there. There is very little of substance in this book and it is more an attack on Whaleoil, which National should distance itself from.
Freedom in this country has been compromised with the release of this book and Nicky Hager has achieved the opposite of his intentions. New Zealand politics just got grubbier with his biased spin and it's opened the door to future similar attacks from individuals with other agendas. Freedom does matter and Nicky Hager has made New Zealand less a land of liberty and individual freedom than it was before with this. He probably doesn't realise it but he is being used as a pawn by a higher power now seeking to influence New Zealand politics.
Monday, August 18, 2014
Monday, May 5, 2014
Capital Gains Tax - Doesn't Stack Up
As another election rolls around the anti-freedom socialist element in New Zealand is dragging out the Capital Gains Tax policy again for another trundle past the masses.
As usual Labour and the Greens implore us to believe on the grounds of "fairness" that a CGT will level the playing field and lead to all sorts of magical beneficial results. So lets take each argument in turn and see how it stacks up against reason and the facts.
1. New Zealand doesn't have a capital gains tax but other countries like the US and Australia do.
Well just because someone else does something has never been a very good argument for doing anything. Many countries don't have gay marriage either but I think we've pretty much been able to make our own mind up on that one.
The US has one of the most complex tax systems in the world and I think would love to have the simplicity of ours.
In fact New Zealand does have a form of CGT already, a fact supporters of a CGT conveniently either ignore or are ignorant of. The Income Tax Act already catches those speculating in the property market and in fact any other asset bought with the intention of selling at a profit. All that is needed is for the Inland Revenue Department to enforce this more rigorously.
Labour is proposing these property speculators be taxed at a CGT rate of 15% when they are presently charged at there marginal rate of up to 33%. A tax cut many developers will be only too happy to accept
2. A CGT will keep house prices down.
The Australian experience shows this just isn't true. House prices have continued to rise in Australia and the only effect on prices was they sellers built the CGT into the sale price they wanted.
The Greens and Labour argue that the majority of the rise in house prices can be attributed to us not having a CGT. The OECD has reported that house price rises both here and in Australia are mainly attributable to easy monetary conditions and immigration flows. No mention of the absence of a CGT being a cause. With the vast majority of house purchases in NZ being domestic family homes, how is a GCT going to keep a lid on prices anyway if family homes are expected to be exempt from CGT?
If you want to find the main culprit for a rise in house prices in the past decade you need look no further than our own Reserve Bank. Their artificially low OCR for New Zealand is responsible for much of the housing boom and misallocation of resources in New Zealand.
The Reserve bank Act was brought in at a time of runaway inflation and, blunt as it was as a tool, did achieve it's single aim of bringing inflation below 3% and keeping it there. Never mind the businesses that went to the wall because of it. It had the desired effect. But the Reserve bank Act has had it's day. In fact it has outstayed it's welcome by over a decade.
Now most political parties are too afraid to get rid of it. The tinkering by Labour with it's addition of another tool using Kiwisaver is a step in the wrong direction. Far from giving the Reserve Bank more power we should be removing it's powers. And I'm very surprised Winston Peters and NZ First support this increasing meddling. I would have though they would like to see a repealing of the Reserve Bank Act.
With the Reserve Bank out of deciding what interest rates should be in this country, rates will return to supply and demand market levels. Yes they may be higher than now, but this alone will do more to encourage saving and reduce speculation in non-productive assets. The Reserve Bank should be a lender of last resort, not a dictator of day to day interest rates. They have had too much power for too long.
3. A CGT is fair and equitable. Well to the Greens and Labour any new tax is fair. You see they all believe in a progressive tax system as if it was something that's always been there. Well no it hasn't. Taxes were first introduced to pay for wars and the running of the government. Later on came the socialists who saw the opportunity to tax as a way of income redistribution. And that's what a CGT would be - just more theft. Money taken by force by the government.
If the government forecast surpluses running far into the future the Left would still want more taxes. Not because the money was needed to run the country but as a way of redistributing money, which is rightfully one persons, to someone else. Progressive taxation is nothing but immoral Robin Hood theft.
Unintended Consequences
As well as not having the kind of effects the Left expect, there will also be a number of unintended negative consequences conveniently not mentioned.
1. The tax system in NZ will become so complex with transitional rules, exemptions and avoidances that accountants and tax advisors will be in short supply.
This is what happened in Australia. It was a boon for this profession and they were run off their feet helping people to try to understand the many exemptions and to find ways of organising their tax affairs to pay as little CGT as possible.
2. Those who have houses already will not only hold onto them for much longer ( decreasing supply and forcing up prices), but rather than putting money into businesses and rental properties will instead put all their money into their CGT exempt family home.
Wealthy people will create mansions and large estates to hide their money away from the tax grab.
3. As mentioned before speculators, under the Labour proposal, will now pay less tax (15%) than they currently do using marginal tax rates.
In summary, the reasons put forward for introducing a CGT into New Zealand do not hold water. Not only will they not have the intended effects, but they will have unintended negative effects. All together a recipe for disaster, and a socialist increase in complexity not worth the experiment.
As usual Labour and the Greens implore us to believe on the grounds of "fairness" that a CGT will level the playing field and lead to all sorts of magical beneficial results. So lets take each argument in turn and see how it stacks up against reason and the facts.
1. New Zealand doesn't have a capital gains tax but other countries like the US and Australia do.
Well just because someone else does something has never been a very good argument for doing anything. Many countries don't have gay marriage either but I think we've pretty much been able to make our own mind up on that one.
The US has one of the most complex tax systems in the world and I think would love to have the simplicity of ours.
In fact New Zealand does have a form of CGT already, a fact supporters of a CGT conveniently either ignore or are ignorant of. The Income Tax Act already catches those speculating in the property market and in fact any other asset bought with the intention of selling at a profit. All that is needed is for the Inland Revenue Department to enforce this more rigorously.
Labour is proposing these property speculators be taxed at a CGT rate of 15% when they are presently charged at there marginal rate of up to 33%. A tax cut many developers will be only too happy to accept
2. A CGT will keep house prices down.
The Australian experience shows this just isn't true. House prices have continued to rise in Australia and the only effect on prices was they sellers built the CGT into the sale price they wanted.
The Greens and Labour argue that the majority of the rise in house prices can be attributed to us not having a CGT. The OECD has reported that house price rises both here and in Australia are mainly attributable to easy monetary conditions and immigration flows. No mention of the absence of a CGT being a cause. With the vast majority of house purchases in NZ being domestic family homes, how is a GCT going to keep a lid on prices anyway if family homes are expected to be exempt from CGT?
If you want to find the main culprit for a rise in house prices in the past decade you need look no further than our own Reserve Bank. Their artificially low OCR for New Zealand is responsible for much of the housing boom and misallocation of resources in New Zealand.
The Reserve bank Act was brought in at a time of runaway inflation and, blunt as it was as a tool, did achieve it's single aim of bringing inflation below 3% and keeping it there. Never mind the businesses that went to the wall because of it. It had the desired effect. But the Reserve bank Act has had it's day. In fact it has outstayed it's welcome by over a decade.
Now most political parties are too afraid to get rid of it. The tinkering by Labour with it's addition of another tool using Kiwisaver is a step in the wrong direction. Far from giving the Reserve Bank more power we should be removing it's powers. And I'm very surprised Winston Peters and NZ First support this increasing meddling. I would have though they would like to see a repealing of the Reserve Bank Act.
With the Reserve Bank out of deciding what interest rates should be in this country, rates will return to supply and demand market levels. Yes they may be higher than now, but this alone will do more to encourage saving and reduce speculation in non-productive assets. The Reserve Bank should be a lender of last resort, not a dictator of day to day interest rates. They have had too much power for too long.
3. A CGT is fair and equitable. Well to the Greens and Labour any new tax is fair. You see they all believe in a progressive tax system as if it was something that's always been there. Well no it hasn't. Taxes were first introduced to pay for wars and the running of the government. Later on came the socialists who saw the opportunity to tax as a way of income redistribution. And that's what a CGT would be - just more theft. Money taken by force by the government.
If the government forecast surpluses running far into the future the Left would still want more taxes. Not because the money was needed to run the country but as a way of redistributing money, which is rightfully one persons, to someone else. Progressive taxation is nothing but immoral Robin Hood theft.
Unintended Consequences
As well as not having the kind of effects the Left expect, there will also be a number of unintended negative consequences conveniently not mentioned.
1. The tax system in NZ will become so complex with transitional rules, exemptions and avoidances that accountants and tax advisors will be in short supply.
This is what happened in Australia. It was a boon for this profession and they were run off their feet helping people to try to understand the many exemptions and to find ways of organising their tax affairs to pay as little CGT as possible.
2. Those who have houses already will not only hold onto them for much longer ( decreasing supply and forcing up prices), but rather than putting money into businesses and rental properties will instead put all their money into their CGT exempt family home.
Wealthy people will create mansions and large estates to hide their money away from the tax grab.
3. As mentioned before speculators, under the Labour proposal, will now pay less tax (15%) than they currently do using marginal tax rates.
In summary, the reasons put forward for introducing a CGT into New Zealand do not hold water. Not only will they not have the intended effects, but they will have unintended negative effects. All together a recipe for disaster, and a socialist increase in complexity not worth the experiment.
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Sunday, September 29, 2013
No Free Market in NZ or the USA
You hear socialists a lot these days crowing that free market capitalism is failing and that countries such as the US and New Zealand, supposedly bastions of economic freedom, are in trouble.
The truth is that, New Zealand in particular, has never had a totally free market. When Roger Douglas began his reforms in the 1980's he only saved New Zealand from bankruptcy and eliminated favouritism by the removal of subsidies and import restrictions. Before those reforms the restrictions on New Zealander's freedoms would have made Communist countries proud. Remember that equitable 66 percent top tax rate, having to get government permission to send more than $5 overseas, waiting 6 weeks for a telephone to be installed. Ahhhh those were the days.
The then Prime Minister David Lange's "cup of tea" break from reforms proposed by Douglas has left New Zealand in a hiatus ever since. Douglas only completed a quarter of what was needed. Subsequent governments have lacked the "balls" to do what was needed to follow through on Douglas's bold ideas. National in particular, whose founding principles closely match the Douglas themes, has tinkered and gradually moved left of it's core principles.
New Zealand is a mixed economy, not a free market. It has elements of a free market mixed with government control of areas they should have no business in. recently the New Zealand government has embarked on a partial sale of some state assets. Of course the statists oppose this. And I do too. But only because it does not go far enough. They should sell the lot.
Like wise in the US a free market does not exist. Arguably the US government has even more of a control over the money and liberties of the American people. The mess the US economic system is in is the result of too much government control not too little. But their sharemarket is at all time highs I hear you say!
And that's fine for those lucky enough to own shares. for those with cash savings and getting almost zero percent it doesn't feel so fair. The banks have been pilloried for risky lending yet it is the Federal reserve which has encouraged this with it's low (no) interest rate policies. Now the Fed has painted itself into a corner and is afraid to remove the economic stimulus it has created for fear of sending the economy into a death spiral. it's the same as if you keeping feeding a drug user drugs to keep him happy. Eventually you will kill him but if you remove the stimulants the resulting chaos and withdrawal symptoms may be just as bad.
The Federal Reserve caused the 2007 financial crisis, then propped the economy up again. They just haven't learnt that they are the cause not the solution. The end game is coming and it will be messy. Very messy. The bubble the Fed has created has been on the go for decades and has been responsible for directing money into more and unproductive areas. One by one those asset classes have fallen. First was the dot.com bubble, then the real estate bubble, the bank/financial crisis. The only asset class left was Gold and even that has topped ( perhaps temporarily).
What the Federal Reserve has accomplished through it's artificial low interest rates is a transfer of risk to the stock market, and a devaluation of the US currency, thereby making all Americans poorer overall. It has propped up big business and the banks through its crony capitalism.
This is not a freemarket. If anything the US in particular is moving further and further away from the free land its founding fathers set up. It's socialism and protectionism at its worst.US banks have been deemed too big to fail at the expense of the ordinary American.
When it all ends the anti freedom socialist will claim the death of capitalism and the free market. In reality it will be the death of state control and the nanny state . I hope it will be seen for that so that America can return to its roots and the liberty its constitution is meant to protect.
In New Zealand we are likely to elect a Labour/Greens government at the next election in 2014. The current National government has lost touch with the mood of the people and more importantly with what it stands for. When a populist government loses touch with what's popular and has no principles it has little left to elect it.
The truth is that, New Zealand in particular, has never had a totally free market. When Roger Douglas began his reforms in the 1980's he only saved New Zealand from bankruptcy and eliminated favouritism by the removal of subsidies and import restrictions. Before those reforms the restrictions on New Zealander's freedoms would have made Communist countries proud. Remember that equitable 66 percent top tax rate, having to get government permission to send more than $5 overseas, waiting 6 weeks for a telephone to be installed. Ahhhh those were the days.
The then Prime Minister David Lange's "cup of tea" break from reforms proposed by Douglas has left New Zealand in a hiatus ever since. Douglas only completed a quarter of what was needed. Subsequent governments have lacked the "balls" to do what was needed to follow through on Douglas's bold ideas. National in particular, whose founding principles closely match the Douglas themes, has tinkered and gradually moved left of it's core principles.
New Zealand is a mixed economy, not a free market. It has elements of a free market mixed with government control of areas they should have no business in. recently the New Zealand government has embarked on a partial sale of some state assets. Of course the statists oppose this. And I do too. But only because it does not go far enough. They should sell the lot.
Like wise in the US a free market does not exist. Arguably the US government has even more of a control over the money and liberties of the American people. The mess the US economic system is in is the result of too much government control not too little. But their sharemarket is at all time highs I hear you say!
And that's fine for those lucky enough to own shares. for those with cash savings and getting almost zero percent it doesn't feel so fair. The banks have been pilloried for risky lending yet it is the Federal reserve which has encouraged this with it's low (no) interest rate policies. Now the Fed has painted itself into a corner and is afraid to remove the economic stimulus it has created for fear of sending the economy into a death spiral. it's the same as if you keeping feeding a drug user drugs to keep him happy. Eventually you will kill him but if you remove the stimulants the resulting chaos and withdrawal symptoms may be just as bad.
The Federal Reserve caused the 2007 financial crisis, then propped the economy up again. They just haven't learnt that they are the cause not the solution. The end game is coming and it will be messy. Very messy. The bubble the Fed has created has been on the go for decades and has been responsible for directing money into more and unproductive areas. One by one those asset classes have fallen. First was the dot.com bubble, then the real estate bubble, the bank/financial crisis. The only asset class left was Gold and even that has topped ( perhaps temporarily).
What the Federal Reserve has accomplished through it's artificial low interest rates is a transfer of risk to the stock market, and a devaluation of the US currency, thereby making all Americans poorer overall. It has propped up big business and the banks through its crony capitalism.
This is not a freemarket. If anything the US in particular is moving further and further away from the free land its founding fathers set up. It's socialism and protectionism at its worst.US banks have been deemed too big to fail at the expense of the ordinary American.
When it all ends the anti freedom socialist will claim the death of capitalism and the free market. In reality it will be the death of state control and the nanny state . I hope it will be seen for that so that America can return to its roots and the liberty its constitution is meant to protect.
In New Zealand we are likely to elect a Labour/Greens government at the next election in 2014. The current National government has lost touch with the mood of the people and more importantly with what it stands for. When a populist government loses touch with what's popular and has no principles it has little left to elect it.
Wednesday, September 18, 2013
Teachers and Unions Feel Threatened By Charter schools
The real reason teachers, unions and the anti-freedom parties of our political spectrum are so vehemently opposed to the establishment of Charter schools is not because of any concern for the students involved, but because they fell threatened. Threatened that their one size fits all world of state run education might be challenged, that their way is not the only way.
It is the parents who should be free to decide how their children are educated. How would maori language schools have developed if we had the view that teaching by English was the only way.
The possibility of Charter school teachers and their pupils being ostracised by unions and state run schools is appalling, ignorant and discriminatory. Surely if these schools work, and there is a mountain of evidence that they can, in transitioning children with special learning requirements, not catered for by the state, then that should be applauded.
Instead opponents are taking the normal socialist anti-freedom stance of being anti everything which might mean people choosing for themselves.
More power to the Charter schools and their challenging of the norm I say.
It is the parents who should be free to decide how their children are educated. How would maori language schools have developed if we had the view that teaching by English was the only way.
The possibility of Charter school teachers and their pupils being ostracised by unions and state run schools is appalling, ignorant and discriminatory. Surely if these schools work, and there is a mountain of evidence that they can, in transitioning children with special learning requirements, not catered for by the state, then that should be applauded.
Instead opponents are taking the normal socialist anti-freedom stance of being anti everything which might mean people choosing for themselves.
More power to the Charter schools and their challenging of the norm I say.
Sunday, April 28, 2013
Labour , Greens Power Play a Warning to National
The Labour and Greens announcement they will reform the New Zealand electricity market if elected is a warning shot to National and the New Zealand public.
Leaving aside the merits of their communist plans for the moment, the bigger issue is what their announcement says about both National policy and strategy overall, and the potential two-headed (possibly more) monster which would be inflicted upon New Zealand should National fail to win back power in 2014.
The National party has long been a shadow of it's own policies. It pretends to be the champion of the free market, an upholder of individual rights and freedoms - and I am sure there are may of its members who think that way too. However, when push comes to shove the National party tries to be too many things to too many people. Its policies are watered down versions of what their party stands for, or in some cases diametrically opposed to them. This of course is what happens when pursuit of power is your main objective and your principles are left in tatters.
So the warning I'm speaking of is that this electricity reform signals a new strategy for Labour. And its not just cozying up to the Greens. Labour knows it may not win the next election if it campaign solely on the policies it put forward last time. Aligning itself with the Greens gives it extra power. But that's still not it.
Labour has decided to attack National where it is weakest, and that's where National doesn't completely ( or doesn't at all) live up to its own principals. Because the National hierarchy is too afraid espouse their party's true philosophy of individual freedom.
The electricity market is an area where National has been lazy. Like so many areas of the New Zealand economy and society it has never been a truly free market. Socialists see the electricity market in New Zealand as being a free market failure. But it has never been totally deregulated.
So Labour and the Greens saw an opportunity to be totally socialist where National was only partly upholding state control. Labour and Greens do state control and anti freedom better so they are going to attack those areas National isn't prepared to apply its own philosophy. This was a test case for the Labour Greens coalition. They will now use the same tactic in Education, Health, Technology, racism,liquor laws, drug laws, and anywhere else can wipe the floor with National over National's socialist part socialist policies.
Leaving aside the merits of their communist plans for the moment, the bigger issue is what their announcement says about both National policy and strategy overall, and the potential two-headed (possibly more) monster which would be inflicted upon New Zealand should National fail to win back power in 2014.
The National party has long been a shadow of it's own policies. It pretends to be the champion of the free market, an upholder of individual rights and freedoms - and I am sure there are may of its members who think that way too. However, when push comes to shove the National party tries to be too many things to too many people. Its policies are watered down versions of what their party stands for, or in some cases diametrically opposed to them. This of course is what happens when pursuit of power is your main objective and your principles are left in tatters.
So the warning I'm speaking of is that this electricity reform signals a new strategy for Labour. And its not just cozying up to the Greens. Labour knows it may not win the next election if it campaign solely on the policies it put forward last time. Aligning itself with the Greens gives it extra power. But that's still not it.
Labour has decided to attack National where it is weakest, and that's where National doesn't completely ( or doesn't at all) live up to its own principals. Because the National hierarchy is too afraid espouse their party's true philosophy of individual freedom.
The electricity market is an area where National has been lazy. Like so many areas of the New Zealand economy and society it has never been a truly free market. Socialists see the electricity market in New Zealand as being a free market failure. But it has never been totally deregulated.
So Labour and the Greens saw an opportunity to be totally socialist where National was only partly upholding state control. Labour and Greens do state control and anti freedom better so they are going to attack those areas National isn't prepared to apply its own philosophy. This was a test case for the Labour Greens coalition. They will now use the same tactic in Education, Health, Technology, racism,liquor laws, drug laws, and anywhere else can wipe the floor with National over National's socialist part socialist policies.
Monday, April 1, 2013
Freedom Wishlist for for 2013
Freedom Wishlist for 2013
That world governments finally realise it is irresponsible meddling and interference which has created the world debt crisis and that only reverting to truly free markets will redress the balance. The Federal reserve has been mostly responsible for the misallocation of resources and investment by printing fiat money and encouraging non-productive speculation. It has only to look at its actions over the past two decades particularly to see the reason for the massive creation of debt which is now only starting to unravel
Punishment for victimless crimes are removed from our statute books. Ok well maybe let's just start with one or two. They won't all be removed at once under the current governance.
New Zealand develops a constitution based on the American one which defends Kiwi's rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. One that treats all New Zealanders as equal under the law.
Flat tax rates become accepted as a fairer tax than progressive taxes. People who earn more already pay more in dollar terms if all are on the same tax rate.Progressive rates are just another name for income redistribution ie socialism.
A party which truly represents the ideas of libertarianism emerges in New Zealand to contest the next election, initially performing the role that the dying ACT party only partially performed in keeping the National Party true to its own principles.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)