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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)