Say No to Facism!
Comments
David Mitchell
Wow, that's a pretty strong statement. Do you really support a party that wants to reward families for having extra children they can't afford?
EONsim
Ugh no thanks! I prefer our society with out any social engineering.
And if your going to call National Facist all I'm going to say is I'm not voting for the commies :P
jim
Dave,
So, do you believe that children are a lifestyle choice, and that only wealthy people should be able to have them?
Brehaut
Mr Eonsim,
Considering the left consists of allowing people the freedom to make choices regarding how they live, and providing legal protection and support for this, rather than forcing a set of `choices' on all people regardless of belief, background or anything else, I find it hard for to understand your claim of social engineering.
David Mitchell
Jim, no I don't believe children are a lifestyle choice at all. They are a blessing but also a responsibility - not one to be entered into lightly. Certainly not for the promise of tax relief.
If you have a child and can't afford to support another it would be irresponsible towards both children to bring another into the world. Certain leftist policies encourage you to have that second child.
Brehaut, don't you agree that having the government spend my money for me is forcing a set of choices on me? Surely I should be free to spend how I like. Health is a big issue and people deserve a strong public health system. I don't want to deny people that. But I feel no sympathy for dole-bludgers and don't want any part in supporting a welfare state.
In general, the current government has tended to further the cause of New Zealand's infamous 'tall-poppy-syndrome'. Not only do they tax high-income earners more - discouraging higher salaries - but the NCEA system is an utter farce. Excellence should be recognised. High income earners pay more tax simply because the tax rate is a percentage; there is no need to put a higher rate on the top income earners as well. In the top tax bracket in 2005, there are 330,000 taxpayers (10.7% of all taxpayers) who between them paid $10.3 billion in tax (48% of all personal tax revenue). To tax like this is fine, that is how the tax system works. To declare tax cuts that only benefit those with children is an insult to those who pay almost half the country's bills.
Finally however, I will grant you that Rodney Hide is a slimey weasel, I don't think ACT is going to solve the countries problems with any of its policies.
Matt
Dave: I don't believe the tax relief outweighs the added financial burden of extra kids -- it's some relief, but there is still a cost to having children. I don't believe the balance is that far off -- it would take some mighty tax relief to outweigh the tens of thousands of dollars it costs to raise a child.
With regards to tax rates and the rich, the fact is that on the whole the rich don't necessarily work any harder than the average citizen; often they've just reaped the benefits of a few lucky choices. The fact is, not everyone has the ability to be rich, be it because of upbringing or education, or simply because of lack of natural talent. I don't believe that it's fair for those people to have to struggle their entire lives -- if pitched tax rates act as a kind of mild wealth-redistribution, then well and good.
Nato
Mr Brehaut, have you never tried to manipulate anyone? You don't have to necessarily use obvious force to manipulate people - in fact, the best manipulations are not at all forceful.
Jared
I am utterly confused. The concept that everyone should be able receive a certain minimum in living in social conditions is to me completely accuarate. Everyone should be able to achieve good health care regardless of income, an education that pushes them to excel and allows them to achieve as much as they are able.
However, this obviously should not be based on race and there should be no race based favouritism; one way or the other. But I acknowledge that the Maori and Pacific people living in NZ on average do require this funding more. However they should not receive more than a Pakeha family in the same condition.
Also, with regard to social engineering I don't think that this should be an issue for a Christian. Even if everything is legalised that doesn't mean that we have to do it.
Matt
Jared, regarding the race thing: the fact is that historically the Maori people have been screwed over, and unfortunately because they were "given special treatment" then they need to be given special treatment now in order to right the wrongs visited on them.
The facts remain that Maori are highly represented among those living in poverty in this country (South Auckland is not a myth), and that the Maori people have the second- or third-highest proportion of imprisonment among any ethnic group in the world. There are obviously some serious systematic wrongs to right, and I believe that will require special treatment to happen.
David Mitchell
Matt: I believe that continuing special treatment is just encouraging the statistics. Poor people need a leg-up - not Maori. If poor parents tend to result in poor children (by and large) and for historic reasons most of the poor parents are maori, then it stands to reason that most of the next generation of poor will also be moari. I believe we need to concentrate on improving the standard of living regardless of race. If more people can be raised up to a level where they can help themselves then those people can do as well as they like.
I have a privileged upbringing and a good education - as do most of you. I can't afford to buy a LearJet but I know that if that is what I want I can work hard for it and achieve it (no - it's true, if I really work hard for it, it can be done). There is a certain level where this holds true for anyone. Unfortunately there are a lot of people below that level - how many times have you seen families of 8 kids living with a single mother in what can only be described as poverty? - continuing to give these people benefits isn't the solution. We are far better off spending some of the welfare budget on educating these people (in trades/business/safe sex - whatever) than just giving them handouts.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day teach a man that having 6 more children when he can barely afford to feed the two he already has is a bad idea and you'll reduce the amount of poverty in NZ
Angus
South Auckland: A Ridiculous Liberal Myth.
Seriously, Matt has a point. Have a read of this report for a few pages. At least with regards to health, which is the area of race relations on which we've been lectured, Maori are far, far worse off than Pakeha.
It's true that Maori are grossly overrepresented amongst the poorest "most deprived" deciles. However, even after you've adjusted for all counfounders like income, there's still a significant gap in "health outcomes" between Maori and Pakeha. The mortality rate gap is particularly damning.
I can't really speculate on why this is the case -- maybe the "education" point is a valid one, maybe not.
All that said, I can see the arguments against race-based policies too; personally I feel they should be a policy of last resort, either (a) righting a specific past wrong, e.g. Treaty settlements, or (b) targeting an area like health where there is definite evidence that a "gap" exists and can't be closed by other means.
Finally -- meh, still can't make up my mind regarding the election. It sucks being socially liberal and fiscally centre-right-ish; I just have to decide which of my principles to sell out ;).
Greg
My two cents:
The left have given us legalised prostition and the NCEA- therefore they represent evil.
The right want to borrow money in order to give those who don't need it a bit of extra cash- therefore, they too represent evil.
The solution? Vote CENTRE! And no, I don't mean that mud-slinging weasel Winston.
VOTE UNITED FUTURE
dan
Vote Christ
jim
"Vote Christ" Ok... so vote for the party that hangs out with the prostitutes, annoys the religious leaders and cares for the poor, and doesn't want you to try and weasel your way out of paying taxes... Ok, sweet, got it...
David Mitchell
Jim, you just described the Greens!
"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains." -- Winston Churchill
I consider myself ahead of my years (in a heartless sort of way)
