New Zealand Conservative

Total madness. Or do some people think it's just the amount we need to debate? For one thing, Lotto sales would fall off. So where should the appropriate maximum income be set? Paul Reynolds's obscene $5 million income is close to 200 times the minimum wage. My pick would be to set the maximum income at 10 times the minimum wage. This would mean a maximum income of $250,000. The easiest way to enforce this would be setting a 100 per cent income tax rate for the combined income from all sources (including share allocations, allowances etc) above this level. Linking the maximum salary to the minimum wage would have the added advantage of providing an incentive for the highest paid to lobby for increases in the minimum wage, unlike the present situation where the corporate sector argue for the lowest minimum wage possible. Minto Madness You can vote for the Mana Party next week, and John Minto is ranked number 4 on the list.

Rush Limbaugh - Shock Jock Rush Limbaugh, a shock jock (so guess what's coming next) accuses the Pope of preaching Marxism. That was attack number one. The liberal/progressive media carrying this story likes to represent that Rush Limbaugh speaks for all Conservatives. That was attack number two. Here, the media want to promote the idea that Christian Conservatives are for sticking it to the poor. It's a win-win. Paint the Pope as a Marxist, paint the conservatives as heartless. Rush's comments are dealt with quite easily. His polemic view is simplistic to the point of stupidity. Anyone criticizing excessive greed is not automatically a Marxist. I like the Vatican response: "It does not seem worth the trouble of answering seriously," said a Vatican spokesman. . A quick Google search finds plenty of other places quite willing to take the trouble to answer, although after all is said and done, it really isn't worth taking the time to answer se...

The Clueless Intelligensia Examples abound, and the one that comes to hand is a recent article by Bob Brockie in his "Wold of Science" column (Dom Post, Monday 25 Feb). I'm not sure who said it; Bob or the "top American economist Professor Robert Gordon" whose book about three great revolutions argues that the third, around computers, was not a big deal, only bringing faster communications and more entertainment apparently. Well, that line of thought adds further evidence to my opinion of economists. Here's the clincher though: "The computer revolution forced millions of secretaries and typists out of their jobs and benefited only the very rich" Really? I think that particular economist doesn't quite understand how pervasive computer technology is. It is no surprise the theme of his book was heading towards a conclusion that science is just about done, with no more major improvements of the scale of the first two revolutions possible...

New York Times: The Occupy Wall Street (OWS) protest reached unexpected early success today when the banking industry indicated they had taken on board the widespread criticism and offered to reform the financial system by next Tuesday. The reforms were seen as modest by some but were described as "a good step forwards".  Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank offered a 10 point plan in response to the OWS protests sweeping the globe: Government bonds would be scrapped.  Investing in government was an oxymoron, as was government investing Fiat currency would be abolished and there would be a return to the gold standard The gold standard would then be abolished, and return to coins minted in the realm of USA, bearing the noble head of Caesar Obama Caesar Obama would appoint local Lords to ensure the rights of citizens were upheld. A small tithe would fund this activity The noble head of Caesar Obama would be phased out for glossy beads Glossy beads would be exchanged for...

Surfing more than hunting. Skimming more than reading. Storing more than considering. Never-the-less, these posts will bear some thinking in the slower cycles of the week. Stephen Franks raises some excellent points that bear further thought when considering inequality in society and how to improve it. We discussed the Spirit Level recently, and here's another example where declaring a solution (tax people until they are equal) without actually addressing the problem will not, ultimately resolve anything. The key word for me in these discussions at the moment though is something completely different: Robots. Have we considered what society will be like in 20 years when robots and computers are taking jobs. I'm seeing the Matrix meets Terminator about 5 years after Blade Runner. Either than or Logan's Run. Surely, it wont be that bad? The Macalope makes a few good points about Windows 8 and the marketing approach of Microsoft, and then a few good rebuttals ...

Here's an interesting idea I'm still trying to get my head around, in the realm of "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em". The people of Iceland have now twice voted not to repay international debts incurred by banks, and bankers, for which the whole island is being held responsible. With the present turmoil in European capitals, could this be the way forward for other economies? Unlike America, the people of Iceland got a vote on how they felt about being taxed into subsistence until the end of the world (not that long according to AGW alarmists). And they decided that they would act like fat cat company directors and simply declare limited liability - make it some-one else's job to pick up the pieces. This is a more democratic approach than simply paying the bills, or perhaps nationalizing all foreign ownership. So why exactly does the New Zealand government have to bail out so many companies? Why do tax payers always ultimately guarantee debts...

On Sunday evening (14 November), Professor Jane Kelsey was detained at immigration at Sydney airport for about an hour. She was informed by a senior immigration official that she was not eligible for visa free entry to Australia on the grounds that she was not an ‘appropriate person’ under Australia’s 1994 immigration laws. Professor Kelsey thinks this may be linked to her efforts in promoting critical debate on the TransPacific Partnership negotiations. I find it ironic that a professor that is critical of free trade, seems to think unfettered free access to the Australian market by herself a fundamental human right. Not having automatic access is her policy in action. Better get a visa son, better get a real good one

I'm all for small government, but in our system, a small government will always grow to be a big government, often as a response to the excesses of capitalism (OK, you got me, often as a response to being infested by socialists who fear the excesses of capitalism). A free market is a worthy goal, but in today's world we don't actually have free markets, partly because of all of the government regulation and control, and partly because multinational corporations themselves abuse property rights and engage in monopolistic practices. Chesterton said: "Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists. Equally, though, too much socialism results in too few capitalists. To my mind, Socialists don't really get the importance of property rights, and how they underpin human rights. Indeed, they get distracted inventing new human rights which require greater invasions of freedom to justify the need for the government to enforce them. ...

I'm all for small government, but in our system, a small government will always grow to be a big government, often as a response to the excesses of capitalism (OK, you got me, often as a response to being infested by socialists who fear the excesses of capitalism). A free market is a worthy goal, but in today's world we don't actually have free markets, partly because of all of the government regulation and control, and partly because multinational corporations themselves abuse property rights and engage in monopolistic practices. Chesterton said: "Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists. Equally, though, too much socialism results in too few capitalists. To my mind, Socialists don't really get the importance of property rights, and how they underpin human rights. Indeed, they get distracted inventing new human rights which require greater invasions of freedom to justify the need for the government to enforce them. ...

Gordon Campbell on a scoop blog suggests government is not spending enough or growing large enough. His logic? We are only $4.7 Billion in debt for an 11 month period. You see, he expected we'd be sitting at nearly 6 billion in debt, so onward! government spending. Any reason to show prudence at this stage, says Gordon would be an issue of ideology, rather than the "state of the economy".

I recently decided to dig up the old restaurant tax story to preserve on this blog as a handy reference. [ A Restaurant Tax Story ] Scrubone has decided to add to that story by putting it in pictures - a series of handy graphs illustrating the nature of proportional taxation and the effect of proportional rebates, and notes that the usual complaints about tax reductions "for the rich" are never discussed in context of the proportions they are first applied. No wonder the criticisms often seem faintly ridiculous.

( written by Victor Boc, and told on his radio program ) Every day, ten men went to a restaurant for dinner. They always ordered the same meals, and the bill for their food always came to exactly $100.00. They did this day after day, year after year, without variation. They did not divide the cost of the bill up equally among them, however. Since some of the men were more wealthy than others, they all agreed that an equal split would be unfair to those with less money. So, the men decided to pay the bill in precisely the same way we all pay our income taxes.

NotPC presents two choices for us to consider: The evil warrior class and the peace creating trader class. Warriors bad, Traders good. Then he acknowledges that warriors are revered (for all the wrong reasons) and traders ignored (until there's a good sale on). That has an element of injustice to it, when we should be thanking traders for exchanging goods for money. I agree with half his argument. Trade is good for peace. A trading culture does bring massive benefits, but setting up a battle between good trader and evil warrior is a losing proposition to me. Here's why:

Last year, for Easter, I did a post about public holidays; Freedom To Shop . This year I regurgitate the same post, partly to see if the comments will change, and partly because the post was on sale at half price, and I couldn't resist a bargain. Freedom To Shop (2008) Over at Kiwiblog, David fights gamely to assure all freedom can be defined by how many days a year a society can shop. He assumes of course that asking people on low incomes to work at time and a half is really an honour that would not be refused. This is all before we consider the Helen Clark factor. Dear Helen turned lower and middle class New Zealand into welfare beneficiaries. Working for Families (WFF) does actually encourage workers to stay at home with their family on a public holiday. Helen deserves full credit for the first accidentally family friendly policy that Labour has introduced. You see, the moment a worker gets paid overtime rates, their income go up, which raises their tax rate and reduces th...

Alan Bollard has dropped the official cash rate 1.5% today - down to 5%. All well and good, but when are the banks going to reflect this rate in their interest rates? I don't care about the fixed rates - what about the floating rates? Those floating rates are still really, really high. But when the OCR has gone up, the banks are right onto raising the floating rate immediately. I only have to go through all the letters I've got from Wizard to see just how quickly they move. All very annoying. UPDATE: Here's a link to all the current floating rates of banks in NZ . The lowest is 7.45% by KiwiBank - still really far off the official drop to 5%.

[Update Tuesday 930am, Bail-out rejected Wall Street Crashes 750 points ] Pat yourself on the back. You've just become a historical footnote. Are you feeling "financially distressed"? Well, if not you should be. You should be either "distressed" or "panicked". Distress is what you feel after a speculative bubble implodes but panic is what you experience when what you though was the bottom turns out to be a ledge over a chasm. I'm reluctant to look down. Neville Bennett of the National Business Review has done us the kind service of comparing financial "panics". Yes, it's a "panic". Of all panics from 1847 to 1929, Bennett asserts that 2008 is most similar to 1929 because of the relentless train of morbid news and annihilation of landmark institutions such as Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch. In other words, recollect yourself and prepare dusty anecdotes for future grandchildren, you've just passed through the most vola...

Well, it had to happen. I decided to get Pizza last night, and Domino's is my favourite. At only $7.90 each, not a bad deal either. But then the guy taking my order said "And would you like Cheese with that?" and I finally read the fine print on my voucher (click image below to expand). At least whale meat is now affordable, albeit even if a bit buttery. Related Link: Rancid butter story has nothing really to do with my post, but I thought I'd link to something for link junkies [Note: Just so Domino's don't ring up to credit me with $10,000 of free advertising, I'll state the obvious: joking! (And I can tell you know, but anonymous commenters are often too stupid to know. I mean, they can't even spell their name.]

I've been lampooned over at the Fundy Post for my crazy ideas on the market. Fundy Post pointed out my apparently insane comment: Finally, there is Zen Tiger, who thinks the Consumer should choose. I tried to gamely defend the idea that the consumer, ultimately should get to choose what product they wish to buy with their money, but was shot down in flames: There is no point in consumer choice if one option is markedly better than the other for all of us, perhaps I'm taking this out of context? Let me add his rider clause: There is no point in consumer choice if one option is markedly better than the other for all of us, but is sold at fabulous prices because the manufacturers know it will last longer than their usual product and so gain them less revenue. Well, to me the last part of that idea is really a separate issue about market competition or at worst, price fixing - something that is only effective in a monopolistic situation, which ironically, would be more likely to...

In today's world, you either own property or you are property. It's an interesting situation that helps the very rich get richer, and the poor stay poor and the middle class pay the taxes. Communists think that this means capitalism is wrong. Socialists do too, but try to act a little more moderate about it. However, their preferred solution is effectively to destroy it by using the government as some form of benign wealth distribution, and where possible, buying back infrastructure assets. It doesn't work. Indeed, by giving too much power to the State, we effectively become property of the State. It's scary socialists cannot see this, or weight the implications of this appropriately. But that is a different post. At the other end of the scale are those like the Libertarians, whose core philosophy revolves solely around property and the much vaunted Free Market. The obvious danger in Libertarian philosophy is that it ultimately reduces a person's worth to ...

Over at Kiwiblog, David fights gamely to assure all freedom can be defined by how many days a year a society can shop. He assumes of course that asking people on low incomes to work at time and a half is really an honour that would not be refused. This is all before we consider the Helen Clark factor. Dear Helen turned lower and middle class New Zealand into welfare beneficiaries. Working for Families (WFF) does actually encourage workers to stay at home with their family on a public holiday. Helen deserves full credit for the first accidentally family friendly policy that Labour has introduced. You see, the moment a worker gets paid overtime rates, their income go up, which raises their tax rate and reduces their WFF tax credit. Ultimately it means their net return for working on a public holiday produces little extra. Indeed, the extra money may not even cover the cost of Labour's other Family Friendly policy: "Free" childcare. Remember the free childcare policy ...