Comments on: …we brought changes to the ETS…

By: Sam

Sam — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 20:58:05 +0000

Jens - yes let’s make it an influential electionl issue.
Why do we need another layer of bureaucracy, costing more tax dollars, when we could have “think small” projects administered by an existing bureaucracy. We could spend 2.5% of GST income on this sort of project, still leaving the government with 10% GST as is NZFirst policy?
We need to change political thinking about taxation and savings. Less taxation, more savings.

By: Jens Meder

Jens Meder — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 23:41:29 +0000

Sam - you can call me Jens - I am all with you regarding your concerns. The question is: Where else could the 100% subsidy for wind generators come from, if not through taxation?
But if we have a substantial NZSF savings rate and adequate funds, what about a low interest loan from the NZSF?
If we get widening support & agreement on a higher rate of domestic capital formation to be invested in productivity, then eventually we will be able to build not only more wind generators, but possibly even have it all at a relatively reduced redistributive taxation rate. (Through a higher savings & investment rate.)
Would you agree, that to have our prosperity dreams come true, this would have to be an influential election issue?

By: Sam

Sam — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:51:35 +0000

Why do politicians always resort to tax increases to get their pet projects in place. I would like to see incentives for us to do our bit for climate change. How about we all get a 100% subsidy to intall wind generators and solar panels on our own properties. That would be better than building another dam in the south island, when we do not have the infrastructure to send power from one end of the country to the other. One leaning power tower in Marlborough is all that stands in the way of total failure of the Cook Strait link.
Jens Meder - I am doing my bit for climate change, more than you think.I want to know why we let the politicians rip us off with another bureaucracy when it is not necessary.

By: Jens Meder

Jens Meder — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 22:34:45 +0000

Yes, Sam - there is a cost to everything you want to have…
And in principle, aren’t the costs of preventing damage (up to a point) preferable to ignoring potentially high cost damage altogether, e.g. as with fire insurance?

By: Sam

Sam — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 22:03:18 +0000

Does not matter what it is called, the ETS is taxation, taxation, taxation. Nothing more, nothing less. We are to be happy with a one off payment of $112 (perhaps)? No matter how you dress it up it is a tax. Note how Global Warming no longer exists, the proponents now call it Climate Change. Why - the earth is actually cooling!!!