Sir Roger Douglas Tells Sean Plunket Budget 2024 Simply Isn't Bold Enough
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 06. 2024
- Sir Roger Douglas tells Sean Plunket Budget 2024 simply isn't bold enough.
Watch the full video at theplatform.kiwi/
Support The Platform & become a CZcams VIP! - / @theplatformnz
Join Platform Plus for enhanced access and features: theplatform.kiwi/platform-plus
Download The Platform app for free:
App Store: apps.apple.com/us/app/the-pla...
Google Play: play.google.com/store/apps/de...
Call 0800 DEBATE or text us at 5050 (Standard SMS text charges will apply)
Listen to The Platform's straight-talking, free-thinking hosts every weekday.
Sean Plunket: 7am - 10am
Michael Laws: 10am - 1pm
Martin Devlin: 1pm - 4pm
Leah Panapa: 4pm - 6pm
#ThePlatformNZ
I think he made a really good point about politicians liking the power of spending our money for us, Tax is theft!
How do you spell idiot?
Arrived in NZ 23 years ago- never been so negative about NZ as now. This country is going nowhere fast we are getting left behind. Racial tension, poor economy with no vision, social engineering on steroids, even rugby is in decline. 🧐
All too true.
A 2020s version of Rogernomics would be pretty good I think! All the painful stuff was done in the 80s weaning the country off the state. Now that we aren't like that anymore what he'd do now we'd probably all enjoy from what he just said. First 56k tax free sounds great for a start.
Roger doesn’t need to be elected again so he can say what he wants. He’s 💯 right but there will always be a politician that offers people something for nothing to get into power.
Tax is a complusory form of saving and sharing in the common good. The first 5% of tax should put aside for super..next 5% for health next 5% for education , next 5 % for justice system ( including police) etc... or a % to show importance.
86 years old, sounds like 100
There are parts of Nz that never recovered from Rogernomics
But they are driving new cars because of Rogernomics. But people forget that.
@@delinquentinparadise only the drug dealers
Roger was best Labour person since Micheal Joseph 😎
Means testing superannuation should be the number one priority. About 50,000 retirees earn over $100,00 while also claiming superannuation. They don't need it. They shouldn't receive it. Government services and support should be oriented towards children and young adults. Full support for those in need until you're 18 years old. Reduced support until you're 25 years old. Then, very limited support after that. Adults should take personal responsibility for their lives.
You need to read what you ,v written. Your last sentence I agree with isn't this what the 50,000 have done. Are the adults who produce these children somehow relieved of their responsibilities and allowed to pass them on to Government.
@@jameslyon9170 So, you're advocating for punishing children because you think they shouldn't have been born? Wow... But you've missed my main point: Retirees with high wealth shouldn't receive any superannuation. That would save billions per year!
Many of those retirees are still working to support their children....
@@nickcarter6640 Yeah, right! 🤣
Another Labour has been , Poking his nose in.Since when did he have a position in govt that faced such huge debt.Really as if he would say anything positive about the coalitions budget
The country was broke when he and David Lange came in. I think he had the worst government finances in history to fix! He seemed to enjoy the job though.
Vegetables, meat ,eggs, and dairy products continue to increase in price . A competitive market. Often, these products are exported and cost less overseas than in NZ.
Except the commerce commission already investigated that and didn’t really uncover anything of major concern except some spare change down the back of the couch
@@Gumpmachine1 Yes! Thank you! Ads loves to spew out false allegations and unsourced claims, so it's great that you've called out his ignorant bullshit.
@@Jon.Morimoto I simply did the math and the numbers everyone were outraged about released by the commerce commission amounted to about a cup of coffee a week per household.
And that’s accepting the rather uncharitable way they arrived at that number, it was a stitch up job to take focus off the government’s poor efforts on managing inflation.
I dont get his maths in paying for tax cuts. But the $ 55,000 tax threshold is smart. And there is a real need to improve government sector productivity
Wow! Some of are old enough and recall those days Roger...
Bloody cheek!
Typical politician.
💯
Time for cup of tea
Roger's heart is in the right place as he has always wanted to help the poor even through a lot of his policies are neoliberal. Conversely ACT & National just neoliberal ideologs and trash the poor.
Plenty of other advanced OECD countries run higher tax / GDP ratios than NZ and have higher GDP per capita. NZ is in fact below the OECD average. If low taxes were the silver bullet answer NZ should already doing well. Its not.
The age of entitlement for super needs to go up and be tied to life expectancy (but could potentially be available at 65 that cant work due to sickness). Super at 65 is yet another example of boomer's intergenerational theft from the young.
Sure first $X tax free but only if there is a comprehensive capital gains tax, gift tax and inheritance tax implemented.
"Get rid of student loans for the rich" - sure, that's progressive income based tax policy.
"What we need to do is make government more efficient" - yes all central and local government spending should go through socioeconomic cost benefit analysis. At the moment National is just slashing its financial knife with no regard to what's best for NZ.
"Health, housing, education - create a competitive market" - if and only if a) perfect competition is ensured (ie no monopolies or oligopolies), b) the government regulates service standards (not the providers) and c) the lower incomed don't miss out and are funded by government. E.g. for health the government would tender for a person's care and hospitals/doctors bid. We dont want the insurance based extremely high cost nightmare that exists in the USA.
For housing there is no profit for social housing provision. Again government (KO) would have to tender new build social housing. However, first we need to stop the insanity of the unsustainable net inbound immigration rate otherwise we will never catch up on housing and other infrastructure.
No mention of:
a) how the unemployed and sickness beneficiaries would be supported and provided a dignified living. (capitalism requires unemployment)
b) a population strategy
says Rodgernomics unbelievable
Many of our economic problems link the debt based economy.
Yep. Another cowardly budget that hasn't pushed the retirement age back. It should have been done a decade ago.
Housing is the biggest issue that affects everything else in a human being's life and he didn't mention that at all. Does he actually live in the real world? Take away housing costs and people need to earn less, will be less stressed from the rat wheel, will have better health, stronger and longer lasting relationships, young people will be able to actually afford children. Too little available affordable housing for people to purchase, will mean the young will rent all their lives and that is a very bad thing. The only thing that actually stops violent revolutions is jobs and mortgages, so without either, young people will just vote full commie. You people are out of touch with reality.
You may be a little out of touch yourself. Of course he lives in the real world. If it were possible to solve the housing crisis, then it would have been done all over the world. Housing is a huge problem in prosperous nations, and it simply can't be fixed quickly (and perhaps not even slowly). The only way you're going to get people housing is by making them more prosperous. And the only way to do that is to increase productivity and/or reduce costs. Whether it's even possible, who knows. Certainly the greatest financial minds on the planet haven't figured it out yet. How are you or I going to do it? And whinging about it, or pointing the finger at other people who can't do what you also can't do, doesn't seem particularly useful either. For me, he made a certain amount of sense; put the money that people earn back into their own pockets. Doesn't sound too bad an idea to me, a bloody good start.
@@jwbjwb999 The only way to make houses available to young generation is to limit the rent prices, so to make it economically unattractive for rantier-capitalists to keep buying out properties to live off rents collected from young people. That is what makes both - houses unavailable on the market AND the rent prices high.
@@AlexthunderGnum Nope. That experiment has been done and there's a couple of reasons why rent protection schemes fail. Capping rents essentially disincentivises developers from constructing homes suitable for renters, further reducing supply. If there is reduced supply then people will be incentivised to pay more if their only option is to live on the street. In some cases this can be in the form of "management fees" service fees for water, electrical and the like to work around the rent cap. If no money is to be made from renters then developers simply won't take the risk of building "affordable" housing and existing landlords will reduce their maintenance costs so they can make some return. Ultimately you end up with relatively high rental and associated costs for people to live in slums.
@@AlexthunderGnum Limiting rent prices is definitely a big factor. Landlordism needs to be discouraged in all kinds of ways, so those properties can be made available for renters to buy. The objective should be to get people into their own homes as soon as possible with unique rules and laws for first time buyers. 5% mortgages, 1% fixed rate interest rates, let people pay no more than 25% of their take home income on their mortgage, create a few new highly desirable small cities from scratch in coastal areas to increase housing stock. There are lots of easy solutions if the will exists to get people into their own homes and not renting.
@@AlexthunderGnum wrong , remove the tax advantage , and watch the land lords sell , and house price become affordable
Super! In 1972 -1975 we had great complusory super scheme. Kiwi saver in 2000 was complusory but another government watered it down.
Roger Douglas in the past, pointed out kiwis are bad savers. Furthermore Roger Douglas talked about the social contract.
If accommodation supplement was abolished we would reduce government spend by 2 billion.
This 2 billion could used to build more statehouses or buy houses to rent.
Climate and the environment was not mentioned.
Why would you talk to Sir Roger Douglas,he was Labour in the 80's and change NZ for ever,ever since
NZers have been sifting around.
Stats NZ showed over last 5 years dwellings constructed exceeded population growth. In particular Auckland's population grew 5.6% and dwellings increase by 11.4% . Is this an example of rot?
S O E's of electricity and reforms of powerboards has not see rreduced prices. Estonia has so much solar power house cannot sell it to the network.
Robert Muldoon and Roger Douglas the 2 worst politicians we ever had in New Zealand
The new government is not innovative. It is not have an effect of increasing the fall in the rate of inflation .
No balance in changes in revenue at expense of supporting society.
Geriatrics are us
he sounds half-cut ... been on the ponk there aye Rodger 🍺🥴👀
Ruth Richardson
Six years! Again a factual error 2017 to 2020 NZ First/Labour. Next three years Labour.
Hell Sean..Roger! He was hardly a star performer in his day.
He is onnly allowed guests of an approved stripe.
20-20 🤓 vision is a wonderful thing aye Roger?
Freakin sellout 'Sir' absolutely 💯 🖕
Lay off the gin beforehand Rog😂