What the Labour's capital gains tax announcement has to do

What the Labour's capital gains tax announcement has to do

When Phil Goff announces his economic package today, he has to solve some problems you didn’t think Labour would be able to solve; and he has to pose some questions National can’t easily answer.

The big question is the deficit. We’re spending far more than we earn. 

National is offering asset sales as the unpleasant medicine to pay off debt - but you can’t keep doing that for ever. Til now, Labour’s just been mumbling about its alternative. 

The poll this week showing more of us prefer a capital gains tax to asset sales makes the government’s solution an even harder sell. Labour has to pay down the debt, at least over the long haul.

The package has to make a credible difference to the economy.  This is a two-edge sword. 

If Labour tries to minimise the impact of the new tax, it won’t provoke as many squeals but it won’t make any difference to the economy either. 

If it is bold enough to make a difference, it will have to outrage a few self-interested sectors. Someone is not paying the tax now; they will if it is introduced. They’ll whine loudly.

I sense there’s a mood to go the whole way. People will accept a broad-based capital gains tax that applies to everything - except the family home and any other assets that most of us own.

Bill English is already claiming the tax is about ‘big government’. He’s fired his bolt too soon. A capital gains tax is equally consistent with small government; it’s just a matter of which income qualifies as taxable. 

The finance minister is already admitting a comprehensive capital gains tax is, at least theoretically, “the right thing to do.” (Listen to him here.)

Labour won’t be able to answer every question today. 

A big new tax is cruelly hard to explain.  Questions will quickly emerge about what the new tax applies to - my engagement ring? My aunty’s rare stuffed axolotl?  No one knows the answer to these, and most of the hard cases will eventually be resolved by a judge after exquisitely-suited lawyers sink their avaricious incisors into the wallet of an affected litigant. That’s just the way the tax system works. 

Other countries make capital gains taxes work, so we can leave some detailed design work to experts.

Above all, Phil Goff has to show us what the tax will pay for. If it’s just a new tax, only the boffins will like it.  I don’t believe the new tax will be about paying for new spending.

If it convincingly pays off the deficit, and shows us some wider benefits, then it might be better received

A lot of commenters have said a new tax won’t grow the economy. But it will if it’s a tax reform that pushes investment in the economy into better areas.

None of us like medicine, but taking it is usually better than the alternative.

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

58 Comments

Comment Filter

Highlight new comments in the last hr(s).

Labour are on to a winner if they can sell their CGT as its either that or sell down state assets (which is hugely unpopular) to balance the books. National may come to sorely regret not seizing their opportunity early (using their election mandate) to cut spending on WFF, student loans, superannuation etc rather than go to the SOE sale option to 'try' and balance the books.

Hopefully one way or another the SOE sale can be stopped - I would even consider voting tactically for Labour to try to prevent it happening.

Andyh - as you know, we're in the meltdown phase now. Even if absentees get their fiscal hands on the generators, the generators and us kiwis are the ones in geographical proximity.

Sooner or later, logistics tells you that those who hold the battle-field win the war. Whether it's a buy-back, as per NZ Rail, is one question. An intelligent way to address that would be a mass non-payment of bills - as is happening in Greece. Tends to lower the price of the repurchase......

Or we just nationalise - either by electing a Govt to do it, or by protest/storming the Bastille.

It's probably more important that the renewables are in place, upkept and functioning - until the slow end of the populace catch on.

Bill English wants to peg al this away in an irreversable manner, but such is never the case.

Labour need to be made to think, or to get out. Their era - and they were valid at the time - is over. Time to morph or die.

Agree PDK - both Labour and National are effectively obsolete - but in however long it takes for the zero/negative growth paradigm to gain traction both are capable of making vastly damaging policy decisions.

True. Part of the blame can be laid at the feet of the media:

Watch this space          :)

I have held the view for some time that we should flog off our assets to whoever is stupid enough to buy. Then when all goes to custard we can just legislate agains foreign ownership and reduce their value dramatically with the stroke of a pen.

But I particularly like your phrasing, very elegant.

too right andyh

today's tax announcement could be a game changer for the election. it's possible (although quite unlikely) that labour could outmanouever national and show the nats to have wasted their mandate......   it could be an interesting fortnight

when the nats came in i remember bob jones predicting they would be a 1 term govt. while that generally looks unlikely there are glimpses like this where it looks possible. i can't say i'd be sad though....i helped vote them in but they've blown it in my eyes.

if the predictions are right that small businesses are to get tax breaks that could be really interesting....ssmall business is the engineroom of the economy after all.

It never ceases to amaze me how people get stuck in a centuries old way of thinking, never seeminlg able to break away from the past and come up with anything innovative.  The predictable answer it seems is always "Tax".  Because it worked so well in the past. Brilliant !!

And even after decades of adding new taxes, what do the "we need yet more taxes" people come up with .. even more tax.  (Hell, maybe we really can tax our way back into prosperity... I'm obvioulsy missing something !!)   Let me guess, the pro-tax people are going to mention "rebalancing of the economy here right?"  Yawn.

Is there really still a belief that the government will then use this new windfall and spend the money wisely and efficiently?  Wow...

But probably the most dissapointing thing is that so many still fail to see that our entire decades old financial framework "experiment" has failed us (as many of the regular readers on this site have pointed out in the past).  And yet we keep seeing the same old material that reinforces the status quo an keeps that can moving along the road one kick at a time.

Anyway, that's enough for one day.  I have a business to build up so that it can be taxed to oblivion. Maybe there will even be enough left over that I might be able to retire one day, that is if we don't have a "retirement tax" by then that is. !!

Matt S your posts today are spot on IMO. It has has been asked here before but by very few, why is it very dicfficult for even folk with a decent brain to accept that the system is brought & paid for , almost from end to end. You can give them as much information to cross check , different ways to view the landscape in hope that perhaps they might see that they have been fooled forever. People dont like to admit to anyone let alone themselves that they have been mugged off. Until the public understand what they are up against then they will continue to be stuck believing in centuries old, outdated systems , which have trained their minds I to a narrow band of thought. Just ask simply , who has benefitted most from existing systems ?
The democratic process is a scam , the system is not our own, and the charade is becoming clearer everyday. I say these things as a challenge to people , because until folk want to try to understand why Nz continues to have term after term of destructive policy regardless of who controls it, they will only assist is the slide to the bottom.
All the best with your business , get yourself an accountant you can trust.

Matt S - Excellent reply, I totally agree with your sentiments.

If National are smart, they will re-jig their SOE sales policy to make it only saleable to New Zealand passport holders. That would completely stifle Labour's "selling NZ to overseas investors" argument. If National want to restrict investment on the non-productive housing sector then the best way to stop speculation is by raising minimum deposit requirements on house purchases, which can be enforced by law. If we didn't have 5% deposit loans then a lot of people would not have ever been able to speculate. This would keep house prices in check and force people to save for the deposit, which is the way it should be.

It should be obvious, that imposing a capital gains tax on property will not protect us against another property bubble from happening - just look at the UK, USA, and Australia who all have a CGT on property, and all had massive property bubbles. The question people should be asking is - is our money safer in governement hands (whcih is the argument for more taxation) or in our own hands (which is the argument for non-taxation and private ownership)?

The countires around the world that have large public sectors (so therefore lots of taxation) such as Greece, the UK, and to some degree the USA, are all suffering right now. The fact of the matter is that more taxation is not the answer, as the public sector is a much less efficient spender of money than the private sector.

So let us keep our own money, Mr Politician, and give us investment alternatives to property. And stop us from being to greedy by imposing maximum LTV ratios on home purchases, if you will, but no more taxes please.

 

Kiwipete -  The problem that I see is that in nearly all OECD democracies, over 50% of voters are now net recipients of Govt welfare.  How many of theses people are going to vote for a income cut?

This ludicrous situation is going to continue until the politicians "run out of other peoples money".  

Lets all not forget that it was that bright bunch of looney Labour that wanted a "Fart "tax for animals. Matt S, keep working sucker because whats yours, will soon be mine and Goofy and his mates to waste. Sorry!

Bobby- on behalf of my kids, theirs, and yours and yours if you have any -

Thanks but no thanks for you selfishnessness, and your ignorance of fact and science.

We are the biggest biomass on the planet - fact.

Every chemical change we are making, we are increasing exponentially - fact.

We need certain parameters to continue existing, or we won't. Fact.

The lead-times for addressing every threat - eventuating or not - means that we have to, every time, be proactive in mitigating same. Failure in this regard, is russian roulette. Fact.

Facts are a bugger, eh....                                :)

I don't think you're 'interested' at all, but I'll play it with a straight bat:

I think it's totally irrelevant.

Planetarily, we have about 5 years - tops - to get ourselves off carbon-baed fuels. To power the morph, we need extra energy over and above BAU, or we have to triage something currently done.

Locally, the issues are sustainability, resilience, and refugee/security.

We can attain equlibrium/sustainability/maintainability - the calcs say we have to reduce to using about 1/4 of the energy we do, but I'm proof that that can be done comfortably. (I run on about 1/3 of what we would have to.

That can't be done by the free market, it has to be 'by command' now - we're out of time to cajole the deniers, and the funding of the denial has been too effective.

The only reason I go with things like the movie industry, is if fiscal relativities are maintained (there will have to be mass defaults - I personally don't think 'relative values' will make much sense in their wake) and we have to repay our jointly/severally-held debt with a dwindling supply of energy to drive the work.

It may well be that the system implodes - 2008 was a precursor - and the debt becomes academic. It's the question of all questions, at this point.

Either way, even with all hands to the pumps, we don't have to time for such side issues. Do you have a suggested replacement for all the oil-based plastic pipework servicing our cities, for instance? Wnen I was a Councillor, we worked on 20 years as the point at which replacement outgunned patching, O&M-wise. And don't tell me that at a certain price........   :)

Welcome to a different paradigm - I know it will be a shock, but so can a visit to oncology. Sometimes reality sucks - but it's still reality.

No I'm not, neither numerically nor time-wise. Maybe 'that you've listened to'. Hubbert predicted this in '50-'56, Malthus beat him by a goodly period. It's not environmentalism is the driver, note - it's maths. Maths drives enviromnentalism, not the other way around.

I only addressed film, here's industry:.

Better is that we retain engineering, as whatever we morph to, logically, won't be what we have, and it'll have to be done under stress. Think wartime improvisation.

Rail (doesn't need asphalt, steel-on-steel is more efficient, diesel/electric likewise) is important, as is food production/distribution (vegie food uses 10 calories of fossil oil for one calorie eaten, meat uses 27 for one). Housing efficiency (there isn't the lead-time to replace the current stock, so retro-fitting is the obvious way) is another open-slather area - we can't get enough. The grid needs to morph to many rather than few generators - think 'internet' as a model, and to becomer an equaliser, rather than a 'feed'. Hydro lakes have to be the 'batteries' for all others.

I give it five years. Max.

Which Party is even on the horizon with that lot?

 

After 5 years?   

War.

Or a series of.

Over resources, particularly energy.

My pick - the USA vs China, both with hangers-on.

We've never done anything else.

Actually, I say 'war by 2020'. Five years is still moot - we might muddle along that long.

Marty what do you think Libya is all about? Why Libya , why now?

Ok , understanding physics , maths etc is all very well , & I agree with PDK does drive the underlying systems etc that he refers. But in order to form a picture you must add history & current affairs to the mix or you will have a hard time understanding the real world.
PDK mentioned USA v China possibly , that's why I mentioned Libya, it's much more telling than I imagine all bar a handful on this site or Nz are aware of if that. Read up and also look into China investment into East Africa over the past 20 years or so.

The rebels also have an oil company and a Central Bank now connected through the Bank of International Settlements.

Libyan rebels in Benghazi said they have created a new national oil company to replace the corporation controlled by leader Muammar Qaddafi whose assets were frozen by the United Nations Security Council.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-21/libyan-rebel-council-sets-up-oil-company-to-replace-qaddafi-s.html"

Libya has been one of the last nations in the world that had its own state run banking system, and control over its own money supply.  By having this system in place, they could demand oil purchases from their oil fields to be made in Lybyan Dinar, and not the US Dollar."

http://www.examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/america-s-true-reason-for-attacking-libya-becomes-clear-with-new-central-bank?fb_comment=31429431#ixzz1S2XODMcn

Anarkist I thought you would be out there some where. If people can just start to understand & somehow put together a picture of the what , then they should want to know the why.
Great post ! BIS is the very top of the banking empire. Guess who set this up Marty & co ?
As for war in 5-10 Marty USA v China, I won't make a time prediction , but will say the rate that countries are being picked off by economic terrorism , & war mongering cartels, you have to ask , where does it end , what is the end game? Ask hard questions & be open to looking for hard answers!

Marty did the mainstream professors you read say what happens when two nuclear powers have a fight over scarce diminishing resources ? Please don't say it's happened before in history. 
Companies exist to make profit & take out competition, simple as that. The biggest industries globally as you will know are oil , pharma , Agra , media & war (industry). What underlines all of these companies & indeed most all other industry too ? Banking '& finance, and who owns that industry lock , stock & barrel ? 
I could keep joining the dots for you , but thats no fun really. 
In case you missed my link earlier to a post yesterday , have a read through this, it's not an oracle just things for you to cross reference. 

http://rense.com/general69/mass.htm

No offence, but I don't think you've got a wide-enough mindset to categorise me.

This is me last weekend:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/PORT-Chalmers-Yacht-CLUB/216801238341347

I'm the cat in the lead - this is Dunedin in winter. Try this:

http://www.odt.co.nz/opinion/opinion/142927/another-day-office

and if you go to my blog (powerdownkiwi.wordpress.com) and select the 'of change, challenge and risk' article (it was an op/ed but I can't remember the heading they used) you'll see a bit of my approach.

Negative?    No.       :)

Haven't got time for that.

 

No, take it from me you've got too much preconception-baggage - yet. You still think in terms of $, I suspect you see the whole world like that.

As for the laboured analogy - I just take reality as it is. I never stop learning (a non-fiction book every two days or so is the norm hereabouts) and I don't wish things into mental existence.

Clearly, a finite resource runs out. Clearly, if the whole planet's (human) infrastructure is based on that, then it's in trouble at the top of the gaussian. So I look further (you have to remember I've got 35 years of this) and check out the alternatives, learn about them, then watch the peak approaching, waiting. Nobody does anything, so I check out whether ther might be more (get a maths-savvy - not an economist or an ideologue) friend to check this out:

http://www.hubbertpeak.com/bartlett/hubbert.htm

So it will happen, sooner rather than later. So I design and build my house, my power system, and all my infrastructure. Not: have it done. Did it all myself. Sort of "as I have been a'thirst, so I have dug a well, so that others may drink".

Now - while thoroughly enjoying life, I try and raise awareness. Nothing to lose by trying.

Oh, and I came to economics from wondering what way Peak Oil would manifest itself. My first thought has continued - how could those who thought to start it - I think Baron de Rothschild put it best:  

 "While on the other hand, the great body of people mentally incapable of comprehending...............will bear it's burdens.............perhaps without suspecting that the system is inimicable to their interests".

Pretty much how I see it too.  But inimicable in  a physical way.

 

 

I think that when you're discussing to probability that 2/3 of the human population may be gone by 2050, stupid is questioning the price of artwork.

I think that (sorry about the analogy) when everyone knows they have to keep re-filling their gas-tanks to keep driving, stupid is somehow thinking a bigger one won't run out

I think that everyone who drives knows you start, then accelerate, but at some stage, all journeys decelerate, then stop. Stupid is thinking the acceleration continues forever, and forming that opinion in a fixed manner, whilst winding up through third.

I think that when someone tells the driver there a brick wall up ahead, the smart ones put on the brakes. If it was wrong, no harm done, if right, they can move on. Stupid is assuming that because he/she hasn't hit a wall so far, that it won't happen, and putting his/her foot down.

I'm describing economists, sorry. Could have saved some space.

Oh - and who's baggage decided I don't have solutions? I'm on County records 25 years ago, arguing for bus-on-rail commuting to be ready for Peak Oil.  I co-chaired Solar Action - a not for profit advocacy group - and the numners are there - just - for the planet. It would be tight, but renewables could replace fossil - but we wouldn't be buying lattes while we did it.

You're not really listening, though. Or you wouldn't have made the statement.

 

Now we're getting to what you're about.

Assumed superiority, coupled with a belief set. Here with an agenda - to put down, to spin on behalf of. 

You're a complete, disingenuous crock, arent you?  And yes, as you clearly are the personality type who accelerate into the wall, it's official - I think you're stupid.

Nothing personal.         :)

And you're not 'testing out my theory' . Thats a crock. You can do that by having a mathematician appraise that Bartlett piece. Or you coud learn about EROEI. Or the Export Land Model. Or learn about things   http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5432  

Come back and debate when you have your head around the science of depletion, creaming curves, water-cuts, etc. It'll take you a while, I suspect.

 

 

Robert Hirsch's report circa 2005 is enlightening....or maybe its frightening....

regards

PowerdownKiwi, the only party I know of that has begun to look at those issues is the OURNZ Party. Yes, I am blantantly advertising, but how does a Media Representative earn their non-existant salary if the media ignores them?

 

Apart from the Greens, no one is proposing large-scale rail construction outside of Auckland. OURNZ is committed to a long term strategy, rail being at the core. This includes ferry facilities and urban cycleway projects.

 

OURNZ also has as a policy of rebuilding the electricity system. Using hydro as the base load, the policy has a plan for the formation of a National Solar Network, more gasification facilites, electronics standards and research into other energy sources.

 

Our only retro-fitting policy is to insulate home so far.

 

However the good thing about OURNZ is that we encourage discussion on policies and issues. All policies at this time have been written by ordinary people like you and I, and we can make ammendments.

 

Come and have a look! http://ournz.org.nz

Ralex - cheers. I think you energy policy could do with some work    :)

Damn, I'm the one who wrote it!

Okay. I commented on your blog, so I think you have my email address. Email me your thoughts if you want.

Wait, what? Humans are the biggest biomass on the planet? That's not a very high quality fact you have there, I think you should take it back for a refund.

Yeah - you should google Solid Energy, see what they say about sequestration.

Goebbels would have been proud.

We aren't going to sequester carbon, now. We're too many, too stressed, too optionless. No matter what the rest of the world does, China now consumes as much coal as the rest of the planet, increasing annually at 7%. If that projected, 10 years to China doing double what the rest are. Politically they can't afford to slow, chlop chlop.

The EROEI of sequestration doesn't stack up, even if there were the will and the volume.

I learned about the EROEI of lignite last night - about 3!  Our BAU requires about 8.

Go figure.

"We aren't going to sequester carbon, now. We're too many, too stressed, too optionless. No matter what the rest of the world does, China now consumes as much coal as the rest of the planet, increasing annually at 7%. If that projected, 10 years to China doing double what the rest are. Politically they can't afford to slow, chlop chlop."

Nope, i agree.....too late now, time to sit back and wait for the huge mess. I just hope lifeboat NZ is far enough away that we dont get swamped. If we are "lucky" we get to watch the drop to 2Billion. I just hope its doesnt come to us one of the few places in the world it might not. I dont like the odds though, unless there simply isnt the fuel to be got....kind of figure enough ppl will realise while they still have enough to try.

8:1?  thought even 10:1 was dodgy...interesting thing is wind etc are 12:1 ish....barely a margin. Got to laugh at the debt "mountain" its blindingly obvious its worthless paper....

regards

Humans are causing more damage and at an accelerating rate...we have overshot by 5billion odd and tahts due for a correction....enjoy the movie.

regards

If National does comes back to power and they go through with the sale of our State Owned Enterprises (S.O.E ) to overseas investors, I wouldn't be surprised if  our power bill's  are sent from  China too. 

 "I sense there’s a mood to go the whole way. People will accept a broad-based capital gains tax that applies to everything - except the family home and any other assets that most of us own."....doh

Who gives a rat's what you sense....!

A broadbased CGT would have to include the family home, boat, batch, boatshed,farm,business,art,gold stash,rare books,shares,woodpile,pedigree pets, livestock,gifts, overseas property.......

Why are people so bloody blind as to the need to reduce the stonking fat size of the state. Instead of handing the pollies more ways to steal from us, how about cutting the spending.

Sir Humphrey et al are sucking on half million dollar bloody pay packs. Treasury eats up $4,700,ooo,ooo a year....we have 60 too many idiots in Parliament. There are whole departments that produce utterly nothing..what does the Retirement Commission manage to produce?...

I agree, it would be better to ease up the RMA rules, making more lands available for building and cut down on Govt spendings (i.e. cons - ultants). 

CGT will be a nightmare to administer.

Wolly I think you will agree that the peoples have been brainwashed much more more than one can imagine. Big govt , more tax , run our lives please we beg you to save us Mr Govt. We are too stupid to think anymore. They will demand more intrusion the worse the situations become.
FYI I love life , but am sick of having to live with the results of a dumbed down public.

Bobby, its not that simple. I have a small vineyard employs one person, with the strife in the industry Im only getting $1k a tonne for grapes and I produce 10 tonnes. This morning my new  yearly water consent charges from the rergional council arrived, $1,000, so %10 of my gross income in water charges on top of the $1200 in regional council rates.

 Im in the process of writting to the council to tell them that my vineyard cannot afford these charges and I will be laying of one person and burning the vines in my fire.  How far do you want to go how much destruction do you want, bring it on Im only just beginning and Im not alone, I can keep destroying production all the way to Zero and go live elsewhere if its comes to trhe wosrt.

It's a pisspoor investment martyB...it rose on the spin and cheap bank loot which allowed the wise to escape the turn...those with debt are screwed. They work for the bank and the council.

Then you have the weather to contend with..one bloody frost and the crop is stuffed. If you get a great crop, so does every other sod and unless you have a water tight contract(hahaha) expect a lower price per ton...

On top of all that you have a wine glut and the quality stuff is being put in the cardboard bottles.

The smart farmers told the banks to shove their money where the sun don't shine and stayed with the sheep. Plenty in Marlborough just laughed at the bullshit from the banks.

The banks don't like you do they martyb....they hate me.

Borrowing has killed this economy. The banks love it and are in total control.

I only know of one party that is attacking the banks. 

 

http://ournz.org.nz/

Especially the government. "Too big to fail"

Cardboard is for sissys. Sav Blanc is leaving the country in plastic blaaders big enough to fill the containers they are shipped in then bottled and labeled offshore. NZ Wine makers are getting a few cents in the dollar for the bulk of what is produced. We need to move to an accreditation system. Limit the supply, increase the quality, or we could carry on making the stuff for nothingi

martyb

Are you having fun?

With your humour you should be making movies with Peter Jackson..

$1k a ton sounds good, some ppl were telling me a few years back they were lucky to get $400....but Ive been out fo contact for 2 or 3 years...no idea what the market is now in Marlborough I assume its just as bad.

regards

roughly $1200 for good grapes which a grower might get if he had a contact with a wine company. Otherwise as low as $600. A few years back they got as much as $2500

Sorry to hear Andrewj. Most of the shiney arses in Councils and Government are no hopers that think there is an endlesss supply of money to keep them in a job and pay for dumb grandiose projects that they can claim as their own.

Bobby, part of the proplem is how we react to lower prices, we produce more, this year over %30 more Savi blanc.   I need a new water pump its going to cost 60k then I get my ACC thats $3200 rates 5k, insurance 5.6k, its just a waste of time. Ive a friend in the process of ripping out over 100 acres of apples he has over 120 students thinning in December and more around during picking, all those jobs have gone. The government cannot win yet keeps on trying,destroying the regional economy  as it goes.We are better to do nothing, live on an island like Vanuatu were the government cannot get hold of you for taxation,  you have your money in ANZ or Westpac, the tax savings supports your life style and the interest you can save.

 Its what happens when governments get too big,yet they want to get even bigger, so more destruction untill the country is brought to its knees.

I had a quick look at the HB Regional Council 2011/12 draft Annual Plan - and they stated overall there was only a 2.45% rates increase?

So what was the yoy percentage increase in terms of your water consent charge?

I'd be very concerned that the consents charges might be subsidising other activities.

I assume all horticultural water users are in the same boat.  Best action would be a "rates revolt" (well in this case a water charge revolt) - where users across the region take joint action not to pay the increase.  Determine you will pay last year's charges plus 2.45% - as that is equitable and fair.   But it has to be a concerted effort by a large number of growers.  Form the group and then get media attention.  Horticulture is the life blood of the Bay - if your increase has been unreasonable - the general population will be behind you.

I guess that's the advantage of having land contours that enable the 'accidental' scooping out of hollows, that by chance happen to fill with rain water and diverted creek flow.

Kate, I now get more than one water consent charge. I get one for zone based water science charges its only $80. Then I get one for more Zone based water science charges its for $325 then a fixed charge of $495 for water takes and low flow, i suspect more to come. If i was a large dairy farmer these charges would be minor as a small grower they are over the top.

 On the bright side I see the council has purchased a new financial system and growen out of its new building and is looking to lease another building for the overflow. Also the council is subsidising the costs from its land sale non investment account so as to phase in full  cost of  the charges.

 The cost of planting a hectare of grapes or apples is $75,000 a hectare maybe more for apples as they take 5 years to crop. With no tax breaks once pulled the land will not be returning to horiculture, personaly Im going to run 20 extra sheep.

Have you thought about this as an option to push the overdue correction along.

We have 67x (6700%) more physical currency than electronic. The bank then lends every dollar you have deposited with them 9 x.

So if you take $1M and put it into say gold, you are actually reducing the money supply by $603M. Perhaps, I guess you pay the $1M to someone for the gold. But if the financial system fails, then you are leveraged to that degree.

 

AJ, heard of anyone cropping pinus pinea (pine nuts)?  From what little I've read 6-8 years to commercial production - and they are at peak production at 40yo.  You can graze sheep between them and (I assume) claim carbon credits on them as well.  Read somewhere you should get 15kg per tree and retail price is $50kg - but don't know how old that comment was. 

 

 

Kate I looked into it in 1980, I was interested in trees when I was young. Try buying Selby Gouldstone’s book ‘growing your own food bearing plants’

 

Pinus coulteri, grows large enoumous cones

Pinus pines (Italian stone) easy to grow intolerant of extreme cold also called umbrella pine.

 Pinus lambertina grows 60 meters also called sugar pine from mountain ranges of Oregon should be good in high country  likes cold winters

Pinus cembroides (Mexican stone)  small tree 8 meters needs wind protection especially with you ;-)

Pinus cembra (swiss stone) Russian produces vast quantities of small nuts medium sized very hardy (should grow with you) slow growing long lived soft pale green foliage cones 10cm long may need frost protection when first planted.

 

Are more pines but they are the main ones

 

I found the book on Trade me

http://www.trademe.co.nz/Books/Nonfiction/Home-Garden/Herb-vegetable-gar...

Got it!  Thanks :-).

 

Anyone who thinks more / higher Tax is a good idea should read this well written article:

http://www.sovereignman.com/expat/the-other-kind-of-inflation