What to do about asset sales? The same Herald story that told us about Winston Peters' Winstonomics lunacy spells out the dilemma that Labour and the Greens have over the government's Mixed Ownership Model legislation; check this out (with our emphasis added):
The Mixed Ownership Model legislation is expected to pass its final stage tomorrow, opening the way for the first partial sale of up to 49 per cent in Mighty River Power.A Key Research poll in the Herald on Sunday showed although nearly two-thirds of voters opposed the asset sales, 60 per cent wanted to buy shares if they could afford it - including 52 per cent of Green voters and 54 per cent of Labour voters. The first SOEs up for partial sale include Genesis Energy, Meridian, Solid Energy and Air New Zealand.
Labour and the Greens have an obvious dilemma in the light of this poll. Yes; people aren't happy with the idea of asset sales, but clearly they don't regard them as a die-in-a-ditch issue as Labour and the Greens portrayed last week. Not when more than half of the Labour and Green Party supporters surveyed by Key Research (how ironic is that?) want to buy shares in the SOE's if they can afford to!
14 comments:
Why are you ignoring the part where 64% oppose the sale? Inconvenient is it? Besides, I pointed out you you yesterday that it's pretty obvious people would want to buy in if they could afford to. That way you can get in on the gouging. It doesn't mean they can. These assets are on their way to a small number of the National Party's rich chums, who can use their tax cuts to pay for them. Works well eh?
They should also have asked if they would like to but shares did they have at least $1000 to do so. People obviously think it will be a Lolly scramble. People will be pissed if they have to watch the lolly scramble from the sideline because they are too poor.
Look, this is perfect if you're one of the National Party's core constituency. It's no wonder IV2 shills so vigorously for it.
They give you a tax cut, run up a huge deficit, claim they need to sell public assets to pay off the deficit, offer shares to those who can afford them cheap so you get them, and then use some of the proceeds to give you some more pork via irrigation schemes and so forth. It's win, win, win, win. Unless you're locked out, in which case you get higher energy bills, a loss of a public assets, a tax increase, and public service cuts.
I
The main argument support the asset sales appears to be "National won the election, they said they'd sell 'em, just suck it up".
There are heaps of sound fiscal arguments against the sales and most polls show that most New Zealanders don't want the sales. John Key was mainly elected because of the perception that he would change his mind if the evidence and public concerns supported it. I just wish he would listen as he did with the class size debacle.
If the sales went ahead I would probably look at buying shares too. I would want to do my bit in retaining ownership in New Zealand and as a shareholder I would probably have some influence on future decisions.
First sentence above should read "supporting".
I really don't think "Key was mainly elected because of the perception that he would change his mind"...That's not a perceptive comment.
i have a great idea. Lets check which policies the public dont like and then work on the basis that we dont like those policies so change them.
i for one dont like being taxed. I bet if you put together a poll on do workers want to be taxed, you would find that most do not like taxes! But we accept it is part of what it takes to make the economy thingy work.
so what is the question to ask - not if we oppose or want such policies. But whether such policies are necessary given a macro view of the world.
"so what is the question to ask - not if we oppose or want such policies. But whether such policies are necessary given a macro view of the world."
No shit Einstein. Explain how you get from that to asset sales to pay for tax cuts for the rich and irrigation schemes for farmers again?
lame troll.
lame.
should policy be judged on whether it is popular?
only if it is a policy the lowly principled labour/greens dont like. despite losing an election over this issue!
by the way JH - income tax tax is a way of governments confiscating my hard earned money. the last tax cut benefitted all income groups. as soon as a reference is made to the "rich", it is clear you are a bitter wee feller.
Can't do it then double d(umbo). Thought not.
"income tax tax is a way of governments confiscating my hard earned money."
Blub blub. Cry me a river, loser. And how did reducing the top income tax rate and increasing GST benefit all income groups?
All the arguments being used here to support the Asset sales are still around the supposed election mandate rather than actual fiscal implications.
The following are facts and having been discounted:
-The government valuation of the assests are a best guess only.
-The value of selling the assets is less than the long term value of dividends they produce.
-The sales are likely to result in an increase in power charges.
-Power is a strategic asset for our local businesses and we should risk foreign control.
-Independent financial advice (BERL) and even treasury have not recommended the sales.
-None of the money will be used to pay back debt
-At around $1000 a share only a small percentage of "mums and dads" will afford them.
-Over 1400 written submissions were received against the sales and only 9 for.
-More than the value of the asset sales have been tagged for motorways that do not meet basic cost/benefit analysis.
Rather than continuing to state that a dubious election mandate allows this government to do anything it likes, how about some more rigorous defense based on the economic advantages? Surely that is a more reasonable approach than petty political point scoring.
I hate not being able to edit comments, my second sentence above should read - "The following are facts and haven't been discounted:"
what a load of rubbish left-washed comments.
Power prices rose exponentially over the Labour administration. However this is what generally happens in price fixing paradise.However ai think bsprouts comments are indicative of what will happen once the shred ARE listed on the bourse. use as Telecom shares are a lynchpin of the exchange.
"However ai (sic) think bsprouts comments are indicative of what will happen once the shred (sic) ARE listed on the bourse. use (sic) as Telecom shares are a lynchpin of the exchange."
Yep, right cheers for that, whatever it was. Slam dunk for the tories.
Post a Comment