Skip to main content

Nats giveth…and taketh away.

The National Party Politicians giveth great tax cut promises, knowing that the National Party Pickpockets will taketh away. Maurice Williamson, National’s transport spokesman, gives us the heads up on what is to follow - any money spent on the common good such as major roading projects will be rapidly recovered by way of tolls. Goodbye tax cuts. Sleeping for nine years on the opposition benches, dreaming about policies of the past, have done nothing for their ability to deal with the here and now. Maurice Williamson’s comments on TVNZ’s Agenda programme about private sector funding and road tolls confirm the fact that National is still a classical conservative party - they will do nothing more than fiddle with the status quo. The problems of the day - debt; taxes; and the funding of health, education, environmental protection and infrastructure development - will not be solved by the political parties of status quo. At present there is no party of reform in the New Zealand Parliament – the need for one is more obvious now, with mounting social and economic problems. Democrats for social credit, a true political party of reform, would place creation and ownership of the nation’s money supply where it belongs: in the hands of the people of New Zealand - with the prime purpose of enhancing the common good. The Nats have got it wrong coming and going. Not only are they proposing an expensive source of funding that benefits the already rich, they are planning to build infrastructure that is unsustainable. Where are the visionary policies for the future? When people are already getting out of their cars and on to buses, why go backward and build more roads instead of investing in better public transport? New Zealand must not allow status quo political parties to fiddle while New Zealand burns – or borrows itself to death.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Reserve Bank of New Zealand

New Zealand's Central Reserve Bank is STATE owned. Despite that, instead of being used for the benefit of its owners, the people of New Zealand, successive Governments have: Allowed the foreign-owned trading banks to create and issue nearly all of the nation's money supply and claim it as their own. Notes and coins make up less than three percent of the money in circulation. Ninety seven percent of our money supply is on loan to us at interest from those banks. Actively encouraged banks to charge "rental" for this money at some of the highest interest rates in the developed world. Used high interest rates as a blunt lever to control inflation, while agreeing to exclude the resultant costs from the Price Index, so that their cost-inflationary effects do not allow pensions and awards to compensate for these. Deliberately used interest rate fluctuations to maintain an unemployed "pool" of about four percent of the workforce in order to hold down wage rates. Fa...

Show Me the “Monetary Reform” David Cunliffe!

Show Me the “Monetary Reform” David Cunliffe! Following Phil Goff’s release of Labour’s Finance Manifesto today, David Cunliffe has said in a New Zealand Labour Party press release : “Labour is backing the drive for more high value exports with monetary reform ...” I challenge David Cunliffe, Labour’s Finance Spokesperson, to front up and explain what he means by the term ‘monetary reform’. If he means replacing toxic debt-based commercial bank credit with social credit, as the sole means of money coming into existence and continuing to exist – issued in the public interest, to serve the common good - then I would endorse his definition. And if he accepts that it’s crazy for our government to borrow from foreign lenders, with interest, when we could use the publicly-owned Reserve Bank of New Zealand as an independent statutory monetary authority with the sole power to create, issue, and cancel New Zealand’s money, then I applaud his endeavours. But if Mr. Cunliffe thinks ‘mo...

Raise super age, doctors say, and spend up on kids

New Zealand Herald 8 July 2011 has the above as the lead headline on page 2. The article continues with " Generous pensions wrong while children are living in poverty, medical trio say". New Zealanders are locked into a "them or us" mentality, instead of a "If we can afford it for them, we can afford it for us as well". Logic suggests that if New Zealanders desire particular outcomes i.e. to provide super to those over 65 years and to spend up on kids health or on any other desired outcome, then the financial system should enable those outcomes to be financially possible - subject only to the availability of people with the necessary skills, technology, resources and that all projects are also environmentally sustainable.