Quote Originally Posted by justakiwi View Post
Firstly, not everyone qualifies for IETC - if you are on any kind of income tested benefit, you do not qualify, even if you are also working (part time/casual or whatever). That is currently my situation as for health reasons I can only work up to 15 hours a week. I am currently doing casual caregiving shifts as available, which is taxed at secondary tax rates. And yes, I am receiving financial assistance from WINZ, so do not qualify for IETC. My total income will be well under $40,000 (more likely to be closer to $30,000).

Secondly, do you seriously think saving $400 a year is of any significance right now? That is $7.69/week - won't even buy you a dozen eggs.

As for the phase 2 flat tax rate of 35% - how the hell do you think that is going to benefit anyone on a low income?

I am sorry, but this is probably the last party that I would vote for, in terms of how it would/would not benefit me as an individual. Even if I was not receiving a benefit, and was still working 30 hours a week, I do not see how I would possibly be any better off than I would be right now. But feel free to explain it to me if you think I am wrong.

As for your last statement - this "I will probably vote for them anyway as I do not like the alternatives" is precisely the issue this time round. People are making voting decisions based solely on getting Labour out of government. In other words, they are "settling" for a party they do not actually want to vote for. Which makes a total farce of our political system as far as I am concerned. Voting for "the best out of a ****ty bunch" is not a good reason for voting for a party - regardless of which party it might be.
At $30k you will be paying $4,270 no IETC under TOP $3,000 or $1,270.00 less, check my numbers if you like.

With the 35% flat tax although circular in nature the $16,500 UBI will more than cover it. Not sure how this works in with welfare, not my area of interest.

The question you are asking is the same as all the ACT voters "what is in it for me". Sadly the waste we see in govt overides the good things being done, so I guess it is reasonable to ask whats in it for me when you see the head of the Ministry for Pacific Peoples lavishing a $40,000 leaving party on himself. That is criminal yet no one will be held accountable.

$8billion losses brought on by an irresponsible RBNZ. No one accountable just "noise" says Adrian.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...PXNBXKV7QS7W4/

Personally rather than "what is in it for me" we should ask "what is best for NZ". There is no right answer but we can vote for the party we think has the best policy to answer question number two.

With everyone asking what's in it for me our politicians are pandering to selfish aholes and focus groups are setting policy. Not good in my opinion.

Obviously as I am a selfish ahole myself, if I were wealthier I suspect my political views might change.