I thought I would write up some of my thoughts on Policies.
Generally speaking I support fiscal conservatism.
I think that
governments tend to spend too much on keeping interest groups happy
because those that are interested in the issue care a lot and those that
are not don't think about it. So it is an easy win for the government
to 'bribe' that group and construct a weak argument for why it was
required. HOWEVER this does not mean that I think that we should cut
government spending just for the sake of it. I also believe the
government can be good at providing some services with the appropriate
systems in place.
1) Tax
I
think tax should be set to a rate that in the long term pays for all
your spending. Being very careful with spending will help to keep those
tax rates down.
In principle like taxes on capital and
on spending instead of taxes on income because taxes are disincentives
and I don't want to discourage income.
So on the tax balance I support labour except in that I think the family
home should not be exempted.
Simple taxes are better -
and only the rich half of the country has a home anyway, so not taxing
the family home created an odd tax structure where the wealthier people
get to avoid tax.
I think that there are perversions in the tax system that encourage
forming of trusts, putting assets in the hands of businesses and so
forth. I think this can be simplified to stop this by getting the IRD to
proactively look for accountants advertising tax loopholes - and close
those loopholes via legislation.
I am not sure exactly
what all of this would result in but I suspect a tax cut. I would tend
to take any tax cut off the bottom and add tax increases on the top as I
thin that top tax rates are a less significant disincentive than lower
ones due to the marginal value of money at those incomes.
2) Dirty Politics
I believe with great power comes great responsibility and beyond that I
propose great supervision. Politicians rights to privacy are
fundamentally less than our own and checks and balances should be in
place. Fundamentally I trust professional bureaucrats who rise to their
positions through the system more than elected politicians that just
happen to get control of a portfolio.
Politicians should face checks and balances so strict that they
regularly get caught and expelled from government and where applicable
face criminal sanctions. And this may include laws that are specific
only to politicians (like possibly an obligation to share certain types
of information with the leaders of opposition parties).
I suppose in this regard I might support NZfirst although I would want far more than I am sure Peters would ever support.
3) Defense spending / Spying
I
think most defense spending is like our old air force and the tank army
in the USA. They are not suited for any plausible useage. The NZ
military should decide what are the likely uses (peacekeeping, self
defense etc) and allocate resources just to doing these jobs well.
Even
within these categories we should be careful, for example I would be
reluctant to commit NZ forces overseas unless there was a compelling
reason.
I am wary of the NZ spy agency becoming to active in things that are not
actually national security concerns. I believe the terrorist threat in
NZ is low. I think the statistics support that. I also think that
pedophiles are not a national security issue - they are a police issue. I
suspect that the SIS actual does almost nothing that is really a
national security matter and thus is probably vastly over funded.
4)Superannuation
I would raise the superannuation rate quite rapidly - simply in the long
run it is unaffordable and if there is a problem with policy it should
be fixed as soon as possible. I would also be tempted to simply replace
it with a sort of unemployment/sickness benefit.
5) Drugs and other substances
Generally I am in support of legalizing and taxing things rather than making them illegal.
I could support taxes on things like sugar and additional taxes on alcohol if they can be shown to clearly be a net benefit.
6) Canterbury Earthquake I think private insurance is
proving to be an inefficient way to deal with a crisis like this. It
seems like the system would work better if everything was more
proactively and collectively managed.
7)Referendum to change the flag
A useless waste of money
8) Maori language in schools
It can be an option, but I put it on a similar level to having a class
on the northern Scottish accent.
In regard to how learning new languages helps the brain - I would far
prefer Chinese in schools. In regard to the argument that it supports
our national identity I think that is to emulate an undesirable part of
the USA. We should not try to teach Nationalism in school for the sake
of Nationalism, if NZ is good we should see it as being good for good
reasons (like our human rights) not just any reason.
9) Housing/Insurance
The labour plan for having a state agency for building housing sounds
like it might work or it could flop if it gets too politically influenced. Building houses in NZ appears to be very inefficient. the Labour plan for a state insurance company might also work in the same way kiwi bank appears to have worked.
10) Education
I suppose I would redesign the education system but in the first
instance I prefer Nationals policies of national standards and charter
schools and larger classes with better teachers. I see a huge gap
between the best and the worst teachers.
I would tend to want to increase education funding - as the primary
level I would want to encourage more dynamic learning strategies. But I
would also want to focus university spending on courses like engineering
which pay for them selves when the graduates enter the economy.
11) Energy
I would be tempted to quite severely curtail the retail energy market
which seems to be a lot of people spending a lot of time not actually
providing anything. The labour policy of a single buyer could be a good start.
12) Asset sales
Generally I oppose selling profitable assets, profits are generally
better than taxes. And of course unprofitable assets are hard to sell.
13) Unemployment
I would simplify how the unemployment system works to cut bureaucracy
costs. The current system seem to be relatively easy for those that
abuse it and too hard for some that are honestly trying to use it for
the purpose for which it is intended. This is because we are working so
hard to create threats to cut off benefits to get people into work - but
still want to protect everyone's rights to not be without the
necessities.
I think the real gains are to be achieve in the other side of the
equation "employment".
14) Employment
I think the private employment agencies are deeply inefficient - I
suggest that the state get seriously into employment, keeping reliable
and detailed records of employment history for its clients, matching
that data to census records drivers licenses, IRD returns and other
resources and working to match the individuals efficiently with
employers.
I acknowledge there are certain privacy issues with this model but there
will be a huge gain in efficiency. you could for example now trust your
employment agent to give you candidates where the agency knows their
detailed work history and can verify the CV. You can also get a fair
picture of if that person is seriously seeking work and if they are fit
for work at all.
Currently some of this work is done by Work and Income - but my model
would be like a full fledged employment agency.
15) Immigration
Immigrants should generally speaking add to the GDP per capita of the
country. If they don't (for example a person coming in to work for a low
income job) then I would be reluctant to allow them in even if the
industry indicates there is a job shortage.
I know that for example the fruit picking industry always says they have
a shortage of fruit pickers. But it overs our average GDP per capita
for a foreign worker to come to NZ to work and then to settle here just
like it raises our GDP per capita for a billionaire to come here and
start a business.
16)Foreign land ownership
I don't mind this in principle but I also like the idea of leases.
Selling NZ land on a 99 year lease like they have in China (I think)
sounds like a reasonable option.
What this does is allows the government to play the 'long game' vs the
general economy that doesn't think in terms of 99 year plans.
17) Roads /Rail
If a project pays for itself - you should do it. So this is a matter of
getting an appropriately independent expert to determine which projects
do this.
18) Resource Management Act
Generally I would weaken this as it seems to stand in the way of public goods and also in the way of some private freedoms.
19) Local government
I would severely weaken the local governments ability to prevent people
from building on their properties. Local areas always have an incentive
to prevent development in order to prop up the prices of their property
by keeping supply low. But in reality many modern NZders are fine with
high density living.
Also over the years Local government expenditure has greatly increased
and it is probably time to bring some services back to government and to
rein in inefficiencies.
20) Foreign Policy
I think aid often ends up funding corruption so I would want to
re-evaluate everything. Those pacific islands that we used to control
and are now independent should not have any special status regarding
access to NZ or regarding aid from NZ and their applications can be
dealt with on their merit. I don't think buying the support of island
nations for their vote in the UN is of much real value to NZ even if our
politicians might find it useful so I don't think we need to be part of
that game.
21) Law and order
I understand the police are currently a little underfunded, so they
should receive a funding boost. I think the costs can be easily saved in
the legal side by using a more inquisitorial approach and also
simplifying a lot of laws and truncation the amount of time spent in
court per case as a lot of time appears to be wasted.
In
general I would look to simplify laws - laws should be designed to
achieve the best possible outcomes but should also be as simple and as
understandable as possible.
22) Health
Assess health policies like pharmac assesses medicine. If they
provide good cost benefit ratios then implement them. I am also in favor
of spending more early on to prevent costs later but everything should
be run efficiently. Ideally a Health system should consider the policies
that will create the greatest number of healthy living years to the
population. So for example one might de-prioritise an operation to save a
90 year old from cancer in favor of one to save a 2 year old from
cancer and the system should do this without any shame. Similarly the
government should not spend 1 million saving 1 life if it is unwilling
to spend 800,000 saving a life. It is no excuse to just "not consider"
the second person and pretend you are making the optimum choice by
denying yourself the choice as the system might do.
The ambulance system for example appears to need more funding.
23) Environment
wherever possible internalize externalities. So if a company pollutes a
river make sure they pay the amount required to offset the full
costs.However I don't like hard and fast rules about protecting things -
it is always a matter of balancing costs and advantages.
I don't
think that we can save the world by ourselves in terms of global warming
and while i am confident it exists - I think that some of the arguments
about it are a bit alarmist.
24) Charities
I think charities tax exempted status should
be removed. Being tax exempt implies that it is a way you can spend the
governments tax dollars as if you can do that better than the state.
that is possible but not necessarily true. For example donating to the
Scientology church might not be considered a good use of money by anyone
who is not a Scientologist.
The charity could ask for that tax back (and maybe more) if it can prove it is really doing a useful service.
